Like most Democrats in the United States, I am actually a socialist. I vote for Democratic candidates in the hope that, after sweet-talking their ways around the real issues, they'll get down to the real work of redistributing wealth and nationalizing businesses. So when John McCain announced that Barack Obama is a socialist, it came as no surprise to those of us who already know the secret handshake.The problem is, an essential plank in the secret socialist platform is the promise that those who have never worked a day in their lives will receive an equal share of society's spoils. Republicans quibble over semantics, saying that wage-earners "work harder," or "have more skills." Fine. These people can succeed anywhere. But what about the people who would rather not work? How are they going to pay for digital cable? They have a lot of time on their hands, and they need to be able to entertain themselves and be comfortable. This is one problem that I have with Senator Obama's plan; he seems to think that those in need of the boost are in the middle class, i.e. skillful people who are likely already working hard. I am left to wonder how, in Obama's plan, those who have never worked a day will be able to watch Bridezillas and Rock of Love.Another problem that I have with the so-called socialism of Senator Obama's agenda is that his health-care plan falls well short of being a monolithic, government-run, universal-care plan. The only thing any Democrat cares about, when it comes to health care: We want to be assured that everyone will wait in the same line for treatment. In fact, John McCain's approach actually feels almost more socialist; he plans to redistribute $5000 per person in the US, and then to tax this amount. Redistribute AND tax; that's double-happiness for us Democrats.But the problem with McCain is that he simply will not guarantee that he'll teach sex ed to kindergartners. If there's one issue that unites socialists-in-Democrat-clothing, it's the belief that, when children turn five, they need to be forced to listen to near-strangers (i.e., their teachers) talk about sex. This seems so obvious. I don't know why McCain doesn't support it. In any case, it looks like all of us Democrats have a tough decision in front of us. One ticket features actual wealth redistribution in the form of a health-care stipend, and the chief executive of a state that actually redistributes wealth to its citizens every year. And the other ticket features the kind of people who usually propose this kind of stuff. I'm not surprised that so many people are still undecided.