Monday, September 20, 2010

Paul Krugman's greed and arrogance know no bounds

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/opinion/20krugman.html?hp

Entitlement: the state of being entitled.

Entitled: to give (a person or thing) a title, right, or claim to something; furnish with grounds for laying claim

Mr. Krugman: "And among the undeniably rich, a belligerent sense of entitlement has taken hold: it’s their money, and they have the right to keep it."

A belligerent sense of entitlement? Could anyone really write that above line without doing a double take and going "Wow, that sounds really stupid"? In order for this to make any sense all rich people must have stumbled across their money while going to get the mail. Or maybe all rich people were given their money by some leprechaun via a pot of gold. And for some reason they feel they have a right to it. An undeserved right according to Mr. Krugman, since it was after all just happenstance that they met the leprechaun and not you.

Of course this is not true. For every Bernie Madoff there is a Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Steve Forbes, CEO's, athletes, or even George Soros. Fantastically wealthy men and women who have the right amount of drive, skills, perseverance, talent, and yes, some luck, to make it big. These people are no less "entitled" to their money than the Burger King cashier. They have earned it with their intellect, ambition, and labor. You are never just entitled to something that is yours without a doubt. It is yours period. People only use the word entitled when there is some debate over whether they really have a claim to it. If it is yours, like your money, there is no reason to speak of entitlements.

Complete morons like Paul Krugman seem to believe that once you hit some arbitrary threshold set by him and his fellow liberal nut jobs you are no longer allowed to make decisions with your money. It is the responsibility of the rich to take care of everyone. They should want to give money to the government and help the country. Of course no intelligent businessman should every want to give money to the black hole of inefficiency that is the US govt. I am sure that most of them realize they could get a better bang for their buck by donating to a private charity. Or even going out to some alley in NYC and handing out stacks of one hundred dollar bills to every panhandler they see.

Paul Krugman and those that think like him are the real greedy. They want to feel good by "standing up for the workers". They are usually unsuccessful themselves or choose not to donate their own money, but instead demonize successful people for being too successful. They lust after other people's success. I am almost certain that they have a self esteem issue and thus they strive to get people to like them by pointing out how "terrible" other people are. Then they pat themselves on the back and go get a hooker (see Spitzer, Elliot)

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Pick a side

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704554104575435942829722602.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Good history lesson from Mr. Ronald Pestritto in the WSJ today. People in the news keep talking about the "middle ground" and compromising. The way I see it, there are two options. Either you believe that individual freedom exists as a God given right, and thus each of us is free to pursue whatever we wish as long as we do not infringe on another person's right to do the same, or you believe, as Teddy Roosevelt put it:

"It is not enough," that a fortune was "gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."

And thus everything a person does is only good so long as it benefits everyone else.

Pick a side.

"So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth." Revelation 3:16

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Modifying ObamaCare is not enough

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703369704575461840575037482.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Good opinion piece today in the WSJ about repealing ObamaCare. Dr. Hal Scherz and his colleagues at Docs4PateientCare (http://docs4patientcare.org/) are posting the letter in the op ed in their patient waiting rooms.

I think this is a fantastic idea and great way to spread the real facts about ObamaCare. It is imperative that people know that many members of the medical community are against the new healthcare law. As Dr. Scherz points out on his website, less than 20% of all physicians in the U.S. are members of the AMA. Yet when the AMA endorsed ObamaCare many thought that this meant that all (or at least most) doctors also endorsed it. Hopefully these letters posted in waiting rooms around the country will show once and for all that this is not true.