House Abukoff

House Abukoff is dedicated to providing new and gently-used treasures at friendly prices through Abukoff Books and Curios, virtual and administrative assistance through our multi-faceted Virtual Assistance Division, entertainment and opinions through our Features, hot political commentary through Kapact's Rant, and addictive and free interactive Star Trek gaming through Fantasy Trek. House Abukoff and its divisions will not be involved in any requests that its operators consider as flouting the law, nor will they assist in matters that they consider indiscreet or objectionable. House Rules run along the firm lines of discretion, honesty, confidentiality, and good service. All features and content (unless otherwise specified) are original compositions, copyright House Abukoff.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Kapact's Rant: "Sharks Under the Bus"

Have you ever noticed that when conservatives stick to their fundamental principles, (and when liberals break from theirs) the country prospers, and vice versa?


It's been fun watching the liberal pack fall on each other like a bunch of blood-smelling sharks. Surprisingly, the Republicans in Congress have stuck to their guns, forcing a weak president to cave and agree to a compromise. Mr Obama isn't good at much, but he is very good at throwing people under the bus at the first sign of trouble. Mr Obama realized that he's lost the rubber-stamp congress that he had for two years (during which time he failed to show any positive results from his socialist playbook), so he's suddenly decided that he has no choice but to cave. (Just like Mayor Quimby from the Simpsons "I have decided... to waffle!") He agrees to a compromise with the Republicans and expects his liberal friends to follow along. Surprise, he suddenly meets something none of us expected, liberals with principles. And what does he do? He shows his true colors and throws them under the bus, but not without calling the Republicans hostage-takers first.

Okay, Mr Obama. I understand that you lectured constitutional law when you realized what a failure you were at community organizing (still haven't gotten that right, have you?), but did you happen to read the document at the time? Because amongst everything else, it says nothing about the president having a vote in Congress. In case that isn't clear, sir, you aren't in a position to compromise on a funding bill. You could try to negotiate a position that Democratic leaders have put forth, but you have no say over what gets written in those hallowed halls built so appropriately on a swamp. In case that whole constitution thing is a little confusing, talk to Mr Reid. He told us on Thursday that the constitution is their rule book. Who knew?

And something else. All this talk about 'paying for tax cuts' is missing a few vital facts (just like most things that come from the liberals and their Newspeak Thought Police drive-by media... I know it sounds dramatic, but really, they are in the business of telling us what to think, aren't they?). I'll put it simply. You don't have to pay for tax cuts. They pay for themselves. Look at it this way. Say I'm managing a household budget (something your average community organizer apparently never does), and I'm making two kinds of purchases. Buying groceries to eat tonight, but also buying seeds to plant a vegetable garden. I might spend a dollar on a packet of, say carrot seeds, but spend a dollar on a one pound bag of carrots. It might take a dollar out of the budget to buy seeds that won't give me carrots to eat for a couple of months, but eventually they'll give me much more than a pound. Wealth works the same way. If people are allowed to keep more of the money that they've earned, they will put it back into the economy. Businesses will boom, and not only pay more taxes, but eventually hire more people, who will pay more tax and spend more money. And of course, those businesses are owned by people who will buy more houses and cars, hire more domestic workers, and maybe even expand their businesses. And as an added bonus, the ranks of the unemployed and welfare dependent will shrink, and the government will have more money to blow. That is simple proven economics that worked before. (Remember when they stopped calling it Reaganomics? When it started working.) The only problem is that a prosperous independent people don't need Uncle Sam to dictate and provide their needs. And liberals, for some reason, don't do well in those circumstances.

At the same time, some Republican senators have already started to add earmarks to this monster spending bill that our Prime Minister... er, President has negotiated, after campaigning on a "no Earmarks" platform. Keep that up and we'll throw you under the bus.

1 comment:

mieledi said...

Good post, I like read, Christian Louboutin will continue to pay attention to it.