Redistribution, Secret Tapes, and the Choice in November: A response to Paul Moomjean

Paul Moomjean writes a column titled “The Right Persuasion” for the VC Reporter, a magazine distributed in my hometown. The column is not WorldNetDaily or Conservapedia wacky, which is kinda a nice break (at least Moomjean doesn’t think Obama is gay- check my twitter exchange with Conservapedia for the context on that statement). But, he is very very conservative and, as you can expect, very very wrong.

His last article was criticizing the DNC for almost excluding God and Jerusalem as part of their platform; my opinion on the matter should be fairly apparent, but a nice summary of how I felt can be read in Matt Dillahunty’s letter to LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (who conducted and ruled on the contentious vote).

Moomjean’s latest article is all about Romney and Obama, specifically the tapes that have surfaced recently. I’ll look at the chunks of his article and explain where he is misguided.

One of the problems with modern politics is that politicians and candidates are terrified of saying specifics, in fear of being labeled numerous adjectives right out of the smear handbook. If a politician believes in taxing the rich and giving to the poor, he or she is called a “socialist,” and a candidate who believes that hardworking Americans should keep their money and let those who don’t work rely on family or charities is labeled “heartless.”

I would have to say that Moomjean is a huge flinger of this smear- just check this article where he discusses Obama’s impending Marxist takeover. But, I wouldn’t say the “heartless” label is unjust for the Romney ideology; it’s not smear to label a politician as heartless if they clearly do not view helping the less fortunate as an important issue.

First, Moomjeam’s take on the Romney tape:

Mitt Romney, meanwhile, got in trouble for having the audacity to remind a group of wealthy people that, “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it.” Can someone please tell me where he is being dishonest? It’s true that over time, give or take a few percentage points, half the country pays for services the other 50 percent don’t pay for but get to use. Be proud of your statement, Mr. Romney. You’re right! There is a large block of Americans who don’t pay into the system, but want the system to help them anyway. They feel entitled because they believe they deserve this. And why shouldn’t people get free healthcare, education, housing, food and other handouts? They won the sperm race. They deserve all the glories of success without actually being successful.

Now, I’ve already discussed this 47% figure: you can read more about that here. But basically the 47% of Americans who don’t pay income tax are the working poor and the elderly; hardly a lazy and “entitled” bunch. But what is most disturbing about Romney’s comments is what Moomjean doesn’t include- where Romney states that his “job is not to worry about those people.” That’s a huge chunk of the population, and Romney is gonna write them off? Shame on him.

Now to what he says about Obama’s tape:

The recently found 1998 tape has Barack Obama spewing collectivism mumbo jumbo, and yet the media has been very quiet about his words. MSNBC (Major Stupidity Nodding Barack’s Collectivism) just laughs at his rant. But why can’t Obama just admit that he said at Loyola University in Chicago, “I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution, because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure that everybody’s got a shot.” (Emphasis added.)

Be proud of your statement, President Obama. Why not just admit this is your goal, to take away from the wealthy and give to the less fortunate. Just admit you think some people make too much money. And why wouldn’t he believe that? He doesn’t believe people built their own businesses. He believes someone else built it. He believes the government-built roads and bridges made success happen. Not hard work. Not inventive thinking. But luck and government-funded infrastructure.

I’ll first address the very end. When you hear anyone bring up the “you didn’t build that” crap, it is an extremely reasonable reaction to quickly mark them as total hack and to expect a horrible argument to follow. Obama has never and will never disparage the American spirit- I mean, he is a much much better example of the American Dream than Mitt Romney. He just made the point that when entrepreneurs succeed in business, it’s not just their ingenuity and drive that leads them to triumph but also the American system that supplies goods to the public. To deny that is idiotic and delusional.

Now to another facet of this smear, and that is concentrating on Obama’s quest for redistribution. Redistribution! A red word, a communist word, an anti-American word!

We have something called a progressive tax, and that tax has been in place a long time. We take a larger income tax from the wealthy, and smaller income tax from the poor. This goes into a pool where it is redistributed by need. And this is not just a Democrat ideal- Republicans have historically dug this too. In fact, according to Politifact, the tax rate under Ford was 70%, under Nixon was over 70%, and it was over 90% for Eisenhower. If Obama pulled something like that (the top rate is now at 35%), there would be rioting.

So this whole redistribution thing is just plain silly. It is necessary for a good economy, government, and country.

Do you believe you are entitled to housing, food and education? Do you think it’s fair that not every able person who uses federal programs has to pay into those systems? Do you believe that America’s revolutionary free-market capitalism is evil? Then vote for the incumbent.

I believe we are entitled to education, of course. That’s the very foundation of a great country.  Food- yes, I don’t want Americans or anyone to starve. And same for housing. And I think that it’s the duty of our government to some degree help those who can’t help themselves. Capitalism is essentially based some part on greed, but I don’t deem it really evil- it just has the potential to create a lot of unhappiness. So, yeah, I’ll vote for the incumbent.

But here is the counter. Do you believe that successful small-business owners were successful because of their initiative? Do you believe that hard-working Americans shouldn’t have to carry on their back those who chose not to pay attention in school or had more kids than they could handle? Do you believe in allowing America to grow, based on the trial and error of risk takers? Do you believe it is the responsibility of the church and charities to take care of those left behind? Then vote for Romney.

Obama, and I, and Democrats respect small business owners (my parents are some). We just realize the importance that government plays. I want America to grow, yes, but not just based off the risks of entrepreneurs-  government must play a role or else we are doomed to crash.

And that statement about having to support those who didn’t try in schools is freaking ridiculous, and shows that Moomjean is, indeed, heartless. Go back to school and witness what so many kids have to deal with, and if you have any heart you’d reverse your position. And yeah I ain’t votin for Romney.

As we’ve seen time and time again, Republicans have no empathy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s