Posted on 04/03/2007 4:05:22 PM PDT by sdnet
Speaking in 2004 to a crowd of wealthy democratic supporters during a fund raising event in San Francisco, Hillary Clinton spoke the very words that illustrate the intentions of the government so very well. "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
While those words were spoken three years ago, they are just as important today. They represent not just the Democrat party's strong commitment to the redistribution of wealth rightfully earned by the American people, it provides insight into the focus that our politicians have in running our nation. It highlights the precise arrogance that Hillary, and many other politicians, have. Our property is not the federal government's to take. The people are not here for the federal government to milk.
Governments are meant to provide protection for their people. Whether that means standing guard at the border, interpreting intelligence data from around the world, monitoring the actions of hostile nations or providing domestic police forces to ensure obedience from the people, governments provide the necessary protection that most Americans simply cannot provide for themselves.
(Excerpt) Read more at smallgovtimes.com ...
Tell me!! Am I the only one here to whom this sounds suspiciously like "From each according to his ability - to each according to his need?"
Could it be that I am being overly suspicious of the motives of these people? Go right ahead. If you think that I'm being overly suspiciously, please go ahead and nail my ass.
Mrs. Bill Clinton has probably had it removed.
Epistle Albert Gore Jr. has expressed a number of bourgeois traits that need to be curtailed. Urban sprawl, bigger cars, modern agriculture practices, what have you. Anything that has made America powerful and comfortable has to be scrapped.
Starting new business has never been more difficult. New products have to run an obstacle course of red tape. Somewhere a small group of people weld enough influence to bridle the American economy. These committees have decided that there is too much consumerism, there are too many trains running, too many planes flying, too many ships at sea, too many automobiles, too many vacation trips, too many guns, too many rich diets. Americans are just going to have to accept the idea that they need to live in mass housing and ride mass transit. By taking things for the common good will bring a planed economic collapse. The people will be told and convinced that it is a good thing. The rich are being marginalized. The new rich and will be those corrupt officials in government.
The lefties harp on Bush taking away our freedoms, whatever that means. Meanwhile if Hillary of another Dem is elected and we see real threats to freedom, the left will not utter a word of criticism. How frightening.
I suppose when HRC says she wants to take away oil company profits this resonates well with a lot of Americans who have been brainwashed into thinking big business, and oil in particular, is evil and takes advantage of consumers. Eventually people might get smart when they see government taking too much of anything from anybody. But by then it might be too late.
“While those words were spoken three years ago, they are just as important today. They represent not just the Democrat party’s strong commitment to the redistribution of wealth rightfully earned by the American people, it provides insight into the focus that our politicians have in running our nation.”
This statement is flat out false. The Democrats don’t redistribute the wealth, same as the Communists. They take it and give it to their cronies, lackeys and toadies in order to keep the power.
Communism is nothing more then an ideology where a corrupt band of thugs steal from the people to support their own power grabs. Their egalitarian society is a myth. They are murderers and thieves, living off the backs of their people while using a duplicitous media and other willing accomplices to further their goals of total domination.
There is only one thing that is stopping the Communists from total world domination. It is called the Second Amendment. Because we can fight back, they cannot enslave the American populace. However, they are doing everything else in their power to destroy this country from within.
However, the Communists have a weakness and Reagan exploited it. Money! If we keep them from making money we can destroy them. That is why it is important to put the MSM out of business. That is why it is important to not buy products that advertise in the MSM.
We can win. We just need to get out our message.
That’s exactly what it is. Exactly.
When Bill Clinton was in Buffalo a few years ago he was talking about the govt. surplus and tax cuts and he said that he wouldn’t give tax cuts because we wouldn’t spend it on the right things.
Those words on a large sign should show up at every one of her campaign stops.
I think your right
Why should we wait until then?
When the debates against the GOP candidates start, they’ll hit her with these words of hers. The Drive By Media won’t be able to cushion her this time around.
Unless,of course,a loophole is written into the legislation...or unless she makes some secret moves before the legislation is enacted.
We'll be able to throw many of these back at her during the campaign.
Because the Gov't KNOWS how to take care of the populace and what we all need. Her mindset is gonna lead to a Gov't that self implodes with greed; after it has bled all of us dry of course...
"The place burned down? F*ck you pay me. Lightning struck? F*ck you, pay me. Slow business? F*ck you, pay me."
Ditto, although I do believe sourcery and Powerclam to be more on the mark. “Proof is for mathematics and whiskey.” I dig it.
Good idea.
Yeah, okay. Getting a creepy feeling. Kinda like the one my ancestors must have had before they fled Lenin, and others...
But if I remember my Marxist/Leninist crap correctly, isn't that phrase in a larger commentary on 'each giving according to his means'. In which case I politely bow and step back and wait for her to lead by example. She has more than most of us, so she has more to give, right?
Of course, I won't hold my breath. I'm still a bit aghast that she actually said that to Americans during her bid for the presidency. She d@mn well wants to be our very own Lenin or Pol Pot or Chavez. Shudder.
most but not all.
Don't forget; "the end justifies the means".
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.