“Capitalism and Communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: ‘No man should have so much.’ The capitalist, seeing the same thing says: ‘All men should have as much.’” – Phelps Adams
So what would Senator Barack Obama say about the rich man and his fine home?
Now that the enigma of a senator has effectively seized the Democrat nomination for president, the aforementioned quote and the questions it entails are becoming increasingly important issues to consider as November 4 looms ever closer. Where exactly does Mr. Obama stand regarding the free market?
In classic Democrat fashion, the answer to that question varies depending on time, place, and audience. As mentioned in yesterday’s Townhall column, “Obamaconomics,” last year Mr. Obama stated:
“I believe America’s free market has been the engine of America’s great progress. It’s created a prosperity that is the envy of the world. It’s led to a standard of living unmatched in history. And it has provided great rewards to the innovators and risk takers who have made America a beacon for science and technology and discovery. We are all in this together.”
The Senator’s more recent quote last month, however, suggests he may not be “in this together” with free-market capitalists after all:
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”
Has our standard of living just become too high? Mr. Obama seems to think so.
It seems that the progress and prosperity Mr. Obama once praised has suddenly become a source of great shame for the senator. Perhaps Mr. Obama would feel better about the country he seeks to lead if China and India were to dictate our energy policies and eating habits.
Moreover, Mr. Obama has gone on to assail free trade policies and agreements like NAFTA, arguing vehemently that NAFTA has destroyed 1 million American jobs and will only continue to wreak its havoc on the American worker. Townhall quotes the senator claiming that as president, he will not “stand idly by while workers watch their jobs get shipped overseas.”
Perhaps the candidate of change needs to do some research for a change. In a Seattle Times article published last month, “Blame it on NAFTA. Really?” the author quotes Daniel Griswold, director of trade policy studies at the CATO Institute, as stating that the job losses in places like Ohio, California, and Michigan, are not to be pinned on NAFTA after all:
“Youngstown, Ohio’s problems have nothing to do with NAFTA. The real story in manufacturing isn’t trade, it is technology…We’re producing 40-50 percent more stuff than we did before NAFTA. We’re just doing it with fewer workers. … NAFTA has probably accelerated that trend to a higher level of manufacturing, but that’s been one of the successes of the agreement, not one of the problems.”
It is clear that it is not facts that matter to Mr. Obama but rather ideology.
The bottom line is that Mr. Obama is staunchly anti-free market and is completely sold out to the far left political mafia which put him where his is today. Perhaps even more worrisome is the fact that the millions of enamored Americans eager to vote for the Democrat candidate in November have little or no understanding of where he truly stands on these vital issues. Nor do they understand the grave consequences of an Obama presidency.
How can America be the great shining City on the Hill if her own president is ashamed of the prosperous houses on that hill?
