The Politics Of Arrogance

Barack Obama
Barack Obama
President Barack Obama put on his best McKayla Maroney face earlier this week when the Olympic Gold Medalist visited the white House. | Photo: Pete Souza | Barack Obama, President, Democrat, Liberal, 2012, Smirk,

We Need Leadership, Not Hubris

Normally, the State of the Union speech is the political event of the season ' especially for a president just starting a new term. But this year, the political event of the season was rather bland, and turned out to be more a display of a socialist politician's arrogance and hubris than an opportunity for America's president to lay out his second-term agenda.

The saddest fact about this year's State of the Union speech was that it could have been any other speech given by President Obama. In fact, if you compare this State of the Union to President Obama's previous State of the Union speeches, then you see President Obama saying many of the same things in exactly the same ways as he did in his four previous State of the Union speeches. We've heard it all before. There is nothing new here, which begs the question of why Obama was re-elected in November. It certainly wasn't for his fresh ideas.

In fact, the biggest difference between this State of the Union speech and Obama's previous addresses was the vitriol. He has definitely taken the blame game of partisan bickering to new heights. He denounced sequestration, an idea that came out of his administration, and pointed fingers at Congressional Republicans for having the audacity to vote for his bill. His language since then has been even stronger, as he now says that allowing the Sequester cuts to go through could kill our economy, cause massive job losses, rock our economy, and bring about the Mayan apocalypse that we missed out on last year.

But the president's prognostications of doom and gloom should be tempered by the fact that if the fall-out from Sequester is as bad as he says it will be, then he will be the one at fault, not Congress.

Barack and Michelle Obama
Barack and Michelle Obama

Barack and Michelle Obama evaluating a beer. Every president that moves into the White House adds a new feature, whether it’s a bowling alley (Nixon), a movie theater (Nixon again) or an extra large bathtub (Taft). When Obama moved in, he added a presidential basketball court, but he also added another first— the first presidential micro-brewery. | Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Beer, Alcohol, President, Democrat, Liberal, 2012,

For starters, Sequester is a drop in the bucket compared to how much money our federal government spends. The Obama administration and Democrats in Congress have been furthering the false narrative that our government does not have a spending problem: when faced with expenses that vastly outpace incomes, their reaction is that we must extort more money from private citizens to fund their spending addiction ' they will never have a spending problem; the issue for them will always be that taxes aren't high enough.

But the truth is, Sequester does not cut anything!
Here's how it works: each and every year, the government increases the amount of money it spends on all of its various departments and programs. There are several programs that are exempted from Sequester, one of the largest of which is Social Security. But while the popular narrative about Sequester is that it cuts $995 billion from discretionary spending over a ten year period (which is a good thing), projections by the Congressional Budget Office show that even with Sequester, discretionary spending will increase by $110 billion over ten years.

Then President Obama, the master manufacturer of fiscal crises, said that we cannot run our nation by moving from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis. This is the man who manufactured the Fiscal Cliff crisis. He has manufactured several debt ceiling crises. He uses these crises for his own political gain time after time, yet he talks about those same crises in his speech as though he is the innocent victim of those mean, evil Republicans.

This is just one example of the level of hubris President Obama displayed during his State of the Union speech. We were treated to the same boilerplate: invest in education, invest in infrastructure, invest, invest, invest. It makes me wonder where all of the trillions we've "invested" over the past four years ended up, and it makes me wonder why any American would be stupid enough to trust this president to "invest" more billions in the same wasteful government spending programs over the next four years.

And then the president had the unmitigated gall to say "nothing I'm proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime." He went on to say "It is not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth."

No other statement makes the case for the argument that conservatives make each and every day: This is a president who is banking on the ignorance and apathy of ordinary, everyday Americans. If the people were paying attention, Obama would have been dragged out of office just based on that statement alone. But President Obama is entirely dependent on the complicit mainstream media to cover for him, and that is exactly what they have done. He will not be questioned on these lies; no one will call him on it. Nothing Obama has proposed would bring about a smarter government, but nearly every proposal he made would grow the size and cost of our government.

Though I guess you could say that Obama was being truthful when he said that nothing he's proposing "should increase our deficit by a single dime." It won't be a single dime; it will be trillions and trillions and trillions of dimes.

Take, for example, President Obama's proposal to subsidize preschool. Over the past several decades, we have consistently increased spending on public schooling, yet we never seem to get a good return on that investment ' schools across America are still failing. But the issue isn't that we don't have enough public education, the issue is that we are undergoing a cultural breakdown that government-funded education will not and cannot fix. A lack of parental involvement is the greatest challenge facing our education system, and that will not be fixed by expanding public education into preschool. And so, by not addressing the real issue behind our failing education system, government-subsidized preschool will just be more taxpayer money flushed down the toilet of federal bureaucracy.

In the final analysis, President Obama laid out an agenda that spells failure for his administration, and for our nation. The kind of arrogant divisiveness that President Obama seems to have become accustomed to will not help America to move forward toward resolving the issues that continue to plague our nation.

Comment on Facebook

Updated Jan 2, 2019 12:28 PM EST | More details


©2019 AND Magazine

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without express written permission from AND Magazine corporate offices. All rights reserved.