Wednesday, May 26, 2010 | 2:04 a.m.
View more of the Sun's opinion section
Among the most often-used justifications by conservatives for labeling everything that President Barack Obama does as socialist is that his plans involve the redistribution of wealth.
I would like someone to explain why conservative agendas that subsidize oil, coal, banking and other industries, grant generous tax loopholes to the rich while raising the taxes of the middle class, and stress less regulation — allowing many of the underhanded schemes responsible for the recession — are not considered redistribution of wealth?
Why is it that only when legislation benefits the poor and middle class it is called socialist?
If socialism only means that the system is designed to ensure that the needy who work long, hard hours for less than they can fairly live on benefit by having a few bones thrown their way, then I say it is a good thing.
Join the Discussion:
Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.
Full comments policy