Robin Hood is a heroic story of conservative principles, I’ve said that before on this blog.
Now the only real bright point of that Kevin Costner film that clip above is from is Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Nottingham. Especially his death scene.* It’s a crappy movie, but if you don’t judge my brain candy, I won’t judge you for that time you watched Jersey Shore.
The quality of the movie, or lack there of, isn’t the point of this post though.
You see, the Obama administration has effectively placed themselves as the Sheriff of Nottingham in America’s little version of Robin Hood.
They even threatened Christmas! What kind of monster does that?!
A new report from the National Economic Council and the Council of Economic Advisers timed to the online shopping holiday “cyber Monday” estimated that consumers could spend close to $200 billion less, while GDP growth could slow by 1.4 percentage points in 2013.
The report also warns that the psychological impact of a looming middle class tax hike could put a huge dent in retail sales over the holidays — traditionally the most important retail period of the year.
“Consumer confidence over the next several weeks is particularly important,” the report warns. “If Congress does not act on the president’s plan to extend tax cuts for the middle-class, it will be risking one of the key contributors to growth and jobs in our economy at the most important time of the year for retail stores.”
As Doug Powers said in his article on MichelleMalkin.com: Raise taxes on the rich or Christmas gets it!
The funny thing about this is that the article was published on Politico on the 26th, but on the 25th Politico reported that there was a “Record start for holiday season”.
It’s estimated that U.S. shoppers hit stores and websites at record numbers over the four-day Thanksgiving weekend, according to a survey released by the National Retail Federation on Sunday.
All told, a record 247 million shoppers visited stores and websites over the four-day weekend starting Thanksgiving, up 9.2 percent of last year, according to a survey of 4,000 shoppers that was conducted by research firm BIGinsight for the trade group. Americans spent more too: The average holiday shopper spent $423 over the entire weekend, up from $398. Total spending over the four-day weekend totaled $59.1 billion, up 12.8 percent from 2011.
Hmm…so which is it Obama? Is the looming fiscal cliff really going to effect consumers that much? Because it seems like it isn’t doing much at all.
I argue that is because the majority of American’s are morons, I’m certianly not out spending tons of money this Holiday season, but then again my argument is confirmed by Obama winning the election.
People are idiots and sales will continue to pull them in. They are spending MORE now than they were in years previous, which means your little threats that Christmas will be ruined if we don’t let you raise taxes, we’re not buying it Scrooge.
Stop threatening to call of Christmas and do your damn job.
I’m on Robin Hood’s side here. If you are going to raise my taxes, I’m probably not going to be spending much at all. You can’t spend my money better than I can, especially not in the Holiday season. A welfare check doesn’t mean quite as much as buying my sister that new Taylor Swift songbook** and it doesn’t look as nice when wrapped up under the tree.
*Because if there is one thing Alan Rickman is fantastic at, it’s overblown death scenes.
**Here’s hoping she doesn’t read this blog.
Foreign aid now comes with strings attached and that’s a good thing. So why is it wrong when domestic government aid comes with strings?
Britain and the United States have both decided that enough is enough. They aren’t going to be handing out anymore foreign aid to countries that ban homosexuality or do not adhere proper human rights in other cases. David Cameron, the Prime Minister of Great Britain says that aid should come with more strings attached.
“Britain is one of the premier aid givers in the world. We want to see countries that receive our aid adhering to proper human rights. We are saying that is one of the things that determines our aid policy, and there have been particularly bad examples where we have taken action.”
And in the United States
“I am deeply concerned by the violence and discrimination targeting LGBT persons around the world,” Obama said in a memorandum. “Whether it is passing laws that criminalize LGBT status, beating citizens simply for joining peaceful LGBT pride celebrations or killing men, women and children for their perceived sexual orientation.”
Obama said, “I am directing all agencies engaged abroad to ensure that U.S. diplomacy and foreign assistance promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons.”
Much to my chagrin, I have to say that if Obama actually enforces this plan, I’ll have to applaud his actions. We can’t give money to countries that are doing things we disapprove of. It would be like continuously giving out free money to people who are only going to spend it on drugs and not on bettering themselves.
Of course I would be a little happier if Obama had decided that any violations of human rights would be enough to nix foreign aid for a country, similar to David Cameron’s plan. Making it only about issues discrimination and violence toward the GLBT community just seems a bit like he is ignoring all the other violation’s of human rights that happen all over the world that have nothing to do with homosexuality.
Liberals are, of course, very excited about this move on both country’s parts. Most of the Conservatives I know are also pleased and if they aren’t, they should just remember something that The Conservative New Ager said to me a couple of days ago. If America is only giving aid to countries that don’t discriminate against against homosexuals, then the countries we give aid too will shrink drastically (good for the deficit) in fact the number will probably shrink down to only 1…Israel.
Of course there is something ironic about Liberals being okay with, even excited about, financial aid coming with more strings attached. Remember that comment I made about giving money to someone so they could just spend it on drugs? Yeah, you may not have read this post I wrote in June, but give it a read really fast.
Liberals were in an uproar about how wrong it was to give people drug tests before they could qualify for welfare. Isn’t that basically the same thing as telling other countries to shape up or we won’t give them money? America and Britain don’t want to subsidize the violence and bigotry of other nations, I think we can all agree that is great. So why is it suddenly wrong when the tax payer’s of America don’t want to subsidize someone’s illegal drug habit?
Laws for the GOP to pass: A cheaper, healthier alternative to food stamps (via The Conservative New Ager)
I’m a terrible procrastinater when it comes to packing for a move. I will say “I’m going to pack today” and then I’ll find myself on the other side of town, at Starbucks, reading Atlas Shrugged until 8pm. I don’t plan to procrastinate, but it always seems to happen.
Today I managed to put it off until after 3 in the afternoon. I still have two weeks until my lease is up, which is amazing for me really…when I moved into this apartment I packed everything in the space of a single evening…the night before I moved.
The other problem I have is that I am a packrat of the absolute worst kind. I inherited the problem from my mother and her mother before her. When packing starts we always say “we are going to get rid of all the stuff we don’t need!” only we don’t specify what we don’t need, so my mother finds herself saying “I know I haven’t worn this purple polyester pants suit in nearly a decade, but you never know when I might need it again!” and into the box it goes. Or my grandmother who has dozens of years worth of Better Homes and Gardens and other magazines and can’t bring herself to throw them out because she really just loves the articles.
When I moved into this apartment, space wasn’t an issue for me, time was. So I threw absolutely every single one of my possessions into boxes without even considering what was important or not. Considering I was moving out of a two bedroom apartment where I was sharing a room and bathroom and closet with my teenage sister and the rest of the apartment with my parents, it wasn’t like I had too much stuff for a one bedroom, one bath apartment of my own.
In fact, my apartment looked a little bare. So I went shopping with my mother. We went to a used furniture place and picked up an art easel that turned into an interesting table in the living room and bought a dining room set. I went through my parent’s storage unit and took a love seat and end table and a massive dresser that was gathering dust in the corner from lack of use.
I was given extra room and I expanded to fill it. That’s what people usually do. We don’t really think about the future. I wasn’t even considering the possibility that I might have to pare down the amount of possessions I had in a year so that I could move into a dorm room.
But now I’m facing that problem and I can’t afford to be a packrat anymore. I’m axing some of the sentimental stuff that I’ve kept for years and throwing out and giving away clothing that I kept because “You never know when I might need it/it might come back into style.” (I feel the need to note that plaid dress pants have never been in style in my era, and are not likely to come back, and the fact that a pair were even in my closet is mildly scary. I think my mother’s closet is trying to migrate to mine.)
And you know what, it’s sad, because some of things that I’m having to give away or put in storage for a year or so are things that I really like having around. My dresser is, arguably, my favorite piece of furniture. Real wood, great workmanship, but it’s huge and would take up way to much space in my dorm room so it can’t come with me.
I think we can all say this same thing about this country’s budget. There are a lot of nice things in it that we wish we could keep, but we just don’t have room for right now because they aren’t necessary (like my dresser and bedside table and couch and…*sob*) and there is a lot of crap that we just need to get rid of because saying “you never know when we’ll need it again” is not a good excuse for spending billions of dollars to keep it. (like the 20 pairs of shoes, pants and shirts that I through out while I packing my closet up. That was just scary.)