Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Some comments on Social Justice
Wow to some of the comments. First of all, there is no such thing as social justice. There can only be justice and there are only individuals. Society is a fictional imaginary thing. As for a social contract, there is none. I don't remember ever signing one. Do you?
It is the taxation itself that is the problem. Taxes destroy what they touch. If taxes were lower overall, then there would be more help for the poor because there would be more business and employment opportunities available.
Taxes just don't pay welfare; they also pay for the roads etc., so we all pay one way or another for the benefits of infrastructure that allows us to have a decent job and life to begin with, but we do not owe underprivileged non taxpayers a part of our paycheck for that.
They didn't build these roads, or train and hire police fire etc. That was by the producers -- the workers, innovators, etc. who did that, not the poor. Yes, we can help them. No doubt, someday we might be the homeless one, but it must be voluntary, not at the barrel of an air gun. --rose
Excuse me? Quit creating misconceptions about Islam. I
would appreciate that immensely.
Question to the students of Social Justice: Could you first define Social Injustice? Yes it does exist but the answer I usually get is "If you don't know it now you will never know!"
Then they walk away. Kind of tells the story.
To all students who think "social justice" does indeed require government involvement on all levels in order to take money from those who presumably have it, to give it to those who presumably need it via various taxation or mandated "fees", read well the Karl Marx quote: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
Then, after you have moved on from your studies and entered the real world of income earners, heads of households and possibly property owners of any kind (home, land, automobile), remember that quote and ask yourself: exactly how many things that you have worked so hard to gain are you willing give up, so that someone else who hasn't worked as hard (out of choice sometimes) can live like you?
Does social justice means that everyone should have equal rights, from richest to poorest? If it's like that, does that mean that the rich and the poor should have equal obligations too? Social justice is a term that i think is unattainable. You can't have equal rights and privileges for everybody, because everybody is different.
The civil rights movement was wonderful, in that it worked to free people from oppression and guarantee them equal rights. The suffrage movement was like that as well. The right to be treated equally under the law.
Yet the progressive income tax and various income redistribution schemes treat people unequally under the law, based on needs of individuals. This is a whole different thing, and is not social justice at all. The fact that all attempts at socialism and communism have failed, does not deter the "social justice" liberals from trying it again. It has always failed because people require incentives to work.
If a man receives the same for not working as the man who works, he is encouraged to become a parasite on the worker.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Karl Marx.
Social justice plain and simple, is government taking from one citizen to give to another to equalize their positions in life. The question has always been who decides? Which is why social justice is man playing God; unlike equal justice which treats every person equally under law with all people born with equal rights.
Social justice sees people as having only the rights that government distributes. The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is said to be a social justice document, is a totalitarian document because Article 29 Section 3 states that all rights are subject to UN goals. As with our Bill of Rights, every person is born with equal rights, which are not subject to any government goals; government is subject to protecting the equal rights that existed before government.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Thursday, November 22, 2012
NewsBusters Interview: Jason Mattera, Author of 'Obama Zombies'
By Lachlan Markay | March 30, 2010 | 18:04
0 0 Reddit0 0
Are young people completely in the tank for Barack Obama and the left? They voted for Obama over John McCain by a greater than 2-1 margin. Obama was young, cool, good looking, and well-spoken -- all the characteristics for a winning candidate in the eyes of the nation's youth.
But it was more than just Obama's charisma that handed him the youth vote in 2008. He was abetted by lapdogs in the press, reliably liberal pop-culture icons, and ultra-leftists in academia. Combined, they created a bloc of "Obama Zombies," writes Jason Mattera, author of a new book by that name.
Mattera was kind enough to give NewsBusters an interview. He described some of the themes of his book, including the incessantly liberal mainstream press -- "pre-pubescent little girls at a Jonas Brothers concert" is how he described the Obamaniacs in the press corps. NB's Steve Gutowski noted the book's tremendous assessment of media bias in his review yesterday.
"Obama Zombies" is the perfect primer for all conservatives worried about the movement's past troubles and hopefully brighter future with newly minted voters. Read the transcript of the interview below, or listen to the audio file here.
NEWSBUSTERS: I just wanted to start out asking you about something that Mediaite's Tommy Christopher said today. I think you've heard it, I thought I saw something on your Twitter feed. But just for our readers' sake, he said, "Aside from [Mattera's] ardent fans, I think most people will find his attack on funding for playgrounds pretty hollow, and his attack on breastfeeding just bizarre," obviously referring to your interview with Al Franken. He goes on to say, to compare you to ACORN scourge James O'Keefe, and says "Rather than search for the truth, both Mattera and O’Keefe seek to create truth. As entertainment, their value is open for debate. As journalism? Not so much." So I just thought I'd give you a chance to respond to that.
MATTERA: Tommy Christopher's a joke. Nobody reads him. It's probably him and his two moms. That's about it.
NB: Okay. Great. Moving on, that's kind of a perfect segue into your style of interviewing, and you've had some great bits recently with Steny Hoyer, asking him about having tax cheats write and enforce the ObamaCare bill, a good one with Bob Gibbs. So does that sort of style of interviewing, was that something that -- because I know you were very active with the college Republicans when you were in school -- was that something that started early in your career as a journalist?
MATTERA: You know, actively, or aggressively beating down liberal ideas and advancing conservative ideas did start on the college campus when I was in school. And that's just because political correctness is so sick, as any conservative will tell you. You have a liberal idea that you're just bombarded with. Conservative ideas are only given a forum when it's the students that take the initiative. So yeah, you've got to be aggressive in promoting it. So, the videography was just a natural fit.
For instance, we know it's nothing new, we have lapdogs in the mainstream media, who would rather cozy up to the cool campaign. They act like they are pre-pubescent little girls at a Jonas Brothers concert every time they're in a room with Obama or one of his minions. So therefore it's up to people like people, to people like you, the great sites that are out there, including NewsBusters, to keep the media accountable.
If Robert Gibbs is not going to be -- if Robert Gibbs is going to dodge question after question, or the media's just going to give him a pass. Same thing with Charlie Rangel. I mean, my goodness. Charlie Rangel. The fact that he is still a member of congress and has not resigned is a scandal of itself. Here's a man who has -- it seems every month there is a new ethics probe against him. And nothing. I mean, we know, if we just have a thought experiment, if there was an R next to his name, we'd see story after story.
Now, this translates into Obama Zombies in the fact that young people just are not up to speed about the activist nature of the media. So that's why people like me, people like you, will have to confront members of the media and expose their own corruption, their own fawning coverage, and in the process, expose political corruption. And hopefully young people not be -- will get rid of the zombie target that is on their foreheads, and realize that there is no such thing as objectivity any more. The mainstream media has declared war on conservatism, and is going to provide a base of support for liberal candidates.
NB: Well that has certainly become evident. You've also taken a more active approach to exposing the "Zombie" nature of so many young Obama supporters, well even before Obama. Before they were "Obama Zombies" they were still, I don't know, liberal zombies maybe. And I thought you could say a few words about the "Whites Only Scholarship."
MATTERA: Sure. It was a parody of racial preferences on the college campus, and liberals -- what's interesting is my university used to have an all student-wide email saying they have compiled a list of scholarships for students of color only, and I was on the email list because I'm Puerto Rican. I showed it to one of my buddies who was not on the list, he was Irish. He was just fuming mad, because he thought the university -- it was accurate -- the university was balkanizing people on the basis of their race, and he worked hard for his grades and why can't he have the same assistance?
So we said, let's parody the idea, let's have a scholarship just for white kids. We'll call it a "Students of Non-Color Scholarship," a caucasian scholarship. And it aint going to be big. It was something like 300 bucks. It maybe gets you a textbook on campus. But it was not for monetary reward. We knew