Response to Obama’s SOTU Speech

It was estimated that only 10% of Americans saw the latest SOTU speech. Perhaps the remaining 90% should understand what President Obama said. 

To summarize: he grossly exaggerated the state of the economy, impacts of climate change, educational achievements, and supposed positive impacts of his statist policies; while grossly under-estimating the negative impacts of such policies, and - most importantly - the real threat of terrorism (as always). And his contradictions and denials of the facts were inexcusable. 

He said he doesn’t want politics to “get in the way” and have factions turn against each other; yet it is his own policies that have done just that. You can’t impose statism/Marxism in this country founded on principles of individual rights and freedom without expecting sharp divisions among the populace. Mr. President, we can’t agree with you just for the sake of satisfying your ego or your ideology. And your political posturing with suggested programs that can’t possibly get through Congress won’t do you or the country any good. 

And you can’t promise bi-partisan cooperation while you threaten multiple vetoes. Or brag about lowering the deficit (due only to the stopping of stimulus spending) when wanting higher spending and ignoring the debt. Or brag about low unemployment when the real unemployment rate remains relatively high. Or brag about our recovery dwarfing that of Europe and then strive to be more like Europe. 

While reported unemployment is down somewhat, that is merely due to private company growth, people dropping out of the job market (due much to the expanded welfare state), and the natural (albeit slow) recovery from the recession; and certainly not to government policies. 

Financial regulations, tax policies and selective corporate subsidies/bailouts are harming our economy, not helping as he suggested. His proposed tax increases are merely more attempts to redistribute income; and all such attempts at that have necessarily failed to boost our economy and work against individual success.  

He took credit for lower gas prices and energy independence, when - in fact - those results are due to private energy development despite his attempts to inhibit the same and raise fossil fuel costs; e.g. his irrational dismissal of the Keystone pipeline. 

He misstated facts about climate change; e.g. rising oceans (a long-term phenomenon having nothing to do with man) and 2014 being the hottest years on record. Mr. President, climate science is certainly not “closed”; and honest scientists have disproved all of your and other environmentalist claims re global warming. And don’t be so naïve to believe that China has truly committed to significantly cutting CO2 emissions. 

ObamaCare is significantly worsening our HC system and will be very harmful to our economy, not the opposite as he suggested. 

Instead of arguing for free trade that would be best for all, he asked for the power to impose trade restrictions as he sees fit. 

Education has been shown to work best in the private marketplace. Government has certainly not, and cannot, improve test scores or better prepare students for better paying jobs. It has, in fact, lowered standards and hurt student opportunities; and has contributed significantly to higher education costs. Creating special interests in education is like forced redistribution of wealth: it only creates class warfare and diminished economic progress. And free community college will only create the under-performing problems that we have seen at the high school level. 

He asked for the power to use force against ISIS, despite the fact that he has already single-handedly used force against them and others in multiple countries (albeit in the weakest fashion possible). And this after saying “America should move off a permanent war footing.” Furthermore, he continues to refuse to name our enemy - Islam, fails to fight terrorists and terrorist regimes in a way required to ever defeat them, and fails to support Israel in their lone fight against their terrorist neighbors. 

From his weak stances against Iran, Syria and others in the Middle East, to his pretense about successful negotiations with such countries, to his naïve belief that he has halted Iran’s nuclear program, to his release of dangerous terrorists from Guantanamo, to his failures in dealing with Russia, Obama has shown no clue about our international vulnerabilities or the ability to deal with them. 

Obama is reaching out to the far left which has been his true leaning all along. He is our most statist, anti-American President ever and we must all recognize the danger of electing another ideologically similar candidate for President. We are not a collectivist nation with a “common purpose” as Obama believes. We are a nation of individuals, each of whom should strive to be the best he can be, and government should leave him free to do so as our Founding Fathers intended.

Speak the Truth on Election Day

Since ObamaCare will be the defining issue in the November election, we need a method for determining the real mood of the public on that issue. 

Democrats believe this bill to be the savior of health care in the U.S. They have continually argued that it enables you to keep your prior health insurance plan if you so choose, you can keep your doctors, it will cover more than you likely had covered, your cost will drop and everyone will finally have insurance. 

Republicans believe this bill will destroy the quality of health care in the U.S. They note that none of Obama’s promises have held up; millions of people have had their policies cancelled, and - according to the CBO (official auditing arm of Congress) - close to 30M people will remain uninsured under ObamaCare; constant delays in implementing significant parts of the bill are indications of eventual failure; and significant increases in taxes will be required to cover net losses, especially after the failure of young people to cover the HC costs of older people. 

Who’s right? Well, the most objective way to determine that is at the polls. I appeal to voters in November to commit to telling the truth on this issue. 

1.    If you and or family/friends have seen your insurance cost drop this year (or even seen the increase from previous years drop) and the same will be true for next year; you did not have your existing insurance cancelled; you have enrolled in an exchange that has enabled you to keep your doctors and levels of coverage, and at a lower price; or combining all components of cost – policy price, annual deductible and increased taxes, you believe you will be better off under ObamaCare, then vote Democrat for Congressmen and Senators. 

2.    Otherwise, vote Republican. 

It’s that simple. Let both parties know how satisfied you really are with this bill.

Don’t simply vote party; vote your conscience on this issue.

What We Can Be Thankful For

During this holiday season, I again find myself most thankful for individual freedom and rights. Unfortunately, our political leaders have forgotten our past and have shown little respect for either.

Fortunately, there is an inkling of hope with the recent unraveling of ObamaCare. And I am not simply being political when I say that. Consider what there is to be thankful for in this case.

1. Virtually everything that the opposition said was bad about this legislation is being revealed as truth; e.g. government control of HC will breed corruption and cronyism, individuals will not necessarily be able to keep their previous insurance policies, costs will not be reduced, etc.

2. HC cannot be considered a right, and attempting to make it so for altruistic and egalitarian reasons is immoral. Also note that every problem ObamaCare was supposed to fix was caused by government controls, not free markets. The unraveling will hopefully lead to rational HC reforms. 

3. Everything that ObamaCare was intended to accomplish was with evil motives: redistribution of wealth, control of the economy, destruction of the middle class and small businesses, increased union power, etc. This could wake people up to the broader statist agenda.    

4. President Obama is being revealed as the liar and narcissist many have known him to be. He does not care if he violates the rights of doctors, patients, insurers and the lives of millions of Americans. His statist/Marxist ideology trumps all. Hopefully, enough people will realize that, Republicans will win the Senate next year and make it impossible for him to do further damage.

Understand that rights exist in order for man to be selfish (yes, that “evil” word of which each person is “guilty” whenever he acts in his best interest), not to be sacrificed: they sanction those actions that enable each individual to sustain his own live and achieve happiness. Let’s be thankful for those rights we still retain and work together to regain those we have lost.

Is there a "Common Good"?

Liberals/statists talk of having some responsibility to the “common good” (CG). Such talk suggests a lack of understanding and acceptance of moral principles. 

The objective approach to the principle of ‘the good’ is to evaluate facts of reality according to a rational standard of value; thus ‘good’ is that which is proper to one’s life from a rational, not emotional or unreal, perspective. The subjective approach considers only one’s feelings, desires or arbitrary needs. Which do you think is the proper method of evaluation? 

Where actions can be objectively evaluated, it is possible for rational individuals to agree to a CG. But since most people do not act rationally, it is meaningless to speak of any CG (or public interest). To impose a CG on individuals is to use force to give preference for the good of some at the expense of others - which is immoral and collectivist. Only by defining ‘good’ for individuals vs. the collective can rights be retained.  

In discussing our recent fiscal crises and federal debt, such reasoning has been lost on most politicians/liberals. Many people do not support higher taxes on the relatively wealthy to support the non-productive and looters in society; they do not support increased spending and the resulting higher debt in the deceptive name of ‘fairness’ and at great economic cost. Thus, re-distribution of income and unsustainable government debt/deficits are clearly not for the CG. It is hypocritical to expect the wealthy to be productive, buoy the economy and provide jobs for the poor and middle classes, while raising their taxes as if they don’t already pay much more than their ‘fair share’. 

Likewise, many do not see it in their best interest to remain defenseless against criminals; therefore gun control is not for the CG. It is hypocritical for politicians to pretend to support the 2^nd amendment as they attempt to restrict guns and ammunition; to expect armed security protection while asking the populace to publicly announce their gun ownership and to give up any guns.  

Many do not support environmentalists who simply want to shut down existing technology and hopelessly pursue inefficient and unnecessary ‘green’ energies at great cost to our economy; thus subjective favoritism toward ‘green’ companies is not for the CG. It is hypocritical to depend on successful oil and gas companies that efficiently provide energy with minimal effect on the environment, while fighting them through regulations/executive orders and subsidizing ‘green’ companies that cannot otherwise sustain themselves.  

Essentially, everything liberals push as being for the CG has hypocrisy written all over it. And hypocrisy results from the lack of moral principles. It reveals the fact that the hypocrites are acting contrary to their nature; they hold ideals they have to accept as their highest ambition despite being hateful and repulsive toward them. Consider, for example, how they must view America vis a vis the world: a country with exceptional virtues, wealth, success and power; yet they show distaste for the term “capitalism”, apologize for its virtues and demonstrate great hypocrisy and evasiveness in international affairs.  

Again I must note that Obama and his followers hold the wrong moral standard. They place the collective good over individual good, government force over support of individual rights. They are willing to sacrifice our happiness for the sake of the allusive CG. Don’t accept this.

State of the Union

If I was to address Obama’s SOTU speech, I would be nearly speechless. How does one respond to a fully statist/collectivist speech which contains many talking points but no real solutions to our financial woes? Redistribution of wealth, punishments for corporations and universities that don’t conform to his wishes, unsound reforms, tax increases, global equality, worthless international diplomacy and financial aid to our enemies is all so un-American that it should scare all of us.  

How can anyone buy-in to this President’s proposals and actions? FDR provides a real clue. Until recent history, liberal historians (and the broad media) have evaluated FDR as near-saintly. Some believes that his election represented a great revolution in American history. But more recent analyses reveal a different picture.  

He was essentially an unproductive man throughout his life; his only success was as a politician. He had low aptitude for economics, business and the law. He was said to have a 2^nd class intellect; however, he had first class charm and guile. In areas where he lacked confidence, he viewed his superiors as having achieved success unfairly. He was financially supported by others on his way to the Presidency.  

He spoke frequently of the virtues of a free market but seldom acted to support it. He blamed his predecessors for the prolonged depression, yet his policies were precisely what depressed the economy throughout the ‘30s. His Smoot-Hawley tariff was clearly one of the primary causes of the depression. He strongly supported the redistribution of wealth, attacked industries (while supporting those who could serve him best – cronyism), and promised a 25% reduction in spending and a balanced budget when campaigning (never his real intentions). He had no business person on his economic team capable of showing him a better path to recovery. 

Obama fits that profile perfectly. Liberals love him for the same reasons and with the same faults. Unfortunately, they blindly accept him despite two enormous flaws that FDR never had: he is a thorough egalitarian and a narcissist. He is indifferent to our economic welfare and is willing to destroy it in the process of taking down the most productive among us. He and his followers are showing either an amazing ignorance or evasion of economics, the Constitution and morality. 

The true SOTU is depressing and there is little hope that Obama – with his ideology – will enable robust growth in the economy. His despicable lies re the supposed disaster to be caused by sequestration (forcing a miniscule reduction in planned growth in spending over a decade) show that he has no intent to truly cut spending. Do you realize that our total national debt in 1931 was equal to our current debt growth in just 5+ days! Do you really believe this trend is sustainable? 

His altruistic morality dictates his statist politics. “Altruism” means sacrificing one’s higher values to lower values, ability to inability, achievement and wealth to need; it is not mere “humanitarianism” as often believed. And being “humanitarian” is caring to help others without sacrifice, not forcing individuals to care for others out of duty, envy or in the name of economic equality as Obama and liberals wish. The Right and the Left both preach altruism (albeit for different reasons), and that moral code is destroying our culture as well as our economy.

Current Issues

Obama’s 12/16 speech re the mass killings in Connecticut was yet another attempt to impose collectivism on our culture. “We can’t tolerate this anymore... these tragedies must end”; “this…is something we can only do together.” “We bear a responsibility for every child.” No Mr. President, we are not truly our “brothers’ keeper” and such tragedies will never end. 

Soon after - as with every such tragedy - the focus turned to gun control. Yet - as always - control advocates are ignoring the facts: criminals attack areas of least resistance - where guns are not allowed or in smaller numbers, there is a negative correlation between gun ownership and serious crime, and new laws cannot control guns. 

I see a three-pronged problem: 

1.    Gun-free zones: eliminate them. Enable responsible individuals in public places to carry or have easy access to guns for the protection of others. And find more creative ways to improve security in such areas. 

2.    The mentally ill: loosen legal restrictions on how we deal with them. E.g. allow a registry (with reasonably restricted access) that identifies persons who have been seen as a potential danger to others - just as we can reveal to the DMV people who are a danger driving. 

3.    Politics! Rational people could agree that we don’t generally need assault weapons for self-defense or sports. But government should not dictate our needs; and the political climate is such that yielding to the control advocates on such a point would only lead to further attempts to impose controls beyond reason. And even if Congress could pass a law that rationally determined which gun restrictions are and are not violations of our right to bear arms, that would not prevent criminals from obtaining illegal weapons. 

Fiscal Cliff: does anyone wonder how a “balanced” solution to the “Cliff” became defined as increased revenues (via tax hikes) and virtually no decrease in spending? Obama’s forced deal has certainly not averted a fiscal crisis yet to come. It simply advanced his short-term goals of punishing the rich, redistributing income for the sake of economic equality and subsidizing his friends. This will all be at the long-term expense of our economy which will likely be blamed on the next President.  

Note that our financial crisis of ’08 began with the equally irrational goal of “equality” of home ownership. Few seemed to understand how that would damage our economy either. Now using the same excuse to confiscate wealth is a moral disgrace; it is a good example of how our morality is been degraded and our political system destroyed. All such redistribution and divisive efforts are undertaken merely for a statist/Marxist principle. The lies to justify it all will never end unless people are taught that inequality is a natural and healthy phenomenon that benefits the poor the most when it results from free markets, not political cronyism and statist policies. As economist Yaron Brook said, “A society that cares about inequality of income is a sick society driven by altruism and envy.” Those who ask for unearned equality or inequality are guilty of parasitism.

Current Events

Obama has no foreign policy per se, just short-term posturing.

11/7 - Govt. acknowledged that Iranian fighter planes had fired on an unmanned reconnaissance drone five days before the election.

NID director Clapper “suggested” Petraeus resign as head of the CIA.

11/9: Petraeus resigned. The Administration had previously objected to his request to provide enhanced support of the Benghazi embassy and his decision to release his own timeline of events; that was when the FBI told Clapper of Petraeus’s affair. What a convenient time to push him out.

11/13: it was announced that 2 days after the attack, Petraeus had said it was not one of terrorism; thus the supposed justification for Susan Rice’s continual claims that it was merely a mob attack due to the video. In fact, his actual acknowledgment of it being a terrorist attack was omitted by someone at the White House from the report given to Rice. 

Benghazi is Obama’s “Watergate” - perhaps worse. And all the above were clearly timed to cover up events that could have affected the election outcome. More lies and deceit. 

War between Hamas and Israel escalated again. Obama was relatively silent re Hamas’ actions but told Israel to show maximum restraint! Then Israel was pressured into a peace agreement that is viewed as a victory for Hamas, giving them more time to garner wider support and arms for the next battle. Obama’s position again revealed his distaste for Israel. And he has even been unwilling to expose Hamas’ “dead-baby” strategy which uses innocent civilians as martyrs while the terrorists hide from return fire.  

11/8: Obama deemed 1.6 million acres of federal land unavailable for oil/gas exploration and production. He clearly lied re his desire to pursue such development; his preference is to destroy competition for green energy. 

Obama continues to show support for immoral union rules and laws that violate the rights of employers as it grants coercive powers to unions and forces businesses to “negotiate” and concede to union demands which always results in higher unemployment, higher prices for consumers, and unsustainable production costs that have driven many companies out of business or overseas. The latest victim is Hostess Brands with at least 15k jobs lost – union jobs he purports to protect. 

ObamaCare is already causing corporations to make changes to compensate for regulations; e.g. cutting hours of employees to avoid fines for lack of HC coverage. And there is growing evidence of a near-future shortage of primary-care doctors. All this was predicted by non-supporters. 

The USPS reported a $16B loss in the recent fiscal year. Now it wants to eliminate Saturday mail service. It is time to end this legal monopoly on delivery service; but in deference to the unions, Obama wouldn’t accept that. 

Obama continues to insist on raising taxes on the rich in the interest of “fairness”, knowing full well that the economy would be hurt by such a move. He has shown no interest in reducing spending and truly resolving our fiscal crisis. He is all about divisiveness: poor and middle-classes against the rich, minorities against whites, women against men. His ends always justify his means.  

Add it up: 0-7 against freedom and respect for rights!