There is something ironically fitting about Barack Hussein Obama and Abraham Lincoln both coming from the same state.

We could start with the fact that they both were and are inclined to Marxism.

We could observe that neither gave or gives two hoots about the Constitution.

We could say that each had and has a pushy wife.

We could observe that each is associated with the gods in as much as they each are connected to a Greek Temple structure.

We could say that each ran for President while having almost no experience for the job whatsoever.

As far as speeches go Hillary’s speech was just so so. It won’t be remembered for soaring rhetoric or profound policy proposals. What Hillary’s speech will be remembered for is her accomplishing the necessity to clearly articulate support for Obama’s candidacy for President. On the surface the Democrats will go into the election cycle united, though beneath the surface I believe that there is a great amount of ill will between the Clintons and the Obamas.

Beyond the necessary niceties in her speech Hillary focused on people she met who told her that they needed the government to help take care of them, even citing a soldier who encouraged her to “take care of my buddies.” Clearly Hillary believes that the government is the parental figure in the country and that it is responsible to take care of the people, its children. It is responsible to take care of people without health insurance. It is responsible to take care of women in America who are being disadvantaged. It is responsible to take care of children. Hillary’s America is one where government is the Nanny and we the people are to be obedient to our caretaker.

From here Hillary offered up boilerplate Democrat positions ranging from anti-corporate rhetoric to pro global warming to her fervid desire for universal health care. More than once Hillary stated the Democratic mantra that “government must be about ‘we the people’ not we the favored few.”

Hillary spent only a little time attacking John McCain focusing more on attacking failed Bush policies while insisting that McCain would continue with the failed policies that find our reputation internationally damaged and our economy not fundamentally sound.

In the end this is a speech that was calculated to deliver Hillary from being blamed in any way for an eventual Obama defeat.

“Over the last 60 years, trillions of dollars have been transferred from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries in the name of promoting development. Through much of that period, many aid recipients actually lost ground economically….Over the years, even the US agency for International Development, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and other aid agencies have been forced to admit that the vast bulk of their munificent transfers generated no economic growth and encouraged no market reforms. The conclusion of outside analysts, led by the pioneering British economist P. T. Bauer, have been more damning. Bauer’s studies showed that, by pouring vast sums of money into many of the world’s worst governments, foreign aid has subsidized both socialism and repression.”

Doug Bandow
The Burmese Tragedy — Foreign Hindrance — Not Aid
August Issue Of Chronicles

International aid is just more wasted taxpayers money that has no basis in the Constitution. Like wealth transfer that happens within the States, wealth transfer that occurs internationally only serves to eliminate the middle class while impoverishing the poor while emboldening the wicked.

Wealth transfer is only about cronyism and the destruction of free peoples, governments and markets. When these United States sends money internationally it is with the intent of enslaving the average man and woman in those countries while propping up socialistic governments.

This is another classic example of how compassion gets turned inside out and upside down. Supposedly it is the compassionate thing to support wealth transfer and hard hearted to oppose wealth redistribution. Here we see why the opposite is true. It is hard hearted cruelty to support international trade because such aid steals the opportunity of freedom from those who long for freedom in those countries. People who vote for people who desire to use the government to achieve wealth redistribution are cold hearted bastards, and their refusal to learn the reality of the way things really are indicate that they are also mush headed morons.