The Real "State" of the "Union"

Prior to 2006 Democrats spent six years attempting to portray themselves as the biggest DEFICIT HAWKS in the history of the nation. On an ongoing basis, Dems lamented the increases in the federal debt limits under George W. Bush. Then Senator Obama was particularly adamant about the dangers of the nation's borrowing habits. Obama is seen issuing shrill debt ceiling warnings just five years ago. In 2006 the political tide changed. All finger-pointing aside, until early January 2011, Congressional Democrats had controlled both houses of Congress in Washington for the previous five years. The last two years, the Democrats controlled all three branches of the federal government.

Obama - Nobel Prize

Since their big election win in 2006, there has been a steady a drumbeat of push from leading Democrats for a variety of policies that can be simply described as “borrow and spend.” It is true that from a political standpoint Dems were mostly successful in blaming Bush for deficits run up between 2006 and 2008. And there is no denying that President George W. Bush did little to thwart the Dem's successful push over the final two years of his presidency to borrow and blow the taxpayer's money. However, it seems quite apparent in the wake of President Obama’s latest “State of the Union” address that plenty of “poll checking" and “focus grouping” was done by the political advisers in the administration about how it might continue to get away with brazen fiscal recklessness.

Obama and his adviser's goal is NOT to retreat from a “borrow and spend” approach to governing. The goal is to “re-brand” the "borrow and spend" method of policy-making. The real message delivered to America in the State of the Union address was not the result of a following through on a sincere and heartfelt concern for national bankruptcy. White House political advisers simply do not care what a continuation of "borrow and spend" government policies will do to America. Their only goal in concocting the language included in last night's State of the Union address was to convince the average listener and viewer that the federal government actually knows the difference between “investing” and “spending.” It was a sad night for America.

In the wake of financial disasters under the watch of Democrats and Republicans, once again the most prominent elected official in the land (Obama) stood before the American public and attempted to convince his increasingly restless flock that bureaucrats in Washington know how to invest better than the average citizens does. And in doing so, he gave the clearest signal yet that nothing has changed in America except the words “Focus Group” experts and “Poll Check” manipulators can identify as “words” that will placate the herd. The cynical hope of most of our leaders is that there is still an ever-gullible American public ready to swallow more of anything except a SPECIFIC shift towards meaningful entitlement reform. Are we really as dumb as they hope we are? We have been so far.

The Real "State" of the "Union"