What's the limit on confiscation?

Jack 99

New member
Got this from www.boortz.com. Good read. Excellent question I'm sure will never be answered. Interesting that the Socialists don't bother to even lie about it anymore, they freely and openly admit they are after wealth redistribution. Not too long ago, they hid the actual agenda:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A QUESTION FOR AL GORE

Excuse me. Mr. Vice President, but would you mind if I asked you a simple little question? It’s important, really, and I think a
lot of people would be interested in your answer. I really wouldn’t bother you, but I know there’s absolutely no chance in hell
that any member of the national press corps is going to ask this question … so maybe you’ll answer it for me. It will just take
a moment, I promise.

Yesterday morning I was talking to Doug Hadaway. You know him, he’s the national spokesperson for your presidential
campaign. We were talking about your Retirement Savings Plus plan .. the one you announced Tuesday.

Mr. Hadaway admitted that, under your plan, certain people would be getting checks from the government to put into their own
individual retirements savings accounts. Actually, after some questioning, he admitted that the money from these checks would
come from taxpayers. I asked him if this was an entitlement program. He said it was. I then asked him if this was income
redistribution. He said it was. At least he was honest, right? You certainly wouldn’t want dishonest people working in your
campaign. After all, look what it did for your boss.

Anyway … I was just wondering … since you seem to feel that income redistribution is OK; that it’s OK to take some money
away from one taxpayer and give it to someone else, could you just tell me what you believe the limit is?

I’ll tell you why this is bothering me. I just can’t find anywhere in our Constitution where it says that it’s a proper function of
government to take money away from one person who earned it and then just give that money to a person who did not. You,
however, think that’s OK. So, Mr. Gore, what’s the limit? That’s all I want to know --- what do you think the limit should
be? Just how much of one person’s earnings do you think the government should be able to seize and just simply give it to
someone else?

Do you think that it would be OK for the government to seize one percent of a person’s income to redistribute? Is that too
much? If one percent is OK, how about two percent? Would that be OK too?

I just think we have a bit of a problem here, Mr. Gore, and I want to know just how deep it goes. Your Retirement Savings
Plus program gives someone out there a right – and entitlement – to some of the money that I am working for today. That
person gets to enforce their right using the police powers of the government ---- so it’s not something that I can just refuse. So
--- what’s the limit?

I know that I have to pay some taxes to pay for the legitimate functions of government …. Military, courts, roads and all that
stuff. But how much liability do I have to pad the retirement accounts of complete strangers?

I think you owe this to the hard-working high-achievers in our society, Mr. Gore. On the one hand you’re telling them that you
are going to take money away from them and give it to other people so that they can save it for their retirement. Don’t you
think that you should tell us just how bad this could get?

So … is it one percent of the money I work for? Two percent? Five percent? What is it? What is the absolute maximum
amount of my earnings that you think the government should be permitted to redistribute. And once you set a limit, how can I
be sure that you won’t go back and raise that limit if you see it will bring you or your party more votes in a future election?

I know you’re not looking for my vote in this election, Mr. Gore. But you are wanting to use my money to buy votes from
those precious low and middle income folks you’re always fawning over. Just let me know how hard you’re going to hit me.

What’s the official government limit on plunder, Mr. Gore?

AND FOR YOU LEFTIST MEDIA TYPES OUT THERE …..

….. just why in the hell won’t one of YOU spineless wimps out there ask him that question for me? As if I didn’t already
know the answer to THAT one.

WHAT'S IN A NAME?
Just a bit more …..

Just why did Al Gore name his little income redistribution plan “Retirement Savings Plus?”

Gore's initial choice was "Social Security Plus."

Gore soon received a letter from Newt Gingrich. It seems Gore had borrowed
the name of Newt's own plan that he had created in 1998. Gingrich subsequently trademarked the name in 1999 and set up a
Web site to promote the idea. Wrote Newt, "I had no idea when we began this organization that I would one day count the
Vice President amongst my supporters. I hope that your attempt to use the name I created is more successful than your
previous attempts to prove you invented the Internet, discovered Love Canal, were the inspiration for Love Story, hand built
the U.S. economy, are addicted to iced tea, wrote stories that had criminals thrown in jail, were a co-signer of the
McCain/Feingold bill or know how to manage rental property. I'm sure it will be."

You will note that Gore's plan is no longer named "Social Security Plus." Soon after he received Gingrich's letter, Gore
changed the name of the program to "Retirement Savings Plus."
Sounds like one of his campaign staffers didn't do their homework.

Read the entire text of Newt's letter at http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2000/6/21/163720

THOSE GUN-TOTING BLACK PANTHERS

The story of the rifle-wielding Black Panthers and their march in Houston last Friday doesn't end there.

To recap: The Black Panthers are angry that their brother, Gary Graham, is set to be executed in Texas. So last Friday, they
pulled up to the state Republican convention in a stretch Humvee and got out, carrying assault rifles and shotguns, for a protest.
No arrests were made. Texas law permits open carrying of guns as long as the people carrying them aren't convicted felons
and they don't point the weapons at anyone. (How the Houston police determined that none of the Panthers were felons is
beyond me.)

The Panthers' information minister, Quanell X, told Fox News Channel last night that his people will be armed and ready for a
"gunfight" with the Ku Klux Klan at the site of Graham's execution, which is slated for today. Quanell X claimed that he had
information that an armed group of Klan members intended to travel to the state prison in Livingston to show their support for
Graham's execution.

Them's fighting words...but since they're coming from a liberal group of minority activists, it's okay. If a conservative group had
marched with their arms in Houston, this story would have made national headlines—and called for swift punishment of those
involved.

Quanell X wasn't finished with Fox News. He took time to lambaste George W.
Bush. X said, "I believe that George Bush is a racist white man. In fact, he's the biggest killer of black men here in Texas.
George Bush has put more black men to death than any other nation on earth."

Whoa! Call the historians! George W. Bush is the new Adolf Hitler! Forget the dictators of African nations who slaughter
their enemies left and right. Dubya's body count surpasses them all! And Quanell X has the statistics to back it up...right?

Probably not...but hey, it sounds good on TV.
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2000/6/21/233537

TODAY'S LESSON IN GOVERNMENT

This flap over rising gasoline prices shows us exactly what liberals are made of.
Consider, if you will, Al Gore's words yesterday. He blamed "big oil" companies for engaging in profiteering. Then EPA chief
Carol Browner insisted that it wasn't the government's fault and continued to accuse the oil companies of price gouging.

Republicans, on the other hand, say the EPA and its tighter regulations must accept partial responsibility for the higher gas
prices.

Basically, the government is saying, "Blame those fat-cat bastards at the oil companies. They're the source of your pain! You
have a right to cheap gasoline. Let us pummel the oil companies for a while. And as for the EPA...it's a part of the
government. Why would your government want to hurt you?"

Remember--to liberals, it's so much easier to blame other people for your problems. But … you should NEVER NEVER
NEVER blame government.

This situation is no different.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/default-2000622231344.htm http://www.washtimes.com/business/default-2000622231721.htm

ANOTHER REASON TO OWN A GUN FOR SELF-DEFENSE
Ladies, if this story doesn't convince you to own a gun for protection, then I don't know what will.

Philadelphia's police department conducted a review of sexual-assault cases in recent years. They found that more than 2,000
cases were improperly classified. Of those 2,000, about half were reinvestigated--and nearly all of them were found to involve
serious crimes.

Among those 1,000 serious cases were 346 rapes. Those rapes had been written off by investigators and shelved. Hundreds
more of these cases are expected to turn up once the review is complete.

Police Commissioner John Timoney summed it up: "There were some women who were raped, subjected to some kind of a
sexual crime, that the police treated at the least improperly, probably unprofessionally, and probably in a god-awful manner."

Bottom line: At least 346 women in Philadelphia haven't gotten justice. In Atlanta, there was a brouhaha a couple of years ago
over the police department's cooking of statistics to make Atlanta appear safer than it really is.

Betcha there wouldn't have been 346 unsolved rape cases if more of those women owned and carried guns.

But that's more personal responsibility than your benevolent federal government wants you to take.
http://web.philly.com/content/inquirer/2000/06/21/front_page/PRAPE21.htm

------------------
"Put a rifle in the hands of a Subject, and he immediately becomes a Citizen." -- Jeff Cooper

"The fact is that the average man's love of liberty is nine-tenths imaginary, exactly like his love of sense, justice and truth. He is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. Liberty is not a thing for the great masses of men. It is the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority, like knowledge, courage and honor. It takes a special sort of man to understand and enjoy liberty - and he is usually an outlaw in democratic societies." -- H.L. Mencken, February 12, 1923, Baltimore Evening Sun

"If God had not wanted them to be sheared, he would not have made them sheep." -- Bad guy from the Magnificent Seven.

"Don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blow." -- Bob Dylan

"This is This" -- Robert DeNiro as "Michael" in THE DEER HUNTER
 
Back
Top