Your critique of socialism is valid - socialism purports to be of benefit to the poor, and even purports to be of benefit to the vast majority of all people. But this is not true.

This is in line with one of the points I often make, and is why I don’t agree with the “tipping point” argument some people advance. Some believe that once more than 50% of the people are primarily dependent on government, that capitalism and liberty are doomed because people will from that point forever vote for the socialist policies from which they benefit.

However, as your article points towards, and as all existing fully socialist countries (Cuba, North Korea, etc.) demonstrate, socialism actually does not benefit the majority of people, or even the poor. Socialism’s claim to benefit people may influence people to consider support for socialism, but in actual practice the vast majority of people of severely harmed by socialism.

That’s why there are so many former communist countries in Eastern Europe - both states dominated in the former “soviet sphere of influence” and actual Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

Finally, I differ with a major point in your first paragraphs - you introduce your article as an explanation of what will happen, now that the American people are supporting socialist policies.

But socialism has not “captued the heart” of Americans. Obama did not win votes on support for his actual policies and actual agenda. If he had proposed his actual current policies during the campaign, he would have lost the election. The American people still oppose socialism, support liberty, and favor a strong national defense policy.

In order to win votes in this right-center nation, Obama had to pretend to support “tax cuts for 95% of the people” and also had to pretend he would take a stronger, more effective stance in the war against terrorism, especially in Afghanistan. Like the claims and promises of the communists to “benefit the vast majority,” Obama’s campaign promises were actually campaign lies. There was a candidate who would have lowered taxes and fought terrorism more effectively, but Obama lied better than McCain told the truth.

We can learn a lot from the lies chosen by dishonest politicians such as Obama. He knew that “lower taxes” and “victory over terrorism” - not socialism - has captured the hearts of Americans. So he chose lies that, although they were in sharp contrast to his actual intent, were necessary to win votes from a right-center electorate.

Obama still has majority approval and acceptance, but Obama’s supporters believe Obama when he maintains that he is not a socialist. He continues to give lip service to “support for free markets” and continues to claims he is “not a socialist.”