Support This Website! Shop Here!

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Why Republicans Will Lose in 2010, 2012, 2014, etc.

The Democrats have an economy that is being trumpeted as the worst EVER.
Whether or not this is true, and to what extent it is true, doesn't matter.

Because most people believe it, the government has warrant to spend trillions and trillions of dollars in the next few years.

All of that money will go into pork for Democrat districts.
They'll use that money to buy votes, just like FDR did.

And, like FDR, they will succeed in buying votes.

Everyone assumes Obama wants the economy to improve, and perhaps he does.
But he has a Republican president to blame economic failures on for the next four years, i.e., lots of deniability.

So - as long as he has the warrant to throw money around - does it really harm him if the economy tanks? I don't see how it does. In fact, you could easily argue that he can profit as much from a deeply damaged economy as he does from a recovering one. It all depends on how good he is at spin - and we've seen how good he is at spin.

And speaking of a tanking economy, he will not only have the ability to throw trillions around to buy votes, he will also have the ability to nationalize health care as a way of reducing social security, medicare, medicaid and general health expenditures.

Despite Democrat Party Platform protests to the contrary, everyone with a brain knows the government health care and social security programs are due to go bust during this first term of Obama's presidency. Social Security can't afford to keep the Baby Boomers alive. One or the other has to die, and it won't be the government program.

Now, old people vote more reliably than any other bloc, which is why Social Security hasn't been repaired or replaced yet. Everyone is afraid to touch it.

As far as a secular humanist is concerned, there is really only one logical way out.

When Stalin was faced with the fact that his economic policies didn't work, that there would be far more demand than a socialist economy could possibly supply, he solved the problem by creating the Gulag system. A large segment of the population was placed in prison camps where their ability to consume could be very tightly regulated so as to assure the supply didn't fall too far behind the curve. Sure, a lot of people died as a result, but the economy didn't crash, which was all he cared about. Can't make a nationalized economy without breaking a few eggs.

National Health Care is the 21st century version of the Soviet gulag. When there are too many old people consuming too many resources, you don't arrest them and throw them into prison.

No, you throw them into a hospital room and make sure they don't walk out again. The ability of sick people to consume far outweighs their ability to produce, so they have to die. In a socially acceptable way, of course.

"National Health Care" is the phrase the Ministry of Truth comes up with in order to make sure everyone gets the kind of health care they deserve. That's how they'll sell it to the old people who vote. And with trillions behind it, it will sell.

It is coming.

And if THAT doesn't work, there's always the FDR/Stalin solution - internment camps.

Dick Morris appears to agree with me on the way the health care will go.


Patrick said...

Inauguration Day stocks tumbled more than any other Inauguration Day in history. In the past, the media always explained that stock adjustments for that day showed how investors really felt about the incoming administration. Let's judge this administration as we have others and by using polling data we can show that the economy first began seriously tanking after B.O.'s polling numbers had him seriously begin to edge ahead of McCain, which makes sense when he made statements like "If it's up to me, I would destroy the coal companies." He has already tried to placate the expectations by saying it will "take years" to recover or that it's really our fault and we have to decide to change. However, this goes directly against his statements that only the government can solve this problem by spending itself out of the problem. Playing both sides at the same time only works for very brief time periods and it looks like he'll be another failed Jimmy Carter unless if he gets serious and takes a stance one way or the other.

Jordanes said...

We're screwed, folks. Pray that God overturns the evil plans of this gang of liars and thieves, and pray that people hear what the marchers have to say today in D.C.

marc said...

The last Rep. Prez. spent us into the hole so deep we will never see the light of day. Ya, Obama sucks... he sucks as bad as Bush sucked. Folks need to hold Congress up to the light and see if they will help America or just contiue to make sure they are re elected.

Steve Kellmeyer said...

NO, actually, Barack Hussein Obama is enormously worse than George Bush. The deficit problems are worse, the foreign policy is worse, the domestic policy is worse.

It's all worse.

Barack Obama is God's judgement on the nation. This is the hell we get for 40 years of abortion.

Anonymous said...

Except there is no God. We're the masters of our own destiny. Abortion is important because we are so over-populated anyways so why force them to have a child?

Obama isn't terrible. He didn't start two wars,one based on pure lies. He isn't a great president but he's much much better than the lying facist before him

Steve Kellmeyer said...


What proof do you have that there is no God?

Most of the greatest scientific minds of history disagree with you, so it's not like you're in very good company in most respects.

As for Obama, you apparently don't understand what fascism involves. Read a history book. Government takeover of private industry is the defining characteristic. Compare Bush to Obama by the definition, and you'll see the problem with your statements.