Cracking The Obama Agenda

I believe I've figured out a key to President Obama's philosophy and, subsequently, his agenda. And I'm convinced it's ultimately the agenda of people like Reid and Pelosi...and our sorry excuse for a Representative, Ciro Rodriguez.

Barrack Obama's father wrote an article in which he said that you could conceivably tax the people for 100% of their income as long as you provided commensurate services via the government collecting the tax. I believe this is precisely the perception of Obama and the Progressives. I will call this the Allowance Doctrine.

What do I mean by Allowance Doctrine? Think about it, using the words of Obama and others like him. He and they have actually said that you can have too much wealth, that you can make "plenty" of money. Now, this assumes that someone decides what enough is. Once you reach that mysterious amount, anything more than that would, it follows, more than enough. Now, if there is enough and if there is too much, then it's logical to assume that Obama and his kind believe there is a threshold for not enough. It has clearly been Obama's agenda, as well as that of the rest of the Progressives, increase the confiscatory taxation of those who are past enough so that the elitists can "spread the wealth" (Obama's own words) to those who are in the not enough category.

I contend that getting and keeping everyone in between the not enough and the more than enough thresholds. This, my friends, would be your Allowance. You are allowed to keep x amount. In fact, in the Progressive's utopia, all of us would work for the government and not actually keep money, but rather simply receive goods, services or credits for the things we need. You would work in factories or other jobs producing the goods and services that the government elites decide are needed and, naturally, good for us. You can already see this happening. We had a pretty thriving incandescent bulb industry going until suddenly the Progressives decided that poisoning the earth with the hazardous waste from florescent bulbs was somehow better than the energy we used with incandescent ones and, with a swipe of a pen, essentially killed an entire industry. There are more examples, of course. But this is simply an example of gradually setting the stage for the move toward the Allowance Doctrine.

Look at the minimum wage. What you have constantly heard from the Progressives is that the minimum wage must be increased because it's not a "living wage". It was never meant to be a living wage. It was meant to create a fair starting point for paying simple labor so that they weren't, for all intents and purposes, slaves. But what the Progressives have decided is that it should represent what you can raise a family on. This, to anyone with any sense at all, is ridiculous. You weren't meant to raise a family flipping burgers. That's not a career, it's not a profession. But the minimum wage is simply one more mechanism to give you an indication where the not enough threshold fits in the Allowance Doctrine.

Now, I could spend pages going on to explain how health care, abortion and a number of other hot button issues also fit into this doctrine...and perhaps in a later post I will. But for now chew on what I've said and see if you don't recognize some other signs of the doctrine.