When the Soviet Union lurched ahead of us in the space race, America's leaders launched a national effort to surpass the Soviets. For Obama, by analogy, the federal government has to be the prime mover in leading and catalyzing America's comeback in education and in economic growth. We cannot understand Obama without recognizing that he believes the private sector can't create or innovate without paternalistic direction and googobs of money from the wiser beings in Washington.
"We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time," he said. "The first step ... is encouraging American innovation." Note that he didn't mean "encourage" in the sense of getting government off businesses' and people's backs. He means the federal government should proactively prod, direct and lead us into the promised land of economic growth.
In this brilliant column, David Limbaugh examines the meaning behind Obama's State of the Union speech and what Obama meant by his "sputnik moment." David emphasizes that Obama's use of the word "investment" actually means using government spending, rather than the free market system, to "proactively prod, direct and lead us into the promised land of economic growth." It is just more proof that the President is not going to be moving to the center, and that he is too arrogant to believe that private industry and citizens can crank up our economy if the government would just get out of the way.
A very special update
I just saw a tweet from a friend on twitter, @Conservativeind, that mentions this song. The lyrics are something very important to keep in mind as you read David's column.
"Remember who we are" ~ by Krista Branch
Video provided by pastormikebranch ~ August 17, 2010
Obama thinks U.S. exceptionalism begins with gov't
By David Limbaugh
January 28, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern
Obama's latest watchword, "investments," is not, as I originally assumed, simply a euphemism for government spending. It captures his entire economic philosophy – a philosophy that is permanently engrained in the core of his being and disastrous for America's "future."
President Bill Clinton shrewdly used the word as a more palatable substitute for income tax rate increases, saying taxpayers needed to "invest" more of their hard-earned dollars in America. But Obama's use of the term was different in two important ways. First, for him, "investments" would apply to the spending side of the fiscal equation. He would ask our support in his plan to "invest" more government money in infrastructure and education.
Secondly, and more significantly, Obama used the term to candy-coat his fundamental lack of confidence in the private sector and free market, as well as his commitment to faith in government as the primary engine for economic growth.
For all the analysis of Obama's speech, I don't think nearly enough has been made of this theme, which was interwoven throughout it. For it is the key to understanding that regardless of any promises he might make to move to the center, he will not do so willingly. It is also critical to comprehending why, despite the marked failure of his economic policies, he is virtually incapable of voluntarily changing course.
Obama's critics often say that it's important to pay more attention to his actions than his words. Though there is much validity in that, it's also true that we must not overlook his words, for he is not always careful to disguise his heartfelt views.
READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com
Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!