Kevin Price
New unemployment numbers point to bigger problem
By Kevin Price
I do not like conspiracy theories, put prefer to talk about the consequences of public policy rather than the possible intentions. But what if the policy maker states his or her intention? That has been clearly the case when it comes to, what I call, the Obama Domestic Doctrine. It is a philosophy that is pervasive in the current administration and its allies. There are plenty examples:
* This policy was articulated early in the Obama administration by then White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who told the Wall Street Journal that "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste, and what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you didn't think you could do before." Emanuel was noting that it is difficult to make major public policy changes when the economy is strong and healthy. In other words, if everything is well, why do you need "change?" When things are bad, however, you have some justification.
* This philosophy was reiterated by Attorney General Eric Holder, who told graduates at Boston University that "Positive change is the consequence of unfavorable and not favorable circumstance. Progress is the product of darkness, not light. Whenever you look into our past, this is true... It was economic turmoil that brought us the progressive era and the New Deal." In other words, the Great Depression led to 25 percent unemployment, but look at the amazing Leviathan called big government we received from it. In the end, "the Great Depression was a good thing." This is very dangerous thinking and common in public policy today. This is why this administration saw only 50,000 jobs created last week, with over 14 million reported unemployment (9.1 percent of the workforce) and are offering no solutions (or changes) in the future. The worst it gets, the more government can do to fix it!
* The theme continues with one of administration's allies in the Senate, former Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) who, upon passage of a very controversial and far reaching banking bill, is quoted by the Washington Post (with tears in his eyes) as saying that "It's a great moment. I'm proud to have been here. No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done." This bill could damage the lending abilities of banks, could take away the ability of the middle and lower income groups to even be able to get a checking account, and have even greater implications on individuals and businesses. With a crisis though, you can do things you cannot do under normal circumstances. In fact, you can even make sweeping policies, without knowing their implications, as seen in this far reaching banking legislation.
The Obama Domestic Doctrine is not based on speculation or mere conjecture by the President's opponents, but is a clearly defined philosophy that is pervasive throughout the Administration. It is predicated on the idea that it is acceptable to harm the economy in order to grow the government.
© Kevin Price
June 9, 2011
I do not like conspiracy theories, put prefer to talk about the consequences of public policy rather than the possible intentions. But what if the policy maker states his or her intention? That has been clearly the case when it comes to, what I call, the Obama Domestic Doctrine. It is a philosophy that is pervasive in the current administration and its allies. There are plenty examples:
* This policy was articulated early in the Obama administration by then White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who told the Wall Street Journal that "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste, and what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you didn't think you could do before." Emanuel was noting that it is difficult to make major public policy changes when the economy is strong and healthy. In other words, if everything is well, why do you need "change?" When things are bad, however, you have some justification.
* This philosophy was reiterated by Attorney General Eric Holder, who told graduates at Boston University that "Positive change is the consequence of unfavorable and not favorable circumstance. Progress is the product of darkness, not light. Whenever you look into our past, this is true... It was economic turmoil that brought us the progressive era and the New Deal." In other words, the Great Depression led to 25 percent unemployment, but look at the amazing Leviathan called big government we received from it. In the end, "the Great Depression was a good thing." This is very dangerous thinking and common in public policy today. This is why this administration saw only 50,000 jobs created last week, with over 14 million reported unemployment (9.1 percent of the workforce) and are offering no solutions (or changes) in the future. The worst it gets, the more government can do to fix it!
* The theme continues with one of administration's allies in the Senate, former Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) who, upon passage of a very controversial and far reaching banking bill, is quoted by the Washington Post (with tears in his eyes) as saying that "It's a great moment. I'm proud to have been here. No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we've done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done." This bill could damage the lending abilities of banks, could take away the ability of the middle and lower income groups to even be able to get a checking account, and have even greater implications on individuals and businesses. With a crisis though, you can do things you cannot do under normal circumstances. In fact, you can even make sweeping policies, without knowing their implications, as seen in this far reaching banking legislation.
The Obama Domestic Doctrine is not based on speculation or mere conjecture by the President's opponents, but is a clearly defined philosophy that is pervasive throughout the Administration. It is predicated on the idea that it is acceptable to harm the economy in order to grow the government.
© Kevin Price
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
