Obama’s Silent Agenda


Barack Obama’s principal agenda for America has been anything but transparent; he would profess transparency and has stated such, however if we delve into the details, Barack Obama has hidden his real intent from America. The underpinnings of the man, his philosophies and ideologies are far from the forefront. We are offered illuminating insights in Dinesh D’Souza’s two tomes, The Roots of Obama’s Rage and Obama’s America. Further, in their film, 2016: Obama’s America, D’Souza and Jerry Molen provide illustrative utterance to Obama’s foundational ideologies. And, in On The Brink, America’s Choice 2012, I offer some fundamental ideologies espoused by Mr. Obama.

As we look to this election, it is frightening what lies in store for America in the mind of Barack Obama. Let us not forget his statement to Dimitri Medvedev, which still sends chills up the spine.

Kimberley Strassel provides a current view of what Obama intentionally isn’t saying about his agenda for the next four years in her latest opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal.

President Obama has a reputation for talking, but not necessarily for saying much. He has achieved new levels of vagueness this election season. Beyond repeating that he’s in favor of making the “rich” pay for more government “investment,” he hasn’t offered a single new idea for a second term. This is deliberate.

The core of the Obama strategy is to make Americans worry that whatever Mitt Romney does, it will be worse. That’s a harder case for Mr. Obama to make if he is himself proposing change. And so the Obama pitch is that this election is a choice between stability (giving Mr. Obama four more years to let his policies finally work) and upheaval (giving Mr. Romney four years to re-ruin the nation).

The pitch is profoundly dishonest. While the choice between four more years of Obama status quo and Mr. Romney is certainly vivid, it isn’t accurate. The real contrast is between Mr. Romney’s and Mr. Obama’s future plans. And while the president hasn’t revealed what those plans are, there is plenty of evidence for what a second term would look like.

Let’s dispense with the obvious: An Obama second term will be foremost about higher taxes and greater spending. The president has been clear about the former and will consider victory in November a mandate to raise taxes on higher-income Americans and small businesses—at the least.

Meanwhile, no matter how the coming budget sequester sorts out, nobody should forget why it came into being: It was the result of Mr. Obama’s refusal to consider any real changes to Social Security or Medicare. There will be no reason to budge in a second term. Absent reform to these drivers of debt, and given Mr. Obama’s ambitions to further “invest” in education, energy and infrastructure, a second term means proposals for even broader and bigger tax hikes—and not just for his favorite targets. Continued and growing deficits are likely as well.

Presidents often use re-election to revive leftover policy objectives. A New Yorker magazine article in June noted: “The President has said that the most important policy he could address in his second term is climate change.” Such an unpopular policy focus might seem crazy if Republicans hold the House, but then again Mr. Obama will want an issue where he can press his advantage and blame an obstinate GOP. The president has to date been unconcerned by how his agenda hurts congressional Democrats; he’s unlikely to begin caring once he has been re-elected.

Yet since the probable outcome of his approach would be continued gridlock, his real efforts will be devoted to fine-tuning the regulatory apparatus he has designed specifically to go around Congress—as the administration has done the past two years. The Environmental Protection Agency in particular will resurrect rules it delayed implementing before the election (see: costly ozone regulations) and move to take over new areas like natural-gas fracking.

The same goes for other agencies, from the Labor Department to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The National Labor Relations Board will continue to cement union dominance over employers. The Solyndras will continue. What Mr. Obama cannot accomplish via regulation, he will attempt through executive order—much as he did with his recent immigration directive.

Most voters understand that a second Obama term means the continuation of ObamaCare and the Dodd-Frank financial regulations. But there is also the carte blanche that re-election will give the president to supercharge those laws, which are only now entering key rulemaking periods. The same Obama appointees who have already taken vast liberties with these laws (see: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s ObamaCare slush fund) will be crafting the new regulations. The bureaucrats will also have four more years to put in place key civil servants who can be counted on to keep the rules going even past an Obama administration.

It is likely the Supreme Court will offer up another vacancy, and Mr. Obama might finally have his chance to shift the balance of the court. A slew of appellate-court positions are also in limbo as the campaign proceeds; they would be filled by a second-term Obama.

Just as important are the things Mr. Obama will not do. His record gives no indication he will revive America’s leadership in free trade. Nor is he likely to restore America’s influence in the international arena. And so we will inch closer to a nuclear-armed Iran and the threats that the regime will pose to international peace and order.

None of this is hyperbole. Mr. Obama is open about his tax aims, is proud of his spending and has never apologized for his regulatory ambitions. Despite a shellacking in the midterms, he moved left, and a November victory will reinforce his sense that he was correct to do so.

While Democrats will take careful pains in coming convention weeks to avoid outlining the president’s intentions, they are sitting in plain sight. The real choice this fall will be between Mitt Romney’s reform agenda and a Supersized Obama. No wonder the Democrats are keeping mum.

Write to kim@wsj.com

Conservative advocate, husband, father of six, grandfather of 18. Author, conservative blogger, and retired investment banker.Enjoy my family, my mountain home, political and philosophical discussions, golf and travel.
View Posts | View Profile | View David’s New Book

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ 

Tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Obama’s Silent Agenda

  1. Paul says:

    The same as in 2008. What will happen is fairly clear. The only question is whether people are paying enough attention. Hopefully they are.

  2. Annette S says:

    Excellent article by Kimberley Strassel…thank you David.

    This piece by Strassel is frightening and she didn’t even mention Obamacare which has turned insurance providers into a public utility and has raised taxes 21 times. Obama’s economic policy is tax the rich, regulate business and convince people that Romney and Ryan want to do away with safety nets. What kind of a party are the Democrats if they want to keep Obama’s true intentions a secret?

    Here is a quote from Yuval Levin (article from National Review)

    “The president simply equates doing things together with doing things through government. He sees the citizen and the state, and nothing in between…and thus sees every political question as a choice between radical individualism and a federal program.”

    “But most of life is lived somewhere between those two extremes, and American life in particular has given rise to unprecedented human flourishing because we have allowed the institutions that occupy the middle ground…the family, civil society, and the private economy…to thrive in relative freedom. Obama’s remarks in Virginia shed a bright light on his attitude toward the middle ground, and in that light a great deal of what his administration has done in this three and a half years suddenly grows clearer and more coherent, and even more disconcerting.”

    It is frightening.

    Tom…..If you are attempting to criticize the point of view of Strassel you have no regard for our liberties or prosperity that a free economy and civil society makes available.

    Romney/Ryan 2012!!

  3. Susan says:

    Even Obama’s brother living in squalor realized that Kenya having driven out the whites, should have instead asked them to stay longer and help them get on their feet. He referenced S. Africa that started their ascend later and now are much further ahead. His words and observations not mine.

    Obama’s father also said that taxing 100 percent of wages was fine as long as citizens got benefits for that taxation. Imagine working full-time and having the government remove all your wages each week to disperse as they see fit. Obama with executive orders has become that agenda in earnest. He is desperately taking state rights away, targeting individuals that make too much , saying at some point they have made enough. What is the number anyway?

  4. Cathy says:

    I never thought I’d live to see the biggest threat to our existence, as a free country, would be our own President.
    May God help us all, and see this man for what he stands for.

    Gov. Romney Thank you so much for stepping up at this crucial time to save us from Americas Armageddon.

  5. Annette S says:

    Tom,

    “If you did then why don’t tell where exactly I showed “no regard for our liberties or prosperity that a free economy and civil society makes available.”

    Because you support a president who is interested in a government directed economy. Heavy regulatory policies over private entities is just a way to take them over or control them. Romney believes some regulations are necessary, but Obama goes too far. Now the ACA is penalizing and taxing businesses and insurers. High taxes and heavy regulations is hard on the private sector. Free enterprise is a way for people to become upwardly mobile and succeed in life. It’s a freedom. It’s a way for people to channel their creativity and desire to build something. Maybe being in business is not for you or other liberals, but it is for many and they don’t want a government that takes the creativity, prosperity and excitement out of owning a business.

    Obama can increase taxable revenue by growing and strengthening the private sector. The private sector pays for everything, government jobs….etc. Along with a stronger and more prosperous economy comes more taxable revenue. But instead he raises taxes on the rich (200K and above)…which really isn’t wealthy. Raising taxes will not pay off the debt or bolster our economy. It won’t help the poor and middle class. When you start down that road, you end up raising taxes on the middle class and the poor. It won’t stop with the rich.

    We need to cut spending, lower taxes and rein in regulatory policies. We need a middle ground where we can experience freedom like private enterprise and civil society.

  6. AfricansforRomney says:

    Thomas,
    You’re a regulation FREAK. Based on your comments so far, i think you should move to Germany, France. You’ll live happy out there. kekekeke
    Your incomptent prez Obama will be defeated on Nov 6 LANDSLIDE. hehehe

  7. Frozone says:

    Any chance we can supress “Cut and Paste”, “Can’t Think for Myself” Thomas Kim?

  8. Pingback: Obama’s Silent Agenda | Union County Republican Central Committee

  9. Eric Gordon says:

    You people are certifiable.