News flash: Obama is not Reagan
It’s been a week since President Obama’s “State of the Union” address. Minutes after the speech’s conclusion, enthusiastic supporters of the president (disguised as mainstream “journalists”) were quick to compare him to President Reagan.
Reagan, nicknamed “the great communicator,” used to give amazing speeches. A former actor, he had great charisma and the cameras loved him. Of course, those behind the cameras, the mainstream media, didn’t want it. Having largely sold its journalistic values of objectivity and truth in favor of liberal ideology, the media of the 1970s and 1980s cared little for Reagan, champion of a new conservative movement whose benefits are still enjoyed in the United States. United today. .
So Reagan was largely described as an “affable lout”, loved by the masses for his ability to charm them, but lacking in “substance”. He was too old. He did not understand social programs, or the need for government regulation and control. He didn’t have a degree in public administration, he didn’t “get” the intellectual pull of collectivism and statism, and he hadn’t earned a ticket to the cocktail party inside the beltway that is the federal government. In reality, he wanted to shrink government, not expand it, as every other president in modern times had tried to do. He was a cowboy with his finger on the “throw” button. Sure, he had briefly governed California, with the same weird public executive office approach… but does that “experience” really count?
How was this buffoon elected (by an avalanche), let alone re-elected (by a larger avalanche)?
The depleted media’s idea of ”substance” was, in fact, very different from that of the new conservatives. Setting aside his legacy of foreign policy triumphs that ended the Cold War (and the Soviet Union) without firing a shot, and focusing solely on his economic policy victories, President Reagan brought much new and fresh to Washington. He convinced a Congress dominated by his political rivals to execute the biggest tax cut in US history, primarily by taking his case directly to the American people (who loved Reagan far more than the journalists). Those tax cuts ushered in the greatest and longest era of prosperity any of us have ever known, and turned America into economic ruin left behind by the Carter administration. Are you old enough to remember the iconic terms of the Carter era – “misery index”… “stagflation”… “oil shock”…? If so, remember that it took a lot of effort, and a lot of different “substance,” on the part of Reagan and conservatives to turn it around.
So it’s ironic, especially for those of us old enough to remember all that, that today’s media wants to paint President Obama with the same brush. He gives brilliant speeches…just like Reagan! He charms and inspires people…just like Reagan! He sounds super smart when he says something (unless he can’t see his teleprompter, but let’s ignore that for now)…very different from his predecessor, goofy George W. Bush, and much more like. .. Regan!
I’ve said several times that the biggest problem conservatives face today is that GOP luminaries (the conservatives’ only choice) are ordinary people, not “great communicators.” From former President Bush to the wildly popular (and media demonized) Sarah Palin, conservative leaders tend to speak like normal people and not like trained orators. I’ve said before that President Bush used to sound stupid when he said smart things, and President Obama sounds smart when he says stupid things. And last week’s speech was a perfect example.
As for the observation that they both have (or had) the ability to make great speeches, I grant that Presidents Reagan and Obama are similar. But the similarities end there. In terms of actual substance, Barack Obama is definitely not Ronald Reagan.
Obama described “investment” (the new code word for “spending”) and a partial spending freeze, announcing that these measures would reduce the national deficit by $400 billion over ten years. Wow, that sounds like a lot, but thanks to Obama and the liberals, our deficit is in the trillions (with a “T”). If he cut taxes by 25%, like Reagan did, the economy would come back strong, like it did under Reagan. Nonpartisan federal accountants have documented that a one percent increase in Gross Domestic Product growth would actually reduce the deficit by $2.9 trillion over ten years. But Obama really doesn’t want to cut the deficit. Socialist colleagues of his, like Professors Cloward and Piven (look them up), have long sought to “collapse the system” under the weight of public spending on entitlements, paving the way for a conversion of our free-market republic to collectivist statism. . No, President Obama would prefer to “freeze” federal spending, by far the highest level in history.
A look at the content (the “substance”) of any of their speeches would reveal that style is the only thing these two presidents have had in common. Reagan believed in personal responsibility; Obama boosts trust in government. Obama believes that government is the solution to all our problems. Reagan, in his first inaugural address, made it clear that government is not the answer to our problems, but “government IS the problem.”
Wealth is needed in a free society to have real investment, which is needed to create real jobs. Obama thinks “the rich” have had a free ride, and he seeks to do everything he can to hit them at tax time; but that’s okay, he says, because the government is going to invest in “green jobs” for everyone! Reagan, by contrast, told the nation on one of his Saturday morning broadcasts that government doesn’t create wealth, it destroys it. Reagan also told us that the government doesn’t solve problems, it subsidizes them… and, sure enough, Obama is looking for subsidies for everything from unemployment (let’s give him government benefits for a staggering 99 weeks, so that he actually forget how to work) to failed companies (bailout banks and car companies, so union bosses can get rich while certain executives, many of them big Democratic donors, are relieved of any performance responsibility).
Reagan cut regulations, inspiring the private sector to take over “business” previously controlled by the government; Obama is taking as much territory as he can from the private sector, as fast as he can, from cars to banks to the entire national health care system.
And foreign policy? Reagan: “peace through strength.” Obama: The only area where we can really afford to cut spending is defense. Obama thinks we don’t need to be strong, we just need to please our enemies. Take a look at Europe, Asia, or the Middle East (Egypt, for example) to see how well it’s doing. I even wonder if our biggest rival, China, sent President Hu Jintao to Washington to help President Obama put the finishing touches on his teleprompter for last week’s speech, or even write the speech himself.
No, President Obama is not Ronald Reagan. In terms of substance, it is the exact opposite (Reagan had something). In just two years, look at how far President Obama and his colleagues in Congress, the media, the entertainment industry, and academia have brought us to the brink of socialism.
A big accident is coming. The time has come to protect yourself against shocks. Earn and save extra money. Learn how to invest your wealth in a way that protects it. Start a side business, so you’ll have something to fall back on when your conventional job disappears. And stay healthy, you’re going to need your strength.
It took an ultraliberal Jimmy Carter to produce a Ronald Reagan, just when the nation (and the world) needed him most. President Obama makes Carter look like Barry Goldwater. Who will rise up, after Obama’s setback, to provide the inspirational leadership we will need to get through the next crisis? It may be that no one leader can save us all from what lies ahead on our horizon today. So each of us, in our own life, in our own sphere, must take personal responsibility to be that inspiring leader. He works on yourself. Make yourself a better person. The best people, not the media or the academically baptized elite, will survive and thrive in the post-crisis era.
by Michael D. Hume, M.S.