Barack Obama, America's Selective Salary Policeman

· Friday, April 30, 2010

President Obama spoke the most revealing and clarifying 10 words of his control-freak administration this week: "I think at some point you have made enough money." Peddling financial regulatory reform at a rally in Quincy, Ill., Obama then ad-libbed peculiar definitions of what he called the "American way" and the profit motive: "(Y)ou can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product or providing good service. We don't want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy."

Fundamental lesson of Capitalism 101: Governments and bureaucrats don't make what people want and need. They only get in the way. It is individuals, cooperating peacefully and voluntarily, working together without mandate or central design, who produce the world's goods and services. They make what people desire and demand for themselves, not what Obama and his imperial overlords ordain that the masses should have.

As usual, Obama's populist demagoguery is telling in its omissions and selectivity. While he lectures on the morality of salary caps for everyone else, his own cabinet is filled with fabulously wealthy CEOs and statist creatures who have parlayed government employment (a "good" service) into private gain as lobbyists, consultants and advisers ("core responsibilities of the financial system") and then back again to public stints. Revolving doors have always grown the Beltway economy.

To wit: Austan Goolsbee, head of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, is the 15th wealthiest member of the Obama administration, with assets valued at between $1,146,000 to $2,715,000. He also pulled in a University of Chicago salary of $465,000 and additional wages and honoraria worth $93,000, according to the Washingtonian magazine.

What "good" did he provide? The government research fellow and Obama campaign adviser was a champion of extending credit to the un-creditworthy. In a 2007 op-ed for The New York Times, he derided those who called subprime mortgages "irresponsible." He preferred to describe them as "innovations in the mortgage market" to expand the pool of homebuyers. Now this wrong-headed academic who espoused government policies that fed the housing feeding frenzy is in charge of fixing the loose-credit mess he advocated. This is the "American way"?

After 16 years in Congress, four years in the Clinton administration as budget director and chief of staff, and a lifetime of schmoozing in the halls of power, Obama's CIA director, Leon Panetta, cashed in big. He's sitting on up to $4 million in assets. While he has zero experience in intelligence matters, he has extensive experience in parlaying his past political tours of duty into lucrative speaking gigs, consulting fees and stock options. Welcome to Obama-approved entrepreneurship.

By Obama's definition, first lady Michelle Obama is a model capitalist. Remember: After serving with real estate mogul Valerie Jarrett in Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley's administration, Mrs. Obama took a post at the University of Chicago Medical Center, where Jarrett was serving as vice-chair of the medical center's board of trustees. Mrs. Obama was promoted in 2005 after her husband won his U.S. Senate race with Jarrett's invaluable aid. As "vice president for community and external affairs" and head of the "business diversity program," her annual compensation nearly tripled from $122,000 in 2004 to $317,000 in 2005. Even after she went on leave in 2007 to help her husband on the presidential campaign trail, the hospital paid Mrs. Obama $62,709 in 2008, prompting one skeptic to ask: "We know this is Chicago, but isn't $63,000 quite a lot for a no-show job?"

Jarrett, of course, is now White House senior adviser to the chief spender of other people's money. And the first lady is now using her new taxpayer-funded position not only to tell folks how they should eat, but also which "good" restaurants and groceries should be built in their neighborhoods.

If there were any doubts left about the Obamas' ideological commitment to wealth redistribution and a command-and-control economy, those doubts have been thoroughly removed. We have a commander-in-chief who presumes to know when you have earned "enough," who believes that only those who provide what he deems "good" products and services should "keep on making it," and who has determined that the role of American entrepreneurs is not to pursue their own self-interest, but to fulfill their "core" responsibility as dutiful growers of the collective economy.

That famous mock-up poster of Obama as the creepy socialist Joker never seemed more apt.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.


Comments

oldsage

Michelle Malkin, thank you for your patriotism.

Posted April 30, 2010 at 1:51:46 AM


Hard Thought

The hypocrisy of this administration in particular and progressives in general knows no bounds.

How dare anyone in the United States or its' current gangster government tell me how much I should make?

This is irresponsible, reactionary regressivism at its' worst.

What an idiot.

Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:16:33 AM


Reaganite Republican

Great post, Michelle

Obama hasn't the slightest clue how an entrepreneurial free-market economy functions... and he doesn't want to, because he detests it.

What makes it worse is that Obama isn't even looking for the best possible proven solution, he's using the economic crisis as an excuse to ram-through his socialist agenda.

To quote that accomplished job-creator Ronald Reagan: "Entrepeneurs and small businesses are responsible for almost all the economic growth in the United States" What a shame then, that Obama's economic plan sees them as some sort of difficult-to-control free thinkers to be saddled or simply taxed out of existence- appalling

Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:42:55 AM


Katie

Apparently "making enough money" refers only to the right. Leftist congressmen and lobbyists can never make enough. But of course they deserve to because they're noble and understand what it's like to be poor and taken advantage of by those mean conservatives.

Posted April 30, 2010 at 10:03:01 AM


billy

Katie -- you got it wrong, "making enough money" only applies to people who earn it. The Congressmen and Lobbyists are "taking our money" and Obama is just fine with that. As long as he and his friends get plenty of our money, everything is on the table.

Posted April 30, 2010 at 10:40:23 AM


Duke of Earl

Michelle,

What you forgot to mention was that everyone should be under a 'salary cap,' except for Barry, his merry minions, and those who revere him as the current and permanent messiah.

He is considering the VAT to pay for his obamacare and, I am certain, the VAT rate will be established at such a rate that the ordinary citizen will end up paying a tax of 30% or more. But, of course, this is not an income tax on those making less than $250,000 per year; as he promised during the coronation , .. er, campaign.

Duke

Posted April 30, 2010 at 12:15:04 PM


Brian

The biggest reason Barry and his supporters fear and loathe the free market system is because none of them could get real jobs in a free market system. If it were not for the public sector, they would be out on the streets, sleeping under dumpsters, which is exactly where they belong.

Posted April 30, 2010 at 12:43:08 PM


Robert, USN E8,Retired

Well said, as always, Ms.Malkin. I like Brian's post, too. Hello? What is not being said, by the Narcissist in Charge, or anyone else in 'gov't' follows.(in re limitations on income)

1. POTUS, and Congrss (people) do not pay into Social Security, or Medicare. And, the legislation recently enacted, specifically exempts those folks from that framework. Hmmm?

2. Government 'healthcare" is,typically, provided at military installations. Bethesda Navy Hospital,et al. A Congressperson will be treated when a military (lowlevel) person is delayed, or ignored. (personal experience, folks)

3. 'Retirement', for Congresspersons, continues.eg; the fellow from West(By God)Virginia: Robert Byrd will continue to draw his Congressional pay until death, even after he 'retires' from Congres. And, his widow (supposing survival) will continue to draw compensation from the US Government. All legal. My widow, on the other hand, will receive nothing after my demise, except what I have created for her. As it should be. For all.

4. Apropos of the foregoing; (at last check) retired POTUS, will ocntinue to receive compensation, 50%, after end of term. Currently hat is about 1/4 million a year. Also, full medical,dental,et al. Wonderful! That was promised to the military volunteer, or his widow (survivor now). Over time, the Congress nibbled away at that. Now? Medicare and Social Security. Both endangered, hmmm?

5. How much is 'too much?" The Obama's filed an income of somethting over 4 million. Skipping income from any source except federal, The Obama's will still be paid a quarter million dollars a year, and will be eligible, al la B Clinton, to pick up a cool million for a thirty minute speech.

Appaarently, that is not 'too much!.' At least, nothing is heard about curtailing that lucrative income.

Somehow, we must restore the Constitution and the overriding Principles of Law to this Republic. And soon! Before it is liquidated by 'hope and change.'

Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:02:21 PM


Reaganite Republican

Great post, Michelle

Obama hasn't the slightest clue how an entrepreneurial free-market economy functions... and he doesn't want to, because he detests it.

What makes it worse is that Obama isn't even looking for the best possible proven solution, he's using the economic crisis as an excuse to ram-through his socialist agenda.

To quote that accomplished job-creator Ronald Reagan: "Entrepeneurs and small businesses are responsible for almost all the economic growth in the United States" What a shame then, that Obama's economic plan sees them as some sort of difficult-to-control free thinkers to be saddled or simply taxed out of existence- appalling

Posted April 30, 2010 at 7:11:04 PM


Dave

I'd like to see Barry cap all movie salaries at $150k. After all, at some point you have made enough!

Posted April 30, 2010 at 10:14:40 PM


Howard Last

Dave, movie salaries would be a good start. I "am Not Fonda Jane" would be the first to agree. Then there are the singer salaries. I am sure Barbara Sriesand could get buy with making $1 K per concert. At five concerts per week that would be $5 K. And of course there are the crooks and or/mental midgets in Washington. How about for each 0.1% raise in taxes they take a $10K cut in pay. No, that is not correct, you only get pay for doing work.

Posted May 1, 2010 at 8:21:13 PM


Post a Comment

Please keep comments civil and brief. Obscene, profane, abusive and off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.

(required, displayed)
(required, not displayed)
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS Connect with The Patriot Post






Our Mission

To Support and Defend -- Read The Patriot Post -- It's Right. It's Free. -- www.patriotpost.us

"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher


The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!

Support The 2012 Patriot Fund