Opinion Forum

Obama’s Alternate Reality

July 11th, 2009

It’s apparent from President Obama’s weekly radio address (taped this week in Italy) that he does not see the same things that the majority of Americans see.

We see unemployment at a near record high, and we see those who believed in Obama (according to every poll) losing their confidence. He sees a recovery act that is taking the country “in the right direction.”

His most astounding statement, however, was this:

I realize that when we passed this Recovery Act, there were those who felt that doing nothing was somehow an answer. Today, some of those same critics are already judging the effort a failure although they have yet to offer a plausible alternative.

Two more Obama lies — blatant lies — in a two-sentence quote. No one with any credibility whatsoever has ever said that “doing nothing” was an answer to the economic problems, and the most obvious approach to resolving the crisis has been suggested hundreds of times — give businesses incentives to grow and hire by cutting corporate taxes and easing some of the regulation.

But what does Obama do? He starts a new WPA (Works Progress Administration). Sure, he’s created a bunch of new jobs, but they’re all government jobs being paid for by our much overworked and now practically worthless tax dollars. That’s not boosting the economy — that’s growing the government, and in Obama’s reality that’s all that matters and the only thing that works.

Then, as a topper, in Obama’s “Alternate Reality” he grabs hold of the thoroughly discredited “global warming” theory (see John Stossel’s The Global Warming Myth?, ABC News) and pushes forward an additional tax on the economy — the “Cap and Trade” (or as his critics have correctly named it, the “Cap and Tax”) legislation (see Martin Feldstein’s Cap-and-Trade: All Cost, No Benefit, The Washington Post).

President Obama and his lapdogs in the Congress are putting the U.S. economy into a hopeless downward spiral — creating new legislation that will obviously make it worse and guaranteeing, through “cap and trade,” that the United States will loose millions more jobs when employers have no choice but to move their operations to countries that are more friendly to business. And then he asks for “more time to allow it all to work.”

Perhaps “Alternate Reality” is not the right name for it — perhaps Obama missed the sign post that warned him he was entering the “Twilight Zone.”

(This article was also posted at My View from the Center.)

Articles written by Harvey Grund
Tags: cap-and-trade, Obama, WPA
Categories: Economics, News, Politics | Comments (10) | Home

10 Responses to “Obama’s Alternate Reality”

Tom | July 11th, 2009 at 6:02 pm

Harvey, it’s a bit much to use words like “lies” and “liar” in discussions about politics, especially when the President is involved and when what’s being discussed are essentially differing opinions on policy. The dictionary definition is “a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth.” Bush was wrong about WMD in Iraq, but he wasn’t lying; he was simply wrong (as far as we know). Obama isn’t lying in this example, either; his perceptions may be wrong, but that’s the extent of it. Beyond all that, calling the President a liar doesn’t advance the argument.

I think there’s a lot of truth in what you say, although I probably wouldn’t go quite as far with it. In particular, what Obama is trying to do doesn’t approach the scope of the WPA, and very few jobs have been created out of these programs, at least so far.

Ari | July 12th, 2009 at 2:00 am

You can’t blame Obama. He is governing pretty much as he campaigned. It should be no surprise that he would tackle most issues from a Socialist perspective; taxation, regulation, government ownership, massive government spending, etc. I know the word Socialist is taboo, but it is an accurate description of the Obama prescription. Those Americans who voted for Obama and are now unhappy have only themselves to blame. Their attraction to “celebrity” and the need to be part of a cultural fad, led to their votes. Maybe in 2010, they will allow a bit more sober reflection to dictate whether they will vote for Congressmen who will continue to carry Obama’s Socialism into ruinous law.

Larry | July 12th, 2009 at 9:28 am

Tom
The old axiom of it walking like a duck, looking like a duck and sounding duck, pretty much means it is a duck, holds pretty well true here. Calling a politician a liar is neither unfair or far fetched. Don’t fall prey to the self righteousness of those that wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them on the a**.

Harvey | July 12th, 2009 at 10:55 am

Tom,

If you believe that Obama really believes that any respectable economist has suggested that “doing nothing” is the answer to the problem or that Obama really doesn’t realize that there have been many plausible free-market alternatives offered, then you obviously don’t see the lies for what they are.

Ari is absolutely right — Obama warned us long before he became president what he wanted to do and the voting public apparently liked it — at the time — well the tables are turning and many of those who voted for him are beginning to see the light. Obama has been consistently and methodically lying to the American public because he knows that if he told the people what he truly believes and told his real goals for this country, the Impeach Obama movement that is just now gathering steam would roll him right out of office.

Tom | July 12th, 2009 at 2:12 pm

Harvey, one last comment and I’ll drop out of this one.

Arguments are often framed within counterpoints designed to make the argument persuasive. That doesn’t make them lies. In this case, there are those who thought doing nothing would be better than the big stimulus bill, and if Obama doesn’t think that anyone has offered a “plausible alternative,” that’s his opinion. Again, not lies.

Over-the-top arguments don’t help make points. For example, Obama isn’t trying to impose some secret socialist conspiracy on America. That’s nonsense. If you don’t like his policies and programs, attack them on the merits. Promoting a conspiracy theory doesn’t strengthen your argument.

“The Impeach Obama movement that is just now gathering steam.” Somehow I’ve missed that “movement.”

Harvey | July 13th, 2009 at 11:21 am

Tom,

What you say about framing an argument “within counterpoints” is no doubt a time-tested debating tactic and in that context, I admit you must be right. He’s trying to make his point and he resorted to extreme examples to strengthen his argument.

As for me, I’m not a debater and see no need to frame my arguments in politically correct or polite terms; I simply say what I believe to be the truth and, in a nut-shell, this is what I believe about Barack Obama:

I believe that the “coin of Obama’s realm” is fairness — not competition, not merit, simply fairness and I believe that President Obama believes that the U.S. is existing under two “unfair” systems: capitalism and the free-market.

I believe that Barack Obama has a true socialist soul and when he sees something that is not “fair” he is compelled to change it.

I believe that his vision for the United States is to remake it into something that resembles the majority of European countries.

I’ve heard what Obama has said and I’ve watched what he is doing and these are the only conclusions (however over-the-top you see them) that I can draw.

I’m not saying Obama is a “bad” man, I’m saying he does not believe in the America we know, in the America we grew up in; he believes in his vision of a completely fair society — and that is the antithesis of what made America into the richest, most powerful and generally the best nation on earth.

If my observations are correct, Obama will do great and perhaps permanent damage to this country before he’s done. If my observations are not correct I will feel a great relief, but will never regret having said what I felt I had to say.

Clarissa | July 13th, 2009 at 11:29 am

“Their attraction to “celebrity” and the need to be part of a cultural fad, led to their votes. ”

-Why do you despise the American people so much? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to suppose that many people voted for Obama because McCain/Palin ticket was a joke? Or because people weren’t hapy with the disastrous Bush administrations?

“Harvey, it’s a bit much to use words like “lies” and “liar” in discussions about politics, especially when the President is involved and when what’s being discussed are essentially differing opinions on policy. ”

– I couldn’t agree more. The “Bush lied/Obama lies” rhetoric is very unproductive.

Harvey | July 13th, 2009 at 11:32 am

BTW Tom,

The Impeach Obama movement is primarily in the blogosphere (where all things seem to start nowadays). A Google Blog Search for Impeach Obama nets over 82,000 hits.

There is also a growing trend in the Letters to the Editor columns all across the country. Right now — based on some of the corporate takeovers of this administration — a good Constitutional lawyer may try to make a case for Impeachment but probably not a strong case. Six more months down the road, unless Obama changes his direction, you’ll hear much more about articles of impeachment.

Lisa | July 13th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

I’m with you, Harvey. Aside from the economy and the healthcare reform which both concern me, I am incredibly astonished that no one in the administration seems to be concerned with the global threat. Kim Jung Il is not one who will stand to be ignored and I fear what he has in mind to do next. All this is occurring while there has been little effort on the part of the administration to foster our relationships with our staunchest allies. President Obama has been more interested in hanging out with President Sarkosky which is clearly evidenced not only in the famous photo from last week but in many others. As we’ve seen repeatedly, photos speak a thousand words.

Harvey | July 13th, 2009 at 11:28 pm

Clarissa,

Certainly SOME people voted for Obama for the reasons Ari pointed out — we know that some people voted for Obama ONLY because they wanted to see the “first black president in office.”

You are certainly NOT wrong when you point out that many more did not vote FOR Obama as much as they voted AGAINST the Republican party.

Neither reason is, in my view, a good reason to vote in a new President of our United States for four years.

It is obviously “a bit much” or as Tom said “over-the-top” to ignore political correctness and disdain ‘weasel-wording’ as I do but what many do not understand is, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything! I’m simply offering my perspective in plain English.

I’ve been fighting with Liberals for years (literally) in blog comments and in political chat sites and don’t think I have ever changed one mind but I hope I have been able to get a few people to at least consider my alternative views.

I do appreciate your comment and hope that you will not let your dislike for my choice of words get in the way of what I’m saying.