Politics
A New Push to Play God from Washington
It’s interesting to me that last week both Thomas Sowell and I made similar comments about the government becoming “God” in the current health care debate. His comments made the evening news, and mine were published by a number of outlets. We must be on to something.
Actually, most of life relates to the concept of God. We can’t escape from it. When we act selfishly and do our own thing, we make ourselves God; When a secular worldview becomes ascendant in society, then government becomes God; But the best form of government is when we let God be God by structuring our institutions according to his principles and administering them through wise representatives.
For over two hundred years, America enjoyed the blessings of the latter and the freedoms it brings. As Thomas Sowell points out in this article, we are now “audaciously” moving toward option two with the Federal Government assuming the God-seat. It will be a hard taskmaster if we do not change course. RB.
Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social commentator, and author of dozens of books. He is currently a senior fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
By Thomas Sowell – August 24, 2009
The serious, and sometimes chilling, provisions of the medical care legislation that President Obama has been trying to rush through Congress are important enough for all of us to stop and think, even though his political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us from having time to stop and think about it.
What we also should stop to think about is the mindset behind this legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is bailing out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing “czars” to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and cannot do.
The idea that government officials can play God from Washington is not a new idea, but it is an idea that is being pushed with new audacity.
What they are trying to do is to create an America very unlike the America that has existed for centuries– the America that people have been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, the America that many generations of Americans have fought and died for.
This is the America for which Michelle Obama expressed her resentment before it became politically expedient to keep quiet.
It is the America that Reverend Jeremiah Wright denounced in his sermons during the 20 years when Barack Obama was a parishioner, before political expediency required Obama to withdraw and distance himself.
The thing most associated with America– freedom– is precisely what must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different country to suit Obama’s vision of the country and of himself. But do not expect a savvy politician like Barack Obama to express what he is doing in terms of limiting our freedom.
He may not even think of it in those terms. He may think of it in terms of promoting “social justice” or making better decisions than ordinary people are capable of making for themselves, whether about medical care or housing or many other things. Throughout history, egalitarians have been among the most arrogant people.
Obama has surrounded himself with people who also think it is their job to make other people’s decisions for them. Not just Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, his health care advisor who complains of Americans’ “over-utilization” of medical care, but also Professor Cass Sunstein, who has written a whole book on how third parties should use government power to “nudge” people into making better decisions in general.
Then there are a whole array of Obama administration officials who take it as their job to pick winners and losers in the economy and tell companies how much they can and cannot pay their executives.
Just as magicians know that the secret of some of their tricks is to distract the audience, so politicians know that the secret of many political tricks is to distract the public with scapegoats.
No one is more of a political magician than Barack Obama. At the beginning of 2008, no one expected a shrewd and experienced politician like Hillary Clinton to be beaten for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States by someone completely new to the national political scene. But Obama worked his political magic, with the help of the media, which he still has.
Barack Obama’s escapes from his own past words, deeds and associations have been escapes worthy of Houdini.
Like other magicians, Obama has chosen his distractions well. The insurance industry is currently his favorite distraction as scapegoats, after he has tried to demonize doctors without much success.
Saints are no more common in the insurance industry than in politics or even among paragons of virtue like economists. So there will always be horror stories, even if these are less numerous or less horrible than what is likely to happen if Obamacare gets passed into law.
Obama even gets away with saying things like having a system to “keep insurance companies honest”– and many people may not see the painful irony in politicians trying to keep other people honest. Certainly most of the media are unlikely to point out this irony.
Dick Morris’ Political Prophecy
Dick Morris served in the Clinton administration and was the political strategist behind Clinton’s widely successful “triangulation” strategy. I do not always agree with him, but in terms of political instincts I value his wisdom and perspective. This article, written in January of this year, is a sobering look at the coming four years in American political and economic history. It’s quite troublesome and appears almost prophetic to me–not in a literal sense, but a thoughtful prediction. I share it with you because some of it has already become true, and the current healthcare debate is the linchpin for “changing America.” I agree with many of Morris’ concerns and want all of us to rise up in prayer and action. Let’s shape this one by our faith in God and undying love of liberty. RB.
By DICK MORRIS
Published on TheHill.com on January 20, 2009
2009-2010 will rank with 1913-14, 1933-36, 1964-65 and 1981-82 as years that will permanently change our government, politics and lives. Just as the stars were aligned for Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson and Reagan, they are aligned for Obama. Simply put, we enter his administration as free-enterprise, market-dominated, laissez-faire America. We will shortly become like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, or Sweden — a socialist democracy in which the government dominates the economy, determines private-sector priorities and offers a vastly expanded range of services to many more people at much higher taxes.
Obama will accomplish his agenda of “reform” under the rubric of “recovery.” Using the electoral mandate bestowed on a Democratic Congress by restless voters and the economic power given his administration by terrified Americans, he will change our country fundamentally in the name of lifting the depression. His stimulus packages won’t do much to shorten the downturn — although they will make it less painful — but they will do a great deal to change our nation.
In implementing his agenda, Barack Obama will emulate the example of Franklin D. Roosevelt. (Not the liberal mythology of the New Deal, but the actuality of what it accomplished.) When FDR took office, he was enormously successful in averting a total collapse of the banking system and the economy. But his New Deal measures only succeeded in lowering the unemployment rate from 23 percent in 1933, when he took office, to 13 percent in the summer of 1937. It never went lower. And his policies of over-regulation generated such business uncertainty that they triggered a second-term recession. Unemployment in 1938 rose to 17 percent and, in 1940, on the verge of the war-driven recovery, stood at 15 percent. (These data and the real story of Hoover’s and Roosevelt’s missteps, uncolored by ideology, are available in The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes, copyright 2007.)
But in the name of a largely unsuccessful effort to end the Depression, Roosevelt passed crucial and permanent reforms that have dominated our lives ever since, including Social Security, the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, unionization under the Wagner Act, the federal minimum wage and a host of other fundamental changes.
Obama’s record will be similar, although less wise and more destructive. He will begin by passing every program for which liberals have lusted for decades, from alternative-energy sources to school renovations, infrastructure repairs and technology enhancements. These are all good programs, but they normally would be stretched out for years. But freed of any constraint on the deficit — indeed, empowered by a mandate to raise it as high as possible — Obama will do them all rather quickly.
But it is not his spending that will transform our political system, it is his tax and welfare policies. In the name of short-term stimulus, he will give every American family (who makes less than $200,000) a welfare check of $1,000 euphemistically called a refundable tax credit. And he will so sharply cut taxes on the middle class and the poor that the number of Americans who pay no federal income tax will rise from the current one-third of all households to more than half. In the process, he will create a permanent electoral majority that does not pay taxes, but counts on ever-expanding welfare checks from the government. The dependency on the dole, formerly limited in pre-Clinton days to 14 million women and children on Aid to Families with Dependent Children, will now grow to a clear majority of the American population.
Will he raise taxes? Why should he? With a congressional mandate to run the deficit up as high as need be, there is no reason to raise taxes now and risk aggravating the depression. Instead, Obama will follow the opposite of the Reagan strategy. Reagan cut taxes and increased the deficit so that liberals could not increase spending. Obama will raise spending and increase the deficit so that conservatives cannot cut taxes. And, when the economy is restored, he will raise taxes with impunity, since the only people who will have to pay them would be rich Republicans.
In the name of stabilizing the banking system, Obama will nationalize it. Using Troubled Asset Relief Program funds to write generous checks to needy financial institutions, his administration will demand preferred stock in exchange. Preferred stock gets dividends before common stockholders do. With the massive debt these companies will owe to the government, they will only be able to afford dividends for preferred stockholders — the government, not private investors. So who will buy common stock? And the government will demand that its bills be paid before any profits that might materialize are reinvested in the financial institution, so how will the value of the stocks ever grow? Devoid of private investors, these institutions will fall ever more under government control.
Obama will begin the process by limiting executive compensation. Then he will urge restructuring and lowering of home mortgages in danger of default (as the feds have already done with Citibank).
Then will come guidance on the loans to make and government instructions on the types of enterprises to favor. God grant that some Blagojevich type is not in charge of the program, using his power to line his pockets. The United States will find itself with an economic system comparable to that of Japan, where the all-powerful bureaucracy at MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry) manages the economy, often making mistakes like giving mainframe computers priority over the development of laptops.
But it is the health care system that will experience the most dramatic and traumatic of changes. The current debate between erecting a Medicare-like governmental single payer or channeling coverage through private insurance misses the essential point. Without a lot more doctors, nurses, clinics, equipment and hospital beds, health resources will be strained to the breaking point. The people and equipment that now serve 250 million Americans and largely neglect all but the emergency needs of the other 50 million will now have to serve everyone. And, as government imposes ever more Draconian price controls and income limits on doctors, the supply of practitioners and equipment will decline as the demand escalates. Price increases will be out of the question, so the government will impose health care rationing, denying the older and sicker among us the care they need and even barring them from paying for it themselves. (Rationing based on income and price will be seen as immoral.)
And Obama will move to change permanently the partisan balance in America. He will move quickly to legalize all those who have been in America for five years, albeit illegally, and to smooth their paths to citizenship and voting. He will weaken border controls in an attempt to hike the Latino vote as high as he can in order to make red states like Texas into blue states like California. By the time he is finished, Latinos and African-Americans will cast a combined 30 percent of the vote. If they go by top-heavy margins for the Democrats, as they did in 2008, it will assure Democratic domination (until they move up the economic ladder and become good Republicans).
And he will enact the check-off card system for determining labor union representation, repealing the secret ballot in union elections. The result will be to raise the proportion of the labor force in unions up to the high teens from the current level of about 12 percent.
Finally, he will use the expansive powers of the Federal Communications Commission to impose “local” control and ownership of radio stations and to impose the “fairness doctrine” on talk radio. The effect will be to drive talk radio to the Internet, fundamentally change its economics, and retard its growth for years hence.
But none of these changes will cure the depression. It will end when the private sector works through the high debt levels that triggered the collapse in the first place. And, then, the large stimulus package deficits will likely lead to rapid inflation, probably necessitating a second recession to cure it.
So Obama’s name will be mud by 2012 and probably by 2010 as well. And the Republican Party will make big gains and regain much of its lost power.
But it will be too late to reverse the socialism of much of the economy, the demographic change in the electorate, the rationing of health care by the government, the surge of unionization and the crippling of talk radio.
Why the Press Hates Sarah Palin
Sarah Palin’s surprise announcement during the 4th of July weekend that she will step down as the governor of Alaska once again took the national media by storm. Her resignation, just two-and-a-half years into her first term, was greeted with the usual off-color jokes, over-the-top criticism, and elite scorn. As she had done both during and since the 2008 presidential campaign, her retreat into a “higher calling” took center stage over such notable stories as North Korea firing off seven ballistic missiles and the on-going saga of Michael Jackson’s death.
Our regional newspaper–The The Seattle Times–carried a large “Happy 4th of July” banner at the top of its masthead, and below in large letters their lead story declared “Palin Creates Political Stir with Sudden Resignation.” The article described her announcement as a “mostly rambling speech” and then went on to largely question the former vice-presidential candidate as being reckless and unconventional. The Times also “happened” to mention a recent Vanity Fair article that was critical of the governor. Their glee over the announcement and disrespect for Sarah Palin was clear.
My oh my, how perspectives can differ! My wife and I watched the entire Palin speech and were nearly in tears at the end. It was actually one of the most heart-felt political speeches we have ever heard:
- It oozed sincerity and honesty–such a missing quality in most politicians.
- She mentioned her faith numerous times, her principles, her policy perspectives, and each one brought a responding “yes” in our spirits.
- Her decision made sense. She had already decided not to seek a second term and could have easily stayed around as a lame duck for the next eighteen months and taken junkets on the public dime and reveled in the power and position. But because of the unfair and relentless liberal attacks on her governance that was costing Alaskan tax-payers millions of dollars to defend, she had decided to do the right thing for the state of Alaska. How novel. How refreshing.
A couple of days later on her blog, she again stated her future goals: “I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint.”
Yet, despite her explanations and candor, the press continued to question and ridicule her. That prompted this response from Governor Palin: “How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country.. And though it’s honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make.”
How true. Sarah Palin is the most media-brutalized politician of my life-time. Only George W. Bush is comparatively close–but still a distant second. Barack Obama left halfway through his first term as US Senator to run for president without a peep from an adoring press. No criticism–no questions. Not Sarah Palin.
The press absolutely hate Sarah Palin. Why?
Before I answer that question, let’s review with honesty the unfairness of the 2008 campaign coverage against vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. How was she mistreated and mis-characterized? Just a few examples:
- She was labeled “inexperienced”– even though she was the only candidate on either presidential ticket that had executive governing experience, both as a mayor and as a governor. Not a peep was said about Barack Obama being the most inexperienced candidate in the history of the United States.
- She was labeled as lacking detailed policy knowledge — That’s true of every candidate that steps onto the national stage. She was an expert on energy policy but needed a crash course in foreign affairs. Barack Obama was experienced in nothing–and made numerous gaffes when away from his tele-prompter. Joe Biden was a gaffe-a-minute–with no outrage from the national media.
- She “blew” the interviews with Katie Couric & Charlie Gibson – They weren’t her best moments, but both were rigged to trip her up. Totally unfair. Gotcha questions. Barack Obama was given softballs for an entire year. Major media bias.
- Criticizing her looks and ward-robe – What’s wrong with being pretty? Do we criticize Hollywood stars for their beauty–and the money they spend to have it artificially created? And the $150,000 clothes? Please. How come we never got a monetary figure for Hillary’s pant-suits or Michelle’s sleeveless dresses? Totally one-sided bias.
- The tabloidization of her family – This was really low. Most families in presidential campaigns are off-limits–and for good reason. And to imply that her eighteen year old daughter’s getting pregnant out of wed-lock was a stain on her family values is to say that Jimmy Carter was responsible for Billy Carter. No–people, children, siblings, make their own choices–regardless of parental input. Everyone knows that–except the jaded national press.
Yet, despite the media machine that pummelled her daily, Sarah Plain drew bigger crowds in many cities than Barack Obama, and probably added three-to-five percentage points to John McCain’s losing campaign–an unheard of accomplishment for a VP nominee.
So why do the national press and political elite hate Sarah Palin?
It’s very simple. She’s a threat to their future power because:
1. She’s the wrong kind of woman – In the age of feminism, only liberal feminists are tolerated by a supportive press. Geraldine Ferraro was a media darling in 1984 and Hillary was the establishment choice in 2008. Barack Obama was embraced because he is a liberal African-American. Sarah Palin? “Why she even made the “horrific mistake” of having a Downs Syndrome baby. She didn’t abort Trig! The audacity of being pro-life!”
2. She has the wrong political philosophy. She’s a conservative on almost every issue. Gad zooks! That makes her non-enlightened, a red-neck nutcase, out of touch, terribly old-fashioned and worthy of late night TV ridicule and scorn.
3. She has the wrong kind of faith. She is a born-again Christian. “She’s one of those religious bigots.” There is a sinister move in this nation to label “all things Christian” as not only out-dated but in need of some hate speech laws. This was the number one reason for trying to damage her. The “progressives” now in control of the media and academia are trying to stamp out the Christian foundations of this nation. Sarah Palin is the type of political leader that stands in the way of their plans.
4. She’s the wrong kind of American. She’s one of us–an average person who worked hard and rose to become mayor of a city and governor of a state. But she never forgot her origins. She shares simple American values of faith, family, hard work, personal responsibility, and freedom. She wasn’t educated at an Ivy League School or born into a weathy family. She’s a “little guy” who still acts and thinks that way. That puts her at odds with the liberal elite who really don’t care too much for the Average Janes among us.
Sarah Palin is the number one target of the liberal media and elite because she is the greatest threat to their dreams since Ronald Reagan in 1980. She has to be destroyed. The devil–the Destroyer–is very much in play here. So whenever you hear Sarah Palin being called a “Caribou Barbie” or described as a “Slutty Flight Attendant” you can know you’re hearing a demonic echo.
In a few weeks she will step out of office into a new future–one she will have to craft herself. There will be no trappings of power around her, just her faith, family, principles and passion. Let’s pray for Sarah Palin that she will be is used by God to raise up many people like her in all the fifty America states. There’s great darkness on the immediate national horizon. We need, as Ronald Reagan used to say, a “new morning in America.”
Will Sarah Palin ever run for office again? I don’t know. But based on her past record, I know she’s going to do what’s right for America–regardless of what the media says.