Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Is Hillary Clinton a Socialist?, William F. Buckley doesn't think so
Is Hillary Clinton a Socialist?
Is Hillary Clinton a Socialist?
Yes [ 9 ] ** [20.45%]
No [ 31 ] ** [70.45%]
Maybe, Don't Know, Not Sure, Other [ 4 ] ** [9.09%]
Total Votes: 44
Victoria Silverw...
post Sep 24 2007, 09:16 AM
Post #1

Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,601
Member No.: 608
Joined: March-16-03

From: Chattanooga Tennessee USA
Gender: Female
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Green Party

I found this quote on a completely unrelated thread:

Hillary Clinton . . . is a known socialist . . .

I dispute this. I would say that there is no major American politician who could accurately be called a socialist (let alone a Socialist.) This perception comes about, I think, from the position that any political position which is not firmly conservative is socialist. It's a good scare word, now that "liberal" is not quite so poisonous a term as it was during the Reagan years. Frankly, I think it's as inaccurate as calling any political position which is not firmly liberal "fascist."

Don't take my word for it. Let's ask William F. Buckley, one of the great intellects of modern American conservatism, what he thinks.


Well, she is sort of ... left-wing, no?

Well, not entirely. In her early political life she was a cheerleader for Barry Goldwater. If she had married George Wallace, and if he had then gone to the White House, is there any reason to suppose that she would not have espoused the views expected of Mrs. George Wallace?

There are those who point to her preposterous health plan as evidence of her ideological naivete, her capacity to fondle statist models for dealing with social issues.

Well, yes, she is certainly a liberal. But there aren't any grounds for believing she is a hard-core socialist.

There are only grounds for believing that she is comfortable occupying positions that maximize her political popularity. She does this with a broad smile, a lovely face, and a piquant sense of destiny. Barack Obama has to pry out a position more central, and then center in on it. Either that, or find for the Democratic party some other, engaging view of what to do for our fatherland/motherland.

(I deliberately choose a firmly conservative commentator who is no fan of Senator Clinton.)

Opportunist, yes. Socialist, no.

For the sake of fairness, let me offer an opinion from someone who thinks that Clinton really is a socialist.


Since the day she became a United States Senator, she has been running for president. Toward that end, she understands better than any, that she has to successfully deceive enough Americans into believing she is a “centrist” -- instead of the committed socialist she is – in order to obtain the most powerful office in the world.

The fact that this article ends with an utterly paranoid nightmare about President Hillary Clinton speaks for itself, I think.

Washington, DC – September 11, 2012 – Today, President Hillary Clinton received the following joint communiqué from the leadership of Al Qaida, Hezbollah, and Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez: “Because your policies so easily allowed us to reconstitute our powers and infiltrate your pathetically porous borders, we have hidden three nuclear weapons in three major American cities. If you try to find them, we will set them off. If you do not give in to our demand, we will set them off. Our demand? That you surrender your nation to us or suffer the loss of millions of Americans. There will be no negotiation.”

Washington, DC – September 12, 2012 – Today, President Hillary Clinton surrendered the United States of America to terrorists.

(Never mind the rather bizarre linking of Chavez with Islamist fanatics; this whole scenario is absurd.)

To Be Debated:

Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? And what definition of "socialist" are you using, anyway?

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
Just Leave me Al...
post Dec 5 2007, 03:49 AM
Post #2

Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 508
Member No.: 4,594
Joined: March-1-05

Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent

QUOTE(nebraska29 @ Oct 29 2007, 10:06 PM) *
Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? And what definition of "socialist" are you using, anyway?[/b]

Excellent topic Victoria, I've been reading, re-reading, and ruminating about it for a few days now, excellent work. flowers.gif

Socialism to me is a "mixed" economy whereby entire segments of the economy are run by the government. Hillary Clinton's views are not socialistic. For that to be the case, the government would run the entire health care system, the entire transportation system, and other industries. Hillary's views are not socialist in any way. Instead of the government employing all doctors and running out insurance companies, Hillary's proposed health care plan would emphasize technological upgrades, prevention, as well as greater consumer choice. A given person could keep their own public or private plan, or choose from a new option. In regards to the economy, Hillary would favor increasing the minimum wage, a balanced budget, as well as growing the economy. For her to be a socialist, she would have to propose the entire government taking over an industry. I fail to see what industries she would do this to. whistling.gif

Wow nebraska. Are we going to get into the definition of the word 'is' next? wink2.gif I like the AZWhiteWolf's definition.

QUOTE(azwhitewolf @ Dec 4 2007, 04:18 AM) *
From MSN Encarta:


1. political system of communal ownership: a political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles

2. movement based on socialism: a political movement based on principles of socialism, typically advocating an end to private property and to the exploitation of workers

3. stage between capitalism and communism: in Marxist theory, the stage after the proletarian revolution when a society is changing from capitalism to communism, marked by pay distributed according to work done rather than need

While I think that you may technically be right nebraska that she doesn't fall exactly into this definition flowers.gif , she would certainly push the country from more capitalist to more communist. And to me that is bad economically. So you have to help me out a little in how Hillary can offer a federalized health care option, balance the budget, raise the minimum wage, and grow the economy at the same time. It just doesn't compute with me.

To pay for the health care option and get us out of the debt that we're already running she would either have to cut a ton of spending or increase taxes (which I think that she has proposed some types of high end increases which maybe you could point me to). Raising taxes won't grow the economy though. If you tax cigarettes, on average people buy less cigarettes. Everyone can seem to get that, but people have a much harder time accepting that when you tax income people on average won't work as hard. First I need to know if you accept that to be true. If so, then you can my problem.

Similarly, raising the minimum doesn't grow the economy, except in the sense that it further encourages you to hire illegal immigrants. If you raise the cost of the cheapest labor, you price some businesses out of the market of expanding operations because they can't afford the employees (the legal ones anyway). So capital ventures/innovations decrease and the economy suffers for it. As an added kick in the pants to the economy, the people that would have been working are still unemployed. Or if the company would have used a guest worker program, new entrepenuers are denied the opportunity to work their way up in this country.

Plus the oil example that the AZWhiteWolf posted. Nebraska if you can explain to me how Clinton is going to overcome these market forces and actually grow the economy, it would go a long way towards me (and probably a lot of other people) considering the Hill.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
Victoria Silverwolf   Is Hillary Clinton a Socialist?   Sep 24 2007, 09:16 AM
Julian   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? An...   Sep 24 2007, 12:58 PM
Vladimir   Notwithstanding the way the term "socialist...   Sep 24 2007, 02:59 PM
AuthorMusician   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? An...   Sep 24 2007, 05:40 PM
Ted   No she is IMO a center left Democrat who is trying...   Sep 24 2007, 05:55 PM
Vladimir   No she is IMO a center left Democrat who is trying...   Sep 24 2007, 08:07 PM
JamesEarl   No she is IMO a center left Democrat who is trying...   Oct 29 2007, 08:43 AM
Ted   [quote name='Ted' post='226680' date='Sep 24 2007,...   Oct 29 2007, 03:30 PM
JamesEarl   [quote name='JamesEarl' post='229319' date='Oct 29...   Oct 30 2007, 12:53 AM
CruisingRam   the minute a self proclaimed conservative calls so...   Sep 24 2007, 06:02 PM
Ted   Hey I feel the same way about anyone who believes...   Sep 24 2007, 07:22 PM
CruisingRam   Hey I feel the same way about anyone who believes...   Sep 24 2007, 08:49 PM
Ted   Well she now “appears” to be right of center but...   Sep 25 2007, 06:51 PM
lederuvdapac   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? An...   Sep 25 2007, 06:55 PM
Wertz   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? An...   Sep 25 2007, 10:00 PM
lederuvdapac   Language does evolve. "Liberalism" was...   Sep 25 2007, 10:58 PM
Wertz   But anyway, I would much like to continue this deb...   Sep 26 2007, 04:37 AM
gordo   Well, far beyond me to say this but if one is to q...   Sep 25 2007, 11:26 PM
nighttimer   Hillary Clinton isn't a socialist. Neither is...   Sep 26 2007, 06:20 AM
BoF   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Why or why not? An...   Oct 12 2007, 08:46 PM
Lesly   Is Senator Clinton a socialist? Um, no. I wish she...   Oct 12 2007, 10:29 PM
nebraska29   Excellent topic Victoria, I've been reading, ...   Oct 30 2007, 03:06 AM
azwhitewolf   Well, to start, my definition: From MSN Encarta:...   Dec 4 2007, 09:18 AM

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: December 2nd, 2021 - 09:01 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.