Obama the Chess Master


Thomas Paine said that “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” With decades of increasing criminality in all three branches of government, it would be pretty hard to argue with one of the great libertarian thinkers in our country’s history. And with Congress’s approval rating at a stunning 13 percent, it doesn’t appear that many people disagree with Paine’s analysis of government.

Now, with a new Congress in session, many are excited about the possibility that the accelerating, anti-Constitutional power of government over its one-time employers (now passively transformed into citizen serfs) will be reversed. But what is the likelihood that it will really happen?

In an outgoing flurry of legislation and attempted legislation (e.g., the infamous omnibus bill that Harry Reid was forced to pull the plug on), Democrats and progressive Republicans — especially the lame-duckers — flipped one last gigantic bird to American Main Streeters. Some were shocked at their audacity, but those of us who have endured decades of political sewage pouring out of Washington have become cynical to the point where politicians’ contempt for voters doesn’t even raise an eyebrow.

Having said this, the big question is, will the Republicans be able to start turning things around between now and 2012? I believe the answer to that question lies in how successful they will be at cornering President Barack Obama into no-win situations. Politics, you say? Yes, of course! Do you believe these fire-breathing, anything-goes political animals are going to respond positively to reason? BHO’s entire adult life has been one big, ongoing game of political one-upsmanship. And, giving him his due credit, he happens to be despicably good at it.

For example, regardless of which way the economy appears to be going on the surface, BHO will be prepared to take the high road. (I say on the surface, because the bowels of the economy are already rotted to the point where a total collapse is inevitable.) If the tax compromise produces a temporary, illusory effect on the economy, he will, without a hint of embarrassment, claim that he turned things around by endorsing a tax cut for all Americans.

On the other hand, if the illusion of a turnaround does not come about, his position will be, "To show bipartisanship, I decided to give Republicans a chance and go along with their insane idea to give billions of dollars away to the wealthiest Americans, and, predictably, it didn’t work. Now we’re going to get back to doing things my way so we can grow this economy." That will give him a perfect excuse for returning to policies that are based on a system that all straight-thinking people realize has never worked: Socialism.

So, as much as I hate to say it, I believe the tax-compromise legislation that came out of the lame-duck session is a bad sign of things to come. And keep in mind that two of the really good guys in the House — Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas) — voted for it.

In all fairness, Ron Paul’s explanation of why he voted for the bill had merit. Being a strict anti-tax, anti-regulatory, Constitutionalist, Paul took a principled stand and said he would never vote for a tax increase on anyone, no matter how much bad stuff he had to swallow.

Ryan was not as clear, saying only that if taxes go up, “that’s going to harm the people I represent.” Which was true. But he also said, “A lot of people are making these political arguments, which are, ‘What is the proper political chess move against Obama?’ And that is not the way we should be thinking right now when it comes to jobs and economy.”

Were it not for the fact that the U.S. Government has become the intolerable evil that Thomas Paine alluded to, I would agree with Ryan. But the reality is that ours is a criminal, Constitutional-hating government, a government headed by an angry young Marxist intent on bringing the United States down to the level of third-world countries around the globe. Sorry, but it’s a chess game whether Republicans like it or not. And if they refuse to play, they will get checkmated all over the board by default.

That said, I have to agree, at least to some extent, with Charles Krauthammer, who believes that Obama snookered Republicans on the so-called tax-compromise bill. However, to me, the most important reason Republicans should not have gone along with the tax compromise is that it was a continuation of their decades-old habit of acquiescing to Democratic blackmail — and blackmail doesn’t work! With each new blackmail success by the Dems, the country moves further into debt, further to the left, and further into the tar pit of tyranny.

The Republicans should have checkmated the chess master in the White House on this one. By letting taxes go up on Jan. 1, they could have boxed Obama into a no-win situation: Lower taxes on everybody, no estate taxes and no extension of unemployment benefits. (I italicized the latter, because it was the real heart and soul of the blackmail, yet most pundits mentioned it only in passing, if at all.)

In this scenario, if Obama caved in and went along with a Republican version of a tax-and-spending reduction bill in January, he not only would have found himself with one or more primary challenges for the 2012 Democratic nomination, he very well might have lost. Which is why, in the final analysis, I don’t believe he would have given in to the Republicans.

More likely, he would have fought against them to the bitter end, even while the economy was moving toward the Greatest Depression. Then, he would have unashamedly blamed the economic holocaust on higher taxes — and Republicans could have had a field day campaigning on a promise to lower taxes on everyone.

It would have been a close call at election time because, let’s face it, Obama has 35 percent to 40 percent of the electorate locked up regardless of what he does. But he would have had to convince at least another 10 percent of the walking dead that higher taxes and spending would ultimately lead to something-for-nothing nirvana.

Either way, if Republicans make the mistake of running the wrong candidate (remember, the best they could come up with in 2008 was super-progressive John McCain!), they’re toast. But with a fearless tax-cutting, anti-spending libertarian-centered conservative, they could win.

Bottom line: I never worry about Democrats. With few exceptions, they are hopelessly lost souls. Trying to proselytize them is an enormous waste of the number of heartbeats one has left in his life.

I worry about Republicans, who seem eternally destined to giving in to Democratic blackmail because they believe they “have no choice.” Actually, strike the word eternally. If Republicans don’t man-up soon, the job of fundamentally transforming the United States of America into a left-wing dictatorship cannot be more than a few short years away.

–Robert Ringer

Personal Liberty

Robert Ringer

is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.