You don't have to look far in the New York Times to find liberal nonsense. In this case, writer Charles M. Blow attacks Rick Santorum for saying he doesn't favor income equality as a result.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/opinion/blow-santorum-exalts-inequality.html?ref=opinion
What Blow fails to address is that Santorum is all for equality of opportunity, just not equality of results. If you want equality of results then you have what they had in the Soviet Union; the doctor or the physicist lives in the same apartment building as the trash collector.
Apparently, that is what Blow wants. Let's say you hand out one million dollars to each of 100 people. Come back a year later and see how much money each has left. Some will have 1.5 million. Some will have .5 million. Some will have 20 bucks. That's life, Mr Blow. It has nothing to do with race or group identity. It all comes down to the individual.
Blow also has a problem with Santorum's belief that our rights are God-given as opposed to government-given. Here again, I side with Santorum. Any rights that the government gives you the government can take away. Even if you want to argue that there is no God, there are certain rights and freedoms in America that we believe are inalienable. Many of those rights, for example, religious and property rights, are under threat from the current administration.
Detroit? What can you say about Detroit? Here is another city, like many, that is showing the results of decades of one-party rule (Democrats). What has it brought to a once prosperous city? Corruption, financial collapse, dead neighborhoods and failed schools. Who do you want to blame that on?
And yee gads! Santorum only gave 1.8% to charity? It might sound cheap to you, but given he made over $923,000 (AGI), it still amounts to over $16,000. (Blow was probably hoping the reader wouldn't click the Washington Post link.)
Of course, attacks on Santorum are not unexpected. It continues to follow the pattern of whoever rises in the primary race, it's time to concentrate the attacks on that person-just as the mad-hatters at MSNBC are doing.
Now it's Santorum's turn in the barrel.
1 comment:
You're all wrong: the NYT, Santorum, and Fouse. Only I have sufficient grasp on reality and appropriate ethics to define these issues properly.
OK, here's how the game works: the next commenter says "You're all wrong: the NYT, Santorum, Fouse, and Jenkins. Only I have sufficient grasp..."
This can go on indefinitely. Opinion columns, even in the New York Times, are only someone who for some reason is PAID to spout his opinion. (Gary and I would love to get in on some of that action. So would Lance I bet.)
Gary added another layer of opinion. That doesn't leave much to argue about except "I don't think so."
Post a Comment