Obama and the Narcissism of Big Differences

The Wall Street Journal’s Joseph Rago brings us this examination of the recent debt fight between the Obama White House and the congressional Republicans with special emphasis on Eric Cantor.

It has become clear that The Obama Fuhrer is pretty much a spoiled brat who never grew up and therefore does not know how to adapt to changing circumstances. All of his life he has had things handed to him on a silver platter. Breezing though on his looks, voice and affirmative action placement, it is clear that he is now the least qualified person in any room he is in. Even when Joe Biden and Barney Frank are there.

These recent conflicts over the size and scope of government spending have made clear to anyone who is watching that the next election will provide a clear choice about the kind of country that we want to be and where we go from here. For the parties represent two radically different world views on the nature of government and the kind of society that we want to have.

These two views are so different that there really is no common ground between them. And that is the cause of the recent battle over the debt. You can either have big government and European style welfare states or you can have America; but you can’t have both.

The “philosophical starting point” of today’s Democrats, as Mr. Cantor sees it, is that they “believe in a welfare state before they believe in capitalism. They promote economic programs of redistribution to close the gap of the disparity between the classes. That’s what they’re about: redistributive politics.” The Virginian’s contempt is obvious in his Tidewater drawl. “The assumption . . . is that there is some kind of perpetual engine of economic prosperity in America that is going to just continue. And therefore they are able to take from those who create and give to those who don’t. We just have a fundamentally different view.”

This entry was posted in Democrats, Economics, Obama. Bookmark the permalink.