6 votes

Get ready for real trouble. Article by Andrew Napolitano.

Only in America can a president who inherits a deep recession and whose policies have actually made the effects of that recession worse get re-elected. Only in America can a president who wants the bureaucrats who can't run the Post Office to micromanage the administration of every American's health care get re-elected. Only in America can a president who kills Americans overseas who have never been charged or convicted of a crime get re-elected. And only in America can a president who borrowed and spent more than $5 trillion in fewer than four years, plans to repay none of it and promises to borrow another $5 trillion in his second term get re-elected.

What's going on here?

What is going on is the present-day proof of the truism observed by Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, who rarely agreed on anything in public: When the voters recognize that the public treasury has become a public trough, they will send to Washington not persons who will promote self-reliance and foster an atmosphere of prosperity, but rather those who will give away the most cash and thereby create dependency. This is an attitude that, though present in some localities in the colonial era, was created at the federal level by Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, magnified by FDR, enhanced by LBJ, and eventually joined in by all modern-day Democrats and most contemporary Republicans.

Mitt Romney is one of those Republicans. He is no opponent of federal entitlements, and he basically promised to keep them where they are. Where they are is a cost to taxpayers of about $1.7 trillion a year. Under President Obama, however, the costs have actually increased, and so have the numbers of those who now receive them. Half of the country knows this, and so it has gleefully sent Obama back to office so he can send them more federal cash taken from the other half.

It is fair to say that Obama is the least skilled and least effective American president since Jimmy Carter, but he is far more menacing. His every instinct is toward the central planning of the economy and the federal regulation of private behavior. He has no interest in protecting American government employees in harm's way in Libya, and he never admits he has been wrong about anything. Though he took an oath to uphold the Constitution, he treats it as a mere guideline, whose grand principles intended to guarantee personal liberty and a diffusion of power can be twisted and compromised to suit his purposes. He rejects the most fundamental of American values – that our rights come from our Creator, and not from the government. His rejection of that leads him to an expansive view of the federal government, which permits it, and thus him, to right any wrong, to regulate any behavior and to tax any event, whether authorized by the Constitution or not, and to subordinate the individual to the state at every turn.

As a practical matter, we are in for very difficult times during Obama's second term. Obamacare is now here to stay; so, no matter who you are or how you pay your medical bills, federal bureaucrats will direct your physicians in their treatment of you, and they will see your medical records. As well, Obama is committed to raising the debt of the federal government to $20 trillion. So, if the Republican-controlled House of Representatives goes along with this, as it did during Obama's first term, the cost will be close to $1 trillion in interest payments every year. As well, everyone's taxes will go up on New Year's Day, as the Bush-era tax cuts will expire then. The progressive vision of a populace dependent on a central government and a European-style welfare state is now at hand.

MORE|SOURCE
http://lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano75.1.html



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

On the economy, I feel that

On the economy, I feel that Obama's biggets mistake is not raising interest rates. That, plus allowing QE (which is kind of the same thing). But I have problems with Judge Nap's statements.

"Only in America can a president who inherits a deep recession and whose policies have actually made the effects of that recession worse get re-elected."

That is because most Americans don't think he's made things worse.

"Only in America can a president who wants the bureaucrats who can't run the Post Office to micromanage the administration of every American's health care get re-elected."

Only in America? Really? How about, I don't know, Europe? This is not an American problem; it is a human problem.

"Only in America can a president who kills Americans overseas who have never been charged or convicted of a crime get re-elected."

This is probably true. This is a very American attitude.

"And only in America can a president who borrowed and spent more than $5 trillion in fewer than four years, plans to repay none of it and promises to borrow another $5 trillion in his second term get re-elected."

Factually, Obama took the deficit from 1 trillion to 1.2. Reagan took it from 80 to 150 while tripling the national debt. Obama's also held taxes to levels lower than they were under Reagan. So I think this is a secondary issue.

"What is going on is the present-day proof of the truism observed by Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, who rarely agreed on anything in public: When the voters recognize that the public treasury has become a public trough, they will send to Washington not persons who will promote self-reliance and foster an atmosphere of prosperity, but rather those who will give away the most cash and thereby create dependency."

Yeah, but sometimes I think Hamilton WANTED it this way. Give the man zero credit. Let me remind you that Hamilton wanted the President to be a King....literally!

"This is an attitude that, though present in some localities in the colonial era, was created at the federal level by Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, magnified by FDR, enhanced by LBJ, and eventually joined in by all modern-day Democrats and most contemporary Republicans."

I disagree. This is a product of Obama, the two Bushes, and Reagan. WW is responsible for our foreign belligerance, Roosevelt is noted for keeping government spending levels to lower than what they were under the founders (in terms of GDP). FDR crafted budget that was responsbile for the lowest levels of spending in the last 70 years.

LBJ serves some blame, but he also gave us civil rights. That is an incredible win. My issues with the limits on private property aside, this was a huge win from the tyranny of the majority.

"Mitt Romney is one of those Republicans. He is no opponent of federal entitlements, and he basically promised to keep them where they are."

Again, Obama has already cut social security and medicare. He was ready to cut medicaid and welfare in exchange for cuts in military spending and tax hikes. He's also hinted at cutting SS even more, even though it is an effective tax hike.

Romney promised to not cut medicare, not cut social security, not cut medicaid, raise military spending by 150+ billion a year, and magically balance the budget while taking GDP to 26 trillion by 2017.

These are the facts.

"Where they are is a cost to taxpayers of about $1.7 trillion a year. Under President Obama, however, the costs have actually increased, and so have the numbers of those who now receive them."

Because of demographics and the recession. People are dipping into their SS because they are retiring. Everyone knew that this was coming. The only thing he has done has been to cut the payroll tax, which takes out the benefits. He has not LEGISLATIVELY increased SS and medicare payouts.

"It is fair to say that Obama is the least skilled and least effective American president since Jimmy Carter, but he is far more menacing."

Screw this ridiculous hate for Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter, who had the audacity to chastise Americans for consuming too much and saving less. Carter, who appointed Vockler. Carter, who added more jobs/year than Reagan did (though of course Reagan increased personal income more). Carter, who actually REDUCED the yearly deficit.

Carter should be criticized for his foreign policy, if anything.

"His every instinct is toward the central planning of the economy and the federal regulation of private behavior"

Again, while Obamacare and Dodd-Frank have not been factored in yet, regulation under Obama is less than regulation under Bush, despite a bigger economy. Bush's regulations cost the economy 1.7 trillion in 2008 and Obama's cost the economy 1.5 trillion in 2010. This is according to the Crane study, backed up by the SBM.

"He rejects the most fundamental of American values – that our rights come from our Creator, and not from the government."

Our most fundamental freedom is our freedom of speech...which Obama still violates. But don't bring religion into this.

The rest I agree with.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Common curtsey

3 paragraphs and then link it, no need to give the feds an excuse for PIPA, CISPA, or SOPA...

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Will do Freedom...I've never read the rules :(

I'll start limiting my posts to 3 paragraphs and then point to the link.

Hussein Obama

will also get to appoint at least one Supreme to the court. Maybe even 2.