“No Martin O’Malley, the beauty of our country came from the radical ideas that WE individuals were sovereign and not some aristocracy (elected or born), that we were a nation of The Rule of Law where the Law was guided by and subject to our Constitution, and that WE The People make the decisions for how our lives are to be lived and not the Government turning the original relationship of service upside down to one of master.”
A couple of rough notes on his time with Josh McElveen:
His statement about lowering the cost of a college education gave me the impression seems to assumes that students are FORCED to take on debt. What about “No”? How about making OTHER choices – not every kid needs to go to college, ESPECIALLY if want they want to study is an economic loser (e.g., if you don’t get a job in academia, getting a degree in “gender studies” is non-functional economically). He seems to assume that kids are FORCED to act this way – but they are not. He never defines what a “mountain of debt” really is (just like with our interview yesterday at the CNHT Picnic yesterday where former VA Guv Jim Gilmore refused to define what “balanced” meant when we asked him about religious liberty in context of religious liberty enshrined in the Constitution vs mere ordinance or regulations of non-discrimination).
Lower interest rates on education loans? Thanks for reminding me in that how NICE and how EASY that would be since Obamacare also nationalized the student loans industry. and the Feds are now the bank. A wave of the pen and a click on the phone?
Automatically enrolled in income based repayment? Ah yes, yet another Federal program which might FORCE you to have to opt out – oh wait – a Fed loan; they can do what they want, huh? But again I ask, does that “strings attached” government mentality also come with one that says that you WILL be forced to pick a major that would lead to a career that has the possibility, you know, to pay it back? Else, this is just a way to make it even “free-er” to have all taxpayers pay YOUR tuition, regardless of the ramifications.
This too; OK, let me ask this with the notion that ALL colleges and universities MUST accept previous credits no matter from where it comes from. Let’s get real – while States may have a program that says students can transfer from community colleges to State Colleges and Universities, let’s acknowledge that not all schools and courses are equivalent. I remember when attending BU and running into some high school class friends that went to UMass Amhearst and we all were taking Organic Chemistry. I was quite shocked to learn that just after 1 semester (of this two semester course at both schools) that I had already completed in 1 semester the amount of material they would in two. This is going to work??
Completely green by 2050. I know I may sound “old fashioned”, given the absolute avoidance of what the President’s role is as outlined by the Constitution, but WHY is it the Prez’s role to complete kill off one industry to favor another? Yet another person who decides that just because they may inhabit the Oval Office, they can make such life altering decisions – arbitrarily? More importantly, when did we stop with the notion that we CITIZENS can no longer be allowed to make such free market decisions for ourselves and instead, , be subject to the whims of a single man (or lately, the EPA / DOE agencies) to make those decisions for us?
Just yet more Socialism in a bottle – Top-Down-Command-Control in the framing of “We know what is best for you than you do yourselves”? After all, given the policies and pronouncements from Democrats, I can’t see much of a difference between them and full-blown Socialists any more. And it is quite telling that one of O’Malley’s rivals IS an unabashed Socialist. They may talk about the GOP going right, but never talk about how much FURTHER the hard Socialist Left has taken the Democrats. And yes, we see Republicans following suit – moving Left, that is.
I can’t wait to see how it will work out on a night on the Northeast in February with no wind on or off-shore – where’s that baseload capacity gonna come from?
Taxes – And once again, we get that stealthy money grabbing phrase “…but I also believe taht we need to ask the wealthiest among us to do more” when asked about “investment”. I remind the Governor that “asking” does not mean what you want us to think it does; there IS no asking – at least tell the truth and tell people straight up that you WILL be taking their money from them and that if they don’t, they will suffer when the Government comes from it. Honesty, sir, honesty – there is none in your statement.
And I have reall problems with this nonsense statement “The beauty of our country is that the stronger we make her, the more she can give back to ourselves and to our children and to our grandchildren by way of opportunities“. It has been a while since I’ve heard a more idiotic statment berift of any logic. No Martin O’Malley, the beauty of our country came from the radical ideas that WE individuals were sovereign and not some aristocracy (elected or born), that we were a nation of The Rule of Law where the Law was guided by and subject to our Constitution, and that WE The People make the decisions for how our lives are to be lived and not the Government turning the original relationship of service upside down to one of master.
He said twice: “No great people ever cut their way to Prosperity” Well, been watching Greece much, there Guv? With all of the money they didn’t cut, with all of the money they “invested” that they didn’t have, shouldn’t we be welcoming them as the world’s newest superpower? This idea just stinks on ice and I’d love to understand why not letting people keep their OWN money (for the sake of THEIR children and grandchildren) instead of shoveling it out to be wasted on all kinds of programs is such a bad idea? Prosperity is not, as Gov Jindal said who followed O’Malley, measured by Government but by the prosperity of individuals. But, I guess, there’s that Collectivist thought again.
And you certainly hear one of those Progressive “tells’ throughout: You don’t deserve it and we know better than you how to spend it.
And he gets one right – our “discretionary” spending may be doing down, but nice try on trying to just skip out on the “mandatory side” (e.g., wealth redistribution) – yet another politician who refuses to acknowledge that what was created by law can be modified / deleted by law. They rhetorically throw their hands up into the air as if to say “What can I do? Nothing”. And “Nothing” is further than the truth – but with such an attitude, it is clear they wish to do nothing about it.
Oh, and on Greece, you have to love the line of “So to that end, I believe we should continue to exert pressure on the leaders of Europe to work out a settlement with Greece so that they can stay within the European Union and not be crushed by this debt.” It is rather ludicrious of him; they didn’t enact “austerity” to “cut their way to properity” – in order to get the money they needed (because they already spent billions of other EU’s peoples’ money in the first place), there were “strings attached” in order, not to gain prosperity, but to pay the money back. And you want to give them a pass, isn’t that essentially stealing other peoples’s money? Yay team – let’s take Greek Granny’s savings and throw it away! Oh, and not ONCE did he mention that the Greeks can retire at age 50 at a very hefty pension rate either – nicely done on not saying much on the other side of the ledger. Nor the taxes that the Greeks are infamous for avoiding. Nope, O’Malley outright wants the Germans to give more of some Hausfrau’s money instead.
Same sentiment with student debt – make other people pay for it. Hey, any conditions of not allowing a preschool Ed teacher to go to Princeton because of the debt they’d pile up?
Just like a Progressive in that HE is demanding that other people give their money to yet a third party. Hey, sport, how much are YOU forking over?
