opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh
12 Feb 2016
David Brooks and Obama's Ongoing Pant Crease

If you read The New York Times "conservative" columnist David Brooks, you might better grasp the chasm … Read More.

9 Feb 2016
Fear Not, My Secular Friends

It amuses me that certain people are convinced that Christians are angry scolds but totally miss the … Read More.

5 Feb 2016
Ted Cruz and the Body of Christ

There is a misplaced fear — shared, I'm sad to say, by many on the right — that Christian … Read More.

Obama's Profits Allergy


I wonder why any president of the United States would feel compelled to protest, repeatedly, "I believe in the power of the free market." Has any other president said it — at least in the context Obama keeps saying it? That's rhetorical.

Sure, Ronald Reagan talked about the glories of capitalism frequently, but never in terms of trying to convince skeptics that he really believed what he was saying.

But Obama said it again in that very context, in his Wall Street speech in New York on Thursday. "As I said two years ago on this stage, I believe in the power of the free market." Believe me; he didn't go on to elaborate on the wonders of entrepreneurship, capital formation, liberty or the robust economic growth that free markets produce and which cannot be replicated, with any faint degree of consistency, in command-control economies.

Indeed, just one sentence later, Obama added one of his ubiquitous free market qualifiers. He said, "But a free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get however you can get it."

Excuse me? Please tell me one capitalist who believes that a free market is synonymous with a license to steal. None does. They all understand that our capitalist system operates under the rule of law. We already have laws preventing stealing, fraud and the like. So why does he have to frame the issue in such distorted extremes? Also rhetorical.

But let me ask you something: Could Obama make the same statements about the federal government, as in, "I believe in the power of the federal government, but the federal government was never supposed to have a license to take whatever it can get however it can get it"?

Sure he could make the statement, but would he mean it? Rhetorical. Surely we can all agree that he has far more confidence in the federal government than in the invisible hand of the free market. In fact, Obama leftists these days are coming out of the woodwork to condemn conservatives and other free market advocates for believing that capitalism can possibly work without the constant heavy hand of government regulation pressing down on evil entrepreneurs for their excess profiteering.

Raised and mentored at the feet of capitalist-hating leftists, Obama repeatedly reveals a visceral distaste for profits. And I don't mean so-called "excess" or "ill-gotten" profits only, but just plain old profits. Obama thinks, like a Marxist, that profits are "surplus value" stolen by capitalists from laborers who produce the wealth.

He is obviously so deeply steeped in Marxist indoctrination that he believes that prices are only high because of profits.

In his static view, only a government-controlled system can cut out those evil profits and maintain reasonable prices. He apparently has no concept of — or any appreciable real-world experience validating — the ability of the market, through competition, to produce higher-quality goods at lower prices.

We witnessed this with his opportunistic war on insurance companies, when he savaged them for their "obscene and excessive" profits. But the unvarnished data proved the insurance industry's profits are modest compared with those of other industries. Obama was surely aware of that but shrewdly labeled them "excessive" because he knows Americans are not allergic to profits as he is.

In hot pursuit of his latest federal power grab (a complete financial overhaul), what Obama doesn't tell us is that it wasn't an unregulated market that primarily caused the financial crisis — the crisis that facilitated his ecstatic quest to completely transform America into a socialist state. It was largely an unbridled, out-of-control, do-gooder leftist Congress that substituted its values for the wisdom of the market and incentivized and forced financial firms to make loans to people who couldn't possibly repay them, among other things. These wonderful leftist congressmen, who hold themselves out as impartial regulators, resisted Republican efforts to rein in their friends at Fannie and Freddie.

Obama's financial overhaul bill would not enhance the rule of law, which in a nutshell is a government of laws, not of men. It would diminish the rule of law by replacing the law's intended impartiality (objective standards that citizens can rely on) with giving "unlimited discretion" to arrogant, power-drunk government thugs who think they are better-equipped, morally and intellectually, to run our macroeconomy. There would be no level playing field guaranteed by the rule of law, but an expansion of the ability of government, with yet more confiscated taxpayer money, to pick the winners and losers for whatever reason it wants and without having to explain why. This, as I wrote before, is TARP writ permanent. And we know how much accountability the government has had with TARP expenditures — or with Obama's stimulus funds, for that matter.

When will this insanity end?

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His book "Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party" was released recently in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



2 Comments | Post Comment
You forgot her $500 Sneakers. Of course, she only wears those when she's at the Shelters, feeding the homeless. How much did their Chicago MANSION cost. He's no different from any other COMMUNIST ELITE. After all...All pigs are created equal. Some pigs are MORE EQUAL than others.
He's just being MUSSOLINI. He's just being LENIN, FRANCO, CASTRO and CHAVEZ. No surprise. After all, that's WHO he is.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Timothy L. Pennell
Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:28 AM
"'As I [Obama] said two years ago on this stage, I believe in the power of the free market.' Believe me; he didn't go on to elaborate on the wonders of entrepreneurship...He said, 'But a free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get however you can get it.'"

This sentence, "He [obama] said, 'But a free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get however you can get it.'", struck me particularly hard, because it reveals so much of the hypocrisy between what obama says, and what he does. He exhibits outrage about what others do, yet sees no problem doing the same thing himself if HE can benefit from it (financially or otherwise!). barack obama has consistently taken "license
to take whatever [he] can get however [he] can get it"!

I think that obama's ideas about the "free market" would only include "profits" that would be accrued to the benefit of a) his "approved" list of companies, industries, or groups, b) his friends or political cronies/benefactors, or c) barack obama HIMSELF (though a vigorous effort would undoubtedly be made to conceal such benefits from the American people).

Given the evidence concerning the Obamas' $5,000,000 income (primarily book sales, etc.), I would say the Mr. Obama doesn't have any problem with garnering "profits" for his personal enrichment; he just sees such profits as negative when they go into the pockets of individuals, companies, or even entire industries of which he does not "approve"!

It's frightening to know that such a person occupies the office of the U.S. President!
Comment: #2
Posted by: Pam
Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:00 AM
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: comments policy
David Limbaugh
Feb. `16
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 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 1 2 3 4 5
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
David Harsanyi
David HarsanyiUpdated 12 Feb 2016
Linda Chavez
Linda ChavezUpdated 12 Feb 2016
Michael Barone
Michael BaroneUpdated 12 Feb 2016

28 Sep 2007 An Unhappy Marriage

20 Jun 2008 Ravi Zacharias: 'Beyond Opinion,' Part 2

25 Apr 2008 It's Barack, Like It or Not