The Bets Are In, The Stakes Are High

When Barack Obama made his since-gone-viral “you didn’t build that” speech (Twitter #YDBT) he turned over a very telling card in a socialist hand that he’s been building since his 2008 campaign. Now that DC Hold’em 2012 is in full play, the cards are taking shape for everyone to see.

As you might recall during the 2008 campaign, Obama told Ohio resident “Joe the Plumber” that we needed to “spread the wealth.” There were plenty of savvy political players who believed that he had just tipped his hand, yet the suckers remained at the table and checked their bets. Then days before the election Obama raised the stakes and said that he intended to “fundamentally transform America.” The chumps stayed in the game, and Obama took the White House.

Now that Barack “Hawaiian Slim” Obama continues turning over his cards, one might wonder why there are still dupes at the table ripe for fleecing. The answer comes in three words: Government funded entitlements. Obama is no doubt pleased with the progress he’s made in the fundamental transformation he’s sought: a new class of Americans who are not only beholden to the State, they’ve embraced their servitude. Obama said it himself. “It’s working.”

Back in the old days, slaves didn’t like being slaves. They aspired to liberty—even willing to risk their lives for a chance at freedom. But the 20th century gave us the insidious promises of socialism, a flawed system that continues to attract the slow learners on the Left. Barak Obama is betting that he can still keep enough pidgeons in the game who’ll buy into his shady hand.

Not one to hedge his bets, Obama sweetened the pot with his latest declaration of “a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared.” Can there be any doubt where he wants to take this country? A statist collective that would even impress Europe. Really, the only question that remains in this drawn out round of political poker is if voters in November will call his bluff.

In 2008, it was "spread the wealth around." In 2012, his semantics have changed to "shared prosperity."

The problem is that for individual citizens in the society to benefit from either of his utopian schemes:

1. There must be wealth created prior to spreading; and,

2. There must be prosperity existing in abundance, in order to be shared.

That is why Adam Smith, the moral philosopher, is such an important figure in America's history of freedom. It was his 1775 "An Enquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations," which fit into the philosophy of the 1776 Declaration of Independence, and the great "transformation" of America from a wilderness into the most free, prosperous nation of opportunity which ever existed.

The Obamas (he who will "spread the wealth" of others' labor), the Edwardses (he of the 2 Americas and poverty solving propaganda), and all the so-called "progressives" are, in fact, regressive in their ideas, because they represent the same old tyrannical ideas of the Old World--ideas which rely on some imperfect people in places of power in government who will plan, order individuals around, allocate their productivity and resources, and not recognize that it is the individual choices made by citizens, as they pursue their own interests that creates and sustains "the wealth of nations."

When the ideas of America's Founders that it is God--not government--who grants rights to individuals was combined with the theories of Adam Smith about wealth creation, began to prevail in 1776 and 1787 in America, there occurred the greatest explosion of goods and services and opportunities for creativity the world ever knew.

Now, we're going back to enslavement by arrogant planner/masters who call it by new names?

We don't think so!!!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.