When the “Have Nots” Rule
With 40 percent of America having now achieved entitlement-class status, it stands to reason that the burden of supporting our welfare country is born by the remaining 60 percent of the citizens.
The political demographics of the Barack Obama victory surely have proven that economic “have nots” and the cyclical welfare class vote as one solid bloc.
The above group, coupled with those empowered by a hatred for President George W. Bush won the day, at least for election 2008.
What could cement the deal for future generations?
Recently, I was reminded of the potential consequence of a blanket amnesty for our 20 million-strong illegal-immigrant population: It offers up the possibility of forever altering the political balance of America.
What real conservative Republicans now universally view as a reformulation period for platform and strategy, organization and message delivery, could become lost in a self-perpetuating liberal rout.
This conclusion is based on the broad statistical evidence that illegals, when enrolled by push groups, like CASA de Maryland and ACORN – obviously without regard to legal citizenship – overwhelmingly become Democrats and vote in kind.
Another way to look at this was revived by famous lightning rod figure Rush Limbaugh on his radio show last October:
“Democracies always fail because once [the] people learn that they can vote themselves money, then that’s it.” Once they figure that out, it’s over. Here’s the full quote from Robert A. Heinlein’s To Sail Beyond the Sunset:
“The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories.
“…For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so…” They’ll vote themselves bread and circuses every time “until the state bleeds to death, or, in its weakened condition, the state succumbs to an invader [such as] the barbarians enter Rome.”
Again, the above was attributed to science fiction writer and social commentator Robert A. Heinlein, who himself probably adapted it from the Roman satirist, Juvenal.
In case you missed it, the entire genre of science fiction, especially during the “Golden Age” of the first half of the 20th Century, was the best hiding place for biting social commentary, especially in a world unwilling to publish elsewhere. The ray guns and starships were simply props for purpose of camouflage.
At this writing, the allocation of the remaining balance of the almost $1trillion of TARP “stimulus” – which ironically was never really even there in the first place – is passing Congress. Far from a bipartisan work, as had been promised, a political shoving-down-ones-throat is the reality.
Voting has been along party lines, as Republican proposals have not been entertained, in a direct snub. Correctly, the GOP insists on holding the line for the benefit of American small business. However, the version that is passing is much more concerned with allocation of spoils than in aggregate results.
As penalty for their push-back, the Democratic leadership is already attacking soft Republican targets nationwide in retaliation.
The form and substance of the final adopted version is well set at this writing. Based upon two factors alone, I see no signs for celebration:
*There has been the complete absence of a coherent explanation, in any provable, challengeable form, of just how this Obama spending package works any significant percentage of cash into the hands of our struggling middle class – this his stated campaign objective.
Indeed, when computer-modeled using devices from his own staff, the results were half of what the comparable Republican plan provided in job creation alone!
*The single discernable connection between the disparate pork-looking elements of this Obama spending package all reek of 1930s make-work, feel better, naïve New Deal programs…that arguably failed as they prolonged that eras despair.
And to my major point, minority firms will get more than first dibs on the highly touted construction spoils, for instance, one administration member indicated that the bailouts were not primarily for white construction companies!
This policy ignores expertise, and the competitive forces that make for a strong market.
In the old days, we called that affirmative action. Aren’t we beyond that in search of our national salvation? Is not the president for all Americans? Or is their an agenda for political conquest playing out?
Is the urge to consolidate power for future generations that strong that we would dilute the opportunity to fix ourselves?
This pandering tendency above is obviously willing to prioritize redistribution of the American Dream above fairness to all Americans. This, an obvious play for future minority votes, in an unending Democratic cascade.
What both Presidents Bush and Obama have called a “stimulus package” has only political origins. When any proven economics-based approach has been abandoned for these “give aways,” it is easy to conclude that a massive pandering outreach is underway for the hearts and minds of the “have nots.”
What we truly need is a “priming the pump” package, as opposed to a very temporary stimulus, whose impact is paid down over generations.
We need to reduce the government burdens placed disproportionately on employers and enable them to reinvest and to hire.
The honeymoon is over; consequences hereafter are all on the Barack Obama watch.
Don’t count on that fifth year to get it right.
See www.ReadTheStimulus.org for a free online searchable version of the entire stimulus-give-away package.