You have probably heard that old saying the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
I heard a great statement today that sums it all up:
Republicans want to help the poor get richer and Democrats (and Socialists) want to help the rich get poorer.
That is so profoundly true. Funny how you know something in your being, but you cannot quite put it into words. When Democrats / Socialists are in charge, the rich get poorer and the poor get poorer.
Think about everything the Democrats / Socialists do, everything that Obama says and wants to do. It all involves stealing from the people who work, are productive, run companies, etc. and giving it to the people who do not work, are not productive, and are usually running America down. Democrats / Socialists talk a good game, but they do not deliver. They usually succeed at only one thing: raising taxes.
Of course, they raise taxes under the pretense of redistributing the wealth. Obama did not come up with that concept (redistributing the wealth). That has been the goal of Democrats for decades. Republicans want to create a climate where people can work, make more money, and accumulate wealth on their own. Democrats / Socialists want to steal our money and then buy our votes. They know most Republicans are smart enough to see through their ploy, but some voters are not looking for leadership and a positive economic climate. They are looking for a free ride or a handout.
New Orleans is a perfect example of where we are today as a nation. That poorly conceived city was demolished by a natural disaster -- hurricane Katrina. There have been other natural disasters like that in the past and no one received that much help from the federal government. However, many residents of New Orleans think the federal government should swoop in, clean up the mess, and rebuild their homes. I have homeowners insurance for things like that. Why should the federal government do more than help out? Why do people think it is the federal government's responsibility to cover their losses. They should have had insurance. Remember, the government's money is really our money. Why should our money go to people who chose not to buy insurance?
People think they are entitled to so many things like healthcare. Someone should not be allowed to die in the street, but they should not expect the kind of care someone that has insurance will get. Some people (like twenty-somethings) just play the odds and do not even bother to buy healthcare insurance. Illegal immigrants do not have healthcare insurance.
I heard another interesting explanation the other day. Pre-existing conditions is a big deal because everyone would just wait around until they develop some costly medical problem and then try to get insurance. For that reason, if insurance companies have to accept people with pre-existing conditions, everyone will have to be covered or the insurance companies will go under in no time.
I have found that most things are the way they are for a reason. It is like the kid that pulled a piece of gum off the dam only to find that it was plugging a small hole, which quickly grew to a large hole, and eventually caused the dam to break. When I start a new job, it is easy to see fault in most every procedure to which I am exposed, but I have learned that, given time, I will usually see the reason for each procedure and for doing it the way it is being done (not always, of course).
I figure Mr. Obama is finding out this principle, that things are the way they are for a reason. Otherwise, there would be no troops in Iraq and we would be retreating from Afghanistan. If dominos are placed on end, side by side, it does not matter who touches the first domino ... they are all going to fall.
He is probably finding out that our healthcare system is the way it is for a reason. Harry Reid is now tossing the $2 trillion figure around. Has he even chosen his political career over Obama's goofy promises?
Of course, healthcare is just one of many ways the Democrats / Socialists can think of to help us all get poorer. Not having a job is a pretty good way to get poorer. The statics say there are only nine or 10 percent of us unemployed. I figure it is more like 18 or 20 percent. And that 20 percent having less or no money to spend is only going to make the rest of us poorer.
I know. It is all George W. Bush's fault. How long are you going to be satisfied with that answer? As I recall, no Democrat / Socialist wanted to hear Clinton's name associated with anything once Bush took over, and I do not recall Bush blaming Clinton for anything that happened during his administration. I suppose that is the difference between a classy president and a Chicago-style president who is so insecure that he worries more about a news network not fawning over him than he does about winning a war or reducing unemployment. Maybe when we are all poorer, and have no TVs, he will not have to worry about FOX News, and he can concentrate on bigger issues ... like bailing out liberal newspapers that are going under.
