Foxy Lady Prof Says "Covet Neighbor's Goods" - But, Will She Share Her "Goods?"

The beautiful Caroline Heldman is a Professor of Politics at the very lib Occidental College situated on the left coast. Occidental is one of many institutions of liberal lower learning that started out as a sort of seminary - this one by the Presbyterians in 1887. How lib is it? Occidental guided President Obama during his formative years, and shaped him very well to go on to Columbia, which is itself so liberal, that Columbia Professor David Epstein is now defending himself for sleeping with his daughter.

Back to that cutey, Caroline, who has made many appearances on the O'Reilly Factor - because she is blond, and quite a looker. Unfortunately, whenever Prof Caroline is posing on The Factor her entire repertoire consists of demanding that people who have money be forced to offer assistance to those who have not. She never offers any constitutional reason for her coveting other people's money to redistribute to those in need. Even Presbyterians at Occidental should know that, "Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Goods."

I sent the following letter to Prof Caroline, wondering if she understands, that when she demands others to give up their property, that she sending very real signals that her personal "property" is also up for grabs.

"Dear Professor Heldman: Unfortunate for socialists is that they forget that the command "Do Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Goods," was pronounced to protect - even socialists like yourself.

When you and your friends demand, via government fiat, the coveting and distribution of other peoples wealth to give to still other people, you are encouraging others who are less prosperous than you to take what is yours.

I am saying that you are opening doors for people who do not have a significant other as beautiful as you to covet you. Why not? What is there to restrain some bum from wanting to covet you - your body, included?

This is not a wacky thought, because if you are licensing others to take from "the haves," such as you, your liberalness has opened the door for others to not respect your person, including your personal territory, as well as possessions.

Why cannot the proverbial thug approaching you in the proverbial alley demand that you give him - you? I mean, why cannot Professor Heldman be distributed, freely to whomever? The law is not able to stop this attitude and behavior as we can see from sociological studies. You social engineers cannot stop it - you only encourage it with your Share the Wealth (Share the Heldman?) constructs.

The next time you see a lonely male student on campus, he may have been taught by you to covet you. "Oh, there's Heldman, she has to share."

I find it ironic, this....woman???....who makes her living by supposedly teaching, the children of people who make over $75k a year, and who herself probably makes over $75k, thinks people should be limited to only $75k a year.

I wonder if she's aware that that would probably affect all her co...workers??? and her bosses.

Not to mention that if everybody were limited to $75k the need or ability to afford college would virtually cease.

How many students would quit school if all they could make in a future job was $75k? I imagine law schools and med schools would instantly close up. Imagine a Dr. going to school for 8-10 years after high school, and dropping $250k-$500k for school and then being told he can only make $75k. A Dr might be in surgery 12-16 hours, with the weight of the world on his shoulders, as one slip can damage a person for life, and for this he's "rewarded" with the pay equivilant of middle management somewhere.

Like the saying goes:
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach

This woman has no useful purpose in life. She has no worthwhile abilities with no useful experience. She has nothing to offer society, and begrudges those who do, the means in which to live by their own means. But feels qualified, through no experience, to tell others how they ~~should~~ must live. (Much like Obama)

Imagine a farmer being told he can only make $75k in a year. What incentive would there be, to work past midnight to harvest crops, when your limit has been met? Why farm 1-2,000 acres, when a few hundred would do? How would a farmer buy a $160,000 tractor or $250,000 combine, if all he were allowed to make was $75k. Friends of mine just bought a 200 acre farm. It cost just over $1 mil.

Who would buy a McDonalds (or a lot of other businesses) if all they could make was $75k.

Maybe she has a nice restaurant or store she really likes. That would probably go out of business, because the disposable income of the majority of the people who frequent it would disappear.

Why would Joe The Carpenter hire any more help? The moment he made $75k there would be no need to do any more work. How many carpenters would not have work, because there would not be enough people with extra cash to afford to have things done?

How many small businesses would shrink over night, simply because the additional labor would bring in additional income over $75k? Why ever expand a business? Why ever invest?

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.