Posted on 09/18/2012 5:00:59 PM PDT by joanie-f
Mitt Sees the Emperor Without His Clothes: Will the Rest of America Listen?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2932983/posts
I can tell you now election 2012 will not be as momentous as the Civil War. Unless the international banking system collapses soon, which it could. More likely the EU will fizzle, though not die, and China and Russia will gang up on us and replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Which will be catastrophic, but not like 1860.
There should be a rule about posting an author’s own article before she does (but thanks for doing so anyway). :)
Now there's a frightening visual.
FRiends, this is my latest commentary on Patriot Post.
Wow, great quote from de Tocqueville and good post. I haven't actually seen this now famous video of Romney because although I hate the Obama presidency and want Romney to win, I generally find Romney less than inspiring.
How come?
I completely agree with you that Mitt is not inspiring. Neither was he my first (or even second) choice for the republican nomination. He is far less conservative than I would like, but he is a decent and honest man, with an excellent running mate, and I would vote for a parakeet over Obama at this point.
Hilarious! :D
And it is excellent. Thank you.
Ping
Excellent work Joanie, keep it up.
The media would have us believe that Romney is in trouble,
but yet from my viewpoint, it’s Obama who is having to
scramble and reply. He is outside of the OODA loop and
the longer Romney can keep him there the better things
will get. We see all this hype about confusion and confilict
in the GOP but what we aren’t seeing is the screaming
and throwing going on inside the Obama camp and you KNOW
it is. To be down to even this early in the campaign for
an incumbent is a horror for democrats and they will
start making bad, then worse decisions as it all starts
to come apart.
Their “foreign policy” such as it was, is in tatters
and has become a threat to Americans around the world
and even at home.
I can see November from my house and it looks damn good.
My Best Tet68.
I truly hope the view from your house is more accurate than the view from mine.
Best to you, dear FRiend ...
~ joanie
Outstanding. Another A+ for you, joanie.
Indeed, Obummer has certainly made it clear that zero-sum thinking informs his domestic economic policies — "You didn't build that"; so why not extrapolate to the international community as well?
But his basic presupposition that the economy is a zero-sum game, though wildly unhistorical, is never challenged. Such a view displays virtually total ignorance of our economic system, which is premised on wealth creation. The zero-sum model assumes that the total economic "pie" is of fixed size; it never gets bigger.
Yet the entire history of the U.S. economy shows that the "pie" does get bigger whenever new real wealth is created. A richer society can afford to pay for safety-net programs that give people facing adversity a hand-up. A poorer society cannot do this — it can only borrow money for current expenditures which go 'way past giving people a hand-up; they rather seem to be designed to make such folks permanently dependent on government largesse.
Good economic stewardship requires the government to get out of the way of wealth creation by keeping taxes low and keeping regulation from strangling private initiative, creativity, and risk taking.
Instead, Obummer is the champion of redistribution — expropriating the fruits of private enterprise from the "rich" and giving it to the "poor." His idea of a good economic model is to take as much as he can get away with from the wealth creators, to put it all in a vast pool to be divvied out — at the sole discretion of an increasingly unaccountable federal government — to the "politically favored."
The "politically favored" are basically those people who believe they are entitled to "freebies" at someone else's expense. So Obummer is lining up as many of such people as he possibly can, by telling them that they are "entitled" to have all their needs — food, housing, healthcare, education, etc.., etc. — taken care of by the "rich," in the process making promises he cannot possibly keep.
The government creates exactly NO new wealth (capital) at all: It only shuffles it around to favored constituencies. Thus the entire idea of a "zero-sum game" becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Printing money does not represent an increase in real wealth. What Bernanke is doing is providing so much "monopoly money" to juice the system short-term. Long-term, such a tactic only further erodes the value of existing wealth, making even more people "poorer."
The question that never seems to get raised is this: Where is all the money to come from, to pay for all the promises that Obummer has already made, let alone all those that are still coming down the pike? As people become more dependent on government, government will have to do "more" for them.
But where's the money coming from, if you destroy the private sector? Not to mention that there probably isn't enough money in the world to pay for the expansion of government "obligations" that the Obummer Administration has made.
Soaking the rich isn't going to do it. If you expropriated the entire private wealth of the nation, it wouldn't be enough. The tax increase "on the wealthiest Americans" — the "1%" — set for January 1 is expected to raise only $80 billion a year — about enough to pay for 8 weeks of debt service on our $16+ trillion of national debt [which is itself roughly the size of the current total wealth of the nation] — a whole bunch of which is owed to China, not exactly our most dependable friend in the world.
Laying off the costs to subsequent generations by incurring such incredible debts — our kids and grandkids and their descendants — is grossly immoral. Why should generations yet unborn be asked to pay for current American lifestyle "choices"??? The current generation has no moral right to send its debts to generations yet to come.
Thomas Jefferson put that point thusly:
...a preceding generation cannot bind a succeeding one by its laws or contracts; these deriving their obligation from the will of the existing majority, and that majority being removed by death, another comes in its place with a will equally free to make its own laws and contracts; these are axioms so self-evident that no explanation can make them plainer. — Letter to T. Earles, 1823That is the American understanding of our Republic, formed under the auspices of liberty and law.
Obummer is like a big, fat termite, chewing out the moral core of the nation.
It's time to call the Orkin man....
Dear joanie-f, thank you for yet another splendid commentary on the real situation that we, the American people, are now in! I hope and pray folks will figure it out before November 6th, and vote to put a stop to the Termite-in-Chief.
The “politically favored” are basically those people who believe they are entitled to “freebies” at someone else’s expense. So Obummer is lining up as many of such people as he possibly can, by telling them that they are “entitled” to have all their needs — food, housing, healthcare, education, etc.., etc. — taken care of by the “rich,” in the process making promises he cannot possibly keep.
True sign of a politician. I’ll get yours from them, but you need to back me.
You don’t have to do anything, but VOTE, and get your friends to do the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.