Posted on 01/01/2008 4:27:05 AM PST by Kaslin
Too darned sensible! Hats off to Mr Sowell once again. He is required Republican reading material.
Anyone gullible enough to believe that government can deliver all these goodies is delusional. We have lots of gullible Americans and even Republicans want their "entitlements" to keep coming.
That commercial sums up American liberalism perfectly.
It is an argument for Fred or Duncan for president.
Happy New Year
Bumping the clear thinking of Dr. Sowell.
I'm honestly surprised that no politician has offered this up as an idea. My guess is that there are not enough people who have lost their life savings in Las Vegas to make for a viable political constituency.
On the other hand, people with student loan problems are starting to number in the sizes need to form a promising constituency. I think in a few years, we'll see at least one presidential candidate offer some sort of student loan bailout plan as a campaign promise.
The Santa Claus thing was exactly what I thought when I saw her commercial. However, she won’t buy the gifts, WE WILL! It was disgusting!!!
Thomas Sowell is on of the brightest, and most concise writers in the country when it comes to economics. In this column he also shows a good understanding of history.
For those who would like more information on the Great Depression, see the recent, excellent book by Amity Schlaes, which patiently lays out how foolish government policies were in the 1930s, and how they prolonged the Depression, and left us with a heritage of Social Security and a raft of other bad policies and bad habits, all touted by the media (and in your public schools!) as the story of how FDR “brought us through the Depression.” (He then “brought us through the war,” and messed up that, too.)
In all fairness to FDR, I think he did the best he could during World War 2, even though he will forever be the absolute worst president in regards to domestic policy. I credit FDR for starting our nuclear weapons program. It was too bad that we did not have a usable weapon until 1945. If we had had nuclear weapons in 1942, we could have ended World War 2 in hours, not years, and lost far fewer lives in the process.
I also believe that had we had nuclear weapons early on in World War 2, it would have prevented the USSR from occupying Eastern Europe after the war. I do disagree with FDR's "selling out" of Eastern Europe to the Soviets, but I think that decision was only made out of pragmatism, as we needed their help to defeat Germany (as we did not have nuclear weapons).
Not me, Dr. Sowell.
Wait ‘til CON-gress “fixes” the sub-prime mortgage problem and the up and coming sub-prime auto loan problem (Upside down in your car loan? Don’t worry, big mommy gov’t will fix it!)
This is a great piece. Thanks.
What a great message. Too bad we cannot get more Americans to subscribe to the message.
PJ O'Rourke
had we had nuclear weapons early on in World War 2, it would have prevented the USSR from occupying Eastern Europe after the war. I do disagree with FDR's "selling out" of Eastern Europe to the Soviets, but I think that decision was only made out of pragmatism, as we needed their help to defeat Germany (as we did not have nuclear weapons).
First, FDR was a failed president in the sense that in his first two terms he failed to get the country going again and he failed to prevent WWII. All other presidents are judged on at most two terms, and FDR was in that sense a monumental failure.Second, if you read The New Dealers' War: FDR and the War Within World War II you will have no illusions that anything the US did that helped the USSR to our detriment was an accident.
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.