Can Obama Win Re-Election by Promising Free Stuff

By now we all know that the candidate who four years ago told us he would bring us together has become the president who will run for re-election by trying to drive us apart.

The president can’t say two words without saying these two words:  “Fair share.” The rich, we’re told, aren’t paying their “fair share” and that’s not fair.

The other day, as he explained why his new budget calls for tax increases on the wealthy, the president said, ”We don’t begrudge success in America. We do expect everybody to do their fair share, so that everybody has opportunity, not just some.”

And since everybody on Team Obama got the memo, the president’s chief of staff Jack Lew recently said, “In the short term, we need to keep the economy growing.  In the long term, we need to get the deficit under control … and we do it in a way that’s consistent with American values so that everyone pays a fair share.”

You will hear those two words over and over again between now and Election Day.  That’s because Mr. Obama, who promised he would change the tone in Washington and usher in a new post-partisan era, has figured out what we all already know:  He can’t run on his record, so he’ll run trying to convince the middle class that the rich are getting away with murder; that the middle class is struggling because the rich are not; that if those intransigent Republicans in Congress would only go along with his plan to increases taxes on the rich, then happy days would be here again.

I suspect that even Mr. Obama, an intelligent man, doesn’t believe any of this.  He’s got to know that if he taxed the rich at 100 percent of their income, it still wouldn’t put a dent in the national debt.  Besides, if you increase taxes on the wealthy – the people who hire people who aren’t rich – we might slip into another recession.  But this isn’t about economics.  It’s about politics.  Mr. Obama has done the math.  He knows that there are a lot more voters in the middle class than in the top one percent.  Turn the 99 percent against the one percent and you can win re-election.  Hope and change has become divide and conquer.

But since Mr. Obama is so concerned about fairness, let’s ask him if it’s fair that the top one percent of wage earners – the people he’s always bashing – pay about 40 percent of all federal income taxes while the bottom 50 percent pay about 2.7 percent.

Mr. Obama says he is not waging class warfare against the wealthy in America.  He is, of course.  His campaign slogan might as well be: ” Vote for Me … I’ll Give You Free Stuff.” This is enticing.  Imagine if you pay no federal income taxes and one of the candidates says, “I’ll take money from rich people and give it to you to pay your mortgage – even if you were irresponsible and bought a house you couldn’t afford.  Vote for me, I’ll make sure you get unemployment benefits for almost two full years.  And, oh yeah, vote for me and I’ll make sure you get birth control pills —  free of charge.

The most important, underreported story in America is the one about who we Americans are becoming.  As Bill O’Reilly put it:  President Obama is “calculating that the American voter has changed into a person who wants free stuff from the government and is willing to sacrifice some freedoms in order to get the free stuff. And you know what? The President might be right.”

Unlike a lot of you who think Mr. Obama doesn’t stand a chance, I have less faith in the American people than you.  A lot less.  I’m with H. L. Mencken who supposedly said, “You’ll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”  Not any of  YOU, of course.  I’m talking about EVERYONE ELSE.  The ones who can be bought with cheap promises. As my pal Bill O’Reilly put it:  “Free stuff is a powerful lure.  No question about it.”

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • Sean M…Las Vegas

    I believe most Americans who “Think” they deserve to stay on the governments teet and hang onto the skirt, are abderianly juvenile. I spent twenty years in the U.S. Navy protecting these people!! America needs to wake up and start relying on their self and stop expecting the government to be their like mom and dad.

  • TOMMY FREEDOM

    BHO WILL GIVE CHRISTIAN CONDOMS FROM RELIGIOUS
    INSTITUTION, 1ST IN LINE SANDRA FLUKE.

    BERNIE, TELL CHRIS WALLACE TODAY THAT HE FORGOT TO MENTION THE RUSH GOT A BOMB SENT TO HIS HOME. HES A WH LAPDOG.

  • Craig W.

    But if the 1% pay a higher tax, won’t they just raise their pay to compensate? Most corporate CEO’s pay has zero to do with whether or not those corporations hire anyone. That is based upon whether or not they need employees to handle the demand, not the CEO or CFO or whomever the 1% are supposed to be getting taxed a little more.

  • TOMMY FREEDOM

    THE LATEST, WILL BHO PROMISE SPY DRONES OVER THE U S, IF YOU HAVE FRIENDS IN THE YARD IT COULD BE A ANTI-BHO RALLY? MY BEST ADVISE, WHEN THE DRONE GOES OVER WAVE YOUR CHICKEN NUGGETS AND CONDOMS, THAT WILL GET SOME VOTES.

  • Wiley Jones

    I do ot have a lot of money but I am a vet that served my countery and proud of it, I do not want to give what I have to some long haired hipey that will not work.

  • joseph slim

    Obama has been and still is criticised by prejudicial nonsense in both fronts, his color and religion, and his political party [democrats Vs. republicans].
    i believe that Obama will win this election simply because the majority of the people are getting sick of dividing America mainly the republicans continue to attack the presidents bills that will improve America’s economy and takes it out of recession, but the republicans made it very clear to create unhealthy environment to all Americans because this president is black.[Shame on you]. We must reform America and get rid of the clutters.
    Yes Obama will win by a landslide.

    • Richard Hilger

      A comment such as this is so very disheartening because it showcases the naivete and gullibility of the average American voter. To read someone who actually blames Republicans for dividing the country, who assigns all opposition to Obama as race-based and believes that trillion dollar deficit spending will improve the economy….. I sadly must conclude that such stupidity/ignorance, ubiquitous as it is, justifies Joseph’s final sentence.

    • am burg

      joseph (smokes filterless) slim(s),
      You must be young AND uninformed. I pity you.
      Tell Jon Stewart to smarten up. He did you a dis-service.
      It was Obama that divided this nation with his forked-tongue.
      HE pitted poor against wealthy, black against white, and Christians against all.
      And I will end by calling YOU racist, as he is bi-racial, not BLACK.

  • TOMMY FREEDOM

    HE CAN IF OUR LAME CONGRESS LETS HIM USE ALL
    OUR TAX DOLLARS.

  • Ron Kean

    Bernie, I just caught the unwed mothers clip. Obvious to many of us. Dumb.

    But what really got me was the gold and pink look. Very nice.

  • Mary Jo

    Bernie, Thank you for your direct, honest outlook on the future of our country. You were so absolutely correct on 2-20 on “The Factor” when speaking of the percentage of women having children out of wedlock. The cost of this alone is draining our economy and quite frankly scares me straight. First, they look to the government for handouts to raise this child, second this child is without role model figures to learn the basic diffence between right and wrong. I was raised in a family of six, I had a mom and dad, they taught me to respect my elders, to go to school, church and most importantly to become a responsible adult. We didn’t have much money, but I got a job out of High School and worked for the next 30 years in banking. I’m not rich but I know how to be responsible show up on time and proudly say I’ve worked hard to have what I have today. This strog work ethic was learned from my parents, both a mom and a dad who wanted the best for their six children. So my advice to those looking for a handout, GET A JOB, any job and earn the respect from your employer. Stop expecting me, who doesn’t have a whole lot of money to help you who doesn’t even try.

    • Norbit

      You are 1000% correct Mary Jo.

      Evolved thinking would dictate a humane reversal of this most pernicious trend.
      Women who don’t have the wherewithal to care for themselves, no less raise and rear a child, should not be having children.

      These innocent children are born into untenable life situations, through nothing more than the selfish, reckless and irresponsible decisions of the mother – often with no commitment from any “father”.

      And before the caterwauling of “Racism!” spews, it’s BEHAVIOR, so it doesn’t matter what neanderthal criteria of group identity the Left uses – particularly color.

  • joedee1969

    There is no chance any president gets reelected with this many people out of work. No sane person believe the government unemployment rate:

    http://americaspeaksink.com/2012/02/foster-friess-is-right-women-should-close-their-legs/

  • Bob Hadley

    “Unlike a lot of you who think Mr. Obama doesn’t stand a chance, I have less faith in the American people than you. A lot less. I’m with H. L. Mencken who supposedly said, ‘You’ll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.’ …The ones who can be bought with cheap promises. As my pal Bill O’Reilly put it: ‘Free stuff is a powerful lure. No question about it.’”

    So, anyone who doesn’t share your analysis is either stupid or easily bought????? Are you a conservative elitist?

    This “free stuff” mantra is propaganda. It projects imagery of the federal government handing out flat screen TVs and other consumer items. Although your explanations is of something different, you and O’Reilly certainly know that imagery can be more powerful than words or reason.

    From reading your piece above, “stuff” apparently refers to mortgage payments, unemployment insurance payments and birth control, i.e. stuff is money and birth control pills or devices. Oookayyyy.

    First, let’s look at helping people with mortgage payments and the extension of unemployment benefits. This can be analyzed in terms of policy – economic or otherwise- or in terms of raw politics. You and O’Reilly both summarily dismiss that there’s any economic reason for this “free stuff” give away.

    In fact, O’Reilly has asked critics of President Obama, “Obama is intelligent, surely he knows that these policies are harmful to the economy, why do you think he persists?” Of course, O’Reilly was inviting them to say that Obama wants to destroy our economy. As far as I know, only Brit Hume reminded O’Reilly that Obama really believes his policies are fitting to our current economy.

    You both certainly know that Keynesian economics is prevalent, if not dominant, among economists. In our severe recession families tightened their belts, as they had to. Accordingly, demand in the private sector continued to decrease. The only immediate way to counter such a trend is to increase demand via government spending. Sure, going into more debt – even at the current rock bottom interest rates – is bad. But not getting a thriving economy is worse. Government stimulus is also necessary to assist an uncertain recovery. Not extending unemployment payments would reduce demand in our economy.

    Our foreclosure crisis is obviously a tremendous drag on our economic recovery. Here again, there are different theories on how best to approach this crisis. There’s the Mitt Romney approach of just letting the housing market bottom out with hordes of home owners becoming renters. But, here again, there’s a body of thought that it’s best for our economy that troubled homeowners have their condition improved even if by government assistance.

    I too am concerned about the social consequences of extending unemployment payments and a housing bailout system, just as I was concerned by TARP I – initiated by Pres. GW Bush and Tarp II. These programs contribute to a growing entitlement mentality and a lessening of personal responsibility. But in a similar fashion, our legal system – both civil and criminal – contributes to this mentality. Shall we trash our legal system?

    Making birth control readily available, even at no charge, while serving a political purpose also serves a real public policy purpose.

    Until we get a healthy economy, cutting spending will not reduce the deficit or the debt. After the economy recovers, we should concentrate on the deficit and on the debt.
    I know. Many conservatives disagree. They say Keynesian policies create a “sugar high.” But to act as though the Keynesian school doesn’t exist or is a fringe theory is dishonest. Here, O’Reilly is the main offender. To my knowledge, you haven’t pretended that Keynesian economics doesn’t exist. You have, however, summarily dismissed this body of thought.

    Of course, politics is intertwined in all this. But there is a rationality to this beyond politics.

    “But since Mr. Obama is so concerned about fairness, let’s ask him if it’s fair that the top one percent of wage earners – the people he’s always bashing – pay about 40 percent of all federal income taxes while the bottom 50 percent pay about 2.7 percent.”

    Is it fair to ask what percent of the national income and of the national wealth goes to the top one percent? If so, what is the answer. I’ve heard that’s it’s more 40%.

  • Dennis

    Bernie nailed it on O’Reilly 2/20/12. Fifty percent of babies currently born to women under 30 in the U.S are out of wedlock. Obvious profound impact on our economic and social problems which the Obama administration and liberal media consistently ignore. Why ? Not just political correctness but also by “condoning” this activity, more dependence, power, and control is afforded to the government.

  • GhostWriter

    You must be drinking Fox News cool aid. What flavor is it? The rich have had their tax cuts since 2000. Where are all those jobs they are supposed to create? You obviously don’t have a clue as to what you are talking about. The only thing the rich did is put the money in their pockets. The electorate will finally come to their senses and vote as many Republicans out of office as they can in the next election.

    • Ron Kean

      Wrong. Liberal minded people gave billions of home loans to people who couldn’t afford them. Barney Frank was in charge and Republicans couldn’t fight it without being branded as heartless. The bubble burst, there was a run on the stock market, the economy tanked and people were laid off. It was the poor people who got the money.

      It wasn’t about Republicans putting money in their pockets. It was about poor people getting lots of money to buy a house. Your argument is irrelevant.

      • Craig W.

        Ron Kean

        So the CEO of Countrywide, which was one of the worst offenders, was a liberal leaning corporate millionaire who decided that sabotaging America was a good idea? Greed had nothing to do with it? And you can surmise their politics by using this train of thought?

  • seanog

    My comment is aimed at all Democratic voters. To solve America’s problems, vote Barack Obama OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE next November.

  • Arkady967

    I suspect, Mr. Goldberg, that you are correct regarding your assessment of largest blocks of our voting public.

    I’d be there, too, were in not for what I at first considered unfortunate circumstances in my life i.e. suffering actual consequences of my own behavior unabated by governmental mercies. (Actually governmental had an initial role, they delayed the necessary inevitable.)

    I’m sure President Obama can get re-elected by promising stuff, including the satisfaction of “sticking it to the rich”. I think he’d do even better were he to throw in free Super-bowl tickets, or a lottery to get them (Surely a program can be instituted.)

    It’s an depressing admission to make, but as I look around me, at my working-class peers, and my educated superiors, I can see how you might come to your conclusions.

    Rats.

  • Brian

    I am not hopeful of my generation (The Millennials/Generation Y.) It seems like the majority of us are losing the good old fashioned American values and traditions, including the one of self-reliance and not expecting the government to give people free stuff, who are capable of taking care of themselves.

    Some people get knocked down, and may need temporary help getting back up. A small percent of people can’t help themselves. A small percentile.

    But giving a large proportion of people free stuff in order to get votes is plain evil. And if America becomes Socialist like France, Russia, or Sweden, individual liberties and personal freedom will begin to erode away.

  • Wil Burns

    Bernie, Vote for Me … I’ll Give You Free Stuff.” Bill O’Reilly put it: “Free stuff is a powerful lure. No question about it.”
    .
    Yep, Unemployment benefits and birth control pills — free of charge. That is all the the 99% want. You and your pal Bill O’Reilly don’t have a effing clue!

    • EddieD_Boston

      If you weren’t so stupid you’d grasp the simple truth that liberal policies drive manufacturing jobs overseas and that social welfare policies have increased poverty b/c it allow the stupid members of society to breed irresponsibly.

      If we got rid of the EPA and ended welfare many of societies problems would go away in the form of a job.

  • Wil Burns

    Bernie, Again, The only reason for a Republican Party, is to cut the taxes of the very wealthy. Everything else, is window dressing! And, the mystery is why working class Americans join the Republican/Corporation cabal in their attempts to destroy the American working class! Folks, There is a class war going on and the ‘one percent’ is losing!

    • Abort Leberal Fetuses!

      Conservatives strongly encourage free abortion, provided the fetus is liberal or named Wil Burns.

    • Tim Ned

      Wil,

      You continue to state your facts wrong. Tax cuts have come from both parties including JFK. I can’t locate any focused on the the top wage earners and the Bush tax cuts were across the board. You would at least have an ounce of credibility if you had some thought in your statements.

    • Brian

      ROFLMAO!!! You must be from the Occupy Movement.

      Maybe some of those working class and middle class folks understand that too much government = a loss of personal freedom. These could include losing:

      -Internet privacy.

      -Right-to-work laws.

      -Free speech.

      -2nd Ammendment.

      -Loss of 4th Ammendment (preventing illegal search & seizure.)

      It could also mean:

      -More Affirmative Action programs that do not look at personal merits that would screw some of those working class and middle class folks.

      Not to mention that the far-left hates Christianity. That does not help your cause.

  • David R. Zukerman

    One thing we are not getting for free is gasoline which under President Obama keeps zooming up in price. And as gas prices go, so, too, do consumer prices generally, I believe.

    Who is most affected by the Obama — keep gas prices high — policy: the one percent (where so many libs are to be found) or us 99 percent? (Full disclosure, I’m in the bottom four percent.)

    This is an administration that is uncomfortable with the Constitution, not least because the Constitution is opposed to the idea of government TO the people — aristocratic government, described in Federalist No. 57, as the “ambitious sacrifice of the many, to the aggrandizement of the few.” (Cf. the Obama Administration and its fondness for crony capitalism, not free enterprise.)

    When, pray tell, will conservatives make their case on the basis of our founding legacy, noted more than “fourscore” years later by President Lincoln, as having given us government of, by and for the people?

  • Shane

    I agree. I’m afraid that America is in decline as the people do not want to work hard to become successful. Too many people want the government to take care of them from the cradle to the grave. If Obama wins another term, America will be well on the way to becoming another failed Socialist state.

    God bless America, and please people let’s unite behind the GOP Presidential candidate to save our great nation.

    • Brian

      The one hope is that if Obama did somehow win, he could be made into a “lame duck president” by voting in more GOP members as state governors and as members of both the House and Senate, who could override his vetoes. (Thumbs up!)

  • Florida Jim

    Free stuff has worked for years for Obama with SEIU, ACORN, Teacher’s Unions, rigging elections in his home district, whatever he can do to lure people into following his progressive policies despite the fact those policies will eventually enslave the same people who think it is “free stuff”.

    • Shane

      Let’s not forget free breakfasts and lunches for middle class children in public schools, and free birth control for American woman, which Obama claims is a new “right.”

  • Wiley Jones

    Free stuf is never free some body has to pay.Please GOD HELP THE USA IF HUSEANJ IS IN FOR ANOTHER4444444444 years

  • Sunnyr

    I am so disgusted by this presidents divisive tactics to win votes! He has half the population of this country on the dole in one way or another and I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see him win by promising more goodies to these Neo-Socialist nitwits!

    I PRAY he is drop-kicked all the way back to Chicago after the November election, but I really don’t know it it will happen.

    God help this country if he is reelected!

    • Drew Page

      I too am disgusted with this president and his strategy of class warfare. He has done more to turn Americans against each other than any person in American history. He has pitted the poor against the rich, blacks and Latinos against whites, union against non-union workers, the unemployed against the employed and taxpayers against non-taxpayers. He uses terms like “fair share” and “the rich” without defining either term and no one calls him on it. He has spent this nation into near bankruptcy and plans to continue doing so, as if the borrowed money he spends will never end.

      We don’t want him back in Illinois, but it would be a small price we are all willing to pay to get him out of the white House.

    • Nancye

      As a football fan,I love your term drop kicked. Oh if only…………

  • Maureen

    Great article,Bernie. I will remember to watch the clowns saying “fair share” ad nauseum.

  • Randy

    I am not a wealth man, at least monetarily. I have a good wife and an excellent child which makes me wealthy in other ways that they haven’t figured out how to tax (yet). But I don’t want ANYONE to pay a dime more in taxes whether they be wealth or not. Firstly, I’m not jealous of another’s success. Here’s the other thing, the more government taxes, the more money government gets, the more stupid things government does, the more money government spends, the more money government needs, the more money government borrows, the more government taxes, the more money government spends, the more stupid things government does… See a pattern here yet?

    And another thing, fair isn’t equal! It’s never been equal. Fair is everyone able to rise to their highest level of success – and conversely fall to their lowest level of failure. That’s fair. What Mr. Barak Hussein Obama wants is equal. And that is not and has never been fair.

    But the sad truth is that people will allow themselves to be seduced by his give-a-ways. Why do you think Mr. Obama put all these supposed goodies up front in his health care con?

  • Webmaster

    The Democrat knew back in the 1990’s if they wanted to win future elections, they needed to figure a way to make those elections go in their favor by just one or two points in a nation that had become split down the middle.

    It would take a while to get the engine moving, an engine related to free stuff. But with the generation that didn’t want credit cards in the 1950’s no longer affecting the morals of the country, that objective could now be accomplished.

    The first was to give mortgages to people who couldn’t afford them, not requiring anything down and 40 years to pay, with Freddie and Fannie via the taxpayer taking the risks off the banks who knew the loans would go bad.

    The second was to give taxpayer money to Americans off the backs of others, calling it social justice as if they deserved it. And the third would be to give illegal aliens amnesty.

    Those three would be game changers in the end for the votes to give Democrats control of what they needed to keep their promises; the American treasury and how those promises would be paid for, Democrats not having to risk any skin in the game.

    And it looks as if their agenda is right on schedule. So if Obama wins in 2012, this time he will have a CLEAR mandate to do what he had wanted to do as “candidate” Obama.

    As candidate Obama he promised a domestic security force with a budget equal to our military. And through his efforts in the first term, the feds under another Obama administration will have 100% control of student loans, candidate Obama saying students should do community work during the summer as part of getting those four-year loans.

    So what will an Alinsky-trained community organizer do with students if president for four more years, students who will do what he says if they want the loans? I will allow your imagination to run wild on that one, coming from the candidate who also said he would fundamentally change America.

    In the dictionary, fundamental is defined to as “deep-rooted.” The synonyms for deep-rooted are: “deep-seated, entrenched, hard-core, rooted, settled.” Does that help conservatives to finally get it?!

    So when a conservative on talk radio or cable says, “Obama doesn’t understand economics,” they’re missing the point. He isn’t interested in good economics. He is interested in fundamentally changing America, an objective that hasn’t changed since his famous crotch salute at a Democrat 2007 fundraiser in Iowa, the term coming from the military for Obama’s stance as the national anthem was being played. Anyone need the video? And then Obama had asked why he had to wear “that flag pin,” the one synonymous with 9/11. Does anyone need the video?

    So to answer Bernie’s question, you bet Obama can win by giving away free stuff. It’s the “fundamental” objective of a community organizer trained with the Power Points of Saul Alinsky.

    Sadly it has only been Newt Gingrich who would dare to say that out loud last month while the rest of the GOP candidates cowered in political correctness from the real truth about Obama.

    • Wil Burns

      Your people seem to have forgotten that the current recession started in 2007, over a year before Obama was elected. And somehow people have not noticed that the economy and the jobs front has gotten better since Obama took office and the stimulus package went into effect. The growing job losses by month from the end of 2007 through January of 2009. There were over 4.5 million jobs lost during that period, all of which occurred BEFORE President Obama took office.

    • Wil Burns

      GEORGE W. BUSH signed the American Dream Downpayment Act in 2003, a measure designed to subsidize first-time home purchases among lower income groups. Lenders were ENCOURAGED by the administration not to press sub-prime borrowers for full documentation.

  • joe from louisiana

    Who does Vol 2, Chapter 6(c1840) sound like?

    De Tocqueville: Thus, After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

  • joe from louisiana

    Soft Despotism. Alexis de Tocqueville was spot on almost 9 score ago.
    From Dr. Samuel Gregg’s “Old Europe’s New Despotism”:
    Tocqueville’s vision of “soft-despotism” is thus one of arrangements that mutually corrupt citizens and the democratic state. Citizens vote for those politicians who promise to use the state to give them whatever they want. The political-class delivers, so long as citizens do whatever it says is necessary to provide for everyone’s desires. The “softness” of this despotism consists of people’s voluntary surrender of their liberty and their tendency to look habitually to the state for their needs.

    • Kathie Ampela

      “Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” –

      Alexis de Tocqueville

  • Darkcloud

    I just received a mailing from the National Republican Party asking for my opinions about issues( they couldn’t give a damn) and of course asking for money. Since the return envelope was pd. for by them I filled out the questionnaire and included my contribution of 1 penny taped to the form. I told them in a number of words what I felt about their efforts to reign in this administration and basically chided them for “no guts,no glory”. This is the bunch who won’t even broach the topic of the ineligible man in office. I will do the same to the Democrats if they send me a solicitation( I am a registered Dem.), except they won’t even get a penny but a 1 cent postage stamp. I suggest all who read this pass on this way of protest as it both makes it clear to the bozo’s in D.C. what we think of them, and it hurts them financially with all the costs incurred sending out their written rubbish.

  • Clarence De Barrows

    Much talk which ignores the salient point. The game is rigged. You can dialogue it to infinity, but you can’t win in a rigged game beyond what the “riggers” allow. The riggers, all of them, must be expunged and that can’t be done at the polls any longer as they too are rigged. You figure it out.

    • Ron Kean

      It will take rigor on the part of the Republican to win.

  • Phil

    I wish to God you were wrong, Bernie, but I know you’re not. The average citizen doesn’t understand the difference between capitalism and socialism. They just hear two candidates: one promising them free stuff, the other saying we’ll need to make tough choices to get our fiscal house in order. Is is a surprise to anyone which one will get John Q’s vote? We’re going to be Greece in two years. God help us.

  • Bill Hurdle

    I fear you are correct in the assumption that “fair” rhetoric appeals to the majority of Americans – those that participate in the freebies, those that are struggling with their personal finances needing someone to blame and those “enlightened” progressives who believe in equity of outcomes rather than equity of opportunity. I personally believe that we have already passed the tipping point and must experience really difficult times before the folly of this path becomes evident to the casual observer. It’s pretty obvious that the media will never give an honest assesment but will only parrot their slogans.

  • Ken Hansen

    Bernie – Without reading one word of your article I can answer your rhetorical question – “Yes!”

    How do I know? Because that’s exactly how he got elected – remember the woman told the reporter she didn’t have to worry about her rent, her car payment, etc.? We all laughed, but there is a part of American Society that truly believe that healthcare will be free (it won’t, as millions of young, healthy folks who previously opted out of their employer’s health care plan are going to be forced to buy it), and they will re-elect Obama believing that with all their heart.

    Bernie, if I had a nickel for every democrat commentator I’ve heard remark on how ‘scandal-free’ this administration has been, I’d have a fairly big pike of nickels! Facts to contrary aside, that simple lie, repeated often enough, will become the ‘known truth.’

    I’m starting to hear commentators remark on Clinton left us with a $1 Trillion surplus – as if the money were sitting in the bank when GWB took the oath of office (it wasn’t, it was a ‘projected’ surplus over the next ten years )… With enough repetition, people forget words like ‘projected’…

    Want to watch a ‘Lefties’ head explode, ask them why letting a temporary tax cut on certain Americans expire isn’t a tax increase (the over $200/250K/yr crowd), yet it is a tax increase when it applies to certain other Americans (those making less than $200/250K/yr)… Or why the Gov’t can’t afford the $70 BN/yr ‘cost’ of the top Bush Tax Cut (the over $200/250K/yr crowd) yet somehow we can’t afford to let $300BN/yr tax cut on incomes under $200/250K/yr lapse?

    Logic is never applied to Democratic claims, so why bother pointing it out?

    As a friend’s father used to say, ‘Never try to teach a pig to fly… It waste’s your time and annoys the pig.’

  • Wildwood Curt

    America has reached a tipping point whereby the tax-free have-nots exert just enough influence on the political system to insure victory for socialists. We will go the way of the UK, France, Italy, etc. until we have bloody riots that will result in a massive crackdown and loss of personal liberties. At that point it will be anybody’s guess as to who gains control of what’s left of the military. Eventually, I see a military dictatorship ruling over a third-world America. Have a nice day!

  • ted wight

    And Bernie whatever makes you think Obama is an intelligent man? His DJ voice and captivating smile with white teeth? What?

    • Nancye

      Agree! I think someone else is pulling his strings – like George Soros? I don’t think Obama has enough sense to pull his own strings.

  • ted wight

    Yes he will win. Both by doling out our tax money — with complete support by the propaganda media — and having no competition.

    No conservative or Republican is standing up and railing against the corrupt labor union bosses and trial lawyers buying elections. No one is standing up and defending the creation of wealth. And the creation of wealth only by business not government. Or the absolute control of business by government since Obama came to power: price fixing, product offerings fixing and the monumental power of the federal government against business, businessmen and women and his and his attorney general’s blatant disregard of the Constitution and the Rule of Law. No one.

    The Right needs a rallying cry: I propose “SUSTAINABLE SPENDING”.

  • Terry Walbert

    If Obama gets his way, it means that the American people has chosen serfdom and dependency instead of freedom and opportunity.

    In 1933 the German people got Hitler as Chancellor by the secret dealings of a small group of reactionaries. Americans will have no excuses for the bad things that will result because we will have fastened the chains on ourselves.

  • kayakbob

    In 2008, the campaign slogan was “yes we can”.

    In 2012, the slogan is, “No I couldn’t, and gosh darnit it is all those Republicans fault. Oh, yeah, and Bush’s fault too”

  • kayakbob

    Bernie,

    Thanks for writing the things I am not articulate enough to write. That said, I must disagree with one aspect of your latest editorial.

    I used to think Mr. Obama knows better than to think his “plan” makes good economic sense in the long run (for anybody). Not any more.

    I have slowly, and sadly, come to the conclusion that he really does believe his rhetoric.

  • Drew Page

    Remember back when Bill Clinton was president and Hillary tried to push national health care? The public resisted dramatically and Republicans scored big wins in Congress. Clinton realized his mistake, hired Dick Morris as a political consultant and pivoted on his position. He signed welfare reform legislation and stated the era of big government was over. He stole the Republicans’ thunder and won re-election.

    If the Republicans were smart, they would propose a compromise on tax reform where they would agree on raising taxes on those earning a million or more per year by a few percentage points and would agree to increasing tax on capitol gains by two or three percentage points, but only for those earning a million or more per year. This would deflate the claims ofthe Democrats who insist the Republicans only protect the rich. It would also give Republicans better leverage to insist on cuts in government spending and in corporate tax rates.

    • Jeffreydan

      Two things to point out:
      First, it does not matter if the Republicans agree to work with the democrats on tax hikes. The left will always throw around the “GOP is the party of the rich” lie.
      Second, Republicans can insist on cuts all they want, using whatever leverage they have, but democrats don’t honor agreements to cut spending (and they get away with it every time).

  • begbie

    “You’ll never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

    Absolutley, 100% agree. It pains me, but this is the truth. As long as “Jersey Shore” and “The Bachelor” get great ratings, the Dems always have a shot at distracting the American buffoon.

    • Kevin T

      No doubt about it, Just came onto a show called “Mob Wives”, can not believed it would see the light of day 30 years ago. Americans have been dumb down since then.

  • Vin Bickler

    The strength and determination demonstrated by the Tea Party is the key to throwing Stinky BO out of the White House. It must be a concerted effort on the part of millions of Americans to overcome the tactics of the far left who will have the media and the “takers” in our society doing all they can to re-elect their provider of “free stuff” for them.

    • RecknHavic

      But how do we do that if Romney (a big govt liberal) leads the GOP ticket?

  • Kathie Ampela

    It takes a least some deep thought to see past empty promises. Free stuff from the government means socialism. I agree with another post I saw here. The GOP have got to HAMMER the message home about the evils and destruction of Socialism…play clips over and over and over of rioting and fires in Greece. Drill it into the public’s head: Socialism is EVIL, Socialism is EVIL, it has to be a very BOLD message. Either a very, very tough counter message or some unforeseen event next fall like a war or something will be the only way Obama will lose.

  • Jenna

    God help us. Please.

  • Dave O’Connor

    Bernie, I’m quite in line with your comment, “I have less faith in the American people than you. A lot less.” (Maybe even less as I live in Massachusetts.)
    And it’s not that American secularism has done in beliefs. Obama rides in the company of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny, as far as “Americana” votes. All he needs is a wish-list to mention and Americans feel “snug in their beds”. with all the poli-sci majors we spent three generations in sponsoring at the font of knowledge, we learn they only gargled.
    As we in the Bay State are awaiting a tide to roar in, we have another Kennedy joining the school marm, Warren, to bolster him.
    As AG Eddy McCormick in a debate with “Uncle Ted” said, “If your name was Edward Moore rather than Edward Moore Kennedy, you candidacy would be a joke.”
    But, I’d never bet against the romantic delirium of the Massachusetts lemmings. But, that syndrome has gone viral. (And Chavez needs Congressional support.)

  • Jay Thompson

    “Hope and change has become divide and conquer.”

    Well said, Bernie.

    Here’s one to add: We’re losing hope and are short on change.”

  • Ralph M. Hahn

    Obama SHOULD giveaway free stuff. As an example, free tickets to the Romney/Santorum/Gingrich/or/Paul inauguration!

  • Robert A. Hall

    Of course he can. When Clinton fell afoul of a blue dress, I predicted in my political column in the Courier Post that he’d get re-elected by going on TV daily and promising expensive new programs. He did. I will link to this from my Old Jarhead blog.

    Robert A. Hall
    Author: The Coming Collapse of the American Republic
    All royalties go to help wounded veterans
    For a free PDF of my book, write tartanmarine(at)gmail.com

  • A. C.

    Of course Obama can win by promising free stuff. Remember this from the last election:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

    Obama didn’t exactly promise anything to get that response. Imagine how they’ll react when he starts actually promising stuff. Worse yet, he’ll start directing his administration to start implementing redistribution programs with or without Congress passing any laws. In the next four years he won’t have to worry about getting re-elected, he can focus on transforming America.

    Remember, Congress depends on the Administration to direct federal law enforcement to enforce any laws they pass. When Obama starts ignoring Congress, and directs those agencies to not obey Congress, what’s Congress gonna do, besides fume, and hold press conferences? After four years of operating under corrupt bosses, the FBI, the federal Marshals service, and any other federal police force are not going to suddenly find their conscience and enforce the law over their bosses’ orders.

    • begbie

      “In the next four years he won’t have to worry about getting re-elected, he can focus on transforming America.”

      Exactly right. That’s what keeps us up at night.

  • Jeannette

    I asked my congressmen whether “O” was evil or just stupid. That was with respect to the Keystone pipeline. Answering my own question, I said maybe both.

    It seems to me he’s doing everything he can to destroy my country, and he’s doing it with fervor. I despise him for it. I cannot bear the sight or sound of him. Four more years? Please, please, no.

    And as to fair share? The citizens of this country are paying this cretin. His fair share would be to return it to the government, with interest.

    • begbie

      My congressman is Eric Cantor-R (VA-7th district). I have to say that he actually responds with mailed letters to my emails. And they’re not canned responses. I respect that, even if I don’t get my way.

      However, my senators Jim Webb-D and Mark Warner-D are not as reliable. I don’t even know what Jim Webb does in the Senate. And Mark Warner is spin-doctor extraordinaire! They both only answer emails when the bill I was protesting has already been passed!

      Off subject reply, I know….but I thought I would make the simple point to gauge your politicians by how they communicate with you when you try to reach out to them…very important.

      • Jeannette

        Begbie: One of my Republican Senators has almost made a career out of beautifully responsive replies to my entreaties for “redress of grievances.” He’s always agreeable to a fault.

        Problem is, he turns around and votes the opposite.

        The other Republican does a fair job of responding to my communications, both letter form and email form, and also does a fair job of voting.

        The Democrat Representative isn’t very responsive to my communications of any kind, yet his votes are closer to what I think a Republican would do. What turns me off is his insistence on writing letters responsive to absolutely nothing I’ve written. I have no idea who’s getting the short end of the stick.

        Actually, I’ve begun to think we take a pig in a poke when we pull that lever. Not that I’m cynical or anything, you understand.

  • Bruce A.

    There is no such thing as free stuff, somebody has to pick up the tab. I am still waiting for the cheap gas Hillary Clinton promised everyone if the Dems a few years ago.

    • Jeannette

      Bruce A.: As mentioned in a comment to an article in the last couple of days, William F. Buckley wrote an article entitled “Free Medicine.” In it he asked the question, “What is free medicine?”

      His answer, later in the article, was this (and I may be paraphrasing): “Free medicine is medicine that somebody else pays for.” That was true then and is no less so now.

      • Wil Burns

        William Frank Buckley, Jr. was born rich, lived rich and died rich. Everything he had was free!

        ’nuff said!

  • RecknHavic

    Incumbents are very hard to beat. W/ the press spinning 8.3% unemployment as an economic boom, pop culture squarely on the side of Dems and the lack of understanding displayed by so many voters it’ll take alot to unseat Obama. Thats why a “safe” choice like Romney is such a bad play.

    Id say Obama probably wins reelection,the repubs hold the House (but lose some seats) and also take the Senate (as there’s many more Red state senate seats up this yr).

    Gridlock will reign!

    • begbie

      Gridlock would not be all bad if O is reelected.

      • RecknHavic

        I have to disagree as our national debt is the elephant in the room that gridlock will not address. If spending isn’t dealt w/ (and it won’t w/ gridlock in DC) we are scr*w*d.

        • begbie

          I agree, good point. But I guess what I mean is, could you imagine a democrat controlled congress again? Remember the damage that was done? Just putting a hault to this crazy train with a little gridlock isn’t good, but it’s better.

          • RecknHavic

            yes, I agree

          • Wil Burns

            I remember G W Bush and the Republican congress. Remember the damage that was done?
            You cannot start 2 wars and cut taxes on the wealthy and not put the country in dire straits!

  • Tim Ned

    My sister and brother, both teachers, retired at age 57. I’m in the private sector. How about since I choose to work, I don’t have to pay taxes after 57. Or how about when my brother and sister got three months a year off paid, how about I don’t have to pay taxes for three months. Or how about I don’t have to pay taxes for every hour I work each week over 60 hours. Or how about this. Why don’t I just say to H$%&# with it, fire 30 people and retire.

    The day I have to pay more than my fair share, I will!

    • Wil Burns

      Tim. Maybe you should have been a teacher? Envy doesn’t get you anywhere,be contented on what you have.

  • cmacrider

    Bernie: As long as Republicans are going to allow Obama to frame the debate as fair vs. unfair …. which it seems you are content to do …. you are going to lose. . Do you seriously think that a young couple ,trying to juggle their personal finances from month to month, are going to empathize with the fact John McCain, Donald Trump, Bernie Goldberg, and Bill O’Reilly are going to be called upon to pay more tax??? Do you seriously think that the argument [even though it is perfectly accurate] that taxing the rich will not cure the economic problems will resonate with a young couple who can’t take a holiday to visit with their out of State parents?? The answer is Noooooooo .
    If you are going to beat socialism, you have to call it for what it is … socialism. (which Bill O’Reilly refuses to do so for some reason.) Secondly, you have to point out that government runs programs are NOT FREE …. Cost more money than private sector solutions …. AND ARE ALWAYS paid for by the middle class not the Rich. You have to provide an alternative to specific social problems which is cheaper and is not going to be a burden on the middle class. In essence the Republicans have to show that they are the party for “the average american” which, at present, seems beyond their acumen. It’s really too bad since Obama will do America irreparable harm.

    • Nancye

      If you are going to beat socialism, you have to call it for what it is … socialism. (which Bill O’Reilly refuses to do so for some reason.)

      ******************

      Ah yes – I remember when he refused to call Obama a Socialist. Me either. I call him a Marxist/commie.

      • cmacrider

        Nancye: I emphasize with your position except …. when you characterize Obama as a Marxist/commie you make it too easy for his crowd to argue against that label. The result is that they gain the sympathy of the independents.

  • Ralph M. Hahn

    To me, ‘fair share’ means a FLAT TAX. For everyone. A family suffering from a catastrophic
    illness should get a bigger break. Establish a
    number (percentage of tax) and no deductions.

    A national sales tax on goods worth over a certain amount of money is also fair. Because, if some individuals, such as mobsters and drug dealers (please pardon the redundancy) who pay no income taxes, yet own Cadillac Escalades, something is terribly wrong.

    • RecknHavic

      Yes I agree, a flat tax is the only fair tax. Somebody please explain to me how having one person pay a higher % of taxes than another is right.

    • Dave O’Connor

      Damnit, the type of tax is almost incidental at this point, if serious cuts aren’t made, whatever the sources, the spending and redundancies will prevail.
      Remember, a great deal of this state largesse is squandered on an already obese manpower shadow.
      You may pay the same cover-charge at a club, but if you can spend a bit more or show the Maitre’d some adoration, you get a better seat.

      • RecknHavic

        Fair is fair and different % rates aren’t.
        But yes, spending is the culprit.

        • Dave O’Connor

          That’s where it is; spending.
          It’s as though after “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men” were called up, over and over again, one of the men spoke up and asked, “What’s so critical about “Humpty Dummpty?”
          Some spending is critical. Yes.
          But “critical” has to be weighed against the reality; not resource and man-power costly largesse to mollify otherwise passive consciences.

    • begbie

      Under the Fair Tax, it wouldn’t be right to give anyone a break. This system, most importantly in my opinion, encourages folks to save their money instead of buying the big new TV. Imagine keeping that chunk of change that has been robbed from you all those years? Now you have an option to pay or not pay tax, and NO excuses.

      Once you start giving exceptions to the rules, you end up with our current debacle all over again. Good intentions but with unintended consequences…aka the IRS…the root of most of our problems.

  • Rick Johnson

    Ron Kean, my wife and I discuss this continually. I think he’s smart enough to know what gets the American sheeple to vote for him; paycheck envy, class warfare, etc. However, I also believe he had an extreme communist upbringing and deepseated he doesn’t believe in capitalism.

  • Glen Stambaugh

    Socialism would work if somehow free stuff were truly free. We’ve all been getting too much free stuff already for way too long. First it compromised our independence and stole what we actually earned. Now we’re swamped and about to drown in the ruin of national debt. I’m ready to trade all these goodies for what was mine to begin with. I won’t go along and I hope others wise up too.

  • Michael

    I despise the man because he is deliberately doing everything he can to turn Americans against each other. He is destroying this country from the inside. The KGB could not have orchestrated a better job.

  • Ron Kean

    These are the classic questions.
    1. Is Obama an empty suit? Not smart but just following a socialistic ideology which truly intelligent people know doesn’t work?
    2. Is Obama very intelligent and intentionally screwing up America because of disloyalty or the minority outsider’s grudge?
    3. Is Obama very intelligent and in it just for fame, money and fun?

    Whichever it is, he’s a pied piper first leading the rats and then taking the children. I hope Romney wins the nomination and uses the strength acquired from adversity to go all the way to victory. For normalcy sake.