Alexander's Column

Breaking the Back of Free Enterprise

The "Fundamental Transformation"

By Mark Alexander · Jul. 8, 2010
“An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.” –John Marshall

Folks with extensive training in strategic analysis tend to have a very different viewpoint of the macro-political machinations from that of folks in the trenches who have a more tactical perspective. As such, strategic viewpoints are many times received with great skepticism.

At ground level, for example, one might have a problem with the following strategic analytical conclusion: Barack Hussein Obama’s macro agenda to achieve his objective of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” depends on the success of his plan to break the back of capitalism under the weight of national debt accumulation associated with welfare spending, and in the ensuing crisis, implement “emergency” government intervention which will, ultimately, replace the last vestiges of free enterprise with a democratic socialist framework (centralized economic planning and regulation with full-spectrum income redistribution).

If that analysis makes you uncomfortable, prepare to become far more so if his agenda succeeds. To avoid a total economic collapse under the burden of trillions of dollars in debt resulting from Obama’s spending programs, the Left will implement dramatic tax increases and devalue the dollar (inflate the price of services and commodities).

As one with perhaps excessive formal training in the art of strategic analysis, I can assure you that Obama’s plan, as outlined above, is progressing on schedule. Of course, my perspective is influenced by the presupposition that liberty is “endowed by our creator,” but as Alexander Hamilton noted, “In disquisitions of every kind there are certain primary truths, or first principles, upon which all subsequent reasoning must depend.”

In regard to the failing economy, Obama recently said, “Make no mistake, we are headed in the right direction, but … we’re not headed there fast enough for a lot of Americans.”

Many people hear those words and interpret them to mean that we’re progressing toward economic recovery. However, the strategic analyst hears that the Left’s objective of a socialized economy is just upon the horizon, that Obama and company would like to bring it to dock at a much faster pace and with such forceful momentum to ensure that the “fundamental transformation of America” can’t be undone.

House Minority Leader John Boehner gets it. In regard to House Democrats' passage of Obama’s so called “economic reform plan,” Boehner responded, “The writing is on the wall for President Obama’s ‘stimulus’ policies and everyone – taxpayers, economists, and the rest of the world – sees it but him. How much longer are we going to continue with this disastrous spending spree that is scaring the hell out of the American people and piling debt on our kids and grandkids?”

Answer: As long as it takes to fulfill their Leftist agenda. Obama’s “stimulus plan” is closely modeled on the Cloward–Piven strategy – which he studied in depth as a student at Columbia University. This plan calls for overloading the government welfare system to the point of crisis, requiring the replacement of that system with a state-directed national system of “guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.”

Some of the most experienced conservatives did not get it soon enough. In a recent interview, Newt Gingrich admitted, in a self effacing response to a question about Obama’s Leftist agenda, that he understood Obama was liberal but “laughed at friends” who suggested he was a Socialist. Now Gingrich says, it is abundantly clear Obama is a Socialist, but why did he, like so many astute political thinkers, miss it?

Perhaps too much Potomac kool-aid and Beltway fumes.

“We had to take some tough steps to pull the country out of the free fall we faced when I took office,” says the blame-shifting Obama.

For the record, the current economic debacle began when a group of Jihadi terrorists, who came to the United States on Bill Clinton’s watch, attacked our nation: 9/11. That attack crippled the U.S. economy, but the ultimate blow was a crisis of confidence in the U.S. housing and security markets – a crisis largely driven by Democrat policies and their refusal to rein in the government-sponsored mortgage enterprises known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The ensuing financial market collapse in the weeks ahead of the 2008 presidential election resulted in the selection of a charismatic radical Leftist community organizer as president of the United States.

Commenting on the agenda of his newly elected boss, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said infamously, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.” And they haven’t.

It is no small irony that on the very day Obama asserted the economy is “headed in the right direction,” the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported, based on the implementation of Obama’s “economic recovery” agenda thus far, that the current accumulation of debt will exceed 100 percent of gross domestic production by 2025, and will total almost twice GDP by 2035. Of course, if one includes the Social Security “lockbox” IOU, the national debt is already 92 percent of GDP.

But not to worry, I suspect our economy will collapse long before our national debt reaches that level. The burden of debt accumulation at current levels makes the current economic problems of socialist European states seem like gnats on an elephant’s … uh, rear.

The CBO report concludes, “Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to higher interest rates, more borrowing from abroad, and less domestic investment – which in turn would lower income growth in the United States. Growing debt would also reduce lawmakers' ability to respond to economic downturns and other challenges. Over time, higher debt would increase the probability of a fiscal crisis in which investors would lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its budget, and the government would be forced to pay much more to borrow money.”

In other words, unless Obama’s agenda is overturned, the U.S. will one day be a subsidiary of Red China.

On the principles of free enterprise, Obama proclaims, “We already tried the other side’s ideas. We already know where their theories led us. And now we have a choice as a nation. We can return to the failed economic policies of the past, or we can keep building a stronger future. We can go backward, or we can keep moving forward. I don’t know about you, but I want to move forward.”

Obama apparently hopes a majority of Americans have no idea where the Left’s theories led in places like the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, he’s probably right, given that many of his constituents are little more than sycophantic lemmings, having been sufficiently dumbed down in our government-run education institutions.

Obama’s primary co-conspirator in this extra-constitutional folly to undermine the economy is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, she of the following ridiculous claim: “When I became Speaker of the House, the very first day we passed legislation that made Paygo the rule of the House. The federal government will pay as it goes.”

In other words, she promised that Congress would not pass unfunded spending bills. But that would mean either radically reining in spending, or implementing vast new tax initiatives on virtually all income earners, which she and Obama promised they would not do. Thus, Pelosi’s Congress has added more than $1 trillion to the national debt, taking the U.S. Debt Clock beyond the $13 trillion mark.

To put their plan into perspective, national debt was about 40 percent of GDP when Obama took office, but with the economic recession resulting in greatly reduced tax revenues, the national debt will be 62 percent of GDP by the end of this year. That would be an increase of more than 50 percent in just two years. (I recommend you read this paragraph at least twice!)

For a complete analysis of federal waste, see the Heritage Foundation’s study, “30,543 Reasons Spending Is Out of Control.”

To make matters worse, Obama continues to inflate the bloated central government beyond any recognition of its constitutional authority even as American families and businesses must cut back to make ends meet. Adding insult to injury, non-military federal employee salaries are now 40 percent higher than private sector salaries on average, and while private sector benefit packages average $9,882, government employee benefits average $32,115.

This week, Obama laughingly launched his annual “SAVE” Award dog and pony show, ostensibly encouraging federal employees to recommend how to save taxpayer dollars. He notes, “This contest is part of a larger effort to make sure that we invest taxpayer dollars in programs and initiatives that have proven records of success and fix or end programs that do not.” I have more than a few ideas, but Obama did not ask taxpayers how to save taxpayer dollars.

That old sage Will Rogers once quipped, “Be thankful we’re not getting all the government we’re paying for.” If he only knew…

Demonstrating the extent to which government has exceeded its constitutional mandate, my colleague Walter Williams wrote, “In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 to assist some French refugees, James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, ‘I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.’ He later added, ‘[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.’”

Professor Williams concludes, “Two hundred years later, at least two-thirds of a multi-trillion-dollar federal budget is spent on charity or ‘objects of benevolence.’”

Is there still time to restore the primacy of Free Enterprise over Socialism before Obama and his Leftist ilk have broken the back of Capitalism?

The short answer is, yes. Next week Part 2 of this essay, “Reversing Course and Restoring Liberty,” will clearly outline how to restore the constitutional role of government.

(Read Part 2 of this essay, Reversing Course and Restoring Liberty)


View all comments


Stan Brown said:

Suggested reading:"2010: Take Back America/A Battle Plan" by Dick Morris & Eileen McGannIt will scare the hell out of you, but will also hopefully galvanize some of the fence-sitters into taking action.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Guy Stevenson said:

Well done! Looking forward to Part II-Just as I suspected though,... 'Barack-ruptcy' I believe would be more apt. ----------------------------------------------------bank·rupt·cy bank·rupt·cy [bángk rùptsee]n 1. legal inability to pay debts: the state of having been legally declared bankrupt 2. lack of resources: the complete lack of a particular quality, especially good or ethical qualities moral bankruptcy

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 12:26 PM

Oregon Minority said:

Strategic & Corporate Planning Was my MBA emphasis. My friend Vladimir Lenin said, “The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”Cloward & Pivin got their Columbia PhDs by adjusting Lenin's prescription to our entitlement programs in the U.S. as well as using every crisis to expand the federal government.Barak is implanting this by checklist precision!bank on it ...

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Marcy Dupre said:

WHAM! Right between the eyes, Mark! Great essay. Can barely wait for Part 2. Now, I have to wonder why the folks at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue cannot, or will not accept the facts. Their policies are no only NOT working, they're driving the United States into oblivion.Keep up the Fire!

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 12:31 PM

R.A. Peddy said:

Sarah, we the people have one weapon for fighting this tyranny that is taking place right before our eyes and that is the ballot box. Come November we can cleanse Congress of the Obamanites like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and their ilk and replace them with people who understand the American system and will honor their oath to uphold and defend the Constitutionn of the United States of America so help them God.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 1:26 PM

Victor Berardelli said:

Mark Alexander's July 8 commentary was extremely and terrifyingly accurate. Ironically, only the day before on local radio here an incumbent Democrat was uttering, "Government is under a 24 hour microscope, so faults are found fast and fixed fast; whereas, with business, the problems aren't found until after the damage is done and then government needs to step in to save people." That is the ground game to numb minds into accepting broadening reach of government over their lives.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 1:43 PM

Joseph said:

OregonBuzz,While I agree that Obama is a puppet and Soros is pulling the strings, sometimes the dummy turns "real". You are familiar with the story of Pinocchio? Well in my dream The Obfuscator-in-Chief is running interference for State, Justice and the EPA. State and Justice so he can gain immigration reform, thereby securing a perpetual batch of new lemmings to vote democratic. And EPA so that, through his ignorance of the Deep Horizon oil spill, he can ram through cap and trade regulations which congress is unwilling to legislate for him.Most of the useful idiots who voted for this Constitutionally-challenged marionette were duped by a lack in our increasingly dumbed down public educational system. Today they are beginning to wake up to the fox they inadvertantly let into their pasture. Hopefully in six months they will unite with patriots and begin sending his agenda packing.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Bob W said:

Mark,Although I believe far-fetched and seemingly conspiracy inclined thought, some readers note the possibility of imposing martial law.On the other hand, in light of the direction our country is hastily moving; such a plan wouldn't surprise me if the country continues to deteriorate into Socialistic control. If martial law were ever to be imposed, I presume media outlets such as the Patriot would be muzzled, internet traffic limited or shut down, communication channels limited, the post office mail system monitored, slowed or stopped, and only party edict drivel allowed. So I suppose my question is, and I wonder, is there any means or methods to ensure state, national and or internet communications from Conservative, Democratic, Capitalistic, unbiased and free patriotic media outlets to concerned citizens? Any disorganized resistance would be chaotic and would not stand a chance without a concerted, informed and organized local, state and national effort. We would need the Paul Reveres’ of contemporary times to inform the conservative masses and free citizens of government intentions and crackdowns. The Patriot could make a great modern day Paul Revere if able to keep the gates of free media information flowing! Any ideas, or is this too inflammatory a topic to respond too?I always say better prepared, better safe, then sorry.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 2:16 PM

Tom Mayo in Waialua, Hi said:

God bless your crew- You are a ray of sunshine in a dark world.As Winston said: NEVER GIVE UP!

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 2:17 PM

Gordon DeSpain said:

The headsup about HR1388 is true and factual, however, this came to the attention of the public about a month ago, yet, look at the Date that is part of the URL (below), February 4, 2009. I sent this news out in Emails, about a month ago, yet, it seems to have happened more than 1 year and 5 months ago, rendering the Legislative Branch of Government moot (it couldn't pass, so they pulled it from the floor, and, Obama ordered it). With this act, Congress became an anachronism, useless, without power, leaving only the Executive, Faculty Lounge, and Judicial to make up their own

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 2:54 PM

jim said:

If Obama isn't an American Citizen why isn't he being ousted from office?

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Doug Simmons said:

"Adding insult to injury, non-military federal employee salaries are now 40 percent higher than private sector salaries on average, and while private sector benefit packages average $9,882, government employee benefits average $32,115".I really enjoy the Patriot and am an avid reader, but, I have to ask about the above quote. Where are you getting this stuff ???? I work for the Department of Defense, specifically the U.S. Navy, as a civilian shipyard worker and I can tell you that my wage is NOT 40 percent higher than the private sector shipyard worker, not even 10 percent, and my so called "benefits" package is no where near as comprehensive as what union workers in a comparable industrial job are getting. My health insurance premiums rise every year, my co-pays increase every year and I get less for my money. If I have to go see a dentist I have to pay at least 50 percent of the cost. On average federal workers are lucky to get a 2 percent pay increase yearly and there have been years that there was no increase. The pay certianly does not keep pace with the cost of living. I don't know the source of your information but you might try a little field work by actually talking to a few D.O.D. workers and see what they are really getting. I know lots of my fellow workers that are struggling to get by and have lost thier homes to foreclosure. How about checking the facts before putting all Federal workers in the same box and calling us "pampered".

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Rod in USA said:

Mark,All I can say is totally AWESOME essay. If these points do not wake people up, I am not sure what will save us.The only thing perhaps missing are footnotes. While I intuitively understand and believe what you have written, the "dumbed down" among us will require more "evidence" to support the positions and conclusions in this paper. It is unfortunate.Thanks for an awesome read. I read Professor Williams' article right befor eyours: Quite the one-two punch!Rod

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 3:09 PM

J Arlyn said:

Mr. Alexander,While your comments regarding the Barackracy are well founded and supported by observation and personal experience, what they point to is hardly within the realm of a Tea-Party-resistance to rebuff. We are dealing with a people who will not be easily dissuaded from the damage they intend to inflict upon our laws and our economy. I began reading your commentary with the earnest hope that an as-of-yet undisclosed plan for peaceful and effective resistance was in the offing but was dealt the cruelty of being forced to wait another seven-days for resolution. I pray that there is still time to turn back our nation from its present rendezvous with disaster. Write Mr. Alexander, as though our country depends upon your words, for it very well may.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 3:10 PM

BRD said:

Funding Hamas directly with $400M in aid last month, completely redefining the war on terror to de-legitimize the fight, refusing to protect American citizens from foreign invasion and suing them for protecting themselves - now using our money to bring proven terrorists onto US soil! And of course ALL of it outside any other government control and oversight! How much more treason, murder, high crimes and misdemeanors will this little fascist in the oval office be allowed? Surely not EVERYONE in positions of authority to challenge this and reverse the cascading disaster is a flaming sycophant like Holder and Napolitano who have already sold America out. For the rest of us, it's only going to get tougher to stand from here on out. You'd best prepare yourselves for cataclysm.

Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 3:23 PM