CONGRESSMAN TRICKS BUDGET EXPERT INTO ADMITTING LOVE OF MARXISM …
U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) has let his hair grow out a little bit, but he’s still the same establishment ball-buster we’ve come to know and love over the last few years.
If you’re a backer of big government, Mulvaney is – quite simply – the very last person you want to encounter at a congressional hearing (which the head of the U.S. Federal Housing Administration found out the hard way last fall).
Slice, dice, put ’em on ice … that’s how Mulvaney rolls.
His latest victim? Liberal budget analyst Dr. Jared Bernstein of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, who appeared at a U.S. House committee on financial services panel discussion this week to testify on issues associated with the federal government’s $17.5 trillion debt.
Mulvaney addressed Bernstein following his testimony, and right out of the gate it got very good …
“You and I don’t agree on many things,” Mulvaney told Bernstein. “As someone who is trained in economics – not in music and social welfare as you were – to hear your comments on economics is sort of like listening to somebody scratch a blackboard.”
Mulvaney then offered up this doozy on the utter pointlessness of holding congressional hearings on the debt (an observation capably reinforced by the largely vacant hearing room in which this discussion took place).
“I wonder: Does it really make a difference? Are we really accomplishing anything?” Mulvaney asks. “We’re sitting here today we’re trying to make our points, the other side’s trying to make their points and … we’re not going to fix this. We’re not going to fix this.”
“We have a leader in the White House who refuses to engage,” Mulvaney said.
Of course the best part of the exchange occurred when Mulvaney finally got around to addressing a question to Bernstein.
“If I utter the phrase to you, ‘from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs,’ would you look upon that generally favorably or generally unfavorably?” Mulvaney asked.
“Generally favorably,” Bernstein responded.
Ah yes …
For those of you unfamiliar with this particular phrase, “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” originated in 1851 with French socialist Louis Blanc but was popularized a quarter century later by German communist Karl Marx – who invoked it as the ideal of his fully developed communist society.
So yeah … Mulvaney just got this liberal economist to admit he’s a Marxist.
Looking at the video, not only was the audience disinterested in little Mulvaney’s grandstanding but neither were his fellow Congressmen.
Where the heck are all the Democrats coming from in here? Whine,cheat, steal and break the country is all you folks understand!
Democrats? What has commenting on a phony like Mulvaney got to do with party affiliation?
I do not watch him as closely as I did when he was first elected because he is no linger my Congressman but I voted for him to unseat Spratt before he was changed by realignment to another Congressional District and I personally think he is conservative enough for me and there are no longer any conservative Democrats in Congress. All of the Democrats voted for the so called ACA.
They are the stay at homers who don’t work and wait on their welfare checks.
also missing is the history lesson of the Mayflower compact’s economics which were in essence “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” which is socialist, sexist and in practice a FAIL!
But for those studied in music, dope smoking and social welfare; Santayna holds true, they must repeat the history they didn’t learn the first time.
I wish to express my admiration for Dr. Bernstein. At least he admits his communists views. Many in government have them but understand it is not advantageous to acknowledge it.
There’s lots of Marxists in power/elected, most are just not as generally honest as Bernstein.
Most progressives run away from their Marxist roots as well. Few want to be called a Marxist, even if it’s true. Kudos to Bernstein for being honest, assuming of course he knew that the original of the phrase.
Just like most Republicans don’t want to admit they are fascists.
Both labels are usually inter-related as well. If Mulvaney is such a “limited government” champion, why has he voted “yes” on EVERY continuing appropriations bill that hit the House since last July?
He’s a hypocrite, just like the rest of them.
“assuming of course he knew the origin of the phrase”
You sound like a Democrat to me!
You sound like an idiot to me.
Most honest,God fearing people sound that way to Democrats!
Dude, you gotta go back to 2011 to find an appropriations bill ole Mulvaney voted “no” on…lol…he’s a real piece of work.
He also sponsored a bill to raise the debt cieling too. He’s got some big brass balls to be talking about deficits, debt, etc. in light of his own voting record.
Yeh but he SAYS hes against all that stuff.Thats all SC Republicans care about.
As long as you talk the talk?The walk isnt important.
Mulvaney is a douche bag, typical of the representation SC has in DC.
No surprise there.
“From each according to his ability”
…is exactly how taxes are figured out. It’s why we don’t pay a flat tax amount, we pay percentages. Percentages of our income, percentages of what we buy, percentages of what our property is valued at. Income tax even has multiple brackets, so that people who make barely anything aren’t taxed at the same rate as people who make decent money, and people who make decent money aren’t taxed at the same rate as the absolute wealthiest.
“To each according to his need”
…is exactly why we have any welfare programs whatsoever. Food stamps that keep poor people from starving, WIC to make sure babies get formula, Social Security and Medicare to make sure old people don’t die in abject poverty, Medicaid to make sure children and old, poor invalids are able to get medical care. Those who don’t “need” this buy their own shit.
There are varying levels to which you can take such a philosophy, up to Communism itself, which I think a vast majority of people disagree with. But the system we have fits this philosophy, at least to some degree. If that makes us Communist, then why were we ever afraid of Cuba/China/USSR to begin with?
All of this is really just silly.
Only Smirks can take a single sentence that describes Marxism perfectly and turn it unnecessarily into a grad student lecture to freshman in a mid level state university poly sci class, so that it says nothing more substantial yet consumes more time than needed.
You just posted an excellent example of that…….
Could have been worse, I could have made it Smirks length.
You’ve reminded me of this one
“Senator Bluster, what’s the election today for?”
“Well, it is to determine whether we shall have a convention to nominate delegates who will be voted on as to whether they will attend a caucus which will decide whether we shall have a primary to determine whether the people want to vote on this same question again next year.”
Here are a few oldies
“My father was just itching for a political office.”
“Did he get over it?”
“Yep. They scratched him at the polls.”
“My father was a great politician in his day.”
“Oh, yeah, what did he run for?”
“The state line!”
“What would be the best way to raise revenue and
still benefit the people?”
“Taxevery political speech made in this country.”
people who make decent money aren’t taxed at the same rate as the absolute wealthiest.
This part isn’t true and hasn’t been for awhile. The Billionaire pays the same rate on his next dollar, as someone with a small fraction of the same total income.
Not exactly commissar, We have a tax system that brackets your income based on earnings, not ability and a social support system that addresses “perceived need” vice genuine need. Obama’s two idiot picks for the SCUS suggested to a major corporation today that they should drop their employer sponsored health care program and let their employees get the coverage “they want” via ACA. A better idea would to have kept all those people off the government sponsored dole and let those who didn’t like the policy of the company go find another job.
Blue describes the liberal.
Not unless they are interchangeable with Mulvanity.
Social Security is paid into via my payroll taxes, as according to “my ability” to do so (a percentage of what I make up to a certain point). Retired people receive that money, as per “their needs.” Medicare is much the same way, I pay into it, old people take out of it. Ideally when I get old and gray, that program should be available for me and other Americans who have worked for decades.
So liking Medicare and Social Security, or at least holding those programs in a “favorable” view, makes one a Communist as well I suppose? This will go well with the old white conservative base that the GOP relies on! lol…
The funny part is that we’re going away from such a system. The rich get all the tax cuts and bailouts and subsidies and regulation/law changes while the tax burden shifts to the working class and the programs that benefit us, the laws that protect us, the agencies that regulate on our behalf, are gutted as much as possible without actually pissing off the masses to the point where they revolt.
Whereas politicians of old saw the dangers of government and, instead of trying to slay it, bent it back towards serving the people, and warned future generations to remain vigilant against those who would try bending it back to serve the few, today all we have are people who want to let the gravy train flow, or people who want to “shrink” government, but ideally, still let the gravy train flow towards those who pay them enough to do so.
Mulvaney’s “victory” is a hollow little amusement, nothing more. I’m sure his fellow colleagues will continue to bow to Adelson, the Kochs, Karl Rove, and various other meddlers, following every whim, killing every aspect of government that actually helps the disabled, the poor, the elderly, or even the average man, but continuing to let government operate as usual for those who fund their campaigns.
“From each not according to their ability, to each not according to their needs.” Tax the poor, give to the rich. But clearly the problem here are entitlements that help those who have paid into them all of their lives, not the corporations getting tons of benefits while paying little to nothing in taxes due to the various loopholes they bribed politicians into passing.
“So liking Medicare and Social Security, or at least holding those programs in a “favorable” view, makes one a Communist as well I suppose?”
Yes, it does. Most don’t realize it, but it does! Most in the US are in favor of some for of Communism, it’s just no one likes calling it that.
Most in the US are in favor of some for of Communism
It masquerades as Christianity!
What a complete tool.
Is he a Marxist? Or does he belueve what the good book says?
All that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. There was a Levite, a native of Cyprus, Joseph, to whom the apostles gave the name Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”). He sold a field that belonged to him, then brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
And there was the old Christian coupke who sold land but kept some of the profits for themselves. When confronted by Peter, they dropped dead. Be careful what you call commmunism.
He absolutely doesn’t believe what the good book says. He is part of the obama machine that is one of the most anti-Christian groups in history.
So, yeah; he’s Communist.
You’ve brought this up before douchebag, you’re conflating voluntary giving with involuntary.
“Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
Let’s see if we can differentiate between a self imposed life style and a government imposed life style why don’t we?
Are you talking about the military, or the legal system?
Mick, is a typical Teapublican hypocrite. He sits on his ass and collects 200k a year from the taxpayers along with his government healthcare and government retirement. If he is so smart why isn’t he in the economy creating value and jobs. Because he is not smart, and he can’t make it unless he is getting a gubment check.
Such a dumb comment. Why is he a hypocrite? What is he supposed to do? Work pro-bono? Ideally he could and should. But it’s silly to call him a hypocrite. Should he retire from Congress and just complain about it miles away from DC, accomplishing nothing? HE’S ONE OF THE FEW WHO ACTUALLY HAS THE AUDACITY TO BE HONEST AND CALL PEOPLE OUT AND NOT PLAY POLITICS. So how do you know his motives? You think he’s a fraud who is just sucking on the government’s teat? You don’t. Which I guess means I don’t either, but it appears to me with this outburst that he’s made his motives quite clear. I’m sure he would happily decrease his salary if he could get other Congressman to approve of it. I’m sure he would get rid of crony capitalism if he could. But it’s not that simple. It’s moronic for you to think it is.
LOL, Mick would not give up one red cent. He is one of the few congressmen who did not agree to give up his check if government employees were not paid for the shut down. Mick needs that gumbment check because he is a taker. living on the backs of the taxpayer.
Congressman Mulvaney, can you agree with this? “I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” -Ben Franklin
Throw a rock to a drowning person, not a lifesaver.. in so doing, you will help him see how easy he had it before you showed up.
Let me know next time you stroll down to the pool…
I don’t need a demonstration of Republican empathy beyond the candidates themselves.
The Teaparty is our salvation!
Fits offering praise to a backbench Fellow Republican that no one ever pays much attention to who made a snarky little remark.
“From each according to his ability”
Luke 12:48. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
“To each according to his need.”
Matthew 6:26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
I wonder if Jesus would feel ambushed by that question, or would stand up for God’s message of love and mercy… because, God knows, it’s better to be a sociopathic materialist than a Christian in America!
Indian Land. Let’s hold hearings.