It’s a safe assumption to make that the reelection of Barack Hussein Obama
to the office of the United States Presidency will be talked about for decades
to come. In history textbooks, 2012 will be referred as a momentous election
year when the nation came together and collectively decided to stick with a
president through the thick. Like Franklin Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and
other “transformative” presidents before him, Obama will be praised for keeping
the country together in the midst of economic difficulty. In sum, he will be
called a popular figure who triumphed over America’s old guard and lead the
nation into a new era of solidarity and renewed social tolerance.
The lavishing has already begun with prominent voices on the left like Paul
Krugman declaring the “new
America” has made Obama their champion. It’s being said in major newspapers
across the world that this new incarnation of the American experiment is much
more attuned to the struggle of minorities and the downtrodden. They went with
a President who will use the divine power of the federal government to lift the
disenfranchised onto the platform of dignified living.
Like most of what passes for accepted history, this is downright
propaganda. The country as a whole wasn’t frightened over sudden change by
throwing out the incumbent. It wasn’t a declaration of a new, more diverse
America. Shaping a new destiny wasn’t on the casual voter’s mind on November 6th.
There is a rational explanation for the
President’s reelection which doesn’t invoke a deep or complex meaning. The only
way to explain the outcome is in the simplest and direct prose: the moochers
prevailed.
Obama’s winning tactic was to do what any respectable man does when he
wishes to have something; he bought it. From cell phones and contraceptives to
food stamps and unemployment benefits, the Obama administration kept the money
flowing to ensure a steady turnout on Election Day. The coup de grĂ¢ce was painting his
opponent as a second coming of Dickens’ Scrooge that was ready to cut the
voters from their trust funds.
The campaign made no attempt to hide this tactic. In an online video, celebrity Lena
Dunham was tapped to extol the virtues of government-supplied birth control.
The advertisement was aimed at a younger generation already guaranteed access
to their parent’s health insurance till they turn 26 (and then morph
simultaneously into full grown, self-sufficient adults). The video was a great
demonstration of the campaign strategy but it was topped by one woman from
Cleveland, Ohio who exemplified the public trough mentality on camera. Commonly
referred to as the Obama-phone lady, this woman was
so enraptured by her “free” cell phone and other welfare entitlements, she was
determined to “keep Obama in president” to use her exact words. Though clearly
dimwitted, Ms. Obamaphone was a phenomenal orator of the President’s message of
goodies in exchange for votes.
Though it worked splendidly, Obama’s strategy was not brilliantly crafted
from the minds of experts. It was the same bread and circus routine employed by
the Romans and applied to modern demographics that relish in a victim-like
mentality. Women, the youth, blacks, Hispanics, and the elderly were all
catered to through subtle patronization and outright payoffs. It was the
same tactic employed by the Roosevelt administration when the New Deal got
underway. As journalist John T. Flynn wrote of the
popular 32nd president:
It was always easy to sell him a plan that involved giving away government
money. It was always easy to interest him in a plan which would confer some
special benefit upon some special class in the population in exchange for their
votes.
The 2009 auto industry bailout was Obama’s great tribute to Roosevelt. By
infusing two auto giants with the federal government and still maintaining the
appearance of their private ownership, the President convinced a majority in the
battleground state of Ohio to put him back in the White House. Criticizing the
auto bailout was the last nail in the coffin for Mitt Romney’s presidential
aspirations.
None of this is to say the election of Romney would have meant the much
needed axing of the welfare state andstate-subsidized
dependency. The army of bureaucrats tasked with cutting checks
in the name of kindness would still work to expand their budgets. The wealthy
interests the former Massachusetts governor looked to appease were welfare
queens in themselves and would likely receive all the state coddling money can
buy.
Obama won the election by catering to the worst of all human traits: envy.
He demonized the rich while promising to take more of their income and give it
out in the form of entitlement payments. Under his presidency, the attitude of
the takers will continue to swell as they clamor for more privileges. Anybody
who speaks out against the Robin Hood scheme will be called an unconscionable
xenophobe and a hater of the poor. The protestant work ethic will slowly be
choked into submission through deliberate iconoclasm launched by the political
class and their pet media pundits.
The opponents of capitalism will keep blaming money and greed for all the
ills of society. They will also keep wearing fashionable clothes and
coordinating protests on their smartphones while drinking caffeinated drinks
that cost the same as some third world country’s average salary. They will
scoff at hard work when it’s the sweat and labor of generations before them
that has created the living standard they enjoy today. Under their tutelage
America will be brought into its final form of, as right-wing radio host Rush
Limbaugh accurately defined it, a “country of children.”
Every time Romney made one of his “let’s get the economy going again”
speeches extolling the virtues of hard work he terrified the millions of
welfare bums and parasites and motivated them more than ever to stand in line
for hours to vote for Santa Claus Obama, their “savior” from having to work for
a living. (It’s always the low opportunity cost class that has the
“luxury” of spending half a day or more standing in a line).
With Obama’s reelection comes the onward march of American society’s
degeneration into that of the lazy, bitter masses forever on the lookout to
loot a hapless minority still trying to make an honest living. The coming brave
new world will be filled to the brim with self-righteous individuals eager to
shuffle around the Earth’s gifts to achieve some kind of equality. In the
process, none of them will produce a lick of good outside of satisfying their
own disturbed need to dominate. It will be rule of the inept over the capable.
Barack Obama will lead the way. He will be replaced in four years with someone
that follows the same doctrine. The collective age of the country will continue
to collapse till it reaches just shy of an unclothed infant wailing for succor.
Except it will be grown men doing the crying and no one around to feed him
because the sensible among us has already left.
The people have spoken and made it so.
No comments:
Post a Comment