‘How Can the Right Defend Greed?”

Posted on | September 20, 2011 | 19 Comments

MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts said the title quote while discussing President Obama’s speech yesterday:

This, of course, is how the debate on taxes, the deficit, the economy, etc will be framed from here on out – all the way up until the November 2012 elections, all in a repeat effort by our mainstream media to try to give Their Chosen Candidate four more years in office by way of shameless, unprecedented demagoguery and outright deception.

And this effort will probably fail. Despite the media’s rave reviews for Obama’s Fightin’ Liberal speech, their enthusiasm will likely prove short-lived. Most journalists are liberals, but they’re also motivated by a powerful herd instinct — natural-born bandwagon-jumpers. Their liberal bias won’t prevent them from abandoning a failure, because nobody wants to be on a loser’s bandwagon, and it is becoming increasingly clear that Obama is a loser.

What is killing Obama is not politics, but his own policies. The failure to revive the economy — and, indeed, Obama’s policies have made a bad economy worse — is the underlying cause of all Obama’s political woes, and no matter how much liberals praise his Fightin’ Liberal speech, it won’t do a damn thing to bring about economic growth. So they can attempt to “frame the debate” however they want, and the result will be the same: Obama’s unpopularity will continue to be the dominant political fact of the 2012 campaign.

So we return to Thomas Roberts’s question, “How can the right defend greed?” Here’s an answer: Herman Cain, millionaire businessman.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Category: Barack Obama, Economics, Herman Cain, MSNBC

Comments

19 Responses to “‘How Can the Right Defend Greed?””

JeffS
September 20th, 2011 @ 2:49 pm

Why do people insist on using the word “deception” when discussing the Lame Stream Media?

“Lie” is accurate and to the point.
Daily Pundit » How Can the Left Defend Theft?
September 20th, 2011 @ 10:59 am

[…] ‘How Can the Right Defend Greed?” : The Other McCain So we return to Thomas Roberts’s question, “How can the right defend greed?” […]
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 3:08 pm

Who are these right-wingers that defend greed? Ebenezer Scrooge and Gordon Gekko? In addition to being fictional characters, Scrooge was probably not much a civil libertarian, while Gekko would snatch up a “too big to fail” government bailout (or handout) faster than you can say Tim Geithner.

Meanwhile, in the real world, George Soros is the greediest little S.O.B. on the planet.
Bob Belvedere
September 20th, 2011 @ 3:43 pm

In many ways, Scrooge was right.
Bob Belvedere
September 20th, 2011 @ 3:45 pm

It’s at times like these that I miss Reverend Ike.

http://www.revike.org/whatis.asp
Joe
September 20th, 2011 @ 3:52 pm

Obama and the left are pretty greedy. For power.

I would much rather the guy who just wants to make more money than those creeps.
DaveO
September 20th, 2011 @ 4:16 pm

Simple: taxes on corporations are passed to the consumer. Consumers pay 100% of all taxes taken from corporations.

Simple: the wealthy park their money in durable goods, such as land, homes, and cars. Ted Turner, no one’s idea of a TEA Partier, is the largest owner of land outside of the federal government.

Simple: Warren Buffett’s company owes US$ 1Bn in taxes. While those taxes remain unpaid, Buffett is living off of the interest on that billion dollars; and using it to pay for influence inside the White House. This is direct pay for play and the Buffett Rule is the proof.

Simple: SCOAMF is a millionaire, and will remain a millionaire through speaking fees, book deals, and all those folks he enriched to the nth degree will always slip him a favorable loan, ready cash, or whatever as silence is worth more than gold.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

So according to this clown, wanting to keep some of the money one earns is greedy. However, Obama & government are not being greedy when they want to take more money from others? He must have been whacked with the stupid stick a lot as a child.
Matt Lewis
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:07 pm

Tomato, Tomahto….Self interest, Greed.

Again, letting the lunatics define the terms of the debate is a losing proposition.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:12 pm

Let’s call it what it is: the Copperheads are endorsing and defending slavery. Again.
Adjoran
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:16 pm

Who is Thomas Roberts and why should I care what the Junior Journ-O-Lister thinks?
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:32 pm

In my own little sphere of influence, at least, I try not to let the lunatics define the terms of debate, but as you know, they’re pigheaded creatures.

For example, I might point out that greed is a constant variable throughout human history; therefore, it is illogical to blame greed for causing something like the financial crisis. But they’re not usually impressed by logic.
Matt Lewis
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:35 pm

True. I usually try to get them to prove their point, rather than simply begging the question.

Or at least Socratically lead them into cognitive dissonance, which doesn’t usually change their mind, but is at least amusing to watch.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:37 pm

I roughly see the unredeemed Scrooge as having espoused a sort of proto-Social Darwinism, a doctrine that provided considerably more mileage for “progressivism” than it ever did for laissez-faire capitalism.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 6:43 pm

As long as half of the population doesn’t pay taxes and votes for politicians to give them money that they take from people who work to earn it, I don’t see why it’s the right that’s greedy.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 7:43 pm

A winning comeback to ‘defending greed’ is to say:

It’s not greed to want a job so that you can support your family.

It’s not greed to want a job so you don’t have to rely on government unemployment and welfare.

It IS GREED for the government to demand more and more money from taxpayers while it wastes more and more money.
Anonymous
September 20th, 2011 @ 8:01 pm

That video clip is actually self explanatory. If one can believe that the anarchists, palestinian supporters and other assorted nitwits, dingbats and socialists who occupied ‘Wall Street” are representative of “middle class anger” everything else they believe makes sense.

These clowns trying to get Obama reelected are truly dense, blinded by their own mythology. The polls indicate that Americans are are concerned about deficits and spending and see a connection between deficits and our poor economy and high unemployment and many feel that the wealthy should pay more in taxes. The Obamanites thinks that this means that we believe any method used to decrease the deficit will be popular. This conclusion is incorrect. While Americans might support higher taxes on Warren Buffet (who doesn’t) they also know that the problem is spending and vaguely regulation they don’t believe that raising taxes are good for the economy and certainly know higher taxes will harm job growth. Elitists shouldn’t attempt populism. They understand nothing about “the people”. They barely understand their people (the left).

The Republicans unfortunately are still in character. That the WH thinks that increasing taxes on business profits reported as personal income for individuals earning $200,000 is a good idea demonstrates how deluded they are and how addicted to class warfare. That single component of their proposal could present the most effective angle of attack. Instead we get Lindsey Graham miss stating the purpose of tax policy. The charge of class warfare is true and therefore a good angle of attack it would be even better if how this is class warfare is demonstrated.
Bob Belvedere
September 21st, 2011 @ 12:31 pm

One of the problems, gentlemen, is that we have let the Left expand the definition of ‘greed’ so broadly.
Bob Belvedere
September 21st, 2011 @ 12:33 pm

Whacked on a regular basis, it would seem.