Right News and Views

Oh, look! Over there! Paychecks to tax! Wahoo!!!

In this piece I wanted to convey just how alien a liberal’s view of the world is compared to mine (that is to say, reality). Theft of one person’s resources is not right. It is not okay to say that, just because one person has two cars and one person has no car, you can take one from the guy with two and give to the guy with none.

Likewise, it is not okay to take money from one person’s bank account and put it into someone else’s 401K. Liberals don’t grasp this simple fact. They think that if government legislates it then it must be okay! Here is a one line answer to that: the government legislated the war in Iraq so why are liberals whining so much about putting and end to mass graves? Ah, but government intervention is okay only if it hurts your average American in favor of illegal aliens, people to lazy to work, or those too weak to take responsibility for their actions.

Hillary (I go into more detail here on here misguided outlook) is just like the rest of the Democrats, of course. It doesn’t matter which one gets elected as it will mean bad news for the country. They are all liberal which means they are all dangerous to moral values, our national security, and our paychecks. The hope to end the slaughter of the innocent unborn will be rolled back if they can appoint a liberal justice to the Supreme Court. Osama will rejoice at seeing a deadly enemy leave the White House to be replaced with someone who wants to get out of Iraq as soon as possible. Taxes will skyrocket as one social program after another hurt working folks standard of living, delays their retirements, and generally rips them off.

So do your country a favor. Vote Republican. They are bad, too, of course, but nowhere near as nightmarish as a liberal running things.

Pelosi and Reid’s reaction to the good news coming out of Iraq.

There has been a lot of positive news coming out of Iraq- and hence the decline of the disgusting liberals “defeat at any price” mantra. You can’t blame them, of course- even they realize how foolish they already look without making it any worse on themselves. So they have mostly (and mercifully) shut their lie holes. The terrorists must be sad to see so little positive news from liberal American media outlets.

Ralph Peters sums up the Iraq progress perfectly in his piece Iraq: what went right. But what will the liberals do now that they can’t claim the effort was a failure? Ending the regime of Saddam surely cannot be claimed to be a mistake since it is headed towards clear success.

So liberals are floundering on an effort they put so much energy into- defeat for America. I hope this latest example of their lunacy will show Americans the truth about liberals and that leftist psychos will simply implode as a political force. I don’t know about you, but I take joy in the fact that they must contain in frustrated rage their inability to loose a war.

Because liberals don’t care, of course, about real results- they care about numbers and the effort itself. That’s why they can throw billions of other people’s dollars at unsuccessful social programs but cannot imagine putting their sissy rear ends in actual danger to help others. For all their talk of “make love, not war” and “war is not the answer” they forget what Peters so clearly understands: “peace can only be built over the corpses of evil men.” I cannot agree more.

But lacking true reason itself, the Left does not understand that monsters cannot be reasoned with and that we should just give up and maybe they will leave us alone (as I’ve pointed out before). Further, this is the group that supports the sending of millions of babies to their graves before they even leave the womb. How can they see that evil must be stopped when they traffic in so much wonton and vile depravation themselves?

Clearly, they cannot- and that is why they are wrong on Iraq.

The Democratic Parties take on any discussion concerning Social Security.

Clive Crook’s piece on reforming Social Security sounds reasonable in the same way you suspend disbelief during a sci-fi flick. To enjoy the film, you have to forgo asking all the really tough questions like, say, how does a laser fired at an enemy space ship make sound in airless space? Obviously, it doesn’t really make any sound. But to enjoy the fantasy you don’t ask that question. You just enjoy because it’s cool to hear it with John Williams music playing in the background.

Social Security works on the same principle. It sounds cool but it is not reality. Crook errs not in supporting reform of Social Security but in the programs existence itself. He notes:

“Private saving in the US is roughly zero. Given every incentive by a lunatic tax system, households have borrowed to the hilt and relied on house-price inflation to provide capital to support them in retirement. Those bets are going bad at the moment. Many Americans, especially the least well off, are going to be much more tightly squeezed after they retire than they expect. Social security gives them a base that should not be jeopardized – but for many of the not-rich, with few other resources to draw down, it is not enough. Politicians should be asking themselves how best to encourage more saving – and Democrats should co-opt “the ownership society” as a slogan of their own. So simple: just rebrand it “ownership for all”.”

Of course private savings in the US is roughly zero. People don’t think they have to worry about anything because big government will “save” them. But he got one other thing right as well- it is a bet that is going bad. But why suffer the consequences of your mistakes? And herein is the problem. It is not right, nor has it ever been right, to force one person or group to pay for another person or groups mistake. Yet that is the guiding principle of Social Security- the so-called “ownership for all.” So if you’re not prepared- for bad health or retirement – then others are forced to take care of you. This is sound in airless space.

Ownership for all is another word for communism- a form of government responsible for vastly worse standards of living for all concerned. It is as illogical a concept as punishment for all for the crimes of one or a few.

Just as we would not put Nancy Pelosi on trial for the war crimes committed by Hitler nor George Bush on trial for the murders committed by Jack the Ripper we should not punish the successful for the benefit of others. To do so is sound in airless space.

You do not fine the person going the speed limit and let the speeder off the hook. So why punish the worker and let the lazy off the hook? According to the “leaders” in the Democratic Party there is a simple answer to this and that answer is that most Americans are too ignorant to plan ahead for themselves. If true, it is time they learned their lesson- only then will they grow up out of the juvenile fantasy of a free lunch. It is the same kind of garbage Hillary is pushing.

But then Democrats don’t want any learning going on or they would be out of power.

Nancy reacts to news that some “poor” people are smart enough not to want her “help.” First she is shocked- then scared.

This piece by Michael Franc is just delicious. As the title suggests, the Democrats finally wake up to who they really represent. They, not Republicans, are the party of the rich. Ah, such irony for the pseudo-political thinkers who attack Republicans because they “don’t care about the little guy.”

Well, then why are so many little guys voting for Republicans? Maybe it’s because most of the little guys out there aren’t as stupid as the elite would like to think they are. Some are- which is how Democrats took over Congress in the last election. But most are not. I’m not, nor am I rich. Indeed, I earn a bit less than any of the median incomes noted in the piece and I certainly would never vote for Democrats.

My objection to Democrats is firmly grounded in moral reasons. I simply could not cast a ballot in favor of a party as morally repugnant as the one represented by a jack ass. But a close second reason is the fact that Republicans represent every clear-thinking American. They mostly want lower taxes for everybody. Do the rich benefit more from an across the board tax cut? Of course they do.

But imagine a family just getting by suddenly finding that their income increased by 10% thanks to a tax cut? That 10% could mean the difference between a happy retirement verses one merely existing on Social Security. Or, it could mean the difference in a better college for their now five year old son. A whole host of possibilities open up to people when they get to keep more of their incomes.

Here is the telling portion of the piece:

“Democratic politicians prosper in areas of concentrated wealth even in staunchly Republican states such as Georgia, Kansas and Utah. Liberal congressman John Lewis represents more than 27,500 high-income households in his Atlanta district. The trend achieves perfect symmetry in Iowa. There, the three wealthiest districts send Democrats to Washington; the two poorest are safe Republican seats.”

As I’ve noted before, it is lunacy to put Dems in power and I’m glad to see more people are realizing that fact. This must be scary to Democrats who drone on about income distribution, class warfare, and wealth disparities. Because if indeed the truth is ever realized by most Americans then Democrats will never be elected again.

And the world, or at least America, will be a much, much better place.

“Oh, oh, oh…look over there- it’s Karl Marx- I’ve simply got to go over there and shake that great mans hand!”

It comes as no surprise to me that Hillary Clinton wants to keep secrets. What is surprising is that so many people don’t already know what surely must be hidden in the documents held by the National Archives concerning her actions as First “Lady.”

As I’ve shown before, it is clear that she is a socialist for any who care to pay close attention. She has actually come out and said she would have to tax us more to insure fairness. She has actually come out and said she would like to “take those profits” and use them for social programs. And this one really lays it out: “Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” Put more succinctly, she said “We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.”

What this would-be thief fails to grasp is that society is made up of individuals. Hurt individuals and you chip away at the very building blocks of society. The tax cuts helped ME and I’m certainly not “well off.” The tax cuts spurred the economy and helped a lot of people find jobs. And, despite the doom and gloom coming out of the ranks of Democrats, the tax cuts helped the economy; it is actually humming along nicely. Don’t believe me or your just too liberal to want to see the truth, then check this out.

When Hillary says “for America to get back on track” she forgets that the theoretical concept of a nation can neither be on or off a track. She is only talking about what she thinks is the track the nation should be on. But it is the people that are either on or off track, depending each on their individual wants and needs. And if she wants people to keep their lives on track then good for her. But it is not her job to see that they are on track. In America you’ve got freedom- and that freedom should include the freedom to fall flat on your face. In other words, it is all about individual accountability; not keeping a nation “on track.”

But for a socialist, the state is all that matters. How many more millions must die – how many more mass graves must be filled - before humanity finally puts the concepts of socialism and communism into their own graves?