A system that robs Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul.....
The Democrat Party gets its political power by making people dependent on government. People dependent on big government are dependent on big government politicians which of course are Democrats. I find this morally reprehensible and repugnant.
I do not believe for one second that when Democrat politicians argue/craft policy for expanding or creating a new program that they really care about the people who are getting the supposed benefits. They just want their power so they can carry on their merry way of creating more wards of the state. They do not want economically free people. They want slaves. Free people are a threat to their power structure because they do not need them.
During elections how many times do we hear something along these lines from a libtard politician: "You have to vote for me because if you don't then Republican candidate Joe Smith will take away your (insert government program here) benefit!!" People either don't see this or they do and just don't care because hey, they are getting something provided to them by their neighbors for "free."
This is what the libtard politician is actually saying: "Vote for me so I can take money from your neighbor, your kid and your grand kid and give it to you. This in turn will make you reliant upon me and my party for your livelihood. You will have to vote for me and my party in order to live."
This isn't a new insight. I'm just sick of it. I'm sick of the detestable Democrat Party and their bullcrap. I'm sick of their class warfare rhetoric.I'm sick of their redistributionist schemes. They don't give a damn about the actual implications of their policies. They just want a good sound bite. They just want a quick bumper sticker slogan to spit out to make them sound like they are the defenders of the poor. In truth, they want them poor. They need people poor.
I find it no coincidence that the very groups (Blacks and Hispanics) that have the worse economic conditions as a group in America are the very groups that the Democrat Party has taken upon itself to represent. Wherever you'll find a large population of poor black people you'll find a Democrat political machine. You'll find a Democrat politician arguing for higher taxes, more programs, and more government regulation. Rinse and repeat for decades.
It's a good racket if you are a Democrat politician.
A former Democrat explains why he has become a Republican:
Patriots come together can't take no mo'!
Tax exempt status Lois Lerner says no!
Applications held up gotta do more work!
All because of some I.R.S jerk!
You gotta fight!
For your right!
I.R.S sees Tea Party and they say no way!
What books do you read and prayers you pray?!
Some would say this is tyranny lite.
I would say this is what progressives look like!
You gotta fight!
For your right!
Star Trek video and conference abuse!
You better watch out the I.R.S. is coming for you!
We'll all stand together and we'll all yell stop!
And we'll all point our fingers right at the top!
You gotta fight!
For your right!
Via The Tennessean:
Tennessee Democratic Party Chair Roy Herron called a press conference in Legislative Plaza to ask Republican members to vote against House Bill 261, a measure that would reduce welfare payments if a child fails a grade unless a parent takes corrective action.
Would it surprise you to know that the Democrats lie when it comes to what constitutes an "assault rifle?" Yeah, I didn't think so....
“We know our economy’s stronger when we reward an honest day’s work with honest wages. But today, a full-time worker making the minimum wage earns $14,500 a year. Even with the tax relief we’ve put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That’s wrong. Tonight, let’s declare that, in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full time should have to live in poverty — and raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour.”
Oh! The horror! The horror I say! Barack Obama's demagoguery knows no bounds. This is just the latest example of emotional rhetoric from the Campaigner in Chief. Let's look at some Obama kryptonite, i.e. data.
Mark Perry, a University of Michigan economics professor and writer for the American Enterprise Institute, looked at the most recent information available on minimum wage workers from the Bureau of Labor Statitstics. This is what he found:
But what about the last part of Obama's statement that implies that raising the minimum wage would pull people out of poverty? For information on that, we turn to a study by Joseph J. Sabia and Richard V. Burkhauser from the Southern Economic Journal . This study was conducted when politicians (Obama included) wanted the federal minimum wage to be raised to $9.50 an hour. This is what they concluded:
"Using data drawn from the March Current Population Survey (CPS), we find no evidence that minimum wage increases between 2003 and 2007 lowered state poverty rates. Moreover, we find that the newly proposed federal minimum wage increase from $7.25 to $9.50 per hour, like the last increase from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, is not well targeted to the working poor. Only 11.3% of workers who will gain from an increase in the federal minimum wage to $9.50 per hour live in poor households, an even smaller share than was the case with the last federal minimum wage increase (15.8%). Of those who will gain, 63.2% are second or third earners living in households with incomes twice the poverty line, and 42.3% live in households with incomes three times the poverty line, well above $50,233, the income of the median household in 2007.3"
Let's break this down. Consider an economy with 100 workers in which the minimum wage was raised from to $9.50 an hour (I know Obama just wants to raise it to $9 an hour but I'd wager that these stats would still be pretty accurate). Using the above information:
"....we estimate that nearly 1.3 million jobs will be lost if the federal minimum wage is increased to
$9.50 per hour, including 168,000 jobs currently held by the working poor."
Once again we have liberal do-gooder policy hurting the very people that they claim to represent.
On the Forbes.com blog, Peter Ferrara points out that the first five years of the Obama Administration have been the worst five years since the Great Depression. Here's a summary:
The enemies of liberty are on the move.
Democrat Senator Diane Feinstein will introduce major gun control legislation on January 22nd. Here are some of the lowlights:
Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:
Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA).
The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.
Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.
Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Contact your member of Congress today and demand that they reject Feinstein's legislation.
Constitutional conservative and free-market defender blogging about national and Tennessee politics