Politics

Obama’s UAW Speech…a ‘Load of You-Know-What’

Feb. 28, 2012 11:18pm

David Harsanyi is a columnist and senior reporter at Human Events.

False choices. Populist bromides. A lecture on values. President Barack Obama treated us to some of his greatest hits this week.

Speaking before the United Auto Workers union in Washington, Obama, champion of the working man, challenged auto bailout “naysayers” to “come around” and admit that “standing by American workers was the right thing to do,” as bailouts “saved” the auto industry. (You have to wonder whether downtrodden citizens appreciate just how close they came to having to roller-skate to work.)

“They’re out there talking about you like you’re some special interest that needs to be beaten down,” Obama told cheering union members. And those who claim that bailouts were just a labor payback are simply peddling a “load of you-know-what.”

I do know what, Mr. President.

Because actually, the United Auto Workers union is a special interest. Like other unions, the UWA regularly lobbies Congress, funds Democratic candidates across the country with millions, and advocates public policy that undercuts competition and free trade. And, as The New York Times recently reported, the UAW and other unions will “put their vast political organizations into motion behind Mr. Obama.” (Nothing like a few strategic taxpayer “investments” to get labor inspired.)

And if by “be beaten down” the president means “compete in the marketplace like every other sucker in America,” well, he’s right. If by “be beaten down” he means “go to bankruptcy court — even if you’ve ‘played by the rules’ — and honor contracts you’ve signed rather than have a friendly administration rip them up and rewrite them in favorable terms for others, then heck yeah.

Yet Obama claims, “I” — “I” — “placed my bet on American workers.”

Now, it’s your bet, technically of course, Mr. President. And let’s be honest; all my favorite bets are made with other people’s money. But you didn’t bet on the American people. That would mean betting that the marketplace and those in it have the capacity and the smarts to find increasingly productive and innovative ways to produce the things that consumers demand. You bet on a politically convenient corporation that believes it’s entitled to eternal state-sponsored protection. Too bad Woolworth’s and Pan Am couldn’t hold out until you came along.

Then again, it’s not just an economic duty but also a moral obligation. “You want to talk about values?” Obama went on to explain. “Hard work — that’s a value. Looking out for one another — that’s a value. The idea that we’re all in it together and I’m my brother’s keeper and sister’s keeper — that’s a value.”

Thank the secular spirits we don’t have one of those Bible thumpers in the White House. They tend to get preachy, you know.

But ponder this: The same week our greed-averse president sends a fundraising letter demonizing the Koch brothers — dubious self-starters and risk takers who employ about 70,000 people without bailouts and hand out billions in noncoerced charity — he is busy celebrating policy that forces taxpayers to be their brother’s keeper, even though their brother continues to make terrible decisions free of consequence.

Now, the auto bailouts began under President George W. Bush — abandoning free market principles to save the free market since 2001 — but Obama seems to believe that pumping money into failure is an economic starter kit. Some unpatriotic rube might even ask: If bailouts can really save jobs, grow the economy and cost taxpayers absolutely nothing, why not bail out more industries — or every industry? Why not bail out every corporation that’s headed in the wrong direction?

What, you don’t care about your brothers and sisters?
———————————————-

David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.

Comments (8)

  • cluebattingcage
    Aug. 7, 2012 at 5:39pm

    “Yet Obama claims, ‘I’ — ‘I’ — ‘placed my bet on American workers.’ ”

    Barack? You didn’t make that bet. Somebody else made that happen.

    Report this comment

    cluebattingcage  
  • sbenard
    Mar. 16, 2012 at 11:37am

    His Unholy Unctuousness didn’t place HIS bet on the auto industry. He placed OURS! He has institutionalized coveting and stealing! Somehow, I don’t think his inspiration source is a divine one when he seeks to coerce our entire civilization to violate two of the basic Ten Commandments! That’s not Christianity. Its “liberation theology. It’s used to be known as Marxism and Communisim!

    Report this comment

    sbenard  
    • ziggyff
      Mar. 19, 2012 at 8:37am

      Hey, the President pays taxes so he can say he bet on their future…there is no “ours” and “his”…why is that so hard to understand

      Report this comment

      ziggyff  
    • Goodforall
      Aug. 7, 2012 at 3:35pm

      Guess what-they were union paybacks! Had he let them become privatized we’d be so much better off and the car industry in America would be as solid as ever w/o all those union perks driving up costs and making them too expensive for the average customer to purchase and putting the companies in a dire position. Sad how the sheep can’t see the forrest for the trees.

      Report this comment

      Goodforall  
  • sbenard
    Mar. 16, 2012 at 11:33am

    It’s just manure, David! :) Spread it everywhere, and things grow — especially government! And so does DEBT!

    Of course, the economy DOESN’T! And freedom CONTRACTS!

    President Perfidious, the manure Chief Executive!

    Report this comment

    sbenard  
  • Invisible Backhand
    Feb. 29, 2012 at 1:59pm

    David’s column sounds like it’s written by a student who copied the who’s paper is copied from Wikipedia:

    “The script is now familiar: there is no such thing as the common good; market values become the template for shaping all aspects of society; the free, possessive individual has no obligations to anything other than his or her self-interest; profit-making is the essence of democracy; the government, and particularly the welfare state, is the arch-enemy of freedom; private interests trump public values; consumerism is the essence of citizenship; privatization is the essence of freedom…”

    Report this comment

    Invisible Backhand  
    • Puddle Duck
      Mar. 7, 2012 at 11:09pm

      Sadly Mr hand your take on the column is typical of progressive deflection tactics, Alinsky-ite in it’s prose and it’s social content. When Gov’t begins to pick winners and losers, the free markety cannot function as it should, collusion and corruption between lobbyists,industries politicians begins to rot the system from the inside out. You fail to address the obvious symbiotic relationship betwwen big Gov and big labor and how that makes the playing field for the rpivate sector that does not enjoy such insider co operation or policy making can ruin entire sectors of manufacturing in a very short period of time. The GMC bail out and how it was handled (along with Chrysler) was a disgraceful sham….I have to wonder how you would have felt if your 401K had some GMC bonds in that portfolio, how YOU would have felt about having that paper arbitrarily declared worthless by the Feds in order to reorganize the co under direct UAW management. There were thosuands of public bond holders frozen out with a stroke of a Gov pen and yet there is no outrage for the common man (or woman) left holding the bag by your grup (leftist communists).

      Gov has never been good at operating private sector enetrprise and it has been proven time and again over the years that it mismanages, overspends, wastes billions of taxpayer dollars.

      The free market has not been allowed to operate as it used to for a long time…the Feds and State Gov are to blame for the whole awful mess.

      Report this comment

      Puddle Duck  
    • sbenard
      Mar. 16, 2012 at 11:51am

      “…who copied the who’s paper is copied from Wikipedia”?

      Interestingly, the ONLY section of the comment Backhand actually composed himself/herself, doesn’t make a hill of beans worth of sense. It is grammatically bad, and so asinine that one is left scratching one’s head, trying to figure out what on earth Backhand meant. It is so fatuous so as to be literally nonsensical! Inanely enough, that’s just about what the Backhand was accusing Harsanyi of. Tu quoque, Backhand!

      Report this comment

      sbenard  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

TheBlaze

Channel Finder

Find TheBlaze on your TV

This zipcode is invalid, please try again

Channel Finder

TheBlaze is available on channel .

Spread the word!

If you can't find TheBlaze, please call to upgrade your package

Channel Finder

Unfortunately, TheBlaze is not available on .

But you can help! Call at or press CONTINUE to email your provider and urge them to add TheBlaze to your channel lineup.

But you can help! Press CONTINUE to email your provider and urge them to add TheBlaze to your channel lineup.

Continue

Request TheBlaze

Please complete the form

I would like to receive news and information from TheBlaze.
Skip

Thank you for supporting TheBlaze

Interested in doing more? Spread the word about TheBlaze to your friends and family.

Spread the word!

TheBlaze Magazine
Restoring Love