Hillary Watch

[[AK]Bribo]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...type=printable

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "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."

Unbelievable.

[[AK]Hylander]

Not really unbelievable Bribo... comes straight out of Karl Marx and Frederick Engel's MANIFESTO OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY.

[[AK]Bribo]

What she fails to realize is that America IS back on track and largely because of the tax cuts.

Scratch that. She does realize that. She's just not being honest.

[[AK]Hylander]

I like this little article by Michael J. Hurd over at Capitalism Magazine:

John Kerry and his wife, Teresa, are worth an estimated $500 million. Along with a $35 million private Gulfstream V jet and an $800,000 boat, they own five homes in the U.S. (Source: MSNBC.com)

Just what we need: more guilty liberals. Much is made about multi-millionaires (e.g. G. W. Bush or Dick Cheney) who want to cut taxes "for the rich." Leaving aside the fact that the rich are people too, "the rich" in this political context usually refer to households making more than $200,000 per year. Compared to wealth totaling $500 million, this is hardly rich. [Bear in mind that any increase in income taxes will not touch Kerry' $500 million--but rather will tax those who are just starting to earn their wealth.]

Liberals like John Kerry are distinguished from conservatives like George W. Bush on just one point economically: they want to raise taxes on those who are earning money rather than cut them.

Which is better, morally? To cut taxes on people who make the same or less than you? (This is what Bush has done.) Or to raise taxes on people who make less than you? (This is what Kerry and the liberals will do.)

We're used to hearing about the rich politicians who made their money in the private sector and now want to cut taxes--and how awful this supposedly is. I hope we start hearing the liberal version too: people who have so much money they don't know what to do with it--and, because of their feelings about this, resolve to raise taxes and impose more government controls on everybody.

Please, rich liberals: stay away from public office. I'm not as rich as you. I can't afford having you in power!

If you truly want to help us, give us back more of the money that we earned in the first place. Most of us are not married to rich ketchup heiresses like Teresa Heinz-Kerry. If forced to pay more in taxes, we will notice it. You never will.

[[AK]Palooka]

I believe it was Karl Marx who said, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." In other words, you have no right to that which you earn through the application of your vocational skills; the fruit of your labor belongs to the government, which will use it as it sees fit, whether that entails giving money to the non-producers of society (welfare) or using it all to build a military, as starving North Koreans who survive on rats, grass, and dirt can attest.

Let's just hope that Hillary's idea of the "common good" coincides with that of the common American. Of course, the 100 million or so people who have died under communism undoubtedly harbored similar optimism before they realized their fatal naïveté. It's mind-boggling to me that a significant portion of the American people (i.e. many liberal Democrats) are still so enchanted by the tenets of Marxism, even having witnessed, among the many atrocities of communism, the horrors of the Great Leap Forward under Mao, in which 27 million people starved to death, the murder of 2.4 million Cambodians at the hands of the most purist practitioners of communism, the Khmer Rouge, and forced utopia under the Soviet Union, which killed about 61 million people. What will it take for socialist liberals to realize that communism and all its various evils, including the redistribution of wealth, are not good for people? When will they understand that the great leftist experiment is a terrible, bloody failure? Maybe 100 million more victims of communist regimes would do the trick, but I doubt it. Unfortunately, most people have very short memories and no grasp of history. Besides, leftists don't let facts get in the way of ideology.

[[AK]Hylander]

I really like this Capitalism Magazine. Some really nice reads.

Like this.