Monday, May 05, 2008

Do "progressives" have compassion for man kind?

If you are a "progressive" you've got to be pumped about the price of gas. Right?

After all, with the increase in gas prices, people will be forced to scale back their consumption; which will be good for the earth.

In addition, all the money people are spending on gas is less money people will spend on cheetos, steaks, and nachos and we know that's good for the environment, right?

But you know it has to burn up the butt's of "progressives" when corporations are getting the profits off of the increases instead of the government.

Three years ago, if Nancy Lollapelosi, had proposed a two dollar a gallon gasoline tax to slow down the consumption of oil, she would have been moved right into atheistic saint hood for her leadership.

But when the free markets do it, (see big oil and big food) there's hell to pay.

All this begs the question, how compassionate are "progressives" toward their fellow man.

Right now we have food being used as fuel, causing food riots around the world. Do you hear a "progressive" speaking out on the lunacy of this retarded ethanol policy? Nooooo.

There are a number of reports that indicate that maybe man made global warming isn't what it appears. Do you hear anything from "progressives" indicating the need to ease Kyoto targets because of the stress they add to the lifestyles of the poor? NOPE.

What about kicking in on the idea of using nuclear energy instead of burning coal for energy. Thus helping the air quality for asthmatics? Negative.

The truth is, despite the rhetoric, "progressives" have a true disdain for their fellow man. How else can you explain putting spotted owls in front of jobs for loggers? How else do you explain the insistence on an ethanol policy that now has people truly starving? How else can you explain support for a baby euthanasia policy when bearing a child just isn't convenient for the mother/society.

People can pick up on the cues. It's why a socialist like Obamania can't make any traction against The Billary; people can pick up on the antagonism true liberals have for their "small town, hick beliefs". They don't trust that he'll put people in front of the spotted owl or caribou, etc. After all, they know he'll want to look good in front of all those well healed "progressives" in Marin County.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Most of the oil profits go to dividend checks of small investors. Actually, the government profits more from high gas prices than the oil companies anyway. They are collecting more in tax from big oil than what is left over after taxes. Funny that we never have hearings on that.

And another point about another thing I never understood. Yes the oil companies might be making a windfall profit. And they pay tax on that. Why is this not considered a windfall profit tax?

Here's an interesting article:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1168.html

gordon gekko said...

Taxing profits in lieu of a per gallon add on is simply moving a dog turd from one pocket to another.... it's still in your pants.



you can actually read my post on government profits on oil at this post

http://taxmanblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/who-profits-from-oil.html