Obama Discovers a Problem With Marxism

Pages: 1 2

In an interview with WFTV, President Obama suddenly discovered what it is that has troubled Americans about Marxism for well over a century. The crucial exchange occurred when Obama was asked about gas prices. “Well, as long as gas prices are going up, people are going to feel like I’m not doing enough, and I understand that,” Obama observed. “Ultimately, though, there’s no silver bullet.”

Then came the critical question. “Your opponents say they can get gas to the $2.50 range,” said the interviewer. “What do you think Americans should be OK with?” Obama, avoiding the question, shrugged, “First of all, nobody believes that. They know that’s just politics. Anybody who says we can get gas down to two bucks a gallon just isn’t telling the truth.”

But President Obama didn’t answer the question.

The real question is why he couldn’t. After all, this is a president who has stated over and over that prices and wages should be set on the basis of fairness. He tried to claw back Wall Street bonuses because investment bankers were making more than they “deserved” to make; he says the rich should pay their “fair share.”

The problem, of course, is that nobody knows what is fair—for wages, bonuses, or gas prices. Is it really fair for some people to pay a far lower percentage of their income to the federal government than others? Is it fair that some people buy ground chuck and others New York strip?

That he struggled to say  how much Americans should have to pay for gas should not have surprised the president. Economists have struggled for centuries to determine what people deserve to pay for precious commodities. . Invariably, they insist on more control of the economy, stating that the blind hand of the market simply cannot produce a fair and just system. That’s why Thomas Edison wrote, “What is wanted is some person familiar with the selling and buying, the technical as well as the financial end of all industries, to devise some generic scheme that business can work on.”

Top-down technocrats fail to understand how an undirected system can work so well. That’s because they don’t understand freedom. How can hundreds of millions of people, all pursuing their self-interest, create more wealth than hundreds of millions of people all directed toward a single end? How can fairness by achieved by seeming randomness rather than by hierarchical control of the right-minded?

Pages: 1 2

  • http://www.examiner.com/republican-in-los-angeles/john-drew Augustine 25

    Sadly, Obama was trained as a lawyer. I don't think he has any relevant understanding of economics, certainly not the level of understanding that would help him understand why the stimulus package failed. If I could get him to read one book, it would be Burton Folsom's New Deal or Raw Deal. It would teach him that Roosevelt made the Great Depression worse. After that, Obama should read Charles Murray's book, Losing Ground. It would teach Obama that welfare programs – not the rich – are responsible for much of the pain and suffering we see in our communities.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

      He was too busy reading 'a post American world' and planning on how he could bring it about.

      He doesn't have time to read things that will actually help us.
      Communism never ends well.

      • trickyblain

        What's wrong with that book? How is it at all disparaging?

        The Post-American World paints a far more rosy picture of our future than apocolyptic right-wing propaganda.

        • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

          I believe in American exceptionalism. I don't see that a post American world is a good thing, or a necessary reality.

          • trickyblain

            There is nothing that negates exceptionalism in the book – Zakaria thinks the US will remain the world's most powerful long-term. He sees threats that may diminish the from sensationalistic media, and hyper-partisan politics clouding the ability to adapt to new world realities (i.e., focusing on trivialities like gay marriage while India and China are focusing on growing their economies). He does not see this diminishment of power as a good thing, but still feels — despite the idiotic pro wrestling-style ideolougues of the day — we will remain the most powerful economy.

            If you knew anything about the book (aside from the cover and that Obama held it once), you'd know that the author is not celebrating the end of America. Quite the opposite.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            And I know enough about that book and our country to say we're exceptional enough to rise above what he thinks, if government doesn't get into the way.

            Quite the opposite, why do you think using so many words makes any of that more valid?

          • trickyblain

            You know the book. What does he think?

            Or is that too many words?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Here is an answer of few words. What the book says gave Obama a hard on. Look at that photo again. Knowing that is enough for me. The book isn't in our best interests.

            Try 'alinsky'ing' that one.

          • trickyblain

            You looked at a photo and knew the contents of a book. Nice. (too many words?)

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            You read my comment and knew what I really meant instead of what I said? Nice. (too many thoughts??)

            1) you tried to alinsky me by mocking a decent comment
            2)you deflected from what I said with a straw man argument, the photo shows he was clearly 'excited' when holding the book.
            3)you can't show that what I said was wrong about Obama not having our interests at heart, or that we should give up our sole superpower status.
            4) do you like it when we expose your failed liberal tactics and mock you back?

          • trickyblain

            1) The book is exactly the opposite of what the moronic email you saw posits it to be.

            2) Too many words?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Too few brains?

            We are in decline, and you don't see that a problem? The author didn't seem to.
            He seemed to think a controlled descent was a good thing. I don't.

            And you side steppe that Obama was excited and had a woody from that book.
            Check the photo, you don't have to take my word for it.

          • WeeToddEdwards

            Don't you like how he is always right?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Poor little wee wee.

            Life is so hard when you have 'size' issues.

          • WeeToddEdwards

            Then please tell us hard your life is.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            None of your business, you're not my type.

          • WeeToddEdwards

            You're the one who brought up how hard your life is

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Quote me.

            Your poor 'wee' label really bothers you. Yet as part of a prefab profile you have to stick with it. That must be frustrating.

          • Stephen_Brady

            Zakaria's biggest problem, in his book, is that he thinks that America can still be the greatest superpower in the world, without a economy to support the military needed to maintain that status. Also, he didn't figure on someone like Obama, who unilaterally decides to decrease America's nuclear deterrent.

    • Larry

      Actually, I'm not even sure he was trained as lawyer. It looks more like he was trained as a post-modern deconstructed moral relativistic racial activist.

    • Anthony

      He is a product of affirmative action. Such people naturally relate to equality of outcomes, because that is what they scored in being born non white.

      • Cherly Gerber

        Padraig Murchadha: What drugs are you using? When is the last time you came up with an orginale idea/conscept? Only if you took a sh*@. Your 32 bullits are childless, unless you use the teleprompter it doesn't hold up to reality. Why are you on this site? You need to move to Iran/Yemen/Afghanistan…. All your points are BS!!!! Your are full BS our just who is paying you? You can't believe your own BS! unless you have no indepent thought!

    • Padraig Murchadha

      Republicans say that Obama can’t govern and that he’s not a leader. Even a lot of Democrats have claimed that he hasn’t lived up to his promise. But consider . . .

      1. His healthcare reform provides coverage to millions of uninsured while taming runaway medical costs.

      2. His stimulus bill pulled the country away from the abyss of depression and saved more than 2 million jobs.

      3. His financial reform (Dodd-Frank) prohibits banks from making risky investments with people’s savings, and prevents credit-card companies from indiscriminately jacking up fees on balances.

      4. He saved the American auto industry.

      5. His "Race to the Top" is widely considered to be the most significant reform of public schooling in U.S. history.

      6. His Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act for Women rectified a grievous corporate wrong against women.

      7. He created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to protect consumers against sharp banking practices.
      8. He negotiated a deal with automakers to double mileage to 54.5 mpg by 2025.

      9. He ended discrimination against gays in the military.

      10. He provided an average $1,000 tax break for all workers and extended long-term unemployment benefits.

      11. He engineered the overthrow of the Libyan dictator without a single American casualty.

      12. He nailed Osama bin Laden.

      13. He converted a feckless counterinsurgency war in Afghanistan to a Special Ops war that represents a revolution in military strategy.

      14. He gave 2 million home-care workers minimum wage and overtime protections.

      15. He brought the troops home from Iraq.

      16. He strengthened our military presence in Southeast Asia.

      17. He made companies more liable for their wrongdoing by barring them from saying they “neither admit nor deny” civil charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

      18. He fulfilled a major campaign promise and repaired the damage done to our national parks by inadequate funding by the Bush administration.

      19. He reinforced the separation of church and state by prohibiting religious charities from using taxpayers’ money to discriminate against taxpayers.

      20. He enacted the largest reform of student aid in 40 years.

      21. He forced plan administrators and investment companies to disclose the cost of 401(k) retirement plans, placing a spotlight on the fiduciary responsibilities of employers.

      22. He managed a diplomatically and politically difficult renewal of the START treaty with Russia.

      23. He improved school cafeteria menus for 32 million kids.

      24. He negotiated a $26 billion settlement with five of the nation’s biggest banks to provide relief to two million homeowners harmed by fraudulent banking practices including robo-signing.

      25. He produced dramatic improvement in America’s “soft power” and international standing.

      26. He had the FCC clamp down on robocalls by approving sweeping changes to its telemarketing rules.

      27. He created the “College Scorecard” to enable students and their parents to evaluate colleges on the basis of affordability and value,.

      28. He established Challenge.gov to crowd-source innovative solutions to agency requirements.

      29. He enhanced auto safety, especially for children, by requiring rearview cameras in all passenger vehicles by 2014.

      30. He negotiated a nuclear moratorium with North Korea.

      31. He forced banks to give monetary relief to military families that had homes foreclosed in violation of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

      32. He ended Bush’s stem cell research ban, with early results promising a remedy for macular degeneration and new treatments for diabetes, heart disease, some forms of cancer, and Parkinson's disease.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

        Do you have the brown rings around you neck still?

        It sounds as if you had your head inserted up obama's bum for a while.

        • WeeToddEdwards

          Bet god loves it when you make you comments like that

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Yes, and I didn't insult any Christians in the process.

            Just the marxist of muslim heritage and his minions.

        • RightWrezko

          "10. He provided an average $1,000 tax break for all workers and extended long-term unemployment benefits. "

          Barry cut funding for Social Security by $120 billion in 2011 and another $120 billion this year.

          How is that possibly good for the country?

          BTW, you forgot to mention that Barry and the Dems cut funding for Medicare by $500 billion in 2009 to jumpstart Obamacare.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            It's all so 'Chicago accounting 101', don't you think?

          • RightWrezko

            Throw in rebates to Dem contributors (via contracts, grants, loans, and special favors) and it's Chicago Accounting 201.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Someone over on what's left of Breitbart tossed something out that has me horrified.

            Obama laid out another unconstitutional executive order. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/0

            It lays out the groundwork for nationalizing all industry at the discretion of the executive branch.

            We're spinning quickly past the benign fascist state. Communism / command economies never work, and Obama is determined to destroy things on his way to becoming dictator.

          • RightWrezko

            The upcoming election could qualify as a disaster for the current Administration, so possibly this could apply.

            And here I thought that we were all so much safer with Barry in the White House, yet now he needs to plan to suspend all our property rights for "national defense."

            There was no need for this Executive Order. If something did happen, then the order could be issued at that point in time.

            Or, Congress could pass legislation within a few hours via a special session.

            I wonder why Barry did it now. He has nothing to gain by doing it and all he does is invigorate the opposition.

          • RightWrezko

            Here's another perspective on the EO: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/18/national-de

            Apparently the current update to the 18-year old version of this EO is relatively harmless. The EO itself dates back to 1939.

      • RightWrezko

        "1. His healthcare reform provides coverage to millions of uninsured while taming runaway medical costs."

        On the contrary, medical costs have INCREASED at a faster rate since Obamacare was approved.

        Also, private healthcare costs shot up dramatically, as a result of Obamacare.

      • RightWrezko

        "32. He ended Bush’s stem cell research ban"

        There never WAS a ban on stem cell research. You lie.

        Adult stem cell research has been unlimited.

        Virtually all advances in stem cell research have been based on adult stem cells because of the greatly reduced risk of rejection.

        Furthermore, the key advantage of embryonic stem cells has now been developed for adult stem cells (e.g., pluripotency).

        Also, there never was a ban on embryonic stem cell research.

        There was a limited number of lines on which research could be conducted, that is true, but that met most research needs.

        Your position is based on lies.

      • RightWrezko

        "27. He created the “College Scorecard” to enable students and their parents to evaluate colleges on the basis of affordability and value,. "

        There are a bunch of private websites that do the same thing. The federal government has no business sticking its nose in places it does not belong.

      • RightWrezko

        "11. He engineered the overthrow of the Libyan dictator without a single American casualty. "

        That's typical of liberals' false claims. It's even more specious than the claim that he "got bin Laden."

        Barry engineered nothing.

      • RightWrezko

        "22. He managed a diplomatically and politically difficult renewal of the START treaty with Russia."

        Russia is glad to sign such treaties, which limit our nuclear arms while letting them retain a strategic advantage. Plus, they never comply anyway.

      • RightWrezko

        "26. He had the FCC clamp down on robocalls by approving sweeping changes to its telemarketing rules. "

        And yet I"m getting more robocalls than ever before.

      • RightWrezko

        "16. He strengthened our military presence in Southeast Asia. "

        ahahahaa and he is greatly reducing the numbers of people serving in the military and cutting the military budget – why is it good to be increasing our military presence and at the same time he takes credit for cutting it worldwide?

      • RightWrezko

        "2. His stimulus bill pulled the country away from the abyss of depression and saved more than 2 million jobs. "

        False. That "jobs saved" metric is totally bogus.

        The spending on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq actually created more jobs for Americans than the failed stimulus program did.

        Barry could have just stopped federal income tax for an entire year. That would have cost LESS than the failed stimulus and it would have actually got the economy moving again.

      • RightWrezko

        "3. His financial reform (Dodd-Frank) prohibits banks from making risky investments with people’s savings, and prevents credit-card companies from indiscriminately jacking up fees on balances."

        Democrats blocked reform of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac in the early 2000s when such reform could have prevented the financial crisis.

      • RightWrezko

        "23. He improved school cafeteria menus for 32 million kids. "

        When kids throw away their lunches because they don't like them, then that does not constitute improvement.

      • RightWrezko

        "13. He converted a feckless counterinsurgency war in Afghanistan to a Special Ops war that represents a revolution in military strategy. "

        I'm glad you admit that Barry is personally responsible for the thousands of deaths of women, children, and other non-combatants via his increased use of drones along the Pakistan border.

      • RightWrezko

        "9. He ended discrimination against gays in the military."

        Uh, are you sure there is no discrimination against gays in the military?

      • RightWrezko

        "25. He produced dramatic improvement in America’s “soft power” and international standing. "

        The US has LESS influence in world affairs now than at any time in the last 60 years.

    • Henry

      Thank you Mr.Sharpiro. Augustine 25 I agree Obama does not "have any relevant understanding of economices" in a free republic. Obama and The Left do not understand Liberty and Freedom, or their aim is to circumvent Americans toward hierachical control, for our own good.

    • RightWrezko

      I'm not sure Barry was actually trained as a lawyer.

      He was trained as a community activist who happened to get a law degree. There's a difference.

    • Anamah

      He is unable to understand reality because he wasn't trained as a lawyer, I think he was trained as a resented close minded leftist activist. The only thing he uses as a lawyer is to seduce, divide, discard, mock, isolate, attack and destroy. With a total lack of scrupulous there…as an expert liar simply he can't change course. But now this is our problem not his. The man is willingly seeking to ruin our economy for ever… he is prepared for that; to collapse the economy as Cloward and Piven theorized… and it seems nobody at the Congress or Judicial branch is going to stop this increasing of our hyper debt. The corrupted Media and Corporations don't say a word…We have a problem America!

  • truebearing

    How ironic. A megalomaniacal, messianic, narcissistic Marxist ideologue who can tame the rising oceans, can't lower oil prices. A man who subscribes to a political religion that worships power, and prides itself as having the answers to all things material, can't find a way to increase domestic supply to exceed demand, thereby lowering the cost.

    In this case Obama is equal parts dishonest and inept. He doesn't want to lower prices, except during his campaign, but he is so to ideologically constipated and so devoid of any impulse to actually help the economy that now, when he needs to help it to help himself, he doesn't know what to do. It seemed so easy for Marx…

    • Viewpoint

      If I could have, I would have liked to have given you a hundred points for your post, truebearing. Well said!

  • Guest

    You are a liar. Your system did not win WWII. Your system is a fantasy. Your system does not create wealth. You are a Liar.
    America won WWII because we are America, not because we were pursuing wealth and we will win the coming world war with the Muslims for the same reason.

    • Grayzel1


    • tagalog

      I don't know about the World War II thing, that was never mentioned either in the article or in the posts that comment on it; but our system demonstrably DOES create wealth, while systems based on central command create poverty and economic disaster. Both those claims are demonstrated by historical events.

      We will assuredly NOT win the war with Islam because we are America, whatever that means, but because we have the best-trained, best-equipped, and most motivated fighting forces, political leaders prepared to see the fight through, and good allies with similar qualifiers.

      • Kendrick1

        Dear tagalong,

        GUEST made me think I had lost it!!! To whom was he directing that comment?

        In any case, I agree with you 100%. Thanks!

    • fiddler

      First thing out of his mouth: attack ad hominem.

  • kentatwater

    This is rich. Conservatives have characterized Hussein as the Anointed One, because of the sycophantic reaction he elicits from his faithful. Trolls regularly balk at this characterization, of course.

    Then, there's this: http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/obama-m

    This article makes an end run around the void of useful content in Hussein's speech, by dwelling on a few small historical details. Read some of the reader comments even this mild criticism brings forth.

  • davarino

    O would make health care cheaper by making nurses into doctors. The doctors can be doctors when they get back from re-education camp……..I wander if they have arts and crafts there?

    Oh ya, and the nurses get shot when they are not very good doctors.

  • kentatwater

    Excellent article, especially the last two paragraphs. They are an excellent contrast of the economic traditions of American liberty, and its antithesis, in the form of a president who cleaves to a wholly alien tradition.

  • oldtimer

    How much federal taxes are there on a gallon of gas? If ob can cut payroll taxes , thus shorting SS, why not eliminate the fed tax on gas…

    • kentatwater

      why not eliminate the fed tax on gas

      Because that would deny the 0ne money to spread around and be fair with. Besides, it's not like every industry or business which needs materials moved from one place to another is hurting due to skyrocketing fuel prices, right?

      The metastasizing federal bureaucracy, with its well-paid and well-benefited ranks, needs blood.

  • pierce

    I wonder if he has ever been called a Bubbaluke cause he sure is acting and talking like one.

  • Grayzel1

    "If, however, you have a massive government standing over you, telling you who should win and who should lose, the system of incentives stops working. You no longer have to work hard to make a living if the government provides you one by taking from a third party and giving you a handout; you no longer have to bargain for lower prices if the government sets a ceiling or a floor on prices. Now, instead of everyone working for the same personal goal, everyone relies on the government to tell them what is fair. And when government decides what is fair, nothing ever is." No truer words were ever written!

  • theleastthreat

    People don't try to make as little income as possible, they go entirely the other way. They get an education, or work two jobs, or run a part time business out of their homes, sell Avon, Invest, play Lotto, go to Vegas or Atlantic City, even criminals do this. It's obvious that humans seek to aquire wealth.

    • RightWrezko

      "It's obvious that humans seek to aquire wealth. "

      Some do so via hard work, creativity, risk-taking, etc., and others do it via force and sloth, like labor unions.

  • intrcptr2

    What troubles me is his actual response.
    He believes his critics are correct by claiming that he is not doing enough, to fix things. But as I understand it, and feel myself, he is already doing too much, and that is the reason things are so wonky.

    It is this conception of political power he has which so destroys its proper exercise. So long as Americans think it is the President's job to fix things, largely single-handedly (Because all those people in Congress are nothing but self-interested political schemers), this country is doomed.

    • fiddler

      This is EXACTLY the problem with the Left and perhaps pocket of the right and middle. Their conception of a president is a "surgar daddy". Same goes for congress people and senators: their job is go lobby to go get us "PORK" for our state. But as the whole issue over healthcare, the government chose to run amok. Polls stated that people were opposed to this, yet Nancy Pelosi gave her rant about going around the obstacle, "pole vaulting", "parachuting", etc to circumvent the publics will — because they KNEW BETTER. They are supposed to rule by consent of the governed. They have become to important to themselves. After all "power corrupts". The Framers are spinning in their graves.

  • clarespark

    I agree with those comments that describe the President as a racialist activist, benefiting from affirmative action. He is not a Marxist but, if any ideological moniker fits, a proto-fascist. See my blog http://clarespark.com/2012/01/25/the-state-of-the…. In his State of the Union speech he came out as the Leader of a militarized society. Also check out the blog linked there http://clarespark.com/2010/09/11/is-wall-street-s… which criticizes the notion passed on by progressives that working class really means "middle class." This is such populism and it is so reactionary. So petit-bourgeois radicalism.

  • mrbean

    Bill "Ted Baxter" Oreilly thinks that Obama should invite all the Oil Company CEOs to the Whitehouse and "make 'em an off they can't refuse." Oreilly is a typical arrogamt Harvard wienie (an not one of the brightest and best by a long shot), who will support the principles of Marxism because "The Folks" (as Harvardians call those little people who need their guidance and control) have needs. But those oil company profits (which are only 4% – 5% of gross sales while government excise and gasoline taxes are 14% to 18% of gross sales. And they would be a hell of alot higher at lower proces if the government would stay out of the enrgy business which they are totally inept at. How about the government reducing or eliminating these taxes. As soon a this clown Obama is gone, watch the drilling start and the prices come down.

  • sedoanman

    øbama almost never knows what he is talking about.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

      You give him too much credit, I don't think he understands a thing that matters.

    • RightWrezko

      I think Barry knows exactly what he is doing to destroy America. None of this is by chance, it's planned.

  • http://www.joeswebmarket.com Joe

    What does ovomit know about truth?.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

      He's heard stories about it. He even lived a couple of blocks away from it in Hawaii.

  • Kendrick1

    "Pale Ebeneezer thought it wrong to fight! Roarin' Bill (who killed Ebeneezer) thought it right!"

    And so it continues on, and will continue on — only as we have people!

  • kentatwater

    Anyone who advocates achieving fairness, but deducting more of what a person earns, based upon how much he earns, promotes such. How much a person's wage is on paper is meaningless, if big government's cut can be tuned to suit the government's wants. I wish I really was paid what I earn.

    Plus, he's unabashedly a supporter of the minimum wage, a direct form of wage control. A "living wage" is all about "fairness," after all.

    • trickyblain

      Again, when did he say "wages and prices should be set on the basis fairness"?

      You claimed he said that. He didn't. Supporting a $6 p/h minimum wage is an example of gov't control of all wages and prices ? Supporting minimum wage? As every administration in modern history has done? Woulld you like to emulate the 10 percent of nations that don't have a minimum wage law? They are far more socialist than you may be comfortable with (Sweden, Norway, Iceland Finland) and have collective bargaining instead.

      • kentatwater

        Red herring. You plant quotes around a phrase, which was unquoted in the original report, then pretend that the original report claims that this is a quote. Not. Gonna. Fly.

        He supports a minimum wage, therefore he supports wage controls. The statement was factual, your picayune attempt to parse it apart not withstanding.

        Regarding minimum wage and collective bargaining, you seem to think either is necessary, or they are mutually exclusive. Neither condition is true.

        I note that you don't even address the issue of "fairness" enforcement, via the mechanism of progressive income taxation, so I guess we can stipulate this is the case, in which case this has lapsed into an angels dancing on pins sort of argument.

        • trickyblain

          Quote from the article: "After all, this is a president who has stated over and over that prices and wages should be set on the basis of fairness."

          Quote from JQN: "No, he didn't"

          Your response: "He did."

          The article claimed Obama "stated over and over" that ""wages and prices should be set on the basis of fairness." You agreed that "(h)e did." I'm just asking when he did this, no Red Herring; it's just a question based on what the author and yourself claimed. And if supporting minimum wage (but not a maximum or median wage) is wage control, than you'll agree that every leader of every nation on the planet supports wage controls (CBAs or MW).

          • trickyblain

            In terms of "fairness," in 1954 the progressive rate on top earners was 91 percent. I don't think that's fair. Nor do I think the ^ 70 percent witholding until 1982 was particularly fair. But I prefer the pay-as-you-go approach to fiscal policy as opposed to the Reagan-inspired "28 percent and borrow to make up for the gap" model.

          • kentatwater

            As long as you play the "what is fair" game, you continue to support the paradigm of wage controls in fact, if not in name. What you regard as fair is hardly the point, as a person should be able to keep what he earns.

            I prefer the era you cite, WRT taxation, as the Tip O'Neal era, since it is the House which must originate all money bills.

          • kentatwater

            Again, you present your challenge, as if the sentiment expressed by Hussein was a quote from Hussein. It wasn't.

            Further, it is an indisputable fact that Hussein supports the minimum wage. A minimum wage equals wage controls. QED.

            As to the rest, you ignore it because it further reinforces the reality that he supports wage controls.

          • trickyblain

            Dunno, when someone says "this is a president who has stated over and over" and another person says "he did," yes, I expect that there would be a quote — somewhere — to support that notion. But there isn't. So what are you trying to say?

            Minimum wage. lol.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            Yes, you're a minimum wage troll simply using obscure questions and vague talking points to interject enough doubt to cover for a marxist president of muslim heritage.

          • trickyblain

            You know you're wrong about my "wages." But you do know you're a subminimum wage nobody who will never surpass "sub." What's so obscure about using direct quotes from an article and commentators?

            Again, let me know if I'm using too many words.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            I'm struggling to take you seriously. No, I'm not. You don't deserve it.

            Were you in a contest to see how many times you could use the prefix 'sub' in a paragraph and I just happened to be the lucky recipient?

          • trickyblain

            Well, since I only used it twice, I'd probably not fare too well.

            Too many words?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

            To few brains?

          • kentatwater

            Minimum wage. lol.

            Yes, the minimum wage is a joke…and a bad joke at that. Read up on the origin of the minimum wage. The whereof and the why of its establishment will likely surprise you.

            But besides this form of wage control, Hussein had also imposed wage controls in other ways, as detailed in the following article:

            Here is a quote…and it's a real quote this time:

            In the intervening months, he had also imposed specific wage ceilings on employees at banks that had taken federal bailout money—the first such federal wage controls since an ill-fated experiment by Richard Nixon in 1971. (emphasis mine)

      • Stephen

        That wasn't a quote. No, he never said those words ver batem. But he HAS taken over wages for some in the private sector and demanded more "fairness" from the wealthy on an almost daily basis. He also believes that the govt should set the price of commodities (like oil) and took control in setting health care costs in the private sector. Please don't play stupid. You know what Obama is all about, and you know the author is accurate. And go live in Sweden and give the government 55 percent of your money if you love socialism so much. We're not going to do that here.

  • maturin20

    Ben Shapiro did not address in any way why gas prices are high. Gas prices are high because all prices are high. All prices are high because the dollar is being devalued. The is dollar is being devalued because the Federal Reserve Bank is intentionally devaluing the dollar. Shapiro wants to quote High School economics theories. Barack Obama does not control monetary policy of the United States at all. He cannot raise the value of the dollar. That is why he cannot lower the price of gas.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

      And supply out strips demand.

    • mah29001

      Should have guessed Moron20 was a dumb wRONg Paul, Paul Qaeda, Paulbot.

      • maturin20

        You mean Right Paul, because he's clearly the only conservative running.

        • mah29001

          I'll never vote for wRONg Paul you dummy imbecile. It's people like you who represent Paul's real agenda which is far from being a Re-Founding Father….more like what Vladimir Lenin and Adolf Hitler were.

        • mah29001

          Screw wRONg Paul and his wicked supporters like you. You're scum to defend Palestinian murderers.

          • maturin20

            Why do you hate the US Constitution and a balanced budget?

          • mah29001

            Why do you hate anything that's logical? Stop treating wRONg Paul as a "Messiah" dummy.

            You know what, I am beginning to see an obvious pattern between O-bots, Paulbots and Romneybots. Imbeciles like you say you "hate" something for just disagreeing with who you're supporting.

            With Obama it's his race….with Romney it's the fact that he's a Mormon and with Paulturds like you it's you "hate" the Constitution. Shut up. I've had enough of your BS.

          • maturin20

            What's amusing, is all this BS is yours. I don't subscribe to any of it, nor did I bring any of it up. Of course I said you hate the Constitution. It's evident on your blog. You are a libeler and an Israel Firster.

          • mah29001

            You hate Jews. How about if I say you hate Jews Imbecile20 when you say it's okay that Palestinians get away with murdering an entire Jewish family. How about that? Palestinian apologist. You hate Jews.

          • maturin20

            You are lying right now. You are typing a libel and saying that I hate Jews. It is nowhere near the first time you have libeled anyone. It seems powerful to you, maybe, when you type it, but it is false information.

          • mah29001

            Like how you lie into stating I "agree" with Stormfront? Even though they will probably agree with your anti-Israel leanings?

          • maturin20

            I said you read them more than I do. I don't read them. I also said you seem to be obsessed with them.

          • mah29001

            Stop being a whiner, Whiner20.

          • mah29001

            Jew-hater, Jew-hater, Jew-hater. Yea, because it's actually true, you did justify murder of a Jewish family by Palestinian thugs.

          • maturin20

            Repeating it doesn't make it true at all. That's what you bloggers don't understand. Make sure you cathart on your blog and gesticulate and repeat your falsehood on your blog too. Make sure you show me who is boss. Make sure you capture and expose another "Jew-Hater" on your WordPress, because otherwise, what proof would you have of your own value?

          • mah29001

            You are a Jew-hater dummy. And now you're so on the defensive. I'm just laughing at how stupid you really look now.

            You cannot stand up to the facts. So you do the following things: 1) accuse me of being a "hater" of something; 2) be mindless about something which is what you are doing and 3) you deny what you said in a previous post, even though that's what you said.

            You should really be named Loser20 or CryBaby20.

          • maturin20

            So you just proclaim I am on the defensive and that makes it so? I hope you don't volunteer for the JIDF because you don't do this very well.

          • mah29001

            So now you're accusing me of belonging to a group which I am not? Boy you are dumb, Dumb20.

          • maturin20

            No. I am only hoping aloud that you don't mess up their fine work with this kind of bumbling.

          • mah29001

            You really have no life do you Moron20, is that why you come here? I have a job which is not this which you would like to accuse me of it.

            LoserForLife20, you have no life.

          • maturin20

            By my reckoning I do not come here at all. What happens is a very rabid bunch of foreign nationalists have set up a traveling roadshow of hatred. Sometimes it shows on the news. Sometimes it shows here. Sometimes it travels from college to college. Sometimes it is on the radio. It's a pretty small and incestuous bunch of hatemongers who really want to see the US on a permanent war footing, and who like to brand every criticism of totalitarianism and economic collapse as "leftism.' All this self-appointed cultural review, and defense of the real against women who breastfeed who might be Islamic terrorists came to me. It came to me. War against Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Norway and the Dollar came to me. Not satisfied with making Muslims the object of your hatred, you chose to widen the scope to everyone who disagrees with neoconservatism. Why do you come to me? If you don't like eating your own hat, why do you try to force other people to wear it?

          • maturin20

            What's amusing, is all this BS is yours. I don't subscribe to any of it, nor did I bring any of it up.

  • alexander

    because he gave billions of dollars for "green energy" development, it does not mean it will happen….what a naive dolt, Fubar Ack….

  • guest

    This is crap. capitalism is the reason gases prices are expensive as they try to maximize profit for what is a right to move about freely. They will sooner or later try selling the people air

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

      No, it's due to government getting into the way and stopping supply.

      It's government that fines for use of the air and forces permits to work in it.
      Ask any electric provider.

    • RightWrezko

      "They will sooner or later try selling the people air "

      Actually it is the left that is regulating air and taxing it.

      Remember their declaration that CO2, a natural product of human respiration, is a pollutant.

    • BS77

      Exxon and Chevron and other suppliers of refined petroleum make less than four percent profit for all their exploration, drilling, refining and delivery…..The government, which does NOTHING to provide fuel, makes ten times that four per cent on every gallon.

  • BS77

    the problem with Marxism IS Marxism….a historic failure wherever it was installed as a political and economic system.

    • RightWrezko

      "Marxism will work this time if only we tax the capitalists enough to fund it adequately…"


  • Kepha

    Ben Shapiro says that people like Obama don't understand freedom, and I agree.

    Early on, Obama floated an idea requiring all physicians to be certified abortionists, regardless of qualms of conscience. When the foolish Terry Jones burned the Qur'an, the O's administration jumped on him and gave him a prominence he didn't deserve when it could have explained to the world that the same First Amendment that lets Jones burn the Qur'an also allows your local imam to call Jews apes and pigs. More recently, the O's administration wants religious organizations to pay for birth control coverage against conscience. In short, the O's administration shows a pattern of being First Amendment-challenged, to put it mildly.

    • kentatwater

      Ben Shapiro says that people like Obama don't understand freedom, and I agree.

      Absolutey. The link below is to a video of an interview of woman from East Germany. She describes many attributes of life under communism, which should resonate with anyone who is objective about the modern dem party, and Hussein.


  • truebearing

    The solution is for every freedom loving person to join any of thousands of groups working to defeat Obama. Donate money, volunteer, help raise money, get involved. The right has to stop exhausting itself with outrage and focus energy on action.

  • alexander

    he is no God – when he says – energy from sun! – it does not happen….
    can we make plastics out of wind or sunlight?
    Oil is the answer.
    Ops, missed that, FuBar Ack O.?
    And "dirty coal" feeds that electric outlet on the wall…..Really!
    Didn't know that either?

  • davarino

    Your name says it all.

  • kentatwater

    Because of the international oil markets?

    Or perhaps ceasing the valuation plunge of the dollar, by stopping our skyrocketing indebtedness? By ceasing to block drilling? By allowing Keystone to go forward?

    No he didn't.

    He did.

    Yeah, that means relative to the rest of us.

    Would that be the roughly 50% of the public who pay no federal income tax?

    If I decided to write an article about how Ben Shapiro likes to bang horses, I could make a more coherent argument.

    When you close with garbage like this, you telegraph how little confidence you have with the rest of your bluster.

  • Kevin Stroup

    The "rich" already pay a huge chunck the of personal taxes in this country. We have a progressive income tax. What is fair about a progressive income tax? It certainly is not just as justice implies everyone operates under the same set of laws. So at least explain what is fair about it.
    The reason fuel prices are so high is the same reason everything is so high. The dollar is being devaluated by our poor money management. The governemnt thinks you can just print more money if you need it and there is no negative consequences to this act. How friggin moronic can you be?
    Have you thought about the impact Chinas growing economy has on the world economy? China consumes half of all metals and 2/3 of concrete used on this planet at this time. They use gobs of fuel too. So a bidding war for fuel is going on. We are in the bidding war with devalued dollars. Brilliant.
    But your boy, the Anointed One, doesn't want to drill here in the U.S. Brilliant.

  • Grayzel1

    Please list the welfare subsidies oil companies receive.

    "The one American government control at work in the oil industry is the corporate welfare of subsidies to an industry that does not need them." Iquit

  • tagalog

    Relative to the rest of us, 50% of whom pay no income taxes at all, the rich are paying far more than their fair share of taxes and should have a sizeable tax cut.

    We should all be just fine with 50% of the people not paying income taxes; that's all to the good; but don't blame our economic woes on not taxing the rich enough. Our economic troubles come from two main sources: (1) our federal lawmakers stealing our money to fund programs we can't afford, and (2) building a huge welfare state. Actually, those two basic reasons for our current economic plight are close to being the same thing.

  • Eric G

    that means relative to the rest of us

    Who is "us"? You most certainly do not speak for anyone other than yourself.

  • BS77

    The oil companies, that invest in finding, drilling, pumping and refining oil make a profit of 2=5%. The government, which does NOTHING…makes a profit in taxation on petroleum products of 40=50%……my figures might be off slightly…but you get the point.

  • http://www.themadjewess.wordpress.com MAD JEWESS

    The rich DO pay their share.
    With any luck, they will tax them to death and then you squatters that live off of their wealth will have no jobs.

  • Mundus

    Is it absolutely necessary to your argument to choose a lewd comparison? Liberals always give themselves away by their inability to be civil, or have the background to argue intelligently and respectfully. It's too bad so many Liberals seem to think hostile attacks dent an argument , or a point of discussion.Do you,justquitnow,honestly believe you present a well-written comment?

  • reader

    "Domesitc production is way up and the Obama administration has issued more drilling permits for gas and oil every year. Domestic production last year was the highest it's been since 2003 and the oil and gas industry is sitting on 7200 unused Drilling permits."

    This is an outright lie. Only oil production in private land is up, the increase being driven by permits approved by previous administration. Production on federal owned land is grinding to a halt. For all intents and purposes, oil production, particularly off-shore is being outsourced to Brazil to benefit Soros interests. Obama's demagoguery about reducing dependence on foreign oil comes hand in hand with the strategy bent on the complete opposite result.

  • trickyblain

    It's crazy. They call a 39 percent rate "socialism" and at the same time point to the 1950's as America's golden years. The top rate in 1954 was 91 percent on those making (adjusted for inflation) $200,000 or more. It stayed at 70 percent or higher until 1982. Reagan and his advisors then created the current model of making up the giant drop in income by borrowing — and we went from an economy that paid as it went to a debtor nation. Now they expect the unsustainable rates and we continue to go deeper into the debt hole. Thanks, Ronnie.

  • fiddler

    Really interesting how he takes credit for doing nothing but somehow throwing in that production is up when he couldn't stop it (not on federal land). If we could read his mind we would find that he is chaffing under the fact that this drilling is going on at all. But hey, it make points with voters, while trying to disarm his opponents.

    Ah, what lurks inside the heart of a true "lawyer"! Discredit you opponent at all costs; what chance does truth have in a courtroom?

  • kentatwater

    Such as the middle class, who are the population most burdened by Hussein's every misdeed.

  • kentatwater

    That's the tyke's World of Warcraft III name. He's very attached to it, apparently.

  • kentatwater

    That's the tyke's World of Warcraft III name. He's very attached to it, apparently.


  • kentatwater

    I suppose paying half the profit in federal taxes isn't enough. It's not a "fair share," huh? Exxon makes relatively little on the domestic gasoline market, yet their full profit is paraded by people such as yourself in rhetorical attempts to cast them as evil oilmongers seeking to bleed every consumer dry, by making their gasoline expensive.

    Fact is, the government take on every gallon of gas is around 580% of Exxon's profit on its sale.

  • reader

    "The numbers were both up and down"

    That could only be possible in two places: Wonderland and a socialist's head. The production on federal owned land is at exactly 9-year low. And it is not by accident.

    "Yeah it's all a conspiracy."

    Exactly. Lenin's favorite word, by the way. And Lenin – as is easily verified – is one of the most admired people in Obama's administration.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    Do you think that The Bush leases, or even the Obama leases mean oil immediately? Do you think there is any lag time between a lease being signed and oil pumping into the supply?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    I'm me, he's him.
    There is no combined 'borg collective' personality.

  • trickyblain

    Why do you think we pay about a third of what Europe pays for gas?

    We, the taxpayers, pay billions in subsidies to the oil companies every year. But I don't agree that it's a bad thing on its face; unlike most gov't handouts — be it welfare or foreign aid to nations that don't need it — these ultimately come back to the vast majority of us (people who drive).

  • trickyblain

    So, verify it.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    And were any of those things true before Reagan cut taxes to usher in on of the longest expansions in our economy?

  • kentatwater

    half the country are deadbeats that don't pay taxes…

    Half the county does not, in fact, pay federal income taxes.

    …instead do crack and have abortions

    Ah, here is the caricature. While both are indeed problems, and may in fact be more predominant among the poor, wealthier people also indulge in such.

    The poor have microwaves and refrigerators which is the same as having real economic mobility.

    That is a strange sentiment. Such conveniences may enhance one's ability to get ahead in a small way, but I'd argue that learned dependance on the government teat is a much greater hurdle to economic mobility.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    No, we have more supply. At least until Obama had his interior department void some of the Bush leases.

  • kentatwater

    Agreed. If Lenin has fans in the WH, I am not aware of anyone publicly expressing such sentiment.

    Mao, however, is another kettle of kommie, all together. The WH crew likes them some Mao, yes indeed.

  • reader

    Just read Stanley Kurtz's book. I'm sure, you've already read Alinsky'sRules for Radicals, so your lame attempts at deflecting aren't impressing me.

  • trickyblain

    Defecting? That would be, like totally changing the subject, reader. Like you're doing. No. I'm not. Just asking for the "easy" verification that Obama's admin is staffed with Leninists. Can you provide? Just asking you to stand by your imbicilic assertion…

  • trickyblain

    Can you enlighten us as to the quality — relative to light sweet crude — of shale and tar?

    (trying to use as few words as possible for you.)

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    Yes, you're deflecting. And it's not subtle.

    Or will you ask me to verify that too?

  • reader

    I just referenced Stanley Kurtz to you. Kurtz published a sizable book with plentiful verification of the fact that Obama was influenced, promoted by and surrounded by marxist-leninists-maoists, many of whom he himself appointed to various positions in his bloated administration. I can never be explicit enough for an alinsky style marxist spinner, can I? You're deflecting and insisting that you're not in the same breath. Pathetic.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    Why? It's a straw man argument.
    And the tar sands are heavy crude much like Venezuela produces.

    And it's still oil and still doesn't have to go past Iran.

  • trickyblain

    Just asking for verification that the occupants of the White House love Lenin. It might be too many words for you to digest.

  • trickyblain

    It's oil in hard form. How are we supposed to process it with refineries that are equipped for sweet crude? You know these forms take more energy to produce than they output?

    It's softer in V and Brazil, not tar or shale.

    Really tried to make the questions concise, let me know if it was too many words.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    I'm not convinced. Can you verify that?

  • trickyblain

    No, I cannot verify that it might be too many words for you.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    Can't verify you had a point either.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    We receive heavy crude from Venezuela and our refineries manage.
    Our top grade engineers can refine it.
    And it still doesn't come from enemies or have to go by Iran.

  • justquitnow

    Huh? I had to look up Stanley Kurtz…and I guess your talking about his masterwork "Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism" with the big red star on it…

    Gee to I have to read this book to continue arguing with you about this article. That's a lot of work when I'm familiar with the contents. I was on FPM at the time and they cover the same ground with the same tactics.

    "You're deflecting and insisting that you're not in the same breath. Pathetic."

    Yeah dude…we're not discussing and arguing, we're "attacking" and "deflecting", and anyone that doesn't agree with you was sent here by the Marxist overlords for the purposes of mitigating the terrible impact this forum is having on our plans for global domination. I know it's pathetic, but what can I do, I'm a slave to your boogeyman.

    I'm looking forward to Kurtz's new tome "The Secret Feelings of Obama" and ten new reasons to hate the President since none of the dire predictions of my last book came to pass"

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

    Yes, he is pathetic.

  • reader

    "Gee to I have to read this book to continue arguing with you about this article. That's a lot of work when I'm familiar with the contents. I was on FPM at the time and they cover the same ground with the same tactics."

    Gee. To be fair, I would have asked you to verify this, but this jibberish does not make any sense in the first place.

  • kentatwater

    Sneaking back on a dead thread. Probably for the best. You evidently can't take the heat elsewhere.

    Your ironic use of newspeak is a new trick. I see you like using it a lot, now. Can you use it in a complete sentence while balancing on a ball? It would make for a fun sideshow act.

  • kentatwater

    So, you're not "sneaking," but I am "stalking." I see.

    Besides your creeping paranoia, what evidence do you have, that I'm using more than one account.

    He is very patient with you…

    He should read a little more slowly. He misses things. Facts, for example. Patience begins with the self.

    .er…I mean Roger

    And wrong again.