Posted on 06/08/2012 11:08:51 AM PDT by Lou Budvis
It didn’t take long for Mitt Romney to hit the hanging curve Barack Obama threw earlier today in his press conference. Speaking in Iowa, a key swing state in the election, Romney asked whether any American President has been more out of touch with economic reality
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
One must be skeptical of the world view, especially in economic matters, of a man whose orientation to leadership of America seems to be dominated by such "redistributionist" ideas.
Had this President spent more time studying the writings of moral philosopher Adam Smith and America's Founders, he might understand that the "American Dream," until co-opted and misinterpreted as a perjorative term by so-called "progressives," was for freedom and the Creator-endowed opportunity to "pursue happiness." Along the way, that freedom of individual enterprise brought economic wealth and growth for the nation and the so-called achievement of the "American Dream" for individuals.
America did not go from being a wilderness, whose occupants still used the tools of ancient Europe, to being the most free, most prosperous, and most admired nation on the earth in the eyes of oppressed individuals all over the globe by a belief that employment in various levels of a government which planned and regulated its citizens would produce wealth and opportunity.
To the contrary, "the wealth of nations," according to Smith and America's Founders arises when individuals are free and government is limited by a written Constitution of laws securing their Creator-endowed rights.
No amount of top-down imposition of equality of results can achieve such results.
From the Liberty Fund Library is "A Plea for Liberty: An Argument Against Socialism and Socialistic Legislation," edited by Thomas Mackay (1849 - 1912), Chapter 1, excerpted final paragraphs from Edward Stanley Robertson's essay:
"I have suggested that the scheme of Socialism is wholly incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the increase of population, which power is so unwelcome to Englishmen that the very mention of it seems to require an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplication have been adopted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a 'proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.
I.44
"I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes—the class, not specially vicious, nor even necessarily idle, but below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the 'ne'er-do-wells'?
I.45
"I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequalities and anomalies in the material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the day's length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to control nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life—imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalies and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history, moreover, is the record of the triumph of Individualism over something which was virtually Socialism or Collectivism, though not called by that name. In early days, and even at this day under archaic civilisations, the note of social life is the absence of freedom. But under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisive strides—broadened down, as the poet says, from precedent to precedent. And it has been rightly and naturally so.
I.46
"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON
Well, one of the things that has always creeped me out about Romney is exactly how bad he does want this. Ironically, it may the one thing that saves us from Obama.
Romney WANTS to win.....no doubt about it!! Plus he will, unless the media destroys him.
Romney is no McLame, I’ll grant him that.
Romney WANTS to win.....no doubt about it!! Plus he will, unless the media destroys him.
( ABORTION...the HUMAN Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
_______________________________________
The media didnt make Willard destroy himself through his own love affair with abortion...
He did that on his own...
Don't know who said it first, but it's true;
"McCain wanted to be the GOP nominee - Romney wants to be President."
“Romney is no McLame, I’ll grant him that.”
Indeed; not only is he not afraid to hit back, it looks like he actually enjoys the idea of “hit back first.” I think he has a mole on the inside at 0bama’s campaign. Maybe several. Have you noticed how quick and effective Romney reacts to everything 0bama does?
He’s not my #1 choice, but I lived through Bush #1 (if you want me to be president, vote for me, if not, oh well) and Bob “it’s my turn” Dole, and John “don’t say bad things about the other guy” McLame.
It’s actually refreshing to see someone who wants the job so much he can taste it. This guy can at least throw a punch.
Hah! So the private economy is doing just fine, eh, obomo?? Tell that to the 5 or 6 million out-of-work people that obomo won’t count as unemployed. And to the millions more that are counted.
Tell all your liberal friends that this is another example of President Obama caring more about public sector union workers than private sector union workers.
“Well, one of the things that has always creeped me out about Romney is exactly how bad he does want this.”
Contrarily, that’s one of the two things I liked about him. The other thing is, he’s an unapologetic capitalist.
Caveat, I never supported him, no flaming necessary y’all.
“I think he has a mole on the inside at 0bama’s campaign.”
That would be awesome.
The death of the press monopoly gave birth to real free speech.
agree- not a big Romney fan but i very much do like the way he’s come out swinging versus the bend over and take it strategy we witnessed in 2008....
The Solyndra appearance told me that Romney knew in advance what 0bama was up to. If I recall, it was done right after some 0bama green policy statement. You can’t put that sort of body slam into action on such short notice in response to an 0bama statement, and “just happen to be in the neighborhood.” This latest “response” is just confirmation.
Romney’s people know what’s happening on “the other side of the hill” as Sir Basil Liddell-Hart called it. Either he cracked 0bama’s Enigma machine, or he’s got sources. I don’t think 0bama’s got an Enigma machine.
Romney and his campaign respond immediately to Obama's gaffe in a way that strikes the right chord and demonstrates nimbleness, and you reply with criticism and accusations against Romney.
You should ask yourself whether you are in fact obsessed with Mitt Romney.
The turnaround on this was really fast OODA baby.
The OODA loop has become an important concept in both business and military strategy. According to Boyd, decision-making occurs in a recurring cycle of observe-orient-decide-act. An entity (whether an individual or an organization) that can process this cycle quickly, observing and reacting to unfolding events more rapidly than an opponent, can thereby “get inside” the opponent’s decision cycle and gain the advantage. Frans Osinga argues that Boyd’s own views on the OODA loop are much deeper, richer, and more comprehensive than the common interpretation of the ‘rapid OODA loop’ idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.