Bring it on Maggie!
This provides some wonderfully understandable images that differentiate between socialists (theives) and capitalists (non-theives):
Liberals see a great businessman and think “lucky bastard” or “cheater” – the notion that the man honestly earned his wealth and his success is a possibility that is seldom considered. Rather, they think of the successful businessman as some kind of exploitive tyrant who earned his prize only because he was able to deny it to those beneath him
Liberals don’t even believe that the concept of business risk exists – they view business as a perpetual money pumping, injustice-spewing machine which serves the needs of the few above the many. They never consider the symbiotic relationship between the job providing class and the working class; the idea that jobs have to be created is not one that occurs until an angry, unemployed mob arrives at their doorstop years after the initial advent of socialism. After all, isn’t a job something that each American is utterly entitled to? Jobs are a right, just like health care and an affordable home.
Socialists are merely the crashers at the capitalist dinner party – one capitalist provides the butter, another the wine, another the steak, and then the lone socialist shows up with a knife and fork asking “where’s my fair share, to which I am entitled?”
And after you have paid your federal income tax and state income tax and federal gasoline taxes and state gasoline taxes and state sales tax and county sales tax and local taxing authority sales tax and school property tax and library property tax and county property tax and service provider tax and your road and bridge tolls and your car liscence tax and your driver’s liscence renewal fee and ………
And after all that – the Obamamessiah pops up and says “you bunch over there make too much, I’m just going to take it because I know better and if you object you go to jail”.
At what point does the withdrawal of the consent of the governed occur? We all know that the coming collapse of the Social Security Ponzi scheme wiill make today’s bailout pale in comparison. But was Social Security and the $53 trillion of unfunded liabilities in it even mentioned in the past campaign? Of course not. Democrats did demogague the taxing of health care beneifts and claim McCain was coming for your Social Security benefits at the very end of the campaign, but isn’t that just standard operating procedure?
President Bush tried to put his political capital to work in 2005 on the Social Security issue and got zero support from his own Republicans. Apparently the decision has been made to simply let the thing fall apart and deal with the consequences tomorrow – just like Scarlett O’Hara.
And by that time if the Obmanauts have already stolen every incentive for anybody in America to even try and work, just where are they going to get the money from for all those wrinkly Baby Boomers?
Here’s an obituary from the Democratic Communist People’s Republic Pravda:
Third-party political activist Peter Camejo, a perennial candidate for state and national office who helped pioneer the financial market niche of socially responsible investments, died Saturday. He was 68.
He helped found the California Green Party in 1991 and ran three times for governor of California. He also ran as independent Ralph Nader’s vice presidential running mate in the 2004 presidential election in which President Bush won a second term. In 1976 he ran for president as the Socialist Workers Party candidate.
Mr. Camejo described himself as a watermelon – red on the inside, green on the outside.
OK – so here’s somebody who was admittedly a Communist/Socialist – who actually RAN as the Socialist Workers Party candidate for President in 1976. Now who was running from the Democrat side in 1976? Here’s a little tidbit from the current Socialist Workers Party obit:
Peter used the campaign to fight for the idea that the great historical stumbling block to the building of any genuine revolutionary alternative organization was the misplaced hope that the Democratic Party could be taken over by the left and used as a vehicle to advance toward socialism.
Surprisingly, even among socialists in the U.S. in the 1960s and 1970s, this idea was in the minority, as the Communist Party, many Maoist groups and the forerunners of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)–Sen. Bernie Sanders being their most prominent member–backed Democrat Jimmy Carter for president.
So this person who believed that the Democrats were too “reactionary” to implement a true revolution in the United States then does what? Well, first he decides to get a job with Merrill Lynch:
Matt Gonzalez, a former San Francisco supervisor who is running for vice president with Nader as an independent, said that Mr. Camejo once told him that when he interviewed for his job at Merrill Lynch, “the only thing that was true on my resume was my name and phone number.”
And he ended up his life as a capitalist fund manager – but it was GREEN!
Mr. Camejo earned his living as a financier and helped start an investment firm, Progressive Management Asset Inc. in Oakland. Clients can arrange their portfolios so that their investments, for example, are not linked to animal testing, weapons or sweatshop labor.
So we say adieu to someone who provably spent his life working for the overthrow of America and Democracy. And please note – founder of the California Green Party. A self-described Watermelon. Thereby giving us further information about why opposing the EcoFreaks is also a good idea.
Someone who’s whole life was given over to everything I personally oppose. And will continue to work in opposition.
And this self-described environmentalist fraud and communist is lauded in the pages of a “major” newspaper? Sort of tells one where their sensibilities lie too.
Basic economics people – trade is a win/win – now if only somebody would tell the two major party Presidential candidates:
McCain and Obama talk constantly about how much they will “invest” — with money taken from the taxpayers, of course — to achieve energy independence. “[W]e can provide loan guarantees and venture capital to those with the best plans to develop and sell biofuels on a commercial market,” Obama said.
What makes Obama think he’s qualified to pick the “best plans”? It’s the robust competition of the free market that reveals what’s best. Obama’s program would preempt the only good method we have for learning which form of energy is best.
And John McCain seems to be no better:
McCain promises a $300-million prize to whoever develops a battery for an electric car. But the free market already provides plenty of incentive to invent a better battery. As George Mason University economist Donald Boudreaux writes, “Anyone who develops such a device will earn profits dwarfing $300 million simply by selling it on the market. There’s absolutely no need for any such taxpayer-funded prize“.
Central energy planning and government-funded prizes are economic idiocy.