The Marxist arrogance of this "newsman" is incredible!
The "newsman" can't grasp why Joe Wurzelbacher aka Joe the Plumber would have a problem with taxing people making over $250,000 (or something less) when Joe himself doesn't make that much.
This "reporter" aka "DNC operative" can't seem to get it through his socialist skull that it is a matter of principle for Joe the Plumber that one person should not have their property taken from them and given to another person against their will.
"I'm not ridin' on anybody elses back. I'm doing it on my own," Joe said.
Incredulously, the reporter asks it yet again.
The concept of not sticking it to the rich just seems to bounce of this Marxist "newsmans" head. It won't go in.
Maybe that's it: socialists like this "reporter" have no principles, so they're baffled when they encounter someone who has them. They just don't get it. They operate by "What's in it for me" and nothing more. That someone might give a rip about the rights of another person is alien to them.
I noticed that when Joe the Plumber educated this "newsman" on Barack Obama's Marxist philosophy, he shifted to the "Well, McCain is no sweetheart, either" strategy. True, but McCain isn't even in the same league of wealth redistribution promotion as Obama.
The only thing I would add to Joe's statement is that all the things government should do and does do like roads, emergency services, national defense, etc. are not the issue. I don't think anyone has a problem paying taxes for necessary services.
What galls me is to have the fruits of my labor taken and given to someone else for their direct benefit. In other words, the roughly 50% of our federal budget that goes to social programs--that are NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION. Things like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and a million other welfare programs.
And now Dems want to expand socialism even further by getting rid of 401(k) tax breaks and forcing you to pour still more money into a government retirement system. They can't tolerate the thought of the private sector doing 401k retirement funds, but can't wait to seize more of your money...so they can spend it on everything else as they squander the Social Security trust fund.
We have a $3 trillion budget, and half or more of it is spent illegally on programs that government has no authority for and should not be doing--individuals and the private sector should be doing them (and used to before the socialist FDR turned our Constitution on it's ear).
There is not a single, solitary shred of constitutional authority for these programs, yet money is taken out of one American's pocket and put in another American's pocket when the second American has done nothing to earn that money--and the first American was not consulted for his "charity."
Consider what the founders said on this:
To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” — Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” — Thomas Jefferson
“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.” — John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787
“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” — James Madison in a letter to James Robertson
In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” — James Madison, 4 Annals of Congress 179, 1794
“[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.” — James Madison
"We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money." — Congressman Davy Crockett
For an individual to help another person, to give of their possessions charitably, is a wonderful and blessed thing. (In fact, conservatives are better at it than liberals--Obama and Biden are pathetic at personal charity).
But for government to force one person to surrender their property so it can be given to another person is not only theft, it robs the giver of any blessing for having given freely. It also robs the receiver of the genuine compassion and relationship with the giver. And in far too many cases, there is no genuine need...which erodes human dignity, the work ethic and personal responsibility.
I know the Marxists have had near-total control of our universities and public schools for decades, but you'd think that some reality would seep into people's brains after they get their education behind them.
This "newsman" is sad proof that this isn't happening.
Conservatives have some serious educating to do if we're going to salvage our country and return it to its historic great ideals.
2 comments:
If the people don't give away their "property", how are we supposed to pay for all these wars that Republicans keep getting us into?? Oh wait, I remember, we pay for our wars through debt. Debt to China. Now that's hardly putting our homeland security first!
Aimee, those wars you're talking about (which incidentally ARE a legitimate and constitutional function of government) take up about 3-5% of our annual budget.
Meanwhile, the unconstitutional social spending takes up more than 50% of our budget.
This presents a serious problem with the math...and priorities.
Post a Comment