HolyCoast: Obama's Increasingly Anti-Capitalist Statements

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Obama's Increasingly Anti-Capitalist Statements

And his anti-Constitutional actions define an American president who doesn't really care much for America:
Obama isn't a socialist, he just hates capitalism -- Are you sitting down? You might want to sit down for this one: Barack Obama doesn't like people who succeed in business without really asking his permission. TheDC's Neil Munro reports: "The texts of Barack Obama's recent speeches seem tailor-made for softening the White House's often hostile description of American business, but the president's impromptu additions are highlighting his efforts to subordinate business to government. At a Jan. 11 event in the White House where Obama's published speech praised businesses for hiring American workers, for example, he departed from his prepared script to toughen his demands for business to cooperate with his political goals." (Click the link for the full story.) In fact, Obama hates successful capitalists so much, he doesn't care if he has to violate the Constitution to keep them in line: "Even a Yale Law School professor is questioning President Barack Obama's claim of a legal justification for unilaterally installing Richard Cordray as head of the new finance-sector regulatory bureau. Obama's staff say the appointment was based on advice from White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, not from the Department of Justice. But this reliance on Obama's in-house lawyer marks a 'bitter shift' that is reducing the advisory role of the Justice Department's confirmed appointees, and increasing the role of Obama's in-house legal counsel, said Bruce Ackerman, a professor at Yale Law, which conservatives have long decried as a hotbed of partisan legal activists... 'All thoughtful people, Democrat and Republican alike, should insist that Ms. Ruemmler publish her opinion without delay,' wrote Ackerman. However, White House spokesman Jay Carney has declined to release or even describe Ruemmler's legal argument, even though few Democratic politicians or academics have defended the administration's legal claim." They don't have to, do they? That's the great thing about being a Democrat: rules and laws are for the other guy.
If there isn't a legal fight over those non-recess recess appointments, the GOP leadership doesn't deserve reelection.

1 comment:

Larry said...

A fascinating part of the article is that Obama takes mild liberal boilerplate, most likely written by others well versed in marketing and salesmanship, and when reading the speach, changes a word here and there on the fly.

“That’s a responsibility we should all live up to.”

“That’s a responsibility that we all have to live up to.”

There is a world of difference between being asked and being forced.