His supporters cried that anyone that called Obama a communist based on this revealing slip was making a mountain out of a mole hill. They said he was “taken out of context” and didn’t mean what his detractors were claiming he meant.
But did he? Did Obama mean that he is for a socialistic, big government confiscation of wealth to have it redistributed to those that have less? Again, his supporters clam this is an outrageous misread of his ideas. But his supporters would have to contend with what then Senator Obama said at a conference at Loyola University in 1998.
At that October 19, 1998 conference, Obama said in explicit and direct terms that he is for redistribution of wealth.
Then he said that he thinks the role of government is to “pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution,” because he “actually believe(s) in redistribution.”
Out of context? Listen to this audio and see for yourself:
Obama clealry feels that the role of government is meant to take from those that earn and give it away to those that won’t, in other words Obama feels that government should implement programs that operate like the communist ideal “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
Meanwhile, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney noted that, “redistributing wealth is an entirely foreign concept.”
Which of these two has the more American ideals? I think you can guess.