by Tom Trinko -
We know Obama loves the poor because he’s been hell-bent on making more of them since the day he was elected. All of Obama’s policies have been about increasing government power, and none of them have been about helping Americans get jobs.
Even though the only product of Obama’s economic policies has been a massive increase in poverty and dependency in America, Obama continues to either demand more of the same or ignore any attempt to bring those the Obama economy pushed into poverty back into the American economic mainstream. With real unemployment running at 14%, Obama is telling us how great therecovery is.
To understand what motivates Obama, it’s important to understand a critical aspect of liberalism: liberals are all about a will for power, not about caring for the poor.
A key core attribute of most liberals is a sense of smug superiority:
- Atheist liberals believe they are better than those fools who believe in God.
- Liberals who give little of their own money to charity believe they are better than Christians who sacrifice to help the poor.
- Liberals who have no children believe they know better how to raise children than do families who actually have children.
- Racist liberals believe that they are better than blacks, which is why white liberals believe they can define who is authentically black.
- Liberals who’ve never run a business or created a job believe they know better than American businessmen how to run a business
Like all those who think of themselves as superior but are not, liberals feel that they have the right to dictate how everyone else lives. They truly believe that the nanny state is the right approach because the benighted folk who cling to their guns and religion in flyover country can’t manage their lives without the benevolent guidance of liberal elites.
Unfortunately, from the liberal perspective, people generally don’t like to be told how to live their lives by pompous elitists. People yearn to be free to make their own successes and failures.
The liberal solution to this “problem” is to make people dependent on liberals. A man who believes that the government is all that stands between his family and hunger or being beaten to death by a racist Southerner will be much more willing to vote for those who would enslave him than a man who knows he can, through his hard work, keep his family prosperous.
We can tell that liberals don’t really care about the poor because if they did, they’d be trying to alleviate poverty rather than just ensuring that the poor don’t starve to death.
With real unemployment running at insanely high levels, liberals are only concerned with increasing the already bloated welfare system. Nothing liberals are even claiming to do is designed to get America back to work. Instead, liberals are working hard to ensure that the dependent can live a comfortable lifestyle, including cable TV, while simultaneously making sure that the dependent know that voting for conservatives will result in starvation.
When Obama took office, instead of trying to stop the “Great Recession,” he moved to vastly increase the national debt and the size of the federal government through his “shovel-ready” Chicago-style payoff for those who supported his election.
Even though that effort failed miserably, instead of trying something different, Obama’s primary objective in his first term was a massive government takeover of the health care system. Once the government controls your health care, it will have a very real life-and-death lever — support liberals, or the death panels will decide you’re too fat or have too many kids or don’t eat right to get the medical care you need.
Obama and his backers always respond to his miserable economic track record by saying that if it weren’t for his paying off his cronies with the stimulus, things would be worse. Of course, this is an unprovable statement. When that doesn’t work, Obama blames others for thwarting him and declares his care for the downtrodden.
The reality is that from their actions, we can see that liberals don’t care for the poor.
Obama’s policies all increase the cost of doing business and add huge amounts of uncertainty to the business world, which simple common sense indicates will increase unemployment. But instead of worrying about that, Obama works hard to generate class envy and blame the “rich” for everything. If he cared about the unemployed, he’d be working to unleash the private sector and enlist the “rich” to help get jobs. But given that his real objective is political power, keeping people out of work and dependent and demonizing the “rich” makes total sense.
Black unemployment is twice that of whites. Yet not only do liberals refuse to try to improve the black inner-city schools so that blacks have a fighting chance of using their talents to support themselves, but they actually work to ensure that public education stays bad.
Obama ended a school choice program that disproportionately helped blacks in D.C., and Obama’s administration is suing Louisiana to end a school voucher program that is primarily helping poor blacks. Any competition would result in the public schools having to improve, but if they do, then there will be fewer dependent people, and that is bad for Obama. Obama proves he cares more about power than about the poor when he works to ensure that the public schools in poor areas remain horrible.
Even Obama is now admitting that ObamaCare raises taxes — giving more power to the government, but doing nothing to reduce unemployment. But if Obama’s objective is to increase dependency, ObamaCare makes perfect sense: by dramatically increasing the cost of medical insurance, ObamaCare is going to make it impossible for millions of Americans to buy their own insurance, thereby creating a whole new class of dependents who will tend to support liberals.
For years, Republicans have let their civility cost them the debate. While Democrats go for the throat and accuse Republicans of being Nazis, Republicans have refrained from pointing out that a key modern-day Democrat senator was a paid recruiter for the KKK.
When Republicans tell the American people that liberals are well-intentioned but their solutions don’t work, we’ve already handed the people who support killing unborn girls because they’re girls and eliminating religious freedom a huge victory.
We’ve changed the debate from “do you want anti-Christian far-left radicals to run your life” to “We think that these well-intentioned people just don’t have the right solution.”
Back in the days of JFK and Hubert Humphrey, many Democrats were well-intentioned. But modern Democrats are all about getting power, hence why Reid’s off-the-cuff wondering why he would bother to help kids with cancer.
That’s really the position of the Democrats in a nutshell: whatever benefits us is good, and that’s all that matters.
We’ve seen how effective Democrats and the MSM have been in tarnishing the Republican brand with lies, so imagine what we can do with truth on our side.
We need to point out that the Democrats are in the business of making and feeding the poor, not helping them.
We need to get people talking about how racist Democrats are — oppressing blacks by keeping inner-city schools hell-holes with success rates that would never be tolerated in white schools. No more about how Republicans opposing Obamaphones are racist.
HT : American Thinker