Will Obama Spread The Wealth?
Oct 20, 2008 Political
When Barack Obama was speaking to the now famous Joe the Plumber he told Joe that when you spread the wealth around it is better for everyone. Obama’s entire philosophy is that government should provide and he likes to tell people how government will give them something. Whether it is health care or stimulus checks, Obama is of a mind that government is giving something.
He is incorrect because government does not have anything to give. Government is the middleman in a redistribution scheme. In order for the government to give something it has to take something. It is our money, not theirs.
Obama’s cavalier remark to Joe says a lot about the candidate. It shows us, that inside, Barack Obama believes that government should decide how much of your money you get to keep and that government can confiscate however much of it it wants and it can do what it wants with it. If government needs more money then it can just take more from you and you have no say in the matter.
You also have no say in how the money is used. Nearly 80% of Americans did not want money spent to bail out Wall Street but government spent it anyway. A vast majority of people want an end to earmarks but that has not stopped Obama from spending a million dollars a day in earmarks. There are countless programs that waste money that people do not want and see no need for (or are duplicated by other agencies) and yet government ignores what the people want. Government just takes the money and does what it wants.
Barack Obama has raised millions of dollars from people who willingly sent it to him (some even legally). That was their choice and Obama appreciates it. He did not have to earn the money and he spends it as if it grows on trees. His convention had to incur the extra expense of renting a football stadium and erecting some fancy background for him to accept the nomination. He is paying a million dollars to air a half hour ad and he spent over 800 thousand dollars for ACORN to commit fraud (and he committed fraud by reporting it as something else). He is spending money without a care because it is not his and he can always get more by sending out a plea to his supporters.
When it comes to his programs and how much he will spend, it will be only slightly different. Instead of people willingly giving money, Obama will confiscate more of it than the government already takes and he will spend it recklessly. He will spend it like it comes from an endless supply because to government, it does. That endless supply is the taxpayer who will get soaked for every spending scheme Obama enacts.
Obama will be the modern day Robbing Hood and he will take money from those who make it and give it to those who do not. This is, as he stated, spreading the wealth and contrary to what he says, it does not work out better for everyone. You get less of what you tax and more of what you subsidize. If he raises taxes he will get fewer people working or at least more of them will look for ways to shelter their income just like Obama and the rest of the politicians do. If he gives money to people who pay no taxes then more people will find ways to put their hands out.
This cannot go on for long before the entire system is bankrupt, and we are not far from that now. Look at what happened in Hawaii. Their free health care cost too much so they had to end it. Why did it cost too much? People took their children off their policies and put them on the rolls of health care paid for by someone else. If people are not forced to bear some of the burden for their own standard of living then they will abuse the system because it costs them nothing. In the case of Hawaii, free health care turned out to cost a lot.
Obama’s Freudian slip opened a telling door to his inner soul. It gave a us a clear view of his intentions and how he views the role of government as well as how he views the distribution of wealth in our country.
This country was not founded on the idea that government would take money from those who have it and give it to those who do not. We were founded on the idea that we had the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Notice that there is no right to the property of others and that would include their wealth.
When Barack Obama told Joe the Plumber that he wanted to spread the wealth around he told Americans who were paying attention that they had no right to their property unless government deemed them to. He also told them that he would take what is rightfully theirs and give it to those who have no claim to it in order to make their lives better.
This is not what America is about and it smacks of socialism.
But I want to know this. Obama took in 150 million dollars in September. John McCain did not take in anything because he, unlike Obama, kept his word and took public financing. How would Obama feel if the FEC stepped in and told him he had to give half of the money he raised to John McCain? How would he like it if the FEC said that it would be better if the campaign with the least amount of money got money from the campaign that had the most? How would he like it if he were told that they did not want to punish his fund raising efforts but that the FEC believes campaigns do better when the FEC spreads the wealth?
I am willing to bet that Obama would go nuts and his supporters would be spilling their double chocolate, caramel, cinnamon, whipped cream, butterscotch lattes on their designer pants while chanting in unison about how unfair it all is (and probably blaming it on George Bush). After all, Obama worked hard for that money and it just is not fair that they would take it away and give it to another campaign to use just because that campaign accepted public funds and was not as good at fund raising. It just isn’t fair because they did not earn the money. It is not right to take it from Obama and give it to McCain just to make things fair. How is John McCain entitled to Barack Obama’s prosperity?
To which I would reply, welcome to the Republican Party.
Tags: Obama, socialism, spread wealth, taxes