I reiterated to my interview guest that three Obama Administration appointees have expressed their appreciation for communism. Van Jones, the former “Green Jobs Czar,” was terminated by President Obama when it was discovered that Jones once identified himself as an “avowed communist,” and White House Communications Director Anita Dunn and “manufacturing czar” Ron Bloom have both expressed their fondness for the murderous dictator Mao Tse-Tung.
And then I asked my guest, “what do you and your colleagues make of this?”
My guest was Representative Walt Minnick, the first Democrat elected to Congress from the state of Idaho in roughly fifteen years. Personally and professionally, Mr. Minnick is a respected businessman in Idaho, and is highly regarded in the Boise community.
Politically speaking, Minnick is authentically a “moderate Democrat” (he identified himself as a “Blue Dog Democrat” on my program at Boise, Idaho’s 580 KIDO radio), and, he has frequently voted against his own party. I believe him to be a good man, and I probably have more agreements with him that I have differences.
I invited Congressman Minnick to appear on my program so as to address a variety of issues, mainly the on-going debate over healthcare legislation. On that topic, Minnick bristled at my reference to “nationalized healthcare,” and noted that some of the legislative proposals could prove fiscally disastrous. He then went on to articulate what was, generally speaking, a free-market oriented approach towards “reforming” the healthcare industry.
But I also wanted to know from this respected moderate Democrat what the Democratic Majority in the House – or Democrats anywhere else, for that matter – actually think and believe about this “communism” theme in the Obama White House. Do Democrats, generally, feel the same about communism as many of Obama’s associates apparently do? Is this the “hope” and “change” that a majority of Democrats envisioned for America’s future, as they rallied to elect Barack Obama last year?
For his part, Minnick’s response to my “communism” question was quite telling. After a second of silence, the Congressman assured me that he affirmed President Obama’s right to select whomever he (Obama) wanted to be his advisors; that some of the choices had been better than some of the others; and that, in any event, Obama is no advocate of communism himself. In fact, Minnick asserted passionately that Obama believes in our capitalist economic system – that Obama both grew up in American capitalism, and is one of American capitalism’s many success stories.
For the record, I said nothing during this interview about capitalism, nor did I ask about Obama and his upbringing. I merely raised a simple question about several Obama staffers and their apparent love for communism.
And it was the Congressman, himself, who responded by “defending” Obama, assuring us that our President was both raised in, and accepting of American-styled freedom.
This situation illustrates an ugly reality – an “elephant in the living room,” to use a family psychology metaphor – about which congressional Democrats can no longer remain in denial. And the reality is this: the worldview, “values,” and ideology that are apparently undergirding this presidency are a dramatic departure from those of most Americans. Likewise, the policies of this President weaken private citizens in a variety of different ways, while fortifying the agents of our government – namely, President Obama himself.
Washington’s current-day “values” and tactics may be a good fit in Obama’s Chicago, or in Pelosi’s San Francisco. But they are quickly beginning to alienate elsewhere in the country -even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has been complicit with the Obama agenda, is now suffering the consequences of his actions in his home state of Nevada.
On economic and fiscal issues, it is nearly impossible to believe any longer that President Obama is seeking to “create jobs” or “stimulate” the economy. He has, however, created more government dependence among private citizens. And as a result of his “corporate bailout” policies, he has created a scenario wherein he (Obama) is now an ad hoc C.E.O. of multiple American companies, including GM, Chrysler, and several banking institutions. And he is now determining the salaries of executives running those companies.
On basic human (and Constitutional) freedoms, Obama also provides a radical departure. Using the full force and authority of the presidency itself, Mr. Obama and members of his Administration have repeatedly sought to demonize and discredit multiple private American individuals and institutions who have dared to disagree with him. The list includes, among others, Rush Limbaugh, Executives with the AIG Insurance Corporation, the Fox Newschannel, private share holders of the Chrysler Corporation, Glenn Beck, the insurance industry, and the United States Chamber of Commerce.
In roughly three years, Americans will again select a President. Until then, the only people who can affectively “limit” President Obama are members of the U.S. Congress.
As such, congressional Democrats must make a decision: does their party have any regard for American liberty any longer? Or has their agenda devolved into merely basking in the glow of a charming and charismatic leader, and making excused for that leader, while quenching his undying thirst for power and control?
Democrats – you must decide.