Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

I'm a big fan of Debra Saunders but I'm confused about what point she is trying to make. I'm actually suprised to see her repeat the liberal talking points. I don't think anyone is tyring to compare these Tea Party protests to the Revolutionary War and setting up straw men like Gingrich misses the point that these protests originated with individuals not with the Republican Party. The old joke that "both Republicans and Democrats will spend every dime in the Treasury - the only difference is that the Republicans will tell you how sorry they were to do it" is operative here. The protests are not about avoiding sacrifice but rather sending a message to elected officials that they are overreaching. If Debra thinks conceding defeat to the big spenders is all we have left well, she knows enough to expect them to reach for even more until the wheels finally fall off the system. She may be right that it is too late to save us from financial calamity but I don't see the advantage in sitting on our hands and bemoaning our fate. Better to let the legislators know that people are upset. Worries about getting reelected seem to be the only thing that motivates them to do the right thing. This isn't about "no taxation without representation" it's about "no GREATER taxataion without RESPONSIBLE representation" and voting the big spenders out of office.

Reply
Report this post

Ma'am;... You express the opinion: " I believe Obama'a soak the rich approach will be bad for the economy"...Okay; since we have not had a soak the rich approach at any time in recent history, what is your explanation for the sorry state of the economy??? Did the economy get rotten on good medicine???Is the cure good; but the patient beyond repair???I read a lot of history, and I can offer many examples of societies that died from too many poor, but none that died from too few rich...Why do you not agree that it takes some wealth to achieve the good for which this country was formed??? Why don't you agree that government is formed for good??? The fact is that our government was formed for a more perfect union, to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provie for defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty...Do you really believe that the denial of these goods to the people comes at less of a cost than their general acquistion??? Property was once taxed, and that tax either supported the government, or forced property into poorer hands where it would support the population... Now, Property can sit for years paying so little of taxes that it does not need to be plowed... Where property must support a city, people are free to abandon it, and go to some other location more favoraable to their will... Their rights are strictly protected, but their obligation is never enforced, so it is the poor who suffer taxes, and taxes on their meager wages helps to cut a chasm between the rich and the poor.... The country must still support the people whether it is in private hands or public hands...It is better that the property be in many private hands rather than a few...Property is never obligation free... Wealth is never obligation free...The goal of this country is clearly stated; but the price of denying those goals is extreme for the country, and if the rich will not pay for the benefits they alone recieve, and the poor cannot pay because they have no benefit from society; then we should just roll up the mess in the rug and trash it... Look at the burden of this society...The greatest part of it is defense and law enforcement; and again, it is the rich who benefit from these services...It is people without wealth who defend the wealth...It is people without property whe must bear the price of protecting property....While the poor suffer crime to a much greater degree than the rich, and the rich recieve much greater police protection, there are more private police in this country than public police....Does anyone believe the rich do not have their private armies???The whole U.S. army is their army enforcing their will for which they are not even troubled to pay...And while defense is a minor cost, the offense they force upon this country is a major cost... I am not against the antitax movement... I know the rich hope to rally the poor to protect them from any sort of just taxation...I hape instead that the whole government that protects the rich is swept away... The private armies that protect the rich from the rath of the poor would all go home if the government could not keep the dollar as legal tender...If the government could not be corrupted with dollars, and could not in turn corrupt the leaders of other countries against their populations then the whole mess of rich and government would fall.. As I see it, the rich do not pay taxes so long as they can bribe government from its stated goals...If the burden of taxes was carried by the ability to pay, the poor would be free of taxes...But the rich are rich, often with hereditary wealth because they do not pay their share and their support of their society....If they do not like it, and we do not like it; we should together let it fall..See if some new governemnt does not tax them more cruelly....Quit letting the rich hide behind the desparate need of the poor for tax relief... Make them pay, or drive them out.... Wealth in the hands of the rich supports only them... It must still support the whole country...And great fortunes have been built upon little taxes, and on the denied goals of this entire country... Let us get on course, and discard these loafers... Thanks....Sweeney