I want you to ask yourself a question: In your life, your entire life, have you ever thought of the government — have you ever thought of taxes and welfare together — as charity? Now, we know the Catholic Church did. They’ve admitted it. Various prelates, archbishops, monsignors, popes, over the years, we know have equated high taxes and activist government with charity. That’s why they supported it. “Liberalism, socialism equals charity. That’s what we churches do, is we help the poor.” Blah, blah.

But I’m asking: In your lifetime, have you ever heard anybody who has achieved in life or is successful and maybe rich argue for tax increases — or argue against tax cuts on the basis, “No, no. We need to help people. It’s charity. The government’s charity” — as a way of making themselves feel good and look good to others? I’m not aware of it. In my lifetime, up until Obama becoming president, I’m not aware of this phenomenon of the rich and the successful looking at tax increases as okay because that’s charity.

Charity is not donated at the point of a gun or threat of a prison cell, a la Obamacare! Charity is not conscripted. Charity is willingly given from the heart, or for the tax deduction. But you have no choice when it comes to taxes. I’d like to see how the government stacks up as a charity anyway based on the usual standards that we would measure other charities by: The administrative costs, what are the real results, the net dollars, all that. I bet it would look bad.

Continue reading on www.rushlimbaugh.com