No one has done more for the candidates on the left than the president on the right. His failures have emboldened all of the left’s socialist causes.
Hillary Clinton is running for president to bring to the White House the voices of the victims of a “wasteful capitalistic system:”
“Simply put, since 2001, our economy has failed the shared prosperity test, and we need decisive, experienced leadership to get us back on the right track.”
To her credit, at least, she claims to relate across cultures to “tune-in” on their needs:
“If we listen to the voices of the American people, we can find a common ground on solutions to provide economic security, fight poverty, and move toward balanced budgets.”
Has she no knowledge of life before 1993? Does she not understand the ingredients of socioeconomic success of the Reagan administration? Does she not know that her economic proposals violate those ingredients and replicate the mistakes of both Bush administrations (increasing taxes, G.H.W.) and uncontrolled spending (W.)?
The other thing about listening is the way Clinton listens. This is no open-ended “Get, Give & Merge Images” session. This is adversarial, take-sides, “Ends Justify the Means” ideology conceived by Clinton’s guru, Saul Alinsky, a Communist Ideologist.
So anyone trained in the Alinsky Approach will listen for key words that signal “Relate or Manipulate.” Carefully guarded, probably in one of the vaults at Wellsley University is Clinton’s Senior Thesis extolling the virtues of her guru: “There is Only the Fight… An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.”
What is so sad is that Clinton does not confess to her immaturity in choosing this simplistic guru.
In this context, Clinton eschews measures of economic success as “dry statistics:”
“Rather, success means an economy that allows those at the bottom to work their way into the middle class, without pushing anyone out.”
Does she not know the data from the last decade?! In one decade, 91 percent of wage earners have risen from the bottom five percent into the lower middle class!!!
Nowhere have the failures of the current Bush administration “teed up the ball” for the democrats more than Clinton’s now-standardized social proposals—health care, education, job creation.
Clinton’s advisors seem to assume that there is a one-to-one correspondence in transferring funding from the War Chest to the Domestic Chest. (Check it out: They will be lucky to obtain ten cents on the dollar!)
Clinton assumes that rescinding “the tax cuts for the wealthy” will enrich the treasury. (Check it out: The top 20% pay over 86% of the taxes.)
Perhaps the greatest failure of Clinton’s proposals is the neglect of the entrepreneurs who historically drove the American Free Enterprise System. (Once again, the Bush administration’s sponsorship of Multinational Corporations has already severely wounded American-style entrepreneurial-driven capitalism.)
While paying passing attention to controlling waste and corruption and restoring fiscal responsibility, Clinton neglects the taxation, regulation, and starvation (of risk capital) of entrepreneurs. (Check it out: Entrepreneurs account for well over 80% of all innovations as well as a similar percentage of new job creation.)
In summary, we may view the Freedom Scores for Clinton in Table 2. She is rated as follows:
- Independent in relating indicates that she can choose to be cooperative or competitive (3.0).
- Authoritarian in governance reflects the “We Know What’s Good for You” of “Momma Governance!” (2.0).
- Command in enterprise reflects the Command-and-Control Economic Systems of benefits-driven enterprise (2.0).
TABLE 2: Freedom Scores for Clinton
Overall, Clinton’s Average or Mean Freedom Score is 2.3, rounded off to “2.” She is dedicated to accomplishing social good through Authoritarian Governance and Command-and-Control Economics empowered by Cooperative Cultural Relating.
To return to the Socialism versus Capitalism theme:
- A well-run Socialist System (Clinton) is probably as good as a poorly run Capitalist System (Bush).
- Even a well-run Socialist System requires the generation of the wealth that it is distributing.
That is the caveat in “The Clinton System:”
“We cannot share what we did not create!”