"A cruel debate opponent" "Pagan blasphemer" "Reverse-iconoclast" "don't get pissed at him b/c he pwn yalls whiney asses"
My Photo
Location: Indiana, United States

Miscellaneous meanderings and philosophical ramblings. The title from a spiral notebook I used to jot down my thoughts on religion and other matters some years ago. I like to write, think and express my views on various issues. Robust discussion is welcome.

Chris of Rights and Charles Martin <-- Lists of debunked Sarah Palin rumors

"Lan astaslem."
I will not submit. I will not surrender.
Choose your language: Francais/French Deutsch/German Italiano/Italian Portugues/Portuguese Espanol/Spanish 日本語/Japanese 한국어/Korean 中文(简体)/Chinese Simplified

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

The SOTU address - some questions

Imagine the uproar over an investment manager that refused to allow his clients to remove their money from a fund they felt was under-performing. Judging from the Demoncrap's hooting and hollering at the SOTU address, over stopping Social Security reform, so far, I have to wonder if they would be throwing parties for such an individual.  As such, I have a few more questions to ask. 

Would they shake his hand if he said no, you do not understand the risks of the market?

Would they give eloquent champagne toasts to a fund manager who even denied the client allocating only a portion of these investments as he saw fit?

Would they praise him, if while he prevented his client from investing his own money as he saw fit, this fund manager was also running up huge debts and covering them with his clients investments and leaving only "guarantees" of payment in their place, by way of nifty accounting tricks?

Would Howard "howling" Dean let loose with a hearty YEAARGH! in approval of such a fund manager? 


Would Ted Kennedy move his sodden mass of flesh to deliver a toast between *hiccups* to an investment adviser who treated his clients with such contempt?


Would Hillary! put on makeup and trust her cattle futures profits to such an investment manager? 


I think the answers to these questions are obvious. That the Demoncraps would be so foolish as to cheer at their preventing reform of Social Security is laughable and instructive. They look down on regular Americans who are unable to trade influence and cash under the table or who have never charged exorbitant lawyers fees to fund their lavish lifestyle while pretending to be for ordinary folk. They prefer that we be locked in a Ponzi scheme retirement fund that they would not tolerate any businessman forcing on their employees or clients. Well, maybe for enough campaign contributions, especially if it creates more busy work for their lawyer friends. Three cheers to the first Conservative, Republican or Libertarian for that matter, who will have the balls to take their jeers of derision and shove them right back down their gaping mouths with a campaign ad that replays their hypocrisy in a nice repetitive loop. Hopefully Howling Howie won't strangle a kitty before his head explodes.


Be sure to check out the following blogs:

The Real Ugly American has a Mid Week Open Trackback Post
third world county has a SOTU/OTA Wednesday
Adam's blog has The 20,000 Visit Drawing Midweek Open Trackbacks Party
Mudville Gazette has an Open Post
Jo's Cafe has a Hump Day Specials post

Tags: , , ,

Trackback URI                             Submit this post on! width=                     View blog reactions
<< Home

Click for Latest Posts

Creative Commons License

As defined and limited by the license, any use of work from this blog, must be attributed to Mark K. Sprengel and include a link back to this blog.

Get updates by e-mail:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Widgetize! Subscribe Social Bookmark Blogs that link here
My Technorati profile

Also, follow me on Twitter

Search this blog:

powered by Aditya

Recent Comments: