Peter, Paul and Mary Hillary

I don't think you should have to sift through dozens of paragraphs in any article to get to the point. So, I'll state it right here: I am no fan of Hillary Clinton. Or Hillary Rodham. Or Hillary Rodham Clinton. The numerous monikers are an attempt to cover her "multiple lack of personality disorder."

There are many reasons to dislike her, but whenever she tries to reinvent herself, the only thing that changes is her name. The rest - the socialism, the shrieking voice and her smug condescension - remain the same. There is nothing worse than an arrogant Marxist with grating speech. She knows what's best for me, and unsurprisingly, it always involves me giving up some of what I have.

Her whole philosophy is based on an ancient political maxim and it goes thusly: "She who takes from Peter and gives to Paul, will always have Paul's vote." Every time Hillary opens her mouth, I hear her pandering for Paul's vote. I also hear the scurrying of many feet running to Sharper Image to buy noise canceling headphones.

What is amazing to me is how transparent Hillary is in letting Peter know that she intends to take things from him. Peter, in case you didn't know, is you and me. And we are greatly outnumbered by all the Paul's out there. Hillary is tapping into their desire to have every need met, without having to expend much effort. Or any at all if they should so choose. She is exploiting their greatest human weaknesses… laziness, envy and greed. Translation: I want what he's got, but I'd rather take a nap.

Perhaps some quotes of hers will prove my point.

In a speech to wealthy donors in San Francisco she said, "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." I'm sure they nodded in agreement, but I'm also certain that each of her benefactors was frantically typing into their Blackberry's, hastily transferring assets to offshore, tax-exempt accounts. How about this idea: instead of advocating raising their taxes, suggest taking away their tax shelters. Then drop a pin in that room and watch every head turn to see what the commotion is.

Here's a trick I like to do: Ask anyone who is in favor of higher taxes at what income the maximum rates should kick in. I'll wager that the dollar amount will be conveniently about ten grand more than the taxable earnings of the person asked. If they are foolish enough to try the martyr approach and claim that feel they do not pay enough, ask if they send extra cash in each year to make up for the shortfall. After two minutes of silence, you are free to tell them they are full of it. Sure they want higher taxes… on everyone else.

Here's a classic Hillary money grab quote: "The other day the oil companies recorded the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits." I'll bet you do. Just a few questions though… If you take their profits, then haven't you also taken the incentive for them to make gasoline in the first place? God forbid Leo DiCaprio can't get his Prius to his private air strip. Why stop there? Why not take the profits of every successful company? The noise canceling headphone makers will have more filthy lucre than Shell Oil, Amoco and BP combined if she gets elected. Let's take their money too. Hillary has to know that if you remove the profit motive, no one will go into business and that means no jobs. I suppose we can all work for the government. As a side benefit, you don't have to be nice to your customers.

Here's a flowery statement: "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." I believe that is the premise socialism was built on. You know, from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Sounds like a great reason to increased your needs and decrease your abilities. Which is exactly what happened in every collectivist society.

In order to succeed, you must have a product or service that is of value to your fellow man. That product or service improves the quality of their lives, which is why they are willing to trade some of their hard earned cash for it. Affect enough lives and you get rich. Take away that incentive, and no one helps anyone. If you've ever been to Circuit City, you know what I'm talking about.

Do you hate specifics? Then Hillary's your gal. She recently told a CNN audience that "something has to be taken (there's that word 'take' again) away from some people" for the "common ground." What that something is, and who those people are that will fork it over were never revealed. She added that people have to give up "a little bit of their own turf." Again, what people and what exactly is turf? I also love that the common good has been replaced with the common ground. Even she knows what she is proposing isn't any good. And ground is just another word for dirt. Isn't that wonderful? We all get to be miserable together!

I saved one of my favorites for last. While talking about companies that bid for Government contracts she said, "We're going to make it very clear to everyone that works for the government that they can't go out and make a profit on their government work. They have to serve the people." Pure genius. That'll get the companies lining up to bid for Government work. I do think it's crazy when we pay $300 for a toilet seat. Personally I'd never pay more than $175, but not allowing a company to make any profit means no one will bid for the work. Say goodbye to roads, infrastructure and defense. And toilet seats. As a side question, doesn't Hillary work for the Government? Not only does she make a profit, she doesn't serve the people.

Which brings me to an observation: It seems that whenever Hillary is talking about sacrifice, it is we who will be doing the sacrificing, not her. When she is blabbing about taking, it is she who will do the taking. I only hope she leaves me with enough money to get to Sharper Image before they run out of headphones.

To return to the articles page click my back: