By Martha Barbara Shirley, Tea Party Views Contributor
It seems BHO and his bands of merry supporters are fixated on one issue and one issue only these days. This issue is the fact there are people in this country who make money while there are others who do not. It really seems to bother this administration any time an individual finds success. In fact, there seems to be an assumption that anyone who is successful is evil.
There is another assumption that anyone who is unsuccessful is magnanimous. It doesn’t matter if this unsuccessful person is truly unfortunate or he or she is a reprobate or simply lazy, in Robinama’s eye, this person deserves more due to his conclusion that failure essentially elevates one to the status of Saint.
In my mind, this way of thinking is perverted. However, to today’s ruling class, the degree of one’s goodness can only be judged by the depth of his failure. Also, another given of Robinama, and his band of supporters is the tenant that government’s job is to steal from the successful and give to those who are currently unsuccessful. What effect this has on the common good means nothing to the Sherriff of Washingtonham . All that matters is whether or not he feels it will get him votes.
The first problem with Obama’s way of thinking is that it assumes that taking working capital away from well off people will solve the problem of high unemployment and terrible gross national product readings. In fact, taking working capital away from the successful has the opposite effect.
After four years of the Jimmy Carter failed economy, Ronald Reagan summed up the United States economic woes this way: “the problem is we’ve tied the hands of the creators and the entrepreneurs in this country. We must unshackle them and let them go about their business of building businesses. They are the engines that drive the train of capitalism.” I truthfully cannot tell you what country Obama was living in or what he was eating for dinner when Ronald Reagan made this statement. In any event, it’s too bad he missed it. Obviously this is not all he missed!
Another thing he missed is the fact he seems thoroughly unfamiliar with the real story of Robin Hood. Robin Hood was taking money, this is true. However, he was taking the money back to poor people that was robbed from them in the first place. These good people were robbed by the Sheriff of Nottingham. He, of course, represents the government. So, in short, the government had been heavily taxing people, thus leaving them poor. Robin Hood, in his own way, was effectively implementing a tax break by giving much of this tax money back to the poor people who had been overtaxed.
In any event, Obama tells the story of a man from Massachusetts Forest who goes around robbing the poor people and giving it to the rich. If his story was actually at all based on the story of Robin Hood, “giving to the rich” would have meant that Romneyhood was overtaxing people. Actually, Romney’s tax plan includes a tax break for all taxpayers. However, the Democrats continue to tell their false story because to them a tax break for a successful person somehow equals thievery even when everybody else gets to keep more of their own money.
I don’t know if the story of Romneyhood will become a New York Times bestseller. However, there is one thing for sure: Obama must truly be desperate if he is basing his inaccurate conclusion on a story he is unfamiliar with in the first place and expecting this will get him votes.
No related posts.