The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘Community Organizing’ Properly Understood: Political Organized Crime

Posted on | September 2, 2011 | 17 Comments

There are two ways to get money: Honestly by hard work, or dishonestly through thievery and fraud. If you vote for politicians because they promise to give you money taken from taxpayers, you are practicing the politics of thievery.

We call it “corruption” or “bribery” when businesses give money to politicians in return for their support of legislative favoritism, but we call it “social justice” when Democrats promote programs that give money to voters who support Democrats:

Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote?
Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery.
Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals. It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country — which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote.

That startling passage by my buddy Matthew Vadum in The American Thinker has provoked head-exploding outrage from liberals, who are sure what he has written is evil, although they cannot deny it is true.

Vadum is the nation’s leading authority on ACORN, the Alinsky-inspired group that helped advance the career of our Community Organizer in Chief. His book is Subversion, Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers.

Category: ACORN, Books, Corruption, Democrats

Comments

17 Responses to “‘Community Organizing’ Properly Understood: Political Organized Crime”

  1. Beto Ochoa
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:11 am

    Did you ever notice that the more politicians that are elected by this bloc of voters, the worse their condition becomes?

  2. Rose
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:12 am

    Yep. Glad to see this getting publicized.

  3. Anonymous
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:21 am

    Matthew Vadum’s article is a must read, the reference to Nixon is yet another example of the fact he was no conservative and did as much if not more damage than LBJ.

  4. Adjoran
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:22 am

    It’s not shocking in that it is old news – Jefferson worried that the Republic would be doomed “once the people discover they can vote themselves monies from the public treasury.”

    What is shocking is that we are discussing it openly. 

    Al Sharptongue is gonna be calling us all racists.  Again.

  5. Mike
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:42 am

    And liberal heads explode…damn, if it were only literally true.

  6. Beto Ochoa
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:45 am

    The poorest I have ever been was when Nixon was president.
    I lived in a crate by the rail station and was glad to have it.
    My job did not pay enough for anything better. I was glad to have a can or two of tuna,  some crackers and a couple of apples per week.
    It was he and Kissinger who set in in motion the events we are dealing with today.

  7. Beto Ochoa
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:48 am

    They never clean up their own messes though.

  8. AngelaTC
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 3:14 am

    Not a Jefferson quote. More often attributed to Franklin, but not him either.  Likely Alexander Tyler, who wrote,” A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

  9. AngelaTC
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 3:20 am

    From the TPM comments: “So, to flip his argument: should the rich not be allowed to vote because they might vote for people who might help them with tax loopholes, tax breaks, etc??? I guess it’s okay for the rich to vote for congresspersons and senators to do their biding but it’s NOT okay for the poor. ”

    That’s the whole issue in a nutshell. Once we decided it was ok for the government to hand out money to people, we lost any real right to decide who should get it.    

    “Enterprise Zones.” Bah.

  10. Anonymous
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 4:07 am

    We used to have precisely that concept, embodied in the “pauper’s oath”: before you were given welfare, you had to swear you couldn’t support yourself and gave up your right to vote until you were self-supporting again.

  11. Anonymous
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 4:13 am

    I thought it was Tocqueville.

  12. Anonymous
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 4:39 am

    Follow em around with a canvas and call it art.

  13. ThePaganTemple
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 1:30 pm

    That’s why there’s laws against vote-buying, and anytime somebody promises you jack shit in return for your vote, that’s what it amounts to. It doesn’t always have to be about money or welfare, you’re not supposed to be voting for anything but who is qualified to be commander in chief and the nations chief executive. In Congress, its who best to represent your state and your district. “I, Me, Mine” isn’t supposed to come into it. But human nature being what it is, I guess it was only a matter of time, and that’s one of the reasons why we have this problem with constantly growing, expanding, and intrusive government. If government stuck to its original limitations and never ventured so much as one inch beyond that, we wouldn’t be having these problems.

  14. Anonymous
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 1:45 pm

    I always liked David Weber’s idea for his Star Kingdom of Manticore: How much have you received in direct payments from the government? If it’s less than what you paid in taxes (using a flat tax), you get to vote.

  15. JeffS
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 2:31 pm

    In this context, there’s another subgroup of people who get money dishonestly through thievery and fraud: government employees.

    Not all government employees, mind you.  But a significant percentage of them either view their job as an entitlement (and hence work at not working), or as a stepping stone to secure or even improve their personal incomes (empire building, corruption, etc).

    Such people go out of their way to ensure that the system favors their laziness and/or greed.  Including voting for public officials who think along similar lines. 

  16. DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » ‘Community Organizing’ Properly Understood: Political Organized Crime
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 3:38 pm

    […] The Other McCain turns over a rock. There are two ways to get money: Honestly by hard work, or dishonestly through thievery and fraud. If you vote for politicians because they promise to give you money taken from taxpayers, you are practicing the politics of thievery. […]

  17. DaveO
    September 3rd, 2011 @ 9:15 pm

    So we return to the arguments of what is a citizen, and what determines suffrage.