Sometimes I wonder why the Republicans wanted to win in 2010 so badly. I hope it wasn’t in a quest for job security because if they’re really serious about putting the country’s fiscal house in order they are not going to have a happy electorate come 2012…Tea Party small-government rhetoric notwithstanding.
Sure, the majority of Americans claim to be for reducing the size of the state to get our fiscal house in order, but do they really understand just how drastic an impact reverting back to a more laissez-faire market-oriented national model would have on their lives? Certainly, if the transcript of the SOTUS I skimmed through yesterday is any indication – and, most revealing, where the applause breaks are noted – I think we have a way to go yet.
Consider: One out of six Americans now receives some form of government assistance. [U.S.A Today.] Fifty million are on Medicaid, a record high. Food stamp enrollment now stands at 40 million, or one in seven people. Ten million Americans receive unemployment benefits, and 4.4 million get direct cash assistance. And these numbers are from only four of the more than seventy welfare programs funded by the federal government! These figures are not anomalies caused by a recession, but a reflection of the trend towards an entitlement culture that has been growing steadily since the 1960s “Great Society” pipe dream.
This is a recipe for doom yet no politician, from the President on down, Democran or Republicrat alike, will ever muster the courage to address the meat and potatoes of our spending suicide…so they will whip up ire aimed at the parsley garnish like private jets and federal salaries instead. So a tipping point is at hand. Almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax, yet so many in this country suckle up to the government teat in one form or another courtesy of the American taxpayer that I see no possibility of this entrenched political system of careerists doing a necessary ‘reset’ to bring us back to a sustainable, market-driven model. Rather it will be the eventual verdict of raw and unfeeling mathematics that imposes what we refuse to do voluntarily in the form of defaults, declining and eventually disappearing government services, and reduced if not eliminated entitlement benefits.
Here’s where I look to the SOTUS for insight, yet I find nothing but more of the same platitudes. Setting aside bloated defense budgets for now (an article all on its own) I did a word search and found the words “medicare” and “medicaid” just once in the entire text of Obama’s 7,000 word address to the nation. And here’s what the President had to say about these budgetary elephants in the room:
“This means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. The health insurance law we passed last year will slow these rising costs, which is part of the reason that nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit. Still, I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year — medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits. (Applause.)
So Obamacare is the way to “slow rising costs”? More government and bureaucracy? Wow. How about cutting costs? Anyway, Obamacare has been shown by anyone with a calculator to be a potential budget busting bomb. Yet, all of a sudden, repealing it will somehow lob the real fiscal grenade? Well, onwards and upwards then!
Social Security has been unmasked for the ponzi scheme it is for this is the first year it will take in less in taxes than it pays out in subsidies. So what, then, did the SOTUS have say about this alarming Social Security development? (Again, “social security” just one hit on a word search).
“To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. (Applause.) We must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market. (Applause.)”
In other words, we must find a bipartisan solution to overcome the equation 2-3 = -1 and make that sum positive! Yes…we…can!!
So this in a nutshell is why I don’t bother to tune in to the SOTUS anymore. It means nothing. If I want mindless feel-good theatre, I can watch reruns of any sit-com starring Alan Thicke. I wanted the President to just once give it to us straight. Like we’re adults. Instead, he chose to avoid the heart of the matter which is that without draconian across-the-board and very painful cuts (call them austerity measures if you will) we are headed towards the same fate as our European friends rioting in the streets as their social utopia merry-go-round is finally grinding to a halt after barely half-a-century of defying mathematical inevitabilities…a blip in the historical timeline really.
Rather than offering yet another rah-rah a campaign speech, Obama could have addressed the numbers head-on and even challenged the new GOP fire-brands to come up with spending cuts that hit every single government program…even the sacred cows. But the new House Speaker prefers to be reduced to tears on his own terms.
As for the American public, they wasted an hour of their lives listening to flowery but in the end empty rhetoric when they could have been watching the Military Channel’s profile of Sherman’s “March To The Sea.” Somehow the burning of Atlanta seemed closer to reality than anything this President had to say about where we’re headed.
Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.