Obama's Real Economic Strategy

The Democrat party has one natural constituency: America’s least productive, least ambitious and least accomplished persons. In exchange for money like welfare payments and other subsidies, these people give the Democrat party millions of votes. There is no wiggle room and no dissent. It is a straight quid pro quo.


The Democrats build up from that dreary base. Their tent includes overpaid, half-speed government workers; political hacks in corrupt urban machines; greedy union activists; left-wing college professors who work 6 months a year at price-gouging universities; unionized public school teachers whose system is spiraling down into oblivion; artists, poets, actors and novelists who currently represent one of the most mediocre cultures in history; slacker college students; lawyered-up environmentalists who fight growth everywhere; enraged anarchists and other violence-based activists; and sundry people whose effect on our culture is essentially negative.


What a motley crew.


When it was announced that there were 651,000 jobs lost in February, Obama was in Columbus, Ohio touting the fact that 25 police officer jobs were saved by his stimulus money.


Is there something wrong here?


Absolutely. What is wrong is Obama’s real strategy, which is a hard-left gamble to turn the country upside down. It very well could backfire, but Obama is pushing it in hopes of capturing just enough votes to fundamentally alter the nation.


Obama was politically strong when he was inaugurated. He could have been using this period to make the changes necessary for a future economic rebound. Those changes would have included deep federal spending cuts and tax relief for business, things that would help the economy greatly but that would upset the natural constituencies of the Democrat party. But he is not making these tough decisions. He is going in the opposite direction.


Obama is not concerned about the economy per se. He was influenced by communists growing up and he wants to do one thing in his presidency and that is to expand government power and the private sector be damned.


One way to look at the effect of Obama is to look at the stats. Consider these economic milestones in the past year-and-a-half since Obama emerged as the likely next president:


*The stock market peaked at an all-time high on October 9, 2007 reaching 14,164.53.


*The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed 13 months later at 9,625.28 on election day November 4, 2008 and then in the next 16 days sank almost 2,000 points to 7,552.29 by the close of business on November 20, 2008. That drop is a show of no-confidence in the new president.


*On the day of Obama’s inauguration, January 20, 2009, the market fell 332.13 points, a record for an inauguration day.


*On February 10, 2009, after Obama Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner laid out his plans for the remainder of the so-called TARP bank bailout funds, the Dow plummeted 381.99 points, or 4.62 percent, to 7,888.88. That was the lowest close since Nov. 20, 2008.


*On February 17, 2009, the day Obama signed his economic stimulus plan in Denver, the market fell 297.81 points, or 3.79%, to 7552.60, just a tad above the November 20 low.


The Dow closed at 6926.49 on Tuesday, March 10, 2009. That is a shocking 49% of its value at its peak.


Had enough? And what does all this mean?


Rational economists warned that this would happen with an Obama presidency, that Obama was a far-left anti-business liberal. Many voters apparently did not believe those economists.


But is this ongoing collapse an intentional strategy? To undermine the economy? After all, during the last great depression of the 1930s, socialism made the biggest advances it ever made. Is Obama seeking the same result?


The answer is that it certainly appears that way.


How would this work?


With a weakening economy, Democrats will build on their base constituency – the government handout crowd, which has been subsidized by the Democrats for decades, expanding its ranks. Obama’s refusal to institute pro-growth policies then is going to create a whole new wave of dependent poor, people who were on the brink even in good times. They will join in a chorus for more government handouts, even participating in demonstrations against any cuts in government funding, as happened recently in cash-strapped New York state.


But wait. You may say that Obama will suffer if there are protests against him.


No. Obama is playing a very hardball game. He is gambling that his strategy will work, that the falling economy will frighten so many people that they will not trust the private economy, that they will see his expanded programs as the only way out. There even is talk of a second stimulus bill! So when there are demonstrations, they will be organized by liberals and leftists themselves as are the ones in New York. And the demonstrations will be aimed at Bush and capitalism, and they will tout Obama and socialism as the answer. Thousands of people will be getting paid to participate in these demonstrations. Others will simply be unemployed people who have lots of free time on their hands. They will be organized by Obama functionaries who will be funded by the government and by rich leftists like Soros.


At the same time, those conservatives who are angry at Obama will organize demonstrations too, but based on the opposite, that Obama has been reckless with spending and other policies. They will be much smaller protests because conservatives generally have jobs and work hard.


The only thing that matters, however, is how many people are convinced that the pro-Obama faction is right. And the media will put on a full-court press for them, portraying the conservatives as minions of Bush who caused the problem in the first place, when in fact it was government policy and liberal lending practices that set off this whole crisis. Other leftists will join in the propaganda war, the same people who helped elect Obama – the public school teachers, the bloggers, the college professors, the environmentalists, the violent anarchists/communists, the urban political hacks, the unions, the college kids.


Obama is playing for keeps. He is committed to a far-left strategy. There is a strong possibility that it will not work, and the Republicans may make a huge comeback in 2010 and 2012. But remember the real mathematical reality here. Elections are won by people who get at least 50% of the vote plus one vote. That is all that Obama needs. And he is convinced that he has the strategy to get it.


Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can print out for free my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.