Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/04/2007 4:05:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Kaslin

2 posted on 06/04/2007 4:06:24 AM PDT by xcamel ("It's Thompson Time!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said, a phrase that has a kind of quasi-socialistic ring to it...

Yeah, and "Deutschland über alles" has a kind of quasi-Nazi ring to it.

3 posted on 06/04/2007 4:30:17 AM PDT by TruthShallSetYouFree (Abortion is to family planning what bankruptcy is to financial planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
“”I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she said, a phrase that has a kind of quasi-socialistic ring to it, one in which the government would play a stronger role in running the economy and setting the rules by which it is allowed to operate.”

Sounds a bit like Chavez, early on. First, I don’t care what ANY elected official personally thinks about how society should be structured, and especially not one who could not pass the DC bar exam. Elected officials are servants, not victors, and should have absolutely no power to ‘restructure’ society.

Society, in the best sense, is what happens when free people organize themselves in a manner consistent with preservation of each of their unique individual identities. In addition, human compassion and charity always works better in helping the poor to be the great individuals they can be and to achieve happiness than does any kind of government dictated social policy. We certainly don’t need Sillary to save the world.

6 posted on 06/04/2007 4:39:29 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

If Hillary were questioned on any of this, and forced to go off-script, she would immediately look like the half-wit she is. This is all platitudes and slogans. She doesn’t have anything to back it up. The media won’t call her on it, and the Republicans are too nutless and gutless to do it. Oh well, at least we have Rush.


7 posted on 06/04/2007 4:46:15 AM PDT by cdcdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Thnak you for posting the entire article. Good one.


9 posted on 06/04/2007 4:58:03 AM PDT by upchuck (If you don't have borders, you won't have a nation ~ Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

I’m always amused when hear libs boast about the wealth of blue states compared to red states and how the red states would be so much poorer if a split occurred. What do they think corporations and other businesses would do if if a split occurred? Do libs really believe that if given the choice businesses would try to operate in a country that either taxed the bejeesus out of them, severely restricted them, or outright banned many them? Obviously corporations and businesses are going to pick a country that doesn’t do any of that. Like Red states. With the current anti-business mentality of most of the Dem leaders, like Hillary Clinton, it’s a wonder why any business or pro-business people would vote for the Donkey Party.


14 posted on 06/04/2007 12:29:23 PM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson