The Real Recovery Plan

Obama has a “recovery plan.” He told us so.

Where to begin? In just a little over one week, so much out of the White House has been utterly disgusting, but totally predictable.

From pointing blame at AIG, drug cartels, and terrorists, Obama and his cohorts seem to effectively deflect identification of the true enemy responsible for the problems of this nation. Adding insult to injury considering the harm they’ve already inflicted, they now intend to try and accomplish a mandatory public “service” requirement of our youth.

What kind of goals are these: the nationalization of private corporations, the taking away of rights in the name of security against drug dealers and terrorists, and the attempt to force young people to “volunteer” to do work for the federal government?

Where will this end, and who is responsible, and if there’s a real recovery plan who has it? We’re certainly going to need a recovery plan to heal this nation from Obama’s “recovery plan.”

Obama’s feigned anger over the AIG was so obviously false, as was those in Congress who tried to also act as if they identified with the American taxpayer. I found Obama’s remarks on March 16 particularly telling of the deceptive man I believe he is. Who is the enemy of the people in this situation? Obama wants you to think it’s AIG.

His remark after he coughed, “Excuse me, I’m choked up with anger here,” was so obviously indicative of his lack of respect for the anger of the American people as he continued with his feigned indignation. True indignation would never mock those who actually feel it. But how can one be angry about something which should be expected?

Things like the discussions of AIG back last November, SEC filings, and corporate policies of retentive payouts aren’t big secrets, and if anyone should know, it should be Obama and his administration. Yet, Obama remained conveniently silent on the subject when he was selling his bailout to the public. The American taxpayer was told of every so called benefit, but not one mention of a detail like this which they might immediately reject.

It’s such hypocrisy for Obama to speak of this issue being about our “fundamental values,” when his plans are the antithesis of those values.

Moreover, for Obama in the same speech to presume to call the corporation one of “recklessness and greed” is the height of arrogance. Who is calling who “reckless” here? Obama and this Congress has propelled our nation way closer to economic collapse, obligating millions of our children and those even yet to be born, to financial duress for years to come. That’s what I call reckless.

Obama should have just told the American people, “Get used to it! This is what bailouts are about. There’s more to come.”

Instead, he and his cohorts, try to cover themselves from the wrath of the people by behaving as if so surprised and as outraged as anyone else. Can anyone believe this? Apparently, so. I’ve not seen any of those so enthralled with Obama renounce their adoration of him yet.

This wasn’t something he should be trying to find a fix for with taxation (a very dangerous precedent), but something he should have owned up to as part of his plan. He could have even used his words to rationalize it as necessary to those who would buy that line, but no, he prefers to act the part as an innocent bystander who is just as disturbed about it as anyone else. Truth is, I believe nationalization of corporations and our banks, is what he’s after. I don’t believe it’s some reluctant action he sincerely thinks justified, I believe it’s what he wants.

As for his “budget” Obama on March 25 at a fundraising event challenged his critics to “show me your budget,” and “show me your ideas.” Once again, disingenuous remarks meant to appear as if he’s open, when in reality I believe Obama is set on doing exactly as he pleases without regard to the best interest of the American people. If truly receptive to other’s ideas, especially when it comes to the budget, he’d heed Ron Paul and others who raise serious questions.

As Congressman Paul said in a March 3 interview on Bloomberg TV, “For a government that’s totally broke, I can hardly see that these are reasonable requests to spend trillions and trillions of dollars more in the biggest budget effort…We should be cutting spending…”

Regarding the president and Congress saying they plan to cut it down by 500 billion, Paul answered, “…I don’t know whether they brainwash themselves or what, but the odds of cutting the deficit in half by stimulating by running up a deficit of 1 or 2 trillion dollars is beyond me…it’s a fairytale, it’s just silliness.”

And yet the American people give their consent, in their apathy, to this grand illusion Obama has drawn for them.

The outrage rather than against Obama and Congress, is directed against a corporation as AIG and its executives. But it is a misplaced rage. It’s wasted rage. The culprit is not some corporation which should have been allowed to fail if fail it must, the responsibility for this situation is with Obama and every member of Congress who voted for this and previous bailouts. The disgust should be with those who voted to do this.

Similarly, as Obama’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blames assault weapon sales in the States and the drug cartel leaders for violence on the border, she doesn’t mention that it is the U.S. government’s influence which caused Mexico to make an enormous “drug war” just as we did here with the same resulting violence. Instead, she lets all know that the U.S. will give them 80 million more dollars to further militarize their drug war by buying Blackhawk helicopters.

Yes, it always comes back to money…throw money at it…appear compassionate…make money from it…and then declare the resulting increase in violence as justification for the money you threw at it and all the more reason to increase militarization of the border..which of course will require more money. Nice set-up there for those who benefit from it. It’s another “war” that never ends. It brings only more suffering.

The Mexican drug cartels are as powerful as they are because the Mexican government, spurred by the U.S. government, made them so. Want to see the violence come to a significant halt, a major decrease in all the violent crime Clinton and Obama would have you believe disturbs them so? Stop the drug war. Stop prohibiting that which human beings have always and will always engage in. Take away the criminalization of drugs, and those using violence for their ends no longer prosper. They won’t be needed. With the illegality gone, buyers and sellers will do what they do. No one to hide from, nothing to kill for, no reason for a black market.

But, no, Clinton doesn’t blame our government. She blames guns…and the answer she essentially says is bring on bigger guns…and the violence continues, and the profits continue (and not just for the drug cartels). At every level, the state benefits greatly from the drug war, so they’re not about to stop it. They made it, they want it, they’ll maintain and grow it because they profit from it.