Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Is Obama An Ideologue?

President Obama unveiled his budget for fiscal year 2011, and it came in at a whopping 3.8 trillion dollars. That's trillion with a T. The deficit will reach 1.56 trillion dollars for the same period, and both figures are historic records. The deficit projection is based on some optimistic assumptions from the administration, which historically don't pan out over time. The president started his remarks Monday, with  blaming the previous administration and previous congress for his inheritance of a huge budget deficit. This is becoming a tired refrain. . 

In no way will I defend the Bush era spending policies, but lets also remember that the democrats controlled both houses of congress after the 2006 elections. But, even if you agree with Obama's constant assumptions of his inherited deficits, does that necessarily justify his unprecedented spending and increased deficits. We could run all the numbers here, but we all know they are fluid, constantly changing with revenues dependent on employment and economic growth. So rather then quibble over exact numbers and how much deficit was caused, inherited, or projected by who, when and how, let's look at the philosophy that is taking us to greater deficits and the precipice of ruin.

Friday when the president met with the GOP house members he made a statement that defies reality. He stated, "I am not an ideologue." There was snickering in the crowd, and a noticeable gasp of unbelief, and when he noticed the stirring he snapped back, "I'm not." It was almost as silly as Richard Nixon's cry out, "I am not a crook." An ideologue according to Merriam-Webster is an, "impractical idealist, or a often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology." With this definition in mind his assertion is laughable on the surface. All of America assumed that since the Massachusetts special election of Scott Brown that Obama would be forced to moderate and at least make a small step toward the middle. Instead his SOTU speech was riddled with a defiant defense of his agenda even though he tried to emulate a populist tone. He is what he is, and most all Americans know that by now. 

He is first of all a big government advocate that believes  government action and largess is the mothers milk of growth as well as a fair and just society. Nothing he has done or advocated in this first year in office can repudiate that. The Keynesian theory of government spending to stimulate economic growth coupled with the bureaucratic interference into free market capitalism is what we have seen. Class warfare and the redistribution of wealth is the method of  achieving his goals. His policies punish success and stifle incentive, while at the same time rewarding passivity and failure. 

His 2011 budget repeals the Bush tax cuts that will certainly inhibit growth, so the vicious cycle can continue and more government spending will be required to meet the needs of the country. He is a pseudo egalitarian, which means he advocates the removal of economic inequalities among people. Our founding documents do not advocate for equality of outcome, but equality of opportunity, and consider redistribution immoral. The problem with the egalitarian is that while he works to achieve an equality among the masses, he becomes what  in theory, he despises, "a ruling elite." It takes a fair amount of political power and persuasion to confiscate from the producers and distribute that wealth to others. The elite lives the life of the self aware. His thoughts and ideas are superior simple because they're his thoughts and ideas. He stands above as arbiter and judge doling out government largess as he sees fit, favoring his political allies and trusted friends. We have seen  through the bailouts, bankruptcies and bills before congress, that his most ardent allies, the unions, have received favored treatment at every turn.

A true egalitarian would never favor one group above another and would live by the same rules he'd advocate for the masses. It's clear he believes corrupt backroom deals that inevitably bring about the desired results are preferred over transparent and honest negotiations, that may result in failure. Of course we have seen him blame congress for that backroom dealing, but he could have put a stop to it at any time, and the union carve out in the health care bill was negotiated at the White House. The old adage, "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." is certainly true, but when you add in the resolve of an ideologue, that corruptive influence in magnified. An ideologue will always live by the motto, "The end justifies the means."

The end result of a far left progressive ideologue's policies, is a continual high unemployment rate, and drastic reduction in the standard of living for all Americans. A decrease in wealth creation, a weakened dollar, and loss of liberty and self reliance. The loss of tradition and community as societal norms dissipate. The devolution of America as a super power and standard bearer for the rest of the world is inevitable. All hope is not lost. Many members of the majority in congress are not progressive ideologues and may take the lessens learned from Virginia, New Jersey, and of course Massachusetts, and began to push back against the will of this White House for the good of the people. And, if that seems too optimistic, we have November 2010 as our next best chance for turning it all around.
Check out my other blog.....Read: Sarah Calls Out the Chicago Thug Machine.....at....Con-Men 4 Palin

1 comment:

  1. Very insightful and to the point. Your post mirrors my thoughts exactly that of the ideals Obama espouses. I also keep up with Glenn Beck as I feel you have similar sentiments. My fervent wish is to see President Obama end his term as mediocre. Projecting himself in a professorial light does no good for our country of which is fair to middlin.