Comment Of The Day (1): “Today’s Dobbs Leak Freakout Developments And Observations”

Keeping up with the Supreme Court draft Alito opinion Freakout and the other ethics offal flying around has put me seriously behind in posting deserving Comments of the Day. There are two related to the May 5 Freakout post alone; this is the first of them, a neat summary of the state of affairs in Woke World.

Here is sooner 8728’s Comment of the Day on the post, “Today’s Dobbs Leak Freakout Developments And Observations”…

***

If you notice, the far left’s policies are always about removing responsibility for bad decisions. You had reckless sex? Get rid of the baby. You didn’t pay your rent because you smoked pot and lost your job? Unemployment benefits. You don’t want to go back to work because you have an irrational fear of COVID-19? Let’s keep paying your rent. You committed a crime (and you are a minority), no jail time or possibly even a fine.

The test is too hard? Lower the standards. You can’t speak proper English? Attack proper English as elitist. Your culture teaches that it’s okay to beat your wife? Don’t judge other cultures who are different than you? There’s a dumbing down going on in this country. [Host’s Note: This process is what Ethics Alarms refers to as “The Great Stupid.”]

The only people they want to attack are powerful white men or anyone who is powerful and conservative, even if they aren’t white. Liberals used to celebrate success. They used to see a company like Apple or Microsoft and celebrate it. Once, the difference was between those who believed in a bigger social welfare state and those who didn’t. The difference today is between outright socialists and moderate conservatives.

Now, anyone who is rich had to cheat and exploit, and successful people are, almost by definition, to be despised and taxed to hell. Instead, celebrate “victims.” Whatever a society promotes as virtuous will become what people do. Since victims are considered the highest status today, victims will proliferate.

12 thoughts on “Comment Of The Day (1): “Today’s Dobbs Leak Freakout Developments And Observations”

  1. A telling response is to Senator Tim Scott’s proposal (which has not been endorsed by the GOP). Among other things he calls for everyone to pay at least something in taxes, to have some skin in the game even if it’s only a token amount. You would think that he was proposing genocide or some such thing. Personally I think it is a worthwhile idea to debate, although I’m not sure how it could be done.

    As a tax preparer, I see large numbers of people who get back big refunds without ever paying anything in — in effect, they have a negative income tax rate. Of course that is the tax policy that Congress has built over the past four decades (the earned income credit, which was the first of the refundable credits, started I believe with the Reagan tax reform bill in the 80s).

    • DG,
      Any chance that the refundable credits that began with the Reagan Tax Reform bill on the ’80s could have been a bit of horse trading with Speaker Tip O’Neill? Top, as I recall, threw many a roadblock down in front of Reagan.
      MB

      • Hmm, I’m glad you asked that question. I did a little more research and it turns out my memory was off a bit.

        The EITC was actually enacted in 1975 under Ford as a temporary measure (interestingly it appears at least partially to be a response to inflation), and made permanent in 1978 under Carter. The amounts back then were pretty small ($400 in 1978 — today it maxes out at close to $6k).

        What Reagan did was to expand it substantially and index it to inflation. And yes, it wouldn’t surprise me if that was something he negotiated with O’Neill — do we remember that back in the day politicians actually did deals and compromises. Congress has since made it steadily more generous (I don’t know the details). Last March with the American Rescue Plan, the Democrats had a field day with the EITC and many other tax credits. They got out their Paul Bunyon axes and cut down every money tree they could find. I’ve been agog more than once this tax season at just how much money they tossed into the tax hopper — but think about just how much money $1,900,000,000,000 is.

  2. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/equality-not-elitism/the-unbearable-rightness-of-being-a-democrat

    One of the writers we used to learn about in school, I forget who, said “Cogito, ergo sum,” I think, therefore I am. I think the new motto of the democratic party and the left is “Irascor, ergo recte,” I am angry, therefore I am right.

    It’s no longer about just avoiding responsibility, it’s about pressing down your own views and your own opinions on everyone else, and everyone else better get out of your way, because you’re angry and therefore any action you take is justified. You are offended by a statue? Yank it down, no permission needed. You disagree with what another organization stands for? Fire bomb their headquarters, no one will do anything about it. You don’t like the president? Assault the White House. You’re angry about some injustice visited on someone far away from your city, who you’ve never met, whose life does not affect yours in any way? Destroy downtown. It’s perfectly all right to kill others and destroy others’ lives just because you’re angry. In fact, some of them will even go to the media and beg that nothing be done to you because they understand just how angry you are. Anger is a free pass to anything.

    However, this only applies if you are on the left politically. If you are on the right, and you engage in any of this behavior you will be punished to the full extent the law allows and then some. Not only that, but your behavior will be used to justify abusing everyone else on the right who hasn’t done anything wrong by tying them to whatever you did and accusing them of being enablers.

    Frankly, when you look at this reasoning objectively, there’s really not a whole lot of difference between this and the thug tactics used by the Nazis or the Bolsheviks to destroy those who disagreed with them and bring everyone else into line. Actually, it’s right in line with the tactics used by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, where anyone who dared to disagree was simply taken out to the “killing fields” and clubbed to death with a pick or a hoe.

    Is it any wonder, then, that this latest crime against the leftist view of things by Supreme Court justices has led to using the same logic? If we don’t agree with what these justices are ruling, then we will make them rule another way, or we will visit violence and terror on them and on their families. It’s not our fault, it’s their fault for making us mad.

    Half raging two-year-old, half abusive spouse, with a generous noggin of hatred of everything, all cast together and painted red. This is by far the worst incarnation of the American left to come into being on these shores.

    • “It’s no longer about just avoiding responsibility, it’s about pressing down your own views and your own opinions on everyone else, and everyone else better get out of your way, because you’re angry and therefore any action you take is justified.”

      IMO, this is the result of the wildly successful “self-esteem” curricula and never being told no.

      When you’re up to your @$$ in alligators, it’s a distant memory that all you wanted to do was drain the swamp.

    • There’s this theory that the therapeutic model of life is now invading everywhere. The therapeutic model is not meant to be a moral arbiter. The therapeutic model is supposed to help people achieve internal balance, but the left believes the entire world should be their therapy room. Remember the New York Times and Tom Cotton’s op-ed? Triggered and crying employees.

      A large part of the left can’t debate principles anymore. They screech and yell and cry and attack people It kind of reminds me of toddlers having a fit. I don’t mean to sound so dismissive, but we can all see what’s happening with our own eyes. More traditional liberals like Bill Maher or Glenn Greenwald see it too.

  3. “Cogito, ergo sum” is Rene Descartes. He was trying to find an irrefutable ground for his Christian faith and did so by recognizing that his doubts were him thinking, and thus, “I think, therefore I am.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.