-
Farewell to the Spectator
December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
Tentative Praise for Ryan's New Bipartisan Medicare Plan
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
-
The Day Ahead: Thursday, December 15
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
-
Examiner for Romney, National Review Against Gingrich
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
-
Paul Ryan to Introduce New Medicare Plan with Democrat Ron Wyden
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
It wasn't long ago that the likes of Sen. Jim DeMint were being made fun of for calling the Democrats "socialist." But Cato's David Boaz makes the interesting observation that we are so lucky as to have a naturally occurring benchmark in self-identified socialist senator Bernie Sanders, who, incidentally, caucuses with the Democrats.
Boaz dusts off his copies of the National Taxpayer's Union and American Conservative Union's guides, and discovers that there are plenty of senators who are rated more liberal than Sanders.
...42 senators in 2008 voted to spend more tax dollars than socialist Bernie Sanders. They include his neighbor Pat Leahy; Californians Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, who just can’t understand why their home state is in fiscal trouble; and the Eastern Seaboard anti-taxpayer Murderers’ Row of Kerry, Dodd, Lieberman, Clinton, Schumer, Lautenberg, Menendez, Carper, Biden, Cardin, and Mikulski. Don’t carry cash on Amtrak! Not to mention Blanche Lambert Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas, who apparently think Arkansans don’t pay taxes so federal spending is free. Sen. Barack Obama didn’t vote often enough to get a rating in 2008, but in 2007 he managed to be one of the 11 senators who voted for more spending than the socialist senator.
And:
The Republican Liberty Caucus declared 14 senators, including Sanders, to have voted 100 percent anti-economic freedom in 2008, though Sanders voted better than 31 colleagues in support of personal liberties.
It doesn't surprise me at all that if you go by the records, many Democrats are "socialists" at least by Sanders's standards. Very few senators are ever obligated to acount for their overarching political outlooks. If they did so honestly, however, I would expect for the out-and-out socialists to come off looking much better than the many members who don't care about much more than pursuing and guarding their own power.
Of course, no one would call the "centrist" Blanche Lincoln a socialist. The fact that she voted to spend more than Sanders says more about the effect the Senate's concentrated power has on its members than it does about their relative personal philosophies.
View all comments (4) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/25/the-socialist-to-the-right-of
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Herbert Hoover's Long-Awaited Magnum Opus
- Common Prayer, Uncommon Beauty
- Progressive Derangements
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jim Hlavac| 1.25.10 @ 10:33AM
Maybe it's time to call a socialist a socialist, and be done with the Democrat label. That the AP keeps calling Sander an "independent" sort of grates, since he is not some wishwashy person floating between two or three mush points. He's an avowed Socialist. Apparently the AP, and many others, can't give a man the party label he adheres to, perhaps lest they inform the public of the reality. You know, it is the socialists, dummies.
Pingback| 1.25.10 @ 11:06AM
Plouffe Hiring Signals Obamas Focus On Populism, (video) « Kyniko's Moonbat Patrol links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Bob| 1.25.10 @ 1:02PM
Maybe it's time for you guys to stop calling Dems "socialists" and for them to stop calling you "fascists". One could make an argument on either side, but both of those descriptions are over the top if you know anything about economic and social systems. Perhaps its time to educate the public instead of playing populist to the tea baggers.
Most of us in the middle want to move this country ahead with a mixture of fiscal conservatism and social libertarianism. The Hatfields and the McCoys solved nothing. So let's stop calling them names and fight for the real issues. The government must tighten its belt and reduce the debt and therefore get smaller. That means you social conservatives should not ask the government to legislate my personal activities as that is more government, not less. The emphasis on health care should be to reduce costs - period. That means tort reform, increased competitiveness, and yes, some form of rationing. We need our government to pay for mandates. So, if we require hospitals and doctors to take care of patients without funds, then we pay them for that activity or just let people die. We need to stop paying for the extended care of old people (like me). If the individual wants to live forever, they can pay for it. Remember, health care is a privilege, not a right.
So, Lawler, you are part of the problem, not the solution. Advocate, don't denigrate. Leave the denigration to me when I call uneducated bloggers "idiots".
martin j smith| 1.25.10 @ 2:32PM
Obama is a hybrid fascist and socialist. His playing the class card,race card, and any other card shows his stuff. For the time being he "allows"private companies and entities to own their company but you waite, if allowed he would take them over too.
So, In my view the Democrat party and their sycophants can call themselves whatever they want. A hamburger for example. Butas for me, as long as this party "is what it is" I will never vote for one even for the office of superintendent of beatle collections. As the Republicans, some seem good and earnest in their work, others are
Playboys, currupted or just fools and They should be retired. Johm MacC, being a good example.