Yellow Dog [Part 15]

Marx wrote [regarding the charitable giving of Bill Gates]: “Mr. Gates isn’t doing any of THAT "giving", that’s his wife driving the charity, there was a Rolling Stone interview with the two of them a couple months ago and HE said he wouldn’t do it if his wife wasn’t the driving force.”


Marx,

Strange. Really strange. I thought people like you really appreciate humble people, people who credit others for their own achievements. Do you know the U.S. Congress actually declared some day [I don’t remember which day] a National Day of Humiliation! Christ! Right here in the United States...a national day of g-damn humiliation. The altruists love to see all of the little humans on their knees...all weak and desperate, helpless and needy. How the leftists hate the arrogant President Bush. Make up your mind! Do you want people to humbly give all the credit to their brother-men [or their wife] or do you want them to tell the truth and say “I’m a heck of a good guy?”

What you just read is actually my argument #2. My first argument would be: Bill Gates’ fortune is the moral result of his creative undertakings. He earned his fortune by his own effort. He deserves every penny of it, and as I have already said, we could never pay him enough for what he accomplished. Think of the trillions of dollars other people have made using his software. By rights, we should all be paying him a percentage! If Bill Gates did not give one dime of his money away he would be no less moral. Giving it all away wouldn’t make him more moral, either. Whether or not a person is living a moral life has nothing to do with how they spend their money...everything to do with how they acquire it. Gates’ wealth is the product of his genius. He can do with it whatever he wants.

Donn

[For some reason Marx decided to completely change the subject.]

Donn,

I understand that you say you’re not a Republican and I understand you keep saying you’re a laissez faire capitalist but you keep defending them and, at the same time, keep saying you’re not one of them. Reagan did a lot of damage. We survived even though we were well on our way to bankruptcy. Thank god Clinton managed to turn it around and, strangely, he did it by raising taxes on the top 1%. The Supply-Siders ALL screamed the economy would crash and burn and, surprise, it not only DIDN’T do that, it was one of the most profitable times in our history. Our economy reacts well to us paying off our bills. He streamlined the military and actually reduced the size of the Federal Government while reforming Welfare from a "way of life" to a "safety net." He did what all conservatives swear up and down they WANT to do but they couldn’t wait to tear him down. You SAY you’re a fiscal conservative but then why don’t you just adore Clinton?

We SOOOOOOOO overacted to 9-11. We let GW force the Patriot Act on us and that’s practically a fascist bill. It strips so many of our rights away. The man can listen to my phone calls, read my emails, sneak peaks into my home and search my stuff without a search warrant. What about Presidential Directive #51? Does it bother you that Bush gave the presidency the power to suspend elections and seize dictatorial powers? Do you realize that I actually held my breath when McCain said he was "suspending his campaign"? He started the department of Homeland Security, the biggest growth of our federal Government since FDR. The shocking thing is, I STILL hear Republicans calling Dems proponents of big government when they’ve grown it bigger than anyone I’ve seen in my lifetime. Its not about the size of government, it’s about the efficiency. Look how efficient FEMA worked under Clinton and what a disaster it was under GW. Reps complain at how inefficient government is and then work their best to make it so. I'd rather have Clinton and his mistresses then Bush screwing all of us.

Basically, I’ve said it before and I'll say it again. In order for our country to compete in today’s world, we need to take anything that works from any ideology. I COMPLETELY disagree with the Neocon concept of the "Unitary Executive." That’s for EITHER side. No one seems to realize what the terrorists REALLY want. THEY are winning. They wanted to financially BREAK this country, the way they BROKE the USSR in Afghanistan. Take a look around you, they’re winning. They were HOPING and praying we'd invade Afghanistan or Iraq and break our financial back and end our world financial domination. They NEVER thought they could invade and capture the US of A. They NEVER thought they could come here and do more than the occasional act of terrorism. They wanted us to react JUST the way we acted. INVADE, WAR, WAR, WAR!!!! They whole "Patriot Act" thing was never what they wanted, that was all Republican propaganda, telling people they were afraid of our freedoms and then, proceed to STRIP us of our freedoms .. it was SOOOO 1984, war is peace, peace is war, white is black, black is white. Mind you, they LOVED that we subjected Americans to this indignity but THAT was never in their plans. They got what they wanted, they got us involved in a war we couldn’t afford with a nebulous enemy we could never see. The truth is, or MY truth is, Clinton was ALWAYS 100% correct, terrorism is a Law Enforcement issue. Worldwide, the CORRECT answer was to work with Interpol and give them more power to find those murderous criminals because, they’re NOT just in Afghanistan or Iraq, they’re EVERYWHERE!!!

Marx