SOS (Same Old Story)the SOS that I have been hearing since 1968 where I have been presented questions of the lesser of two evils. Which has seen the country go through 9 presidents, which as the Roman Republic and Empire, since the death of Julius Caesar (JFK) all too many consuls, of the petty ambitions of those driven by money and power, for money and power rather than what is true, just, right, correct and proper rather than what untrue, unjust, not right, incorrect and improper in a life time of choices in the lesser of two evils.
Where just today I began again a new pleading addressed to President Obama and Mitt Romney:
Do what is good for all the people HANG THE BANKERS OR HANG YOURSELVES, KICK THE BANKER MONEY CHANGERS OUT OF THE AMERICAN TEMPLE, or fall on your swords like good little soldiers and stop acting like whiny cowards!:
As for all my fellow Americans of the 48 something comments which preceded me I see nothing less than a rhetorical Civil War in which the common folks have been dragged into because of those petty ambitions of those driven by money and power for money and power rather than what is true, just, right, correct and proper as in all of my life time I have never been presented with anything more than the lessor of two evils.
Where we are lead one way or another way without change is the end of democracy, the republic and the nation for which one can only hear the cries of the common man as the rich and powerful continue in their pursuits on behalf of the rich and powerful.
Where then we can begin first by asking then what?
The Biondi's, unfortunately, are full of bull and our Repubicon plants. In addition, they are misrepresenting the facts regarding the Affordable Care Act, etc.
To win Pennsylvania, Obama needs more than just Philly
What he really needs a different record as president to win.
They one he has will sink him like a lead ballon.
Absolute worst un-American and un-patriotic poser to the office of the president ever. The real Manchurian Candidate and Marxist Moron.
He makes Carter and Clinton look like Conservatives.
The lies about BAIN, the smears of the DNC against MItt, and what is more important: every failed policy that Bama and the Reid Senate forced on America, Pa.,NJ like Obamacare, 3 scandals, no energy policy except failed Solyndra green baloney, The Chevy Volt fraud which has had zero effect and minus sales in dollars, more taxes, regs, spending than any other Prez in our history except for FDR and a guy who just ended WORKFARE FOR WELFARE. Yikes. Why would Pa. or any other state want this naif in the WH or any Congressional Dem.
Second, our economy under George Bush was devastated by the worst man-made and worst natural disasters to ever hit this country: 9/11 and Katrina. But he pulled our country together and got us back up and running. Obama, on the other hand, is the master of dividing all groups against each other, and trying to get all of us who are striving to move upward to hate all those above us.
We can't survive four more years. --------------------------------------
Sam2012go; Lets examine your assertions one at a time:
"Our economy under George Bush was devastated by the worst man-made and worst natural disasters to ever hit this country: 9/11 and Katrina." ----------------- The greatest expense caused directly by 911, (except for the loss of life) was the cost of three buildings, mostly to private owners who were covered by insurance. The most devastating costs resulted from the mishandling of the Iraqi fiasco; you know the one that he lied the country into.
AS for Katrina Just read the headlines at the time about his handling of that catastrophe.
And last, but not least, you said: "He has run up a grater debt in four years than George Bush did in eight. And now we have to pay the RUSSIANS to take us into space since he ended our space program." ----------------------
Actually after the Bush Cheney disaster America can no longer afford to fund NASA because it is much less costly to pay Russia to "take us into space" .......... Under President Bush, The national debt went from $5,807,463,412,200.06 (trillion) on September 30, 2009 (the last fiscal year of the Clinton administration budget>>>>>To $11,909,829,003,511.70 (trillion) on September 30, 2001 (the last fiscal year of the Bush administration budget). An increase of 205% ($6,102,365,591,311.64), all due to cutting taxes (revenue) while increasing spending and borrowing money to sustain the economy.
The unemployment rate went from 4.2% in December 2000 to 7.2% in December 2008, a 171% increase.
By 2009 the economy was headed (like an avalanche) into a second great depression. It took nearly $3 trillion in stimulus spending (mostly borrowed) during the present administration to limit it to the serious recession it presently is. $2 trillion of the Nearly $5 trillion debt increase during this administration is the interest paid on the accumulated debt
There has been a lot of talk of the president "redistributing wealth", but in actual policies, what has he done, or proposed, that fits that bill? Whether one likes his health care plan or not, at its essence, it forces people to be responsible for their own health care, and penalizes those who refuse to do so, but can afford it_ the same as Romney's.Many things that he is being blamed for are not his fault_ or not solely his fault. We have had an obstinate, negligent Congress that is equally to blame ( and in some ways more to blame for our overall sluggish economy because they actually control the purse strings of the country.The economy was never going to turn around in a couple of years time because of the deep hole that we were in when the president took office, but there are proactive things that Congress could have done _ and could do even now__to make things better, but chose not to because the president proposed them-even when some were based on GOP ideas or precedence).Much is made of the fact that, technically, more people are on food stamps now than any time in history; but what never gets said is that that is just barely true.Only a fraction separates the number of people on food stamps now, from when George W. Bush was in office.As for unemployment payments,employers pay unemployment benefits into the system as an insurance so that workers have something to fall back on if laid-off/fired, so the recipients aren't just "taking" money from the government.There are those who have exhausted their benefits, and may still receive some form of aid, but our economic problems are second only to the Great Depression in their severity, so from a practical standpoint, what do we do with families that don't have any other means of support_ let them starve and live in tents?[Most who lost their jobs were probably hard-working , honorable citizens; not people just looking for handouts]. Ideology/philosophy is important in leaders. The big picture matters.Romney has hitched his wagon to Paul Ryan, and some very radical proposals.There's no question that we have to deal with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid to preserve them long-term,and it sounds like the president and some Democrats realize that, but how it's done is important.What the GOP is proposing through Ryan ( and what Romney has , for the most part ,endorsed) amounts to gutting our education system,Medicare, bloc-granting to the states Medicaid funding, and the eventual privatization of Social Security.At the same time, they want to give massive tax cuts to upper income earners, which isn't right.They protect the upper income earners, while making the rest of America sacrifice, and causing the most vulnerable to come up short_ seniors ( who would see an astronomical rise in the cost of their health care), the poor, K-12 and college students; those who need to train or re-train to get into/ back into the work force, or even to get out of poverty or off of welfare, etc.To give huge tax cuts at such a time even undercuts Republicans' own argument about the seriousness of dealing with our debt.There are a lot of considerations across the board , from potential Supreme Court retirees and replacements to whether we are going to have toxic dumping grounds next door( because of a weakened EPA) or another banking/financial crisis ( think JP Morgan Chase, Barclays,etc. ), because of many clamoring for less regulation.[Some regulations are too intrusive, but most were created out of some breach of trust, or the potential for it. We need stronger ones in some areas].These issues and the candidates' positions on them are important.They have to be dealt with, but President Obama has shown more of a willingness to come to the center on many issues; and would probably take a more balanced, measured approach to dealing with the economy; and entitlements, education,etc. in a way that doesn't gut them altogether
Proof of the pudding is in the tasting as the saying goes. ALL of Obama's policys have been redistributing wealth....upward. Here is an article proving it.
"Mr. Saez is the E. Morris Cox professor of economics and director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California at Berkeley, no bastion of conservatism. Mr. Saez's field of expertise is public economics. According to Mr. Saez, fully 93 percent of the income gains made during the Obama "recovery" in 2010 went to the despised top 1 percent, while the other 99 percent saw only a 0.2 percent growth in real income."
First of all - no one getting healthcare under Obamacare is being "responsible". That is a joke. Billions will be spent to expand Medicaid, and to provide "subsidized" healthcare insurance. This will go to the same 50% of Americans who currently do not pay federal income taxes - to be paid for by those who ARE currently paying the bills. Is someone getting free food under welfare being "responsible"? Is someone getting free housing under Section 8 vouchers "responsible"? No - they are living off the efforts of others. It will be no different for the vast majority of people who "gain" health insurance under Obamacare - they are not being required to be "responsible" - they are being given a handout - to be paid for by others (or with more borrowed Chinese debt).
If you want to understand why there ARE so many people on food stamps and unemployment - then look up the last big government sponsored "giveaway" program - which was subprime loans with lowered underwriting standards - given to "poor people" (AKA - people with bad credit) by liberal democrats. Pick up a copy of "Reckless Endangerment" by NY Times reporter Gretchen Morgenson. She covered the entire subprime mess from start to finish - over 2 decades. Her #1 villians??? Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines at Fannie Mae - who initiated to push to lower lending standards in the 1990's - "supposedly" just to help poor people buy a house - but they conveniently had their bonus structures tied to Fannie Mae growth. That growth exploded by using subprimes and their earlier derivatives - netting Johnson over $100 million, and Raines (former Clinton budget director -BOTH of these men are prominent Democrats) tens of millions before he was forced to resign in disgrace due to accounting fraud that likely started under Johnson. These men nearly wrecked our economy - NOT George Bush. All Bush tried to do was to introduce regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before it was too late.
Obamais not a centrist and if he;s elected you'll see it. He has no respect for the Constitution and has violated on more than 1 occasion. The largest tax hike in history, Obamacare, is wealth re-distribution and will put small businesses out of business do to increase costs. He punishes success. Just check out the number of wealthy people leaving France to avoid their socialist tax. I can only surmise that liberals have no understanding of how to run a business.You want to keep borrowing your kids future and create a Greece here, than Obama is your man. If not and you want the hard choices made on budgeting you have to go with Ryan and Romney to get the cuts done. THe safety net will not be gutted but the waste will. For instance 47 overlapping job training programs, that some cases train people for jobs that don't exist,become under 10 with the same money. That;s is efficiency the government needs.
Wisconsin, it is what I look too for best estimate of what to think of numbers being presented by our left media.
Right up until they couldn't spin their BS anymore (aka 9pm election night) they had the Democrat up by 7 points.
Huh, sounds alot like spin in Pennsylvania.
Mr. Obama could care less about any American excepting what he can squeeze out of it for HIM. Every speech Bozo gives, he always uses possesive wording. He will be fine once fired, can go on the speech circuit and make millions.
Can't your last paragraph apply to every elected official today, regardless of party? They all sound pure pre-election; after, they all immediately change tune.
Bill: "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." Mitt: It depends on what the meaning of the words 'employed' is. The Blue Dress is Mitt's Tax Returns No stain, no pain Can a person be impeached before he is elected This question is Mitt's Bain in the A$$.
Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive!
We must all remember a major contributing cause of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was the filing of false or misleading documents with the SEC. This is no small matter, since 2009 the SEC has collected fines of over 3 Billion dollars for this; from financial institutions such as, among others: Countrywide Financial, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Charles Schwab, Credit Suisse Group, J.P. Morgan, Wachovia Bank, and UBS Financial Services. Even if Mitt Romney actually left all operational control of Bain Capital 1999, he sanctioned and acquiesced to the filing of false and misleading documents with the SEC until 2002. While this violation may not rise to the level of these other institutions, it does indicate a certain attitude towards these filings. This was an attitude all too prevalent in the financial community prior to 2009, and all of us paid the cost.
Is full disclosure to the SEC one of the regulations Mitt would do away with? What about the other regulations regarding the financial community; Wall Street and the banks too big to fail? If you put a fox in charge of the chicken coop, you have a problem for the chickens. Will Mitt's election be the equivalent of that for the small investor? As a life-long Republican, small investor, and small businessman, I can not take that chance; I have been burnt once by a government that did not believe in regulation, and was asleep at the wheel. The sad thing is that Bain was first brought up by a candidate who wanted to colonize the moon, and the false filing was never mentioned. If this was discovered earlier, I would not have supported Mitt in the primaries and we would have a different candidate. Perjury is perjury. It was ethically and morally equal to saying "I never had sex with that woman" only worse since it was related to a public institution, not sex; and there could be no equivocation since the two official documents Mitt signed exactly contradict each other 100%. He can not flip-flop between these two documents. The only way he can extract himself from this hole is release the 12 years of tax returns, as his father did, and thereby prove he received no direct benefit from Bain after 2000.
"We must all remember a major contributing cause of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was the filing of false or misleading documents with the SEC"
You may remember it that way but no one else does. What a stretch.
Speaking, as you did, of putting the foxes in charge of the chicken coop. Where do you think Tim Geithner, Larry Summers and Jeffery Immelt came from? It sure wasn't from the chickens. Obama has been a failure as President which it why his entire campaign is to tear down the opponent. As one of his supporters you have three paragraphs with not a single word positive about your guy. Why? Because there is nothing positive to sell.
I can see that the shop owners have swallowed the Fox News talking points hook, line and sinker. Whenever anyone says they're disgusted with the redistribution of wealth in the country, they've sipped too much of the GOP Kool-Aid(tm). The only redistribution of wealth that has occurred over the last 10 years is more middle class money going into the pockets of the 1%. The gap between super-rich and middle class is at its widest in decades. Keep in mind that the Office of the President, regardless of occupant, has very little control over job creation. Congress passes laws, not the President. In the current Congressional stalemate, everyone loses.
We hear it (talking points armchair QBs) a lot on PA talk radio; as soon as the host says "please explain what youi just said," you hear the hang-up. Still, from the top down, corruption reigns in this state (the land of "what's in it for me?"); unfortunately Turzai mmay be correct - the sad thing is his type can state this publicly, and get away with it.
sman6015 said, "The only redistribution of wealth that has occurred over the last 10 years is more middle class money going into the pockets of the 1%."
This is completely false. There are plenty of examples of wealth transfers just since President Obama took office in 2008. The PPACA (otherwise known as Obamacare) transferred $500 billion dollars of Medicare funds from those that paid into the program, into the government treasury to fund healthcare for the "30 million" people who'll be getting their healthcare for "free". And starting in 2014, Obamacare will transfer the wealth of the young and healthy portion of our nation, to the sick and elderly people to help cover THEIR healthcare...by forcing them to buy insurance policies they don't want or need.
Another wealth transfer was the US Auto bailout where the ownership of GM and Chrysler bond holders was signed over to the UAW; directed specifically by the Obama Car Czar. Another wealth transfer was the Cash for clunkers program where taxpayer funds were given to people who purchased cars that met specified criteria.
And don't even get me started at the wealth transfers of BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to dodgey green energy companies like Solyndra (and dozens of others) by the administration Green Energy Czar.
There are COUNTLESS other wealth transfers if you care to really think about it. Every instance the Federal government hands out free cell phones, food stamps, picks up the tab for defaulting mortgages, sends money to shore up Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac/AIG, sends money to the UN, Egypt, Pakistan, etc....they are transferring our nations wealth into the hands of other people who didn't earn it.
The problem is, there are fewer, and fewer people that are having their wealth confiscated (pulling the wagon), but are instead receiving the wealth (labor of the working class) as it is seen fit to be distributed by our corrupt and bankrupt government.
The taxpayers are broke! Wake the hell up! There are more people riding the wagon than are pulling it, and this can't continue for very long before the wagon collapses from all the riders!
Stop drinking the liberal kool aid and step up and help save our nation from collapse!
If your really worried about wealth being transfered up to the 1% then how can you justify a vote for Obama. There is nothing but the 1% represented on his financial team. And look at who has done best in his anemic recovery...the 1%. The rich are getting richer under Obama yet those who are drinking from the MSNBC pitcher of Kool-aid are somehow convincing themselves that he is for the middle class. Who gets rich on his health care reform? Big Insurance and Pharma companies with whom he cut back room deals. Wake up and smell the coffee. Obama is on his way to being super rich and therefore needs to pander to them. Romney already is rich and does not have to try to please them. They can offer him nothing he does not already have. A vote for Obama is clearly and demonstratively a vote for the rich and against the middle class.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Where just today I began again a new pleading addressed to President Obama and Mitt Romney:
Do what is good for all the people HANG THE BANKERS OR HANG YOURSELVES, KICK THE BANKER MONEY CHANGERS OUT OF THE AMERICAN TEMPLE, or fall on your swords like good little soldiers and stop acting like whiny cowards!:
As for all my fellow Americans of the 48 something comments which preceded me I see nothing less than a rhetorical Civil War in which the common folks have been dragged into because of those petty ambitions of those driven by money and power for money and power rather than what is true, just, right, correct and proper as in all of my life time I have never been presented with anything more than the lessor of two evils.
Where we are lead one way or another way without change is the end of democracy, the republic and the nation for which one can only hear the cries of the common man as the rich and powerful continue in their pursuits on behalf of the rich and powerful.
Where then we can begin first by asking then what?
What he really needs a different record as president to win.
They one he has will sink him like a lead ballon.
Absolute worst un-American and un-patriotic poser to the office of the president ever.
The real Manchurian Candidate and Marxist Moron.
He makes Carter and Clinton look like Conservatives.
Zionism?"
Second, our economy under George Bush was devastated by the worst man-made and worst natural disasters to ever hit this country: 9/11 and Katrina. But he pulled our country together and got us back up and running. Obama, on the other hand, is the master of dividing all groups against each other, and trying to get all of us who are striving to move upward to hate all those above us.
We can't survive four more years.
--------------------------------------
Sam2012go;
Lets examine your assertions one at a time:
"Our economy under George Bush was devastated by the worst man-made and worst natural disasters to ever hit this country: 9/11 and Katrina."
-----------------
The greatest expense caused directly by 911, (except for the loss of life) was the cost of three buildings, mostly to private owners who were covered by insurance. The most devastating costs resulted from the mishandling of the Iraqi fiasco; you know the one that he lied the country into.
AS for Katrina Just read the headlines at the time about his handling of that catastrophe.
And last, but not least, you said: "He has run up a grater debt in four years than George Bush did in eight. And now we have to pay the RUSSIANS to take us into space since he ended our space program."
----------------------
Actually after the Bush Cheney disaster America can no longer afford to fund NASA because it is much less costly to pay Russia to "take us into space"
.......... Under President Bush, The national debt went from $5,807,463,412,200.06 (trillion) on September 30, 2009 (the last fiscal year of the Clinton administration budget>>>>>To $11,909,829,003,511.70 (trillion) on September 30, 2001 (the last fiscal year of the Bush administration budget). An increase of 205% ($6,102,365,591,311.64), all due to cutting taxes (revenue) while increasing spending and borrowing money to sustain the economy.
The unemployment rate went from 4.2% in December 2000 to 7.2% in December 2008, a 171% increase.
By 2009 the economy was headed (like an avalanche) into a second great depression.
It took nearly $3 trillion in stimulus spending (mostly borrowed) during the present administration to limit it to the serious recession it presently is.
$2 trillion of the Nearly $5 trillion debt increase during this administration is the interest paid on the accumulated debt
"Mr. Saez is the E. Morris Cox professor of economics and director of the Center for Equitable Growth at the University of California at Berkeley, no bastion of conservatism. Mr. Saez's field of expertise is public economics. According to Mr. Saez, fully 93 percent of the income gains made during the Obama "recovery" in 2010 went to the despised top 1 percent, while the other 99 percent saw only a 0.2 percent growth in real income."
Read more: http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Sees-rich-getting-even-richer-under-Obama-3485930.php#ixzz20tf0N1Hj
So many words - but so many errors.
First of all - no one getting healthcare under Obamacare is being "responsible". That is a joke. Billions will be spent to expand Medicaid, and to provide "subsidized" healthcare insurance. This will go to the same 50% of Americans who currently do not pay federal income taxes - to be paid for by those who ARE currently paying the bills. Is someone getting free food under welfare being "responsible"? Is someone getting free housing under Section 8 vouchers "responsible"? No - they are living off the efforts of others. It will be no different for the vast majority of people who "gain" health insurance under Obamacare - they are not being required to be "responsible" - they are being given a handout - to be paid for by others (or with more borrowed Chinese debt).
If you want to understand why there ARE so many people on food stamps and unemployment - then look up the last big government sponsored "giveaway" program - which was subprime loans with lowered underwriting standards - given to "poor people" (AKA - people with bad credit) by liberal democrats. Pick up a copy of "Reckless Endangerment" by NY Times reporter Gretchen Morgenson. She covered the entire subprime mess from start to finish - over 2 decades. Her #1 villians??? Jim Johnson and Franklin Raines at Fannie Mae - who initiated to push to lower lending standards in the 1990's - "supposedly" just to help poor people buy a house - but they conveniently had their bonus structures tied to Fannie Mae growth. That growth exploded by using subprimes and their earlier derivatives - netting Johnson over $100 million, and Raines (former Clinton budget director -BOTH of these men are prominent Democrats) tens of millions before he was forced to resign in disgrace due to accounting fraud that likely started under Johnson. These men nearly wrecked our economy - NOT George Bush. All Bush tried to do was to introduce regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before it was too late.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/19/business/19fannie.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Right up until they couldn't spin their BS anymore (aka 9pm election night) they had the Democrat up by 7 points.
Huh, sounds alot like spin in Pennsylvania.
Mr. Obama could care less about any American excepting what he can squeeze out of it for HIM. Every speech Bozo gives, he always uses possesive wording. He will be fine once fired, can go on the speech circuit and make millions.
Mitt: It depends on what the meaning of the words 'employed' is.
The Blue Dress is Mitt's Tax Returns
No stain, no pain
Can a person be impeached before he is elected
This question is Mitt's Bain in the A$$.
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!
We must all remember a major contributing cause of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was the filing of false or misleading documents with the SEC. This is no small matter, since 2009 the SEC has collected fines of over 3 Billion dollars for this; from financial institutions such as, among others: Countrywide Financial, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Charles Schwab, Credit Suisse Group, J.P. Morgan, Wachovia Bank, and UBS Financial Services. Even if Mitt Romney actually left all operational control of Bain Capital 1999, he sanctioned and acquiesced to the filing of false and misleading documents with the SEC until 2002. While this violation may not rise to the level of these other institutions, it does indicate a certain attitude towards these filings. This was an attitude all too prevalent in the financial community prior to 2009, and all of us paid the cost.
Is full disclosure to the SEC one of the regulations Mitt would do away with? What about the other regulations regarding the financial community; Wall Street and the banks too big to fail? If you put a fox in charge of the chicken coop, you have a problem for the chickens. Will Mitt's election be the equivalent of that for the small investor? As a life-long Republican, small investor, and small businessman, I can not take that chance; I have been burnt once by a government that did not believe in regulation, and was asleep at the wheel. The sad thing is that Bain was first brought up by a candidate who wanted to colonize the moon, and the false filing was never mentioned. If this was discovered earlier, I would not have supported Mitt in the primaries and we would have a different candidate. Perjury is perjury. It was ethically and morally equal to saying "I never had sex with that woman" only worse since it was related to a public institution, not sex; and there could be no equivocation since the two official documents Mitt signed exactly contradict each other 100%. He can not flip-flop between these two documents. The only way he can extract himself from this hole is release the 12 years of tax returns, as his father did, and thereby prove he received no direct benefit from Bain after 2000.
You may remember it that way but no one else does. What a stretch.
Speaking, as you did, of putting the foxes in charge of the chicken coop. Where do you think Tim Geithner, Larry Summers and Jeffery Immelt came from? It sure wasn't from the chickens. Obama has been a failure as President which it why his entire campaign is to tear down the opponent. As one of his supporters you have three paragraphs with not a single word positive about your guy. Why? Because there is nothing positive to sell.
Still, from the top down, corruption reigns in this state (the land of "what's in it for me?"); unfortunately Turzai mmay be correct - the sad thing is his type can state this publicly, and get away with it.
This is completely false. There are plenty of examples of wealth transfers just since President Obama took office in 2008. The PPACA (otherwise known as Obamacare) transferred $500 billion dollars of Medicare funds from those that paid into the program, into the government treasury to fund healthcare for the "30 million" people who'll be getting their healthcare for "free". And starting in 2014, Obamacare will transfer the wealth of the young and healthy portion of our nation, to the sick and elderly people to help cover THEIR healthcare...by forcing them to buy insurance policies they don't want or need.
Another wealth transfer was the US Auto bailout where the ownership of GM and Chrysler bond holders was signed over to the UAW; directed specifically by the Obama Car Czar. Another wealth transfer was the Cash for clunkers program where taxpayer funds were given to people who purchased cars that met specified criteria.
And don't even get me started at the wealth transfers of BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to dodgey green energy companies like Solyndra (and dozens of others) by the administration Green Energy Czar.
There are COUNTLESS other wealth transfers if you care to really think about it. Every instance the Federal government hands out free cell phones, food stamps, picks up the tab for defaulting mortgages, sends money to shore up Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac/AIG, sends money to the UN, Egypt, Pakistan, etc....they are transferring our nations wealth into the hands of other people who didn't earn it.
The problem is, there are fewer, and fewer people that are having their wealth confiscated (pulling the wagon), but are instead receiving the wealth (labor of the working class) as it is seen fit to be distributed by our corrupt and bankrupt government.
The taxpayers are broke! Wake the hell up! There are more people riding the wagon than are pulling it, and this can't continue for very long before the wagon collapses from all the riders!
Stop drinking the liberal kool aid and step up and help save our nation from collapse!
This is an outright lie.