Did Barack "Spread the Wealth" Obama Just Blow the Election?

Back to blog

tramadol hydrochlorothiazide

ZOOpFf I bookmarked this link. Thank you for good job!

tramadol hydrochlorothiazide of AZ @ Aug 02, 2009 15:53:26 PM

cialis 5 mg

ovk0PL Incredible site!

cialis 5 mg of NE @ Aug 02, 2009 13:49:44 PM

no erection viagra

5L4Jx8 I want to say - thank you for this!

no erection viagra of KS @ Aug 02, 2009 00:05:12 AM

Asjgxias

iVzcXF

Asjgxias of WA @ Jul 14, 2009 08:19:02 AM

Spreading The Wealth

I thought the "Spread The Wealth" statement, by Obama, was so unusual that I wrote a song about it, found two other people to record thir own versions of the song, and put together a contest.

It's all at http://www.SpreadTheWealthUSA.info.

Keep on helping Paris Hilton to spread some wealth!

Swamp Water Films of FL @ Feb 11, 2009 13:35:20 PM

Post-election

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Jessica Wilson @ Nov 23, 2008 11:50:31 AM

Blowing the Election

Yes, he sure did blow the election. You are so smart.

of @ Nov 10, 2008 15:55:29 PM

I Have an Idea

Sen. Obama can fulfill his Marxists dreams by doing thus:

Ensure that NOBODY makes more than 200,000 per year. (See, having more is just plain evil) By instituting such a law the US government can take the extra millions earned and re-distribute it to those earning lower income or to those earning nothing. People like:

Angelina Jolie- 14 mil per year

Jennifer Aniston 27 mil

David Letterman 45 mil

Jay leno 32 "

Miley Cyrus 25 "

Cameron Diaz 50 mil

Make a law that money earned over 200,000 per year will be spread to those less fortuntae and from JUST these 6 entertainers Sen. Obama will have 191,800,000 each year to re-distribute to those less fortunate. Can you imagine the extra money brought in from NBA, MLB and NFL stars? How about corporation owners? Let's just end poverty as we know it. NOBODY takes home over 200,000. That's fair. ISn't it? I mean , who NEEDS more than that?

Uncle Spike of MI @ Nov 04, 2008 07:57:08 AM

I Have an Idea

Sen. Obama can fulfill his Marxists dreams by doing thus:

Ensure that NOBODY makes more than 200,000 per year. (See, having more is just plain evil) By instituting such a law the US government can take the extra millions earned and re-distribute it to those earning lower income or to those earning nothing. People like:

Angelina Jolie- 14 mil per year

Jennifer Aniston 27 mil

David Letterman 45 mil

Jay leno 32 "

Miley Cyrus 25 "

Cameron Diaz 50 mil

Make a law that money earned over 200,000 per year will be spread to those less fortuntae and from JUST these 6 entertainers Sen. Obama will have 191,800,000 each year to re-distribute to those less fortunate. Can you imagine the extra money brought in from NBA, MLB and NFL stars? How about corporation owners? Let's just end poverty as we know it. NOBODY takes home over 200,000. That's fair. ISn't it? I mean , who NEEDS more than that?

Uncle Spike of MI @ Nov 04, 2008 07:55:38 AM

Mao would be laughing in his coffin

"Sharing the weath?!" Well, that's nothing new! Almost a century ago, Mao and his radical group made this slogan to millions of poor Chinese peasants as he was smart enough to know that 80% of population were peasants and thus, he could control the country easily if he motivated them. He succeeded a few decades later and forced all landlords and others who had some properties to "share" except his own palace and giant salary! As a Chinese immigrant, I can't help telling that this whole theme reminds me too much of what Chinese went thru in the past century.

Well, Mao certainly wasn't the first in the world. Maxism and Leninism were ahead of him. Nevertheless, building up a wealthy community with everyone having a fair share and getting same pay and living happily thereafter is not a bad fantacy. If I recall correctly, Max started his fantacy while he was hungry in a cold winter... This is probably why Russians and Chinese bought those theories and fantacies to try it out. Well, we have seen the result. Ironically, China is getting better in its economy because they imitate our capitalism in the past couple of decades. The problem of such fantacy is that it against human nature and the system will kill people's motivations to compete. I am not saying that we shouldn't help those who are disabled and can't make it, but we shouldn't punish those who work so hard and sacrificed in various ways in their lives.

Do we need to follow others' dust blindly just because we don't like W's administration?! Think again! I hope my fellow people here are smart enough not to be fooled easily by some fancy words and short vision.

cbalus of DC @ Nov 01, 2008 12:47:40 PM

Back to blog

Add Your Thoughts
About You
Capital Commerce

Capital Commerce

U.S. News business reporter Matthew Bandyk examines the issues, people, and debates that shape the nexus of political and economic life in the nation's capital.

advertisement

advertisement

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

A weekly insider's guide to politics and policy — in a multimedia, digital format. 52 issues for $19.95!

U.S. News & World Report

6 months of U.S. News & World Report's print edition for only $15. Save up to 67% off the cover price!