For Useful IdiotsLike many other
definitions that have been rewritten by left-wingnuts over time, the
term "general welfare” no longer means what it did when it was
written in our Constitution and ratified by the colonies in 1789.
September 12, 2008
As Thomas Jefferson
once explained, "To take from one, because it is thought his own
industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare
to others who have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate
arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to
everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
The preamble to the
Constitution establishes the goal of the effort as to; "establish
justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense,
promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity.”
liberals insist that the term "general welfare” implies a Marxist
view that the federal government has the duty and the power to "take
from each according to his ability, and give to each according to his
need,” - to define and measure out individual well-being against the
will of some on behalf of others. This is not only very dangerous to the
basic concepts of liberty and freedom; it is diametrically at odds with
everything the founders formed.
Target Taxing "the
Aside from the fact
that punitive taxation penalizes the most productive members of society
and rewards the least productive, it won’t work. This is not a subject
up for debate. This is very old news which has been beyond dispute for
As a result, Jefferson,
America’s best known liberal, stated it very clearly for future
generations, - "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can
prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people
under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Jefferson’s point is this, - such an effort is not only punitive
towards productivity; it is a "waste.” It won’t work. It is a
"waste” of hard earned resources... in terms of simple economics. But
that does not mean that the effort is without purpose. It has a
The Obama campaign has
been very clear about their intention to raise taxes on two specific
target groups, "the rich” and "corporations.”
According to their
campaign, Obama defines "rich” as those households making above $250,000
in annual income, approximately the top 2% of income earners. They claim
that this target group of U.S. citizens is "not paying their fair
share” and that they must pay more in order to provide for the
"general welfare” of others.
Obama refers to this as
"charity” – though charity is usually a private individual act which
requires the consent of the giver.
This is exactly what
Jefferson said we should not and could not do. But Karl Marx is very
much in favor of such a notion, and so is the Obama campaign and all of
their voters who never fail to cast their votes on the basis of what
their government can do for them in their personal lives.
Who Pays Taxes Now?
Is it true that the
Bush administration has lowered the tax burden for "the rich” and placed
it upon the average Joe?
No, it isn’t...
According to IRS reports for 2001 through 2006 (last report available)
this statement is not at all true. It is patently false!
The Top 5% of income
earners pay an increasing lion’s share of all taxes in America.
2001 – 53.25% (of all
federal taxes collected)
2002 – 53.8%
2003 – 54.36%
2004 – 57.13%
2005 – 59.67%
2006 – 60.14%
In each year since Bush
took office, the top 5% of income earners, those making more than
$150,000 per year, have paid an increasing share of the federal
It is not at all true
that "the rich” do not pay their "fair share.” "The rich” have been
targeted for a very long time already. I’d sure like to know what
definition of "fair share” we are working with here.
Meanwhile, the bottom
50% of income earners ($32,000) have enjoyed a decreasing share
of federal tax obligation under Bush.
2001 – 3.97% (of all
federal taxes collected)
2002 – 3.5%
2003 – 3.46%
2004 – 3.3%
2005 – 3.07%
2006 – 2.99%
To put this in terms
that even the average modern liberal can comprehend,
Census Bureau, the
median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 in 2007.
American households making below this figure will pay less than 3% of
all federal taxes collected, while those making above this figure will
pay 97%, with the top 5% paying over 60%.
been "wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them”
for decades now and the fundamental basis for Obamanomics is to do even
more of the same!
Class Warfare and
There’s a good reason
why today’s Marxists have adopted the democratic process as its means to
advance its socialist agenda... Unlike communism at gun point, it works!
If you place a gun to
the head of most Americans, there’s a reasonable chance it is you who
won’t live to tell about it. But Americans can be talked into a
kinder-gentler form socialism and few will look far enough down the road
to see where they are headed.
like Obama have been counting on this trend for years now and their
mission is all but complete. Jefferson was right about a lot of
things... "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one
percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
When those who pay
little or no taxes at all (most Americans) get to define "fair share” in
the tax code, they will seek out a small target (the rich – top 2%) with
Madison wrote – "Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that
which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term
particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is
a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his
Property rights are at
the foundation of individual liberty and personal freedom and our
government was formed for the primary purpose of protecting and
preserving individual freedom via protecting the right of every
individual to earn and own property.
Yet it is the
principles of Marxism that drive Obamanomics and rule economic policy
via democratic mob mentality today.
Choosing the Right
Winning any battle
begins with choosing the right opponent. Left-leaning politicians
understand the principle of choosing sides wisely. No matter how deep
their pockets, the top 2% of income earners are completely defenseless
against the mob mentality of the other 98% of voters who have defined
"fair share” as "from each according to his ability; to each
according to his need.”
Karl Marx wrote that
"democracy is the road to socialism.” Marx was right, at least as
relates to any democratic society in which the majority of voters mark
their ballot on the basis of gifts from the public trough.
The Fundamental Lie
called Corporate Taxation
Corporations are made
up of individuals. You can’t tax a corporation. Every penny in corporate
tax is passed on to employees, shareholders and consumers, aka -
The minute someone says
they are only going to tax "corporations,” they are attempting to
conceal the very real fact that they are in the end, raising taxes on
employees, shareholders and consumers.
Back to the Drawing
Once again we return to
the topic of targeting America’s "rich.” They are an easy target. The
"rich” have been a defenseless target of the left ever since FDR’s Raw
Deal re-wrote the Constitutional definition of "general welfare.”
If 2% of the nation’s
population paying more than 60% of the nation’s federal taxes is not
enough, what is enough?
Would 2% of Americans
paying 70% of the federal tab be enough? Would 80% be enough? Or are we
simply working our way towards the top 2-5% paying 100% of the federal
This is Obamanomics 101
in a nutshell. It isn’t new, so it isn’t a change. It is more of
More of the same mob
mentality, class warfare and punitive measures against our nation’s most
productive and most defenseless citizens.
2% of American citizens
have no means of defending themselves against the will of the vast
majority of modern voters who have been trained to believe that they
have a right to the earnings of others. Democrats know this and it is
It is not enough to
protect only yourself from continued affronts on individual freedom and
liberty. You must be willing to protect and defend the freedoms and
liberties of others in order to protect and preserve your own.
What the mob can do to
only 2% of your fellow citizens, they can also do to you. What
Obamanomics can do to 2% of Americans, it can do to you, and eventually
Charity requires the
consent of the giver. Give as much as you like. But taking from a few
against their will in the name of the mob, is called tyranny.
Do you really have
any doubt about what Obamanomics represents?