Flock Fairness, from Jay Eisenhofer and Richard Schiffrinm, AOL News :
(Dec. 16) — With President Barack Obama facing an outpouring of criticism from his party base following the tax-and-spending deal cut with congressional Republicans, it is time for the base to face reality: The Democrats’ message on the economy is not working.
Voters are not misguided or confused or too angry and upset to think clearly. And if Democrats persist in telling themselves that this is the message of 2010, their long-term viability will suffer no matter what happens in 2012.
Instead, the electorate has shown that it will listen to a party that presents a vision for growth, greatness and fairness. An agenda that is limited to fairness is doomed to failure.
Nice words, growth, greatness and fairness, but one term is not like the others. While growth can be measurec and greatness observed, it is utterly impossible to define fair and utterly imposable to achieve enough fairness to satisfy a socialist, such as Obama. Dim Won would rather see no growth than to see growth whicg were to benefit anybody who did not contribute to his campaign.
No practical definition of the concept of fair exists. Therefore it is pointless to use fairness as an economic criteria.
Bitsblog’s double secret blogger, examines the perils of an undue obsession with fairness, from Fausta :
Whether Marx or Lennin had good intentions ever (which they didn’t), or whether Communist apologists “sincerely wish the best most prosperous future for everyone”, is besides the point: The moral blindness and lack of compass of anyone who can possibly defend the Communist system, knowing that Communism is directly responsible for the deaths of some 100 million people*, is indefensible as of itself
Remember that White Housea adviser Anita Dunn’s favorite philosopher was Chairman Mao . So whenever Dim Won, b/k/a Barack Obama talks about the need to limit growth to promote his private concept of fairness, take pause. Be afraid.
Remember, what can not be defined, can not be achieved.