Obama's speech ... Fair Fair Fair
By Neal Boortz
Dear Ruler gave a campaign speech in Kansas yesterday. I told you yesterday that his theme was to be “fairness,” and he certainly did stick with that theme. In a particularly lengthy lecture .. with a teleprompter, of course .. Barack Obama ramped up his class warfare campaign.
Predictably, the ObamaMedia went into a state of euphoria over this speech. National Journal’s Ron Fournier said Obama’s speech was “…a searing and historically poignant account of the greatest challenge of the American experiment.”
Ok … if you’re through gagging, let’s take a look at Obama’s speech by numbers. This may help to better understand what kind of speech this really was. Here’s a look at how many times certain words appeared in his speech:
Freedom: zero.
Liberty: one.
Opportunity: three.
Responsibility: six.
Fair (or some variation): Fifteen.
You read that correctly. There were fifteen distinct references to “fair” or “fairness” in Obama’s campaign speech. “Fair” is a focus group word. You get a group of random voters in a room and start throwing words at them to gauge their reaction. Toss them words like hard work, determination, dedication, accomplishment, earn, responsibility, sacrifice --- words that need to be associated with any person’s quest for success in a free market economy, and the reaction from your focus is, at best, somewhat lukewarm. They know they have to work hard with dedication and determination, and that they have to be responsible for their own success .. but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. But throw them a word like “fair” and their reaction is more positive. After all, while everyone might not like the idea of hard work and personal responsibility, everyone wants life to be “fair.” So … that will be the word for Obama 2012. Forget “change” and “hope.” Now it’s “fair” and “fairness.” Look … Obama needs a hook. He certainly can’t run on his accomplishments as president … so rhetorical gimmicks will be the rule of the day.
So let’s take a closer look at some points in the speech, shall we?
Ever since, there has been a raging debate over the best way to restore growth and prosperity; balance and fairness. Throughout the country, it has sparked protests and political movements – from the Tea Party to the people who have been occupying the streets of New York and other cities.
The problem here is that the current occupant of the White House knows nothing about how to restore or promote economic growth. His goal is to push America toward a European-style socialist welfare state. Economic growth comes from a strong and vibrant free market economy. No other economic model in the history of the world has brought more people out of poverty than has capitalism. Obama simply does not like capitalism. He despises it. Hence his focus on balance and fairness.
Their (the Republicans) philosophy is simple: we are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules. Well, I’m here to say they are wrong. I’m here to reaffirm my deep conviction that we are greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, and when everyone plays by the same rules.
Play by their own rules? What the hell is he talking about? In America we play by the rule of law, not by our own rules. Obama would rather the voters not be aware of the concept of “rule of law” however. He likes the “rule of man” idea, where the majority rules, not the law.
But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you want from whoever you can. It only works when there are rules of the road to ensure that competition is fair, open, and honest.
Excuse me .. but just who is promoting the idea that you can be free to take whatever you want from whoever you can. Oh, that’s right. The Occupy Wall Street crowd. Right now their seizing foreclosed properties that are owned by private banks and lending institutions. Why? Because they want to. Furthermore … our government is far beyond the point of limiting the free market; it is now in the business of controlling the free market. Also, why does government seem to have a “free license to take whatever you want from whomever you can” under the guise and protection of the law, but for individuals or the free market this is a crime?
It’s not a view that says we should punish profit or success or pretend that government knows how to fix all society’s problems. It’s a view that says in America, we are greater together – when everyone engages in fair play, everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share.
The three F’s according to Obama: fair play, fair shot, fair share. And that “greater together” line? What Obama is saying here is that the collective is better and more worthy than the individual. Just another page in the long-running leftist attack on individualism.
So what does that mean for restoring middle-class security in today’s economy? It starts by making sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success.
Excuse me, but would you mind defining “fair shot?” Does fair shot mean that Americans should be free to pursue their dreams without undue interference from government … and be free to succeed or fail based on their own hard work and decision making? Hardly. For Obama it means that the government should somehow guarantee success for every American .. with those who do succeed covering the tab. And by the way … we do more to deny our children a “fair shot at success” by sending them to the government to be educated. Obama doesn’t seem too concerned about THAT.
And so we’ve also paid for these investments by asking everyone to do their fair share. If we had unlimited resources, no one would ever have to pay any taxes and we’d never have to cut any spending. But we don’t have unlimited resources. And so we have to set priorities. If we want a strong middle class, then our tax code must reflect our values. We have to make choices.
Our tax code must reflect our values? A tax code is not supposed to reflect the political values of one ruling political group or another. It is supposed to raise revenue for the legitimate operations of government. And what of our present tax code? What values are reflected by the fact that one-half of Americans do not even pay any income taxes. The top 1% of taxes pay close to 40% of all income taxes, while earning around 20%. The top 5% of taxpayers pay more than the bottom 95% combined.
This is the height of unfairness. It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay a higher tax rate than somebody pulling in $50 million. It is wrong for Warren Buffett’s secretary to pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett.
Here he goes with this dishonest nonsense again. We’ve exposed this lie before, and we will do so extensively in the next Nuze item: Anybody who believes that Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary was clearly educated in a government school and has no idea the truth behind this statement., hence why Obama can continue to use this absurd talking point.
Investing in things like education that give everybody a chance to succeed. A tax code that makes sure everybody pays their fair share. And laws that make sure everybody follows the rules. That’s what will transform our economy. That’s what will grow our middle class again.
Obama knows that saying everyone should pay their fair share is based on a premise that there are some people out there NOT paying their fair share. The government educated dumb masses buy this totally. If there is any group not paying their fair share it’s the 51% paying nothing, not the 1% carrying the load. This, I guess, is the fundamental transformation Obama spoke of years ago? He believes the problem is that people in America (rich people) aren’t paying their fair share! Little does he know that if the government were to seize all of the wealth and assets of the richest Americans and all of the profits of the top Fortune 500 companies, it would only be enough to fund out government for eight months. That’s not going to do much for growing the middle class, is it? Especially when the businesses and the job creators have nothing, therefore no jobs for the middle class!
In the end, rebuilding this economy based on fair play, a fair shot, and a fair share will require all of us to see the stake we have in each other’s success. And it will require all of us to take some responsibility to that success.
By the way … who gets to decide what “fair play” and a “fair shot” is? Why, the government of course! Since when do you as an individual have a responsibility to see that someone else succeeds? You could argue that there is a moral responsibility to do so, but that in no way needs to be dictated by the imperial federal government.
“We are all Americans,” Teddy Roosevelt told them that day. “Our common interests are as broad as the continent.” In the final years of his life, Roosevelt took that same message all across this country, from tiny Osawatomie to the heart of New York City, believing that no matter where he went, or who he was talking to, all would benefit from a country in which everyone gets a fair chance.
It is not the role of government to dictate fairness. It is only the role of government to ensure that others cannot infringe upon your pursuit of life, liberty and property and this shall be done with an equal application of the law. Seems as though we’ve strayed pretty far from this concept, etc?
