It's takers versus makers and these days the takers are winning

Glenn Harlan Reynolds | Columnists | Washington Examiner

excerpts:

• an important point of Sykes’ book is that moocher-culture isn’t limited to farmers or welfare queens
• If you spend $1 million on lobbying, and get a $1 billion subsidy from the government, that’s a thousand-fold return on your money
• as Margaret Thatcher once said, the problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money
• A federal government that actually operated within the limits intended by the Framers would be much smaller, much less capable of creating economic distortion, and much less attractive to moochers and the politicians they enable.
• Which would require a president interested in appointing justices with such views.

Comments:

That's why it isn't just class warfare to go after Romney.  He's too immersed in the moocher type of thinking.  I know, I know.  Gingrich's critics will point out his work at Fannie Mae or what have you.  But that is the pot calling the kettle black.  Did Romney ever really create anything himself?  Or was he just engaging in a bit of predatory capitalism?  And now he's engaging in predatory politics.  What's the difference between moocherism and what Romney did at Bain Capital?

Then it becomes a matter of us v them.  Romney and his supporters are turning the election into a personality thing, which is an outgrowth of that type of thinking.  Us, who favor capitalism- v them, who favor socialism.

Ronald Reagan once said that we are told that we have to choose between left or right, but the real choice is between tyranny and freedom.

Those who abuse power in order to gain advantage can come from both sides of the so-called political spectrum.  They'll base their politics upon personalities.  It will be us v them.  Not  tyranny v freedom.