Culture of corruption update:

By GEOFF EARLE Post Correspondent
March 11, 2009

WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has gone from frequent flier to jet-aircraft connoisseur, with aides berating military officials to get the best planes, e-mails revealed yesterday.

Pelosi, who clashed with the military to get nonstop service when she flies home to California with police protection on government planes, revealed a particular fondness for Gulfstream’s sleek G-5 – a plane glamorized in Hollywood films and rap videos.

“It is my understanding there are no G-5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable . . . The speaker will want to know where the planes are,” a Pelosi aide wrote in an angry e-mail to the military. ~nypost.com

These people are out of control. Mitch McConnell says they are spending $1 Billion dollars an hour!

“In just 50 days, Congress has voted to spend about $1.2 trillion between the Stimulus and the Omnibus,” McConnell says. “To put that in perspective, that’s about $24 billion a day, or about $1 billion an hour—most of it borrowed. There’s simply no question: government spending has spun out of control.”  ~politico.com

So what it begins to look like is that all these years that Democrats were using spending as a cudgel against republicans the reality is that the precense of the GOP in power was actually holding back Democrats from spending like drunken sailors (which is in fact an insult to drunken sailors everywhere).

WASHINGTON – Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans. ~news.yahoo.com

I’m sure that’s not all she’d be willing to garnish our wages for. There are undoubtedly hundreds if not thousands of things that would be for ‘our own good’ that need funding.

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.

The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC’s “This Week,” she said: “I think there are a number of mechanisms” that are possible, including “going after people’s wages, automatic enrollment.”

Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, “it will be affordable for everyone.”

Clinton also suggested that Obama would be more susceptible to Republican attack ads in a general election because he has not been scrutinized for years as she has.

“I’ve been through the Republican attacks over and over again,” she said. When Obama was elected to the Senate from Illinois in 2004, she said, he “didn’t face anyone who ran attack ads” comparable to those aimed at her.

That’s what Democrats (socialists) mean when they say, “we’re all in this together.” It means that everyone shares the pain for their ungodly utopian socialist schemes.

“We just can’t trust the American people to make those types of choices…Government has to make those choices for people”  ~Hillary Clinton

If that doesn’t give you a good idea, this quote may help…

“Many of you are well enough off that … the tax cuts may have helped you … 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.   ~Explaining her opposition to President Bush’s tax cut in San Francisco (28 June 2004)

WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that every child born in the United States should get a $5,000 “baby bond” from the government to help pay for future costs of college or buying a home. ~news.yahoo.com

I’ve long argued that it would make more sense to just hand out cash to every citizen in America rather than allowing all the welfare state money to filter through the Federal beauracracy.

I mean, if your goal is merely the redistribution of income in the name of, “social justice,” this makes the most sense. Why waste 90% (or more) of our taxes on beauracracy when you could just eliminate poverty directly?

The Federal Government currently spends something like $2 trillion a year. Divide that by 200 million people and we all get about $10,000 a year. Wouldn’t that be fair? Seems equitable to me. No one could claim to be richer (or poorer) than anyone else and there would be no more more crime (since we know that poverty creates crime) and we would all live together in perfect harmony. Problems solved.

But what happens after everyone only makes $10,000 a year? Would we still have taxes since all our money is coming from the government anyway? But then where would the government get the money to give us our $10,000 a year?