Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Hillary’s version of "Two Americas"
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Or perhaps the better title would be "trying to kill the tradition of "rugged individualism" in the name of fairness".

At least that's what I got out of reading Hillary Clinton's "economic vision":
Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it's time to replace an "on your own" society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an "on your own" society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none."

That means pairing growth with fairness, she said, to ensure that the middle-class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEOs.

"There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed," she said. "Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies."
Well, of course, it all depends on how you define "fairness" doesn't it? If you define it as our founders did, it means fairness of opportunity and fairness before the law.

If you define it as radical egalitarian types do, it means equality of outcome. And of course, that's how Clinton defines it. It should also be obvious that Clinton intends to use the power of the federal government to make her vision of fairness happen.

If you need proof I'll remind you of her earlier quote:
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
The imperial "we". The final arbiter of what is "enough" and who should have it. This is what Clinton will bring to the table if she ever wins the presidency - an almost reflexive tendency to use the coercion of government to build her utopia. What you have is hers. And it is hers to "give" or not "give" to you. She's already told you her inclination is to "not give it to you".

Fair warning.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
It Takes The Village. . . . You are "unmutual"! (You’d have to be a fan of THE PRISONER to get it.)
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.
Try it, shrew.

Molon labe.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
We all knew she was a socialist, but isn’t this pretty much incontrovertible proof? I’d say so.
 
Written By: Faisca
URL: http://faisca.wordpress.com
Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it’s time to replace an "on your own" society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.
In other words, replace "on your own" with "Goverment owns you"
The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an "on your own" society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.
In other words, she’ll make it fair by divesting you of ownership of money, etc
"I prefer a ’we’re all in it together’ society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none."
In other words " I prefer a socialist society"

The more she talks, the more convinced I am she will never get elected
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Somehow, every time you think she couldn’t possibly issue a more direct warning, she does. Earlier, it was "take things away from you..." Then, more recently, it was "I want to take those profits..."

But now, to outright deride "ownership" as nothing more than being "on your own" — just breathtaking. And what’s so awful is that that notion of being "on your own" is terrifying to millions of people who have come to depend utterly on the federal government for just about everything. The government gives and the government takes away and ownership of anything by anyone other than the government is a dreadful, dreadful personal risk from which Hillary can save you.

Well, thank God she voted for the war and the primary voting netroots will never forgive her for that one. I hope.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
Linda, you would be shocked...

Saw in a chat room someone going INSANE and list all these things about hillary, one was her stance on the war...

I reminded this cretin that Hilly voted for it, and she was all "But she retracted it!!!"

And I just had no words.

I would love for her to go against Fred Thompson. THAT would be a show. He’d destroy her in a debate.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Hillary was a non issue before, but reading stuff like this i think im heading more toward the utter contempt for her existence.

"Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies."
I have no words...
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
It does take a village.
But it also requires an ownership society.

If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics we could have the best of both worlds. Now we seem to have the worst of each; an ethic of ’whatever’s good for me I’ll do, damn the rest’ and a response of ’well, then we’ll get the government to force you do what we want.’ The Democrats, like the Republicans, need new thinking, and Hillary is not going to provide it.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
This has been another addition of "Run Away, Run Away. Hillary’s coming. Hillary’s coming. Eeeeeeek"
 
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
oops edition.
 
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics
We used to have those values, too bad they were destroyed by the hippie generation....
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
This has been another addition of "Run Away, Run Away. Hillary’s coming. Hillary’s coming. Eeeeeeek"
You honestly have no problem with her taking your stuff and giving it to someone who’s done nothing to earn it??

In that case, I’ll give you a head start. Send me half your paycheck every pay period.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Did she ever read Harrison Bergeron?
 
Written By: Beroach
URL: http://
"The Democrats, like the Republicans, need new thinking, and Hillary is not going to provide it.*"
Well, folks, you saw it here first. Professor Erb is an Obama supporter!

*This is an actual quote.

 
Written By: Robert Fulton
URL: http://
You guys are awfully damn hard on Erb when he says something good, which he does. I find nothing wrong with the following at all.
If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics we could have the best of both worlds. Now we seem to have the worst of each; an ethic of ’whatever’s good for me I’ll do, damn the rest’ and a response of ’well, then we’ll get the government to force you do what we want.’
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
If she is so right .. why not share the Presidency with all comers.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Reading the comments, I have a feeling of Deja Vu.

Something to do with "paid volunteers" and Colin Powell.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Please Neo. No one needs to pay me to point out the flaws in Clinton’s thinking. It’s an act of love towards my fellow man that compels me to point out her thinking is crappy-crap-crap-crap.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics we could have the best of both worlds. Now we seem to have the worst of each; an ethic of ’whatever’s good for me I’ll do, damn the rest’ and a response of ’well, then we’ll get the government to force you do what we want.’
Hmm. Personal responsibility with a sense of community value and ethics - sounds like something you might hear about in church. How ironic that someone from academia would yearn for what arguably schools have been for decades trying to remove with their mulitcultural agenda complete with its moral relativism.
 
Written By: Irony Challenged
URL: http://
One thing good about Hillary is that, although she has never used the "s" word in public, her socialism is pretty much out there in the open. Most "liberals" seem to be in a state of denial about the nature of their poilitical philosophy. I have the feeling Hillary one day is just going to say, "Yeah, I’m a socialist—what of it?"
I’ve heard Objectivists compare her to the odious character Ivy Starnes in ATLAS SHRUGGED, and that comparison is very much on the money; but she’s also increasingly like Ellsworth Toohey in THE FOUNTAINHEAD, who never disguises what he’s about, and is always disdainfully amused when his useful idiots (his "liberal" supporters) keep deluding themselves that he’s anything other than what he so blatantly is.
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics we could have the best of both worlds. Now we seem to have the worst of each; an ethic of ’whatever’s good for me I’ll do, damn the rest’ and a response of ’well, then we’ll get the government to force you do what we want.’
Hmm. Personal responsibility with a sense of community value and ethics - sounds like something you might hear about in church. How ironic that someone from academia would yearn for what arguably schools have been for decades trying to remove with their mulitcultural agenda complete with its moral relativism.
QFT
Erb wants us all to go to church!
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics
Yep, sound like good old fashioned religion...

Edmund Optiz has a good book on how Christian libertarians can reconcile the two philosophies.
This book of writings from Reverend Opitz; some written over 20 years ago during the "Social Gospel" debate, will help libertarian Christians state their beliefs and reclaim their heritage. Shattering once and for all the notion that libertarian means "libertine", this powerful work reaffirms that morality is consistent only with individual freedom. This book makes available to a new generation Reverend Opitz’s penetrating insights and a commitment to the principle of human dignity and freedom.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://www.asecondhandconjecture.com
If only we could find a way to connect personal responsibility with a sense of community values and ethics

We used to have those values, too bad they were destroyed by the hippie generation..
So what caused the hippies — do you blame rock and roll, or color TV?
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
" Now we seem to have the worst of each; an ethic of ’whatever’s good for me I’ll do, damn the rest’..."

Maybe you and your friends think that way, but do not tell that to the multitudes of Americans who donate their time and money to help others. Some communities even have volunteer fire departments, where folks risk their lives to help others. Of course I know you know this, since no doubt you volunteer for one of the thousands of charitable organizations helping their community in this country. Many of them have existed for quite a few years.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Do you pay taxes Scott Jacobs? If so please stop the whining about "taking your stuff".
 
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
Keith — good quote. I admit being driven by a kind of moralism/spiritualism, though I’m too libertarian to accept organized religious belief.

But, to respond to Irony C., I am certainly no moral relativist and in fact believe we have a crisis of spirituality due to our exceedingy hedonistic and materialist approach to life.

On my May 4th blog entry I argued we need a new Axial age (a term Karl Jaspers cited for the era from about 800 BC to 200 BC). Here are some snippets from that entry:


The last axial age produced religions which connected universal spiritual beliefs to particular traditions, rituals and notions of identity. They dealt with the questions raised by the rise of cities and trade, but those questions remained primarily local. It was less about how to integrate with different cultures — trade rarely meant any kind of mass contact with others — and more about how to define local identity in new conditions. As such religions often became dogmatic and exceptionalist. Only those who believe in Jesus, or follow the Koran, or are devoted to the way of wisdom or devotion can either be saved to experience paradise, or perhaps escape the futile and painful wanderings of Samsara.

Now we are confronting the need to address these questions anew, experiencing new technology and globalization which causes people to have to interact and live interdependent lives. The old ways of thinking lead to competition and rivalry, especially involving exclusivist religions such as Christianity and Islam. Thinkers need to develop a spiritual approach that does what was done in the axial age: build on past traditions, but develop a new approach that gives society an intellectual and spiritual means to comprehend and contemplate human existence. This doesn’t mean old religions have to disappear, but somehow they have to define their traditions and approach the questions in a way that moves beyond the simplistic ’here’s how you get to heaven.’ Most importantly, they have to move to an inclusive view, whereby other religions are seen as legitimate and potentially effective, even if they are not ones’ own.
...
The modern era started this process. The enlightenment took up the questions of humanism anew, and religious developments like natural religion, Deism and even atheism tried to address these issues. The problem with the enlightenment is that its focus on reason and rationality over spirit and sentiment only addresses one side of the human essence. We are rational thinkers, yes. We are also spiritual and emotive creatures, and rational analysis is devoid of personal meaning without that spiritual/emotional connection.
...
At this point our spiritual development is stuck with the old religions, which find it easier to arouse passions by stressing exclusivity rather than inclusivity. Our reason leads many to denigrate and try to even element the importance of spirit, dismissing emotions as mere psychological phenomena. That reinforces the sense of hopelessness and despair that drive people to fanaticism, and also risks creating a cold of cold rationalism that loses itself in ideological faith. The ideology fills their spiritual and emotional need, but they fool themselves into thinking it is based on reason and that they have the right way of understanding the world. Secular religion, in other words (and if you haven’t seen the power of secular religion, talk with a committed Marxist or a devotee of Ayn Rand). Exclusive secularist ideology is as dangerous as religion, and just as much in need of a jolt of new thinking.

So we as a world community are at a crossroads. We’re entering a new era, and while we’ve developed technologies and our facilities of reason and rational thought, we have yet to truly address the questions of meaning and humanity. Reason leads to post-modernism and nihilism, and that is no answer. We have the scientists, we need the poets and visionaries unafraid to think about the nature of humanity in spiritual as well as material terms.
So while some of you were trying to be sarcastic, I admit there is a religious/moralistic twinge in my thinking, and I certainly understand that can be annoying. That post, plus another one on May 8th on "Time and Space" go into these issues — if you’re interested just click my blog link below and scroll back to those entries.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Soon you’re going to have to opportunity to prove to the rest of the World that all Americans aren’t as dumb as GWB. I think that you should chuck all the presidential candidates in a house Big Brother style (reality TV show) and public phone vote for the winner.
 
Written By: snafu
URL: http://
Do you pay taxes Scott Jacobs? If so please stop the whining about "taking your stuff".
I do pay taxes. Hillary says she wants me to pay MORE. I think I pay plenty, thank you.

She wants to take your stuff, and give it to someone who didn’t earn it. She wants take from those with more and make it so everyone has exactly the same amount.

You seriously have no problem with that?

Damn...
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Retief’s "stop whining about ’taking your stuff’" reminds me of a famous cartoon, probably from THE NEW YORKER, showing a glum guy sitting in an IRS office across the desk of a cheery tax auditor, who’s speaking to him. The caption is something like: "You know, Mr. Smith, it helps if you stop thinking of it as your money."

Or as Retief and his candidate, Hilse She-Wolf of the IRS would put it: "Bend’em, spread’em, and when we’re through, say, ’Please, sir—may I have another?’"
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
"Here are some snippets from that entry:"

Crikey. I should have known. I thought I could escape that fate by not going there, but it follows me. I must have sinned, bigtime. Him and the Maytag repairman—an unwanted and unnecessary service. Like I said in another thread-weird.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
I thought I could escape that fate by not going there, but it follows me. I must have sinned, bigtime
Instant karma’s going get you...

But you’re right — no more quoting myself. If anyone wants to read they can go there.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider