The face of the Democratic Party  

Page 2 / 23

rotorhead
Posts: 2452
(@rotorhead)
Trusted Member
Joined: 14 years ago

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 have nots, it’s the do's 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’sabout 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. That’s not invective, that’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 victim-hood 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. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.

Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – 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. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, 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 in equality 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 inequality 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 our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our 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 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.

113 Replies
MissJustice
Posts: 548
(@MissJustice)
Trusted Member
Joined: 7 years ago

I have a graduate degree and make a fine living. There is no question that those who have more usually made better choices. But I am glad that Obama is talking about raising wages and not raising entitlements. Obama didn't invent the concept of the minimum wage, he is simply talking about adjusting upwards for inflation. When a billion dollar company like Walmart or McDonalds pays people $7.50 per hour, it is we the tax payer that gets stuck with their emergency room costs, their Medicaid, their tax refunds, housing subsidies. You can't just pay people for what they know, you have to pay them for what they do. A bachelors degree teacher in the VI with 2 kids who is divorced made $29,000 per year last year and therefore was eligible for foodstamps. And earned income credit. Are you okay with this? The moguls on Wall street who brought our economy to the edge of a depression got entitlements and no jail time. Are you okay with that? More than half of all food stamp recipients work full time? Are you okay with that? More that 2/3 of all food stamp recipients live in red states and vote Republican? Fact. Our country became great because companies like Ford standardized the work week and paid a living wage. The minimum wage is responsible for the creation of middle class. If people get paid a living wage, we decrease their entitlement eligibility and increase their tax burden. I come inequality feeds continued dependency and keeps people less likely to maintain marital relationships. I am all for cutting off people who are lazy and do not work by choice. But for god sakes, if someone is willing to do an honest day's work, they should get an honest day's pay. And that has nothing to do with race.
You make me love Obama a little bit more because he is championing work. I notice you dig at him more than. Exes wary instead of arguing the concept. If Mitt Romney had won, we would be like Kentucky/ Arkansas/ Mississippi/ Louisiana/ Alabama. Deeply red states with the highest rates of welfare and doles. 60% of all entitlements go to white people. So why are you mentioning race? Are you criticizing our half white president for promoting entitlements that by far and by large go to white people?

The face of the Democratic Party is doing just fine. I give him an A- . Points off for responding to corruption in the territory.

Reply
speee1dy
Posts: 8723
(@speee1dy)
Expert
Joined: 11 years ago

miss justice-what do you consider entitlement? not trying to start an argument but a real question.

and lets take mcdonalds who is pretty similar in what others pay starting out. what is wrong with working hard and working your way up. trying to better yourself. seriously, if you have not made a raise or promotion and you are still working there after 3 years, it is your own fault and not that of others.

Reply
rotorhead
Posts: 2452
(@rotorhead)
Trusted Member
Joined: 14 years ago

Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?

Way to go Barry!

Reply
janeinstx
Posts: 656
(@janeinstx)
Trusted Member
Joined: 7 years ago

Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?

Way to go Barry!

Reply
MissJustice
Posts: 548
(@MissJustice)
Trusted Member
Joined: 7 years ago

miss justice-what do you consider entitlement? not trying to start an argument but a real question.

and lets take mcdonalds who is pretty similar in what others pay starting out. what is wrong with working hard and working your way up. trying to better yourself. seriously, if you have not made a raise or promotion and you are still working there after 3 years, it is your own fault and not that of others.

These are what I consider entitlements:

1. Oil subsidies
2. Wall Street bail outs
3. Inheritances tax breaks
4. Farm subsidies
5. Pork barrel projects
6. Welfare (AFDC)
7. Medicaid
8. Food stamps
9. Housing subsidies
10. Earned income credit
These are what I can sided entitlements in order of size and reverse order of merit and common sense.

Reply
Page 2 / 23
Settlers Handbook

Thinking about moving to the Virgin Islands?

The Settler's Handbook is a Indispensable Guide

The current 18th Edition, will help you explore your dream of island living. A solid reference book, it was first published in 1975. That's 40 years of helping people move to the Virgin Islands.

Order Today $17.95
Close Menu
  
Working

Please Login or Register