Tag Archives: Fairness

Video: children complain about Obama-style redistribution of their Hallowe’en candy

Canadian conservative Steven Crowder took this hidden camera video:

Story from Red Alert Politics: (H/T Bad Blue)

Fox News contributor Steven Crowder decided he would see how well children would take President Barack Obama’s redistribution of wealth idea when it was applied to their Halloween candy.

He went to a trick-or-treat tailgate and had children line up after they had collected their candy and Crowder redistributed it so that every child would have an equal amount.

Sure enough, they weren’t too thrilled.

“Dude that’s not cool,” said one upset child dressed as a baseball player. “It’s not fun to take people’s candy. This is my candy, I worked hard for it.”

Another little girl in a princess costume’s jaw dropped as Crowder dropped a handful of her candy in another child’s bag. She looked up to her parents in disbelief and near-tears as if to demand that they protest this injustice.

The video is an attempt to show the real effects of a popular Obama campaign point which is to, “make the rich pay their fair share,” or, in other words, redistribute the wealth of the rich to the poor, regardless of who earned the money in the first place.

“You just stole my candy,” yelled one kid dressed all in white who looked like he was ready for a fist-fight.

“Is that your costume? You didn’t make that shirt, you didn’t build that,” replied Crowder, referring to Obama’s famous quote where he told business owners that they owed something to the government because they didn’t build their own businesses.

“I’m gonna call the police!,” yelled another child who swarmed Crowder with a group of his friends who appeared to be getting aggressive. Some even tried to swat Crowder in the face.

To say the least, Crowder was far from popular that night, but his prank served its purpose. Redistribution, in the words of one angry trick-or-treater, “is just not fair.”

Hilarious! But the public schools will brainwash them to become little socialist zombies in due time. What else can we expect from unionized public school teachers but big government indoctrination?

Patients starving and dying of thirst in socialized NHS health care system

From the UK Telegraph, a story about government-run health care in the UK.

Excerpt:

Forty-three hospital patients starved to death last year and 111 died of thirst while being treated on wards, new figures disclose today.

The death toll was disclosed by the Government amid mounting concern over the dignity of patients on NHS wards.

They will also fuel concerns about care homes, as it was disclosed that eight people starved to death and 21 people died of thirst while in care.

Last night there were warnings that they must prompt action by the NHS and care home regulators to prevent further deaths among patients.

The Office for National Statistics figures also showed that:

  • as well as 43 people who starved to death, 287 people were recorded by doctors as being malnourished when they died in hospitals;
  • there were 558 cases where doctors recorded that a patient had died in a state of severe dehydration in hospitals;
  • 78 hospital and 39 care home patients were killed by bedsores, while a further 650 people who died had their presence noted on their death certificates;
  • 21,696 were recorded as suffering from septicemia when they died, a condition which experts say is most often associated with infected wounds.

The records, from the Office for National Statistics, follow a series of scandals of care of the elderly, with doctors forced to prescribe patients with drinking water or put them on drips to make sure they do not become severely dehydrated .

This is the problem with socialized medicine. You pay your money up front and then later on the government decides how much treatment you get. They have no reason to be nice to you – you already paid them. They don’t get paid more or less based on the quality of care they give you. You can’t get a refund on taxes paid. And where else can you go? It’s a single payer system.

Related posts

Landslide in North Carolina: traditional definition of marriage wins 61-39

Eastern United States Map
Eastern United States Map

The traditional definition of marriage was affirmed by North Carolina voters on Tuesday. The count was 61-39.

North Carolina approved a constitutional amendment Tuesday defining marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman, becoming the latest state to effectively slam the door shut on same-sex marriages.

With most of the precincts reporting Tuesday, unofficial returns showed the amendment passing with about 61 percent of the vote to 39 percent against. North Carolina is the 30th state to adopt such a ban on gay marriage.

Tami Fitzgerald, who heads the pro-amendment group Vote FOR Marriage NC, said she believes the initiative awoke a silent majority of more active voters in the future.

“I think it sends a message to the rest of the country that marriage is between one man and one woman,” Fitzgerald said at a celebration Tuesday night. “The whole point is simply that you don’t rewrite the nature of God’s design based on the demands of a group of adults.”

In the final days before the vote, members of President Barack Obama’s cabinet expressed support for gay marriage and former President Bill Clinton recorded phone messages urging voters to oppose the amendment.

The Obama administration opposes traditional marriage and instead favors gay marriage.

Notice that there is nothing in the amendment about banning anything:

Sec. 6. Marriage.
Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.

That’s something you hear in the leftist media, but this bill is no more a ban on gay marriage as it is a ban on polygamy. It simply affirms that the state will only recognize traditional marriages as valid. People can do whatever they want and live however they want. What they can’t do is force other people to call relationships that do not affirm the right of a child to have a mother and father “marriage”.

To understand why people oppose same-sex marriage, you can read my post from yesterday, in which I lay out 3 non-religious reasons to oppose gay marriage. In addition, my friend Melissa has another reason to support traditional marriage that Christians in particular will find compelling.