Democrats’ promises same as past utopian efforts — they will fail

Who are the Democrats of today? Do they still believe in the words spoken by President John F. Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”? Or do they just wish to lay claim and hold onto the mystique of the Kennedy name? 

Let’s look at the Democrats’ promises of today: free education, free housing, free food, free medicine, free healthcare, free phones, free Internet and more gun control. One will find, all these promises of today are like the past promises of a “somewhere over the rainbow” utopia promised by communist and socialist leaders around the world.

ADVERTISEMENT

The reality of these promises today, in America, is a more expensive, more intrusive, ever growing government behemoth attaching more strings and regulations to the bows and ribbons of these so-called free gifts and a nation in debt by over $19 trillion and growing every minute.

Some free things they call a safety net, but in reality they constitute a giant net that captures and anchors so many stagnating in the cesspool of poverty. These well-intended programs remove the burning desire to succeed, to improve one’s lot in life and replace it with an overwhelming complacent resolve to dependency and failure. 

With their opiate call of fairness and free, the Democrat politicians of today and the socialist and communist leaders of the past deceitfully acquired the power so they can take from those who have succeeded and enrich their lifestyle while providing minimal sustenance to those who have failed or not even tried. 

Of course, in their utopia all must live at a lifestyle level that the government decrees. Look at all the wonderful government housing projects and the ghettos people have been herded into and compare it to the housing and lifestyle in which the political class lives. 

How many times has the world been promised utopia and failed? Can you name one success?

From Jim Posmer, Polk City, Fla.


Ryan better off cooperating with Trump than dealing with Clinton

It would be beneficial for Congressman Paul RyanPaul Davis RyanNo time for the timid: The dual threats of progressives and Trump Juan Williams: Pelosi shows her power Cheney takes shot at Trump: 'I like Republican presidents who win re-election' MORE to choose a different venue to voice his policy disputes with White House hopeful Donald TrumpDonald TrumpBaldwin calls Trump criticism following 'Rust' shooting 'surreal' Haley hits the stump in South Carolina Mary Trump files to dismiss Trump's lawsuit over NYT tax story MORE (“Ryan ‘not ready’ to support Trump,” May 5). As Speaker of the House, Ryan (R-Wis.) can air his concerns with Trump via his control of the legislative process. Further, any dispute that Ryan has can be worked out through negotiation. Indeed, the Founding Fathers created the separation of the legislative and executive branches so that different policies and viewpoints could be discussed and adopted. 

Ryan must come to the realization, however, that it will be easier to advance his policies, negotiate with and obtain conservative legislation with Trump. Trump is a conservative, agrees with Ryan on most issues and has proved that he is willing to meet with Ryan. Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonRepublican Ohio Senate candidate slams JD Vance over previous Trump comments Budowsky: Why GOP donors flock to Manchin and Sinema Countering the ongoing Republican delusion MORE, who has a vastly different policy agenda than Trump, has stated that she wants to function as Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaPolitics must accept the reality of multiracial America and disavow racial backlash To empower parents, reinvent schools Senate race in Ohio poses crucial test for Democrats MORE’s third term, and she is much less likely to negotiate with Ryan. If Ryan wants to advance his policies, therefore, he is much better off with Trump as president. To make this situation a reality, Ryan must endorse Trump, help unify the Republican Party and focus on Clinton as his main opposition. 

From Michael Abramson, Atlanta