Keep her out of my chain-of-command

If she becomes President, I won't be writing negative things about her...but she ain't in my chain-of-command yet!

I got to see most of the Democrat debate today when it was replayed on CNN. While most of what was said just generated a rolling of the eyes on my part, there was one particular thing that Sen. Clinton said that really made my blood boil.

When touting her economic ideas she said we have to get rid of the "wasteful tax cuts" that the Bush administration has put in place. To call tax cuts "wasteful" is very illustrative of Mrs. Clinton's ideology.

What makes me so mad is that this shows that she thinks our money is not our money. Well, I beg to differ with that! Every cent that the Federal Government has originates from the citizens of this country. Washington does not earn; it only spends. While Congress spends as much as it possibly can and spends more every year than that year before, one thing it cannot spend is a tax cut. A tax cut is the government NOT taking earnings from its citizens. This cannot be an expense. It is not taking what belongs to the citizens, not spending something that the government has already. Yet Senator Clinton's ideology is that all the money is the Government's and the Government has the right to do with it what it wants. It's about the "equitable distribution of wealth" (something else I find repugnant). She wants to TAKE the profits of companies and give that money to social programs and people who aren't earning their own money. This kind of arrogance makes me want to vomit! How dare she (or Obama for that matter) tell us that the money we earn is theirs to with as they please. this is why the federal government needs to be limited in its scope. It must retain the right to tax (and not abuse it) because there are legitimate functions it must fund...like a military:) The job of the Federal Government is to protect, not provide for its citizens. If it provides anything, it should only be the freedom for which so many have died. The best way it can do this for its citizens is be STAYING OUT OF OUR LIVES. God forbid the day ever come that a President of the United States of America tells the man on the street that he has to go see the doctor, or else! When did people start accepting the premise that this is a legitimate role of government? I reject it completely. I don't need anyone to tell me when or where to go to the doctor. (Different topic though)

I digress...

Additionally, I find it personally offensive that Senator Clinton would say that government has "wasted" something by not taking more of our money. Now, if she were to read this I'm sure she would say that she meant it's wasteful because it gives tax breaks to people who earn more than should or who earn too much or who earn more than they need. Well, I intend to be one of those people in not too many years and I reject the punishment of the successful for the rewarding of those who either earn less or are too lazy to earn at all. Do you doubt that there are those among us who do not earn, but are happy to take what's given to them by the government? Do you doubt that there are those who could work who don't? One reminder on that "if any man will not work, neither let him eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10
When I'm running with my soldiers I tell them that if they want to run as fast as I am that they have to catch up to where I am because it won't help them run faster if I slow down so they can catch me. This plays into the theme at hand. If we want to help those who are financially lagging in our economy, we won't do it by holding back those who are earning more than they do. Taking 40% of what Peter earns and giving it to Paul doesn't mean that Paul is earning 40% more than he was before. At best, it's a theft of Peter to give a gift to Paul.

Now, lest this criticism of Mrs. Clinton be construed as support for Sen. Obama, let me dispel that notion right now. Senator Obama is just as liberal as Clinton, but this post was sparked by what she said specifically. There may be things to respond to in the future regarding Obama, but I'll leave it for another time.

...sigh
Is there a conservative leader anywhere in Washington?