Publisher's Note: My friend, Rusty Walker, has accepted my invitation to write a guest essay. It is my honor to publish it here.
*****
At the G20 conference, President Barack Obama was elegant, thoughtful, and charming. He wasn’t as charming and prepared as, say, President Reagan, or, even President Bill Clinton, both of whom had been governors, the best preparation for a United States president. That said, he struck a sincere chord. This is what he does best. The culture of personality that abides in our time suits him. But, as an American president one should retain the patriotic stance of never making apologetic statements about our alleged past actions in opaque references to the prior administration. We are the most powerful nation on the planet and of course we are a world leader. President Obama barely managed to choke out that we have American exceptionalism! If Russia were in our position, the world would be speaking an East Slavic dialect, not to mention the Fundamentalist, Neo-fascist Islamics.
At home, Democrats want the government to look after us, save us, apply rules to everything in our lives, forgetting that freedom, liberty, enterprise and American innovation is what made this country great. I remember reading Lincoln (R) cautioning that the people should be careful of the government you give power to, as the same government can take your rights away, and, Reagan, rightfully, in my opinion stating, "the government IS the problem!"
I don’t disagree with some of Obama’s goals, just how to get there. We elected a very junior senator with no foreign relations experience and who never budgeted within the restraints necessary of, say, a mayor or governor. He is an Educator, and he is bringing his idealistic, academic theories to government - he never ran a business. He is reminding me of Woodrow Wilson’s naïveté combined with the socialist mindset of some of those who surrounded FDR.
On the budget, Obama and his Democratic Congress define "spend" as "Invest," and "deficit spending" on health care, energy, and education, as "infrastructure." In my view, while these are necessary over time, in the proper congressional process, all of this is rammed-through reconciliation. Such initiatives will not have the immediate effect as Obama thinks. Based on my readings about the Great Depression, and the panics on Wall Street, and listening to both sides of the congressional debates, you cannot just write huge checks address to energy, education and health care and expect to reap immediate benefits in employment, consumer spending and business.
The economists tend to agree that the stimulus package was and is necessary to boost the economy. Ben Bernanke of the Federal Reserve is highly qualified and holds credibility; I have less confidence in Treasury Secretary Geithner – but, both say the huge sums are necessary. Japan missed its opportunity and it cost them. But the stimulus package that was passed by the Democratic Congress contained long-lusted-for Democratic earmarks unnecessary to the economic growth. And, the line-by-line editing Obama said he would commit to is a no-show. This is as disappointing as when Clinton was elected, with votes for health care reform, and he and Hillary failed to deliver on this lofty goal. Remember this in politics and life: No one is coming to save you.
I believe Obama and his advisors put too much on the promise of “hope” and “change” as a strategy; on the economy, green jobs and enormous education funding, while quick fixes, will penalize those making over $250,000, which includes small businesses - as if we want to regress to 1907 when the government taxed the rich at 75%! We got rid of that because it clearly discouraged honest business dealings and suppressed the economy.
Also, the Democrats have an almost pathological fixation on Bush – to justify all this spending! The Bush legacy of high-deficits they keep referring to peaked in 2008 when the crisis hit and the stimulus package was proposed – written by Democrats, and agreed to by all! And up until 2007 Bush’s deficit was actually only 1% of the GDP (Obama’s will take us to dangerous 13% in 2010, and even with their most optimistic projections, an unsustainable 5% of GDP). You can’t have it both ways, complain about Bush and then pile on more deficit. Also, the Democrats in 2007-2008 were the majority - the $787 Billion stimulus and $410 Billion Omnibus Stimulus Bill, is a spending bill that is all Democratic, full of pork. According to my research, the public debt (which is a different way of looking at it, from deficit) was historically around 10%-20%, but will reach depression era 80% of GDP under Obama’s proposals.
This is the change we were promised? President Obama, with his Democratic Congress, is growing the government in our lives. I “hope,” to use his term, he knows what he is doing. I believe he thinks he is FDR (who actually ran a huge state as Governor of New York). Obama, just this last week, called for resignation of the CEO of GM & Chrysler (stocks plummeted). This isn't the Soviet Union ... yet!
President Obama is a good man, but, he is, as part of the Chicago machine, aligned with the unions who have destroyed the profit margins in the auto industry. The smaller non-union U.S. car manufacturers didn't need stimulus package and were showing a profit – in some cases actually made more than the union wages. Why? Because of what the country runs on – free enterprise. And, Obama is also forcing the production of green-energy efficient cars be produced with NO thought to consumer market demand!
Yes, Obama’s proposed doubling of the debt in five years, tripling in ten years, is causing concern abroad; China, our great creditor, is rightfully concerned. I don't think a new currency would prevail though, because the U.S. dollar, which is still strong, has more than Obama's flailing policies going for it - the US has a strong economic history, and we are still way out in front with number one in GDP (followed by Japan - also in trouble). Still, many countries with problems, including France, Great Britain, Spain, Indonesia, Iceland (bankrupt due to their own government speculative idiocy), etc, etc. etc.), would favor the U.S. dollar. Obama is NOT following bi-partisanship as he campaigned!
Obama is still riding the crest of the popularity with the "hopeful" liberals who wanted "change" and didn't care what change meant ... and so he is still predictably using his Messiah-walk-on-water according to the major-network-channels, that, along with a Democratic-majority-Congress affords him the voting power. Still, he appears to be over extending his Constitutional Executive powers in my humble opinion.
Here is a relevant quote from the book I am reading: "It is difficult for men in high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion. They are always surrounded by worshipers. They are constantly and for the most part sincerely assured of their greatness" - Calvin Coolidge, 1927 p.46., The Forgotten Man, by Amity Shlaes.
Good essay Donald, if somewhat toned done in rhetorical style.
ReplyDeletetoned down, even
ReplyDeleteTim: This is Rusty's essay, so I imagine he's more fair than I am.
ReplyDeleteThose on the left demand that we on the right view Obama’s election as a mandate. IT WAS NOT MANDATE. It was nothing more than millions of people voting for rhetorical flourishes and grandiose promises that no one firmly planted in reality could ever hope to see kept.
ReplyDeleteHad there been no teleprompters present on the campaign trail, this president’s bid for the Oval Office would have had an entirely different, perhaps, even disastrous outcome.
Your guest writer is more than correct in many of his assessments of this administration. As his first 100 days in office reach their end, America watches and waits for a leader to emerge. All we have seen thus far is a supplicant, an apologist, a community organizer and a narcissist.
Obama is not enjoying his conquest in leisure and that fact is revealed daily.
I could not have said it better myself.
ReplyDeleteGreat comments, No Sheeples!
ReplyDeleteThanks for visiting.
Hi Zach: Thanks for commenting, and love that picture!
ReplyDeletegreat essay...i'm wondering quite often what happened to the promise to post everything on the web before it was voted on...which is only one of the many broken promises since jan 20!
ReplyDeleteGeez, Libby, that's a good one!
ReplyDeleteI “hope,” to use his term, he knows what he is doing.
ReplyDeleteYes, one would hope so, but so far, it doesn't look like it.
He does know a lot about making empty promises, and speaking a lot of words which mean nothing.
He is most adept in using the tactics needed to achieve his real goal..which, in my opinion, is to be in control of everything..and I do mean "everything."
When was the last time that any U.S. President ordered any CEO of any company, to step down?
I'm not aware of that ever happening in this country.
Great essay, Mr. Walker.
President Obama's policies aren't really a surprise in kind, simply in scope: I never thought his policies would be good ones, but I never realized that he'd take them to the extent that he did.
ReplyDeleteBut we live in a democratic republic, and Mr Obama was democratically elected. The Congress which passed his plans were elected by the people of the United States. We have met the enemy, and they are us.
And no, we can't escape some of the blame for this. Republicans were never eager to hold President Bush's feet to the fire on spending. Yeah, we had wars going in Iraq and Afghanistan, but even if we could have waved a Harry Potter magic wand and made all of that spending disappear, we would still have been running a deficit. A good chunk of that deficit was the responsibility of new programs passed under the Bush Administration, and a Republican-controlled Congress; think of No Child Left Behind and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, things without which our country survived perfectly well for the first 225 years of our history, but which were suddenly found essential in the 226th year.
Complain as we might have about earmarks and porcine spending, the Republicans had their snouts in that trough just as deeply as any Democrat when the GOP controlled the Congress. There's little wonder that people who aren't loyal Republicans found a rather large helping of hypocrisy involved in our complaints.
Like it or not, Barack Obama is our president, and the Democrasts control our Congress, and we Republicans are just as responsible for that unfortunate situation as our friends on the left.
Common Sense Political Thought tracked back with: We have met the enemy, and they are us.
ReplyDeleteIt's a good essay, but I have to nitpick just a bit: As Rusty says, Obama is part of Chicago politics, and we know how corrupt Chicago politics is. I don't think of Obama as "a good man." He made too many promises that I doubt he ever intended to keep. He will push as many socialist programs down our throats as possible. Nor do I think he cares about the average American. It's all about socialism. He knows full well once the programs are in place they're very hard to get rid of.
ReplyDeleteNeither do I think that the Democrats pushing socialism have forgotten that freedom, liberty, enterprise and American innovation made this country great. I believe they're perfectly aware of it but they ignore it because they don't care. They want socialism at all costs, thinking that it doesn't matter that it has never failed because they are arrogant enough to believe that with them in charge it will work for the first time in history!
Calvin Coolidge is right, and the blind worship Obama enjoys sets a new record, at least in modern day America. Or I should say it did set a new record. As he keeps on pushing, many who voted for him are having second thoughts. Too bad they didn't have them before they voted for him.
Oops! Almost forgot! HAPPY EASTER!
ReplyDeleteBut the more I read this essay, the guy ain't all that.
ReplyDelete"And, Obama is also forcing the production of green-energy efficient cars be produced with NO thought to consumer market demand!"
Obviously, he's never been in line to buy a Prius! There is a huge market demand here.
Also, what non-union car companies. The unions have not destroyed the car companies, and that is a known and discredited fact. It was demand for the cars, which the unions do not design and create. They put them together. And those very same unions are what made the American middle class the envy of the world.
Tim,
ReplyDeleteI think you are a little misinformed about how various aspects of the car industry affect the bottom line. It is a fact that management failed to deal with the union in a way that would have protected the stockholders and the bottom line.
Most of the car companies do not have a problem with design. It is a problem of costs relative to those of foreign made cars. Much of this cost comes from fringes acceded to unions over the years. So the unions, as well as management, have a significant affect on their viability as a going concern.
This is not withstanding the damage caused by disgruntled union member's. It does not take long for these stories to get around to new car buyers.
Thanks Jan! Actually, I hope he just learns what's he's doing, cause it's been pretty lousy so far. I do give Obama some credit on Afghanistan, but that's about it.
ReplyDeleteHopefully we'll do better next time in power, Dana. But we have to get there. Excellent points, in any case, and thanks for commenting!
ReplyDeleteHappy Easter to you, Gayle!
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you on Obama's lack of decency. Rusty was very kind in his analysis, but watching Obama's intense secrecy is too much sometimes, and on abortion I do think the man is evil.
As noted, though, I give credit to Obama on Afghanistan policy, so maybe there's a little hope.
Thanks!
"The unions have not destroyed the car companies, and that is a known and discredited fact."
ReplyDeleteWrong, Tim ... badly wrong!
Donald,
ReplyDeleteHappy Easter.
I do not know whether you have seen these yet, but I thought them quite appropriate for a number of commenters. I found them at HotAir.
Enjoy:
The Troll — Everyone knows this guy (and it’s usually a guy), who intentionally visits sites in order to stir things up, provoke a furious reaction from other posters and then disappear. Classic examples are the Free Republic types who visit Daily Kos and vice versa.
The Angry Man — We all know this guy. His solution for almost any problem in the world is the summary execution, in as grisly a manner as possible, of every possible perpetrator.
The Dismisser — The ultimate arrogant commenter, this person never actually engages with the topic, but merely declares it beneath anyone’s interest, already resolved, or improperly stated — and thus hardly worth the bother. The dismisser’s only real message is: I’m smarter than you and you need to acknowledge that fact.
The Kumbaya — These folks always show up two-thirds of the way through any heated on-line debate and ask, “Why can’t we all just get along?” They are inevitably ignored or trashed.
The Skimmer — The commenter, usually sour, who reads only a headline or sentence of a piece, draws exactly the wrong conclusion, and then embarks on an embarrassing rant.
The Defender — Bloggers love these guys. When you are getting hammered by other posters, this is the guy who watches your back, supports you, and tells your enemies off & and does a better job of it than your real-life friends.
I especially love "The Dismisser."