Everywhere you look, somebody or other is accusing republicans of "voting against their own self-interest."  It's on TV, in print media, and all over the internet.  Why, it sounds like you could practically call it waging war on self-interest!

But what does it mean?  What are people really trying to say when they play the 'voting against one's self-interest' card?

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but "self-interest" seems to be a pretty euphemism for "other people's money."  Voting for the people who promise you more of someone else's stuff, instead of the people who want you to keep more of your own stuff, is all the rage across the land.  And really, what's the harm?  Richie Rich has way more money than he needs, so why not take it from him?  Why would anyone vote against that kind of "self-interest"?

We could start with "because it's excruciatingly unethical."  Yes, that's right, boys and girls of the collective.  I'm going to throw down the gauntlet and challenge your ethics.  The law says you can vote yourself a lifetime supply of free cheese and beer at someone else's expense, and then vote for someone else to pay for your triple bypass and liver transplant too.  But is that ethical behavior?  Just because the system says you CAN, doesn't mean you SHOULD.  So yeah, paying your own way is more ethical than robbing Richie to pay for 100 strangers whose only claim on his assets is that they want them.
 read more »