Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Unions to spend $100M on saving Democrats | Main | Sestak Repeats Charge of Job Offer, White House Still Stonewalls (Updated) »

May 21, 2010

Re: 'Who's Crying Socialist?'

Topics: Political News and commentaries

More often than not, the WaPo's reporting that unabashedly and defiantly defends Barack Obama - regardless of the facts, is fast-becoming a caricature of itself. Take for example Dana Milbank's complaint that Mitch McConnell inaccurately called Obama a socialist.

David Boaz writes over at Cato:

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post complains that Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell "held a news conference in the hallway outside the Senate and all but called Obama a socialist." And what exactly did McConnell say? Milbank goes on:
"They're running banks, insurance companies, car companies, taking over the student loan business, taking over health care, now, apparently doing to the financial services industry what they did to the health-care industry, doubling the national debt in five years, tripling it in 10," he railed. "They've got people over at the FCC trying to take over the Internet. This is a massive government overreach."
So McConnell didn't call anybody a socialist. He just listed President Obama's policies -- accurately, it seems to me. And Milbank listened to that list and said "hey, you're calling him a socialist!" We've been cautious here at Cato about calling anybody a socialist. But if Milbank thinks a description of Obama's policies amounts to "all but calling him a socialist," I'll just let his analysis stand.
In other words, if it walks like a socialist, sounds like a socialist, and looks like a socialist, it damned well must be a socialist. And who are we to disagree with the WaPo's definition of a socialist, anyway?

Posted by Richard at May 21, 2010 9:52 AM



Articles Related to Political News and commentaries: