Wednesday, January 26, 2011

State of the Union: Horrible

Obama's state of the union address was a bloated mess of logical contradictions and inane platitudes.  He paid lip service to free enterprise while advocating massive government intervention in the economy.  He spoke of coping with the nation's catastrophic budget deficit while the members cheered his promise to save and preserve Leviathan's most egregious offender: social security and medicare/medicaid.  He proposed spending cuts of $400 billion over 5 years which is less than 1/3 of the federal budget deficit THIS YEAR.  At one point, he promised to veto any bill containing so-called earmarks to the smug guffaws of the gluttonous House members.  He showed no grasp of the government's role in causing and sustaining the economic crisis nor does he have any sense of the magnitude of the catastrophe being wrought by the Federal Reserve's system's inflation of the money supply.  His foreign policy rhetoric remains, as Niall Ferguson once described it: "a Facebook entry."   

In short, nothing has changed. 

I went to Wikipeida and looked up a pie chart of the federal government budget.  By  my 30 seconds of reckoning, you could cut the budget by about 75% in one day by limiting the government to its proper function, the protection of individual rights.  The Department of Defense is 19% of the budget, the Department of Justice is 1.5%, and the interest on the national debt is 5%.  Ok, 74.5%. 

Problem solved.     

7 comments:

mtnrunner2 said...

My reaction was that this man has utterly no intellectual rudder, and that he's damned expensive. He's a committed altruist, but he's not even principled enough to be a very "good" one.

It's going to be quite the circus watching politicians trying to cut benefits.

This morning I heard protesters in Ohio complaining that proposed cuts would impact the poor disproportionately. Well, duh.

There's a slight difference however, between the weathly (sometimes) complaining about keep their rights, and the poor complaining about not being able to violate the rights of others. Just a bit.

Perplexio said...

I actually enjoyed last night's speech. Paul Ryan did a great job.

Oh, wait, you mean that other monstrosity before Ryan's speech?

Doug Reich said...

Perplexio,

I think Ryan was going in the right direction, but I was not that impressed - and I say that as an admirer of Ryan.

Consider that the guy who is considered to be the most radical guy in the Congress, Senator Rand Paul, just came out and proposed cutting $500B in one year (http://www.fox41.com/story/13911626/rand-paul-proposes-500-billion-in-federal-budget-cuts)

$500B is only 1/3 of the deficit for 2011! It's only about 10% of total spending!

So the most radical guy is proposing something that is a drop in the bucket and he will be laughed at. Bachmann had a pretty good speech on behalf of the Tea Party, but very few are serious about tackling this are even on the radar screen. Scary.

Perplexio said...

I think my perspective on Ryan was a little "rosier" considering I had just sat through the entire state of the union address. Even a mediocre speech after THAT State of the Union would sound excellent by comparison.

Doug Reich said...

Funny, I had the opposite reaction. I was disgusted and cynical after his speech that if Ayn Rand had delivered the rebuttal I may have accused her of being middle of the road.

Josh Kaib said...

I completely agree. Obama's speech was just a bunch of empty rhetoric. I just found your blog and I really like it. It's nice to find other blogs like mine!

In case anyone is interested, here's my blog address. http://americantruthmachine.wordpress.com/

Michael said...

Ryan's speech carefully towed the line between altruism and egoism. BTW I actually wish he had said what krugman said in his NYT article:

"the suffering of the unfortunate isn't a proper concern of government, and alleviating that suffering at taxpayer expense is immoral, never mind how little it costs."