Obama and the S Word
crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts
There is the chance that as politics moves past the history of the 2008 Presidential campaign what was presented then will be forgotten. Is it reasonable to ignore issues raised about then Presidential candidate Barack Obama now that he will be sworn in January 20th as President Barack Obama? From his mysterious past to his questionable associations and alliances to criticism of him being a socialist a November 2008 election victory should not assume these issues are moot. In view of his massive spending package plans and the rest of his agenda the issue of socialism has not gone away.
In an opinion piece at the WSJ use of the S word indicates it has not fallen off the radar in this year’s political landscape. In the end, he advises, Republicans can only win if they rediscover the power and voter appeal of innovative and reform-minded solutions to the nation’s ills. “If we’re going to have a party that gets the White House back before we fall totally into socialism, we need to persuade voters that our market-based solutions work, and government mostly doesn’t. And we’re going to have to apply these principles to a whole new set of policy challenges.”
‘Before we fall totally into socialism’ is the key phrase and might be viewed as being directed to the coming Obama Administration but to be fair it was applied to both major parties. In 2008 the GOP became the party of federal bailouts and other socialistic solutions to the financial meltdown. Most voters don’t fully understand why the stock market and economy collapsed this year, says Mr. Barbour, “but they do know it happened on our watch, and so we get the blame.”
While out of control spending was not an idea lost on the GOP in recent years that is in no way an excuse to allow the next Presidential Administration or the Democratic party majority in Congress to duplicate the mistake. With all the talk of reform during the 2008 campaigns the reference below may suggest those concerns have been abandoned in favor of continued massive spending measures. Simply continuing to throw money at a problem is no guarantee of a solution.
Nevertheless, it is imperative that something be done about the reeling U.S. economy — and soon.
Introducing more fear into the equation with the notion we have to act quickly. All that guarantees is more waste and less oversight or good judgement. To preface the need for speed by stating the public may not want another brewing fiasco like the TARP situation does nothing as an argument to support more spending.
The problem with applying the same logic to government spending as a reasonable short term solution is that any marriage between government and spending is never short term. Like the Energizer bunny it just keeps going and going and going. But the S word appears again in the piece above. Everything about this situation screams socialism and no one is more qualified to bring it to America than the Democratic party. With the spending spree in full bloom liberals are euphoric. Check the following video featuring Obama and Pelosi for more proof. Notice the scary demeanor of Pelosi drunk with the notion of all that money and Obama in the White House.
There have been reports suggesting PE Obama, aka PEBO, will include every spending item for his entire administration in his continuation of the bailout frenzy or his stimulus package. The idea being he wants to enable his entire spending agenda as the government answer to everything in his first play from the White House. The political move of adding tax cuts to the agenda is merely an attempt to persuade Republicans to vote for it. What about things PE Obama has already said?
I think when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody. (Barack Obama)
If the people cannot trust their government to do the job for which it exists - to protect them and to promote their common welfare - all else is lost. (Barack Obama)
In the end, that’s what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or a politics of hope? (Barack Obama)
We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen. (Barack Obama)
We have an obligation and a responsibility to be investing in our students and our schools. We must make sure that people who have the grades, the desire and the will, but not the money, can still get the best education possible. ( Barack Obama)
This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably. Trade has been a cornerstone of our growth and global development. But we will not be able to sustain this growth if it favors the few, and not the many. (Barack Obama)
Focusing your life solely on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition. It asks too little of yourself. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential. (Barack Obama)
Some of the quotes above sound much like the spirit of the following quotes:
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people.
The two quotes above are from Karl Marx. Marx is also credited for a quote that he was not a Marxist. Obama denies he is a socialist. This would be another example of actions speak louder than words and simply saying something doesn’t make it true.
quote sources:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/quotes/index.htm
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/k/karl_marx.html
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/barack_obama.html
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
January 10th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Now that I didn’t know.
Knowing the class of Republicans we’ve got — directionless, principleless, and “centrist” it wouldn’t surprise me if that worked. Many of them will actually believe that it’s possible to cut taxes for people that don’t pay them. The Presiden Elect’s plan isn’t really tax cuts though. It’s more refundable tax-credits. That way he can give money collected through the tax system to people that don’t pay any taxes. That’s not likely to make a lot of people that actually do pay taxes very happy. I always hate to see it when people like my granddaughters mother get seven times more money back in their tax “refund” than they ever paid in during the year.It’s pure socialistic redistribution of wealth, and the Republicans in the Senate are likely to go along with it. The Republicans in the House of Representatives don’t matter — they can’t stop it even if they stand on principle with Speaker Pelosi’s new set of rules.
January 10th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
I don’t know about that particular Marx quote either. One of the source pages I listed has it.
I’ve been posting how individuals in Congress voted on the bailout referred to as the Economic Recovery and Stabilization Act of 2008 along with related press releases from their websites on Forum @ MoreWhat.com. The task of doing that has been very revealing. Just looking at the roll call vote results it is obvious this measure was not passed on a party line vote. It is illuminating to view the number of GOP members defending it as well as the Dems members who strongly reject it.
We all know that politics pollutes reason. Or it may even be fair to recall that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The only time one can have some sympathy for those in elected office in when they are confronted with a decision that must be made and no matter what they do it will be viewed as a mistake or some self-serving action. But this was not one of those times. They come rarely if at all.
But in the case of the House vote on HR1424 I have more respect for the roughly 25% of Dems who voted against it as well as the more than half of GOP members who did.
But the stimulus package that Obama will present soon and the roll call votes on that will be more revealing. There may be enough issues voted on early this year that will define which Senators and Congressmen can be put on the list of elected reps we should respect and support. But all the backroom dealing that goes on may muddy the water on how each one votes and why, as usual.
It would be a blessing if the role of government could be separated from politics.
Thanks for stoppin’ in Perri and the commentary.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:18 am
Stanford, I don’t think there’s a thing now to stop this steaming locomotive. This will have to be a lesson, hopefully, well-learned. How, or if, we can climb our way back out is the question. With the amnesty that is coming, and that will also be added to our debt, this will likely not be the America you and I have known.
I’ll run over and read your previous posts on role call votes. Excellent research and analysis.
Maggie at Maggie’s Notebook
January 11th, 2009 at 6:49 am
This hasn’t been the country I know for some time now. I am not sure if that means it really changed that much or if the country I know (knew) is the result of earlier influences on my perception.
I do not expect shamnesty to prevail. I express that with more confidence than I did earlier. For then I was convinced there were enough people opposed to it on principle that it would be defeated on any subsequent attempt. Now I believe the global economics will supersede principle. Fewer jobs will reduce the demand to come here illegally, reduce the selective pursuit by Americans out of work and reduce the type of spending that helped fuel the demand for outsourcing and hiring illegals.
Thanks for the complimentary words regarding this post but I am not overly pleased with it as it was a topic I much wanted to post about but limitations on time required publishing before I was satisfied. I covered the main points I wanted to make but it lacks style and finesse.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
hello my friend…how utterly horrid that this marxist anti semite got elected!
January 11th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
He probably thinks enough of himself that he will be able to truthfully deny he is a Marxist as soon as his own manifesto is published and he can confirm he is an Obamanite. Might be an ego thing and he wouldn’t want to play 2nd fiddle to Karl Marx.