“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas


Tuesday, October 09, 2007

America....Hillary's Cuba to the north

OK, let me get this out of the way right now. If you are one of those people who is going to get tired of my pointing out Hillary's many, and I mean many, shortcomings during the next year and possibly the subsequent 8, then perhaps you should find another blogger to annoy with your whining and sniveling. However, if you can take the ridicule and scorn you will receive for defending her socialist policies, then bring it on. Hillary's intent is to railroad this country toward socialism faster than Rosie O'Donnel toward a triple bacon-cheeseburger with extra mayo, and I intend to point it out every chance I get. So get used to it.

Irksome reader capt. america was indignant and claimed that I took Hillary's comments out of context yesterday. Well, tell me how this is out of context...

WEBSTER CITY, Iowa (AP) - Every citizen could get a 401(k) retirement account and up to $1,000 in annual matching funds from the government under a plan offered Tuesday by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

At a cost of $20 billion-$25 billion a year, the plan is Clinton's largest domestic proposal other than her plan for universal health insurance. The New York senator said it would be paid for by taxing estates worth more than $7 million per couple and would help narrow the gap between the rich and those who don't have enough savings for retirement.


Having tabled her disastrous vote-buying scheme of $5000 per child gift of other peoples' money, she's onto another scheme to insure the hand-out voters pledge their easily-bought loyalty to her. Of course she'll victimize the evil rich who'll foot the bill, like they do for all liberal income redistribution schemes. Hillary does what any dyed-in-the-wool socialist would do in her shoes....plunder the productive achievers in society to reward the degenerate, loafers.

She uses phrases cunningly designed to evoke sympathy for victimhood like......those who don't have enough savings.... She wants to convey the idea that it's not these peoples' fault they don't have enough savings. She ignores the truth which is, these people made bad choices after bad choices in their lives. This is why they don't have savings. Why should money earned by people who made good choices be used to reward the deadbeats who chose to flunk out of school, who chose to become heroin addicts, who chose to have 6 babies by 6 different men, who chose to rob liquor stores for a "living", who chose to buy lottery tickets, cigarettes, and booze instead of putting money in the bank, who chose irresponsibility and fecklessness over prudence and ambition, who chose dependence over self-reliance, and who chose to live by demanding the fruits of the labor of others rather than living by hard work and dedication?

Except for a slim few(the infirm and the retarded), there is nobody to blame for not having a little money in the bank but themselves. Yet these are the people on whose vote Hillary is counting to get elected queen. She uses class warfare to justify stealing from the rich productive class to give to the shiftless, dependent class.

16 comments:

Kevin said...

Why is she so determined to take away from the producers in society? I feel like the consequences of her actions would be common sense, and yet she continues to dish out more and more nonsensical plans and ideas. I feel like if anything else, the American people would be hesitant to vote in a woman who refused to divorce her husband even after it was clear that he had nonsexual relations with another woman.

Joe Camel said...

I assume that all federal couples in the $7 million range are exempt as well. (Bill and Hill)

Kevin said...

Well they aren't really producers anymore, so yes they would be exempt. Thats what is unfortunate.

Ed said...

No, they'll gladly pay the tax if it passes(which it won't), because it'll mean a whole new generation of dependents to vote democrat.

Anonymous said...

Wow, paranoid much?

Kevin said...

No, not paranoid, aware of what Hillary's plans will do to our nation.

David said...

Ed,
I've got goose bumbs after reading this rant. well done!

David said...

bumps... I mean.

Anonymous said...

You people are wacked out of your gourds. I am no democrat, but

ed said...

So, may we assume that you think it's a good idea for the government to take money from those who earn it and give it away?

Answer this: If the government wants to manage retirement accounts for every American, who decides in which mutual funds the money is invested? Do we want the federal government meddling in the investment markets? I think you are out of your gourd.

Kevin said...

If families want to save money for college or a home, let them do it on their own freewill. Giving people money who don't want to save it is a waste of money, and is only going to destroy the foundation this plan is set on. Hillary, why don't you let the people decide what they want to do for their money? Or do you not think that Americans are capable of making decisions for themselves?

David said...

The truly wacky are the neocommunists being paraded as presidental candidates. This time the cold war might be internal...maybe a cold civil war?

Kevin said...

Or maybe a sudden burst in emigration? Who's with me? Outback mates?

ed said...

@Kevin,

Nice usage of the oft overlooked "e-migration" as opposed to "im-migration". Not many people are aware of both and most can't tell you the diff.

Kevin said...

I payed attention in school, its not hard to miss.

David said...

Australia it is!

Oh, and by the way, I'm no doorknob either.