Why the President’s proposal regarding student loans is even worse than it first looks

I have to admit that I’ve gotten to the point with President Obama that, whatever he’s for, I’m automatically against in the first instance, at least until I’ve had a chance to check it out.  Take, for example, his recent proposal for a “three-year freeze on discretionary, ‘non-security’ spending.”  My very first reaction was, “What’s the catch?”  That reaction was separate from the fact that it’s an obvious attempt to make a populist statement that will appeal to people’s non-thinking lizard brains, and it was separate from the fact that it’s a stupid and lazy way to deal with a massive budget problem.  Of course, I then found out that it is also almost completely meaningless.  Yes, it might save $250 billion over three years, but when one compares that to the trillions of dollars the Democrats have committed on our, the taxpayers’, behalf, who really cares?  This is meaningless theatrics.

In other words, a year’s worth of experience with Obama’s approach to politics demonstrates pretty clearly that virtually everything he does is a lie, a Trojan horse, or ineffectual.  The only area in which he gets a small pass is for sticking it out in Afghanistan.  Otherwise, he also fails in national security, where he’s been responsible for some heroic flails, such as his disastrous Iran policy, his being asleep at the switch both before and after the flaming panties bomber, and his decision to try KSM in federal court, but at least he’s held sort firm on Afghanistan, which is something.

For these reasons, I automatically assumed that there was something dreadfully wrong with Obama’s proposal to nationalize student loans.  This assumption was separate from the fact that I don’t want to nationalize anything, since I think the federal government already has too much power.  My suspicion was that there was something beyond the obvious to dislike about the proposal — and I was right.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Danny Lemieux

    And, people working in the private sector are subsidized entirely be people creating wealth and taxable income. Is it time to burn down the homes of King George’s tax collectors, yet?

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

    Well, it *is* the “Chicago Way” — lavish rewards to your supporters, and a boot in the keister (at best) to your detractors…..
    @Danny – it’s getting very close, my friend……..

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    Obama has already stolen the businesses and properties of conservatives nation wide, reference auto dealers.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ Ymarsakar

    While the Left had to fabricate war atrocities and Patriot Act violations, we are not so lucky.

  • Mike Devx

    DAnny Lemieux and Earl,
    Yes, it is getting very close, isn’t it?  Closer and closer!
     

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

    @Danny and Mike:  Here’s the quote of the day from a friend of mine, and it might be better advice than arson…..
    “So often we think we have got to make a difference and be a big dog. Let us just try to be little fleas biting. Enough fleas biting strategically can make a big dog very uncomfortable.”

    –Marian Wright Edelman,
    founder of the Children’s Defense Fund

  • suek

    Check this site out:
    http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/01/government.html
     
    Not much on this particular page, but the links are there that will give you the info on why I was checking out the topic.  He has better links than Dogpile did…!
     
    (And for you lawyer types – an amazing looking blogroll!)

  • Danny Lemieux

    MikeD and Earl…it certainly worked for Sam Adams.  Fire and fleas are not mutually exclusive. Neither are pitchforks, tar, feathers and fence rails.

  • oceanguy

    BHO needs to channel George Costanza and do The Opposite, of whatever his instinct leads him to do.  Then I might be able to get behind him.

  • bogleech

    Amazing how different people can be, isn’t it? “Sticking it out in afghanistan” is my sole disappointment with Obama.
    Making the same analysis as you, I found this proposal to be 100% worthwhile, along with everything else he’s proposed and done so far.
    People like you let your abstract “principles” get in the way of sense. You dislike things on the grounds that they’re different or that they “give more power to the government” (a gobbledygook phrase. A meaningless bogeyman of the right wing agenda) without really thinking about why.