Posted on 05/07/2012 4:17:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
I shared an amazing video last year featuring Margaret Thatcher exposing the left for wanting to keep the poor destitute if that was the price of hurting the so-called rich.
Deroy Murdock makes similar points in a great column for National Review.
For too many liberals like Obama, “fairness” is not about enriching the modest; it’s about impoverishing the moneyed. Multibillionaire Warren Buffett has energized liberals with his still-unverified claim that his tax rate lags his secretary’s. …Somehow, reducing the secretary’s taxes never came up. Instead liberals demand the so-called Buffett Rule, an instrument for bludgeoning the successful rather than boosting the downtrodden. …Here’s how the Right should challenge the Left: “If you dislike income inequality, lift those with the least. Let’s adopt universal school choice, allow personal Social Security retirement accounts (to democratize long-term capital accumulation), radically reduce or eliminate America’s anti-competitive 35 percent corporate tax (to supercharge businesses), and pass right-to-work laws (so the jobless won’t fester outside closed shops). Let’s build the Keystone Pipeline (to create 20,000 blue-collar positions right now and lower everyone’s energy costs), frack for natural gas, and tame the EPA, OSHA, SEC, and other power-mad bureaucracies, so U.S. companies will stay here, and foreign firms will move in.”
Needless to say, the left will not accept Deroy’s challenge.
Too many of them care about enriching teacher unions, for instance, more than they care about educational opportunity for poor children.
And most leftist leaders would like to impose higher tax rates on success, even if the government collects less revenue.
Today’s a big day in European politics. French voters are going to the polls to decide the fate of Nicolas Sarkozy, the socialist incumbent. I’ve endorsed Francois Hollande, the Socialist challenger, so I’m curious to see what will happen.
The more important contest, though, is in Greece. Voters are electing a new Parliament, and it will be interesting to see whether the two establishment parties (both of which are statist, of course) hold on to power.
The looters and moochers that comprise the Greek electorate are in a pissy mood and may opt for various protest parties.
That’s not too surprising, but the press coverage of the election is a bit surreal.
An article in the EU Observer is entitled “Greek elections to usher in anti-bail-out parties,” and the opening paragraph echoes this title, implying that Greek voters don’t like bailouts.
Greece’s two main parties are set for heavy losses in Sunday’s (6 May) elections, with anti-bail-out groups on the extreme left and right to enter parliament for the first time, raising again the prospect of an exit from the eurozone.
There’s just one tiny problem with the both the title of the first paragraph. Contrary to what’s written, the new political parties are pro-bailout. They are quite happy to mooch off German taxpayers, American taxpayers, and anyone else who is stupid enough to send money (after all, somebody has to finance critical functions of government, such as collecting stool samples from people who want to set up online companies and subsidizing pedophiles).
What gets them upset is the notion that they should do anything in exchange for these handouts. Perish the thought!
If the media had any brains (I don’t think this is a case of ideological bias), they would change the title from “Greek elections to usher in anti-bail-out parties” to “Greek elections to usher in anti-conditionality parties.” Or something like that.
I actually hope these anti-conditionality parties prevail. Because if they get power and say that they won’t do anything to fix Greece’s budget, maybe the fiscal pyromaniacs at the International Monetary Fund and elsewhere will finally stop the bailouts.
Which is what I said was the right approach way back when the crisis began. So maybe after every other option is exhausted, the right thing will finally happen. Hope springs eternal.
Think about how many members of the radical Left are children of wealth, like Ayers and his wife.
The real objective of the radical left is to make it impossible for a smart, energetic person of modest means to become wealthy, and possibly displace some of the old elite via competition.
Neither. That want the whole world dependent upon them. For instance oil companies. They don’t hate oil-in fact most libs have a bigger “carbon footprint” than anyone else.
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2007/02/gores_carbon_fo.html
what they hate are “oil companies” whom everyone else is dependent upon...which makes it hard for the libs to control.
Basically Liberalism is the collective manifestation of all the worst of the individual crazy control freaks you’ve ever met in your life.
“they want” ....
2 Tim 3
1 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9 But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.
"having the form of godliness but denying its power" - liberalism as a religion. Desiring the "feel good" of godliness, but denying His authority over their lives.
"the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women" - Modern feminism. You don't need a family, especially a "man". You can have all the protection and provision from the government without any of the obligations of being a wife to a man.
Excellent. Truth always divides.
-—7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these teachers oppose the truth. They are men of depraved minds-—
So true of countless modern intellectuals, from Marx through Keynes and Kinsey.
For anyone interested, see “Degenerate Moderns,” or “Intellectuals.”
If they were honest, the Dems would admit their constituency is made up of a lot of whiners and people who feel life hasn’t been fair to them. They should be millionaires and not the people who actually are millionaires through dint of hard work. Human nature. many people are just jealous of what other people have. Which is why there will always be a Dem party. Or the Thief Party as I call it now. Here in Wisconsin the Dems (especially teachers union members) are boiling mad that Scott Walker made them contribute to their retirement and health fund. And they’re really mad that Walker’s reforms worked. So they’ve got a bunch of candidates who are lying about what Walker did, and are promising to steal the money back for the teachers. Which would plunge the state back into billions of dollars of debt. These people are shameless.
A lot of rich socialists out there. They love socialism because it locks out their competition.
Hatred, of course.
I have systematically purged every liberal acquaintence from my life. Not only are they actively trying to destroy my country, they are the angriest, most spiteful and jealous people I know.
Hate is an unavoidable byproduct of envy, which is an unavoidable byproduct of vanity. Vanity/pride is the root cause of all sin. Humility is a virtue, vanity is a vice. To fight evil and leftist thought we need more humility. But humility is very hard to achieve when even the left side of the bell curve has no awe of God. Instead of saying grace before dinner they now check their EBT balance on their free smart phone, while their big screen cable TV blares in the background and the kids have their iPods plugged into their ears checking Twitter and Facebook messages on their iPads.
Superficially, the motive of those who hate the good is taken to be envy. A dictionary definition of envy is: "1. a sense of discontent or jealousy with regard to another's advantages, success, possessions, etc. 2. desire for an advantaged position possessed by another." (The Random House Dictionary, 1968.) The same dictionary adds the following elucidation: "To envy is to feel resentful because someone else possesses or has achieved what one wishes oneself to possess or to have achieved."
This covers a great many emotional responses, which come from different motives. In a certain sense, the second definition is the opposite of the first, and the more innocent of the two.
For example, if a poor man experiences a moment's envy of another man's wealth, the feeling may mean nothing more than a momentary concretization of his desire for wealth; the feeling is not directed against that particular rich person and is concerned with the wealth, not the person. The feeling, in effect, may amount to: "I wish I had an income or a house, or a car, or an overcoat) like his." The result of this feeling may be an added incentive for the man to improve his financial condition.
The feeling is less innocent, if it amounts to: "I want this man's car (or overcoat, or diamond shirt studs, or industrial establishment)." The result is a criminal.
But these are still human beings, in various stages of immorality, compared to the inhuman object whose feeling is: "I hate this man because he is wealthy and I am not."
Envy is part of this creature's feeling, but only the superficial, semirespectable part; it is the tip of an iceberg showing nothing worse than ice, but with the submerged part consisting of a compost of rotting living matter. The envy, in this case, is semirespectable because it seems to imply a desire for material possessions, which is a human being's desire. But, deep down, the creature has no such desire: it does not want to be rich, it wants the human being to be poor.
This is particularly clear in the much more virulent cases of hatred, masked as envy, for those who possess personal values or virtues: hatred of a man (or a woman) because he (or she) is beautiful or intelligent or successful or honest or happy. In these cases, the creature has no desire and makes no effort to improve its appearance, to develop or to use its intelligence, to struggle for success, to practice honesty, to be happy (nothing can make it happy). It knows that the disfigurement or the mental collapse or the failure or the immorality or the misery of its victim would not endow it with his or her value. It does not desire the value: it desires the value's destruction.
Wrong choices given.
The absolute convictions that
(1) they are smarter, superior than you and me; therefore they ought to be in charge of everything;
and (2) all others are just ‘tools’ to be used as they see fit, all for the greater good, of course.
Yep. Bloodthirsty power is the correct answer.
Of course, they don't understand that the number of slavemasters would be very few and that, even though they voted to enslave “them,” they would also be under the lash.
The leftists hate the poor, too. They want to keep poor people poor and ignorant. If they loved poor people they’d want them to become responsible and diligent members of society.
Leftists hate everyone and everything. It is said that lust, greed and anger are the three gates leading to hell. Lust, greed and anger are the very guiding lights of leftists.
Of course they do?
The left hates themselves. Their hate simply carries over to everyone else.
The 10 Commandments was written for a purpose. Those human vices for which it was written are the same vices that the Left exploits for their pursuit of power and control.
The Left always appeals to all that is base in the human character. The reason is not hard to fathom.
While there are a few demagogues who simply exploit the base tendencies, most of those on the Left are compulsion driven. Hating the reality that we are all different--and hence each responsible for our own performance--they seek fantasy driven wish lists, that deny reality--and they do so with a fervor that says much about the neurotic compulsions that substitute for human reason.
For example, see Compulsion For Uniformity; or The Greatest Mischief Ever Wrought.
William Flax
Bravo! You contribution to the subject is most appreciated!
I often refer to the Left as living in the fantasy world of the Unicorn Farm. It is the fantasy of Utopia, devoid of reality that keeps them in bondage on the farm I call the Unicorn Farm. The Unicorn Farm is a slave plantation. They are slaves to their own human vices that the Left exploits.
That's more of a pose. People who talk that way usually don't want their own income or privileges to decrease. It's just the comforting things they like to tell themselves.
Maybe somebody else, somewhere will have to pay more taxes. They won't. I'm not sure where that leaves us.
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.