hopperbach


Ya betcha it’s socialism

After several frustrating years of watching a timid GOP walk on eggshells when it came to the time-honored Democrat practice of wealth re-distribution, it appears that they are finally starting to call it what it is. First John McCain, and now Sarah Palin (who ROCKED on SNL this weekend, BTW) is starting to use the dreaded “S” word when referring to Obama’s tax plan. And to think it took an aspiring plumber to get the ball rolling:

At an airport rally in Roswell, N.M. on Sunday afternoon, the Republican vice presidential nominee once again invoked Joe Wurzelbacher, now widely known as “Joe the Plumber,” pushing Wurzelbacher’s contention that Obama’s tax plan sounded like socialism – a point also invoked by Sen. John McCain on Sunday.

“Senator Obama said he wants to quote ‘spread the wealth.’ What that means is he wants government to take your money and dole it out however a politician sees fit,” Palin said, drawing boos from the crowd of several thousand.

“But Joe the Plumber and Ed the Dairy Man, I believe that they think that it sounds more like socialism,” Palin added, referring to both Wurzelbacher and a man holding a sign reading “Ed the Dairy Man” in the crowd. “Friends, now is no time to experiment with socialism. To me, our opponent plans sounds more like big government, which is the problem. Bigger government is not the solution.”

Keep it up guys. Wear the word out even. And when Obama and liberal pundits start whining that you are using the term too much, use it even more. Because in this matter the Boy Wonder and his Dem pals have no defense. Taking money from a higher income bracket and giving it to a lower one (better known as “spreading the wealth around”) IS socialism.  Always has been. Always will be. No nuances. No grey areas. Thank you Joe, for having the guts to point that out — and right to Barry’s face no less. And kudos to John McCain for having the sense to take that ball and run with it (I imagine it took very little prodding to convince Sarah).

After years of eluding us like the freakin’ yeti, are we finally starting to see something resembling a conservative platform in the GOP?  I’ll tell you this much, if McCain had been doing this kind of stuff all along we would see a much different story in the polling data. The center is Obama’s game, and he’s much better at it than McCain (better at sounding like he’s a centrist I mean). If Johnny wants us to fight with him he needs to move further to the right and use his VP candidate to her fullest capacity. We only fight when we have a clearly defined enemy. Socialism fits the bill quite nicely, dontcha think? Ya betcha.

Advertisements


A taxing philosophy
September 18, 08, 3:44 pm
Filed under: campaign, electioins, Joe Biden, politics, taxes | Tags: , ,

Joe Biden has been kind of in the sidelines of late… which is a shame because the man can be very entertaining when he opens his mouth. Here’s what he had to say about taxes this morning:

“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

I highlighted these two phrases because they so aptly reveal the Democratic Party mindset. When he says “take money” he dosn’t mean take it from the overflowing coffers at Capitol Hill. He means taking just a little more from those whom he and his colleages have deemed to be the overpriveledged.

Biden could just have easily put it this way:

‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his need’

It’s called ‘redistribution of wealth’… and Karl Marx thought of it a long time before the Dems ever adopted it as their official tax platform.

But Biden’s quote is a great one because it illustrates the classic Democratic class-envy thinking that so energizes their voter-base.  Three things are implied here:

  1. The upper-class has more than they need
  2. They took much of their money from the pockets of the middle-class
  3. Congress has the right to confiscate that “stolen” money and “put it back” with it’s rightful owners

Here’s a better idea Joe: How about taking the money that YOU and your porky Dem pals have confiscated from the middle-class over the years and giving THAT back to them?  How much do YOU really need? Why does someone else always have to compensate whenever YOU might have to do with less?

Just wondering…

Biden has a reputation for gaffes but I don’t think that term quite fits here. His real weakness is that he tells the truth far too often. These “slip-ups” of truthfulness are labeled gaffes because it embarrasses the Democratic party to have their intentions revealed. They don’t like it when one of their own puts it in plain English. At least not during the peak of the election season when they are trying so hard to appeal to the center.

But wait… I’ve saved the best for last:

Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

[cue “America the Beautiful”] How it must swell the hearts of those in higher tax brackets who already pay over 50% the country’s overall taxes to know that they may soon have the opportunity to serve their great country even more. Certainly this is what Thomas, Ben and the boys had in mind when they set up this representative republic of ours. Thank you for reminding us of what true patriotism is, Senator Biden.

Incidentally, I’m not angry here… I’m laughing way too hard to be angry. This is wonderful stuff.



Obama courts the envy vote: promises CEO tax hike
May 9, 08, 3:11 pm
Filed under: barack obama, campaign, ceo, democrat, liberal, obama, taxes

In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer yesterday, Barack Obama promised to stick-it to evil Corporate America by raising “CEO Taxes” when he becomes President:

“If you’re a CEO in this country you’ll probably pay more taxes,” Obama said. Obama speculated his CEO tax rates “won’t be prohibitively high, you’ll pay roughly what you did in the 90’s when they were doing fine.”

Obama also said he would eliminate the Bush tax cuts and install what he called a “middle class tax cut.”

Blitzer asked Obama to define “middle class.”

Obama replied, “You know, I think the definitions are always a little bit rough” and said “if you’re making $100,000 a year or less, then you’re pretty solidly middle class…On the other hand, if you’re making more than $100,000 and certainly if you’re making more than $200,000 or $250,000, you’re doing pretty well.”

“Solidly middle class”? Says who? Apparently for Obama and liberals like him, it’s all about digits. $99,999 puts you in the middle. One more dollar and you’re a heartless corporate FATCAT — or at least you get invited to their cocktail parties. Either way, you clearly have more than you need and it’s time to give some of that excess wealth to those we have determined to be the less fortunate — that poor Joe who is struggling to make ends meet on a meager $50,000. Curiously enough, the less fortunate in this country still seem to have managed to scrounge up enough pennies on their paltry income for a satellite dish and a 42″ HDTV. But, as Obama and his ilk will gladly point out — they don’t own a private yacht like the average CEO does — and that’s just not fair.

In truth, it’s all relative. A person living in a hut in a third world country would view even the lower class in America as “well off” — and would probably wonder why some of them don’t work a little harder given the freedom and opportunities they have. The middle class would look absolutely fabulously stinking rich in their eyes. Two cars? Electricity? Plumbing? Life is sure good over there.

So where do liberals like Obama get their numbers? Nowhere. They are purely arbitrary and are based on emotion rather than any solid data. $100,000 “sounds” rich to a person making $36,000. But even someone making $36,000 a year can still have a decent quality of life provided they manage their money. Conversely, there are people making $250,000 who are barely living within their means. It’s all a state of mind.

But Obama’s philosophy is nothing new. It’s the typical liberal strategy — divide people into classes, pit the lower against the higher, and then position yourself as the hero who will charge in and make things right. Obama has merely tweaked it a little by giving the enemy a face — the face of Bob Nardelli, Michael Eisner or any other of a growing list of famous CEO’s who have become notorious for their apparent greed and excess. By adding this extra emotional layer Obama hopes to garner that “solid” middle-class vote.