Obama The Whistle-Blower Confronts Obama The Billionaire Spender

Obama The Whistle-Blower Confronts Obama The Billionaire Spender

The human mind continues to amaze. We can never overestimate how often a person unknowingly—unconsciously—sees himself so clearly in others, specifically in the “mistakes” of others. Such perceptions are the proverbial speck one can see so certainly in the eye of his neighbor while neglecting to notice the log in one’s own eye.

No single person in recent memory wears those particular glasses so well as our 44th president—Barack Obama. Having decided he was losing his case playing nice with the Republicans by offering concessions on the debt crisis in which he agreed to “cut spending,” he decided instead to come out swinging as a liberal—to “return to his roots.” He declared that it was time to “draw a line in the sand” as he aggressively pursued tax hikes for corporate high-fliers as well as billionaires and millionaires—the one group of Americans who were truly being indulged by the system. He told his people that opposing such tax raises was “indefensible” and that “this is a public argument we can and should win.”

But what his left brain giveth his right brain taketh away—meaning what his conscious (left brain) presents as a good idea, his intuitive unconscious (right brain which speaks through ideas) confesses that he is really talking about himself. Clearly he sees himself in the mirror of others. The subject is money and the question is who has the most and how their financial self-indulgence works to the detriment of America. I submit that there is no billionaire in the world who represents as much of a threat to our nation as does Obama. The U.S. government, of which he is the CEO, spends an extra $4.2 billion it does not have every single day of the year! This debilitating deficit-spending has put America $4 trillion in debt in just three short years.

And he wants more of your money. Obama’s deeper intelligence makes the point his surface mind misses—he is the self-indulgent, no accountability billionaire who needs to be confronted. The more things change the more things stay the same.

His compadres—the OWS: Occupy Wall Street protestors—busily berate greedy corporate America even as they indulge themselves in New York City’s money just to clean up their mess. Like Obama, they blatantly reveal their true, selfish selves with their demands posted for all the world to see. “Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment;” a $20-an-hour minimum wage; free college education; forgiveness “of all debt on the entire planet period;” and “open borders” so “anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.” In the end, even for them it is all about money and, like Obama, they are shouting at themselves, at their secret sense of entitlement, their subtly masked greed. Like Obama, they want “open boundaries” so “anyone can do whatever they want when they want especially with your money.” As Obama said, we ought to be able to sell the public on the idea of reigning in such folks, people whose greed is “indefensible.”

Joining in the name-calling which echoes back in his face is Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod who says Republicans have done “diabolically well” at creating a “dysfunctional political system.” This from the man who helped Obama create a mountain range of debt for your grandchildren, who fanned his trillion-dollar excesses. To most people, that is what truly embodies the definition of “diabolical.”

Taking it a step further in January of this year Obama appointed Jeffrey Immelt, General Electric Co.’ s CEO as head of his new economic advisory team to replace Paul Volker. Interestingly, General Electric had taken much of its business overseas earning $5 billion in tax free profits last year with plenty of money for political contributions and lobbyists. More than half of GE’s money comes from outside the Unites States. Such policies are bad for small business. More importantly we ask was Obama also speaking of his friends with “billionaire”’ companies who should pay their fair share or was his admonition just selective.