The Obamassiah will “take care of my gas and mortgage”

In 1953, Ezra Taft Benson was appointed U.S. Secretary of Agriculture by President Eisenhower.

In the 1960s he stated to the BYU student body:

“I have talked face to face with the godless communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. [Nikita] Khrushchev for a half day when he visited the United States, not that I’m proud of it. I opposed his coming then, and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But, according to President Eisenhower, Khrushchev had expressed a desire to learn something of American Agriculture — and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why. As we talked face to face, he indicated that my grandchildren would live under communism. After assuring him that I expected to do all in my power to assure that his and all other grandchildren will live under freedom, he arrogantly declaired in substance:

“‘You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.’

“And they’re ahead of schedule in their devilish scheme.” (Ezra Taft Benson “Our Immediate Responsibility.” Devotional Address at Brigham Young University. circa 1968.”)

Contrast that with an Obama supporter after watching his “infomercial” on Wednesday:

VOICE: It was the most memorable time of my life. It was a touching moment.

VOICE: Why?

VOICE: Because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to work on putting gas on my car, I won’t have to work on paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he’s going to help me.

Here’s the video:

I could comment but read Glenn Beck’s comments. They sum up what I’m thinking. Where’s our country heading?

No arguments? – Just call names.

This about sums it up.

Bar Stool Economics

This one’s been going around the net lately. I wonder why?

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

‘I only got a dollar out of the $20′, declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’

‘Yeah, that’s right’, exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’

‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’

‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

Note: Professor David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. doesn’t claim authorship but it’s good nonetheless.

HT: Douglas Wilson

Obama – Use the Supreme Court to redistribute

In a 2001 interview Obama laments that the Supreme Court hasn’t forced wealth redistribution.

Our Republic is an Oligarchy

The definition of Oligarchy:

From the Greek for ‘rule of the few’, this is a form of government in which power is centralised in the hands of an organised élite and is used for their social and/or economic benefit. Their power is maintained by force or by the shaping of the law to restrict the people and/or remove any need to consult them or be accountable to them. Many of the monarchies established in Europe during the Middle Ages began as oligarchies, with one family eventually gaining ascendancy over others.

Based on our “elected” representatives actions of the last few weeks I think our Constitutional Republic is almost dead. No longer do our elected officials listen to us. They simply do what they want. Take Diane Feinstein for instance. She gets 91,000 calls about the bail-out bill with 85,000 telling her to vote no. Her response:

Feinstein to 85,000 Callers: “You’re Confused”

During this evening’s Senate vote, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) took the podium to explain her position on the proposed bailout package. In her statement, she explains that she received 91,000 calls and emails, with 85,000 of them opposed to the measure. Even armed with the knowledge that 93% of her constituents passionate enough to contact her office pleaded for her to vote “nay”, she votes in favor of the bill, claiming that “there is a great deal of confusion out there” and these people “don’t understand” the situation.

Sounds more like Oligarchy to me. 99% of our “representatives” in Washington don’t give a flying rat’s behind what we think unless they’re up for re-election. Even then, they simply give us lip-service to get elected and then go on doing their own thing. We need to punish them when they do this by not ever voting for them again.

What can we do? Well, in the near term quit voting for these guys and gals. End the mindset that they have to have a “D” or “R” after their names or you’re throwing away your vote. The only way to change this broken system is to change the way we approah voting. Sure, a third party may not win for many years to come. But, in the process a few ’safe’ incombants may get knocked off. They’ll know our displeasure. I wrote both my Senators and Congressman and implored them to look at Dave Ramsey’s Common Sense Approach to solving this current crisis. I also stated that I would never vote for any politician who vote yes to this pork-laden, economic sell-out plan. Well, John Cornyn just lost my vote. I’ll be looking at any non-democratic opponent he has. If they meet my criteria, they’ll get my vote. Plan and simple. The same goes for Senator Hutchison when she’s up for re-election, or runs for Govenor. No vote from me for her. Finally, even though he probably won’t get my vote anyway, if Congressman Nick Lampson votes yes, he will have sealed his fate with me.

I encourage folks every where to hold these guys accountable and put your vote where your mouth is.