He loves to talk about roads and bridges, roads and bridges, roads and bridges. But roads and bridges were bought. Calls for proposals were issued, bids were received and reviewed, contracts were let and people were paid. It's no different than what happens when Obama's employees stop at Capital Hemp for their, um, medicinal needs. They identify a need, visit the store, shop around, select a bong and then they ... pay for it. Once they've paid for it, no one chases after them yelling, "you didn't build that!" Of course they didn't build that. That's what money is for. It exists so you can hire someone else to build it. Once that transaction is done, both sides agree that the relationship, as far as the bong or the highway is concerned, is complete*.
So who cares who built what? What on Earth is the idiot saying with that "you didn't build that" nonsense? Context is irrelevant because the entire concept is simply incomprehensible. Does it mean we need to keep paying? Does it mean we need to erect a shrine in our house to the people who built the roads and bongs? Does it mean we need to exchange Christmas cards with them forever? When is a transaction complete? From what Obama is saying, it never is.
Does anyone in the White House think at all?
 |
| We wouldn't be where we are if the Romans hadn't built those roads. |
Elsewhere: Our Monastery of Miscellaneous Musings has a good take. So does Shane Atwell. Left Coast Rebel has something to say about it, too.
1 comment:
Two thoughts: Yes, government builds the roads (actually they take money and pay private contractors to do the work). But have you seen what happens when private entities try to build roads for themselves? Government is no help in getting access to land, and they demonize you when you try to pay for the road with tolls.
Kim Strassel has a good take on this in today's WSJ: by setting the narrative of "it's not yours," government paves the way (pun intended) to take it away from you.
Post a Comment