Mrs. Governator
February 4th 2008 14:52
Now that Arnold, the Governator of California, has endorsed John McCain (another R.I.N.O.) for president, his charming little wife is speaking up for Barak Obama. Why doesn't that surprise me? I guess McCain isn't liberal enough to please her, being a Kennedy. But he's way too liberal for the real Republicans.
I can't help but wonder why she chose Obama instead of Hillary... After all, she's as liberal as they come (not that there's much difference between her and Barak.) But wouldn't you think that Maria Shriver would favor another ultra liberal female instead of any man? Good thing her Uncle Ted isn't running, she'd be in deep trouble with her family if she didn't support him, wouldn't she? Of course, Caroline has endorsed Obama. Sort of a slap in the face to both Clintons, isn't it?
I can't help but wonder why she chose Obama instead of Hillary... After all, she's as liberal as they come (not that there's much difference between her and Barak.) But wouldn't you think that Maria Shriver would favor another ultra liberal female instead of any man? Good thing her Uncle Ted isn't running, she'd be in deep trouble with her family if she didn't support him, wouldn't she? Of course, Caroline has endorsed Obama. Sort of a slap in the face to both Clintons, isn't it?
| 66 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
When due to hyperinflation, gasoline hits $50/gallon, and milk about the same, people will be, through "free enterprise," running to go to the concentration camps. (Unless we stop this insanity. The danger is not "communism" by putting the mortgages on freeze, etc, the danger is Fascism.)
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Since you don't like freedom (in the marketplace, at least) could you explain what system you think would work? And would there be any freedoms left?
Comment by Howard
Real Crash
It does say in the U.S. Constitution, that this Constitution is for the General Welfare of the people and their posterity. This is a continuation of the Commonwealth Party of France, Tudor England, and the Puritans in Massachusetts. Yes, we need initiative for the enterprising, brilliant, etc., but we also have to maintain the role of the lower 80-percent of the population to be productive, healthy, and happy. That is the Declaration of Independence's Leibnizian "Pursuit of Happiness."
See my latest blog entry for some other comments on the Rush Limbo crowd, and Ayn Rand.
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Self interest is another thing altogether. Paying your bills, having a job, taking care of your family are all things done in "self interest." It simply means doing things that are important to you. An engineer is using self interest when he applies for a high paying job rather that working at MacDonalds. It is in his self interest to be well paid for his work.
I don't understand your notion that 80% of a population should be "maintained" in their "role" to be productive. That smacks of communism, my friend. 80% work to support the 20% who do the creating and prospering. In your idea, would the 80% simply spend their lives creating an income for the 20%?
Have you ever heard of the "American Dream?" The philospohy entailed in the "American Dream" is that anyone can succeed and achieve. The opportunity for improving one's "station" in life has brought untold millions to the USA to seek their fame and fortune and follow their dreams. This was never intended to be the nation of "class distinctions" or "class warfare" in spite of people like John Edwards who use wealth vs. poverty as a political mechanism to further his own ambitions (and his own version of "the American Dream.")
Haven't there been sufficient revolutions through the centuries to convince you that keeping 80% of the population in servitude doesn't work?
If the government you prefer actually works, where is it? If you're thinking that communism isn't so bad, can you name the communist Utopia to which millions risk their lives trying to achieve? Maybe Cuba? Or North Korea? Or China? In those countries (the only examples
of communism still extant), 80% of the population does all the woking and all the giving so the select 20% can "do great things." So, what great examples of creative genius have come from those countries? Where is the proof that the philosophy works (as opposed to the iron-clad proof that it never does!)
If I misunderstood your premise, Howard, I'm sorry. But that's what it sounded like to me. Removing the free market system and opportunities for expanding one's horizons would creat a nation of miserable drones. Just like it has done in the communist countries.
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Comment by Howard
Real Crash