Comments on E3 Gazette: Obama's history favoring "Redistribution"

This is scary, this overt socialism, but also this...

2008-11-22T20:24:00.000Z

This is scary, this overt socialism, but also this rejection of negative liberty. I guess Hayek was right about socialism leading to totalitarianism (also see "speech codes"). This isn't a first, however. Wilson openly disparaged the Constitution, and FDR attempted to replace the old Bill of Rights with an "economic bill of rights." Not that's that much consolation, those were our two worst presidents.

They amaze me, those who do not interpret Obama's ...

2008-10-31T15:48:26.389Z

They amaze me, those who do not interpret Obama's words literally, as spoken by the Messiah.

Some pretty strong Kool-Aid.....leaves your head spinning, even if you haven't had any!

Lance,qwer is most definitely a dude(Well at least...

2008-10-31T04:56:53.647Z

Lance,
qwer is most definitely a dude
(Well at least he says he is. This is the "INTERNET", after all)
and I join you in applause.

PS. Let me state, on the record, that I have no idea about the size of his feat.

qwer:Brilliant. You've impressed me into succinctn...

2008-10-31T01:54:50.242Z

qwer:

Brilliant.

You've impressed me into succinctness. That, sir/madam (?), is no small feat.

Tyrone Slothrop wrote October 30, 2008 7:02 PM:In ...

2008-10-31T00:16:04.964Z

Tyrone Slothrop wrote October 30, 2008 7:02 PM:
In my opinion, the declaration by Mr. Whittle in a previous National Review article, opining that the Republicans deserved to win more than the Democrats deserved to lose, is an inversion of how I view the just outcome of this seemingly endless, and oftimes interminable, electoral process.

I don't mean, here, to cast aspersions on your choice. It is your own, and I say best of luck to you with it.

I prefer not to sit in judgment. I especially prefer not to mete out punishment to others for their transgressions.

I prefer to fix problems rather than punish those who create them. As a result, perhaps I view this election differently than some of the other people here.

I'd like to fix the earmarking that has bloated federal spending. Between the two parties, I find little difference on this point. However, between the two candidates, I have no difficulty in determining who is likely to better achieve that end. It is a contest between the man who refused to take earmarks and stood against that tide in the first place, and yet another man who took them in abundance. What do you do with a man who won't put his ladle in the trough when everyone around him drinks their fill to overflowing?

I'd like to fix the causes of this latest financial crisis. Between the two parties, I find a few differences on this point, some moderately significant but opinions differ. However, between the two candidates, I have no difficulty in determining who is likely to better achieve that end. It is a contest between the man who led the charge time and again to attempt reform in the first place, and a man who wrote a single letter and never followed it up. What do you do with a man who is willing to beat on the Bastille door however futile it seems?

I'd like to fix the great partisan division in this country. Between the two parties, I find a some differences on this point. However, between the two candidates, I have no difficulty in determining who is likely to better achieve that end. It is a contest between the man who formed his own bipartisan group (you may remember the reviled "Gang of 14") and withstood the slings and arrows from within his own party to forge one bipartisan consensus after another, versus a man who kept his head down and went along with the majority flow safely within the most left-leaning inner circle of his party.

There are numerous other things that I'd like to fix in the federal government as well. But as these are the most pressing economic and divisive issues, they are more than sufficient -- more than merely indicative -- of who is more likely to cure the ills that face the nation.

It is one thing to talk about the need for changing course, for fixing the great problems of the day. It is another thing to have taken such a stand back when those problems were difficult and unpopular.

I plan to vote for such a man.

~Paules says:"I can't wait for eight LOOOOOOONG ye...

2008-10-30T23:08:46.738Z

~Paules says:

"I can't wait for eight LOOOOOOONG years of OBAMA rule." ~Anon.

Rule? Is that what you want, Anonymous? You wish to be ruled? Wow. I thought that in a republic the people ruled through their elected representatives. But I will thank you for your candor. You have taken Obama's cult of personality to a logical conclusion.

I prefer the words of Gandhi: "The truth is still the truth even if only one man know it." Conservatism will never die as long as free men value liberty. Obamism is just a fad. Liberty is an enternal principle, and free men will still fight for her long after Obama is gone.

I can with a certain confidence make a couple of predictions. The premature crowing by Obama supporters will turn to rage if he loses. And if he wins, Americans will rue the day they elected a man they did not know. Placing one's confidence in a persona(and that's all Obama really has to offer) is the sure road to perdition. The clear-eyed see only mass psychosis in Obama's adoring crowds.

And the truth remains the truth even if only one man knows it.

Tyrone Slothrop ....what's with the alliteration o...

2008-10-30T22:13:42.640Z

Tyrone Slothrop ....

what's with the alliteration overblow?

I can literally see your ego bulging through my computer screen. Here's a tip: no one cares about a dried up burnt out rag like the National Review anymore... just look at the dwiddling subscriber numbers... oh that applies to the entire conservative movement as well...

I can't wait for eight LOOOOOOOOOOOONG years of OBAMA rule

chant with me oh pious neo-cons OBAMA, OBAMA, OBAMA! LOL

MuscleDaddy and qwer - Thank you very much, gentle...

2008-10-30T19:02:26.837Z

MuscleDaddy and qwer - Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your kind words and extended hands. The marked amenity of your manners is more than matched by the sound sagacity and patriotic passion of your prose. I am only sorry that I introduced myself to you all with a sneering rejoinder aimed at Dr. Melanie, which The Monster promptly and politely stomped to the curb.

I have been reading the essays and comments from your Ejectian archives, and I am impressed. I find that, when you launder and leapfrog the legion of insulting, infantile and imbecilic trolls that pour in perpetuity from the undersides of some vast bridge over the river Why, conservative sites oftentimes stimulate and interest me more than others. Perhaps it's because, being a libertarian-yea-authoritarian-nay liberal, I enjoy, and derive benefit from, immersing myself in political, social, economic and philosophic thought currently not copacetic to that of myself; to endeavor to learn from, or at the least understand better, those - the majority - who do not necessarily share my purview, but have more than contributed to the greatness of America. I began from a position where critical thinking was unfailingly trumped by visceral, where I valued equality more than freedom; I am trying to improve on the former and re-evaluate my adherence to the latter. In this peripatetic pilgrimage, I have found much to muse upon from the combined wisdom of such Burkean descendants as your good selves.

Sadly, the demands of real life are exerting their scabrous hold upon my time these days with an unparalleled ferocity, but I will close with this: while I have serious concerns and reservations about an Obama presidency - in especial one with unfettered assistance from bicameral majorities - I find that the earlier endorsement of he whom you label The One by Mr. Francis Fukuyama (which can be found here) propounds a position within a well-tossed horseshoe of mine. His comment:

It is hard to imagine a more disastrous presidency than that of George W. Bush....As a general rule, democracies don’t work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure. While John McCain is trying desperately to pretend that he never had anything to do with the Republican Party, I think it would a travesty to reward the Republicans for failure on such a grand scale.

In my opinion, the declaration by Mr. Whittle in a previous National Review article, opining that the Republicans deserved to win more than the Democrats deserved to lose, is an inversion of how I view the just outcome of this seemingly endless, and oftimes interminable, electoral process.

I shall intrude upon your future discussions here as and when I find the time and marshal the relevant thoughts - but I shall remain to educate and inform myself, whether cloaked or visible; of that have no doubt!

Good day, gentelmen.

"Do you really want Public Health Care? Really? Th...

2008-10-30T06:16:16.739Z

"Do you really want Public Health Care? Really? Think about the following before you answer: public housing, public busses, public toilets. Oh, but public healthcare will be different. Yeah, right.

You Rawk! Mr. P.

Tyrone -I'm with MuscleDaddy. Nice demeanor. Ple...

2008-10-30T06:03:18.278Z

Tyrone -

I'm with MuscleDaddy. Nice demeanor. Pleasant conversation. Quoting a Founder. And helping to even the keel. I like the way you trim your sails.

D4 - check in the inbox.Morph - nice to meet ya an...

2008-10-30T04:20:51.933Z

D4 - check in the inbox.

Morph - nice to meet ya and have a handle to hang on the mannered discourse. And thanks for the kind words.

I will try to reconstruct my response, but can't tonight. Trial tomorrow demands bedtime now.

Parting tidbit: looks like Story of the Soul-Numbing Spectre gets deeper and better/scarier: Checks on Joe more extensive than first thought. Looks like it wasn't just child support records; it was also taxes and welfare records. Says Ohio's latest embarrassing public official (whither Jen Bruner?): "Jones-Kelley wrote that the checks were "well-meaning," but misinterpreted amid the heated final weeks of a presidential election. . . Jones-Kelly also has denied any connections between the computer checks on Wurzelbacher and her support for Obama. She donated the maximum $2,500 this year to the Obama campaign."

Newspeak Fevah: Catch it!

~Paules says:"Redistribution" under any political ...

2008-10-30T00:36:27.600Z

~Paules says:

"Redistribution" under any political ideology is a fundamentally flawed concept. All issues of "justice" and "fairness" aside, the use to which government puts redistributive wealth is the growth of more government. Period. End of story.

Public education in my district, for example, requires one bureaucrat for every two teachers in the classroom. Allocated to each student is $10,000 per year. Run the math and you will see that my cut of that 10K is $2000 for each student (5 classes averaging 16 students calculated on a per diem basis), or a salary of 32K. Peanuts. The other 8K is for infrastructure, administration, books and materials.

Give me 160K and I will rent space, provide all materials, and offer a better education for sixteen students than any of them currently get from the public school system IN ALL SUBJECTS. And I'll make 100K doing it, if not more. I think my analogy is fair. Government spends $4 on administration for every dollar it redistributes.

I know some of you readers are prepared to pick apart my example. Don't bother. I know the example is simplistic. The point is: Why would anyone trust any civic institution to the hands of government? Do you really want Public Health Care? Really? Think about the following before you answer: public housing, public busses, public toilets. Oh, but public healthcare will be different. Yeah, right.

And me? I'm about to launch another Paules Challenge for a box of paper. That's right, folks, I have used up my paper ration for the YEAR. When a teacher goes begging for basic supplies you know it's just WRONG.

And that's today's lesson from Mr. ~Paules' Classroom.

Tyrone,I think I'm gettin' to like you.Here's hopi...

2008-10-30T00:33:25.905Z

Tyrone,

I think I'm gettin' to like you.

Here's hopin' ya stick around.

- MuscleDaddy

qwer wrote: Perhaps the difference between the quo...

2008-10-29T22:44:19.042Z

qwer wrote: Perhaps the difference between the quotes lies in the experience Jefferson acquired between the writings: yours from the mid-1780s and mine a decade or two later.

That's doubtless true. I'm certainly no expert on Jefferson, but from what I've read the views he espouses in your post seem to be truest to his most deeply held convictions. In his day things were of different perceptionary hues as well, politics papered in greenish patterns of the so-called idle rich generating lucre on land that others coerced into productivity through their blood-sweat and callused-toil; and e'er have just men been roused, wracked and repulsed by a perceived injustice.

I must admit that I find this Barackian tax-tweak to be somewise troubling.

Tyrone Slothrop wrote October 29, 2008 8:19 PM :I ...

2008-10-29T21:42:06.148Z

Tyrone Slothrop wrote October 29, 2008 8:19 PM :
I cast a couple more of his offerings before you as an earnest defensor of El Diablo

Perhaps the difference between the quotes lies in the experience Jefferson acquired between the writings: yours from the mid-1780s and mine a decade or two later.

Oyster,Indeed - much as I said earlier - "context"...

2008-10-29T20:56:55.390Z

Oyster,

Indeed - much as I said earlier - "context" should not be limited to a single speaking engagement.

Tyrone,

Sounds like the way it works now (sans "tax-rebates" to those not paying taxes in the first-place)...

- MuscleDaddy

qwer - I agree with your [silent] supposition rega...

2008-10-29T20:19:08.679Z

qwer - I agree with your [silent] supposition regarding the acute wisdom and thoughfulness of the giant Jefferson. I cast a couple more of his offerings before you as an earnest defensor of El Diablo:

"Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785. ME 19:18, Papers 8:682

"Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the individual." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1784. FE 4:15, Papers 7:557

Thank you qwer, you just added another book to my ...

2008-10-29T19:19:33.550Z

Thank you qwer, you just added another book to my already overloaded "To Read" list.

Anonymous @ 5:57PM - taken without any historical or personal context, that is a perfectly valid interpretation. It is one with whose sentiments I whole-heartedly agree. It is also utterly contrary to the statements, sentiments, and actions that Mr. Obama demonstrated both before and after this interview. I wish sincerely that he had meant it as you interpret it - but I cannot for a moment believe that, because these quotes do not exist in a vacuum. "Listen to the whole thing - with out preconceptions" you said - but what we are using is not preconception, it is the evidence of his own character and history. A quote without context is useless, and will only reflect the thoughts of the reader. That says good things about your own benevolent impulses, but nothing good about his.

So, just to put this "spreading the wealth through...

2008-10-29T18:14:54.358Z

So, just to put this "spreading the wealth through taxes" idea in perspective. Here are some quotes from "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson", Memorial Edition (ME) in 20 volumes, 1903:

"Our wish... is that... equality of rights [be] maintained, and that state of property, equal or unequal, which results to every man from his own industry or that of his fathers." -- 2nd Inaugural Address, 1805. ME v3:pp382

"To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association--'the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.'" -- Note in Destutt de Tracy's "Political Economy," 1816. ME v14:pp466

"If the overgrown wealth of an individual is deemed dangerous to the State, the best corrective is the law of equal inheritance to all in equal degree; and the better, as this enforces a law of nature, while extra-taxation violates it." -- Ibid.

Something to ponder.

Listen to the whole thing - with out preconception...

2008-10-29T17:57:37.861Z

Listen to the whole thing - with out preconceptions. See if you see something different.

Here's what I heard:
Obama is saying it was a tragedy that the media focused on the court battles during the civil rights movement. The real power of change that was occurring was happening in the community - which is were the real power is - not the government. Real power is in the community - with the People. The government and the courts are a reflection of change that the People bring about - not the other way around.

And, we still suffer from the media implying that change comes from above - from the courts or the government, when it DOESN'T. This great country we have is By the People, For the People. If we want change We The People must make that change - and NOT leave it up to the government to decide for us.

THAT is what I got out of the interview...

How's that for a complete 180 on interpretation?

Glad you finally realized it. But it goes much fa...

2008-10-29T17:34:32.426Z

Glad you finally realized it. But it goes much farther back than that "Uncle Walter" Cronkite almost single-handedly turned the Tet Offensive in VietNam into a US defeat when it actually destroyed the Viet Cong as a fighting force. Walter Duranty of Time magazine was a Stalin apologist all through the 30s. It's just now we can find the truth much more easily and their extreme bias and spinning of what's actually happening is becoming glaringly evident.

About the elitist press exposing only that which f...

2008-10-29T17:18:43.055Z

About the elitist press exposing only that which fits their agenda ... I recall distincly being almost in shock after the last presidential election when I heard Tom Brokaw (a man who I always thought as fair as a lib reporter could be), basically compaining about bloggers because "it's up to us to decide what is news". He was referring to the big 3 network anchors when he made that statement, and it was a light bulb moment for me.

- The "Constitutional Handgun Ban" pronouncement.-...

2008-10-29T16:00:28.257Z

- The "Constitutional Handgun Ban" pronouncement.

- The "Redistribution of Wealth" comments and other socialist-leaning statements.

- The race-baiting comments, both live & in his books.

- His past-and-present associations with terrorists, terrorist supporters, unapologetic racists, criminals and assorted America-haters.

- His meddling with the securtiy situation over the treaty in Iraq for his own political gain.

- His campaign's open efforts to suppress dissenting opinion.

At any other time in American history, any one of these would have disqualified a candidate from a viable run on the Presidency.

Of course, at any other time in the past 50 years - ALL of these would have been broadcast to the American people, with the volume turned up to "11".
(instead of only garnering a careful mention on Fox)

- MuscleDaddy

Morph, first I want to echo a few others who have ...

2008-10-29T14:54:29.748Z

Morph, first I want to echo a few others who have welcomed your considerate debate here.

Others have discussed the issue of socialism probably better than I could. I would like to bring up the point that it is not just the socialist direction that Barack Obama wants to go in that bothers people about the possibility of his being elected.

For instance, there was his declaration that the Washington, D.C. Handgun ban was constitutional. The Second Amendment is pretty clear, in my opinion as well as many others, and no possible wording of such a ban could avoid violating it, except in the extremely limited sense of preventing convicted violent felons from legally owning guns.

Another issue is the potential for abuse of power. He has already tried to intimidate groups who run ads critical of him by trying to get the Justice Department to prosecute them. As you can see in that article, it's not the first time the DoJ has been used in this fashion.

Then there is the number of Obama's radical and criminal friends and associates. I don't know about others, but I would be willing to forgive him for one or two, if they weren't "close friends", but he has a whole laundry list, including not only Bill Ayers, but international terrorist Khalid Al-Mansour. Let's see, Bill Ayers helped Obama launch his political career by holding a fundraiser in his house, Rev. Wright, who Obama described as his spiritual mentor, claimed things like 9/11 was "America's chickens coming home to roost", and that HIV/AIDS was created by whites to kill black people, Tony Rezko was a slum lord who didn't turn on the heat in the buildings he managed during bitter Chicago winters until forced by court order. Those are just a few examples.

There are other things, but I start to get disjointed in my writing after a while, so I'll stop there and come back to it later.

Wow!Good stuff last night.Congratulations for comi...

2008-10-29T13:35:40.395Z

Wow!
Good stuff last night.
Congratulations for coming out of the anymouse closet Morph. Civil disagreement is ALWAYS welcome here. In fact we thrive on it.

Peter, you can witness those same tactics here. When some douche tries to hijack the thread and we cut him off, they start screaming about their RIGHTS. "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"

Sandokan, you blew our cover! It's all a Rovian plot. Run, run away!

Anymouse @ 11:30
"I am ashamed to be a member of the Republican party at this point." I'm not a member, they just get my vote because the alternative is worse. No, Obama won't turn us into a Socialist nation overnight but I'd prefer not to take three more giant steps down that road.

Paul A, It's good to have back on the right side of the world, buddy!