>>>>This portends bad for the immediate US future, but good long term, as it will be fatal to many of the dems who are ruining our economy, and attempting to invoke Stalin's master plan!
>>>
>>>What is the similarity with Stalin here? Do you mean there is a tendency for the government to take total control of every aspect of life, or what?
>>
>>Haven't you heard? Democrats are Socialists. Or maybe Communists, one or the other.
>
>I recently read an editorial on socialism and Obama's policies. I can't remember where, but this stuck in my mind (I'm paraphrasing until I can find the article):
>
>Socialism, like farenheit, comes in degrees. A government that nationalizes GM is definitely more socialist than one that doesn't. Doesn't necessarily mean we are living under socialism yet, but differences of degree shouldn't obscure differences of kind.
>
>So far, 82 billion of 39 trillion corporate business assets have been nationalized by the U.S. government. That's less than 1%, but it is a socialist act.
>
>It bears watching closely. It's not critical unless that 1% keeps increasing in degrees or different socialist acts keep occurring.
>
>Another comment I recently read (this is a good one from either the Hill or the Atlantic):
>
> While terrorists do not need to fear any violation of their constitutional rights, CEOs of Fortune 500 companies will not be so fortunate.
>
>:o)

Obama has no interest in being in the auto business or the banking business. Some very large institutions were going to fail, hence the bailouts. You are using the word "nationalized" incorrectly. If these guys weren't too dumb to avoid spectacular losses none of this would have come up.