Liberalism’s Moral Bankruptcy Has Bankrupted America
Sometimes I like to play a little game with my liberal friends. Let us suppose, I say to them, that you have one hundred dollars with which you plan to purchase food for your family at a local grocery. Now let us suppose that I come along and rob you while you are on your way to the store, taking half of your one hundred dollars.
At this point I ask my friend: Is the robbery good or bad for you economically? “Bad,” they invariable answer, for “I now have less money for groceries.” Then I ask them: Is my robbing you good or bad for the grocer? “Bad,” they again answer, for “now he, too, has less money for his family.” Next question: Was it morally right or wrong for me to rob you? “Wrong, of course,” they answer, for “the money did not belong to you.”
Then, the coup de grace: What if I planned to give your money to someone else, I ask, someone whom I felt was more worthy or deserving of your money?
At this point, many liberals begin to suspect they have been led into a rhetorical cul de sac, and cognitive dissonance sets in as they realize that an honest answer necessitated by their answer to the previous questions will conflict with their stated political principles and past voting habits. Some will nevertheless admit, “Well, it isn’t really for you to decide who gets my money….”
An alternate hypothetical: Ask any liberal friend whether it would be morally sound or economically advantageous for an individual to rack up mountains of debt, until the gap between what is taken in and what goes out can never be rebalanced, with the fiscal burden passed onto their children and their children’s children, who likewise have little hope of living debt free.
An honest answer is that such behavior, like the hypothetical robbery, is both morally wrong and economically deleterious. Yet the same liberals who can see the fault in such behaviors for individuals support exactly those behaviors on the part of governments; confiscatory taxation and unsustainable deficits and debt are, after all, the inevitable consequences of liberal governance.
It is not hard to understand why. Liberals rarely see individuals except in the abstract aggregate, and so often fail to see the trees for the forest. Some are cognizant of this blind spot in their liberal world view: Margaret Carlson recently admitted, by way of explaining the president’s inability to connect with individual voters going through tough economic times:
It’s a long time now since Obama was a community organizer. Even then, he might have been more comfortable dealing with communities than with individuals. Democrats are best with groups. If I break down on the side of the road, I hope a Republican stops — he’ll fix my flat and offer me a drink. A Democrat will get busy forming a Committee to Protect Women Who Own Vulnerable Cars.
Quite. And it is precisely this feature of liberalism that has led to the economic and spiritual wasteland it leaves whenever and wherever it is put at the controls of government. For the truth is there are no such thing as “groups” — there are only individuals. To say, for example, that this or that policy is good for blacks, or for women, is to overlook the vast differences that exist between individuals — differences in needs, wants, ambitions, life-experiences, temperament, etc., even if they may share skin color or gender in common.
To smooth out such differences, which are in fact the manifestations of the uniqueness of each soul, is to suffer from a tragic myopia that can only lead to destruction — of rights, of property. After all, these are things that “individuals” possess. To see only groups is to necessarily dehumanize; to dehumanize in theory is to oppress in practice.
Genuinely brilliant. Very very well said!
One of if not the finest piece of logic and understanding, a statement of the truth of our times I have ever read. Spectacular.
Bravo!
Bravo!!
Bravo!!!
Ditto!
I have been calling it theft for some time now in comments. I have repudiated those who support redistribution as having “the dark heart of a thief”. I am so glad to see others picking up on this argument in comments, and now in blogs. Stossel wrote about it very recently, and now this excellent piece.
Please, everyone keep calling it the the stealing, the armed robbery, that it is. Define it. Do not let them use innocuous-sounding euphemisms like redistribution.
Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not steal.
“Well, it isn’t really for you to decide who gets my money….”
Yeah libtards – what goes around, comes around.
Now start applying that to the government. It is not really for the government to decide who gets OUR money. I’ll start caring about what happens to YOUR money the instant you start respecting OUR property rights.
We don’t give a rat’s patootie how uncomfortable it makes you to start thinking along those lines.
We’re sick and tired of you using the government to steal from us, in the name of the poor, in order to create more and more cushy jobs for libtards.
I echo your sentiments completely.
Man is a social animal. Except for random defectives, humans do not exist as individuals — they are members of families, clubs, political parties, churches, races and nations. A socio-economic philosophy based on Robinson Crusoe is not realistic. An individual should be judged as an individual, but groups can be judged by group standards. If somebody told you that you had to pick a winning basketball team and had to pick from a group of blacks or from a group of Chinese, would you really claim that you couldn’t make a decision? I know there’s a Chinese guy in the NBA, but would you pick from the Chinese group on that basis? Groups have common characteristics, which not every member shares, but that more members of that group possess than members of other groups do. BTW, affirmative action programs benefit every black individual, as well as blacks as a group. Just as whites are disadvantaged by AA, individually and as a group. Now that we can study the human genome, I hope to hear no more crap about race not exisitng, or being a social construct. Any characteristic that can be ascertained by reference to the genetic code does exist.
“Well, it isn’t really for you to decide….” Well… yes. Exactly. the wealth of the nation does not belong to the nation as a whole. It belongs to the individuals who earned it. It isn’t up to others to decide when someone else has “made enough”, or what they should do with their money. They are not entitled to any of it.
But, but… “There’s no reason why anyone should be poor in this country!”, one commenter lamented. Yes there is. They are poor, because they haven’t EARNED more.
The world doesn’t owe you something because you’re here.
Bingo!
There are a number of able-bodied persons out there who are just not producing their fair share…
I’ll go one further and say it isn’t about “fair share”. If someone doesn’t want to work to their full potential, that is their choice, and they must be allowed to live with those consequences. No one should be robbed to pay for those choices, either through direct taxation or through the currency-devaluing effects of government debt.
In a true, free-market society, there is no “fair share”, there is only what you have earned and your right to keep it, and a decentralized government with limited power that is there to little other than to enforce contracts, prosecute fraud, and promote the rule of law.
In other words, the libertarian ideal: Everything is permitted except that which infringes on the life, liberty, or property of another.
They are not only not producing their “fair share” but instead they are looking for and vote for those that promise new and better ways for those that only take from others as how they get their fair share. This would be the deadbeats that want someone else to provide all life’s needs and wants!
Its a good article I enjoyed reading, but like so many that analyze liberal thinking I believe you give too much allowance for good intention. Most liberals I know willfully ignore their contradictions and simply prefer to demonize the conservative/libertarian to see themselves superior. There’s nothing genuine, nothing heartfelt in conviction for the betterment of the “group.” Its ultimately for their own self-image and to what ever means they may profit.
“One might say in fact that it is the moral bankruptcy of liberal ideology that leads directly to the economic bankruptcy of states and nations that liberals govern.” Indeed.
My favorite analogy regarding Obama has to do with Halloween, which will soon be upon us. Imagine you had a child and he or she went trick-or-treating. The child comes back home with a bag full of candy. You then grab the bag of candy away from your child and dump the contents on the table. You then take half of the candy away from your child and say that you are going to give that candy to another child who didn’t lift a finger to do any trick-or-treating. Why do you do this? Because it’s just “fair” to give half of what you earned to somebody who didn’t do anything to earn it, right?
Like the commercial on TV states, “Even kids know when something isn’t fair.” But liberals could care less about what is fair. They are socialists and want to redistribute wealth any way they can. Everybody has to be the same, no matter how hard they work or how inventive or creative they are. You all should have the same home, the same car, and the same crappy health care. But, ya know, for the liberals in power, those rules really don’t apply to them, right? Like Pelosi and Reid, they still have the big car, the big house, the big paycheck, and all of the candy. They just didn’t do anything to earn it.
Obama’s entire staff is proof of that. Has anybody on Obama’s entire staff ever run a large, successful, business and actually have to meet a payrole? No. They are all Ive League elites who thrill at coming up with new and creative ways to run your lives. And now all of those rats are fleeing a sinking ship, as they should be.
Hopefully, in November, we can at least stop their spending by taking over Congress. It will be the first step in going back down that road of fiscal sanity and real economic fairness, where people get to keep more of what THEY earned on their own.
Thanks for a great essay! If only every voter asked himself/herself those questions, we might begin to reverse our slide into serfdom.
Is not “immoral” synonymous with “evil”?
What a dopey article: we don’t have people dying in the streets and lying uncollected (well, except maybe when there is a Republican President and a hurricane), and it was a Democrat, Bill Clinton who ended up getting serious welfare reform done (although imperfectly), and in general having a right winger accusing liberals of moral bankruptcy is like having a hit man for the Mafia gripe about people who illegally double park.
And so far this political season, I haven’t heard any Republicans running for any office offer up reasons to vote for them that weren’t: A) nonsensical; B) smear attacks on their opponents or; C) a combination of A and B. They are the party of No and Fear, and apparently this is not exactly a new thing
And as far as your attempted rebuttal, I haven’t seen you offer up any reasons to vote for your side that weren’t: A) nonsensical; B) smear attacks on your opponents; or C) outright ignorant.
I am impressed. Rarely have I seen a commentator not only re-write history but engage in such outright distortion of reality. Your mama must be proud.
It was the Republican led Congress and the American people who forced Mr. Clinton to pass welfare reform. He had rejected previous attempts and finally capitulated to satisfy public demand.
As to the current political environment, the Democrats – led by Mr. Obama – have alienated the American people and roused the anger of the voters. Even Republican incumbants who refuse to get it have suffered defeat. You live in a fantasy world if you really believe what you wrote.
So is the average tax payer who complains about the taxation like a mafia hitman as well? Are all the average wage earners in society criminal and corrupt for wanting to keep their earnings? You betray your liberal arrogance and hidden shame by trying to smear those who dare want to keep what they earn.
You are wise to be getting in some early practice on the gnashing of teeth and bellyaching. You and your ilk are going to have great deal to whine about after November 2nd, and that’s a promise!
To paraphrase: What a dopey BitChie.
Modern Liberal “thinking”: Attempting to prop itself up now with the promise of the golden future, meanwhile ripping off now for the good of its own whims. Mafia? Small fry compared to Mr. President. Or, is the comparison apt?
Hey BitChie. Do you think that that so called “republicans” can be Modern Liberals too? Make Room For Daddy! Mommy! They will make sure you get the “free lunch”. Free. That’s right. Freeeeeee!
Yes BitChie, the would be commissar. Imagine, having your property confiscated for a “parking ticket”.
It’s Goldstein’s fault.
BC is a Soros-funded, post-n-run troll. Nothing surprising in this latest post of inane nothingness.
BC is an independent imbecility contractor. The area he comes from has a lot of intellectual light weights just like him. Soros spends his money where he can get some value, not on self-mocking wannabe elitists like BC.
BC – always enjoy your posts – the liberal mind is fasinating in its inability to grasp reality. You keep repeating the same BS over and over and somehow think it’ll convince people it’s the truth. I especially enjoyed your prior post on Americans not being intellectually capable of grasping the awesomeness of Socialism. (please name one instance where implementation of this disease has not resulted in destroying people’s quality of life and death on a massive scale.) Understand this – on this board we’re not a bunch of sheep that follow NBC and NTY – we actually have the ability to grasp rational thought and critical thinking. When I say “We” I’m referring to the good people of this country who side with George Washington and the founding fathers – “You” being the people who side with George Soros who want to destroy destroyed or as your messiah has promised “Fundamentally Transformed”. Same “messiah” who called for a “civilian army just large and well funded” as the military. Any sane person in the audience that day in Colo Springs would have maybe questioned that but no – they all cheered like a bunch of idiot robots.
Here sre a few reasons to vote Republican: Jan 1, 2006 – after 6 years of Bush the Dow was at 13000 and unemployment at 4.9%. Then Democrats took over and crashed the housing market and the economy. Fiscally irresponsible – millions lost their jobs and foreclosures at an all time high. Insane levels of borrowing and spending. Didn’t even bother to do a budget. Poverty rate this year jumped at a rate higher than ever and food stamp receipients at an all time high. Black unemployment at an all time high of 16% and overall unemployment at 10-17% depending on the measurement. Youth unemployment at 24%. Obama personally destroying jobs of non-supporters by closing car dealerships (read the Tarp inspector’s report on this to confirm). Continues to be hostile to the private secotor which is HURTING MILLIONS of Americans – DO YOU GET THAT? Liberal policies destroy lives. Liberals lie, defame, attack, and will do anything to further their misguided causes. Obama’s the poster child – even stated in his autobiography this behavior was justified. Ends justify the means – liberals are morally bankrupt. The only true statements Obama has read from his teleprompter are the fundamentally transorm remark and “Judege me by who I surround myself”.
Bill Clinton was bailed out by a Republican Majority let by Newt. He was forced to balance the budget and pass welfare reform. Katrina was the result of a collossal failure by state and local response by elected incompetent DEMOCRATS.
Hope that clarifies things….
More barking at things he can’t even begin to understand from our favorite dog-in-a-museum, BC.
Bad dog! (rubs nose in floor piddle)
Bad, BAD dog! (thwacks with rolled-up newspaper)
Hey stupid what does BC stand for? Did you forget the A or perhaps it stands for Buncha Crap!
Where, in America, are dead bodies piling up, uncollected, at the moment?
I’d really like to know.
Detroit. The city cannot afford to bury unclaimed corpses.
Hasn’t Detroit been under Democratic control for a number of decades now?
QED
Yeah, those dead bodies do vote too.
You would think those in Detroit would have figured out what they have been doing wrong…voting a straight democrat ticket at the voting booth!
Bill Clinton wasn’t the one who got serious welfare reform done. The serious welfare reform was done by the conservative Congress that was elected during the mid-term. Bill Clinton, being the smart politician that he was, saw that he could gain political credit for signing on to this legislation. Had the leftists still been in charge of Congress after that mid-term election, it wouldn’t have happened. This strategy of “triangulation” is ultimately the strategy that saved his Presidency from being considered to be an utter failure.
Regarding the overall topic of the article that heads this comment section, one of the leftists I work with was railing on about greed this morning. Because I consider the word “greed” to be a subjective measurement, and the use of the word “greed” in an argument to be designed to invoke an emotional response, I expect someone who uses the term “greed” to be able to define it. Of course, like all these leftists, my colleague told me that greed was “wanting more than you should have”. I have yet to meet the individual who can define for me how much I or anyone else should have. My leftist coworker was unable to defend his positon and thus resorted to the fallback position of name-calling. BC, I’d bet that you make more money I do. Can you tell me, based on your world-view of “social justice”and “fairness”, how much of your money I’m entitled to. Unless you can actually come up with a specific number, you’re as full of horse feathers as any other leftist. Good luck.
Sorry guys, but it was Clinton who put the together welfare reform, although I think the Republicans threw smaller than normal rocks at him then since welfare reform was something in theory they supported, but only if they could do so by giving a tax cut to the rich.
As far as nonsensical, smearing ads go, I just have to turn on the TV here in Massachusetts and wait for an ad for Charles Baker, who’s running for governor: holy guacamole, where are the Republicans getting candidates these days, in Craigslist under “Fools & Doorknobs”? That Baker is a serious threat to Deval Patrick is testimony to how Massachusetts is not quite the hard core liberal, commie loving state that right wingers portray it. We have a sizable population of conservative idiots too, and they were the ones who got in Scott Brown. Around here we call them suburbanites and they live in deadly dull places not near anything, where they mow lawns, shop at malls and Home Depots, drive huge SUV’s, raise immature kids, eat kittens, and then go to bed early.
Also this has nothing to do with any of this, but I’ve been watching the Chilean mine rescue live — cool, very cool, and a reminder that not everything has to be about politics.
To the author – If what you have is a rhetorical cul-de-sac; then you are not taking morality seriously.
What you see is the bind you get into in your thinking when you accept altruism from conservatives or liberals – that your life and property do not belong to you – but to god, neighbor or society.
Republicans advocated and achieved ‘Welfare Reform’ —
What is needed for moral sanity is to abolish it from politics altogether.
To learn clear and independent thinking on such issues please read and learn from Ayn Rand
All things belong to the entity that created them. Who created your life? God did. Therefore, God owns your life.
But what if one doesn’t believe in your God?
then God will be really pissed when He finds out
God is the Great I AM and does not concern himself with your disbelief! He does not require to to actually believe in him although he has hope for you eventually to see his ways through science study and a search for truth, you were given free agency by God himself to make whatever choices you do in life…he and I hope you pass the earthly test without remedial education after you are deceased!
(1) Years ago, some journalists started using “liberal” as a euphemism for “socialist.” But socialism is not liberal, and what you describe are socialist policies.
(2) The grocer, to whom the robbery victim described above was going, does get the money that was robbed. After all, the robber also needed groceries.
Well, the grocer gets whatever isn’t spent with the local drug-dealer.
Still, the point is, that “redistributionist” policies are a net-decrease on economic activity.
“the robber also needed groceries”
Oh? He needed a joint.
Awesome article!
The great Marshall Fritz, founder of the Advocates for Self-Government, used to give a presentation he called Does Wrong Become Right if the Majority Approves? He followed a line of development quite similar to the lead in the essay above. His key question: “How many votes does it take to transform the ‘wrong’ of robbery into the ‘right’ of taxation?”
It’s a worthy approach – and absolutely nothing I’ve tried on a liberal enrages them more. It destroys their whole illusion of moral superiority, which I contend is the principal front in the politics of our day.
i ,love scenario examples,,such as what has been used in this article.i too use them,in order to bring some common sense,to a debate,to those who are void of logic.jesus christ was famous for his,but was described as parables(making comparisons,to a story,or subject;) parable,or comparitive scenarios,are,great to use,to describe,or explain,to others about the flawed,deceptive,corrupt,destructive,dangerous,and evil characters,of those,like barack obama,and liberals who believe that what belongs to others,is theirs,by proxy,of government mandate;which is,involuntary servitude/slavery;brought to you by the same political party,that has historically,since america’s founding;from andrew jackson;(democrat)and democrat congress’s”indian removal act;”signed into law,against native americans,land,and rights,against the objections,of conservatives,like davy crockett;liberals version then of redistribution of, wealth.slavery in the 1800′s brought to you by;the democrat party,while conservative republicans,have always fought,and sacrificed their themselves,as well their own,to end;same in the 1950′s,and 1960′s,that a democrat congress tried to defeat,with civil rights,legislation as today.the same,political machine,and party,affiliates,with the same divide,and conquer,religious ideaological;”power to the government” mentality;only difference is,the targets of their conquest,to take,the fruits of labors,of others;deny the free exercise of others,their god given rights to life,liberty,property,opportunity,and every persons right to pursue their version of happiness,as well their own destiny;learn from history,or be condemned to repeat the worst parts of history;it should be of no surprise,to anyone,today,why,white,male conservatives,conservative blacks,hispanics,and women.especially,orthodox biblically,judeo-christian principaled,and believing christians,our military,and the american dream,is the target of such vile,profane,perverse,immoral,godless,lawless,discrimination,and hate today;these are the very,principals,and beliefs,that have threatened,and have prevented the democrat party,from destroying,america,”the promised land”,and america’s promise to,be like a big brother,on behalf of israel,since america,and israel was founded;we often ask,why do so many,(the majority)of blacks,jews,hispanics,native american’s,and most women,vote continually, for the democrat party,the slave owner party,the anti-civil,and human rights,party;for many unfortunetely,are judas iscariots,whose only loyalty,is,their own self-interest,and to the almighty dollar;example;george soro’s,(proud democrat)of descent,during the holocaust helped adolph hitlers regime,set-up,and lead his own people to slaughter,for his own self interest,and the almighty dollar;same with the al sharptons,jesse jacksons,and the present leadership of the n.a.a.c.p.women,with;n.o.w./planned deadbeat parenthood;hispanics,with larasa,and muslims with groups like,c.a.r.e.all leading their own people to slaughter.just as george soro’s did the jewish people’s during the holocaust;others are seemingly well intentioned people,but have been blinded by the hype,and propaganda,of the democrat party.that have played them like a fiddle.how/why?ignorance of history,lack of will to seek,and find the truth,instead believe,what makes them feel good,and excuses,that will give justification,to why,their lives are still screwed up;while no one ask them are you better off than you were 40 years ago,under the leadership of the democrat party’s propaganda,”words just words,yes we can,hope,and change,empty rhetoric,bumper sticker slogan;”polices.why not look to the success,and happiness,that,have worked,for hundred of years,in america;conservatism has worked effectively for all,whenever it has been used;unfortunetely,if you look at america’s history of who’s ideaolgy’s have reigned supreme,its been under democrats,and moderate republicans,who are just democrat trojan horse armies;in the last 100 years only calvin coolidge,ronald reagan,the 1994 contract with america polices,written by conservatives,but given undue,unearned credit to,a socialist,predator democrat”bill clinton”by trojan horse republicans,who hate conservatism as much as bill,and hillary do;but history reveals the truth;3 times tried,3 times success;when it failed,it was because of lies,propaganda,over regulation,and big government polices,enacted by democrats,and moderate trojan horse,judas iscariot,republicans;learn from history,or you will be condemned to repeat it; unfortunetely,too many today are ignorant of history,or don’t even care to know the truth;”words just words”suits them just fine;and the mess we are in today, is a result of their apathy,poor education,and attitudes,that continues to bring the condemnation,of repeating history,down on the rest of us;those ignorant of history,or refuse to learn from history,are to ignorant,and should be refused access to the voting booth until they do;we don’t allow people to drive drunk,maybe we should as well test their,intoxicated,indoctrinated incompetance,before they can vote. because it is them that is driving america over a cliff;life is a two way street.”the right way,and the wrong way.good vs evil; the political leadership are the pimps,and dealers,that are traffiking,what the lazy,destructive ignorant,obsessesd,selfish,perverted,immoral,and addicted are buying;changing america,and the american dream for the better,begins with ourselves;that has to happen to work;so when you hear those trojan horse republicans,say we need a bigger party,and not a purer party;they are telling you who they are,and who,and what they will represent as your political leaders;which is good character,principals,morals,values,honor,truth,self-sacrifice,independence,the law,the constitution,the bill of rights,equal rights,and justice,means nothing to them;only strategic,maneuvers,spin,deception,and corruption,loyal only to,and on behalf of the highest bidder;for their own self-preservation,wealth,prominence,and political power;democrats are easier to figure out;political correctness;their version,of islam’s shari’a law;which are both,”lucifer’s law” war against the one true god,and jesus christ the savior of humanity;exactly like lucifer;they demand,and expect that their will is to be exalted above god,jesus christ,the true followers of god,and jesus christ,humanity,human,and civil rights,lives,liberties,property, resources,and opportunities,of true orthodox biblically believing,and principaled christians,and pro-life,and freedom,peoples;and any that dis-agree’s,refuses to submit,to their predatorial,crusades;doesn’t have the right to exist;jimmy joe;”the liarfryer”
jj…
Capitalization and Paragraphs would put strength into your message.
People might actually read it.
You wanna really make a Leftist’s head expode? Ask him the following question:
“Which do you Democrats want to take credit for: the so-called “Clinton budget surplus” or the 2008 financial meltdown?”
Because if they claim one, they have to claim both.
The “Clinton budget surplus” – fiction, though it is – was the result of budgets that were crafted by and approved by a REPUBLICAN-controlled legislature…budgets that Clinton later signed-off on. The 2008 financial meltdown – according to the Left – resulted from the deregulation of the financial/banking industry via the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a bill crafted by and approved by a REPUBLICAN-controlled legislature…a bill that Clinton later signed-off on.
So, Lefties, the exact same legislative and executive processes took place in both instances. Which one do you want to take responsibility for?
Being a Leftist means never having to say you’re sorry!
There’s another first-principles question that functions as the best Vulcan mind-meld truth-o-meter for libs: “To whom does your life belong?”
All else follows from that. And nothing works better to expose the bento box-like compartmentalization of half-baked ideas and nonsense that comprise the modern American liberal mindset. Makes their heads explode – it’s usually 10-20 seconds from the end of the question to when the name-calling starts.
Another Fun With Lefty conundrum that always gives them nose-bleeds:
“How do you logically justify EXCUSING an able-bodied adult human being from the responsibility for providing for their own material needs whilst FORCING another human being to provide for that persons needs?”
‘…in 2010, it’s more true than ever: more people are poor today than before Johnson started his war.”
Ah! But are they equally poor?
The govt. must confiscate all, and dole out the confication equally. Equality, man, equality.
Dead Wrong. Equality of opportunity not government mandated equality. Conservattive value as opposed to Marxist.
Well said, comrade! Now, tell us all how well that’s worked out in the past. We won’t hold our (ugh) collective breaths waiting for your brilliant exposition.
I believe he was being facetious.
I realize that most liberals must HATE the Constitution (it gets in the way of their glorious plans to recrete America in THEIR OWN IMAGE, not God’s.
However, there is one sentence they need to understand. “Life, liberty and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS.”:
1 – If someone is poor because the took a short cut to immediate gratification, i.e. dropped out of school to get money now. Too Bad, that stupid decision does not give them the right to steal my money!
2 – If someone is poor because they got pregnant as a teen, that was careless and stupid. Too Bad, that stupid decision does not give them the right to steal my money!
3 – If someone is poor because hey committed a crime and went to jail instead of school, that too is stupid. Too Bad, that stupid decision does not give them the right to steal my money!
I worked hard to earn my money, I support numerous charities. When the Communists (obama, reid, pelosi, etc) steal my money,I will stop giving to charities because DC must be taking care of ALL THE NEEDY!!!
If any at all of the Obamanistas had every taken and passed a course in basic ecomonics, maybe they would not be making all of these stupid decisions.
As I said way before the last election, “hope and change” really meant “You had better hope you have some change left after “the Boma” takes over because he will take ALL of the FOLDING money.”
Sincerely,
Roger T
This article makes many good points but ignores the seminal reason for poverty, the high non-marital birthrate(70 percent in inner cities and near forty percent overall).
In large measure,poverty is a self-inflicted wound. Women who do the following have a poverty rate of less than 10 percent: Finish high school and forstall your first birth untill you are married and at least 20 yeras old!
That lifestyle is, unfortunately, highly subsidized. Such women get WIC, subsidized daycare, free school lunches for the kids, subsidized housing, and often, a welfare check. Charities will provide the kids with Christmas presents, camp outings, and other such.
Even then, he [Obama] might have been more comfortable dealing with communities than with individuals. Democrats are best with groups
Obama keeps using the creepy phrase “collective salvation”
Yes in his mind we are THE COLLECTIVE
and HE is the LEADER who will take us tothe promised salvation
UGH
so creepy
…………….
Enjoyed your article Matt
There’s a real Jim Jones ring to those words, “collective salvation,” isn’t there? With everything that implies.
Democrats Ducking Town Halls
08/17/2010
Numerous vulnerable House Democrats are refusing to schedule town hall meetings in their districts over the summer recess.
A survey conducted by the National Republican Congressional Committee shows that of 75 Democratic House members who are targeted for defeat by the GOP, 65 have not yet scheduled a town hall meeting with their constituents.
The figure is astounding, to say the least. The “Gang of 65” includes freshmen who rode in on the national Democratic tide in ’08, among them Pennsylvania Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (who faces a stiff challenge from car dealer and conservative GOPer Mike Kelly) and Ohio Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy, who won a much-disputed “squeaker” against Republican state legislator Steve Stivers and now faces him in a rematch.
In addition, many Democratic “sophomores” who came in on a nationwide wave of anger against the Bush Administration and the Republican-run House in ’06 and then won on Barack Obama’s coat-tails in ’08 are also AWOL when it comes to scheduling meetings for constituents. These include two-termers Jason Altmire and Chris Carney of Pennsylvania, both of whom face stiff re-election challenges in 2010.
Even surprise winners of special elections in historically Republican districts, but who are under strong fire this year, are among the 65 who do not have town meetings on their calendars. Democratic Rep. Bill Foster won the Illinois seat of former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert in a dramatic upset in ’08 and Scott Murphy won the upstate New York district of fellow Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand when she was named to the Senate last year. Murphy won in the 20th District by just over 500 votes.
As to why Foster, Murphy, and the others are ducking town hall meetings, it could be any number of reasons. Earlier this year, veteran Rep. John Dingell (D.-Mich) had a town hall meeting over healthcare in his Dearborn-area district turn into a near riot, as constituents angrily charged that the lawmaker had not read the healthcare bill that was before Congress.
In Illinois’ 8th District, Democratic Rep. Melissa Bean had gone weeks during the healthcare debate without a town hall meeting on the issue. Republican opponent Joe Walsh hit this hard and began holding meetings of his own on alternatives to the proposals before Congress. In so doing, Walsh drew standing-room-only crowds and swatches of publicity.
Dingell and Bean apparently got the message. Neither are part of the “Gang of 65.” As to why there are so many who haven’t gotten the message and scheduled meetings, that’s something they will have to explain themselves—especially since House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on ABC’s “This Week:” “We are very proud of the agenda that we have put for to the American people.”
So why not talk about it with constituents?
A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him. He asked, “What are all those clocks?”
St. Peter answered, “Those are Lie-Clocks, Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie, the hands on your clock will move.”
“Oh,” said the man, “Whose clock is that?”
“That’s Billy Graham‘s. The hands have never moved, indicating that he never told a lie.”
“Incredible,” said the man, “And whose clock is that one?” St. Peter responded, “That’s Abraham Lincoln‘s clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire Life.”
“Where’s Nancy Pelosi’s clock?” asked the man.
“Nancy’s clock is in Jesus’ office. He’s using it as a ceiling fan.”
Tax Cuts – As Explained By A Democrat
If you don’t understand the Democrats’ version of tax cuts (and you are not alone), maybe this will help explain it:
50,000 people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due
The team was about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National Committee’s interpretation of fairness.
After all, if the refunds were made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the ticket holders of the most expensive tickets. That would be unfair and unconscionable.
People in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they have less money to spend. Call it an “Earned Income Ticket Credit.” Persons “earn” it by demonstrating few skills and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.
People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because that’s only fair.
People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don’t need a refund. After all, if they can afford a $50 ticket, then they must not be paying enough taxes.
People in the $75 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they have way too much to spend.
The people driving (or walking) by the stadium who couldn’t afford to watch the game will get $10 each, even though they didn’t pay anything in, because they need the most help (sometimes known as Affirmative Action!).
Now do you understand?
Hah! Excellent analogy!
Progressive’s want Health Care but want someone else to pay for it. They want energy but want the power source built someplace else. They want money but want someone else to work for it. They want security but want someone else to die for it.
See why it is so easy to be a Progressive?
ad;sorry my words,wern’t literate enough,capitalized,or paragraphed to your liking,i wasn’t fortunate enough like you, to attend,the harvard school for,rules for radicals,and jerks;i went to the school of hard knocks,and common sense,do no harm,and not spending my life,personally trashing others,i know nothing about;how would you know what mistakes,i made,while admitting,you never read it;for your information though,any mistakes i make,are due to being new at computers,unlike you,my message was factual,and my artcles,comments,and blogs,have enough,renowned respect,for truth,and reason.i don’t think your insults,will make me a more skilled computer guru.but maybe if you tried reading what i write, rather than,throwing insults,on how i pronounciate,my words.it might teach you a few things that seem to be void in your writing;class,respect,character,people,and topics,you apparently know little,or nothing about;but, i wish you well anyway;jimmy joe;”the liarfryer
JJ,
The comment submitted by AD was more constructive than insulting, and in fact, I chose not to read your post because it was, frankly, difficult to read. AD was pointing out that a well written post, in every sense of the phrase, will get more views and more credence.
You say you’re new at computers, and therefore must be new to the internet, so please take some advice and spend time using the and keys. There are many people on the internet who take great pleasure in humiliating and deriding a poorly written post. Even if your facts are straight, sometimes because they are, some folks will jump on silly mistakes and typos when that’s all they have.
FWIW!
(For What It’s Worth)
Good luck.
Dang! “…so please take some advice and spend time using the and keys.”
Should read “…so please take some advice and spend time using the shift and enter keys.”
Clearly, I’m still learning this computer stuff, too!
….and the space bar. That would be the extra wide key with no letters on it, in the middle of the row of keys nearest to you.
“Yet the same liberals who can see the fault in such behaviors for individuals support exactly those behaviors on the part of governments…”
I have often thought that if the US and Mexico were people instead of countries, one could imagine that the US is an enabler of irresponsible behavior on the part of Mexico, much as a spouse is an enabler when s/he acts in such a way as to permit the other to take exploit him/her continually. In this case, a liberal would be quick to defend the exploited (read: victimized) enabler and encourage him or her to have better boundaries, perhaps while hidden away in a safe place while long-term plans are made.
Yet notice what happens when one mentions the possibility of “better boundaries” for this nation.
I’m sorry my words were not literate enough, capitalized,or paragraphed to your liking. I wasn’t fortunate enough like you, to attend the ‘Harvard School for
Jimmy Joe tried to write …
—-
Rules for Radicals and Jerks.’ I went to the school of hard knocks and common sense. (I) do no harm and (I’m) not spending my life personally trashing others. I know nothing about how you would know what mistakes I made while admitting you never read it; for your information, any mistakes I make are due to being new at (English?Writing?Time Travel?–ed) computers. Unlike you, my message was factual. My articles, comments, and blogs have enough reknown (and) respect for truth and reason. I don’t think your insults will make me a more skilled computer guru. If you tried reading what I wrote, rather than throwing insults on how I pronounciate my words it might teach you a few things that your writing (lacks); class, respect, character, people and topics. You apparently know little or nothing about (those things). I wish you well anyway.
Jimmy Joe, “The Liarfryer” (and an obvious time traveler from the future, if the US education system is allowed to continue 20 more years in it’s current fashion. –Ed note)
Nixon and Obama: Two Peas in Similar, Sleazey Pods
The same day the president suffered the indignity of having a book thrown at him and a streaker streak him in Phladelphia and just a few days after the presidential seal fell off the rostrum in D.C., Obama was accused of underhanded Nixonesque tactics. It’s almost as if the sky–and his facade–were falling all around Barack.
President Richard Milhaus Nixon, widely castigated and justifiably shamed out of office but now regarded as one of the better presidents of the twentieth century by objective observers had some things in common with President Barack Hussein Obama.
Oceans if not galaxies separated their political philosophies but, as men and policians, there were more similarities between them than our current leader and his supporters and idolators would dare admit.
Last week Obama visited the great state of Maryland, a state he carried two years ago but which in 2010 is somewhat less than a Democrat sure thing. His audience in Bowie, MD consisted mainly of ”thousands of African Americans who came to see the man they voted for two years ago.” His message ”was simple: Get out and vote for the Democratic ticket in next month’s mid-term elections, even though he’s not on the ballot:” http://tiny.cc/1w6vs
Nixon, a white man, never had an extrordinarily great appeal to African Americans, (he received a piddling 18% of the black vote in his ’72 landslide) but Obama garnered a whopping 93% of that vote in 2008 so, very reasonably, he said to his mostly black audience in Bowie, feigning levity, “Don’t make me look bad, now,” now being the midterm election on November 2nd.
Obama is fully aware that the election in three weeks has the potential of sinking his leaking ship and will determine the fate of his agenda over his last two years in office. He needs his black constituency to support his fellow Democrats as much this year as he did two years ago.
Nixon won election in 1968 primarily on a divisive strategy. He appealed to what came to be called “the silent majority,” that multi-million mass of Americans who were fed up with the war in Viet Nam that we were losing for political, not military, reasons, and fed up with the overall condition of the country under the less than conscientious care of a war-distracted LBJ and a disunited Democrat Party.
Likewise, Mr. Obama, who campaigned to a war-divided nation on the basis of some undefined change ostensibly planned to unite the country, to end our wars which still rage, and to launch us on an as yet undetectable economic recovery, essentially plotted just the opposite. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=2171
wow; i really don’t want to get into a battle of wits any longer.as a matter of fact,after reading your indignant attempts to insult my computer skills.i’ve noticed,you don’t know how to spell,and your phrasing attempts,do not even qualify you,to mock anyone;are you a harvard radical leftist obama, zombie,borg.or cling-on.or maybe,a clueless rainman,or forrest gump,with no real connection to the real world,spiritual,or human experience,or reality.but if you are an example of our education system,and today’s educators;unlike myself,you have no future;i’ll pray for you though;good luck,rainmain;jimmy joe;”theliarfryer
I don’t quite get why you think this is a “liberal” issue. US conservative governments have never had any problem with running up debts. It’s a bipartisan phenomenon. Reagan spent a mozza on a military build up while simultaneously cutting taxes. Both bushes ran major wars entirely on borrowed money – and the second one did it, yes that’s right, while cutting taxes.
Jimmy Joe, “The Liarfryer”
You missed the point AD made:
“jj… Capitalization and Paragraphs would put strength into your message.
People might actually read it”
He/she is correct – I bailed after only a few words when I felt a headache coming on!
Either you don’t care if anyone reads what you write, or…???
I confess, I have NO clue why you’d even expend the energy to post!
Excellent article, generational theft is putting it mildly. Blatant, outright STEALING is more like it.
Actually Dennis it is much more than simple stealing it is in fact armed robbery! I do believe armed robbery is a greater offense than thievery because they threaten your very life if you do not comply with their wishes to take your possessions!
Another problem with the Democrates view of everyone as belonging to a group, and then trying to help the ‘group,’ is that the composition of an economic ‘group’ is fluid. College students start out poor, and so are in the group of those considered ‘poor’ but they don’t necessarily stay that way.
As far as helpign out groups based upon race and gender, the problem is that the problems associated with races and genders are never limited to the races and genders the problems are stereotypically associated with. THere are plenty of disadvantaged white males out there.
#7 BC(BEYOND CRETINISM) “Dead bodies lying uncollected”?Listen, cretin, cretin, you mean like those of the men ,women , and chidren murdered by ATF thugs acting under the orders of Janet Reno and Bill(the rapist) Clinton? Worries about the impending demtard catastrophe,as well as your pre-existing medical condition(tertiary syphillis)is making your posts even more grotesquely absurd than usual.Get treatment.Or not
#7 BC(BEYOND CRETINISM) “Dead bodies lying uncollected”?Listen, cretin, cretin, you mean like those of the men ,women , and chidren murdered by ATF thugs acting under the orders of Janet Reno and Bill(the rapist) Clinton? Worries about the impending demtard catastrophe,as well as your pre-existing medical condition(tertiary syphillis)are making your posts even more grotesquely absurd than usual.Get treatment.Or not