Submitted by: Jason Lord
TWO AMERICAS
In early January 2014, Bob
Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on
WHAM 1180 AM, said this in
response to Obama's "income inequality speech":
Two Americas
The
Democrats are right, there are two Americas.
The America that works,
and the America that doesn't.
The America that contributes, and
the America that doesn't.
It's not the haves and the have nots,
it's the dos and the don'ts.
Some people do their duty as Americans,
obey the law, support themselves,
contribute to society, and others
don't. That's the divide in America.
It's not about income
inequality, it's about civic irresponsibility.
It's about a
political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization
in order to
win elective office.
It's about a political party that loves power more
than it loves its
country. That's not invective, that's truth, and
it's about time someone
said it.
The politics of envy was on proud
display a couple weeks ago when President
Obama pledged the rest of his
term to fighting "income inequality." He
noted that some people make
more than other people, that some people have
higher incomes than others,
and he says that's not just.
That is the rationale of thievery.
The other guy has it, you want it, Obama
will take it for you. Vote
Democrat.
That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the
electoral
philosophy that is destroying America.
It conceals a
fundamental deviation from American values and common sense
because it ends
up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The
Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in
a
culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead
of
ability and hope.
The president's premise - that you reduce
income inequality by debasing the
successful - seeks to deny the successful
the consequences of their choices
and spare the unsuccessful the
consequences of their choices.
Because, by and large, income variations
in society is a result of different
choices leading to different
consequences. Those who choose wisely and
responsibly have a far
greater likelihood of success, while those who choose
foolishly and
irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.
Success and failure
usually manifest themselves in personal and family
income.
You
choose to drop out of high school or to skip college - and you are apt
to
have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on
with
purposeful education.
You have your children out of wedlock and life
is apt to take one course;
you have them within a marriage and life is apt
to take another course.
Most often in life our destination is
determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes
far more than I do. There is significant
income inequality between
us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome,
but, our lives also
have had an in equality of effort. While my doctor
went to college
and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and
residency, I got
a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice,
and our
choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot
better
than mine.
Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs
to take away his wealth?
No, it means we are both free men in a free
society where free choices lead
to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to
take away, it is freedom. The
freedom to succeed, and the
freedom to fail. There is no true option for
success if there is no
true option for failure.
The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less
when you face the punitive
hand of government if your pursuit brings you
more happiness than the other
guy. Even if the other guy sat on his
arse and did nothing. Even if the
other guy made a lifetime's worth
of asinine and shortsighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats
preach equality of outcome as a right, while
completely ignoring inequality
of effort. The simple Law of the Harvest -
as ye sow, so shall ye
reap - is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work,
the more you
get."
Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are
to be punished as
enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded
as wards of
society.
Entitlement will replace effort as the key to
upward mobility in American
society if Barack Obama gets his way. He
seeks a lowest common denominator
society in which the government besieges
the successful and productive to
foster equality through
mediocrity.
He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on
power is based on
using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the
other. America is
not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it
is divided by the
differences in our efforts.
It is a false
philosophy to say one man's success comes about unavoidably as
the result
of another man's victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution,
but a separatism. He fomented
division and strife, pitted one set of
Americans against another for his own
political benefit. That's what
socialists offer. Marxist class warfare
wrapped up with a
bow.
Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to
Lincoln's maxim
that a house divided against itself cannot
stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment