New Republican technique: irony

It seems too obvious to need pointing out, but “socialism” calls for ownership by the government of the means of production.  As far as I know, there are no socialists remaining on the left edge of American electoral politics.  To my knowledge, neither Bernie Sanders nor Dennis Kuchinich supports government ownership of insurance companies, steel mills, or banks.

So when John McCain accuses Obama of advocating “socialism”, he’s stretching a point: that by supporting progressive taxation, Obama is trying to achieve some of the same effects as genuine socialists hoped could be gained through direct ownership.

This would all be politics as ususal except – STOP THE PRESSES!  – the Republicans have just finished screwing things up so badly that the federal government has embarked on a massive program of buying up stock from every major bank in the country, and directly intervening in their management.  If we imagine the existence of a genuine socialist, wouldn’t this be EXACTLY what they would propose as a solution to a crisis of capitalism?

The only comparable nationalization of banking occured over 200 years ago, when Alexander Hamilton created the First Bank of The United States – under somewhat similar circumstances.

I believe both Sanders and Kuchinich voted “no”.  And of course McCain joined Obama in supporting it.

So it seems like a very strange time to interject the issue of “socialism” into the campaign – but maybe that’s what makes McCain a “maverick”.

I’m not writing merely to muse over the absurdity of politics in general, and Republican politics in particular.  My bigger point is this may be an effective response to one of the final rounds of mudslinging in this campaign.  Is  anybody in either the media or the Obama propaganda machine paying attention?