Obama: The Conservative in 2012?
posted at 2:52 pm on December 26, 2011 by Rovin
Just when most conservatives thought they’ve heard all of the outrageous narratives and commentary from the liberal media establishment for 2011, along comes this whopper—Obama is “the conservative” in 2012. According to Mr. E.J. Dionne, he futilely offers the argument that President Obama is your conservative candidate; for the extension of substantive redistributive policies designed to “equalize” the downtrodden middle class. In providing out of context statements from Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and finally Mitt Romney, Mr. Dionne’s distressingly intentionally deceptive reasoning is that Republican candidates are radically out to eliminate government entitlements—a scare tactic that liberal progressives will use repeatedly in the coming months:
“Obama is defending a tradition that sees government as an essential actor in the nation’s economy, a guarantor of fair rules of competition, a countervailing force against excessive private power, a check on the inequalities that capitalism can produce, and an instrument that can open opportunity for those born without great advantages.
Today’s Republicans cast the federal government as an oppressive force, a drag on the economy and an enemy of private initiative. Texas Gov. Rick Perry continues to promise, as he did last week during a campaign stop in Davenport, Iowa, to be a president who would make “Washington, D.C., as inconsequential in your life as he can make it.” That far-reaching word “inconsequential” implies a lot more than trims in budgets or taxes.”
You see here Mr. Dionne would have Democrats, (and more importantly, independents), believe that the central government is the traditional arbiter in driving the nation’s economy, and Obama is our saving grace to protect us all from those greedy capitalist pigs—OWS 101. Further, E.J. suggest that the government can “open opportunities” for the disadvantaged while he smugly dismisses that this could be provided by the private sector. Dionne thinks that all private sector businesses possess “excessive power,” which can be reined in only by Obama’s insight. But Dionne mistakes arrogant shallowness for insight. Indeed the problem of the last three years has been that middle class Americans have unfortunately been mere spectators in a contest between Obama’s shallowness and his arrogance.
Mr. Dionne proceeds to “substantiate” his disdain for the GOP by soliciting two of his liberal colleagues:
“The GOP is engaged in a wholesale effort to redefine the government help that Americans take for granted as an effort to create a radically new, statist society. Consider Romney’s claim in his Bedford speech: “President Obama believes that government should create equal outcomes. In an entitlement society, everyone receives the same or similar rewards, regardless of education, effort and willingness to take risk. That which is earned by some is redistributed to the others. And the only people who truly enjoy any real rewards are those who do the redistributing — the government.”
Obama believes no such thing. If he did, why are so many continuing to make bundles on Wall Street? As my colleagues Greg Sargent and Paul Krugman have been insisting, Romney is saying things about the president that are flatly, grossly and shamefully untrue.
But Romney’s sleight of hand is revealing: Republicans are increasingly inclined to argue that any redistribution (and Social Security, Medicare, student loans, veterans benefits and food stamps are all redistributive) is but a step down the road to some radically egalitarian dystopia.”
To begin, Sargent and Krugman are hardly impartial arbiters of whether things said about Obama are untrue. Indeed each has their own proven problems with the “truth.” More to the point, this argument is simply a non sequitur: that so many are continuing to “make bundles” shows nothing about Obama’s beliefs about redistribution. His admiration for Marxists during his college years and his response to Joe the Plumber that redistribution is a good thing is a far better indication of the One’s beliefs. Moreover, the fact that many continue to make bundles on Wall Street is far more of an indication of the extent of Obama’s cronyism than anything else — the majority of Wall Street money goes to Democrats and Obama…or does anyone think that the ties that bind Immelt to Obama have nothing to do with politics?
Only in the delusionally sycophantic world of E.J. Dionne would Obama be considered a conservative.
(East of Eden contributed to this post)
Recently in the Green Room: