What Liberals Think
"The Democrats know what needs to be done. Again, we're working to try to push this agenda forward. The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. (Laughter.) I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to find alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence! (Cheers, applause.)
--Hillary Clinton,
Speaking before the Democratic National Committee, Feb 2, 2007
That's right! The room, filled with Democrats, applauded Hillary's desire to steal from a private company; ie, 'the rich'. Why!? BECAUSE THEY MADE TOO MUCH MONEY! Oh, the cause is noble! Yes, it is! Why, everyone APPLAUDED after all. That must make it right!
Oh, those evil rich! How dare they become successful through hard work and investment while so many of this nations' poor can't manage to save a dime, let alone rub two nickles together. Yes... the poor, with their flat-screen TV's, X-Box's, $1,000 Rims on their ghetto rides...
There are, of course, the genuinely poor: the homeless, the destitute; living under bridges and overpasses, having to depend on the kindness of motorists who kindly discard their aluminum cans on the highway's verge. But Liberals don't really care about 'these poor'... they don't typically vote.
This is who Liberals are.
from the mind of... Eric | 8:10 PM
17 Comments:
"But Liberals don't really care about 'these poor'... they don't typically vote."
You know what? I quit.
God have mercy on your sad, angry soul. Look to friends like Ben, he seems like a good guy, spend time with him.
And please don't condemn Jesus and his family because, My Word!, what they had to say about the rich.
I'd hope you'd give them a bit more grace than you are those you consider "liberal."
The Lord has brought down rulers from their thrones
but has lifted up the humble.
God has filled the hungry with good things
but has sent the rich away empty.
-Mary, Mother of Jesus
Luke 1:52-53
But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.
-Jesus
Luke 6:24
Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
...Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you.
-James
EL, try to stop being obtuse about politics and economics. If the we as a nation and global economy are to begin fighting the changes we have set in motion through 150 years of dirty fuels, then the oil and energy companies will have to be reduced. Just as the large tobacco companies have been reduced. Just as the telephone companies were reduced. Just as the 18th century railroad companies were reduced. In all these instances the body populous decided that it no longer wished to support an industry or such a monopolies were damaging the public and that the resources and funds tied into that industry should be refocused on other efforts.
The tobacco companies were reduced through court settlements because people thought they were a danger to public health and well being.
The telephone companies were broken by federal regulators because it was felt they stifled innovation.
The railroad barons were reduced through congressional action because they promoted unfair working conditions.
It seems to me responsible to say that part of this new environmental movement may be funded by the very companies that contributed so much to the current sad state.
(More thoughts) Capitalism is a great system for creating productivity and wealth, but it is a poor system when measured against the growth and happiness of its workers. Capitalism encourages each company to become more and more efficient. To seek always to rise to the top by producing goods with a greater and greater price margin. There is nothing in this model that encourages care and safety or the workers, or consideration of the greater good of society. That is why capitalism must be tempered by regulations.
Regulations that require companies to provide health care to their employees. Regulations that keep companies from selling dangerous and unacceptable products to just any customer.
Hillary wasn't talking about breaking up monopolies or reducing influence, she was talking about "Taking"... Theft.
I distinctly remember an argument you and I had a year or so ago, wherein you claimed the rich should be made to pay more in taxes because they can afford to pay more. This is socialist class-warfare. The Democrats applauded her... They applauded theft of property. If you want to reduce the influence of American Oil Companies, pump more money into incentives for research and development of new technologies. Don't steal from the energy providers who will in turn pass their loss off onto the consumer. It's not only wrong, it's irresponsible.
You're beginning to sound like Marx and Lenin. In terms of ideology, Hillary's a socialist too.
Since when was it the mission of America to tell it's people just how much they can earn? That's not why the Revolution was fought-- "Taxation Without Representation" immediately stands out... America is about liberty. Your vision of an American Utopia is, in reality, a Communistic nightmare; and it's failed every time and every where it's been tried.
(even more thoughts)No one is talking about taking Donald Trump's millions. Or Oprah's billions. Or Bill Gates's trillions. No Senator Hillary Clinton in this speech was talking about beginning to tax oil COMPANIES because they bring pollutants to our shore. Because we want to begin to wean our economy and our society from these toxins, creating an economic disincentive is a responsible first step.
Besides which, I don't need you or Dan or anyone else to tell me what Liberals think. They broadcast what they think every time they open their mouths.
----
On another note: It's about time! I was beginning to think Dan didn't know when to quit!
I've quit pointing out those instances when you're misrepresenting the truth - for instance, calling Hillary a socialist. "Socialism" means something. Hillary's a capitalist who'd tax a company, not a socialist who'd nationalize the company - taking it from its owners.
Words have meanings. When you continually misrepresent the way things are, well, it represents something about you.
But I'm quitting pointing it out. Your misrepresentations can sink or float on their own.
Just shame on you for continuing to do it.
I'm not quitting dialog with you, not until you tell me to go away. Dialog is important when a nation or world is as divided as we seem to be.
Yes, Ben, by unjustly taxing a single industry, and hurting the poorest American constituent pocketbooks when they go to fill up their "spit and bailing-wire" vehicles. Politicians in their Limos, Lincolns, and SUV's needn't worry, though. They're living off the taxpayer teat; living high on the hog and pork-barrel projects. Perhaps they should begin by weaning themselves.
Should I try to tell you what Republicans/Conservatives/Christians think? How the hell do you know what I or Dan or Hillary Clinton or Franklin Delaeno Roosevelt or anyone else think? Should I judge you only by a few of your most violent quotes?
Remember when you said we should round up all the Palestinians and gass them? Or when you talked of nuking Mecca? Oh yeah there was that great screed a few weeks ago where you said most of America were myrmidons, and imbecciles. Should I take by these comments that you have nothing but contempt and hatred for the greatest majority of humanity?
Dan, you are a walking misrepresentation of the truth! You're just too blind to see it.
Ben, I never said "Gas the Palestinians" nor did I use the word "Imbecile". I did say "Nuke Mecca" and call most Americans "Myrmidons".
There are already economic incentives to use less oil. You get 30% of the cost of upgrades back on your taxes for installing solar cells on your house. If you buy a hybrid there is the immediate lower cost of puchasing less gass. Plus there are tax breaks for those too.
However, as discussed in an earlier thread most of this country's oil use is in manufacturing. There are right now no incentives or disincentives for those sectors to begin finding alternative processes. Taxes and levies on oil companies would be passed on to manufacturing sectors and will encourage those new scientific breakthroughs. It will also generate revenue which can be used to cleanup already damaged parts of the environment.
One hopes the result would be a cleaner, better stewarded world.
I tried to comment over here a while ago, and blogger wouldn't allow me to comment. But my comment was so long, I decided to just create a whole blogpost out of it and so you may see my comment on this post over at my place (Your idea properly credited of course).
And now that I've done it, blogger allows my comment. Go figure.
While Hillary probably meant to say she wants to tax, or take PART of the oil company profits, she said what she said. She didn't say part, or some, or even most. She said she wants to take the oil company profits. Period. How does one interpret that to mean taxation, and aren't the oil companies profits already taxed?
Yes Mark, those profits are already taxed, or will by, via the Capital Gains tax. Remember, you can't tax a corporation, they will only pass that loss on to the consumer. You can only tax people. And those profits, above and beyond the Profit Margin, belong to the shareholders. Will those shareholders think kindly on Democrats when their investments are stolen by Hillary and her Band of Merry Thieves?
The idea that corporation profits because their profits have already been reduced by taxing customers is misguided. Economics is about money flowing. Money doesn't stop. If a company makes a profit then that profit goes to employees, business improvements, other businesses, and company shareholders. Those monies distributed going from that company are then funneled back into other companies and individuals. There is no final point in the money cycle.
To limit government to only being able to take some of this money when is passes from individual to business, or employer to employee is silly. It's like saying that the only correct way to harvest water for municipal use is to catch it as precipitation. No siphoning from rivers. No pumping from aquifers.
To limit government is the whole idea of the Constitution, Bent. America rebelled against Great Britain because of too much intrusion-- ironically in the form of taxes.
Personally, I'm in favor of scrapping the entire IRS in favor of the FairTax, reintroduced this legislative session with even more co-sponsors and this time with bi-partisan support.
Now, before any of you liberal yahoos start screaming about a 30-32% tax rate, let it be known I'll reject any such comments because the claim is not only unfounded, but it displays a genuine lack of understanding and knowledge of the the Fair Tax. Don't waste your time... or mine. I only mention it as an aside.
Post a Comment
<< Home