As Joe Lawler brought to our attention, in some comments made in Hawaii on Tuesday, Barack Obama proved his intellectual weakness yet again. (See video below.) It's not just his thinking that Hawaii is in Asia. Just listen to how difficult it is for him to get into and out of fairly basic concepts. Our once-soaring orator is utterly lost without his teleprompter.
But that's not the biggest problem with what Obama said.
As usual, he returned to this idea of "spread(ing) out the sacrifice...so that it's fair." The more common formulation by Democrats is "shared sacrifice."
Let's not forget what "shared sacrifice" means to Obama and friends. Here's a metaphor of my own design:
Imagine you usually around the street with $100 in your wallet. One day you get mugged and the mugger takes your hundred bucks. A few days later your boss comes to you and says "Bob (assume your name is Bob today), we're really struggling at the company. I don't want to fire you but if you want to keep your job, you're going to have to take a 20 percent pay cut." You, knowing how hard it is to find work these days, accept the pay cut -- almost with some gratitude that you weren't fired.
So now instead of walking around with $100 in your wallet, you walk around with $50 in your wallet. (Yes, I know that's more than the 20% pay cut, but don't forget that much of your pay goes to fixed costs, so a 20 percent cut in salary cuts much more deeply into your discretionary spending.) Now, you get mugged by the same mugger as before, but you only have $50 to give him to avert bodily harm. He's a good listener, this mugger, so although he was looking for $100 he understands why you only have $50 and walks away without pistol-whipping you.
In Barack Obama's world, you have shared the mugger's sacrifice.
Yes, I said that right: it's not that the mugger has shared your sacrifice, but that you have shared his.
President Obama's intellectual approach to political economy is fundamentally identical to a mugger's approach to income generation: find someone with money and take it from him under threat of force. It is a philosophy that is as morally bankrupt as it is certain to economically bankrupt the nation.
Furthermore, just as it would still be morally (and legally) impermissible for a mugger to take your money even if a vote of nearby citizens approved the action (since you are an unpopular person in your neighborhood), it remains immoral for government to force "shared sacrifice" even if that government has won an election.
Until American citizens reach a more fundamental conclusion about the morality of government rather than just its utility, we will be consigned to drifting between unprincipled Republican presidents and wrongly-principled Democrat presidents, each of which is all too willing to be the mugger-in-chief.
I don't know about you, but I'm tired of being mugged. It's time for the muggers to sacrifice -- without our having to "share."
|<< <||> >>|