An Obama Presidency Could Do Far More Damage To America Than FDR
Posted by: Bob Ellis | 10/21/2008 4:58 AM
To anyone who cherishes freedom and the way America was intended to operate, the prospect of a Barack Obama presidency is frightening on an unprecedented scale.
As socialistic and morally bankrupt as President Bill Clinton was, it is almost certain even he cannot hold a candle to the kind of damage Obama can do to America.
As strange as it may sound, Clinton's self-absorption and pursuit of his own good above all else actually served to mitigate his liberal tendencies.
Barack Obama, however, is a true believer in Marxism and is far more dedicated to the selfless promotion of those revolutionary ideas.
Obama has already made it clear beyond a doubt that he plans to gut the U.S. military far more thoroughly than Bill Clinton ever did.
Obama has been equally up front about his intention to radically re-engineer marriage, the family and the way we think about human sexuality itself. He has vowed the total repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which could pave the way to impose homosexual "marriage" on all the states, push for more pro-homosexual "hate crime" laws, and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military.
And Obama's associations with a number of people who visercally hate the United States could not possibly be clearer. This is one of the most disturbing aspects of a potential Obama presidency.
As if this wasn't enough, Paul Rubin's piece at the Wall Street Journal paints a foreboding scenario for socialist re-engineering of America's economy.
Using FDR's socialist New Deal as a spring board, Rubin says--and I believe him--that Obama could go much farther much quicker in turning the United States economy into a Marxist reality than FDR ever dreamed.
He looks at how the economic mess of the 1930s provided the perfect atmosphere of chaos and desperation FDR needed to knock most of the pillars out from under the United States Constitution and take our nation in a direction it was never intended to go.
For the past 60 years or more, the world has relied on United States military power to maintain relative peace and stability around the world.
The United States military relies on our powerful economy for it's funding; without that economic dynamo, our military will wither.
Do I really need to connect the dots?
A socialist "wealth redistribution" debacle engineered by socialist Obama would have far-reaching and utterly devastating consequences for our economy.
The socialist model always fails because it inherently fails to take human nature into account. A powerful economy requires incentive--incentive for investors to take risks and invest, and incentives for workers to work hard. Both incentives usually provide a return for the investment of risk and sweat. But if you know that no matter what you do, your "extra" will be "spread around" to others who did not want to take the risk or expend the effort, then why should you put yourself out when there is no reward for it?
And if our economic engine slows to an idle, we cannot sustain the military which has maintained relative stability around the world for all these decades.
When the despots, tyrants and power hungry around the world realize the United States is no longer in a position to stop them, what will they do?
Americans who love our country, our way of life, and the noble dreams the founders had for this country need to work hard and pray hard that John McCain, flawed as he is, will win on November 4.
An Obama victory could have terrible consequences here at home, and around the world.
As socialistic and morally bankrupt as President Bill Clinton was, it is almost certain even he cannot hold a candle to the kind of damage Obama can do to America.
As strange as it may sound, Clinton's self-absorption and pursuit of his own good above all else actually served to mitigate his liberal tendencies.
Barack Obama, however, is a true believer in Marxism and is far more dedicated to the selfless promotion of those revolutionary ideas.
Obama has already made it clear beyond a doubt that he plans to gut the U.S. military far more thoroughly than Bill Clinton ever did.
Obama has been equally up front about his intention to radically re-engineer marriage, the family and the way we think about human sexuality itself. He has vowed the total repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which could pave the way to impose homosexual "marriage" on all the states, push for more pro-homosexual "hate crime" laws, and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military.
And Obama's associations with a number of people who visercally hate the United States could not possibly be clearer. This is one of the most disturbing aspects of a potential Obama presidency.
As if this wasn't enough, Paul Rubin's piece at the Wall Street Journal paints a foreboding scenario for socialist re-engineering of America's economy.
Using FDR's socialist New Deal as a spring board, Rubin says--and I believe him--that Obama could go much farther much quicker in turning the United States economy into a Marxist reality than FDR ever dreamed.
He looks at how the economic mess of the 1930s provided the perfect atmosphere of chaos and desperation FDR needed to knock most of the pillars out from under the United States Constitution and take our nation in a direction it was never intended to go.
The new president's response was to restructure the economy with the New Deal -- an expansion of the role of government once unimaginable in America. We now know that FDR's policies likely prolonged the Great Depression because the economy never fully recovered in the 1930s, and actually got worse in the latter half of the decade. And we know that FDR got away with it (winning election four times) by blaming his predecessor, Herbert Hoover, for crashing the economy in the first place.So what would give Obama the boost that FDR did not enjoy? Why, the groundwork laid by FDR himself.
Unlike FDR, Mr. Obama will not have to create the mechanisms government uses to interfere with the economy before imposing his policies. FDR had to get the Supreme Court to overturn a century's worth of precedents limiting the power of government before he could use the Constitution's commerce clause, among other things, to increase government control of the economy. Mr. Obama will have no such problem.Rubin says a President Obama would take a page from the FDR playbook and blame Republicans for the economic mess. However, that is already happening. Despite the fact that Republicans like John McCain tried to head off this mess two years or more ago, while Democrats insisted "There's nothing wrong, there's nothing wrong," Democrats are blaming Republicans...and thanks to the "mainstream" media echo chamber, the lie is sticking.
FDR also had to create agencies to implement regulations. Today, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the National Labor Relations Board (both created in the 1930s) as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and others created later are in place. Increasing their power will be easier than creating them from scratch.
For the past 60 years or more, the world has relied on United States military power to maintain relative peace and stability around the world.
The United States military relies on our powerful economy for it's funding; without that economic dynamo, our military will wither.
Do I really need to connect the dots?
A socialist "wealth redistribution" debacle engineered by socialist Obama would have far-reaching and utterly devastating consequences for our economy.
The socialist model always fails because it inherently fails to take human nature into account. A powerful economy requires incentive--incentive for investors to take risks and invest, and incentives for workers to work hard. Both incentives usually provide a return for the investment of risk and sweat. But if you know that no matter what you do, your "extra" will be "spread around" to others who did not want to take the risk or expend the effort, then why should you put yourself out when there is no reward for it?
And if our economic engine slows to an idle, we cannot sustain the military which has maintained relative stability around the world for all these decades.
When the despots, tyrants and power hungry around the world realize the United States is no longer in a position to stop them, what will they do?
Americans who love our country, our way of life, and the noble dreams the founders had for this country need to work hard and pray hard that John McCain, flawed as he is, will win on November 4.
An Obama victory could have terrible consequences here at home, and around the world.
Caring about whether a president is 'socialist or morally bankrupt' is of little consequence as we teeter on the precipice of multiple disasters. If we have to engage temporarily in socialism to fix our woes, then so be it. It's a natural response until more prosperous times return, even if it is an unlikely and extreme measure. Regardless of who the next president is, he's walking into an office in shambles, unlikely to be cleaned up overnight.
Socialism is what got us in this mess in the first place. More of it will only dig the hole deeper.
I started to read your text but gave up after only two paragraphs. Things are actually very simple: Clinton reduced government, reduced entitlement programs (welfare reform), spent less than he got (where did those budget surpluses go?), and did not conduct nation building (Iraq, anyone?), to name a few. How does that rhyme with socialism? Look what we got now: A huge government (which didn't even do what it was set up for, remember Katrina?), enormous spending, nation building, deficits as far as the eye can see (and beyond), INCREASES in entitlement spending (medicare benefits), and, to top it of, government takeover of the largest financial institutions. To me that reeks of socialism of the purest breed. Bush, the socialist, who would have thunk that?
How in earth can you make me believe that Bush stood for the republican ideals that I admire(d)? And how do you think that McCain would do any better? I've seen, in Obama, a very very intelligent man who is surrounded by even smarter men (and women) and who, as I firmly believe, will get this country back on track.
How very much like a liberal, Erik. Reality is tough, so run from it.
You have a very selective and rose-colored memory of the Clinton administration. If you will remember his first two years, he had a socialist agenda barreling down the road like a tank convoy, with massive government health care leading the way. Thanks to an overwhelming response from the people and from Republicans in congress, that got stopped dead in it's tracks.
And then, the Republican Revolution hit congress, and this kept Clinton mostly in check for the rest of his time. In fact, the things you credit to Clinton are 100% the product of a Republican congress that Clinton couldn't stop. The only "government" Clinton was into reducing was the military--the one part of government we need the most.
Bush has been a lousy Republican and an even lousier conservative. McCain is probably a worse example of both.
But Barack Obama doesn't even pay lip service to conservative ideals, or even American principles. He has made it clear that he holds the ideals that made America great in high contempt.
And an Obama presidency would take this nation to the edge of the precipice of Hell, and probably over that edge.
Dear Red States,
We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us.
In case you aren't aware, that includes Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, North Carolina, Virginia and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of Bliss.
To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and most of the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get Elliot Spitzer. You get Ken Lay.
We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get BU and Cabarrus Community. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama
We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share. Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the ChristianCoalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that "Bliss" will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq , and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.
With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools, the Big Ten, plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech, U of Chicago, UNC, Duke, UVa, and MIT.
With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson, and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.
Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, and 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11.
By the way, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.
Peace out, Blue States
You know, Go Blue, that's an interesting proposition. It's actually a fantasy I've entertained on more than one occasion: simply letting all you liberals go your own way, leaving real Americans to go back unhindered to the way our country was supposed to operate.
You're going to need all that tax revenue...and more. Your unrestrained socialism is going to make today's U.S. federal budget look like lunch money. Without the Red States around to at least mitigate the drunken spending, your citizens are quickly going to be serfs to the imperial government.
You won't have much money left for that wine and cheese after you're taxed silly...unless you're one of those elites, of course. As George Orwell said in the Animal Farm, under socialism, all animals are equal...but some animals (the elites) are more equal than others.
It would be great to be unencumbered by your anti-American defeatist drivel so that we could deal decisively with the situation in Iraq, and with other international matters. When the international community saw that the Red State America is serious, united and committed to dealing decisively with evils like terrorism, their will to fight would quickly melt. Being unencumbered by your whining and defeatism would be quite a boon.
It won't be long before the Red States America takes off in an unprecedented boom of economic prosperity, no longer held down by mindless and useless regulations and other socialist restraints, and no longer sucked dry by confiscatory taxes to spend on a bloated government budget where more than 50% goes to unconstitutional social programs.
Meanwhile, your Blue States America will in a few decades go the way of all the other socialist enclaves around the world. If you only go a little more socialist, you may become a nice, mediocre country like the Western socialist nations, or if you really go whole-hog and just come out of the closet with your love for Marxism, you can go the way of the old Soviet Union and collapse on the ash heap of history in a few decades.
It's an entertaining thought, attractive in many ways. And it would provide the opportunity to prove once and for all that the founders of the United States were absolutely right, and the disciples of Marx are absolutely wrong.
But in the end, I can't endorse such a plan. There are still too many good people trapped in occupied territory in the Blue States. We can't just turn our back on them and leave them to Marxism. Also, the entirety of the United States, as one great and glorious union, is worth fighting to preserve.
And so I will. As will other patriotic Americans. The principles of socialism are in direct contradictions to the principles of Americanism. We will not surrender this great nation--not even a part of it--to the evils of socialism.