America's Waning Capitalism, The Spectre of Growing Government Under Obamaism...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny



Capitalism is under attack. Cronyism and corporate welfare will of course be defended in many nefarious ways by the Obama administration. We are indeed witnessing the slow transformational changes this President promised the nation. It ain't going to turn out so picturesque as the nanny state gig government statists would have Americans believe.

This excerpt from the David Brooks article in yesterday's New York Times says it well.

... The president is now running an ad showing Mitt Romney tunelessly singing “America the Beautiful,” while the text on screen blasts him for shipping jobs to China, India and Mexico.

The accuracy of the ad has been questioned by the various fact-checking outfits. That need not detain us. It’s safest to assume that all the ads you see this year will be at least somewhat inaccurate because the ad-makers now take dishonesty as a mark of their professional toughness.

What matters is the ideology behind the ad: the assumption that Bain Capital, the private-equity firm founded by Romney, should not have invested in companies that hired workers abroad; the assumption that hiring Mexican or Indian workers is unpatriotic; the assumption that no worthy person would do what most global business leaders have been doing for the past half-century.

This ad — and the rhetoric the campaign is using around it — challenges the entire logic of capitalism (emphasis mine) as it has existed over several decades. It’s part of a comprehensive attack on the economic system Romney personifies.

This shift of focus has been audacious. Over the years of his presidency, Obama has not been a critic of globalization. There’s no real evidence that, when he’s off the campaign trail, he has any problem with outsourcing and offshoring. He has lavishly praised people like Steve Jobs who were prominent practitioners. He has hired people like Jeffrey Immelt, the chief executive of General Electric, whose company embodies the upsides of globalization. His economic advisers have generally touted the benefits of globalization even as they worked to help those who are hurt by its downsides.

But, politically, this aggressive tactic has worked. It has shifted the focus of the race from being about big government, which Obama represents, (emphasis mine) to being about capitalism, which Romney represents (emphasis mine).

Just as Republicans spent years promising voters that they could have tax cuts forever, now the Democrats are promising voters that they can have all the benefits of capitalism without the downsides, like plant closures, rich C.E.O.’s and outsourcing. Just as Republicans used to force Democrats into the eat-your-spinach posture (you need to have high taxes if you want your programs), now Democrats are casting Republicans into the eat-your-spinach posture (you need to accept outsourcing and the pains of creative destruction if you want your prosperity).

The Romney campaign doesn’t seem to know how to respond. For centuries, business leaders have been inept when writers, intellectuals and politicians attacked capitalism, and, so far, the Romney campaign is continuing that streak. {Read More}

Perhaps Romney and the Republicans ought to revisit, read, and grow to understand Ayn Rand and they just might to be able to sell capitalism on the basis on which it should be sold. I'm not holding my breath.

Via: Memeorandom

Comments

  1. Capitalism died WAY before Obama came along, in fact, before Obama was born.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A has been noted here many times; capitalism, in its truest form lived for but a very brief time an America. We soon began to take on the attributes of a "mixed economy" and ver time we became less capitalistic and more 'Mixed" or regulated.

      As I have said regulation is not altogether bad, if it serves only to insure public safety on the highways and bridges, on the waterways, in the air, at work etc. Unfortunately regulation has gone way beyond such noble causes.

      Obama is merely the most recent and perhaps most virulent in his influence in "mixing" the economy and our lives with more regulation for the purpose of growing the nanny state and insuring statistic is firmly entrenched in out government and ultimately accepted by the vast majority as a "good thing." Which clearly for free thinking individuals it is most certainly not!

      Delete
  2. Obama is an anti-capitalist demagogue.

    Were he to get his way, he would stop all this outsourcing and off-shoring, and next, the in-sourcing would stop. How many millions of people in this country work for foreign firms that choose to do business here? Think of the Toyota, Nissan and BMW plants alone.

    Forward! Down the toilet...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obama is a globalist collectivist statist new world order proponent. Which IMO is a more accurate description of his ethics and philosophy and a grand scale.

      Delete
  3. considering that you adhere to a the strict interpretion that you do could you explain to me what part of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate safety in the work place?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Griper, I refuse to be baited by your reactionary tactics (which is not to be confused with valid conservatism) going forward. So, in light of the fact you consider yourself a constitutional scholar (Erroneously so IMO) you may submit your arguments to me for rebuttal (which I shall fully publish in a dedicated post encompassing both your question (challenge) and my response in full)as it is completed.

      Hint: The often misused however valid general welfare clause.

      Second hint: e careful and research well.

      Delete
  4. Ya' know, Les, that little cartoon you posted sums up the utter and total lack of reality in your argument. To see the little, weak arm of Wall Street sticking out of the mouth of the Big Bad Wolf government, is to see the hallucination of a radical Objectivist; completely out of touch with reality.

    And to call Obama "an anti-capitalist demagogue" is just plain ludicrous. Insane. If you said that in person to someone who has actually lived under the rule of an "anti-capitalist demagogue," they would think you a small-minded, small-town, local-yokel, uneducated, unworldly kinda guy.

    You are none of those things, Les, so you should know better than to be so ridiculous.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To which I reply; Mirrors are often the teller of sublime yet powerful truth my friend. As well as reflections of ones often subdued and unaddressed insecurities.

      Clue: Think outside the proverbial box.

      Delete
  5. What box? What the hell are you talking about?

    You're spouting common, cheap, wrong right-wing propaganda and I'm somehow the one thinking in the box???

    I thought you were above Republican talking points!

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The mirror, the box, scary stuff huh jmj. Questioning oneself and arriving at an awakening is a scary journey isn't it jmj?

      Read the almost 1,850 posts I've put up. Then we'll talk.

      Delete
  6. Why doesn't Romney do an ad with some of the folks from the Sports Authority and Staples? This whole notion by the Democrats that every business MUST succeed and that every business MUST hire only American workers needs to be countered and quickly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For sure! Especially since I an considering the possibility of entering into the field of nutrition, health, and fitness (specifically in response to ObamaCare) in the the coming 24 months.

      Delete
  7. Les,
    "Griper, I refuse to be baited by your reactionary tactics (which is not to be confused with valid conservatism) going forward"

    since when does asking a simple question in regards to you political beliefs a reactionary tactic? i would expect an accusation like that from someone on the left not from someone who claims to be from the right.

    your first misconception:
    I don't claim to be a "conservative". in fact i have more than once, over the years, corrected those who would place me in that camp.

    your second misconception:
    I don't claim to be a scholar of any issue only a poor student always seeking greater knowledge. that is why you'll find me asking far more questions than most persons.

    for i have found those who consider themselves scholars and experts to be very arrogant and self-righteous in regards to their viewpoint, especially on the subjects of politics or religion. in fact, i just wrote a post on this very subject a few days ago.

    as for your challenge, no thank you. i have already responded to one of these challenges and am still waitin on a response from you on it.

    besides, i have already responded to a challenge like that from myself over two years ago and it still is one of my most popular posts online.

    but just to give you a little hint like you were kind enough to give me i'll say that the use of that phrase for your viewpoint is a twenty century interpretation of that phrase not an eighteenth century understanding of it. and be an interpretation as validated by a "living document" understanding of the Constitution.

    now, you can run as far as you'd like with that response to your challenge. for you see, i already have the answer to my question as asked explicitly as well as implicitly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) Because some of your positions, as indicated by your "questions" phrasing are obviously leading questions and the intent is to support what I and others might consider reactionary. Just an observation Griper, take it for whatever you feel it is worth.

      2)Not a conservative? Not a reactionary? I suppos you are an independent then.

      3)Neither do I claim to be a scholar. I do claim to be intrspective, alwats questioning myself.

      4) My challenge was in response to your challenge that I believe I satisfactorily answered over many comments/discussions.

      5) And I Griper have the answer as well.

      Delete
  8. Les,
    always questioning yourself? a person who is always questioning themselves welcomes questions from others. they do not make accusatory responses like you did mine.

    and a person who questions themselves do not give responses to the question of others that satifies themselves as you have admitted that you do. he gives answers well enough to satisfy the needs of the questioner and is patient enough to continue to answer any other questions the person has or responds to his conclusions instead of telling them they lack understanding as you so often do.

    for a person who is honestly questioning himself recognizes that his own questions to himself is biased as well as prejudicial in his own favor therefore welcomes a question from another prespective to add depth to their own ideas.

    as for so-called leading questions you say i ask, i will only say that if a man holds to the truth they are not afraid to give the answer to them unless they are afraid that the answer will lead to a revelation of a fallacy of belief or to a question they are unable to answer without jumping to conclusions. and they will realize that any response they get is an honest observation not reactionary as you accuse them of.

    and you supposition that i am a political independent is also a misconception.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

RN USA is a No Judgement Zone (to steal from Planet Fitness), so please, No Judgement of others. We reserve the right to delete any such comment immediately upon detection.

All views are welcome. As long as the comment is on topic and respectful of others.



Top Posts

2015 Could Be a Bad Year for Liberals...

April Job Numbers Appear Improved... Are They Really?

Jon Stewart and the Babbling Nancy Pelosi...

Is Our Democratic Republic At Risk From Forces Both Foreign and Within?...

Artur Davis Calls Biden Remarks 'Racial Visiousness'...

From the Tea-Publican Right...

Small Businesses Can Improve the Health of a Community...

The Ignorance and Arrogance of Obama...

It's Going To Be Close, Brace Yourself For Continued Polarization of America, Especially if Obama Loses...