Posted by
Patrick Henry on Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:36:34 PM
In a now famous campaign face-off with "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher in Ohio, the latter asked
Obama if he was really going to raise taxes on small businesses. Obama's memorable response was that
he just wanted to spread some of the wealth around. The redistribution of wealth means taking from
those who have and giving to those who don't. It has been a rallying cry of socialism and communism
for many decades, and it is a pivot point for Barack Obama's domestic, economic and foreign policy.
The concept is made to sound innocent enough by its proponents, and is likkened to the noble notion
of sharing, with a difference. And the difference is huge! Sharing means the willing common use of
one's goods or property with another. But it is the volition of the sharer that drives the deal, and he or
she decides what or how much to share, when, where and under what conditions. In redistributive
socieities, the "sharers" have absolutely nothing to say about what they will share, how much of it they
will share, when, how or with whom they will share. All of this is to affirm that communism, socialism
and redistribution are not, by any stratech of the imagination, sharing. They amount to forced government
confiscation, and are entirely inconsistent with a free society. You probably think it can't happen here,
in the United States of America. I've got news for you. It's already happening. And if Barack Obama
and the Democratic party get their way, you haven't seen even the tip of the iceberg yet.
The first sign of most socio-political cataclysms is in the rhetoric. Phrases like "spread the wealth
around," or "tax the rich" to pay for this or that or a "public health insurance" option supposedly made
necessary by 'immoral insurance comapnies' and wasteful medical personnel. It's there in sideshows like
saving $500 billion in Mediacre fraud and then, instead of using it o reinvigorate a failing Medicare
system, funneling it to pay for government run healthcare for the poor who can't afford health insurance.
It's there in the deficit building bailouts and social program boondoggles whose costs will be passed on to
our children and grandchildren since the only way to sustain them will be to tax, tax, tax. But where is the
end of it? Where is it all headed? Watch for the three key trademarks.
First among these is the creation of huge social programs (giveaways) that further entrench a social class
thet cannot survive without them. Democrats want free healthcare for everyone. Then, as soon as they're
finished shoving that down America's throats, they want blanket amnesty for twelve to thirty million
illegal aliens, who will then be eligible for those healthcare benefits we already can't pay for. Once this
is accomplished, U.S. borders will exist in name only, and it is difficult to conceive circumstances in
which any alien can be considered illegal. The motto seems to be, "Bring us your tired, your poor, your
wretched refuse, and we'll take money from those who are neither poor nor wretched and fix them right
up with everything they need."
The second mark is forced unionism and government takeover of private enterprise. Today, American
doesn't manufacture much of what the world wants. We can't make cars that are competetive in the
world marketplace with the Japanese, the Germans, or even the Koreans, and most businesses that do
make products generally move their production facilities to other countries. Why do you suppose that
is? It is because the unions, whose goal is to take more of what companies earn out of the pockets of
owners and shareholders and put it into the pockets of workers (redistribution) has increaingly made
American businesses untenable. Then, when these businesses collapse under the wait of unsupportable
union contracts, the government steps in using taxpayer money, and then turns over huge ownership
chunks to whom? You guessed it. The unions! How sweet a deal is that? The two fundamental goals
of both socialism and communism are government control of the means of production and resditribution
of wealth. And the unions are the hammer that drives the nail. There is a bill currently in the legislature
that would deprive employees a secret vote on whether to unionize, thus making it easy for these
underhanded power brokers with proven histories of corruption to muscle their way into business after
business. In the end, if Obama and the Democrats get their way, there will be no viable businesses
that are not owned by the government and controlled by the unions.
Third among the signs of the times is forced globalism. Obama has made it repeatedly clear that he
is first of all a citizen of the world. As such, he has bargained away America's economic sovereignty
by joining a G-20 pact to "coodinate economic policy" and he has promised millions to a corrupt
United Nations to help the poor in third world countries. That's right! You thught that redistribution
was just the plan for the U.S.? Wrong! Obama wants to see the entire world on an identical economic
footing. And the only way to achieve that is for the richest countries to forfeit much of their wealth.
Guess which country is among the richest, and who is at the top of the U.N.'s "fleece list." Under
Obama's globalist philosophy Americans would be subject to laws made elsewhere and by non-Americans
and would see billions of tax dollars go to third world ratholes and straight into the pockets of
corrupt officials either there or at the United Nations itself.
If any of this sounds like stuff you don't want, then you'd better wake up and smell the coffee. The
lesson the Democrats have learned in trying to find a way to pay for healthcare reform is that there
aren't enough rich people, nor are they rich enough to pay for all of the left's unilateral wet dreams.
They can't turn to the poor who don't have anything. So guess who they're coming for? It doesn't
take a genius to figure it out, and why should we be surprised? It's what Democrats do. They dream big,
they spend big and they tax big. What America needs is a president who considers himself an American
first of all, who cares more about what the people who put him in office think than he does about those
in the world who hate and are jealous of America do, and who will make responsibility, not dependency
first principle of government. If you think Barack Obama is up to any part of that, dream on. For a
growing multitude, 2012 can't come soon enough. Redistribute that!