Ed Driscoll

Building a Bridge to the 20th Century

The early 20th century, as Obama channels Teddy Roosevelt, whom the New York Times dubbed a super-socialist before later embracing a similar worldview during the FDR era and bitterly clinging to it ever since.

But then, being a self-described “progressive” means never having to update your ideas, no matter how much reality has run roughshod over them.

As Ace writes, Obama is effectively saying that “Capitalism Has ‘Never Worked:'”

He says “trickle-down economics” rather than capitalism, but “trickle-down economics” is merely an argument in favor of capitalism. There is no such thing as “trickle-down economics.” There is capitalism, and the argued advantage of it, which is the trickling down of created wealth.

So he is in fact saying, as the headline puts it, that capitalism has never worked.

Meanwhile his Suicide Solution Socialism has apparently set the economic world on fire, I guess.

I don’t talk about this too often because Monty does such a good job and it’s frankly depressing. But Europe is probably going to plunge into something in between a recession or a depression, and may erupt in violence and political disorder.

And Europe is Obama’s lodestar. That’s where he wants to take us. To the extent we haven’t gotten there yet, it’s because Americans are soft, lazy bitter clingers who hate other sorts of people (and their politico-economic systems).

So Europe’s 60 or 70 year history with socialism is about to end in violent upheavals and misery… and here’s this ignoramus saying that it’s capitalism which is the proven failure.

And Allahpundit runs down the number of presidents Barack Sybil Obama has channeled over the last four years in search of an identity:

How many presidential incarnations has this guy been through in four years? When he first started campaigning, he was pushing Lincoln comparisons and citing Reagan as the model of a paradigm-shifting leader. Then Ted and Caroline Kennedy endorsed him and suddenly he was the new JFK. Then he was sworn in as the new FDR whose can-do ideas about government intervention and stimulus would dig us out of the recessionary hole. A year later he got ObamaCare passed, making him the heir to LBJ’s Great Society legacy. As the economy floundered, his team pointed to Reagan’s 1983 turnaround as their electoral model; Recovery Summer came and went and the economy kept floundering, so they turned to Truman for inspiration on how to scapegoat a “do-nothing Congress.” As of today he’s a Teddy Roosevelt progressive, ready to slay the dragons of plutocracy with the sword of government. And on top of all of this, of course, the Carter comparisons are evergreen. I’m honestly curious to see how he draws the inevitable Gerald Ford analogy before his term’s up.

Oh, he accomplished that last item on the checklist right at the start of his speech.

But Obama’s geographical cluelessness is far outweighed by his stunted sense of history. Isn’t there the potential for a GOP presidential candidate to rebut this by saying something along the lines of, “President Obama seems trapped in the past. He started off his presidential aspirations in 2008 channeling the ghosts of Lincoln, FDR and JFK, and now he’s channeling Teddy Roosevelt. All great Americans to be sure. But I prefer a more forward-looking vision that will bring America further into the 21st century, rather than constantly looking to the dawn of the 20th century for our answers. A vote for President Obama is a step backwards, back into the past. A vote me is a vote on the future, a more positive future for America. Forward or backward — which direction would you prefer?”