James Bopp, Jeff Kent *help* Obama with RNC "Democrat Socialist Party" resolution

COVID-19 Response

Like everyone else, we urge you to wash your hands and engage in social distancing.

Unlike everyone else, we urge you to also help with this smart plan to get more tests, ventilators, and PPE. Everyone can do that plan right now, at home, in just 15 minutes.

If enough people help with the plan we can save lives. Take time out now and help get more desperately-needed supplies.

Before the election, many Obama opponents kept making the same mistakes over and over; those mistakes had the ultimate impact of helping Obama win. Several days before the election I listed twenty mistakes those opponents made in satirical form; as if to reinforce my point, that list was immediately deleted when I posted it to FreeRepublic. A couple days before the election, I accurately predicted how the "Obama wants to bankrupt the coal industry" story would end; simply telling the truth would have actually been effective.

Now comes RNC member Jeff Kent and RNC Vice Chairman James Bopp Jr. with a proposed RNC resolution with Kent as the chief sponsor suggesting that the Democratic Party changes their name (news story here, description here):

In just a few months, the goal of the Obama administration has become clear and obvious - to restructure American society along socialist ideals. The proposed resolution acknowledges that and calls upon the Democrats to be truthful and honest with the American people by renaming themselves the Democrat Socialist Party. Just as President Reagan’s identification of the Soviet Union as the evil empire galvanized opposition to communism, we hope that the accurate depiction of the Democrats as a Socialist Party will galvanize opposition to their march to socialism.

1. It's false to say that Obama, the leadership of the Democratic Party, or the great majority of Democratic leaders are socialists. Some of them may lean in that direction more strongly than others, and that can be pointed out on a case-by-case basis. Misleading and smearing about a whole group is not a wise idea.

2. Some of Obama's less-informed fans might favorably associate Obama with socialism and support that ideology because they think he does.

3. Millions of mainstream Democrats - including those who are more conservative on some topics than many GOP leaders - will take umbrage at being called socialists. This resolution isn't going to win the GOP any converts from that group or crossover voters.

4. Millions of independents and moderate Republicans will no doubt think the GOP has taken leave of its senses.

5. The MSM's "fact checkers" will rush to remind everyone that Obama and the Democrats are not socialists. That will have the impact of both hurting those making that claim and helping Obama.

Why are Jeff Kent, James Bopp Jr., and the rest of the RNC so intent on helping Obama?

Comments

Well, actually if my Econ 200 professor in college back in 1977 was correct, we already had a benign form of socialism back then. I don't think we've seen a tremendous shift to the right in the last 32 years either. That said, Obama and his party certainly do share many, if not most of the goals of the Democratic Socialists of America. In fact, the House Progressive Caucus used to be formally affiliated with the DSA, until such an honest, out in the open connection began to attract unwanted attention. Labels are silly, especially when no one wants to acknowledge what Obama and his party are actually up to. They don't want socialism (i.e. state control of the means of production) per se, they are facists. In other words, they allow private business to exist, but only to the extent that it can be regulated and made to pay protection money, oops I mean make campaign contributions. The de facto government takeover of 2/3 of the automotive industry and a large swath of the financial sector is proof of this. Tell me again how it is we're different from the Mexican kelptocracy/thugocracy? I think a case could be made the Mexican way is actually cleaner, since all the corruption is out in the open and there for all to see.

_Some of Obama's less-informed fans..._ For most of them, it makes no difference -- even if they were better informed they would still be fans. Going by his past statements -- and the fact he spent so much time in Rev Wright's 'church', no small point -- Obama is more interested in redistribution.

This is one of the sillier counsels I've read. "Obama is not socialist"; "Democrat party is not socialist". Perhaps this is so, as a matter of fact -- but not as a matter of inclination. If a murder is prevented by outside force, the perpetrator is considered an "Attempted Murderer" and while the punishment is not as severe as "Completed Murder", the perpetrator is still a DANGEROUS FELON no less. Obama and the democrats are (were?) prevented from socialism only by the application of severe outside force. They are certainly "socialists in their hearts" and certainly "Attempted Socialists". If you wish to pretend the semantic distinctions somehow lessen the threat to us, that is your prerogative. However, it is fundamentally dishonest and makes me wonder (1) if you really understand this and (2) which side you're on. Regards, The Spirit of '76 Philadelphia