Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Thursday, May 31. 2007

QQQ

"Not since I was 16 have I wanted so badly to be on my own."

Powerline's Scott Johnson, in response to Hillary Clinton's statement this week: "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society."

How is that as a contrast to the earlier QQQ today from our hero Maggie Thatcher in 1980? 

Posted by The News Junkie in Quotidian Quotable Quote (QQQ) at 18:47 | Comments (10) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

"Every man for himself" sounds positively high-minded compared to this scary "shared responsibility" ideal. Maybe Hill means the electorate bears its share of the blame for Bill's philandering and her sixties indelibly forged Marxism.

"Shared prosperity" has got to be a euphemism for Robin Hood bureaucracy and policy. Leave it to Hillary to promote men in tights.
#1 Richard Morris on 2007-05-31 20:52 (Reply)
The thing to remember about Robin Hood is that he was a criminal.
#2 NJSoldier on 2007-05-31 21:27 (Reply)
and not a "merry" activist?
#3 Rich Morris on 2007-05-31 21:51 (Reply)
Ultimately, a good point, NJS. Even though I myself have, since an early age, always rebelled against 'the man' no matter the tightness of his pants. Does it depend on who specifically fills that role, or does it matter? When exactly does the juvenile urge for change disappear? At nearly 60 I'm still kinda working that out. Cynical I suppose. Ultimate authority should always be greeted with skepticism, least in my feeble mind, earthbound and all. Don't mean too sound snarky, just always curious.
#4 Luther McLeod on 2007-05-31 22:04 (Reply)
well, she's spent many years near Nodding Ham.
#5 buddy larsen on 2007-05-31 22:05 (Reply)
Dang. I always hated that nodding porker. I was like Simon in Lord of the Flies going along with everything that swine said, and it said it was all good. It wasn't...let me tell you. Listen to your gut. When it says 'move away from the pig', do it.
.
#6 Cowgirl by the Ham on 2007-05-31 22:16 (Reply)
Strange, but I wrote this yesterday based on a similar post on another blog:

"...we're all in this together." The problem with this grand philosophy is that eventually people stop caring. There is no incentive to rise up. Entrepreneurship, innovation and creativity are products of individualism and freedom. They'd be killed in this kind of 'we' crap.

And the fact is - people are not equal. That's not PC to say, but egalitarianism is a dream that eventually turns into a nightmare of discontent. I sure as hell do not want my hard work shared with some slug who is too stupid or lazy to do a thing. That's the way it is with human nature, and denying one of human nature's most base instincts - to get ahead on one's own power - is a guarantee of trouble. When people are realistic and truthful, they know no society can exist without an underclass, a middle class and an upper class. The ideal would be to have a benevolent upper class, and when you come right down to it, America is pretty close to that as we make no bones about class and disdain any pretense of it. Now Hilary wants to change all that..... right. What a moron. THEN America WILL develop class warfare.

Posted by: Phoenix | 05/30/2007 at 08:34 PM
.
#7 Phoenix on 2007-05-31 22:20 (Reply)
That's what she wants, tho. It won't be an accident. Marxism needs it for its "historical inevitability" promise.
#8 buddy larsen on 2007-05-31 22:26 (Reply)
Clinton: "time to reject the idea of an "on your own" society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society.""
Pelosi: warned that if elected speaker, she will immediately move to scrap tax cuts in favor of restoring taxation levels to that of the Clinton era.” Details will have to be worked out, she emphasized ominously. “We must share the benefits of our wealth.”

Pres. George Bush: "The momentum of today's prosperity began in the 1980s — with sound money, deregulation, the opening of global trade and a 25 percent tax cut. Along the way we have confirmed some truths and discarded some dogmas. Government can be an ally of enterprise — by creating an environment that rewards work and inspires investment. But government does not create wealth. Wealth is the economic measure of human creativity and enterprise."

No difference between the two Party's? I've found it frustrating talking to people at work about this. None of the younger people have read enough history to recognize the socialist/Marxist didactic coming out of these peoples mouths.
#9 John on 2007-06-01 10:09 (Reply)
She's a dangerous skirt. Until the mythology of the New Deal, the war on poverty, 'market failure', and benign statism is finally laid to rest, our nation's 'tommorrow's' will always be troubled by bad choices between lesser evils.
#10 Tom C., Stamford,Ct. on 2007-06-02 10:32 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.