Good Riddance, Mr. Obama, by Robert Gore
Barack Obama was not the worst president in US history. That honor goes to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was dead before most of us were born. Any education in history threatens to shed light on present conditions, so it’s been eliminated from curricula, replaced with pandering propaganda. Proper instruction would teach that FDR effected the sea change that transformed the US from a melting pot of mostly self-confident, self-reliant, marvelously competent individuals into a bankrupt welfare and warfare state, the majority of whose citizens are jumpy at their own shadows, afraid of their fellow citizens, and terrified of their politicians. Mr. Obama has merely been mop-up relief for the welfare-warfare team’s starter, FDR.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
"His tactic was breathtakingly simple: use the government’s failures to expand the government." I submit that this tactic has long legs and has been adopted many times by the statists. Creating a problem allows them to justify more statist action thus creating more "unintended" consequences, requiring more intervention.. Rinse and repeat... ad infinitum... until the inevitable collapse. It is the unavoidable, inevitable story of empire building. Jefferson knew of the perils- "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, & government to gain ground."
There are so many reputable books available now that clearly contradict the unearned elevation of near hero/savior status of FDR. And, yet it is still the predominant propaganda we were all fed decades ago by statist historians that dominate the thinking of the majority of citizens. The only good that FDR did was sign the 20th amendment/repeal the 18th amendment. :) Buuurp!
Obama was definitely cut from the same cloth. Yes, good riddance.
Always a pleasure reading your work SLL.
Respectfully,
O.A.
Well said, what comes to mind is regarding the contradiction about FDR, here in accord with you. "By the essence and nature of existence, contradictions cannot exist.”
— Hugh Akston
Regards,
DOB
Thanks for the graphic illustration . I am also guilty of claiming
Oblame-all as the worst President. Well we sure have had a string of vile repugnant kakistocrats.
In my life, I first learned of the tremendous JFK from an adoring media and as time past, his morals and fraudulent election were revelations.
Than LBJ what a creep. Was he capable of participating in an assassination? I wouldn't be shocked. Nixon , I think he was in over his head
The military money machine( Kissinger) and his deplorable Intelligence pals they were the frauds.
From what I've come to believe were derived from Dulles and the Rockefeller CFR. Carter was like a disease to the economy. +1 for Reagan 1st term,
Having Bush as Vp was big mistake. Fast forward to today. The open mendacity of virtually everything regarding Obama. His narcissism, the castigation of producers. IRS as his weapon , Al Sharpton as a White House advisor...wtf. His loud vituperation to "deniers" of AGW. Aggressive fed land grab all right before our seeing and understanding eyes.
The others before him at least pretended to care about the middle class or producers.
Another great hero like yourself spreading truth of our history was Norman Dodd . Crediting Roosevelt as the birth of the end may well be right although the holding hands ,the courting , the first kiss ,second base all led to the copulation that enabled a birth in the first place. The Carnegie institute for world peace had the funds and the plan to place Wilson and his secretary of war. Their meeting min.s explain what has occurred
All According to their plan.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gz-ouH2MRfQ
Every one of Obama's speeches have been about himself, with the words I, me, my, mine used more than in any other President's speeches. When the American people clearly were not in agreement with his position, he chalked it up to them being unable to understand, needing more explanation.
For one of the most voluble Presidents in history, his speeches have largely been forgettable, with few memorable phrases. Some of his speeches have been staggering in overblown self imagery, such as the one he made bragging about his pending actions on climate change, where he pronounced that history would mark this as the day the seas began to recede, as though he was a new Moses.
Obama skipped dictator, skipped monarch, and went straight to deity, in his own mind. More infallible than the Pope, thwarted by only those evil minions of hellfire, the Republicans. He will not be missed.
Section 2: We hereby stipulate that all laws passed by the Congress of the United States and signed into law by the President of the United States or which became law through constitutional procedures without the President's signature prior to the passage of this document shall be randomly assigned a numerical value from one to fifteen. Beginning in the second year after ratification of this amendment the laws numbered one through fifteen shall, with each subsequent year, become null and void.
Section 3: Excepting Amendments one through ten (the “Bill of Rights”) – and exempting the 16th, 17th, 22nd and 26th Amendments which are hereby immediately repealed – each amendment to the Constitution passed previous to this document and which shall have been in force for 50 or more years shall be submitted to the several States for re-ratification . If the previously ratified amendment is not again ratified by the necessary number of states it shall be considered repealed.
Section 5: Each article of this document and any future ratified Amendment to the Constitution shall likewise by submitted for “re-ratification” after 50 years.
Let's get started dismantling this disastrous behemoth! (Investigating and indicting any and all persons within the government who used their powers inappropriately -- in any recent government -- is another beginning step.
I do agree with you. However, I actually would like to see what Trump does. I'm willing to wait and see if he's going to pull off "drain the swamp". And, I would like to give him his chance since he worked VERY hard to become president.
Can mankind not conceive of some better version? Sorry, that's out of reach for most everyone.
http://noruler.net/?s=going+voluntary
Cicero certainly did his best to attempt to circumvent Caesar's rise to power (Caesar was popular with the people---the conquering general), but Cicero was also combating Cataline, who was manipulating the masses. Caesar was also, promising grain and debt forgiveness.
Just a few clues. The American founders studied history, and were certainly aware of how easily republicanism can change to autocracy.
It started as a triumvirate, you know.
Obama caused the instability across North Africa and the Levant; he didn't just stick his nose into them.
And of course Americans didn't want to get involved in another European war. But Churchill knew without the "might and strength" of the United States, all of Europe would fall to Hitler. I won't get into the role of Stalin and the brave people of Russia, nor even how Stalin knew Hitler meant what he said in "Mein Kampf."
You are showing a typical American attitude towards events happening in the rest of the world. You should get over that.
And you said something to the effect that Hitler and Stalin should have been left to kill each other off. To me, that shows a superficial attitude to the real events of the advance and engagement of World War II.
It is undoubtedly true that US entry into the war relieved some pressure on the Soviet Union and made it easier for the Soviets to eventually defeat Germany. However, by Normandy, the tide had decisively turned (Stalingrad was over February 1943), and I think it is more chauvinistically American, even superficial, to argue that it was the US entry into the war that was decisive. Had Hitler and Stalin been left to kill each other off, perhaps Stalin would have been too weak to swallow the Baltic nations and Eastern Europe. That, of course, is conjecture.
As for my preferred foreign policy, it is the same one favored by George Washington and John Quincy Adams, but that's another debate. "Isolatinism" is just a smear for a policy that endorses trade and peaceful intercourse with other willing nations, but eschews alliances and foreign political and military entanglements. It has worked quite well for Switzerland.
Even Putin has thanked the US for entering the war, so as to help defeat Hitler.
I don't think you are really aware of the carnage wrought in Russia due to the Siege of Leningrad, and Operation Barbarossa, and the Battle for Kursk.
Robert, I don't disagree with you on the American founders policies of isolationism, and even the Monroe Doctrine. The founders did not want those warring European states to export their wars to America. However, time marches on, and it is a different world, and a different America. Americans no longer have the luxury of forgetting that the rest of the world exists. Take the Islamic State of Nowhere, for instance. (I call them that, so they can believe how unimportant they are to the me.)
America is not solely responsible. America did not have colonies in Africa. THAT problem was inherited. Unfortunately, the solutions we tried exacerbated the problem. Your article on the Deep State addressed some of the reasons for America's actions over the last 7 decades.
The Cold War was also a contributing factor to those 'solutions.'
I sometimes indulge in this blind hope. I figure if President-elect Trump can sell amazingly absurd crap, then maybe he can sell the "absurd" (according to conventional thinking) notion of cutting the size of the federal gov't in half over the next ten years. This is pure fantasy, but I'd take it if it came true. The other side of the coin is he'll act on the stuff he spews for the consumption of the deplorable looser element of his supporters. They're a minority, I know, but so are those of us who want a drastic reduction in state power. If you truly oppose statism you may long for President Obama in a few years. We don't know. In the absence of Constitutional limits that we actually observe, we are playing with fire.
I don't think that post you deleted was actually posted by CircuitGuy, was it?
I'm skeptical that Trump will do anything other than move the government along the same path his predecessors did, and which I deplored in my article. As for whether he's a clown and a showman, I'll judge the man by his results.
I don't agree with that assessment at all. I think he did a good job at managing the status quo. He hasn't fixed the structural problem of gov't. I don't know if it's possible for a president to do because part of the problem is executive over-reach.
"As for whether [President-elect Trump] is a clown and a showman, I'll judge the man by his results."
Yes. I am sure he's a showman of sorts, but it remains to be seen whether he will use to expand gov't power or protect citizens' rights. It could go either way. It will probably be a mixed-bag.
I do not know what the markets don't reflect this uncertainty. Maybe market participants don't think the POTUS has much impact on business, or maybe they're all looking at their own fantasies they project on him. For many reasons, I predict VIX will eventually reflect the uncertainty I perceive.
Getting back to the topic of judging by results, I agree completely, and I have a low bar. If a president can just manage the modern reality of a huge federal gov't with an empire-like military presence around the world, I will be satisfied. So if real per capita spending stay flat AND the deficit decreases while real per-capita GDP grow, I'll consider that success. Since President-elect Trump is talking about massive borrowing, similar to President Obama, my notion of a 10% cut in real spending over two years is pure fantasy.
"The biggest deficit that we have in our society and in the world right now is an empathy deficit. We are in great need of people being able to stand in somebody else's shoes and see the world through their eyes."
Barack Obama
Narcissistic fraud is an empty epithet not related to Ayn Rand or President Obama, but you by chance hit upon one of my biggest disappointments with Obama: He campaigned on hope but often talks about fear. I was optimistic that investors would worth through the financial crisis on our own. He promoted fear, not hope, to sell people on expanding President Bush's policies of gov't bailout and stimulus. In the quote you cite, he's talking about the empathy deficit rather than on how empathy has been an amazing part of the civilizing process. Cruel treatment of criminals and animals are looked down upon. Solving your disputes with guns is seen as low-class, not something for top leaders like Burr and Hamilton. I don't see the deficit. I see huge progress, and I have hope that an even better world is possible.
because they're so decentralized and the numbers involved" Obama. If you like this POS you are a fool.
Obama can't die quick enough.
Think you're sick of that traitor now? Just wait.
He will spout of his worthless opinions till the cows come home.