No Doubt Left, Hillary is a Socialist
The Associated Press reports that Hillary Clinton promotes shared responsibility:
Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it's time to replace an "on your own" society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.
The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an "ownership society" really is an "on your own" society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.
"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none."
If there was any doubt left in anyone's mind that Hillary is a socialist these comments should remove that doubt. "Shared responsibility?" "We're all in it together?" What does that mean? Does she propose that the government assign part of my time to helping someone else meet their goals? No, I think she means that the government should assign all our time.
Hillary clearly believes that the government can take care of people better than people can take care of themselves. She demeans everyone by criticizing the concept of an "on your own" society. Hillary holds people in general in very low esteem yet it is people that will have to staff this government of hers that she expects to lead us all to prosperity.
Actually, most people are quite adept at looking out for themselves. This is one reason that socialism doesn't work and capitalism does. In a socialistic society the competent people in charge are looking out for themselves and the incompetent people in charge are botching up the process. In a capitalistic, free-market society only the competent people are in charge (for the most part).
There is one thing we can count on from Hillary's vision of government: It will definitely narrow the gap between the rich and the poor. It will rid the country of the rich and make all of us poorer.
There might be a little golden nugget in Hillary's comments though. If she believes in "special privileges for none," does that mean she opposes Affirmative Action?
Comments
Make a comment:
- Government is Friction
- We Have Too Many Experts
- Money is Not Wealth
- The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- Let's Use Afghanistan as an Entitlement Testbed
- Socially Disadvantaged Farmer or Rancher
- Even Charity is Not Always a Good Thing
- Why Not Give Universal Footwear a Try?
- Supporters of New Health Care Acts Disingenuous
- anhinga on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Carson on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- anhinga on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Carson on Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- anhinga on Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- anhinga, 31 July 2010
- Carson, 19 June 2010
- Liquid Egg Product, 18 June 2010
- Carson, 02 May 2010
- Liquid Egg Product, 01 May 2010
- Anhinga
- Carnival of Climate Change
- Ekawaaz
- Flashpoint
- Florida Cracker
- I Can Plainly See
- Ironic Surrealism
- Liquid Egg Product
- Ms Understood
- The Hatemongers Quarterly
- Truth, Lies and Character
hillary addressing wealthy donors at a Democratic fund-raiser June 2004, for barbara boxer.
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," "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."
To which she was honored with a medal.
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/images/Medal_Hillary.gif
"There might be a little golden nugget in Hillary’s comments though. If she believes in “special privileges for none,†does that mean she opposes Affirmative Action?"
Now that is one helluva question. Maybe you should ask her. lol It would be interesting to hear the explanation/double talk that would fly off of her forked tongue. Or maybe not...
What Hillary can't admit is that the tax cuts helped the poor more than the wealthy. I don't think she is stupid enough to not understand this; it just doesn't serve her agenda to admit it. She is hoping that the majority of voters are stupid enough to not understand it.
One other thought on her "special privileges for none" remark: Does she believe that politicians shouldn't be shuttled around the country in private jets? Or does she believe that everyone should be shuttled around the country in private jets?