Be Afraid. Very Afraid
Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles try to scare America into doing something about the deficit
“Wonkish, crotchety, and mostly bald, the co-chairs of President Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform want you to care about the deficit the way cable television wants you to care about pedophiles.”(Slate – Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid)
This latest flurry of panels and commission reports is getting serious attention, and they are bipartisan. Alice Rivlin and Erskine Bowles are Clinton Democrats. Liberals are scared.
Progressive schemes fail without other people's money
Look for more sniveling, snarking commentary like this from the left. Take away their access to other people’s money, and their positive rights agenda collapses. They can no longer buy votes by confiscating our money and bribing people with it.
A free-market, free-people agenda as envisioned by the founders costs nothing. Negative rights are natural, God-given, and therefore free.
9 comments:
What about Fredd's 'rights,' Silver?
1. My 'right' as an American to reach into your pocket and take your hard earned money so I can live more comfortably because I don't have enough money of my own to live in the rightful manner in which I am entitled? Would you mean spiritedly deny me?
2. My 'right' to live off of my fellow man without lifting a finger towards supporting myself? Would you toss me into the gutter, simply so you could have a good laugh at my misery?
These 'rights' of which I speak are also free (at least to me).
Liberals favorite words "I, me, mine, we think you should, not-for-profit, rich white greedy republican business owners, what about Bush, take, you should be thankful, obstructionist, party of no, astro turf, redistribute, war is lost, we can't win, ear marks, the right is partisan, increase tax, spend our way out." Did I miss anything???
I so tire of the words 'positive' and 'negative' when applied to rights.
Rights are just that, in the case of the Constitution they are simply explained in that people have them and 'intitutions' i.e. government has only those we the people grant it.
Only those in government call rights negative and perpetuate the myth.
You can get as tired as you want, Christopher, but these are terms of art.
I do share your larger point, that legitimately, positive rights are not really rights.
But the flip side of that is that food stamps is a "right" and the government has a concomitant responsibility to provide it.
This is an invented right, but it is indeed a right that flows not from God or nature, but from a man-made government. You may argue with them setting up that right, but it is still a government-made right.
That is why we need these two terms of art.
First of all, Americans are insane to have elected the Mubarak Hussein Obama.
Born to a Muslim father, raised by Muslim step father, he is legally Muslim and should he ever decide to apostatize he will be sought for beheading.
Now, some people may think that "what's wrong with Muslim". They think that Islam is like other religions.
The truth is that Islam is not a religion. It is a totalitarian system that controls every aspect of life: Personal, social, economical, political, legal and religious.
The goal of Islam is to conquer the whole world and subjugate it to Sharia.
Our Hussein President is doing everything in his power to destroy America, as America is the only power potentially capable of stopping the Muslim conquest of the world.
Obama and his Marxist handlers love Islam because they hate America. They don't mind that Islam stands for everything contrary to the normal leftist goals: It stands for beating women, even for slavery.
I don't care who Palin is, she may be good, may be bad. If the other choice is Obama or Palin got my vote
If we can keep their nasty, deceiving hands out of the proverbial cookie jar, they will have lost a lot of their influence and power.
As Mel Gibson yelled on Braveheart, "FREEDOM!" that should be the cry of every hard working American.
Silver,
Art you say? No!
Lies and misrepresentation ,,YES!
And no, these are not "government-made rights" but rather entitlements, let us be very clear on the verbage.
There is a HUGE difference between the two and never the twain shall they meet.
There are absolutely no 'entitlements' in the U.S. Constitution therefore they are not, nor ever will be 'rights'.
I will argue this point until my dieing day!
Should it really be "rights" or "freedoms" that we all desire? I argue that it is freedoms.
I'm not defending the constitutional abuse Christopher. I am saying that I as a person can grant you the right to come on to my property.
Government takes it a step further and grants positive rights with other peoples money. I'm not saying I agree with it. It's just putting a name to a concept.
Post a Comment