Skip to comments.Change, or more of the same? [Pravda endorses Obama]
Posted on 10/26/2008 12:40:45 AM PDT by bruinbirdman
If anybody believes that John McCain will not continue the Bush policy of lying, warmongering and making the rich richer, then they certainly have missed the oddest accusation that McCain has leveled against Obama: that Obama should be condemned for wanting to spread the wealth around. In keeping with this theme, McCain and Palin have even tried to resurrect the spirit of the socialist bogeyman to attack Obamas economic policies.
But, according to many economists, ninety-six percent of the wealth is held by only four percent of the population. In such a milieu, it seems strange that a presidential candidate would believe his opposition to spreading the wealth would somehow appeal to the masses.
It would be even more ironic if this strategy actually worked. But it would not be surprising. American history has shown that with the right blend of prejudice, fear and uncertainty, Americans have frequently cut off their noses to spite their faces.
Of course, McCain attempted to rationalize his remark by contending that the creation of new wealth is more economically beneficial than redistributing wealth already created.
But where will the overwhelming majority of this newly created wealth go? Right into the hands of the wealthiest four percent, because trickle down economics is really trickle across economics.
Of course trickle down theorists will say Not so! They will argue that when the rich acquire more wealth, they will be more inclined to invest that wealth, which in turn will lead to the creation of more jobs.
What these theorists neglect to mention is where this wealth will be invested, and where these jobs will be created. How much of it will be deposited in overseas bank accounts exempt from American tax laws, how much will go into building and maintaining factories in third-world countries where workers labor for pennies in dangerous and environmentally hazardous conditions; how much will go into the paychecks of foreign workers whose jobs were created because American jobs were outsourced.
In several previous Pravda.Ru articles I endorsed the axiom that evil is the principal motivating force in the world. But I also stated that the benefits one reaps from doing evil are constrained by ones own mortalityhence the old adage, You cant take it with you.
I also expressed the belief that evildoers will ultimately have to pay for their deeds, while the good, who often spend their entire lives toiling in obscurity and poverty, will eventually receive their reward. This is the foundation for most of the worlds religions, and a just and balanced universe demands nothing less.
But I must admit that at times Ive begun to wonder whether these contentions are little more than rationalizations or naïve optimism on my part, to avoid the thought that there really is no justice, that honesty is for the foolish, and that wealth and power far too often go to those who not only do evil, but who awaken evil in others.
Perhaps the upcoming presidential election will justify or refute my suspicions. America currently has an evil, ignorant president and an evil, warmongering vice-president. A McCain/Palin victory would simply reverse these roles, giving America an evil, warmongering president and an evil, ignorant vice-president.
Can the world stand four more years of that?
How much of it will be deposited in overseas bank accounts exempt from American tax laws
so let’s raise taxes so even more money will go offshore?
So far, “The One” has received endorsements from Islamafacist terrorists, South American Communist dictators, Communist propaganda sheets from the old Soviet Union and the New York Times. I’m starting to see a pattern here.
Yes, you are so right comrade Huffman. That is why things are so great in Russia, right. Spreading the wealth around, I suppose, is the reason any photo one ever sees of Russia reminds them of something bleak, cold and circa 1960’s.
Do you recall when you Ruskies had your hand out for loans and aid? You commies must have spread the wealth a little too thin, huh?
Where do these people and articles come from?
No other place on the face of the planet should have a more graphic or clear understanding of the disastrous consequences that come from "spreading the wealth around", yet to throw in another hackneyed phrase, some "can't see the forest for the trees."
And in case anyone missed the punchline: unlike the U.S., Russia has instituted the flat tax, and it’s worked very well for them.
Pravda is saying that the U.S. should do the exact opposite of what their country is doing. Isn’t there something even a little fishy about that?
I can't tell the difference between Pravda and the Washington Post or New York Times.
Why am I not surprised in the least?
The American Pravda, ABCNBCCBSCNNREUTERSAPMSNBCNYTWAPO, is also enthusiastically campaigning for Obama. In fact, all Pravda’s everywhere are on board for the New World Order.
For those who don’t know, “Pravda” is Russian for “New York Times”.
Thank you for the ping, Impy. With this great endorsement, maybe Obmaa will dance again:
Obama dances before heading off to Grandmother’s side
Well, that stuned my beeber... not.
How could he ever get through being sooo broken up over granny?!
Really upset about her, huh?
Stupid commie propaganda forgets to mention that America has the wealthist middle class and “poor” people in the world. We are not protecting the filthy rich...we are protecting us and our rights.