Listening to
the DNC debate on CNN without a picture on your television, hearing just sound,
one would be hard pressed to know what year it was, or frankly in what decade
these left-wing candidates are living.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5bb3c/5bb3ce6b9ab96e8e5c52cb2342bb7100333ca57d" alt=""
When the
domestic issues were asked, such as the state of our economy, they again beat
the Bush to get around commenting on Obama. We heard Bush again blamed for the
real estate mortgage stock crises with poor Obama inheriting a collapsed economy.
Hillary went so far as to suggest she warned the Bush administration that the
real estate bubble would burst.
Funny, but
it was Bill Clinton that changed the banking laws in this country, (repealing
Glass-Steagall) on the books since 1933, for the sole purpose of increasing
home ownership by low income minorities through Fannie and Freddie Mac. When
Hillary claims she warned Bush about potential crash, did she talk to Barney
Frank, who refused to hold hearings in the House (requested by Bush) to determine
the solvency of this quasi private public mortgage lending program?
But what
happened to "What difference does it make?" Why are the Democrat
candidates allowed to ignore the current state of the state and instead dig up
the political bones of the past? Is it because their management of both the
economy and foreign policy that has proven time and time again to be
disastrously lame is why they need to blame Bush? Note to Democrats: Barack Obama
is President. Barack Obama is in his second term as President and Barack Obama
has inherited Barack Obama's foreign policy and economic malaise.
The Bush
deflections aside, one is curious as to what new refreshing ideas these Democrats
bring to the political table, for voters to mull over. Did they propose a debt
solution? Did they propose a bold new foreign policy position? Did they even
have one criticism of the current administration and what they would do
differently?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/19d84/19d84475be9856c07563d69ee0bf2e68e406c57d" alt=""
New ideas?
Some may want to count as new ideas, Hillary's government paid college tuition
and family leave promotion but we all know that socialists want the government
to be our daddy, and we also know Democrats like to pander for votes with their
famous four letter word.
What's the
four letter word? It's the word that you learned as a child trying to achieve
maturity. It's the word you as an adult understand is fraught with strings
attached. It's a word that only the irresponsible thinks exists without a
price paid by someone else. The word is free.
Democrats
are trying to offer more "free" programs to roil the pander pan for
votes and hope to answer little in the way of specific details except that the
rich will fund these give-a-ways. However, the road to the White House must
pass by Greece, meaning, no candidate can ignore the looming debt and the
inevitable need to fix America's insolvency.
Worse for
the Democrats is that their "free" healthcare, Obamacare, is about to
shock voters with its actual costs that are expected to skyrocket by 2016 for
policy holders. Millions of Americans in the country are about to see how
expensive "free" really is to those trapped in the socialized snare.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7cb79/7cb79966c136869ceb772d63b4ed63cdc8dc4252" alt=""
How many
times can Democrats double down on dumb lame policies and win support? I guess
as long as some selfish voters believe that the fairy godmother left the money
under their pillow, that melting icebergs are more dangerous than Iran shooting
off nukes and when free stupidity that occasionally is the beneficiary of dumb
luck, proves itself to be, too expensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment