Study: liberalism is same as socialism

I have written before on this blog, including my political lexicon, that liberalism and socialism are the same thing. I have debated my liberal coworkers regarding this, and they adamantly denied there was any link between liberalism and socialism.

However, if you check out the latest Gallup Poll by clicking here, you will see that there is, as I have postulated, a real and actual link between liberalism and socialism. Thus, when you are electing liberals into the political arena, you are electing socialists.

What started out as Marxism has evolved over the years. When Marxism became a bad word, communism was the term of the day. When communism became a bad word, it was changed to socialism. When socialism became a bad word it was changed to liberalism. Now that liberalism has become a term of shame, the term of the day is populism (I'll define populism in a few days).

As you can see by the poll, 61% of democrats believe in socialism (liberalism) and 17% of republicans. The believers of liberalism in the democratic party are aplenty in Washington at the present time, as you have Obama, Reid and Pelosi and their followers.

In the republican party socialism (liberalism) is less prevalent, however you have your moderate republicans like McCain and Snow and republicans who cater try to draw in independents by giving them what they want in the form of government programs. And, likewise, to pay for these programs you have to take from the rich and give to the poor, which is socialism.

Even George Bush had his liberal tendencies, as with his education programs, his prescription drug program and his quest for amnesty for illegal aliens. These are all quasi forms of socialism.

Yet, no party is stuck with more socialists than the democratic party. I'm telling you, as I talk with some of the liberals I work with, they say things that prove to me that their core beliefs lie in socialism.

In fact, one of my liberal friends recently said, "I don't think it would be such a good idea if some other nation became the leader of the free world. The U.S. has become too arrogant." She also said, "I think it would be fine if our taxes were 60% or higher, so long as the money goes to a good cause."

That's marxism/socialism/liberalism/prograsivism.

Obama's/Chavez handshake gives credence to thug; and to American bashing book too

Obama had a chance meeting with Hugo Chavez today and Chavez gave Obama an American bashing book. Obama looked at Chavez and gave him a "What's this?" look.

I have trouble imagining Obama didn't know what he was getting, as Obama's good friend William Ayers (the terrororist) hailed Venzuela for teaching Marxism in public schools, and chastising capitalism.

While he would never come right out and say it, Obama is socialist himself who does not put the interests of America before himself (I wrote about this here). I wrote before that he blames American capitalism for all that ailes the world, and this "chance" meeting simply validates my earlier claims. He's also not a proud American. He's a socialist like Hugo Chavez.

We must also note here that after this "chance" meeting this America bashing book moved from 54,295 on Amazon to #2 behind Mark Levin's book promoting American exceptionalism, capitalism, liberty and freedom.

While Obama later cliamed that no harm can come from shaking hands, I think he really meant that, as this book went from miniscule sales to #2 on Amazon. This is exactly what Obama wanted all along.

I'm telling you folks, this man is scary. While he tells his cabinet to tell Americans we should be worried about people in our own country (conservatives like you and me), he's saying we should shake the hands of our enemies abroat -- enemies that have openly said they hate us.

Look, it's easy to make friends with enemies. Sean Hannity could shake the hand of Obama and tell Obama he agrees with everything he stands for. Sean would be instantly popular.

Yet he would be going against his principles, something he's not willing to do. So, in the same respects, it appears to me wrong to give credence to a thug like Chavez, but to Obama, on the other hand, it might seem like a good move as it gives credence to the socialism he really wants for America.

I hope I'm wrong.