Obama to deliver completely fabricated SOTU speech
Question: if a lie falls in the forest, and millions of people (though not me, you can bet your ass on that) are there to hear it, does that make it true?
The left’s new focus group-tested attempt to deconstruct “equality” as it pertains to liberty, equal protection under the law, and opportunity and redefine it as egalitarianism, which is essentially forced conformity held together by a regulatory and police state and sanctioned by an authoritarian government, can only work if the Republicans allow it to.
— Which is to say, of course it will work, because the contemporary Republican leadership isn’t at all conservative, isn’t particularly dedicated to free-market capitalism, and are in fact even incapable of quoting JFK right back at the openly socialist Democrat party, when all they need do is agree with his formulation that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Instead, they believe they, too, must show concern over “income inequality” — even when income inequality is a ludicrous metric under which to gauge wealth: if the poorest among us are richer as a result of free market capitalism, their standard of living rises. But the left, as Margaret Thatcher famously noted (h/t to Mark Levin, who played the clip last evening), would rather see the poor remain poorer provided the rich didn’t get richer.
This is the communist manifesto as physical reality. And establishment Republicans, having lost any connection to classical liberal / constitutional conservative principle (that is, they aren’t filthy “Purists” or delusional “True Believers” who cost us elections, as the ascensions of Presidents Dole, McCain, and Romney clearly show), lack either the skill or the desire to fight philosophical battles. Instead, they vie for political positioning and rhetorical vapidity that they believe keeps them viable in a country they believe has to cast aside the era of Reagan. Back when wealth and jobs were created and government was treated as the necessary evil that it is. It’s a kind of surreal joke.
Disparity in income is the very byproduct of a free people making choices based on any number of personal metrics. For instance, I gave up what could have been a career in academia in order to have a stay at home parent for our children — deciding that in the long run the benefits of my making far less money by working from home running a website rather than pursuing a career path that would have required day care, etc. for the children — and that was my choice. So my income may have suffered for the choice, but it was a tradeoff I was willing to make, and one that as a free man I was free to make. The consequences — betting that my wife had better future earning potential given her field vs mine — meant that we lived for a time in a 400 square foot duplex, right up until our oldest was a bit over 2. Since then, however, we’ve made strides: my wife has worked hard and, after a few jobs and promotions, we bought a beautiful starter home. Through more hard work — which for me involved balancing running this site and a side business while taking care of two boys, one of whom is not yet two, the other of which needs transportation to and from his charter school; and for my wife involved moving from project management to sales and then returning to the industry in which she was a project manager as a new VP of sales, a path that required a not insignificant amount of travel and time away from the kids and me as her great sacrifice — we are now getting ourselves in a position to move into a new home, and perhaps even keep our current home as a rental property.
This we did through our own choices and industry; our own sacrifices and compromises. That is to say, our path from the lower end of the income spectrum up to what Obama would call “millionaires and billionaires” (which we sure as hell ain’t) is the product of liberty coupled with personal responsibility and sacrifices. And it is the very model of income mobility that is available to a free people.
That our hard work and sacrifice — our liberty, our decisions, our compromises, our travails and eventual triumphs — is said, once monetized on a tax form, to belong in great part to the government, to then divvy it up as it sees fit, is a moral outrage, and is the very antithesis of equality. Radical egalitarianism is not equality. It is homogeneity. Equality is having at one’s disposal the liberty to pursue one’s own course of action, relatively unmolested by a government charged with protecting our natural rights.
But instead of having a GOP establishment that can say, openly and proudly, that an increase in the standard of living for each and every quintile is better than a smaller “income inequality” gap in which misery is forcibly shared, and no set of choices can be juxtaposed against other sets of choices so that people can use such templates to chart their own course in life, should they so wish, we have one that has adopted the premise of income inequality being a “concern”. And in so doing, they have adopted the progressive socialist paradigm that rejects the equality intended in our founding.
This sickens me to no end. And that these people are, in addition to ceding ideologically incoherent economic paradigms to the left, pushing for amnesty simultaneously, which will flood the already disastrous labor market with more cheap unskilled labor and give the socialists a demographic advantage in exchange for the backing of their corporatist buddies, makes me doubly resigned to the idea that, without some restructuring at the state level that kneecaps the federal government and overruns the bureaucracies that Obama is using for his socialist coup (sorry, Mark. But this here Visigoth has been calling what we’re undergoing a coup every bit as long as you have, if not longer, so please don’t accuse me of stealing your formulations), we are finished as a nation, and the only recourse is to either become subsumed into a new iteration of the United States or find some other recourse through which those of us who won’t go quietly don’t go quietly.
It is what it is. And both sneering GOP rah-rah chorus and the immoral, thieving leftist tyrants can pretend that only “extremists” see in their purported compassion such a nefarious end game, in which a permanent ruling class manages the great herd of economic units, content with their gas efficient tin cars and tiny living spaces and the Soma of 150 channels and cheap Chinese electronics. But that doesn’t make it so.