It is patently unfair to credit Barack Hussein Obama with single-handedly replacing our Constitutional Republic with an urbane national socialism. Most presidents since Woodrow Wilson have busied themselves with centralizing and expanding the power of the National Government beyond our Founders’ worst nightmares. The difference, if any, is that the more notable usurpers, Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, may have innocently believed that their constitutional transgressions were in the American national interest, and that the forcible redistribution of wealth from rich to poor and the judicial redistribution of power from the States to Washington, DC, was in the collective interest of all.
Obama’s significance isn’t that he added trillions of dollars to the national debt, or added trillions in new entitlements, or that his Federal Reserve is debasing our currency with trillions in new money. No, these achievements do not make Obama unique, except to the extent the exceptional nature of his policies awakened the Tea Party and energized the various liberty movements now fomenting against him.
What makes the Obama presidency uniquely disturbing is that he uses the cover of Progressivism (and the sorry dupes of that movement) to hide his sickening blend of Chicago politics with a class war strategy as literally outlined in the Communist Manifesto. Obama is a smart, calculating man, and he cannot be unaware that the twentieth century was unkind to centrally-planned economic policies. FDR was the first to disprove Keynesian economics on a grand scale. Then LBJ’s Great Society became the cultural and economic death sentence for our urban poor. Obama — as a perceptive student and witness to this history — should know better.
And if he should know better – with the full hindsight of the twentieth century behind him – why does he persist in pursuing grandiose new entitlement programs that expand government dependency that we can ill afford? Why does he shill for billions more in ‘stimulus’ spending though all the evidence – in the US and abroad — is against demand-side economic policies?
The answer, which will offend all liberals and their moderate enablers, is that Obama is not a Progressive Warrior seeking to improve our collective lot. He is instead seeking to use the failures of the progressive movement – government dependence and economic stagnation – as the means to cement the power of centralized government against the formerly sovereign States and a formerly independent people.
You, my reader, may very well like the comfort afforded by national socialism, trading freedom for security, swapping natural rights for a nanny state, and replacing a Jeffersonian republic with an Orwellian central government. I’m not so into any of that, for me and my children. Which is why, come November, Obama must go.