“I’m not a socialist.” You’re right – you're more dangerous than that.

Obama comes from a certain school of thought: The rich can afford to carry the poor on their back. He assumes that all they need is opportunity. Given opportunity, they will rise to the challenge and become happy, productive wage earners.

How naïve.

In my criminal practice, I had a young man say to me, “Why would I flip burgers at McD’s? Not only is it disgusting, I can earn more in a few hours of selling rock [crank cocaine] than I could in a month there.”

I recall another client. 18-year old kid. Literally round from obesity. Very poor family. I was, by the way, a federal public defender. They (mother and son) asked me to drive them home from court because the bus was too expensive. On the drive, she explained to me that she couldn’t work because she had “the sugar.” She was in her early 40s. There were no outward ill-effects of her diabetes. I asked – “No,” she responded, “I don’t need insulin. I just get dizzy sometimes.” They asked me to stop at McD’s for take-out. He ordered about $15 worth of food. For himself. It was more than the bus would have cost.

You think “opening the door to opportunity” is going change these lives? Are you that stupid?

He also thinks that entire industries can be removed from the economy. Even the smallest gear, Bambi, is integral to the system. Don't you understand that?

Let’s spread the wealth of some of Obama’s ideas.

2001 Radio Interview. The language of “redistribution.” Tells us SCOTUS must broaden its view of the role of government – must break free of the constraints of the Constitution. [Numbers (e.g., “40:10”) are the times spoken in the running transcript.]

“40:10 But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court it wasn’t that radical. 40:30 It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution. At least as it has been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it generally in the same way that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties. 40:43 Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf…”

January 2008. Will bankrupt coal-powered plants through carbon offsets. “Let me sort of describe my overall policy,” he said.

What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.

March 2008. Healthcare for everyone. Pay for it how? Through taxes increases.

The Obama campaign estimates his health care reform plan will cost between $50 and $65 billion a year when fully phased in. He assumes that it will be paid from savings in the system and from discontinuing the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 per year.

Of course, we have learned now that the $250,000 number is, um, flexible.

October 2008. Redistribution explained to Joe the Plunger Guy. It’s fair, he seems to be saying, to take from the rich and give to the poor.

"It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too.
Then, Obama explained his trickle-up theory of economics.

"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Yes, we could go on with more examples. No need.

Obama has a basic assumption in mind that is wrong. He thinks everyone wants to contribute. He thinks no one desires only to take.

It reflects his utter lack of experience and the degree of university poisoning of his mind.

What a simpleton he is in so many ways.