Liberals would criminalize the American ideal

By Chris Adamo

Invoking modern parlance, it is reasonable to say that liberals are doing their utmost to make Bain Capital the "new Halliburton." Though comparatively few people can actually explain what Halliburton is, or how it functions, they "know" (having been spoon-fed the "facts" by the "mainstream media" for so long) that it is unquestionably evil, and a sinister tool of former Vice-President Dick Cheney. If the Alinskyite effort to smear the reputation of Bain meets with similar success, the result will be a massive, widespread, and ultimately mindless condemnation of the investment firm, fervent in conviction, but lacking in substance.

It is glaringly obvious to anyone who remains connected to reality that the entire assault on Bain is nothing but an Obama/Democrat campaign ploy, perpetrated for the specific objective of sullying the reputation of Republican challenger Mitt Romney. However, the style of the attacks on Bain reveal much more about the menacing agenda of the political left than any wrongdoing by either candidate Romney or his former investment partners. Even a superficial assessment of the tenor and nature of Romney's leftist critics uncovers ugly realities of the liberal agenda that are cause for real concern among the good people of the country.

For nearly a week now, the entire liberal political/media machine has been incessantly repeating "allegations" that Mitt Romney's timetable of his association with Bain is somehow criminally flawed. Unsubstantiated accusations that Romney remained involved with Bain until 2001, which ostensibly contradict his avowal of having left the firm in 1999, are being floated as "possible felony violations." Strident repudiations by the Romney camp are then characterized by the same Obama media minions as "defensive" responses. In short, the whole charade has been constructed as a no-win situation for Governor Romney, and it will undoubtedly continue for as long as the liberal propagandists can get away with portraying it in that manner.

Yet it would behoove the Romney camp, and all of conservative America for that matter, to consider the real nature of the hostility that motivates liberals to react with such venom to a financial venture that while personally benefiting Romney, also preserved and generated innumerable jobs within the companies his firm restored. Far from being the miserly overlords of enslaved hordes, beneficiaries of Bain's expertise were ultimately able to maintain their business in the private market place. Employees on the ground level could therefore keep working, thereby avoiding the unemployment office. And in truth, this is the actual underlying reason the Obama cabal finds the whole situation so abhorrent.

It is not the supposedly misrepresented dates of more than a decade ago to which the Obama camp takes exception. It is capitalism itself. Unlike the countless failed "green energy" enterprises which have cost the taxpayers so dearly, Bain did not contend for government "stimulus" money. In fact, each of its many successes constituted a diminished need for unemployment checks, food stamps or any of the other social "safety net" handouts which inevitably debase the people while empowering government.

In the same sense, it is the independent, self-reliant businesses on Main Street that threaten the ever expanding and self-serving "nanny state" along with its hopelessly entangled web of parasites, both in "public service" and on the public dole. Barack Obama's envisioned utopia of national squalor, and the resultant helplessness and victimhood, eased only by the beneficent bureaucracy, simply cannot become the norm in a nation in which a significant segment continues to thrive and prosper from the initiative and ingenuity of a free citizenry. The obsessively dependent cannot coexist amicably and contentedly in the midst of an unfettered and motivated citizenry whose members remain devoted to meeting challenges and overcoming them.

It is increasingly obvious that the attempted criminalization of Romney over the trivial argument of when he left Bain Capital is really a microcosm of the effort to criminalize capitalism itself. If the Obama version of America is to prevail, in which "equality" is imposed by a government that owns all and dispenses evenly (Solyndra and its type notwithstanding), then any who attempt to lift themselves out of the mire of mere subsistence must be driven back down, by taxation, regulation, and marginalization.

In the past, Obama has ridiculed legitimate concerns over excessive taxation, especially at the upper end of the pay scale, sarcastically claiming that tax increases would not prevent the rich from purchasing their flat screen televisions. In his mind, accrued wealth is merely to be spent on expensive toys and indulgences (a belief reflected in the many lavish "vacations" which he and his wife take at tax-payer expense). Meanwhile, he remains oblivious to the benefits of investing by the "wealthy," from which other business ventures are underwritten. And of this nation's great success stories, he invariably displays complete contempt.

Any lingering doubts that this might be the case were thoroughly dispelled by a series of outlandish comments he made to an audience in Roanoke Virginia on July 13. Rather than highlighting successful Americans as role models who could inspire others to imitate their achievements, he mocked those individuals for believing they had triumphed on their own. Dismissing their hard work and initiative, he asserted that "There are a whole bunch of hard-working people out there. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help." From there he meandered into the predictable mention of "roads and bridges," made possible of course by the "investment" of others.

From his words, we are intended believe that the entrepreneur whose product is transported over America's roadways has never paid a dime of highway or fuel tax? Or did those who now prosper, after investing the tireless hours necessary to build their businesses to great heights, completely avoid paying any property or income taxes until the great Barack Obama appeared on the scene to right all past wrongs? Or is it more likely that despite such people shelling out enormous sums in income and capital gains taxes (the top ten percent of earners foot two thirds of the nation's tax bill), they have yet to pay their fair share, with "fairness" being defined by Obama and his collectivist minions?

Regardless of all of the liberal sanctimony, the real war is not being waged on behalf of the weak. It is being waged against any who have overcome weakness, and any who would seek to elevate themselves beyond a state of dependency. As the bile and venom from the Obama camp continues to escalate (an inevitability from this cabal between now and Election Day), it would be wise for all Americans to remember that those who would wield the enormous power of government against any one innocent citizen, invariably become a danger to every citizen.

© Chris Adamo