Regressive Socialist Liars

Sure, the title of this writing may sound redundant to those who’ve been paying attention to recent American politics.  That’s not to say that the manifestation of regressive socialists (formerly known as liberals, currently self described as progressives) telling lies is a recent development.  This regressive socialist boil has been growing since it infected Amecian politics, especially since the early 20th century days of Woodrow Wilson’s administration.  Today, that boil is coming to a festering head.

The election of a huge regressive socialist majority to the U.S. House of Representatives and a filibuster proof majority to the U.S. Senate, combined with the election of a regressive socialist to the White House emboldened this fringe political element to take the dramatic and drastic actions needed to enact their legislative agenda out in the open.

First, there was passage of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (aka TARP), originally the brainchild of U.S. Treasure Secretary Henry Paulson and President George W. Bush.  What’s most memorable of this fiasco isn’t that the money hasn’t been spent by either Bush or his successor in the way it was intended by law.  What most remarkable about passage of this Act is the statements made by a collection of regressive socialists before and after it’s passage.  Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi led the way in making the charge that the collapse of the financial system was the result of failed Republican policies and of George W. Bush.

Anyone familiar with the Community Recovery Act signed into law by Jimmy Carter, the financial penalties levied on banks who refused to abandon sound banking principles and make mortgage loans to unqualified home buyers (signed into law by Bill Clinton), ACORN’s bullying of said banks, the misconduct of the regressive socialist CEOs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the protection of Fannie and Freddie by regressive socialist politicians (see Barney Franks and Chris Dodd) knows that these statements are thread bare of truth.

Next came the passage of the massive American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka the stimulus bill) to the tune of $787 billion (before interest).  This was allegedly going to fund shovel ready construction projects that would keep unemployment from rising above 8%. 

The “stimulus” plan has been so unsuccessful that current plans to repeat this massive spending mistake has been renamed a “jobs” bill.  According to polls taken within the past few days, only 6% of Americans think the “stimulus” plan has worked.  To put that number in perspective, 7% of Americans think Elvis Preseley is still alive.

Since the “stimulus” bill was signed into law, the American economy has shed four million jobs, and unemployment has reached as high as 10%.  The administration keeps claiming that it’s “saved or created” a huge number of jobs (numbers vary depending on who’s making the claim, and/or what day the statements are made).  The “saved” jobs can be described simply as: unionized government jobs within states and cities that have practiced long term fiscal irresponsibility and are running huge budget deficits.  Billions of dollars have been borrowed (with interest) from the likes of Communist China and channeled through the “stimulus” plan to these states and cities in order to stave off the inevitable; having to lay off unionized government employees.  Unfortunately, since this (hopefully) one time payout of federal funds “rescued” them from their own wasteful spending they haven’t changed those habits.   These states and cities are still saddled with huge unfunded liabilities, largely thanks to contracted payouts of unsustainable benefits packages to government employee unions.

If its passage was so critical that Congress wasn’t even given a chance to read it, why is it that only on third of this massive government stupidity has even been spent?  Where are those shovel ready jobs?  Why has so much money been wasted on pork barrel projects like a new runway for the John Murtha airport, which receives two flights a day? 

We now see the true purpose of the “stimulus” plan being unveiled.  The pathological liar in thief and his regressive socialist buddies are going to use it as a slush fund in an attempt to buy votes.  The votes of unionized employees depending on their government paycheck.  A paycheck that averages $32,000 a year more than the average private sector pay.

The current regressive socialist majority thinks they can continue to borrow, tax and spend their way into an all controlling big brother government, upon which a majority of the “uneducated electorate” populating middle America will depend for their very survival.  They think we’re too stupid to see through their ruse.

We haven’t even gotten to the “transparency” of the health care “reform” debate that was going to be televised on CSPAN, or how there weren’t going to be any lobbyists working in this administration.  Lest we forget, we were also promised that there would be no more earmarks and that every piece of legislation would be online for all Americans to see for five days before any vote by Congress.

Sorry, Americans are not that stupid.  Oh, except perhaps those who are still defending an aggressive anti-American agenda.


9 Responses to “Regressive Socialist Liars”

  1. Pablo Neruda Says:

    As a socialist I can tell you that no one in federal elected office comes anywhere near socialism. I would think it prudent to nationalize the banks instead of bailing them out in light of the fact that they overvalued bundled securities and sold them worldwide.
    The collapse of the economy was truly the bi-partisan work of both the party of torture and the party of Wall st.
    They may indeed be regressive and they probably are good at bending facts (so what else is new?) however they are not socialists. Not a one.

    As capitalists both ruling party’s agreed that a total financial meltdown would ensue had Wall St not been bailed out. I agree. Now that castasrophy has been averted why no regulation of dervatives or hedge funds?
    Why indeed?

  2. mjfellright Says:

    The sale of overvalued, bundled securities could never have happened without regressive socialists in Washington DC deciding to impose equality of results in the housing market through social engineering by government.

    Equality of results through centrally planned social engineering is more than socialist enough. Thanks to government intrusion into the free market a huge problem existed where non existed before. Now, the regressive socialists in Washington want to impose central planning onto our healthcare system, our education system and our energy sector.

    History tells us that equality of results imposed through central planning can only enforced by the barrel of a gun. A government gun aimed at enslaved citizens.

    Thanks, but no.

    The Constitution of the United States and a free market provides much better solutions for both the individual liberties and physical well being of Americans.

    I suggest you stay as far away from the United States as you can. We do not need any more people thinking the way you do.

  3. Pablo Neruda Says:

    “Equality of results through centrally planned social engineering is more than socialist enough. Thanks to government intrusion into the free market a huge problem existed where non existed before”

    I see no difference between public and private ownership of enterprize.
    McDonald’s restaurants can continue to serve hamburger no matter if the controlling shares remain with Roy Kroc or is held by the US government. Management of an enterprize is seperate from the profits derived from that enterprize.
    Allow the board of directors to be comprised by those with an ownership stake in the business including the workers.
    As for staying away from the USA, a quid pro quo is in order…. america should allow foriegn military bases within its borders in direct proportion to the military bases she holds in the other countries.

  4. Pablo Neruda Says:

    I note from a photograph posted online that you were wearing, along with that hat, a shirt which sported a likeness of Obama with the inscription “Re-Defeat Communism”.
    I thought you might be curious to see a socialist critique of Obama written by an american friend of mine:

    From a socialist point of view Obama doesn’t measure up to the tenants of socialism (let alone communism). Thus we are puzzled by the strident rhetoric of the teabag movement in that from the left Mr Obama seems to defend both capital and empire.

    As an aside- was your speech recorded and availible online?

  5. mjfellright Says:

    First of all, if you want me to pay you an ounce of respect you need to drop rhetoric like “the teabag movement”. Otherwise, I see no point in continuing a discussion with someone who’s obviously hostile to the concepts contained within the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

  6. Pablo Neruda Says:

    Our newspapers across the spectrum refer to this movement from the far right in the USA as “tea baggers” and that is where I found the name. It was not meant to imply a pejorative connotation.
    We just had an election here last month and the center right candidate defeated the socialist coalition which had been in power for the past ten years. The election was clean and thus one must respect the result and try to forge an alliance for the good of progress within the country.

    I did post earlier a left critique of President Obama which criticizes him for not abandoning the free-market in areas such as the financial markets and healthcare; as even most of latin america is now modeled on european social democracies and not american lassiez-faire.
    We are perplexed by the rhetoric in your party which claims that the american administration is socialist while some like yourself sport messeges claiming that the Obama administration is marxist.
    From my vantage point these claims are simply rhetorical devices as the thrust of govenment investment has been to shore up financial markets and not the populace. There is no sign of american abandoning its imperial standing, decreasing its military budget, or nationalizing education or healthcare.
    That is why I have been asking for clarification and wether the speeches made in Los Angeles regarding the ascribed political movement are availible online.
    Hoping you will address the substance of my questions and forgive any misomener regarding the movement itself.

  7. mjfellright Says:

    To you, the current White House occupant isn’t extreme enough to be called a socialist, marxist or communist. To real Americans, he’s much too close for comfort. To me personally, he should be impeached for treason. When he was sworn into office he took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. An oath he’s utterly failed to uphold.

    We don’t have a parlimentary system of government, so your prescription for forming a governing alliance doesn’t apply.

    Here, you’re ideas are summarily rejected as destructive to our individual liberties as well as less productive economically. NOTHING is meant to be nationalized within our Constitional Republic. NOTHING. Not education, not healthcare…NOTHING.

    American patriots prefer our system of government and our economic system to a socialist system of any sort. We will do what we must to defend them.

  8. Sigrid Vall Says:

    Like Elvis, Michael Jackson is topping the charts in death as in life.

  9. Home Loan Says:

    Oh! This is perfect! Thanks for dispelling many
    misconceptions I had read about this recently.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: