Well, that title got your attention didn’t it? (Just humor me and say that it did.)
As you might imagine, I’m not talking about that closet. No, I’m referring to a more metaphorical, ideological closet — the socialist closet. It’s that tiny, cramped, smelly, termite-infested corner of the liberal Progressive mindset where radically anti-American notions exist unabated, in desperate need of a good sanitization. But alas, there’s no sweeping up President Obama’s latest dogma spillage. It’s too big of a mess. So, all that’s left to do is stare at this heaping pile of philosophical clutter and let the man wallow in his own filthy debris.
On Tuesday, our president, the Leader of the Free World, made some rather problematic and absurd remarks at what most people are calling a “poverty summit” or, more correctly, an “anti-poverty summit” at Georgetown University in D.C. Is it just me or is there always some sort of summit? I mean, what is a summit anyway? Let’s see. Dictionary.com says it’s “a meeting or conference of heads of state, especially to conduct diplomatic negotiations and ease international tensions.” Well, that’s pretty much the opposite of what happened at this particular “summit.” Go figure.
Anyway, if you want to read the full transcript of Obama’s profoundly stupid remarks, you can view them here on the White House website. Or, you could just go shove your head into a blender.
To summarize the basic gist, really the thesis, of his comments, you have to wrap your brain around the man’s worldview, which, honestly, is no easy task — especially since his worldview seems to fluctuate every so often. But, in this particular instance, the president posits that most Americans, and people in general, resent the poor class. Of course, this is nothing short of absolute lunacy and is supported only by…well…nothing. Secondly, Obama asserted that this so-called condition of people resenting the poor is actually perpetuated by conservative media outlets, specifically Fox News. (Again, supported by nothing.) I’m not sure what his obsession with the Fox News channel is, but it’s actually quite hilarious that he mentions them so often, given that it only serves as free advertising and publicity for the network.
As he often does, Obama used a lot of fancy rhetoric and pointless words to make a very small point; a point that he’s been harping on since he took office: “take from the rich and give to the poor” which really just means “spread the wealth around” — which, interpreted literally, means Huzzah! Socialism!
I don’t mind admitting that I watched this speech with my mouth hanging open in utter disbelief, as our president, our commander-in-chief painted a picture of socialistic America run by a federal government wielding absolute power — sort like a regime with one king in charge of everything. Here’s a snippet of what he said about Fox:
“I have to say, if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it’s a constant menu. They will find folks that make me mad. I don’t know where they find them. They’re all like ‘I don’t want to work, I just want a free Obamaphone or whatever.’ That becomes a narrative that gets worked up. And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress, which is much more typical, who is raising two kids and doing everything right, but still can’t pay the bills.”
If you’ve spent any time listening to Obama give speeches, especially back when he was running for president, you know that this is his favorite debating tactic: straw-man arguments, hypothetical examples and fictional sob stories designed to play on the emotions of the utterly naive listeners. It’s downright slanderous and, dare I say it, evil to manipulate people in order to accomplish a horrifically skewed ideological goal. It’s as if he has no conscience, no moral compass. That’s rather disturbing. It’s borderline eerie.
Here, let’s look at another comment from his discussion:
“There’s a fairness issue here and, by the way, if we were able to close that loophole [between the rich and poor]…that’s where the rubber hits the road. That’s where the question of compassion and ‘I am my brother’s keeper’ comes into play.”
Um, compassion? I’m my brother’s keeper? What the crap is this man talking about? For God’s sake, where is the compassion in taking someone’s money without their consent and spending it on a federal program or giving it to someone who hasn’t earned it? Where’s the fairness in that? Oh, that’s right. There’s isn’t any fairness in that. Not to mention the blatant hypocrisy of the Left here, who don’t give nearly as much to charity as conservatives — a fact that’s been documented over and over again. In fact, Joe Biden gave less than one percent of his annual income to charity, which is pathetic when you consider that middle-class Americans working part-time jobs tithe more than that at their local churches and former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave more to charity than Obama and Biden combined.
Here’s another quick one, if you can stomach it:
“If we can’t ask from society’s lottery winners to just make that modest investment…”
Society’s lottery winners? Really? The wealthy people in America — the CEOs, doctors, chemical engineers, movie producers — they’re just “society’s lottery winners?” I guess this line of thinking really isn’t all that surprising coming from man who never ran a business, never had to hire and employ people, never had to make the sort of sacrifices and decisions that business owners make every day in this country. In his mind, those people didn’t work hard, they just “lucked out” and now it’s time that they “pay their fair share” and hand most of their wealth back over to the federal government — the entity that we’re to believe is the whole reason they were able to obtain their wealth in the first place.
True to his Leftist ideology, Obama went on to blame today’s family structure problems, particularly in the African American community — like dads who walk out on their families, leaving mom to care for the kids and earn the income — on poor economic conditions and a stagnant job market. So let’s just give ‘em all a bunch of free stuff! I’m paraphrasing here, although that might as well be what our president said. The welfare handouts and unmonitored, unrestricted system access and abuse is out of control, but it’s supposedly what will solve all of those problems. If we can just give people enough free stuff, everything will work out in the end. There’s no need to talk about fathers taking responsibility for their own actions and adhering to family values when we can just give them all more stuff. But that free stuff has to come from somewhere — more specifically, from someone.
This sort of thinking is laughably insane.
Man, what I wouldn't give to hear my president say on national television that dads should start being dads without the assistance of the federal government. That irresponsible men should clean up their acts, stay committed to their families and teach their children good moral values. That kids should avoid the thug culture, stay in school and pursue academic excellence.
I guess I’m just living in a fairytale land.
NOTE: If you're reading this post in your e-mail inbox and would like to comment, please feel free to reply via e-mail or click on the post title above and leave a comment on my site.