Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts

Monday, February 3, 2014

TWO AMERICAS --- IT IS DIVIDED BY THE DIFFERENCES IN EFFORTS

 
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM 1180 am said this in response to Obama's "income inequality speech" .

Two Americas

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.
The America that works, and the America that doesn't.
The America that contributes, and the America that doesn't.
It's not the haves and the haven'ts, it's the dos and the don'ts.
Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don't. That's the divide in America.

It's not about income inequality, it's about civic irresponsibility.
It's about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.
It's about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. It's not invective, it's truth, and it's about time someone said it.
The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when president Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting "income inequality." He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that's not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat.
That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America.
It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope.
The president's premise - that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful - seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.
By and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure frequently manifest themselves in personal and family income.
You choose to drop out of high school and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.
You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course, you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

My doctor makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.
He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.
Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom.
The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.
The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime's worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring equality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest - as ye sow, so shall ye reap - is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.
Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity.
He and his party speak of two Americas and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other.

America is not divided by the differences in outcomes, it is divided by the differences in efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man's success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man's victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He has fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That's what socialists offer.
Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.
Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln's maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand

Sunday, July 22, 2012

BLAME IT ON BUSH

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was
actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of
Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th
Congress.

The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the
first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy
that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:

January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and
the Congress. At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH

Remember the day...

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House
Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate
Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part
of the economy?

BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping
5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in
2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?

OBAMA and the Democrat Congress

So when someone tries to blame Bush..

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"

Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and
the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat
Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 &
2009 as well as 2010 &2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused
them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough
on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush
entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running
until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a
massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that
very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he
signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the
last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five
years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After
that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that
includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a
nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted
for starting Jan. 2, 2007 and then I voted to expand that deficit
four-fold since January 22, 2009.

There is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!


h/t BK Alpert, FB member