Posted on 09/09/2012 2:51:11 PM PDT by IBD editorial writer
His Agenda: President Obama's convention speech got rough reviews, and rightly so. He offered little but tired bromides and recycled promises. But critics overlooked one promise that will guarantee an even bleaker future.
There was plenty to dislike in Obama's speech. The language was flat, his delivery languid. The speech was stuffed with standard Obama chestnuts about the smallness of politics, the corrupting influence of money in politics, and how cynicism is our worst enemy. [snip]
But while everyone was picking apart these and other flaws in Obama's speech, they overlooked the most frightening line of all.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Obama
You can choose a future where more Americans have the chance to gain the skills they need to compete, no matter how old they are or how much money they have. Education was the gateway to opportunity for me. It was the gateway for Michelle. And now more than ever, it is the gateway to a middle-class life.
Sunni Cleric: Allah Will Send an 'American Gorbachev' to End the American Empire Soon
Forget Gorbachev's perestroika.. a FReeper has name it BARRYSTROIKA
RTFA!
It was when Zero promised to follow the example of the Doofus on the Dime, that he'd pursue "the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one." The editorial goes on to cite Amity Shlaes's analysis in her book The Forgotten Man that FDR's government action to end the Depression only served to lengthen it.
Of course, Obama is simply promising to continue and intensify what he's been doing ever since he took office, namely policies that have produced the weakest recovery since the Great Depression.
Introducing Zero's New Normal:
Labor Force Participation Rate |
 Reagan Recession & Recovery
|
 Bush, Sr., Recession & Clinton Recovery
|
 Most Recent Recession and Zero Recovery |
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316222/tale-three-or-really-two-recoveries-yuval-levin
Thanks to Obama and the Democrat Party, there are 12 or 13 million Americans who should have jobs who have given up and are largely invisible in the numbers.
Has anyone ever gone back and mathematically modeled the FDR Depression-era measures to try to discern whether, in fact, he knew that his policies were noxious, but pressed ahead anyway precisely to pressurize the public into supporting him, on the theory that people in a world of hurt pay attention and do as they're told?
THAT would be interesting to know. In the light of what we now know he knew, and did not act upon, in the days and hours before Pearl Harbor, and about his wilfully and very determinedly hanging his Hawaiian commanders out to dry (he even used an ambitious and "available" Supreme Court Associate Justice, Owen Roberts, as a tool in FDR's campaign to pin blame on Admiral Kimmel), the question about FDR's character resolves, and so it is timely to go back and inspect his economic and political initiatives (packing the Supreme Court, the NRA) with the same perspective.
Except as a power-mad subversive who entrenched his damned political apparatchiks for the following 100 years.
BULLSHIT!*
Increased taxes ON EVERYONE immediately, and cut deficts by $4 trillion TEN YEARS FROM NOW?
IS ANYONE STILL BELIEVING THAT BULLSHIT?*
WTF?
Everybody forget that he kinda sorta never provided any detailed plans to go along with his BS HOPE and CHANGE in 2008?
What's changed?
The old "hope and change" Fairy's been replaced?
Excerpt...
"The essence of bullshit is getting away with it, with persuading listeners or readers of a sincerity that is, by definition, phoney. The bullshit artist simply does not care about truth: 'He pays no attention to it at all,' writes Professor Frankfurt. 'By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of truth than lies are.'”
Since we all use the same roads and bridges, then why aren’t ALL businesses successfully built?
And we are all lucky enough to have lived to see his replacement!
My dad asked me one day ifI had ever seen a US destroyer on a US coin. I said no daddy I haven’t. So he pulled a dime out of his pocket and said now you have
enough said
BTTT!
Are you trying to argue with the President?! You ingrate! He's smarter and better than you and knows more! Who are you -- a typical bitter-clinging white person? Figures!
Go to your room! (After you bring us a round of beers.)
“That was when Obama promised that he’d pursue “the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.””
Call that “terrifying?”? That’s almost reassuring compared to the campaign promise Obama made in when running for office in 2008, when he promised to “fundamentally transform America”. The reaction of our moronic electorate was to get a tingle up their leg and elect him in a near landslide. Now, our years later, with a depression staring us right in the face and a president demanding more power so he can compete his agenda, this cretin has a 50-50 chance of getting reelected. Which all goes to prove that people get the government they deserve.
You know he only did it because he had to. Call of duty, muse of history, and bushwah, bushwah, bushwah!
</s>
A historian or two has recorded what MacArthur said when a messenger came forward to find the general sitting in a Jeep on the side of a road in Luzon, listening to the sound of the fighting up ahead, with the news that President Roosevelt had just died. MacArthur was alone except for the driver. The messenger departed, and MacArthur sat for a while saying nothing. After a long moment, he said to nobody in particular, "Now there was a man who never told the truth, if a lie would suffice."
True story.
The following link is to an old FR thread, about an even older conservative booklet called “The Revolution Was”, written in 1938 about FDR and the New Deal. It is ALL happening again - amazingly, chillingly so. Only worse.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts
An Excerpt:
Worse outwitted were those who kept trying to make sense of the New Deal from the point of view of all that was implicit in the American scheme, charging it therefore with contradiction, fallacy, economic ignorance, and general incompetence to govern.
But it could not be so embarrassed and all that line was wasted, because, in the first place, it never intended to make that kind of sense, and secondly, it took off from nothing that was implicit in the American scheme. It took off from a revolutionary base.
The design was European. Regarded from the point of view of revolutionary technic it made perfect sense. Its meaning was revolutionary and it had no other. For what it meant to do it was from the beginning consistent in principle, resourceful, intelligent, masterly in workmanship, and it made not one mistake......
Having passed this crisis, the New Deal went on from one problem to another, taking them in the proper order, according to revolutionary technic; and if the handling of one was inconsistent with the handling of another, even to the point of nullity, that was blunder in reverse.
The effect was to keep people excited about one thing at a time, and divided, while steadily through all the uproar of outrage and confusion a certain end, held constantly in view, was pursued by main intention.
The end held constantly in view was power.
Reality is that FDR did more tap-dancing on the Constitution than any President except Obama. The media of the day covered for him, too, and unfortunately the fable has been presented by the agenda driven and the lazy as history.
Obama's first term? "At the end of the first year, in his annual message to the Congress, January 4, 1934, President Roosevelt said: 'It is to the eternal credit of the American people that this tremendous readjustment of our national life is being accomplished peacefully.'"
Obama's second term? No crisis goes to waste?
"The scientific study of revolution included of course analysis of opportunity. First and always the master of revolutionary technic is an opportunist. He must know opportunity when he sees it in the becoming; he must know how to stalk it, how to let it ripen, how to adapt his means to the realities. The basic ingredients of opportunity are few; nearly always it is how they are mixed that matters. But the one indispensable ingredient is economic distress, and if there is enough of that the mixture will take care of itself.
"The Great Depression as it developed here was such an opportunity [that was not wasted] as might have been made to order. The economic distress was relative, which is to say that at the worst of it living in this country was better than living almost anywhere else in the world. The pain, nevertheless, was very acute; and much worse than any actual hurt was a nameless fear, a kind of active despair, that assumed the proportions of a national psychosis."
. . .
"This revolutionary elite was nothing you could define as a party. It had no name, no habitat, no rigid line. [There was a Communist Party but it was too obvious, too crude.] Nobody could say that about the elite above . . . What it represented was a quantity of bitter intellectual radicalism infiltrated from the top downward as a doctorhood of professors, writers, critics, analysts, advisers, administators, directors of research, and so on — a prepared revolutionary intelligence in spectacles . . . there was a shibboleth that united them all: "Capitalism is finished." [and one idea] the idea of a transfer of power. For that a united front; after that, anything. And the wine of communion was a passion to play upon history with a scientific revolutionary technic.
. . .
[The aims of the recovery from the Great Depression could be considered two sides of a coin] One side only would represent the revolutionary intention. The other side in each case would represent Recovery — and that was the side the New Deal constantly held up to view. Nearly everything it did was in the name of Recovery. But in no case was it true that for the ends of economic recovery alone one solution or one course and one only was feasible. In each case there was an alternative and therefore a choice to make."
(Sounds like Cass Sunstein's "libertarian paternalism"; libertarian in the sense that the people will make the choice and paternalism because the elite will define the only options while nudging the people to choose the "correct one.")
I think that the first part down to "PROBLEM ONE TO CAPTURE THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT" is kind of an overview and the naming of the steps; then after that it gets into detail.
I think that this is also important to know our future..
Garet Garrett, born Edward Peter Garrett, was an American journalist and author, who is noted for his opposition to the New Deal and U.S. involvement in the Second World War. I don't know if he was one of the "bloggers" charged but he was..
the perfect target of The Great Sedition Trial of 1944 that targeted minor players in critics of the government. Powerful ones like Senator Taft were left for later after getting the little people. Fortunately the judges back then stopped the travesty. There ain't many of them kind of judges nowadays -- most seem to be in the "doctorhood".
We haven't reached the point where conservatives are charged en masse but there is precedent -- and yes it was a Democrat president. Yes it was W.W.II but those charged were long-time, pre-war FDR critics and critics of the U.S.S.R. The U.S.S.R. was a combat ally against the Nazis thus the sedition charge for criticizing the U.S.S.R. To try to insure conviction and stir up public opinion against the accused, the FDR DOJ included known Nazi sympathizers, totally unrelated to the FDR critics, in the group charged.
” - - - After you bring us a round of beers.”
Since CO2 is essential to all Life on Earth, I will gladly join with you in the festive consumption of highly carbonated beverages such as brewed in Shiner, Texas!
To the Road well traveled! Cheers!
There are so many good quotes in that article - but you picked up on ones that I also found pertinent. But like I said, although a long read, it is AMAZING how the same things are being set in motion today by Obama, and it makes for good reading. I imagine Obama is using FDR’s playbook in the hope of completing FDR’s vision.
Interesting, and scary, information on FDR’s attacks against his opponents.
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.