The New Deal 2.0

7 07 2008

If Barack Obama wins the presidency in November and retains majorities in Congress, this country will make a hard turn to the left not seen since the New Deal. Seventy-five years ago, Franklin Roosevelt’s first 100 days began with his March 4, 1933, inaugural, and culminated June 16 with his big push for the National Recovery Administration (NRA).

I should preface this by pointing out that the material depression was far greater in 1933 than today. Americans needed Roosevelt to act, and he did. Like Barack Obama today, Roosevelt used his rhetoric to bring Americans into his camp. But his NRA programs, plowing through Congress exploiting a 313 to 117 Democrat to Republican ratio, only exacerbated the Great Depression. 

Roosevelt pushed his unprecedented, government-growing legislation through not only because of his majority in Congress, but like Obama today, he appealed to the emotions of voters using biblical falsifications such as the government’s “duty” to seize control and expand all forms of transportation, communication, and other utilities.

Barack Obama’s vision for an increase in government power carries a Rooseveltian harmony. As evidence, I submit any supporter of Barack Obama who can’t explain his position on any major issue. These types of voters are more numerous than you might imagine. Just about every late night and political talk show has interviewed such persons on numerous occasions. They have been beguiled by the mellifluous notes of The Pied Piper’s Barack Obama’s flute. And to top it all off, they have no excuse. First, they have the failures of Roosevelt’s New Deal to look back on and learn from, and second, we are not in a depression and do not need our next president to expand government in order to survive. Obama’s ideals for government power are for his personal benefit and the good of his party, not the American people. 

In 1935, thanks to a conservative Supreme Court, the NRA was found to be an unconstitutional deprivation of liberty, resulting in FDR backing off. But he cranked it back up after his reelection. And since the voters during those depression years preferred the hope the NRA paraded to the medicine GOP candidate Alf Landon offered, Roosevelt enjoyed a second term with another majority in both houses of Congress and no opposition to obstruct his liberal programs. 

What can conservatives do this year to prevent The New Deal 2.0? One way is obvious: work to elect John McCain. But if McCain appears headed for defeat, Republicans will have one other viable option: prevent a sizable Democrat majority in Congress. The Wall Street Journal’s John Fund recalls what happened in 1996 when Bob Dole’s loss was imminent:

The Republican National Committee decided to take bold action by directly appealing to the public’s fondness for divided government and fear of one-party rule. It rook out ads that featured a fortuneteller staring into a crystal ball showing scenes of Biblical devastation, plague and conflict were seen. The announcer warned what could happen if Democrats swept the elections:

“Remember the last time Democrats ran everything? The largest tax increase in history. Government-run health care. More wasteful spending. Who wants that again? Don’t let (insert local state) down. Don’t let the media stop you from voting. And don’t hand Bill Clinton a blank check.”

It worked. Republicans gained two seats in the Senate and lost only a handful in the House.

Fortunately, McCain is running close enough in the polls that option one is still highly possible. But if Obama’s daily flip flops have the intended consequence of duping more voters into believing his words today over yesterday, then plan B may be our only hope for survival.




9 responses

7 07 2008
The New Deal 2.0 : Stop The ACLU

[…] Crossposted at Truth and Reason […]

7 07 2008

You know TR, I just put a post up this morning about one of my favorite economists, endorsing BO. Not just any economists, but David Friedman, the son of Milton Friedman. David, unlike his father is way more hardcore. He’s what you would call, an Anrcho-Capitalist. And for him, to even come and endorse someone, is impressive.

Another thing to point out is, Obama has some amazing economists working on his campaign. The two main ones, are from the “Chicago School”. Which Milton Friedman pretty much came up on his own. The “Chicago School” mainstreamed Free-Market Libertarian economics. Read “Capitalism and Freedom” by Milton, it is why I am a Libertarian today.

So, to say we may have another “New Deal” is a bit strange. At the sametime, reading McAmnestys economic plan, theres a lot to be desired. Cutting taxes for “Corporations” that are friendly with the Federal Government, is not the way to go. No, I’m not a liberal. When the Government, and Corporations get in bed together, we are done for. Hello Socialism.

The New Deal, by the way, was the reason why the Depression lasted so long, and made the Government so much more powerful than any other time in history prior to that. And if I were to ever (god-forbid) to become President, I would get rid of the whole damn thing. And repalce it with Nothing.

7 07 2008

I think you’re dead on, TR. And the idea that a Friedman is supporting Obama doesn’t jive with anything I’ve ever heard Obama say. Friedman must be aware of all of Obama’s socialist and even communist influences, both growing up and later in life.

I linked to this at Conservatism Today, where I wondered about the summary to your post.

“I’m not sure what I think about this. If Obama becomes President, I think I’d rather see the Dems gain total control. Give today’s young adults the experience of what happens when they get what they wish for, and they’ll never wish for it again.”

7 07 2008
Conservatism Today

The New Deal 2.0?…

Here’s a good post at Truth and Reason:Roosevelt pushed his unprecedented, government-growing legislation through not only because of his majority in Congress, but like Obama today, he appealed to the emotions of voters using biblical falsifications s…

7 07 2008

W.W.R.D…I had to do a triple take to see if I read it correctly. Like I said before, David Friedman is hardcore. All you have to do is read his book “The Machinery of Freedom” to see what I mean. And it’s a real good book.

And, I don’t have any doubt that he’s done his research on Obama. Listen, I’ll be the first one to point out BO’s communist rhetoric. But on the flip-side, I’d also point out McAmnesty’s socialists rhetoric as well. Neither of them are going to be good.

Another thing, endorsments 99% of the time do nothing for me. I like who I like. Bob Barr, being my guy. But in my view, Friedman carries a lot of weight with me personaly. And if he’s saying something “nice” about ANY politican, much like his Father, I’m going to listen.

7 07 2008
Mr. Incredible

==Fortunately, McCain is running close enough in the polls …==

And he hasn’t even revved up his campaign in earnest yet. Nationally, McCain is statistically even.

7 07 2008
Truth and Reason

If Friedman wants to endorse Obama from an economic standpoint that’s fine. But he’s not considering the most important leg of the three-legged stool of conservatism: the social leg. And Obama fails even more miserably there. He’ll never get my vote for that reason, even if he promises to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

WWRD, I too, have thought of that, but I came to the conclusion that there is too much at stake to use failure as our teacher this time around. The SCOTUS is primary reason we can’t afford this lesson. We’re one vote away from a solid conservative sc. We won’t have this chance for another few decades. Besides, with the resources available today, young people can easily find out why they shouldn’t vote on emotions with a cursory reading of a few blogs (including my own 🙂 ) and other internet sites.

Thanks for the link, too!

8 07 2008

regularron – thanks for pointing that out, that’s interesting and I put the book on my “to do” list. That being said, nothing will ever persuade me to even think about voting BO.

TR – Ultimately, I usually come around to the same decision for the same reason.

No problem on the link, I only found this site because I saw that you linked to me before.

28 10 2008
Recycling We Can Believe In « Truth and Reason

[…] 10 2008 Is Barack Obama’s mantra of “change” really anything new? As I’ve noted before, it’s more of a recycling of old-time socialism first brought to political life by Woodrow […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: