It’s called “Shared Prosperity.”
Says it all, doesn’t it?
Flashback: “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.” — Senator Hillary Clinton, June 28, 2004
Ahhh - Socialism. The Democratic party’s cup o’ tea (scroll). It just keeps getting clearer and clearer.
More: Read related thoughts on the “shared prosperity” news via Jim Lynch at bRight and Early.
Posted By: Sister Toldjah in: Congress, Election '08, Elections, The Clintons
| Email This Post | Print This |
| Email This Post | Print This |
And thes scariest part: she is the leading white house wanna be.
First, a liberal take over in congress. Next, socialism strikes in the United States. Sounds like the end of the world to me…
Comment by Jonathan @ 5/29/2007 - 3:23 pm
My Momma always said that socialism is, is socialism does.
Comment by Fat Tone @ 5/29/2007 - 3:41 pm
Listen, when Hillary said (not long ago) that if she could, she’d “take” the oil company profits and put the money into a government healthcare scheme, it should’ve told you all you need to know. This is the kind of theft Hugo Chavez and his socialist pals are famous for. And here’s an alleged presidential frontrunner campaigning on the same platform.
Comment by Tango @ 5/29/2007 - 4:46 pm
Ah, the joys of socialism. If you feel like the government should be in the health care business, just think about what a wonderful time you always have at the DMV getting your car tag or drivers license, and multiply that by 1000.
Comment by Severian @ 5/29/2007 - 6:49 pm
Shared Prosperity = shared misery. It’ll probably sell to the masses, as misery not only loves company it demands it.
Comment by Severian @ 5/29/2007 - 6:50 pm
What perfect timing…Hillary goes out of her way to prove my point from a few days ago: her campaign song should be Nothin’ I Say Makes Sense.
In fact, it looks like she went right to the first line for inspiration…
Comment by Great White Rat @ 5/29/2007 - 7:59 pm
For The Greater Good ™
See Chavez, Hugo.
Comment by CZ @ 5/29/2007 - 8:53 pm
When did Gorbachev sign on as St. Hillary’s economic advisor? If this speech were well publicized, which it won’t be given the MSM’s leftist political bent, it could be the biggest mistake St. Hill made since she said, “I do!” to Slick Willie. I seriously doubt most Americans are ready to accept socialism.
Comment by Bachbone @ 5/29/2007 - 9:47 pm
She is nothing but a bona fide commie, plain and simple. All you have to do is listen to what she says. I for one, do not wish to live in a socialist country run by a menapausal dictator and if she wins I swear, I’m pulling an alex baldwin and moving to the land down under with the Aussies.
Bye yall.
Comment by Drewsmom @ 5/29/2007 - 10:07 pm
One salient point. Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, and the rest of the rich Democrats will never share their wealth. They’ve worked very hard to keep themselves above the “riff-raff” they perceive the American public to be.
Comment by PCD @ 5/30/2007 - 8:46 am
One salient point. Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, and the rest of the rich Democrats will never share their wealth. They’ve worked very hard to keep themselves above the “riff-raff” they perceive the American public to be.
“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” - Orwell
Comment by Severian @ 5/30/2007 - 11:06 am
It’s actually called “The Nanny State” Senator Clinton. And we’re not nearly as stupid as you think we are. Despite what you think it does not take a Rhodes Scholar to see through what you and the far left are trying to do to this great country. Maybe less time in the world of ‘what could be’ and more time in ‘the real world’ is in order…
Comment by Vegas Art Guy @ 5/30/2007 - 5:49 pm
One salient point. Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, and the rest of the rich Democrats will never share their wealth. They’ve worked very hard to keep themselves above the “riff-raff” they perceive the American public to be.
True, PCD. They think there really are two Americas - one with no rules or restrictions for the leftist elite, and one for the rest of us who must toil to support the elites.
For all Hillary’s talk about sharing the prosperity, how much of the Clintons’ income goes to charitable causes (especially in non-election years)? A pitifully small percentage. Meanwhile, did you know the supposedly greedy Dick Cheney gives away about 75% of his income? That, my friends, is truly “sharing the prosperity”. But don’t count on Clinton/Edwards/Gore/Kerry to ever do anything of the sort.
Another point: it would seem undeniable that the best way to make prosperity more widespread would be to improve education everywhere, to give the poorest among us a chance to escape failing schools and succeed. And who fights hardest to keep those kids in those schools? Why, our liberal friends do. Because given the choice between better opportunity for poor kids and more campaign cash from the unions, they’ll grab the cash every time, and to hell with the poor. Wouldn’t have wanted one of those lower class people to be admitted to Chelsea’s classes at Sidwell Friends, would we? The masses must learn to stay in their place.
Comment by Great White Rat @ 5/31/2007 - 12:25 am