I wrote the following syndicated column at the inauguration of Obama, January 20, 2009. It is entitled “Contrasting Reagan and Obama.” I share it here again now, because Obama will deliver his State Of The Union message in a scant couple days. Specific to that point, Obama has taken to comparing himself to President Reagan. I didn’t know President Reagan personally, but I can assure you Obama is not a President Reagan nor will he ever be able to hold a candle to President Reagan or his vision for America. This piece was true at the time I penned it, and Obama’s first term has only served to reenforce my words from three years ago…
CONTRASTING REAGAN AND OBAMA:
Inauguration Day is as much a day of new beginnings as it is a continuation of the old via an orderly transfer of power from one administration to another. That said, it is not the continuation of constitutional erosion and an anticipated ephemeral supplication that lauds the values that Scripture tells us God abhors.
Jan. 20, 1981, in his first inaugural address, Ronald Reagan said, “We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow.” That commitment notwithstanding, he understood that more government intervention would not be the answer. He continued, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem.” This is a truism that President Barack Obama and his fellow liberals would do well to grasp.
Obama views government as the only solution to America’s current problems. However, he overlooks the fact that Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., are complicit in the housing and mortgage market failures because of their refusal and that of their respective congressional committee members to act when they were warned of misdeeds taking place in said markets.
President Reagan understood that, “From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people.”
Obama and company view America as being too complex to allow for our constitutional imperative to self-governance. They observe and are totally committed to a belief in their superiority pursuant to knowing what is best for us.
But Ronald Reagan knew: “If no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?” I submit as evidence of this Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., William Jefferson, D-La., Larry Craig, R-Idaho, Mark Foley, R-Fla., Dodd, Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Clinton – as a short and by no means complete list. We are asked to believe that Obama’s stalwart crop of failures and political lesions, who are unable to control their own lusts, know what’s best for us.
Obama fails to comprehend this important reality, even as lurid and corrupt dealings continue to surface about his various appointees. Still, we are told that these selections are the elite crusts of genius who know what is best for you and me – and that our job is to passively go along with all they say.
Obama, like every politician on Capitol Hill, owes his success to special-interest groups – albeit he and his liberal counterparts tend to be indebted to the most reprobate of same. Reagan understood, “Our concern must be for a special-interest group that has too long been neglected … in short, ‘we the people,’ this breed called Americans.”
A safe assumption is that Obama’s address will be filled with phony platitudes in an attempt to pacify us, as he explains that only his administration, vis-à-vis massive government intervention, will be able to set America on the right course.
Ronald Reagan, in his first inaugural address said, the “proper role of government [is] to do the will of the people” – not the will of Congress, the will of the courts, or the will of Erebusic special-interest groups. He said, “It is not my intention to do away with government. It is, rather, to make it work – work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his second inaugural address, professed with clairvoyant supremacy, “Instinctively, we recognized a deeper need – the need to find through government the instrument of our united purpose to solve for the individual the ever-rising problems of a complex civilization.”
The media breathlessly describes Obama as the ascendant shadow of Roosevelt. We would do well to remember Roosevelt’s ceaseless attacks against entrepreneurs, big business and the industry titans of his day. And to that point it would do well for Obama to promise to do the same.
Roosevelt took credit for creating “moral controls over the services of science,” making it a “useful servant.” Are there not other pre-World War and post-World War examples of this? The controls of same are not for the betterment of man as such; rather, they are to set government and an elite few in place as the arbiters of what is in our best interest.
Now, more than at any time in our history, “we the people” would do well to remember the wisdom of Ronald Reagan as he delivered his second address: “For the first time in history, government, the people said, was not our master – it is our servant – its only power that which we the people allow it to have.”
Reagan knew that “the system has never failed us, we failed the system. We asked things of government that government was not equipped to give.” We have asked government to coddle us, think for us, and be our nanny. As we continue to witness the resulting consequences, let us remember that such is an offer which evil and corrupt men cannot refuse.
Print 
PDF
This year, 2012, both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union
address will occur on the same day.
This is an ironic juxtaposition of events.
One involves a totally meaningless ritual in which we look to an insignificant creature of little intelligence for prognostication.
The other involves a groundhog.
In your opening rant today Mychal, you said that these people “who are unable to control their own lusts” etc. etc.
I wonder if it’s that they can’t control their lusts or just think that they are so important and powerful that nothing can be done about what they do?
Totally great article. Excellent. I have absolutely no earthly idea where the idiot-in-chief ever came up with that analogy. It is amazing. For the last 2 weeks, I have been posting blogs like a spider monkey jacked up on mountain dew and I have continuously posted that this Republican contest is not at all about who is better or who has better plans or who did what to whom or who would make a better president. No No No. This entire contest is about who can beat Obama!!! And that can only be done in the series of National Debates coming up. In those debates, we need someone with a Vlad the Impaler debate qualities, someone like the notoriously famous William F. Buckley, the ultimate debater. It should be remembered that one of this nation’s most beloved presidents was John F. Kennedy and both he and his brother, Ted, were notorious womanizers. So were a great many other great presidents. So, don’t talk about Gingrich’s past marital baggage. It does not count. It also is useless to bring up his political baggage for that was acquired during the era when he was not under the public microscope of scrutiny. He and others were able to get away with a lot. That changes drastically as the president. Now, I doubt he will be able to go to the bathroom without the microscope of scrutiny closely focused on his every breath. I do not care about that. He could run and profit from a chain of brothels, is infested with STDs and was married to too many women to count. I do not care. I only care about one thing. Who can totally crush Obama and have his lying, narcissistic evil butt evicted from the White House. It takes a scalpel to cut out a tumor and restore a body. The people of South Carolina should be praised for their common sense. Obviously the citizens of that state are genuine forgiving Christians.
The POTUS is not our only problem. To change things we have to get control of congress. There are 2 Democrats not seeking re-election in 2012 and 17 who are. 7 of them are over 65 years old. Retirement age. That’s 19 seats to be decided upon.
Republicans can win a majority in the Senate by holding the seats of the 10 Republicans up for re-election in 2012 and winning 4 or more Senate seats currently held by Democrats. If the people in these states really want to make a difference then they will vote to make this happen.
If Congress was doing its job as a co-equal branch of our government, half of what Obama has done would be stopped. Judicial Watch says that they (Congress) is afraid to come out against Obama for fear of being labeled racist; which Obama is famous for.
All republicans running for Congress can’t be cowards. They will be damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Must we all be damned because of a few cowards?
Another outstanding article Mychal, thanks for reiterating it for us. For obama to have the audacity to even use his name and that of President Reagan in the same sentence is an egregeious insult to the memory of one of the greatest presidents that ever served “We the People.” I thought the clintons were about the worst criminals to ever occupy our White House but the obamas have them beat all hollow.
Just as the Anti-Christ is the antithesis of Jesus Christ, it is my contention that Obama is the antithesis of Reagan. In other words, they are both dead serious about what they mean, only from a polar opposite definition of what we might perceive they are saying.
That being said, I believe it is possible that Obama has mastered the mass hypnotic technique to a tee, able with great swelling words to sway the masses whenever evoking emotional touchstones, just as the Anti-Christ will do when he is revealed. The stage is being set for the Great Tribulation period to unfold and Obama and his ilk are being used by the enemy of our souls as useful idiots to bring this to pass.
Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus!
A week or so ago Mr. Obama wanted to compare himself to President Truman, and now as he continues to grope for an identity he is seeking to glom onto President Reagan’s legacy.
Why?
Because he cannot possibly run on his record, or lack thereof. He has never quit campaigning because he lacks the moral fiber and fortitude to lead. Moreover, now that the curtain has been pulled back, it is apparent to all that his intentions are not to work within the framework of our democracy, but to circumvent it every turn for the purpose of centralizing government control at the expense of our liberties.
If he keeps changing the ex-presidents that he compares himself to, he’ll take Romney’s flip-flop reputation away from him.
And speaking of flip-flopping, isn’t there something to be said about a person learning that a previous position was wrong and changing when he has learned more?
There certainly is if they change their position because they genuinely believe the previous one was wrong. This one changes his position based on which office he is running for. Try as he may, he has not been able to pull off the social cameleon gig. That’s why he has not been able to pull off the “conservative”
hat he is trying to wear. This leopard has not changed it’s spots. Go online and find a copy of “The Romney Book” to see his record on all the issues.
Dan, does it strike you as funny that President Truman is famous for his well known phrase “The buck stops here”. While with Barry O, it’s “The buck stops somewhere else”.
Nothing surprises me with this clown.
His new mantra today is “fairness”———a communist code word if I ever heard one. There is no Constitutional provision for legislating egalitarianism, but then again, he’s not familiar with that particular document.
Another well placed jab, Mychal. However, the parasites in ‘guvmint’ are only there because of the criminal banking industry that Congress allows to continue. The bribes offered by the international banking gangsters is more tempting than our ‘public servants’ can resist. Will Rogers told us, “Once a man has become a politician, he is no longer suitable for honest work.” No more truth has ever been uttered. Will Rogers understood very well that the Fed Reserve, the criminal banking business and the military industrial complex had bought, and paid for, the ‘guvmint’ of his day. And it hasn’t changed in our day. ‘Quid Pro Quo’ means “…the bribe was enough for this round.” Only Ron Paul has been courageous enough, in our generation, to addrss this. And until we elect a president that will lead Congress to overthrough these criminal bankers and Fed Res, you can only elect more Obamas that want their turn at raiding the cash register. If I’m wrong, prove me wrong. Shalom, Ya’ll.
With the willing help Dodds and Franks
How can you tell when a politician is lieing?
A. When his/her mouth is open.
Great article, Mychal, sorry I missed it the first time around. I know many of us are very appreciative of your perception and your clarity in sharing it. Thanks.
Different religions can read the same Bible differently to suit their ends; fit their beliefs. Obama can compare himself to Reagan but there is much contrast. Obama can take Reagan’s words and deeds and construre them to meet his own agenda; Making it appear that he is using Reagan’s philosophy but actually with a “Twist.” How dare Obama to even utter such nonsense. Remember that Obama is a manipulater, intimidator, dictator and has an agenda that Reagan warned us about. Obama is an orator with a toothy smile and does the exact opposite of what he says. Right now, he is working on more demoralization of the American People and trying to herd us into complete dependency on Big Government. It’s all in Obama’s/Soros/Bilderberg plan. Secret Service impression of Barack and Michelle Obama: Quote: “Clinton all over again, party animals. hates the military and looks down on the Secret Service. He is egotistical and cunning; look you in the eye and appears to agree with you, but turns around and does the opposite – untrustworthy. Obama has temper tantrums. Michelle is a complete bitch, who hates anybody who is not black; hates the military; and looks at the Secret Service as servants.” end of quote. Ronald and Nancy Reagan: Part of Quote: “The Real Deal…moral, honest,respectful, and dignified. They treated Secret Serice and everyone else with respect and honor. Thanked everyone all the time. He took the time to know everyone on a personal level… Nancy Reagan>she was very nice but very protective of the President; and the Secret Service was often caught in the middle. She tried hard to control what the President ate…the Reagans were the ones who lived life as genuinely moral people.” End of Quote. This came from Secret Service views of Presidents and First Ladies. See any comparisons?
I read the book too Marilyn (well some of it). I found some surprises, but not with Obama. I knew he was a liar when he was campaigning. I knew all I needed to know about his racist wife when she uttered her now famous “For the first time in my life etc., etc.) Too bad the news media didn’t see fit to tell us, much like they didn’t tell us about the Clintons.
Very insightful and well said Marilyn. If there is anyone that could tell us what is behind the masks presented to the public it is members of the Secret Service. I would take their word any day over the images the media tries to convince us are showing the “real” person(s) occupying our White House.
I don’t think we can put too much trust in what the media says because they are first trying to sell ad space and secondly to report the news. We’ve seen several times over the years that the media will report bald face lies of their making to get a story going so they can sell their space. The Secret Service, in this instance, is charged with protecting the President, period. I wonder if the Secret Services oath is to the constitution like the militaries is, or to the president?
I have to admit that I did not vote for Reagan out of the starting gate. I didn’t like his association with the union in California. I was wrong. I wish I could be wrong again about any of the candidates running for the nomination.
But I was more right about Obama than I knew.
More than anyone knew, sumitch. ‘Some’ democrats, not Leftists, are now seeing what they have voted and regretting. I sure didn’t want McCain but I didn’t want Obama’s “Change.” That one word made my skin crawl. And, anything to do with the Clinton duo was too much for me to handle. So, I voted for McCain and not because of Ms. Palin. I voted because there was no way I wanted Obamas to be President and The First Lady. It was pretty evident that H. Clinton would get a good position but I never dreamed…And, Where and How did Biden ever come into play? I guess because he declared himself a Zionist. We have learned a lot these past three years and I think we can make a decent choice this time around. Everyone has ‘skeletons’ in their closet so I guess it depends now on which candidate has the least disturbing skeletons and how much damage was done. I’ve read Abarmoff’s book and it has some revealing information but I can’t let that be my total guideline for making a candidate choice.
I think you’re right Marilyn. There’s a lot of “buyers remorse” going on out there right now. I hope that people remember or are reminded what our government has done (sans the Supremes) to us the last few years. I don’t even get the pleasure of voting against either one of our Senators next round because they’ve both said they are not going to run (rats leaving a sinking ship?). But that’s the same thing that Kay Bailey has said ever since she won her first term.
Isn’t it amazing that we have had the two smartest people to ever live in the white house back to back?