taxed enough already
Keynesian Economics, and Why It Fails
Keynesian economics. You’ve probably heard the phrase before; it’s usually touted by liberals as the ultimate example of perfected economic policy. My college professor explained that Keynesian economics is the idea that the government should spend extra money when the economy is down in order to stimulate it, then cut back on spending when the economy is good. FDR used this model with his New Deal programs, as has the current president with his 2009 Stimulus Program (though both without ever cutting back on spending).
Well my 18-year-old brain was essentially mush at the time I entered college–not completely, but just about. I bought this ideology hook, line, and sinker…then. Now after 4 years of my own study in the school of common sense I’ve realized that my beloved college professor left half the story out of the lecture. The only way that government has any money is by taking it out of the private sector with the down economy, thereby making the problem worse. Certainly large government picks and chooses who gets the money as it sees fit, but it cannot produce more money–only a thriving private sector can do that.
With all this talk of governments spending money, Keynesian economics begins to sound very much like redistribution of wealth (see theft). Well here’s the bombshell: it is. Keynesian economics follows the same idea that the government knows how best to spend money, and if it can only spend enough it will eventually stimulate a struggling economy. The big problem is that government spending has the exact opposite effect, dragging a slow economy into a worse and worse state. So it really doesn’t matter if you call it Keynesian, or redistribution, or Marxism–they all have the same economically destructive effect.
Hilarious: Glenn Beck Show Baby Talk
Reagan Vs. Obama – Social Economics 101
How to Talk to a Liberal: Redistribution of Wealth
Living in California most of my life has given me the opportunity to witness liberalism first hand in some of the most tragic ways. High taxes, manipulative policies, special favors for illegal aliens–you name it, we’ve got it. Liberals have left no stone unturned in finding new ways to legislate, regulate, and utterly ruin the lives of the average citizen every time they come in contact with a government run entity.
You’d think I’d one day get used to this kind of ideology–but no! California liberals never cease to amaze me at how ready they are to take your money and spend it on foolish, fraud filled programs. Take Chad for instance (real name withheld for privacy concerns). Chad believes that middle class families should be paying for his life as a college student. Their money should be taken from them and redistributed to those who do not make as much, if any at all.
This is all well and good if you’re Chad the starving college student who never worked a 40 hour week in his life. However, the best way to respond to this liberal (Marxist) nonsense is to set up the scenario in terms that he can understand. What if Chad got an assignment from his liberal college professor, and he worked REALLY hard on it for weeks on end to get it done. And what if Chad turned in the assignment and got an A, but when the teacher handed it back he said, “Chad, I know you got an A on this assignment, but I don’t think that it’s fair to the other people that didn’t work as hard and got lower grades. I think we’re going to have spread your grade around and just have everyone get a C.”
How does redistribution feel now Chad? Not so good when you’re the one having the earnings from YOUR hard work taken from you, does it? The way I always look at this Marxist ideology is not via the myth of taking from the rich and giving to the poor, but by looking at redistribution of wealth as what it really is: theft.
So Sick #LOTR
Was Hitler a Christian?
Christianity is often used as an excuse for bad behavior. Look at how Nancy Pelosi calls 
upon her Catholic “faith” to justify forcing churches to provide contraception, when Catholic doctrine specifically teaches the exact opposite. The popular belief is to call oneself a Christian and then define it as whatever pleases you or pushes your agenda in order to justify your actions.
Hitler called himself a Christian, despite Nazi philosophy being deeply rooted in the occult (Google swastika).
“I say: My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. .. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison.” -Hitler
Hitler’s words are rebutted by Romans 1:16, “For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, first to the Jew then to the Gentile.” However, this and other such statements lead some (especially those looking to do damage to Believers) to preach that Hitler was a Christian. However, one cannot be a Christian simply by calling yourself a Christian, quoting the Bible, or talking about God. Even Satan quoted the Bible (Matt 4), so by that logic are we to believe that he is a Christian too?
Holocaust Memorial: Berlin
A Christian is defined as someone who follows Christ, meaning someone who has admitted that they are a sinner (Romans 3:23), believes Jesus died to pay for their penalty caused by sin (Romans 6:23), and has confessed and asked him to forgive you (Romans 10:9-10). The result of this is salvation and a deep desire behave as Christ did while on earth. Any other additional doctrine is antithetical to the Bible and not defined as true Christianity.
The Best of Mark Levin: Mark Messes With Idiot Caller While He eats!
Think Before You Tweet
One night I was perusing through the #iHateItWhenPeople hashtag and I noticed this gem of a tweet from a self proclaimed liberal.
I would just like to ask my dear friend Jesse if he took the time to read my bio in which I describe myself as a Christian conservative (among other things), would the first thing that came to his mind be a stereotype? Do you think of a sheltered, home schooled girl still wet behind the ears that “clings to God and guns?” Well it turns out that Jesse (from NorCal) actually believes in a few stereotypes as well, demonstrated in a previously retweeted post.
This retweet clearly expresses the false stereotype that prolifers only care about unborn children, and don’t give a rip about what happens to them after they are born. Perhaps by retweeting this false stereotype of cruelty and heartlessness Jesse was trying to explain to us why we shouldn’t believe media narratives or political caricatures–or perhaps not. It’s unfortunate that the same people that cry against bigotry only seem to desire open-mindedness for opinions that they agree with, while stereotyping those they do not.
WarriorWoman91 