Obama to America: 'Who's your daddy?'

Recently, I was discussing President Obama's so-called health care reform proposal with someone in the health care industry. This person was not in favor of the legislation, enumerating many of the reasons it is a horrible idea; still, he was somewhat unclear as to the motivation of those in government, particularly Obama, who are almost perceptibly aching to get it through.

In addition to the reasons not to implement this variety of health care reform, which fall into the realm of common sense, historic and economic concerns, we discussed our disquietude as regards the level of power doing so would give the federal government, the potential consequences of which are not being discussed in the establishment press.

"Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason they are seeking that degree of control is that – like others before them – they're simply evil?" I asked.

After all, despots and tyrannical governments have never come along and said: "Hi, I'm evil. Would you mind putting the future and fortunes of yourself and your posterity into my hands? Thank you very much." Typically, they devise a manner by which they might acquire the power desired before they manifest their true intentions. More often than not it is in the form of a real smoothie who represents himself as something wholly other than what he is.

Whatever happened to states rights, limited government and natural law? Find out in Judge Napolitano's "The Constitution in Exile"

Apropos Americans who support the currently proposed health care reform and President Obama's other obscenely expensive and risky schemes (remember that oft-uttered charge from the George W. Bush years?), the questions remain, ones that have many American brains in knots right about now: Why would people who owe everything they have to a system that promotes life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness wish to advance a system that promotes stultification (death), slavery and poverty? Why would those who have secured such blessings opt for changes that will drastically curtail the opportunity for subsequent generations to enjoy the same blessings?

Considering some who are of this class – primarily politicians – the answer is easy: These are people who are incapable – or perceive themselves as incapable – of prospering within the framework of a competitive system wherein production and contribution are recompensed commensurate with the inherent value (of the contribution) to society. The reason they favor socialism and Marxism over representative republics and capitalism is that they and others like them stand to profit more in the long run within a system in which their particular talents – duplicity, nefariousness and guile – supplant those of our current system.

What about those who are not influential, the "just plain folk" who support these socialistic fixes despite the fact that they stand to lose far more than any politician? These have simply been misled; they do not believe that they are supporting an inequitable, destructive arrangement in which they will suffer. They have been led to believe that our leaders are only endeavoring to refine the current system. The degree to which they have been deceived becomes clearer when one realizes that they were sold a dedicated Marxist (Obama) as a centrist – and they bought the goods; in fact, most are still buying.

Then, there are the thoroughly deluded among American voters. They know, more or less, what the socialist puppet masters seek to bring about, but they believe that it is a more equitable arrangement than the capitalist/democratic system. Some might evaluate such people as anarchistic, because they advocate a sort of societal demolition followed by universal suffrage in squalor and desolation; this might not be a completely inaccurate assessment. What really puzzles many people is that some of these folks are actually quite successful.

Of course, Americans weren't allowed access to adequate information on the candidate sufficient to make a coherent valuation of him prior to the 2008 election. Now, they aren't even allowed to evaluate the Obama administration enough to develop buyer's remorse. Whether through ignorance or arrogance, they are ambling unwittingly to the slaughter, secure in their delusion that Daddy is taking care of everything.

Why would one desire to use that kind of power to bring a nation to the ends many of us fear? Why would a man become a pimp, living by selling others whom he abuses and slowly destroys, having brainwashed them into thinking that somehow, he actually loves them?

Is it so difficult to believe in evil? At least for now, perhaps it isn't; many Americans are still willing to acknowledge evil when they witness untoward developments in other nations and the atrocious exploits of their leaders. What they have trouble believing is that it can happen here, and in fact is happening here.

Who's your daddy?