A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
George Bernard Shaw
2007-02-19 12:11:25 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
there isn't enough time or space to explain what is wrong with the liberal party...
2007-02-19 12:14:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 4⤋
A government that robs the lower 95% of it's population to engorge the upper 5% of the super wealthy is the Bush neo-conservative policy. A government for the rich, to enrich the rich by making those least able to afford it, pay for their elitist excess. Peter and Paul both take it in the neck from these vampires.
What's wrong with the liberal party is that we embarrass the bloodsuckers while they are feeding.
2007-02-19 12:26:10 · answer #2 · answered by blogbaba 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
“Don t expect to improve the weak
by tearing down the strong.”
- Calvin Coolidge
“I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you’ve earned,
but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.”
- Thomas Sowell
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent
the government from wasting the labors of the people
under the pretense of taking care of them."
- Thomas Jefferson
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually
run out of other people’s money.”
- Margaret Thatcher
When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.”
- Benjamin Franklin
"Anyone who would trade their freedom for safety
deserves neither freedom or safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
We were warned but idiots don t listen...
"I guess being enslaved and feed is MUCH BETTER than self reliant and dead!"
“Happiness belongs to the self-sufficient” Aristotle
"There s nobody who cares more about you than you, and there s nobody better to take care of you than you."
"Great ideology creates great times and unforunately we re not living in great times."
"We are now reaching a dangerous point where ideology is taking over from commonsense"
2015-07-09 05:08:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Kudos to your using a GBShaw quote, but to answer your question? No. All parties do that. The only difference is who gets to play Peter and who gets to play Paul. I'd rather *nobody* got robbed. But it seems *if* (and only if) someone must, we'd get a lot farther a lot faster by robbing from the rich to give to the poor. Just saying.
2007-02-19 12:25:58 · answer #4 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Rrriiiggghhhttt . . . . because libs were the ones to run the deficit up to the trillions. Yeah, I understand THAT logic.
2007-02-19 13:06:54 · answer #5 · answered by kungfufighting66 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
bad part,,peter will eventually run out of money
2007-02-19 12:32:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is what is wrong with government. No party has a monopoly on this philosophy.
2007-02-19 12:15:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Call it what it really is The American Communist party.The republicans are now the dem party and moving left
2007-02-19 12:16:09 · answer #8 · answered by bruce j 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Well put, another would be "never do today what you can put off til tomorrow."
2007-02-19 12:23:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are still back in the sixties at a love in,in the gay bay!
2007-02-19 12:14:55 · answer #10 · answered by Classic96 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋