Toned Down and Dressed Up: Obama-Speak and the Government of Atlas Shrugged
Posted by JustinLesniewski 11 years, 3 months ago to Politics
And you thought the Detroit debacle was bad … in the midst of President Obama calling his administration's ongoing string of scandals “phony,” First Lady Michelle Obama (FLOTUS) enters the fray with a personal email to her supporters that contradicts reality so greatly it’s hard to believe that anyone, let alone a Princeton graduate, could think it.
FLOTUS writes, "When I was growing up, a family like mine -- living on my hard-working father's salary at the city water plant -- could build a solid life without much debt and without relying on any form of public assistance. Today, for too many families, that American promise is no longer within reach. Barack is working to fix that and he needs solid Democrats in Congress to help him."
Really? Craig Bannister (Cnsnews.com) smartly points out that President Obama’s “administration is spending millions actively promoting dependence on government assistance in the form of things like food stamps [NOTE: 103 Million on food stamp programs v. 97 Million “full-time” USA employees] and health care [at a “net cost of $1.1 trillion”].” (http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-bann...)
One explanation for the contradiction is that FLOTUS is neatly delivering what her husband has perfected: a bit of doublespeak that would cause George Orwell…or, well, Ayn Rand to tremble.
In her 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, Rand penned an exchange between lobbyists and bureaucrats that demonstrates the exact tactic President Obama is using. Tell me this doesn’t sound familiar:
“‘But can we get away with it?’ asked Wesley Mouch [the Senior Coordinator of the Bureau of Economic Planning and Natural Resources].
…
It was Eugene Lawson [former head of the bankrupt Community Bank of Madison and now a bureaucrat at the Bureau of Economic Planning and Natural Resources], who answered. ‘That’s not, it seems to me, the way to put it. We must not let vulgar difficulties obstruct our feeling that it’s a noble plan motivated solely by the public welfare. It’s for the good of the people. The people need it. Need comes first, so we don’t have to consider anything else.’
…
[Head of State Thompson] said with brisk cheerfulness, ‘That’s the line…Tone it down and dress it up and get your press boys to chant it—and you won’t have to worry.’”
FLOTUS is not saying the President is trying to put everyone on public assistance. She is saying the President is trying to get everyone off of public assistance by starting them on it and then weaning them off it. She is saying POTUS’ has a noble plan motivated solely by the public welfare. And she is doing it by packaging it with the “American promise.”
As Rand demonstrated in her novel, which is in the midst of being made into a motion picture trilogy, there is no such thing as the “public welfare”, only a collection of individuals freely choosing to associate or not. That is the American promise--to live your life how you want. Any statement otherwise is just a toned down and dressed up attempt to increase government control.
Atlas Shrugged Parts 1 and 2 are available on DVD and Netflix. Part 3 will be in theaters in 2014.
FLOTUS writes, "When I was growing up, a family like mine -- living on my hard-working father's salary at the city water plant -- could build a solid life without much debt and without relying on any form of public assistance. Today, for too many families, that American promise is no longer within reach. Barack is working to fix that and he needs solid Democrats in Congress to help him."
Really? Craig Bannister (Cnsnews.com) smartly points out that President Obama’s “administration is spending millions actively promoting dependence on government assistance in the form of things like food stamps [NOTE: 103 Million on food stamp programs v. 97 Million “full-time” USA employees] and health care [at a “net cost of $1.1 trillion”].” (http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-bann...)
One explanation for the contradiction is that FLOTUS is neatly delivering what her husband has perfected: a bit of doublespeak that would cause George Orwell…or, well, Ayn Rand to tremble.
In her 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, Rand penned an exchange between lobbyists and bureaucrats that demonstrates the exact tactic President Obama is using. Tell me this doesn’t sound familiar:
“‘But can we get away with it?’ asked Wesley Mouch [the Senior Coordinator of the Bureau of Economic Planning and Natural Resources].
…
It was Eugene Lawson [former head of the bankrupt Community Bank of Madison and now a bureaucrat at the Bureau of Economic Planning and Natural Resources], who answered. ‘That’s not, it seems to me, the way to put it. We must not let vulgar difficulties obstruct our feeling that it’s a noble plan motivated solely by the public welfare. It’s for the good of the people. The people need it. Need comes first, so we don’t have to consider anything else.’
…
[Head of State Thompson] said with brisk cheerfulness, ‘That’s the line…Tone it down and dress it up and get your press boys to chant it—and you won’t have to worry.’”
FLOTUS is not saying the President is trying to put everyone on public assistance. She is saying the President is trying to get everyone off of public assistance by starting them on it and then weaning them off it. She is saying POTUS’ has a noble plan motivated solely by the public welfare. And she is doing it by packaging it with the “American promise.”
As Rand demonstrated in her novel, which is in the midst of being made into a motion picture trilogy, there is no such thing as the “public welfare”, only a collection of individuals freely choosing to associate or not. That is the American promise--to live your life how you want. Any statement otherwise is just a toned down and dressed up attempt to increase government control.
Atlas Shrugged Parts 1 and 2 are available on DVD and Netflix. Part 3 will be in theaters in 2014.
"Wow, this looks cool." says VJ, aka Wesley Mouch in a skirt. "Let's try this. We'll tweet it have Carney lie about it to the press, congress will pass it without reading it, and we'll make a new app for all the smart phones and people will eat it with a spoon and ask for more. Easy peasy."
Your comments and quoted lines from AS are spot on. The question is how can they be called out and countered? They are so soft and cozy, any slighty negative word about them is like "Po and Flo are being attacked again by those nasty rights.