How is it the Democrats traditionally bamboozle the masses into believing they are the party of the little guy? Clinton was often mimicked for the phrase, “I feel your pain.” That despite Hilary holding up air traffic in LA while a Hollywood stylist coiffed her hair.
Why is it the mainstream media chooses not to highlight the lavishness at which the Obamas enjoy the Presidency? The previous trip to Europe seemed more than a bit over the top, but now, we have the trip to India.
The President’s entourage includes 40 commercial jets. In the Taj Mahal Hotel, they’ve booked 470 rooms, plus an abundance of others for the peons who don’t get the Taj Mahal. Four Marine choppers are being dismantled and then reassembled in India for sightseeing. Conservative estimates? Over $100 million. Impact on the taxpayers? Priceless.
George W. Bush, while not being my favorite President, was often slammed as a oil tycoon. His Texas ranch hosts an eco-friendly estate. Al Gore has eco-draining mansions. Yet, somehow, he gets a Nobel Peace Prize for his enlightening revelations about climate change.
Then there’s Nancy Pelosi - Speaker of the House. Her net worth can’t be pinpointed, but estimates range between $25-$92 million. As part of the financial bailout package, somehow, her husband, Paul Pelosi, won some very lucrative deals with exclusive investments. As far as being a wealthy Democrat, Pelosi is not alone. Of the 15 wealthiest members of Congress, 9 are Democrats.
In 2010, Obama had a net worth of over $10 million. After taxes, his income left him with a measly disposable income of somewhere over $3 million - for that year. Wanting to stay in shape, our President has a personal trainer, Reggie Love, who gets a paycheck of $102,000 courtesy of the taxpayers. But that’s okay; the President needs to be physically fit for all the golf he plays.
From where did this fiction come which is entrenched in party identity that Democratic candidates emerged from the downtrodden? The only connection I see is their pandering of that voter block. It’s pathetic. The politicians who promise deliverance depend on the ignorance of their constituents. As long as the elite liberals can keep the lower socio-economic group believing the Democrats are the party of the “little guy,” the longer they can enjoy their power. The strategy has not changed for decades. The mantra is to vote for the caring Democrat and he/she will deliver you from poverty. In truth, the Democrat plan is little more than post Civil War plantation economics. It’s a recurring story of the sharecropper who can never escape because he is in debt to the master.
Democrats rely on an ignorant voter base. The less that group understands, they easier they are to fool. The more you can tie them in to social programs that provide their basic needs, the more that group is married to continuing the feeding trough. Why would people who get welfare, food stamps, housing, and medical care ever want to turn off the flow of subsidy?
No comments:
Post a Comment