I've come to bristle and snap back at fools who come to debate political issues armed with cutesy names and soundbite laugh lines. I know I shouldn't cast stones because I daily refer to the Messiah, but I alibi that it is merely a bit of artistic license to lighten the message.
I don't like "Obama-lama-ding-dong" or "Klintoon" or Molly Ivin's famous "Shrub" or any the others. They are cover for shallowness. We need to get beyond sloganeering if we are going to actually begin to identify the vacantness of "hope and change" as a policy.
New Paltz Journal does a bang-up job of illustrating the difference today. He's got a friend with a good one-liner..."We're stuck not only with a socialist, but a seemingly incompetent one..." Bada-bing, rim-shot, cue the laugh track.
He expands from there and clearly explains that it is more seriously flawed than the the joke. Socialism, or the idea of a government-controlled, centrally planned economy is inherently flawed when placed in an objective comparison with Adam Smith's classic free-market process in action.
Understanding, Not Cheap Shots
One need only watch a few stomach-turning minutes of the hearings in Barney Frank's committee on the AIG bonuses to get all the evidence one needs that government can't run a corporation successfully. They are too concerned with posturing and increasingly with brow-beating of the citizenry.
If they get away with what Chris Dodd in the Senate and Barney Frank in the house propose, can you see what that portends? They intend to craft specific legislation specifying a named group of American citizens and singularly confiscating their wealth in the name of the government. If they can confiscate the money paid under contractual obligations to the AIG employees, can they be restricted from taking anything else they wish from you?
It would seem to me that the 14th Amendment clearly suggests that no person can be deprived by the government of life, liberty or property except under due process of the law...OK, they can enact a law to take away your property...But, wait...nor shall any person be under their jurisdiction be denied equal protection under the law.
So, is singling out a list of specific individuals for their own personal confiscatory tax rate in any interpretation a form of "equal protection..."?
No comments:
Post a Comment