In a recent State of the Union Address Obama invoked the name of JFK, in an apparent attempt to link himself to the Democrat President. I assume by making a reference to a President respected by many, particularly by Democrats, Obama hopes to place himself on that same plane of adoration. But how similar are these two Presidents? There may be some similarities, but there are also very distinct differences.
Obama began his recent address with the following statement:
Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that “the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress…It is my task” he said, “to report the State of the Union--- to improve it is the task of us all.”
Obama’s use of this statement is interesting in what it omits. Here is Kennedy’s original statement:
“Members of the Congress, the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress. We are all the trustees for the American people, custodians of the American heritage. It is my task to report the State of the Union---to improve it is the task of us all.” JFK Jan 11, 1962
The word “trustees” describes a government hired by the people as agents of the people, subservient to the people. Obama strides as a colossus above the people and where he cannot find willing submission to his desires, he unilaterally enforces his will over the people. “Custodians” would suggest a duty to preserve our Constitutional heritage, not fundamentally transform the foundations of the Republic. Obama thinks, as Chris Rock proclaimed that he is the “boss” of the people, our “dad of the country” and if Obama decides that we no longer need portions of our Constitution, we should bow to his will. Obama despises the Constitution and the limitations it places upon his monarchy and his statements are full of contradictions and deception. This statement, taken from his State of the Union, is a perfect example.
The American people don’t expect government to solve every problem.
That may be true of the American people, but Obama doesn’t really believe that, and his own words give him away. In this same speech, Obama directly contradicts himself so many times it makes me wonder how he ever choked out the original assertion. Everything in the speech was about what the government will and must do to solve all of our problems, including the assertion that private industry is so incapable of doing anything that it must have government as its partner. Sadly, we know that many in private business are only happy to take tax-payer dollars while they line their own pockets. Government subsidizing private enterprise only engenders waste and corruption, and the end goal is power, not progress.
Here is a difference. While Obama forces communism upon us through Orwellian propaganda and coercion, JFK fought communism:
“There are many people in the world who really don't understand--or say they don't--what is the greatest issue between the free world and Communist world. Let them come to Berlin! There are some who say that "communism is the wave of the future." Let them come to Berlin! And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere, "we can work with the Communists." Let them come to Berlin! And there are even a few who say "yes, that it's true, that communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress." Lass' sie nach Berlin en kommen! Let them come to Berlin!”
While Obama and his surrogates encourage racial division, JFK fought racism and discrimination:
“It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. This is not a sectional issue…Nor is this a partisan issue…This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone…We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution.”
While Obama holds the government to be the ultimate and only solution to every problem, JFK said:
“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Obama asserted, throughout his State of the Union, don’t worry about doing anything, WE will do it all for you. Far from calling for Americans to strive to produce, he declares that those who are successful and productive must be punished. While JFK may have been a proponent of expanding the welfare state in many ways, he still had more of an understanding than this President of what distinguishes America from third world philosophies that run counter to a belief in a limited government that derives its powers from the people.
While Obama seems to worship government as god, JFK knew the source of our rights:
“And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe — the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God… let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.” Inaugural Address, JFK
There remains another distinguishing factor between Obama and JFK.
Obama is likely the most pro-abortion president we have ever had. Never in the history of this country have we had a president that voted multiple times to deny medical assistance to babies born through failed abortions. Never before in the history of America have we had a president that made a public statement that children should be considered “punishment” to their parents. NEVER would Obama nominate a pro-life Supreme Court justice, but JFK did. JFK nominated pro-life judge, Byron White, for the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge White served on the Supreme Court during the Roe v. Wade case and opposed the majority opinion offering his dissent:
With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.
The Court apparently values the convenience of the pregnant mother more than the continued existence and development of the life or potential life that she carries. Whether or not I might agree with that marshaling of values, I can in no event join the Court’s judgment because I find no constitutional warrant for imposing such an order of priorities on the people and legislatures of the States. In a sensitive area such as this, involving as it does issues over which reasonable men may easily and heatedly differ, I cannot accept the Court’s exercise of its clear power of choice by interposing a constitutional barrier to state efforts to protect human life and by investing mothers and doctors with the constitutionally protected right to exterminate it. This issue, for the most part, should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs.
The shameful thing is that the Democrats are ignorantly buying into this comparison; believing that Obama is a Democrat just like JFK. While I am no JFK apologist, Obama is NO JFK Democrat. Obama is a communist, a Marxist of the highest order. Sorry, Dad, this Chaika is not my grandfather’s Oldsmobile.