Obama Comes “Clean”
Obama’s Friday Firehouse address may represent the turning point in the 2012 presidential campaign, and Romney didn’t have to lift a finger.
Obama’s thesis that government enables all individual effort and accomplishment, an enabling that producers must repay by disproportionate taxation, betrays Obama’s total ignorance of history, philosophy, human nature, and, perhaps most embarrassing, because it’s the only activity he’s ever seriously pursued, political tactics.
It’s ironic that Obama is associated with “stimulus” because this remarkable thesis efficiently chills incentive at all levels of society. Those that have the capacity to create value will hardly be comforted in knowing that the glory is not theirs, but rather Bael’s, who must be fed. Those with lesser capacities can relax without further effort, comforted by the knowledge that it is they who make all the good things happen. Since the enabling is accomplished by spending taxpayer money, this may be more difficult for the unproductive to pull off since they don’t pay much in the way of taxes.
Of course, the notion that individuals owe government for making their accomplishments possible is vintage Marxism, but Obama is not sufficiently grounded in history or philosophy to appreciate this. It would undoubtedly be news to Obama to know that it is government that is the debtor to the individual, a debt which is discharged by keeping the country safe and the population free.
Already, pundits on both sides of the political spectrum are expressing astonishment that Obama would betray so openly his ignorance of the American way of life and his hostility/jealousy regarding productive Americans.
As a companion piece to the Dems demand for past Romney tax returns, there is a developing interest in Obama’s academic background and record. Obama’s latest pronouncement on the roles of government and the individual will do nothing to assuage this curiosity. The speech will also surely produce increasing skepticism about the notion that Obama is bright, even in his specialty field of pragmatic, parasitic politics.
(c) 2012 Gordon Osmond