How can 300 million people have a totally warped view of erroneously refered to as Socialism?

[Ingrid]

Because of our educational system failing so miserably, we hear totally idiotic phrases over and over again.
When Larry King asked John McCain is Obama is a Socialist, McCain answered: NO. But still the cerebrally impared continue to use improper terms.
People who are using that therm, have no clue, what it actually means.

[RitchWilliams]

Because while the form of 'socialism' advocated by Sen. Obama and his friends Harry and Nancy may not fit your little college poli sci course definition, 'socialist' is still the word that comes closest to Sen. Obama's views and agenda. I applaud you for paying attention in class, but I chastise you for not being able to expand your literal understanding of the word to its current, wider meaning.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." ~ Kark Marx, the Communist Manifesto

Sound familiar? Sen. Obama believes pretty much the same thing. Now, if you do not feel as though your limited and literal definition of 'socialism' sits well with Sen. Obama's agenda of expanded government, increased social spending, higher taxes and greater controls on business, please tell us which word you would prefer that we use and we'll be happy to comply. Until then, 'socialist' will suffice.

You might also share with us your economic rationale for believing that sucking a greater share of the life blood out of an economy to support an increasing dependency of the population on a growing, more powerful government is a good thing and leads to your European affluence and greater prosperity. I submit that it does not. I've lived and worked in socialist countries and while they're surviving, I would not call them 'affluent'. In fact, they tend to have significantly higher unemployment, significantly higher taxes and greater difficulty meeting their financial obligations.