creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh
21 Oct 2014
Criminalizing Innocent Christian Behavior

Where are all the atheist freedom lovers we always hear about? It's time for them to start standing up for … Read More.

17 Oct 2014
Fascist Leftists in Houston

Note to Readers: The following column, which was based on the reporting of various other media outlets, … Read More.

14 Oct 2014
Beware of the Perfect Storm

I've always felt as if I've known renowned Christian apologist Josh McDowell through his many excellent books,… Read More.

Obama Doubling Down on His Leftist Radicalism

Comment

You can't even casually surf the Internet on any given day without numerous reminders of just how radical President Obama is — and this is during an election year, when it should be in his political interest to mask his radicalism.

Minding my own business, I happened on an article by Jacob Laksin on FrontPageMag.com, titled "Obama's Pick for World Bank Hates Capitalism." I'd heard a bit about this before but hadn't yet studied it. I'm so used to Obama's extremism that such revelations hardly move me, much less surprise me. I know where he stands; I just wish everyone else did.

Obama has nominated Dartmouth College President Jim Yong Kim to head the World Bank. In 2000, Kim edited a collection of studies under the title "Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the Health of the Poor."

The "book's radical central premise," writes Laksin, is that "capitalism and economic growth (are) bad for the poor across the world." Kim co-wrote the introduction, which includes the claim that the book shows "that the quest for growth in GDP and corporate profits has in fact worsened the lives of millions of women and men." It says that even in those instances in which free trade and free markets have led to economic growth, they've done so without benefiting "those living in 'dire poverty,' one-fourth of the world's population." Can't you just hear Obama himself in those words?

One thing that helps the plight of the very poor, according to one chapter, is a socialized health care system, such as the one in Communist Cuba. The chapter's author touts that system because of the Cuban government's "commitment not only to health in the narrow sense but to social equality and social justice." As we opponents of Obamacare have said repeatedly, Obamacare is hardly just about making health care more affordable or more accessible, neither of which it will do in the end, but is a stealth vehicle to greatly expand governmental control over limitless aspects of our lives to enable the leftist central planners to effectuate "social equality and social justice" under the innocuous guise of providing health care.

As with so many of its ideas, the left is wrong about the record of free markets on the poor, notes Laksin, who points to "overwhelming evidence" that economic growth raises income levels and reduces global poverty. But again, leftist ideologues aren't motivated by a desire to improve the lot of the downtrodden, domestically or globally, but by a burning passion for statism.

This book is right out of Obama's playbook.

Can you not see the common thread running through these alleged glories of the Cuban system and Obama's approach to health care and his war on oil, coal and gas, along with his corresponding commitment to green energy and his various stimulus bills, all of which increase our national deficits, debt and unemployment but greatly increase governmental control?

Obama's nomination of Kim should be no surprise to anyone, considering his consistent record of radical associations and appointments, from Van Jones to transnationalist Harold Koh. For Obama, one's radicalism is not a deterrent to one's resume, but an enhancement. His appointment of Van Jones was not a mistake owing to the administration's failure to vet him as Obama's defenders later claimed once Jones' radicalism was exposed. Obama appointed Jones precisely because his administration was intimately familiar with Jones' views; indeed, the White House carved out a new position — green energy czar — specifically tailored for his worldview and then happily placed him in it.

Tearing myself away from this uplifting article, I next encountered one detailing Obama's ongoing fulfillment of his promise to bankrupt the coal industry — with his Environmental Protection Agency's issuance of new proposed rules on carbon emissions, which will please the goddess Gaia but won't do much for the production of energy, economic growth, jobs or the poor, for that matter. This was after watching a report on Fox News earlier that morning highlighting Obama's obstruction of oil shale production based on other dubious environmental doom-saying.

Next, I saw John Fund's piece on National Review Online outlining Obama's background in the sordid community organizing tactics of famed leftist radical Saul Alinsky and Obama's close ties with the now fallen ACORN. According to New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor — in her new book on Obama — Obama still thought of himself as a community organizer when he was senator. He still does today, and, Fund warns, conservatives should be prepared for his Alinsky tactics in the 2012 campaign.

Maybe this all wouldn't be so exasperating if Obama didn't hold himself out as a uniter, but he is the furthest thing from it, as he, if anything, is doubling down on his polarizing radicalism and his unswerving commitment to a statist agenda for America.

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book, "Crimes Against Liberty," was No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction for its first two weeks. Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM



Comments

6 Comments | Post Comment
David said:

"but is a stealth vehicle to greatly expand governmental control over limitless aspects of our lives to enable the leftist central planners to effectuate "social equality and social justice" under the innocuous guise of providing health care."

Yeah, Goldfinger, world domination, the secret plan, David, the more you post the moe you appear like a serious paranoid. So, Obama has a secret plan to dominate the country and turn everyone into socialists, none of his programs could be in the interest of solving our many problems could they?.....go take your meds, your paranoia is escalating. .,,
Comment: #1
Posted by: Bloom Hilda
Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:55 PM
Yeah real intelligent response Broom, big on attacking the messenger, extremely short on saying anything intelligent about the content. Like David said straight out of the Obama play book. You are the definition of a useful idiot.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Thetruth
Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:34 PM
Re: Bloom Hilda

If Obama's programs are intended to "solve our many problems," then he's incompetent, since everything he wants to do will make things worse.

I guess he could run on "I'm not evil, I'm just stupid." It probably wouldn't actually cost him much support among his brain-dead followers, after all.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Jeff Gunn
Sat Mar 31, 2012 5:07 AM
Minding my own business, I watched the Charlie Rose interview with Republican Simpson and Democrat Bowles. I was surprised to hear both these honorable gentlemen openly and matter of factly state that the President knew, and they agreed he was right, that anything he endorsed would have less chance to succeed if he embraced it which is why the President handled things as he did. Alan Simpson concurred, stating "anything the President came up with, would be rejected by the house". He said this and more, that nothing could be done bipartisanly because "these new Republicans didn't come to limit government they came to get rid of it." Even more, Simpson and Bowles both speak contemptuously of those Republicans unwilling to compromise stating Boehner and the President both wanted to do the grand bargain, using the framework of the Simpson Bowles budget had a great plan in place and it would have passed if not for the 83 Republican obstructionists.

What does this have to do with this column? Just that when you hear an honorable Republican and an honorable Democrat speak respectfully and truthfully to each other, of the President and the problems faced by this country, I am reminded again that reading some of these columnists is akin to reading National Enquirer.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Steve
Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:13 AM
Re: Steve

"Alan Simpson concurred, stating 'anything the President came up with, would be rejected by the house'."

And anything the House comes up with will be rejected by the Senate.

But hey...who's counting?
Comment: #5
Posted by: Jeff Gunn
Tue Apr 3, 2012 4:04 AM
Re: Bloom Hilda --When you study the history of Socialism in the US post-1960, you will discover that Limbaugh knows of what he speaks. Stanley Kurtz's book "Radical in Chief" thoroughly researches the history and makes it clear that Michael Harrington, Manning Marable, Quentin Young, John McKnight, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) et al have a profound influence on the policies of the Obama adminstration.
Comment: #6
Posted by: formerdemocrat
Tue Apr 3, 2012 12:59 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
David Limbaugh
Oct. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Authorís Podcast
Laura Hollis
Laura HollisUpdated 23 Oct 2014
Matt Towery
Matt ToweryUpdated 23 Oct 2014
Deb Saunders
Debra J. SaundersUpdated 23 Oct 2014

13 Sep 2013 Christian Liberties, the Stepchild of Today's 1st Amendment

19 Jul 2011 America's Financial Restoration vs. Obama's Ideology

1 Aug 2014 Democrats, the Constitution and the Rule of Law