The Lunacy of Left on Full Display - Politicrossing
Connect with us

Politics

The Lunacy of Left on Full Display

The Left loves total authority and imposing its will on all of us, forevermore.

Published

on

In another life, I leaned left on nearly all issues of the day… Then reality kicked in. Today, I find almost every liberal or leftist viewpoint, from no need for voter ID, to restrictions on the First Amendment, to be harmful to society. The prolonged and now questionable lockdown over COVID-19, their willingness to upend women’s sports, and Biden’s laxity about illegals further exacerbates my feeling that that Left loves the idea of total authority and of imposing its will on all of us, forevermore.

Good By You?

Do you believe as leftists do, for example, that children may choose their gender? Is it okay to teach children that there are more than 50 genders? Do you think that cross-dressers should be reading to children at story hour?

Should mathematics, the sciences, and other core academic disciplines be taught to accommodate ‘politically diverse’ points of view? Is the 1619 the date of our founding? Should entire college curricula be redesigned because most of the great works of literature throughout history have been written by white males?

Should student loan debt be exonerated? Are you fine with colleges holding separate graduation exercises and celebrations for different ethnic minorities? Are you upset when conservative speakers on campus are disrupted from speaking, or are banned altogether from campus? Should colleges set up safe spaces? Curiously, can a university promise students an unbiased education when 97% of college professors’ political donations go to Democrats?

Is late trimester abortion acceptable? After a baby is born, is it the right of the mother and the doctor to choose whether or not that person will continue to live? Should Medicare be provided for all and, if so, how do you pay for it?

Are illegal immigrants to be given free healthcare the moment they cross the border? Indeed, should we have open borders, and let in anybody who wants to come here? Are sanctuary cities a good idea, and do they support the lives and aspirations of actual American citizens?

A More Civil Society?

When newspaper headlines scream about gun violence, is wringing your hands over the issue any solace for families in Chicago or Baltimore ghetto communities who experience gun violence on a daily basis? Do you care about the issue, or do you only get riled up when the mainstream media stokes your emotions?

Is calling others racist acceptable when, in your own heart, you know that you are biased at times? Is a comment made by a movie star or celebrity – or a politician, for that matter – 30 or 40 years ago enough to cancel his or her career? Tell me, please, is virtue signaling an acceptable form of social participation, or should one actually take appropriate, non-violent action to address a wrong?

Are the goals and violent tactics of Antifa acceptable to you? If they’re proud of what they stand for, and forthright in their actions, why do they wear ski masks? Appearing in selected cities in time to cause trouble, and leading the turmoil following the death of George Floyd last summer, how many of them actually hold jobs? How many pay for their transportation and housing costs?

If they do not pay for themselves, who, pray tell, is paying? Most curiously, why do they often go after the most vulnerable people they can find in any gathering? Is it okay when law enforcement stands down in the face of violence committed by those on the left?

When Minds Can’t Meet

To me, the left now embraces mass insanity and it’s getting more absurd by the week. The lockdown of the last 11 months has given us all a taste of what socialism is like. What’s more, they don’t understand the magnitude and ramifications of many of their political and social views. As the summer riots and continuing mayhem in Portland and Seattle have shown, the left’s agenda will destroy our civilization within a few years.

Ronald Reagan said it best, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men [and women] were free.”

It would be wonderful to be able to reach consensus in some way with those on the Left, however my sensibilities cry out and say that would be cultural and national suicide.

Jeff Davidson is "The Work-Life Balance Expert®" and the premier thought leader on work-life balance, integration, and harmony. Jeff speaks to organizations that seek to enhance their overall productivity by improving the effectiveness of their people. Visit www.BreathingSpace.com



  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Business

Can You Increase Prosperity By Taxing Success?

Published

on

“You can’t increase prosperity by taxing success.”

~ Calvin Coolidge

 

One of the mantras of Democrats is to make the wealthy pay their fair share. You heard it often on the campaign trail from the plethora of Democrat candidates who ran for president. So it should come as no surprise that one of the most vocal proponents of soaking the rich, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), has offered up legislation for a wealth tax.

The bill, called the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, would apply an annual 2% tax on individuals with net worths between $50 million and $1 billion. Individuals worth over $1 billion would pay an annual 3% tax. Senator Warren claims it will generate $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years and that money would be invested in programs such as child care, education, and infrastructure.

On the surface, this may sound like a good idea to the common citizen working a 9 to 5 job. Why not soak the rich and make them pay their fair share? One must ask a counterquestion. What do you consider a fair share?

The top 25% of taxpayers pay 86 percent of total income taxes. The top 10% of taxpayers pay 70 percent. The top 5% pay 59 percent. The top 1% of taxpayers pay 38.5 percent of total income taxes. In contrast, the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay only 3.1 percent of total income taxes. It is a myth that wealthier individuals aren’t paying a fair share.

The next question is how do you enforce this wealth tax? It’s an administrative nightmare. In Warren’s proposed legislation, she allocates an additional $100 billion into the IRS for enforcement and mandates a 30 percent annual audit rate for the agency. That would mean hiring more IRS agents and a third of American households would be audited every year.

On top of that, do you really think wealthy people like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett will actually pay that wealth tax? They may be big liberals but also realize they have some high-quality accountants to help avoid paying any more in taxes than necessary. They will find loopholes and off-shore accounts to shelter their wealth.

You may wonder why does this even concern me? Do you think politicians like Elizabeth Warren will stop at those with wealth of $50 million or more? You can already picture a scenario where the revenue this wealth tax brings in will be far less than they anticipate. Thus, they will have to expand the tax to anyone who has wealth of $20 million or more. Then to $10 million or more. Then to $1 million or more. It’s yet another slippery slope to an ever expanding tax.

“Well first of all, tell me: Is there some society you know that doesn’t run on greed? You think Russia doesn’t run on greed? You think China doesn’t run on greed? What is greed? Of course, none of us are greedy, it’s only the other fellow who’s greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by the free-enterprise system.”

~ Milton Friedman

 

If Elizabeth Warren and her comrades were truly interested in leveling the playing field and making a difference in the lives of people across America they would advocate for limited government and focus on a more robust free-enterprise system. The reality is that’s not what they are seeking.

This legislation is more about pandering to the Democrat base and low-information voters in a continuing concertive effort at fostering class warfare and animosity. By creating division through class and racial strife the Democrats see their path to decades of power. This is all about redistribution of wealth.

You can’t expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong. The entrepreneurs and visionaries create jobs. As businesses grow and expand they create further job opportunities and opportunities for ancillary businesses.

Warren’s legislation is an impractical and arbitrary scheme of leveling. It’s despotic and completely antithetical to our Constitution. In a sane Congress this legislation would find its way into the trash can. Given the current political situation in Washington that seems unlikely. Democrats are pushing forward on every one of their Marxist policies and insanity runs amok.

Continue Reading

News

What is the State of our Union?

… if the so-called President cannot deliver the State of the Union address?

Published

on

If Joe Biden gives a State of the Union address sometime this March, it will be late, based on precedence, but still in accordance with an 87-year tradition. All of which brings up the question: if Joe Biden does not deliver or cannot deliver a State of the Union address, is he truly the president?

In 38 days, he has not held a full press conference. Each of us who frequent Politicrossing and read the articles has known for quite a while that poor old Joe lacks the cognitive capability to handle the job. He is a mere puppet to a cabal of Leftists who want to irrevocably reshape America, and not in a good way.

So, the question arises, if Joe Biden does not deliver a State of the Union address this March, or, let’s say, even in February 2022, given that he lasts long enough, does anyone seriously believe he is the functioning president of the United States?

A President by any Other Name

If he does offer a State of the Union address this March, or next February, and he messes up terribly, as many of us suspect will happen, other than temporarily claiming the title, is he actually our president? If one lacks the capability to address the nation, with both houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court Justices in attendance, who exactly is leading our country? His handlers will claim, “COVID concerns.” Okay, then present to the camera in the East Room of the White House. “No” to that idea?

How long can the mainstream media continue to cover for him? How long can they avoid the issue altogether? If he does somehow manage to deliver the SOTU, how will the libstream media machine spew their propaganda when everyone, from all sides of the political spectrum, witnesses the undeniable elder abuse?

In other countries, Australia for one, Biden is not getting a free pass. “It’s clear to me at the least that U.S. President Joe Biden is struggling with dementia and is clearly not up to the task he’s been sworn in to do,” said Sky News host Cory Bernardi when asked to give his views of Biden’s performance in the early weeks of his administration.

Bernardi added, quite simply, “Never before has the leader of the Free World been so cognitively compromised.” What recognizable journalist or reporter among the mainstream media in the U.S. has said the same? Where are you Lester Holt, David Muir, Norah O’Donnell, Jake Tapper, Anderson Cooper, Brooke Baldwin, Wolf Blitzer, Jim Acosta, Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, ad infinitum? “Cat got your tongue?”

Is observation of the obvious too much for you to acknowledge?

No Surprise

The Democrats knew well in advance that Biden would not be able to continue for very long at the level required for the job. That never mattered to them. Joe Biden was nothing more than a vehicle for their side to gain power.

Whether or not you object to the way in which the election occurred, with the gross irregularities, the terrible reality is that a mentally unfit man and his unworthy vice president are in office, and other people are calling the shots, be they Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, Valerie Jarrett, John Brennan, George Soros, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, or whomever.

The 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution clarifies presidential succession if the president dies, resigns, or is removed from office. It establishes how and when the vice president becomes president. However, the vile Nancy Pelosi, and other plotters on the Left, might not need the 25th Amendment to remove Biden.

It’s likely that he, or his wife, or his greedy family, will do so themselves when it is apparent that his continuing on will be an embarrassment to everyone, most of all themselves.

Waiting in the Wings

Some people speculate that Nancy Pelosi’s true intent in relation to the 25th Amendment is to remove Kamala Harris, before she names a VP, should she ascend to the presidency. There’s plenty in Harris’ past to disqualify her.

Once both Biden and Harris are removed from office, guess who gets to be the president of the United States of America? That’s right: The person who so eagerly tore up President Trump’s brilliant State of the Union address in February of 2020, none other than the vindictive, power-crazed, authoritarian wannabe, Nancy Pelosi.

Continue Reading

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!
 
Send this to a friend