We The Government

battered

Obama’s SOTU in brief:

  • Raise the minimum wage.

This is a job killer.

  • Spend more in infrastructure.

Higher taxes. We’ve been here before. It was called shovel-ready jobs. Which Obama famously yucked-up as not-so-ready.

  • Climate Change.

Used to be called Global warming, but the warm weather got in the way of the narrative, hence the relabeling. This is another way of gouging even more taxes out of the American people—to control the weather.

  • Gun Control.

This is code for confiscating and banning weapons owned and legally purchased by law-abiding Americans. It’s a scheme to make government and criminals even more powerful. This will not pass. Even I, a mild mannered, middle-class citizen, will never relinquish my right to bear arms.

  • Anybody who disagrees with Obama is evil.

Marco Rubio correctly pointed out that Barack Hussein Obama demonizes anyone who disagrees with him.

Of course, this is what community agitators do. They agitate and divide—black against white, rich against poor, etc.—in order to conquer.

We do not have a President. We have a Democrat-Socialist-Alinskyite regime.

When Obama says “we,” he means government.

Obama is a classic Marxist. He sees nothing beyond government, nothing beyond a highly regulated society. He does not see or recognize the individual. And of course, he does not recognize metaphysics: man’s relationship to the universe, to nature, to G-d.

He is a man who, like Marxists everywhere, does not recognize basic psychology. Obama and his fellow travelers believe that man is motivated purely by materialism, by physical need and desires. The spiritual dimension is of no consequence. The infinite mirrors of human consciousness is reflexively reduced to a specific political ideology. Individual aspirations and achievements have been rewritten as the work of an amorphous collective, the Obama we.

Obama is steeped in a rigid political agenda. Like a Stalinist bureaucrat, or a mad, narcissistic New Age preacher, he plows over dissent and ignores economic realities, all the while scorning and caricaturing the very beliefs and values he claims to represent. His is the utopian dream world of the prosperous political class whose lives are dedicated to a bloated, dogma-ridden, authoritarian government.

In Obama’s America we no longer make stuff in order to prosper and live a better life.

In Obama’s America, we manufacture government in order to make more government.

This entry was posted in Economy, Obama Watch, Second Amendment and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Comment Rules


Seraphic Secret is private property, that's right, it's an extension of our home, and as such, Karen and I have instituted two Seraphic Rules and we ask commentors to act respectfully.

  1. No profanity.
  2. No Israel bashing. We debate, we discuss, we are respectful. You know what Israel bashing is. The world is full of it. Seraphic Secret is one of the few places in the world that will not tolerate this form of anti-Semitism.

That's it. Break either of these rules and you will be banned.


35 Comments

  1. Jeremayakovka
    Posted February 18, 2013 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    All good lessons for Quebec/Canada, where Montreal’s Champlain Bridge has to be rebuilt in the next decade. (Kind of like the Bay Bridge challenge in SF not too long ago.)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  2. Earl
    Posted February 16, 2013 at 12:24 am | Permalink

    I’m currently reading Charles Gasparino’s ‘Bought and Paid For’ about the unhealthy alliance between Barry Obama and Wall St.  Very dry, but worth the effort.  The bankers are getting even more wealthy off the increasing debt – seems their donations are paying off extraordinarily well at the expense of the taxpayer.
     
    Gotta run, ‘Space Cowboys’ is on the teev!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  3. Jake
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Pastor Rick Warren has some great things to say about these things and the government is trying to subvert religion. Including: Any religion that cannot be lived out … at home and work, is nothing but a meaningless ritual,” 
    ‘Without the freedom to believe in what one chooses, there is no reason for freedom of speech, of the press, of petition, or of assembly.’

    ““Freedom of religion is not the right that the state gives us, it’s a right given to us by God. This is the first freedom. It is actually fundamental because it determines all the other freedoms.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/13/rick-warren-says-church-does-health-care-better-than-government/#ixzz2KpF0ozAF
     
     


    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    • Brianna
      Posted February 14, 2013 at 6:47 am | Permalink

      I would not say that freedom of religion per se is the fundamental freedom, but rather freedom of thought and of conscience, of which freedom of religion is only a part. 

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted February 14, 2013 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

        Brianna:

        I have always interpreted freedom of religion as the freedom to practice religion, which is quite distinct from thinking. Thought crimes, and crimes of behavior are quite different.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

        • Brianna
          Posted February 14, 2013 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

          That’s fair.  Certainly the right to think what you please in your own head means little if you are not allowed to express those beliefs in practice.  It would be like declaring your love for freedom of the press, but then licensing journalists, putting quotas on how much paper/ink you could buy, then putting Political Officers on the staffs of all the newspapers.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Robert J. Avrech
      Posted February 14, 2013 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

      Jake:

      Thanks so much for the Pastor’s fine quote. He is a great man, a man who understands the meaning of liberty, unlike the Dear Leader.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. alterbentzion
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    Before I ask my question, I have to say that, as a former (14-year) rabbinical student, I’m MUCH more worried about the moral course Obama’s plotting for this country – openly sanctioning that which the Torah calls an abomination, and not just for Jews – than I am about his fiscal escapades. (I’m also worried about the government trying to put itself beyond any fear of an armed populace, BTW.)
    But at any rate, I don’t understand why infrastructure spending is bad. Case in point: I-75 runs from Canada to southern Florida, and it crosses the Ohio River in Cincinnati, my home town. IIRC, more than one in every twenty freight shipments in this country passes over the Brent Spence Bridge, which is fifty years old and way too small. This is a matter of national concern. Why shouldn’t the Federal government (and the nation’s taxpayers) pitch in?
    I’m not asking this out of belligerence. Please do explain – and, if the case I’ve brought is an exception to the rule, please explain that, too. 
    Thanks!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Posted February 13, 2013 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      It’s all smoke and mirrors. Investors.com just posted a story about his SOTU address which began
      “Shortly after the $830 billion stimulus bill was enacted in 2009, President Obama boasted that it included the “largest new investment since President Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System,” and said it would “help states create a 21st century infrastructure” …”  The article is entitled “5 Myth Behind Obama’s Infrastructure Spending”
      We spent $830 BILLION in 2009 and everyone has their hand out for more. We are on the edge of what the media has dubbed “the fiscal cliff” — and we’ve had no budget for 3 years now. Why the hell should we give this man ANY more of our money to spend? He talks a great game, but the results just don’t reflect his words.
       

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • alterbentzion
        Posted February 13, 2013 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

        Thanks, ProphetJoe! I found the article – http://news.investors.com/091511-584886-obamas-5-infrastructure-myths.aspx – but it’s from September, 2011, and it’s hidden behind a pay wall. Would you mind summing it up? Am I correct that you’re distinguishing between ordinary (actual?) infrastructure spending and something else which Obama is pitching as such?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      • alterbentzion
        Posted February 13, 2013 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

        Wait  - I think I found the story quoted on another web site: http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/ursel-twing/blog/2011/09/5-myths-behind-obamas-infrastructure-spending-push

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Robert J. Avrech
          Posted February 13, 2013 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

          Alter:

          Thank you for asking an excellent question.

          Living in California, I pay some of the highest taxes in America, city, state and federal. And yet, no matter how much we pay there is a series of pot holes on my street that are never, ever repaired. The pot holes on my block are representative of the all shovel-ready jobs. Nothing gets done beyond feeding the coffers of the unions who do nothing, and when they do something, they do it badly.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

          • alterbentzion
            Posted February 13, 2013 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

            Ha! We just had the Metropolitan Sewer District fix a sinkhole in the street in front of our neighbors’ house. It took them three workdays to fix, most of which were spent waiting for various pieces of equipment to arrive and concrete to dry. (But the “down time” did work out well for my wife and her play-group kids, who got to take turns looking down into the big hole in the street, while my wife held them!)
             
            Of course the fix for mismanagement and laziness isn’t fiscal; it’s structural/managerial.  It’s a government problem, not an Obama problem, per se. But how many politicians, left or right, have the will, the political clout, or the cojones to do anything? Would firing all the government infrastructure employees and hiring private contractors change much? What is the political equivalent of an armed populace in this situation?

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • David Foster
      Posted February 13, 2013 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

      One point I’d add, in addition to the excellent comments already posted in response to Alterbentzion’s question, is that “infrastructure” is not a synonym for “government infrastruture.” America’s freight railroads, without which we would soon all be starving and freezing in the dark, are private infrastructure. The fiber-optic and other lines that provide our Internet, telephone, and private data networks are private. Most electricity generation, transmission, and distribution is private. Oil and gas pipelines are private. And so on.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted February 14, 2013 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

        David:

        And one more point to add to Alter’s fine question.

        Let us remember the original trillion dollar stimulus Obama spent on infrastructure.

        Where did it go? How was it spent? Where are all the new/repaired highways, where are all the new/repaired bridges? They do not exist. The money was squandered, used mostly as political payoffs to various Democrat, left-wing groups.

        “Investing in infrastructure” is code for democrat political graft.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted February 14, 2013 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

        David:

        Completely off-topic. But here are some Chicago photos that are just wonderful:

        http://galleries.apps.chicagotribune.com/chi-20th-century-entertainers-20130125/

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. David Foster
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    Instead of watching Obama, I watched another episode of the late-1980s British TV series Wish Me Luck, which is fiction based on the real women who worked for SOE in Occupied France during WWII.
    And I had to wonder, “what was it all for?”, given the current state and direction of things in both the UK and the US.
    But I remember the line “Nothing is saved forever.” The WWII generation bought us around 50 years, and now it seems civilization is going to need saving again.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

    • Bill Brandt
      Posted February 13, 2013 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

      A depressing assessment and one I can’t disagree

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  6. Posted February 13, 2013 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    Another marvelous post, Robert.  Thank you for your indefatigable devotion to American ideals and exceptionalism. 
    Another apt quote from the Gipper, suitable for this moment in the Obamination :
    Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. 
    Ronald Reagan

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  7. Johnny
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    Free pre-kindergarten and raise the minimum wage.
     
    Obama is the best at spending other people’s money. World class! Champion!
     
    Leading a country? Eh, not so much.
     
     

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  8. Bill Brandt
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    In the People’s Republic of California, Gov Brown just got passed via initiative higher sales and income taxes. And the blowback has come – a lot of wealthy people – like golfer Phil Mickelson said they are moving out. And I hear on the radio this morning that retail sales are down.
     
    The left always seems to think that raising taxes brings linear results – not believing that the action will affect behavior.
     
    But they have their constituency – the “cheese and butter people” as a friend calls them.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    • Nickie Clifford
      Posted February 13, 2013 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

      As a fellow-Californian who sometimes vacations in Arizona during the winter – I have to mention that I feel very comfortable there with the political ‘climate’ (although,  less-so with the ‘climate’ during the summer;)  Any area with a ‘John McCaine Highway’ has to be more accepting of us conservatives. Perhaps, that’s the solution for California’s Republican’s -relocate to Arizona upon retirement? (Just make certain you have a pool and VERY good A.C.;)    

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted February 14, 2013 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

        Nickie:
        Karen and I have been to Arizona and we loved the little we saw. We do have relatives in Tucson and plan on visiting them sometime this year.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Nickie Clifford
          Posted February 14, 2013 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

          Robert:
           
          Make certain to pop over to Sabino Canyon and take the trolley-ride.  Gorgeous topography – and there are some lovely adjacent neighborhoods Karen just might be interested in taking a peek at;)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  9. Posted February 13, 2013 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Are you familiar with Alexis de Tocqueville? Here are some relevant quotes from a man who studied American politics and died prior to the Civil War:
     
    “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”
     
    “Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
     
    “Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
    and my favorite:
     
    “We can state with conviction, therefore, that a man’s support for absolute government is in direct proportion to the contempt he feels for his country.”
     
     

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

    • Brianna
      Posted February 14, 2013 at 6:42 am | Permalink

       “We can state with conviction, therefore, that a man’s support for absolute government is in direct proportion to the contempt he feels for his country.”
      Ooh, I like that!  Stealing!

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • Robert J. Avrech
      Posted February 15, 2013 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

      Prophet Joe:
      I’m not a big fan of things Français but they have given us two very great people:

      1. Alexis de Tocqueville
      2. Brigitte Bardot

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  10. Larry
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    Keep in mind the difference between what the statists say and what they mean. They say “gun control” as if their method will remove only those horrible weapons (as defined by them despite meaningful, useful definitions). What they really mean is weapon confiscation to disarm the serfs to implement their totalitarian dictatorship. They say “climate change” as if their methods to reduce the impact of carbon dioxide has any meaning, which it doesn’t because CO2 has a minuscule impact compared with water vapor. What they really mean is to impose restrictions on carbon (remember the “carbon footprint” baloney?), which is the foundation of all our energy and of life. Statists love feudalism.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    • Brianna
      Posted February 14, 2013 at 6:48 am | Permalink

      “Statists love feudalism.”

      You reminded me of something from Atlas Shrugged.  I bit long, but I think it’s worth including all of it:
       
      Then [Dagny Taggart] saw the answer; she saw the secret premise behind their words. With all of their noisy devotion to the age of science, their hysterically technological jargon, their cyclotrons, their sound rays, these men were moved forward, not by the image of an industrial skyline, but by the vision of that form of existence which the industrialists had swept away – the vision of a fat, unhygienic rajah of India, with vacant eyes staring in indolent stupor out of stagnant layers of flesh, with nothing to do but run precious gems through his fingers and, once in a while, stick a knife into the body of a starved, toil-dazed, germ-eaten creature, as a claim to a few grains of the creature’s rice, then claim it from hundreds of millions of such creatures and thus let the rice grains gather into gems.
      She had thought that industrial production was a value not to be questioned by anyone; she had thought that these men’s urge to expropriate the factories of others was their acknowledgment of the factories’ value. She, born of the industrial revolution, had not held as conceivable, had forgotten along with the tales of astrology and alchemy, what these men knew in their secret, furtive souls, knew not by means of thought, but by means of that nameless much which they called their instincts and emotions: that so long as men struggle to stay alive, they’ll never produce so little but that the man with the club won’t be able to seize it and leave them still less, provided millions of them are willing to submit – that the harder their work and the less their gain, the more submissive the fiber of their spirit – that men who live by pulling levers at an electric switchboard, are not easily ruled, but men who live by digging the soil with their naked fingers, are – that the feudal baron did not need electronic factories in order to drink his brains away out of jeweled goblets, and neither did the rajahs of the People’s State of India.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      • Robert J. Avrech
        Posted February 14, 2013 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

        Brianna:

        Wonderful excerpt. Thanks so much.

        Confession: I have never read “Atlas Shrugged” or “The Fountainhead.” I started both but the often leaden prose put me off. Does that make me a bad, or at least incomplete, conservative?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Brianna
          Posted February 14, 2013 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

          It makes you a very bad conservative, but I will magnanimously forgive you ;-)

          More seriously, while I love the stories, I can understand why some might not.  Rand had a style, and it was very unique.  You might enjoy some of the non-fiction essay collections though; they are shorter and the writing is wonderfully clear.  Try “Philosophy: Who Needs It?” or “Virtue of Selfishness.”

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

          • Robert J. Avrech
            Posted February 14, 2013 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

            Brianna:

            Thanks so much for the recommendation. Will endeavor to be a better conservative:-)

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • pmrt7
          Posted February 18, 2013 at 10:22 am | Permalink

          My opinion of Rand’s writing in general, and “Atlas Shrugged” in particular, is great ideas smothered by too many words and unnecessary details. 
          IMHO Robert Heinlein – one of her admirers – does a better job of conveying many of Rand’s ideas, without the ponderous verbiage. 

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  11. Posted February 13, 2013 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    I was listening on the car radio and I only caught the end of his domestic blather – raise taxes; and the beginning of his international – leave Afghanistan and do the frowny face on nukes…
    Every other word out of his mouth, I’m screaming “What!!??”  “What??!!”  “What the hell is wrong with you… Willis!”
    This man makes me angry like no President has before – including the viciously antisemitic Carter or the (when I was a long haired hippie freak) psychotic Nixon…
    I was listening and thinking that he must have some deeply personal bizarre issues to make him so Manufactured; so only Carefully Scripted in order to have the maximum Public Appeal for the Great Unwashed Masses.
    He makes me angry but – it is my fellow Americans that concern me more.  They like this demagogue.  That is rather scary.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

  12. sennacherib
    Posted February 13, 2013 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    Democrats: “They’re always there when they need us!”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting