A very dear friend of mine, whom I’ve known and been extremely close to for more than 20 years, is voting for Sen. Obama for President.
Though I’m sure she can’t quite articulate why she’s voting for Obama. She doesn’t watch the news much, may not even know what a blog is.
Which is why I she is typical of many of Obama’s suppoters — people voting for Obama despite it being against their best interest.
My friend was born into money. A lot of money.
And as soon as she graduated college, she married into even more money. A lot more money.
Despite her privileged upbringing and higher education, she’s never worked a day in her life. Oh, she’s been busy, serving on this non-profit board and throwing gala fundraisers for that charity organization. But she’s never punched a clock, never brought home a paycheck.
She’s always been dependent on the men in her life (first her father, then her husband) to take care of her.
If Obama wins the Presidency, the wealth that he plans to spread is her’s. Or, more accurately, the wealth earned by her father and her husband (who earn subtantially more than $250K.
But that doesn’t bother her, you see — because it’s not her money. She doesn’t really understand what it is to have something taken from you that you earned. Because she never has.
To me she epitomizes the typical Obama supporter and “new Liberal” — more than happy to give away other people’s money, while they sport their Obama t-shirt at the country club and assuage their white guilt with the trendy vote.
Email This Post
⋅
Print This Post
Your friend is Cindy McCain? Is she abusing her meds again?
Dang, Robbie.
You know Penny Pritzker?
Interesting.
B-HO has remained remarkably consistent in one of his core beliefs, even if all the other’s have been…redefined.
Yeah,….it’s far too easy to give away what is not yours…..
I know someone like that.
This is a spot-on post. Those who have a “lot of money” will not be hurt by Obama’s plan because even what they are left with is still a lot more than most of us have. The problem is Obama has set the limit down pretty low. $250K/year for a family is commendable money, but take away 40% of that and you are left with $170K a year. Now, that still sounds like a lot, but let’s fast foward to 10 years from now. Considering inflation, we’re talking about getting into the salaries of two married mid-level professionals and certainly many small business owners. Plus, not everyone is married. Also, what about all the 401K distributions that baby boomes will be collecting.
My point is, Barack Obama’s plan may sound good now, but I can guarantee you that the “middle class” will be singing the blues 10 years from now.
The number tossed around on the TV is that 40% of Americans pay no taxes and receive a ‘refund’. We are already a welfare state, getting ready to be plain old socialist. bomma will see to that. No wonder why we have a huge deficit……….
250k for a business is nothing. To make that money, you usually need a couple of employees. You have to pay rent. You have to pay workman’s comp insurance and payroll taxes. You need insurance for the business itself. You have state and local taxes and business licenses fees. They just suck you dry. Obama wants to raise payroll taxes and to stop deferred taxes on 401k and other savings plans for retirement. They want money money money. We payout trillions on entitlements and programs and it is never enough for the greedy democrats.
More change from Comrade Obama: The magic number is now $200k gross.
Robbie–can you ease my fears about a potential President Palin modeling the US on Alaska? Do you think she would bring Alaska’s oil-wealth distribution style to the US? That is, would she use the government to re-distribute wealth?
- Tom
Knock it off, Tom. No one believes you would ever not vote for your shiny new object. Here’s a better idea: why don’t you moonbats allow people to keep more of the money they earn instead of grabbing it for yourselves?
Anonymous – I don’t get your comment about my question. Could you splain?
-Tom
Distribution of royalties earned from the sale of natural resources of a state to the “owners” of the state is quite different from pooling income taxes and giving money out to those that do not pay into the pool.