The Politics of Socialism, Why it Never Works, and Lessons for the U.S. [Reader Post]

By 37 Comments 1,732 views

The Politics of Socialism – Obama’s Policies

This post is for Greg and all the other socialists who hang out here. I am anxious to see what references they come up with to refute this treatise. With a h/t to MataHarley.

As taxpayers forked over $700 billion to bail out Wall Street and $787 billion to “stimulate” the economy, questions are now being asked about Obama’s economic policies and whether he is leading us toward socialism. The proposed 2012 budget is expected to be about 40% of this country’s GDP, very similar to European socialist states. Government spending in the European Union nations averages 47.1 percent of the GDP, meaning the U.S. is roughly seven points behind. We are getting close. In a socialist state, the government owns the production, it owns the factories or the plants or the businesses. But that government spending runs counter to the idea of Jeffersonian democracy, that it’s the individual who knows best. “We are looking at an economic crisis caused by the collapse of our financial sector,” Heather Boushley said. “If we don’t get people back to work, the problem will spiral out of control.” Critics warn that’s exactly what happened in Europe when it implemented socialist reforms, forcing unemployment into the double digits.

Obama is pursuing a “stealth socialism” policy by advocating economic justice. “Economic justice” (social justice) simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It’s a euphemism for socialism. The closest we can get to a specific definition came when Obama said of the Warren Supreme Court (you know, the one that gave us the concept of criminal rights) in a 2001 radio interview, that the Warren Court hadn’t “ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.”

Obama is driven by one thing above all: social justice. He believes that prosperous Americans have a moral obligation to help the deprived in the United States. The problem is that Obama does not really understand what drives poverty. Poverty’s deepest and most debilitating deficits are moral, not financial; the most serious deprivations are cultural, not economic. Many people living at the bottom of American society have cell phones, flat-screen TVs, and some of the other goodies of consumer culture. For Obama, social justice is all about money. And he is well on his way to bankrupting the nation in attempting to achieve it.

Why It’s the People’s Choice

There are four primary reasons why socialism is the people’s choice.

  1. Socialism allows people to spend other people’s money without feeling guilty about it. Socialists deny the concept of ownership, but even they know that they are using the fruits of others’ labors for their own purposes, desires, and decisions.
  2. Socialism satisfies the deeply felt and widely held emotion of envy. Envy is a strong emotion that has always had a powerful impact on society and politics. But because no one admits to acting on the basis of envy, the term “equality” is used instead. Socialism is the perfect political expression of envious people because it purports to rein in greedy and wealthy capitalists and foster social equality.
  3. Socialism relieves people of the burden of worrying about their economic well-being. Free-market capitalism emphasizes the individual’s responsibility for his own economic welfare. Many people are happy to be rid of this burden and glad to be able to blame others for their problems. They do not see the downside: laziness, profligacy, and passivity.
  4. Socialism is a secular substitute for religion and offers people (false) solace against the traumas of this life. Socialism acts as a religion-substitute. Socialism purports to offer a solution to virtually all human problems. In contrast, the claims of capitalism are seen as too modest, and hard work is required as well.

Economic View

Socialism is a Big Lie that always fails. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality is achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery. In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. In the long run, socialism has always failed. Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. Without the incentives of market prices, profit-and-loss accounting, and well-defined property rights, socialist economies falter and fail.

The temptress of socialism is constantly luring us with the offer: “give up a little of your freedom and I will give you a little more security.” The offer is tempting but never works – we lose both our freedom and our security.

Academic Example

An economics professor at the University of Florida said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class. The class insisted that socialism worked, that it was a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.” “All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade.” His three exams went thusly:

  1. After the first exam the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had studied very little were happy.
  2. After the second exam, the students who had studied little actually studied even less; and the students who had studied hard studied less. The second exam average grade was a D.
  3. After the third exam, the average grade was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because: the harder people try to succeed, the greater their reward (capitalism); but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try nor succeed. Anyone who states Socialism helps those who can’t help themselves is full of it. It helps those who don’t want to help themselves.  [emphasis mine]

Consequences, Lessons, and Warnings


The deficit crisis that threatens the Euro has also undermined the sustainability of the European standard of social welfare. Europeans have bragged about their social model, with its generous vacations and early retirements, its national health care systems and extensive welfare benefits, contrasting it with the comparative harshness of American capitalism. It has benefited from low military spending, protected by NATO and the American nuclear umbrella. But all over Europe governments with big budgets, falling tax revenues and aging populations are experiencing rising deficits.

Changes have now become urgent. Figures show the severity of the problem. Gross public social expenditures in the European Union increased from 16 percent of gross domestic product in 1980 to 21 percent in 2005, compared with 15.9 percent in the United States. The French state pension system today is running a deficit of 11 billion Euros, or about $13.8 billion; by 2050, it will be 103 billion Euros, or $129.5 billion, about 2.6 percent of projected economic output.

President Nicolas Sarkozy has vowed to pass major pension reform this year. The French government, afraid to lower pensions, wants to increase taxes on high salaries and increase the years of work. But the unions are unhappy, and the Socialist Party opposes raising the retirement age. Europeans say the Continent will have to adapt to fiscal and demographic change because social peace depends on it.


In 2009, European government spending as a share of GDP rose to 51 percent, and to 36 percent in the US with the Obama stimulus plan. With Obamacare, America’s number will rise into the low 40 percent range. If the present administration realizes all of its ambitions, the American profile will look more like Europe’s. And that will be disastrous news for America. What the global debt crisis should tell us is that the European socialist model leads to disaster. The lesson Americans should draw from the market turmoil of recent weeks is that America requires a sharp about-face, away from the statist direction of the Obama administration.

President Barack Obama has made great strides toward implementing the European Socialist form of government with passage of his recent health care reform plan. It appears, however, that the European Union is finally waking up to the fact that nothing in life comes for free. So what does all this mean for the U.S.? Why should we care what happens across the Atlantic? People want the government to provide them with everything, but they don’t want to pay for anything. When the government does begin to provide its citizens with everything, it creates an unsustainable entitlement.

The socialist ideal contained three ideas at its core: economic central planning; the belief in collective or group rights; and the case for nationalized social services. The application of these three ideas in socialist countries resulted in economic chaos, social conflict and ethnic warfare, and the collapse of all basic services. The American people seem oblivious to the lessons to be learned from the socialist experience in other lands. And the ideas leading us further along our road to socialism are the same ones that lead other peoples to the dead-end of state control, economic stagnation, group conflict and societal decay.


If Americans think fuel and food prices are high, they should try Europe, particularly Italy. In theory, Italians accept that they are going to have to be a lot more like the Germans, and less like the Irish, Portuguese, and Spaniards. In reality, they may end up like the Greeks, who are still striking and occasionally rioting because too few foreigners wish to continue subsidizing their socialist paradise. All this European turmoil raises a paradox. If Europeans are conceding that something is terribly wrong with their half-century-long experiment with socialism, why in the world is the Obama administration intent on adopting what Europeans are rejecting?

So where are we now?

We have seen that Obama’s political policies are leading the U.S. toward socialism. We have seen why it is that some people favor socialism. We have learned that economists do not like socialism. We have seen the consequences of socialism, and have received lessons and warnings from Europe. The question now is: Will the U.S. heed these consequences, lessons, and warnings?

But that’s just my opinion.

37 Responses to “The Politics of Socialism, Why it Never Works, and Lessons for the U.S. [Reader Post]”

  1. 1


    “The question now is: Will the U.S. heed these consequences, lessons, and warnings?”

    As has been well evidenced, the human animal as a whole refuses to learn from their history. As was noted on another post here yesterday (by Skook I believe), part of the liberal mantra is their blind idiotic belief that the folks before them just “didn’t do it right”. We’ll do it so much better. Combine that with the horrific ideological indoctrination now known as an education system and a co-opted media that openly espouses Anti-American ideals and philosophy and you have the recipe for the disaster that is now occurring here.

    But as I said in comments on Dr. Snyder’s post yesterday, I’m really afraid the last few generations of voters are way to far out in left,left field to turn this around. The complete lack of self responsibility shown by the electorate today, the ” you owe me mentality”, the how dare one expect me to work and earn something when a rich guy owes it to me state of mind and worse of all the blatant arrogance of this President and his open adherence to not just Socialist policies, but in fact Soviet Style Socialism which is quickly equating to dictatorship is I’m afraid a cancer that might possibly be a now terminal disease.

    A government is only as good as its leaders and since a mind dead electorate keeps voting in Anti-American ideals scum on both sides of the aisle, one has to think this at the moment is not a good government! Unless the co-opted media decides to openly cover the lies and deceit instead of covering this Commie’s ass while at the same time the electorate as a whole chooses to get real and pay attention to the facts rather than hope the lies they vote for one day become truth, I’m afraid there isn’t much hope!
    I hope and pray I’m wrong, but as I mentioned to Dr. Sanders in the other post, listen to someone like my oldest daughter who chooses to believe the lies rather than what I and my wife had hoped was a moral upbringing and one does indeed have to worry about our country’s future.

    Great article Warren and I really am enjoying your opinions!

  2. 2

    Nan G

    Great read, WB.
    When I post the comparative graphs of all of the unemployment levels in all of the recessions since WWII I do it to make the point that – had Obama chosen the RIGHT policies instead of his socialist, redistributive ones – our unemployment would have swiftly improved long before now.
    He was ELECTED at -19 on the graph.
    He took office at week -13 of the red line on the graph.
    Everything after that is on his policies.
    Looking at the dotted line shows how pitiful his attempt was to skew the numbers by hiring, firing, re-hiring and re-firing thousands of US Census workers.
    All he did was use our country’s wealth to pay back his union leader buddies and government workers (same peeps, basically.)
    The graph.

    BTW, that little blip from Obama messing with people who wanted to work the census?
    It exactly mirrors the little blips on other graphs like the auto sales with his Cash For Clunkers and the home sales with his $8,000 rebate.
    Both of those cost taxpayers TONS of cash for what they accomplished.
    Neither turned the economy around.
    Obama’s underlying philosophy is faulty.

  3. 4


    @heckrules: Yes, heckrules, I KNOW that the economics class example is an urban legend, but it made such a good and salient point about socialism that I had to include it. And it really hit home for two reasons. First, I was enrolled in several economics classes and and loudly argued against everyone getting the same grade each time the topic arose. Second, I was once a university professor and I expected everyone to do his/her own work.

  4. 5

    Gary G. Swenchonis

    Liberals could care less if socialism works. Just like they don’t care about learning from the past. They have been promised a Utopia by their Masters. Even if in reality only a very few people were ever rewarded socialism. Every liberal state ends the same way, with the masters reaping all the rewards of socialism. While the average person in such a state becomes nothing more than a drone with a number who conforms to the socialist idea of Utopia. Liberals have always reminded me of hardcore alcoholics and addicts, they keep looking for the answer to all their problems in the bottle, or the drug. And regardless of all the negative consequences that previous people and themselves have had from their alcohol/drugs usage they keep on using and telling everyone around them that “this time it will be different!” They just refuse to come to grips with their own denial of the facts. But then again some people will always chose fantasy as opposed to reality.

  5. 6

    Christopher-Conservative Perspective

    This is the best piece about what is going in our nation I have read to date.

    The problem is that many voters do not know or care too know what is going on past their own neighborhood let alone the world. At my place of work and elsewhere I speak about many topics to and including what you state here and usually met with “How do you know all of this?”

    The answer of course is simple but what I find is that a majority of people, when faced with such talk, want to know more when one such as myself shows them proof on what I speak of.

    I encourage all reading this post by Warren to print it out in numerous amounts and leave the copies at your place of work in a common area like a lunch room or cafeteria. Email it as well.

    This post is worthy of a term most have come too despise but is the very reason for it; Redistribution.

  6. 7



    Several points I want to expound upon from your article, which is very good.

    -One, you state, “Socialism is a secular substitute for religion and offers people (false) solace against the traumas of this life.” Now, while I agree with that on principle, one must understand that many atheists come to that for a variety of reasons. The reason that many atheists are such is not by method of reasoning that since they do not have proof of God, that hence, they cannot believe in him. No, many atheists, particularly those who advocate socialism, or statist tendencies, do so out of feeling. For, if it were reason that brought them to non-worship of God, then they most definitely would not support socialist ideals, as socialist ideals do not stem from actual reason. Ayn Rand was pure reason, and thusly, could not believe in God, nor could she believe in a system that defied reason. My point is that most non-believers that support socialism do not do so by anything other than what they “feel”.

    -Two, you state, “Socialism satisfies the deeply felt and widely held emotion of envy.” That is, perhaps, the universal truth of why people support socialistic types of administration of government. Greg, who you mention within this article, is the best example of this statement. Envy is a strong human emotion that, left alone, and not tempered by the words of God, allows one to feel that he is “owed” something by his fellow man, simply for the sake of one’s living. You have a bigger house than he does? It must be due to something beyond his, and your, control, and thus, feeling the envy, he uses government to ‘equalize the resultant’, and thus, legislation such as the CRA is born. God, and his commandments, temper this envy, by stating thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, or any other of your neighbor’s property. Socialism promotes the coveting of ones’ neighbor’s property, and advocates that government must be then allowed to ‘equalize’ such disparity amongst citizens.

    What they, those who advocate socialism, do not tell people, is that it works in opposite as well, and while one may accept property that doesn’t actually belong to him, the government, applying socialist principles, is coming in through the back door and taking their property as well. The rubes who support such ideals think nothing of coveting the results of another’s success, but expect not to have their own property coveted by others. But, such is the idiocy and degeneration of society when socialism is allowed into society.

    -Three, and this is coupled with my above statements, you said, “Socialists deny the concept of ownership”. While that is true, they only mean to deny that concept for others, and that while in public they may speak in terms of “non-ownership”, in private, they protect their own property and do not wish to give it up. Hence, we end up with the example of Russia, where the mass of people subsist upon handouts, while the people who schemed well enough live in luxury, with multiple homes and luxury food, and basically enjoying the fruits of the masses’ labor. Do we not see that here, in the US, with those in government, like Pelosi, talking about ‘shared sacrifice’ while she, herself, was ferried around in luxury, dining on luxury, and living in luxury, all at the people’s expense? Or Obama, who plays golf constantly, his family on ‘vacations’, and he and his wife on ‘date nights’, all at the expense of the people?

    Socialism, while on the surface it might look “fair” and “equitable” to all who live in such a society, the nature of humans, and the susceptibility to evil due to it, causes the unfair and un-equitable to be the norm. It enslaves one, to another, and vice versa, by requiring that all live for the sake of others.

  7. 8


    and having all the time of non participation to his own life, well this empty time awaiting for the cash coming to him , was use to study the socialist and communist and marxist views in books made available free to all in a university of MAINLY FOREIGNERS, some haters of AMERICA

  8. 9

    Gary G. Swenchonis

    @Christopher-Conservative Perspective: Sir, I guess it would depend on where one works. I worked in Criminal Justice, and mental health two fields that have become liberalized. Back in the mid 90’s I began to try to fight back by doing just what you suggested. My job required that i “network” with different county, state, and federal offices, and programs, and schools of course. I was called on the carpet in less than two months after beginning this effort. I did not try to force it on people, I only left materials on the break room table for my staff, and others, and at all the conventions I went to. In short I was told to quit or resign, or “they” would get me.This was told to me by a good friend and who was my boss as well. She had already gone threw the wringer, and nearly lost her job. I still have friends in all levels of government, they tell me it is even worse. I still tried to do my best at fighting back till and keeping my job at the same time. My own daughter tells me the same thing too about her school. Thats the problem we are faced with. The liberals followed the play book to a T. They knew that once they got control of the schools, local government, and state that they had the perfect platform to reach all citizens with their propaganda. Plus the press as well. And the playbook worked like a charm for them! It always will too if you use it correctly, which they did to their credit. Most Americans were caught sleeping, and have only recently woke up to that fact. Yet we still have these CINO’s who refuse to take any real stand against the liberals. We are seeing a few brave examples like with the Governors of some states. But do you see any senators, and or congress people with that kinda of courage and political fortitude? I see Palin and Cain, both of them despised for the truth they speak.

  9. 10

    Christopher-Conservative Perspective

    @Gary G. Swenchonis:

    I am UAW , not by choice that is being I reside in Michigan. What you seem to imply is “public sector” union experience which is another ballpark all together which needs dismantling first and foremost.

    I however remain steadfast in my statement no matter where one might be employed as we must maintain a level of persistence that cannot be ignored.

  10. 11

    Gary G. Swenchonis

    @Christopher-Conservative Perspective: I hope you don’t think I was trying to pick a bone with you, I was not. I understand completely what you are saying, and agree. Our government is not Union in Texas, but it might as well be with the prevailing political beliefs. And yes I still fight the liberal machine on daily basis, and have since I recognized its potential to change our nation dramatically. Which it has. Back before many Americans woke up to the seriousness of the threat that we are dealing with now, it used to drive me crazy when people would deny that the liberals had an agenda, and people like me were paranoid. What drives me even crazier is the people who continue to vote for the same politicians who stood by and did nothing as the liberals gained control in many important institutions. As an example Perry sold out real immigration reform here in Texas, yet people will still vote for him. If many Americans could travel and stay about two weeks in south texas they would realize that its not really American anymore. I hired people from all over the States to work my programs. Many of them went back North. They were stunned that in whole areas english is not even used anymore, or they were laughed at because they could not understand spanish all the time. It was not that way until it began in the 90’s when the liberals encourage the hispanic youth to speak spanish. I tried to stop a staff member from doing that with the kids, I was accused of being a racist as well. Its insane down there. We sold out and moved futher north after we retired. All our friends or most of them had already bugged out And some of our friends that moved are Hispanics. But they are conservatives., and called a hispanic name that means brown on the outside, and white on the inside, like blacks are called oreos, by other blacks for voting republican. Where whites and blacks are refused service, not outright. The waitress/waiter will just act like your not there, or act like they can’t speak english. Hopitals shut down, whole small towns that look like ghost towns now. Yet our state leaders continue to do nothing so they can get the hispanic vote. People talk about how great Texas is doing now, just wait for a few more years. The picture is changing and fast. We will probably move futher north in a couple of years. Maybe all the way to S. and N. Dakota where many of our older friends went. If only we could get a leader with the Guts like the Arizona lady! That woman has got courage!

  11. 12


    What? No comments from Greg and his socialist buddies refuting what I, and my references, have said (in writing)? Come on, Greg, I’m disappointed!

  12. 13

    Christopher-Conservative Perspective

    @Gary G. Swenchonis: “I hope you don’t think I was trying to pick a bone with you”

    No, I did not think that at all just wanted to clarify and emphasis my point. We are on the same page and Happy Independence Day to all ! (If we can keep it?)

  13. 14


    As taxpayers forked over $700 billion to bail out Wall Street…

    Point of order here, that socialist bailout occured at the hands and with the blessing of Republican President George W. Bush.

    . The proposed 2012 budget is expected to be about 40% of this country’s GDP, very similar to European socialist states

    And that will pass, or something very similar to it, with the aid of a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED HOUSE.

    So you have a nice graphic of Obama as some NKVD goon, but you left out his Republican shills.

    PS I know I’ll get lots of crap for pointing out the Republicans aiding Obama in conversion of the US into a socialist state and I’m ready for it, as always.

  14. 15


    We have seen that Obama’s political policies are leading the U.S. toward socialism…

    Wow, this is an excellent example of partisan writing. Good work on your part!

    The only problem is that you lose credibility when you leave out the part where he is able to do this with the assistance of his Republican confederates in congress and in the states (like the Republican Senators in NY State).

  15. 16

    bill james

    The author is correct. Socialism is a failure and Obama after inheriting a bad economic situation is making it structurally far worse.
    However, there are some realities that aren’t mentioned in his overall philosophy.. What’s made the US exceptional is economic/employment opportunity. People came here from around the world to be US citizens for our opportunity society. That’s now gone–it left around 2002 with massive corporate offshore outsourcing. We’ve lost over 5 million corporate sector jobs in the US, corporate sector has created over 3 million jobs overseas, and the US has gained 30 million in population with a smaller percentage of people working since 2001. We’re not creating the middle/upper middle class 50-200K jobs anymore which cause trickle down jobs for others through personal spending.

    IMO, until we reduce the cost of doing busines sin the US including taxes, mandates, and regulations while increasing it overseas eliminating tax incentives for business to send jobs overseas encouraging private sector jobs creation here we’ll cease being that ‘opportunity society.’ And, we’ll also see a shrinking taxpayer base paying higher taxes to subsidize those unable to find decent jobs resulting in a larger population being supported. That means we’ll take on so much water we’ll bankrupt the ship of state.

    We’re not creating jobs. Till we do more and more will clamor for socialism as if the private sector doesn’t create opportunity for them, they’ll unfortunately natuarally look to the public sector.

    Just my five cents as a 30 year self-employed Executive Recruiter …………….

  16. 17


    point of order here: we are into campain mode, as you know,
    but you should realze to limit your negatives observations to

  17. 18


    Bill James, exactly what is to be done, increase over sea’s AMERICAN COMPANYS,

  18. 19



    point of order here: we are into campain mode, as you know,

    I know,I know. I still find it frustrating that our problems never get solved, they just get managed. The fact is that neither party shows any true leadership- just political hacks and grifters of the worst sort.

  19. 20

    Gary G. Swenchonis

    @Ivan: Sir, no crap from me on your points. It took both parties to get us to the edge of the cliff. Look at voter support and trust for politicians. It only continues to sink lower and lower. But here is where we may differ in our beliefs. Obama has surpassed Bush in his efforts at bringing us past the edge till the cars front wheels are now over the cliff. His supporters deny that fact. And yes some far right supporters deny that Bush and the republicans helped us all to this point. Thats only one part of the problem, but a big part never the less. The only thing that gives me hope and others like me is that we are beginning to see a new type of politician come onto the scene. People who are more worried about the future and welfare of the country, then they are for their political careers, and their minority voters, and special interest groups. One thing that most people who are polled have come to realize is that we cannot continue on the current road like we are now. If you read about our founding fathers they actually feared that something like this could happen with the formation of political parties. And they were and are right. Some of them despised political parties for this very reason, and the threat to our democracy that they represented. “the common and continued mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. it agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, forments occasionally riot and insurrection.” G. Washington Ad there is much more wisdom as to the dangers of political parties. And just that one paragraph shows old george new a little something about parties. Thats why its my hope and many other people that i know that we are watching a major reshaping of politics for the better with the beginnings of a new breed of politican, and ultimatley the reshaping of the republican party. But like old George I think all these actions will bring about another insurrection in the end. One formula in human behavior has withstood the test of time, when one changes, those changes have an effect on the other party as well.

  20. 21


    @Gary G. Swenchonis:

    Thats why its my hope and many other people that i know that we are watching a major reshaping of politics for the better with the beginnings of a new breed of politican, and ultimatley the reshaping of the republican party.

    No offense, you’re a good guy, but lay off the sauce,okay?

    honestly, both parties are so beholden to the special interests-beit BAC, Citigroup, GS, the NEA, the NRA (whih I like), Wall Street, etc., that they will be no “inner revolution” where some magical, populist Republican Party emerges from the ashes of the current scam party.

    I’m not a big fan of Nelson Mandela, but he did say something very wise; A corrupt institution is incapable of reforming itself.He was, and is correct.

  21. 22



    I’m not a big fan of Nelson Mandela, but he did say something very wise; A corrupt institution is incapable of reforming itself.He was, and is correct.

    I agree with that. And we have a number of citizens in our country trying to reform it from the outside, hence the formation of groups such as the TEA Party. Assuming they can keep from being hijacked by either major political party, they should further the cause.

    And, while both parties are beholden to outside influences, the mere effort of those outside groups to influence politicians should not be disparaged. It is only when the politician acts in opposition to the Constitution, due to those influences, that we, the people, should be outraged over. This includes not only politicians influenced by business, but also those influenced by “rights” groups seeking to change by legislative and executive fiat the very meanings of the various clauses and paragraphs within the Constitution. I expect to have influence with my congress critter. I do not expect to have my influence overshadowed by groups outside my congress critters sphere of constituency, and especially not when it happens to violate the Constitution.

  22. 23



    I agree with that. And we have a number of citizens in our country trying to reform it from the outside, hence the formation of groups such as the TEA Party. Assuming they can keep from being hijacked by either major political party, they should further the cause.

    Well, John, given that the TP helped elect officials who voted for the BIGGEST BUDGET BUSTING BUDGET last spring I’d say your hopes are breathtakingly misplaced in the “non-hijacking” of the Tea-Party.

    Let’s face it, after the Republicans betrayed their base, again, the TP should have taken to the streets like they ddi in 2009.

    But they didn’t. They sat on their ass watching the NCAA finals or porn on the net.

    Controlled opposition John and you and I fell for it.

    The difference is I realized it and you still don’t.

  23. 24


    Yvan and Gary,
    yes but I feel that we have to solve one PROBLEM first, and get it resolved like you say,
    because It’s the number one the most urgent and important, which will

  24. 25



    The difference is I realized it and you still don’t.

    You can believe that. I don’t. I’ve talked with many who support the TEA Party, and they are just as outraged at the GOP, either enabling the liberal/progressives, or supporting the ideas of them, like the Maine sisters.

  25. 26



    You can believe that. I don’t. I’ve talked with many who support the TEA Party, and they are just as outraged at the GOP, either enabling the liberal/progressives, or supporting the ideas of them, like the Maine sisters.

    Sad. You’re a smart man, obviously still under the spell of your university professors.


  26. 27

    Gary G. Swenchonis

    @ilovebeeswarzone: I agree with you Bee. But again my frustration and anger lie with both parties for their total disregard of the welfare of the country. I agree with Johngalt that people should be outrage at where we are at, and not with only one party but both of them. Think about it Bee. They sold us all out for personal gain. That outrage is growing, and maybe if we are lucky it will consume both parties. Maybe, just mabe we can get our government back to what the forefathers envisioned so long ago.

  27. 28



    You can believe that. I don’t. I’ve talked with many who support the TEA Party, and they are just as outraged at the GOP, either enabling the liberal/progressives, or supporting the ideas of them, like the Maine sisters.

    Talk is PHUCKING cheap, John. The “tea party” took to the streets in 2009 to oppose Obamacare. They then went AWOL when the Republicans continued to piss-away the US treasurey with it’s BUDGET-BUSTING BUDGET in 2011.

    Not a peep from the TP after the budget was passed, other than some tokenism to give dead-enders like yourself cover.

    Let’s face it, you’re easily impressed and I’m not.

  28. 29



    Warren, I too would like to congratulate you on a very well written opinion piece. While you graciously offered me a h/t (?), it’s all you, and there is no credit reserved to me for your work and perspectives.

    Greg may not have weighed in, but predictably Ivan did, in order to again bash the GOP. At least you got something…. LOL

    Frankly, I saw nothing in your piece that attempt to give any party in Congress a pass. Therefore Ivan’s red herring seems to be seeking yet another outlet for his continued frustration, always offered with venom and without solutions or suggestions. And apparently, the concept of opinion/op’eds (…i.e. “Wow, this is an excellent example of partisan writing. Good work on your part!”) escapes him since “partisan” or opinion is the intent of an editorial op’ed. well duh…

    I think you did outstanding.

    The point is, Obama – with the help of Pelos and Reid’s majorities – does bear the bulk of deserved criticism for failed economic policies that took an already bad situation – created over decades of bad legislation and government meddling – and further tanked it over the past two and a half years into a dangerous and possibly unrecoverable spiral.

    And, as usual with Ivan’s ungracious and rude commentary, accusing Gary of being a drunkard (i.e. “lay off the sauce”) demonstrates why Ivan’s opinions is worth precisely what we pay for it here… nothing. I would, of couse, be quite curious as to what “biggest budget busting budget” vote occurred in the spring of 2010 since we never got a budget, and haven’t since this POTUS took office.

    That said, there is shared frustration with Ivan over elected officials in general… tho it’s difficult to find much pleasure in having an opinion in common with someone as personally offensive, and emotionally hyper, as Ivan. There is no doubt that decades of Congress… both parties… are the culprits that have put us in our fiscal fragility. And tho TARP was a GOP erroneous piece of economic legislation, the same has been compounded and distorted by both Obama and the Pelosi/Reid dominated Congress when they illegally used those funds – specially written to apply only to financial institutions – to seize GM and usurp federal bankruptcy laws by awarding control to the unions instead of the rightful shareholders to boot.

    The House majority is also straying far off the reservation of logic with a July vote planned for a balanced budget Constitutional amendment proposed by VA Goodlatte (R), in July.

    There is no way in hell I support such an amendment. It simply legitimizes tax increases to be Constitutionally mandated in order to justify their spending, which all parties seem to be reticent to reduce. Considering that even Ryan’s budget, which wouldn’t be balanced for decades, wouldn’t even muster compliance with such an amendment, we can all only look forward to creative ways Congress would invent to cover their proverbial spending butts.

    Not with my support… nope.

    Which then brings me to the TP darling, Rand Paul… who definitively states that there will be no raising of the debt ceiling without such an amendment.

    News flash… even under Ryan’s budget, the debt ceiling has to be raised. Without immediate and notable slashes in spending, it’s inevitable. And what concessions the GOP are holding out for are nothing more than a bad joke.

    Add to the campaign talking points the new seer skill of Obama’s HUD appointee, Shaun Donovan, who portends that home prices are not only slated to be on the rise this fall, but that…

    “It’s very unlikely that we will see a significant further decline,” Donovan said yesterday on CNN. “The real question is when will we start to see sustainable increases. Some think it will be as early as the end of this summer or this fall.”

    Now we’re supposed to believe that house prices can’t fall anymore? Woof… Exactly what does he think will happen when Bernanke raises the prime rate? Something that has to happen if we are ever to be ablel to control inflation.

    Talk about rose colored glasses…. I half expect the man to roll up his sleeves and show us watches for sale, rimming the span of his forearm. I’m not sure who Donovan thinks is that gullible. The Case Schiller revelations are that prices are back to 2002 levels (and need to be even lower realistically). And the late June’s Radar Logic report plainly states that an overwhelming foreclosure inventory and negative equity fuels further declines on the horizon.

    “Clearly, the very large supply of homes for sale or potentially for sale is weighing heavily on the market,” said Michael Feder, president and CEO of Radar Logic.

    “Perhaps more worrisome,” Feder continued, “is the clearly established discount on distressed properties. Reason would suggest this discount reflects the level at which buyers are comfortable they can achieve a reasonable rate of return. We expect this situation will continue for some time and will deter any truly robust economic recovery.”

    Oh yes… and the buyer market pool dwindles with each tick up of unemployment, which doesn’t show any promise of abating any time soon either.

    This little wizard of political fairy tales was pulled back into HUD action, and promoted to the head cheese, when he was part of the problem during Clinton’s HUD crew. So it becomes even more laughable that this Clinton resurgent oversee’s FHA and that FHA’s fiscal obligations and loans dominate the top 20 markets in the nation… the same markets that are on the decline.

    Snake oil. We are being peddled snake oil here. All of Congress appears to be clueless to solutions, mostly because free markets are the solution and it requires that Congress get out of their way. But that doesn’t sell votes for a gullible and desperate nation.

    We have only two choices… bad (old school GOP), and piss poor worse (lib/progs). The solution seem to be to select a reasonable (not Romney/Huntsman/Paul) “bad” and then hold their feet to the fire for proper legislative remedies. Most of which means to get government out of the housing, insurance and financial reform business.

  29. 30

    Christopher-Conservative Perspective



    I thank you for honesty on the very topic of socialism; “out the part where he is able to do this”. I agree with what led to this, however I remain amazed at your honesty?

    We may not agree on certain topics but we sure do here and once again say thank you as it pertains to clarification!

  30. 31


    Socialism fails because it destroys the human creative flow that leads to wonder and illumination. and in return draws back into itself to under duress and depressed. the verdigris of what remains of the brig-en pshyci of the arts. Art means nothing, Music means nothing, Al that exit is the will of ther leadership

  31. 32

    Nan G

    Since the government (central planning) bailed out some US automakers BUT not others, it is educational to see what transpired afterward.

    General Motors, the bailed-out automaker, made public that it now has a growing inventory in its truck lines of 122 days worth of sales, nearly twice that of its non-bailout domestic competitor Ford Motors for similar lines.


    Peter Nesvold, a Jefferies & Co. analyst, points out that GM averaged 78 days on hand at year end from 2002 to 2010.

    He put a ”hold” rating on GM stock, saying:
    “It’s unbelievable that after this huge taxpayer bailout and the bankruptcy that we’re right back to where we were. There’s no credibility. Is GM falling into old, bad habits?”

    To be fair, Ford had updated their truck line to include a popular V-6.
    GM has NOT updated their truck line since 2006!

    So, even with the HUGE taxpayer bailout, GM has not been able to operate in a profitable and efficient manner.
    Bad for us.

    A little over a year ago, the Wall Street Journal predicted exactly all of this.
    Read it all and weep.
    Abrogating bankruptcy law, screwing over secured creditors and rewarding Democrats’ union supporters with billions in equity, tax breaks and subsidies didn’t really fix GM….DUH!

    But that was ”central planning’s” big idea.

  32. 33


    @MataHarley: MataHarley, you deserve a h/t for inspiring me with your positive comments.

    Also, I LOVE your name! One, the first part of your name: Mata. I assume you chose that part because of Mata Hari:

    Mata Hari was the stage name of Margaretha Geertruida “Grietje” Zelle (7 August 1876 – 15 October 1917), a Dutch exotic dancer, courtesan, and spy who was executed by firing squad in France for espionage for Germany during World War I. BTW, the “j” is silent in Dutch.

    I would never accuse you of being a courtesan, although you are quite exotic, judging from your picture.

    Two, Harley. I used to have a ’48 Panhead chopper that I built. I worked on it two hours for every hour I rode it.

  33. 34



    That’s kind words, Warren. Here’s hoping you are further inspired by many, because it will be a pleasure to read your penned posts.

    Correct on the take off of Mata Hari…. it’s a handle I’ve used on the internet for years (since the mid 90s), combining the politics of both m’cycles and in int’l/national in general, and the attitude that I needed to read and hang in “enemy camps” in order to best understand opposition views.

    BTW, there are no photos on the internet that I know of. There is a Spanish queen… LOL… who uses the name mataharley. (I had it first…). Calls himself a “big b*#tch” and has a YouTube account. That’s not me… I also understand there’s a porn star, German I think. That’s also not me…. LOL

  34. 35


    I do apologize for that rather cryptic post above (#31). I had a rough night following a medical procedure and I had to take a sedative to get to sleep. It must have kicked-on while I was reading, I barely remembered posting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *