Obama vs. Reagan: No contest

Bruce Johnson
Can there be a greater contrast between two concepts of the United States of America than to juxtapose Ronald Reagan's vision with that of Barack Obama?

"Somewhere a perversion has taken place, our natural and unalienable rights now are considered to be dispensation of government."  Ronald Reagan

"Outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy." Ronald Reagan

Obama in a 2001 interview, with the federally funded NPR. 

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth...and more basic issues of economic and political justice."

"...it (the Supreme Court) didn't break loose from the essential constraints placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution." Barack Obama

"Generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the States cant do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, doesn't say what the State of Federal government must do on your behalf."  Barack Obama

"...lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power that bring about redistributive change." Barack Obama

One would be hard pressed to find a Democrat from the 20th century that aligned with Obama's ideas.  Not Kennedy who instructed us to not ask of the government. Not McGovern who saw the benefits of the capitalistic engine. Not even Clinton who realized budgets must be balanced, that compromise must be struck.

The great Obama seems to be confused about the Constitution of which he allegedly is an expert. How can anyone remotely familiar with the Constitution suggest the Judicial Branch had wealth redistributive capabilities, much less the power to do so?

Obama also seems unfamiliar with terms such as "negative liberty" which has quite a different meaning than the manner in which he attempted.

"Negative liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. One has negative liberty to the extent that actions are available to one in this negative sense." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 

Obama uses the term to describe the Constitution's protections of the citizen and limits of Federal power. Clearly, Mr. Obama misuses the term.  What grade did he get in that class we wonder?


Bruce Johnson


Can there be a greater contrast between two concepts of the United States of America than to juxtapose Ronald Reagan's vision with that of Barack Obama?

"Somewhere a perversion has taken place, our natural and unalienable rights now are considered to be dispensation of government."  Ronald Reagan

"Outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy." Ronald Reagan

Obama in a 2001 interview, with the federally funded NPR. 

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth...and more basic issues of economic and political justice."

"...it (the Supreme Court) didn't break loose from the essential constraints placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution." Barack Obama

"Generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the States cant do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, doesn't say what the State of Federal government must do on your behalf."  Barack Obama

"...lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power that bring about redistributive change." Barack Obama

One would be hard pressed to find a Democrat from the 20th century that aligned with Obama's ideas.  Not Kennedy who instructed us to not ask of the government. Not McGovern who saw the benefits of the capitalistic engine. Not even Clinton who realized budgets must be balanced, that compromise must be struck.

The great Obama seems to be confused about the Constitution of which he allegedly is an expert. How can anyone remotely familiar with the Constitution suggest the Judicial Branch had wealth redistributive capabilities, much less the power to do so?

Obama also seems unfamiliar with terms such as "negative liberty" which has quite a different meaning than the manner in which he attempted.

"Negative liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. One has negative liberty to the extent that actions are available to one in this negative sense." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 

Obama uses the term to describe the Constitution's protections of the citizen and limits of Federal power. Clearly, Mr. Obama misuses the term.  What grade did he get in that class we wonder?


Bruce Johnson