Here is a link to the speech:
Let me begin by sharing my hope for success as I travel the quest in search for the ever elusive brevity.
Before I begin my responses, you should know the intention behind those beliefs which guide my approach to everything. Four quick points ought to get us there. We should have the smallest and weakest government possible because ultimately we were founded on knowledge that governing is always a use of force against the people. That force quickly leads to power, which corrupts through corporatism enhanced by an entrenched two party system, which shuts out almost all competition and therefore true choice and change. Secondly, government must adapt and unfortunately grow with changes in our nation and society. Thirdly, this growth must be designed and implemented through legislation in such a way as to always maximize the value and minimize the size of every bureaucracy created. Congress must also find ways to limit the growth, and often the existence, of each agency. This means limiting power. Next I would point out that charity can be and should be part of our governmental system. However, I think that 90% of this should come from the states. We must focus one thing ultimately if we are to return to a country which can provide us with prosperity and liberty; remembering that our government has wasted trillions of our dollars since it began promising us benefits and fairness if we would just give it the money to do it. Now I’m not mean, I’m not impractical; I wouldn’t do anything rash without a fair transition for those reliant upon assistance. But the philosophy must drive each piece of legislation in order to assure the eventual goal of liberty and a fulfilled society. Lastly, liberty is not just a word to chant out at Tea Party rallies. (For the record, I went to two, they were the original Tax Day party and the following one.) Liberty is the goal of our country. It is the goal of each and every person here. Financial liberty, personal liberty, professional liberty and the list goes on. Just go tell an American they HAVE to do something and watch what they say. Ask any Joe or Jane walking on the sidewalk if they think the government is too expensive and see what they say. We agree more than we think we do. The choices we are presented are never the right ones anymore. Almost no one makes the right suggestion or offers a truly new way (except in stump speeches) because the system supports them all. It isn’t in their best interest to offer true change and a return to the America became the defined example of a free and prosperous people. To make my point and end this prattle, I will simply point out that not one serious offer is on the table to limit the cost of our government for the debt reduction issue (nor the payroll tax increase but we’ll get to that.). That is ridiculous
-"It's not a view that we should somehow turn back technology or put up walls around America," Obama said in the 55-minute speech, which frequently prompted applause. "It's not a view that says we should punish profit or success or pretend that government knows how to fix all society's problems.
"It's a view that says in America, we are greater together -- when everyone engages in fair play, everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share."
--- Technology progresses faster and better in the free market. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were pushed to their limits in order to keep up and attempt to out-due each other.
---Saying you aren’t going to put up walls doesn’t provide us with a choice. You are saying you won’t put up a wall, but you aren’t telling us what you WILL DO (both sides love this trick).
--How about you punish the ridiculous health benefits and retirement packages of members of Congress before you talk about raising taxes on even Bill Gates? How about you bring home troops from the foreign bases that haven’t been attacked for over 40 years? How about you tell the FBI, CIA, NSA, State Police, County Sheriffs, City Police and all the rest to get on a network run by Zuckerberg? Sweet, now we can get rid of Homeland security and save billions!!!!
--- You can’t logically pass a bill that LITERALLY gives the power to an appointed bureaucrat (Secretary of Health and Human Services—is that Hamiltonian or Jeffersonian LOL) to set the requirements for every single health insurance policy in the country and then force people to buy it, while claiming government is not your solution to just about everything. If you are willing to take that kind of power, how can anyone believe you are not willing to make much smaller power grabs by the hundreds or thousands with another four years?
- It sounds nice doesn’t it? Preaching fair play is saying you are going to ignore the rule of law. How? WE ARE FAIR! The law says so. Every time we are told that the government is going to change the rules to make things fair we must be very careful. Whatever good has come from the progressive agendas dating as far back as you would like to go was ultimately a recognition of liberties that had been denied until that point. Those are examples of the fantastic growth our nation is capable of. They are not symptoms requiring the growth of government or the removal of any liberty. Legislation pursuing fairness ignored the rights of those being polluted upon and justified (regulated) it for a fee. Now we have waited to create the technology and allowed the polluters and their politicians to corner the market and make things difficult. We should have held them accountable at the time thereby encouraging the development of new technology for profits. Everyone would have won the game already! The philosophy drives the approach. Just enforce the laws that we were given and most of the time you’ll have your solution.
“He framed the issue as a choice between making vital investments in future growth or the Republican position he characterized as maintaining "tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans in our country." “
--Same old crap from each party. Once again, come talk to me when you have stopped overpaying bureaucrats compared to the private sector and giving them life benefits on my dime. You know, they buy votes with that crap. They are stealing money in order to pay people benefits FAR beyond the private sector, Those people don’t ultimately believe in smaller government or turn a blind eye so they are reliable voters. They can safely vote for either party and never threaten the system! Bought and paid for! Confront the military empire as mentioned. Look up the words efficiency and consolidation, say them in the mirror everyday for a month, remember them and use them and then come talk to me about how much money you really need to govern.
"This is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class," the president said. "At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement."
What is at stake is if the government can set standard to your aspirations here. Fairness through legislation requires them to decide for you what a “modest savings” is or what constitutes “enough” money to raise your family on. Ask yourself, do you want that? That is a rare moment where Obama actually said what he believes instead of babbling. Think about that. Why isn’t someone saying “You really need keep your money so I paid us only double the median income and matched the best retirement package I could find. We saved enough to pay for the payroll tax. Without leaving Washington even!”
"This is the height of unfairness," Obama said. "It's wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker (who) maybe earns $50,000 should pay a higher tax rate than somebody raking in $50 million."
---Don’t need to say much here. To be extreme, the Constitution didn’t allow for an income tax until Congress changed it. To be realistic, if they would just stop changing the laws for favors, taxes would be simple and fair. Stop giving favors out and the law can be concise, clear and fair.
“Why? Does anyone here think the problem that led to our financial crisis was too much oversight of mortgage lenders or debt collectors? Of course not." “
---Yes I do. The combination of the banks, the Federal Reserve and the politicians gave us the force of law, which brought idiotic loan standards, whose bubble was partially filled with theft through monetary policy and inefficient social programs, and who also managed to make us poor and holding the tab in the end! By the way, all along the way you ignored your duty to enforce contract laws in order to pull your schemes. Don’t tell me you need more authority, you can’t use what you have already!
I’m going to stop here because I imagine no one made it this far. If you are interested in more, check out another article or leave a question. I’d be glad to respond to just about any question or comment.
