Krauthammer on inaugural address: 'Obama unbound'
Was the speech an ode to Big Government?
- Duration 7:37
- Date Jan 21, 2013
Was the speech an ode to Big Government?
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Perspective on this speech for her reaction from syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer.
On the inaugural address Charles I thought it was an amazing speech.
Historically very important not memorable.
Things -- idea that will -- be repeated.
But -- -- very important historically.
Because this was really Obama and and I think what's most dangerous things that Obama.
Basically he's declaring the end of reaganism in his speech remember he once said that Ronald Reagan was historically consequential.
In a way that the Bill Clinton was not.
And what Obama meant is that Obama had changed the ideological course in the country.
In his inaugural address within two minutes.
Reagan had -- clear that at the government is not the solution government is the problem.
Today's inaugural address was a rebuke to that entire idea.
This speech today was an ode to big government it was -- him to be.
In -- reframe the three we the people's.
He said number one I'm gonna defend what liberalism has achieved the twentieth century.
Larry mentioned social security and Medicare and Medicaid so I'm not gonna let any of that he chipped away.
And then second he said the vision for the future.
He's climate change and green energy is going to be his new expansion of liberalism.
In the new century and then the third element was.
This expansion of civil rights we talked about immigrants and gays and even shoehorn the gun rights under the -- the rubric of security he outlined and he liberal agenda is big government agenda in the future the Britt talked earlier back out.
Remarkably there's an absence of any mention of the economy.
Of deficits of what outsiders -- would say is a great challenge.
Of our time heading into over a cliff.
A real Clift of debt into sort of a great future there is nothing of that in his speech Obama has zero interest in that.
And this is a declaration in his interest is to restore us.
To the liberal ascendancy of sixty years fed reagans stopped he gave us these three decades and Clinton in the middle of the three decades said.
In his -- -- State of the Union Address.
The error of big government is over.
This speech was a declaration the -- big government is back.
I'm the man who will do it a remarkable speech.
-- -- one line that says we must make hard choices to reduce the cost.
Of health care in the size of our deficit but as Rick mentioned it's followed by but we reject and then.
A series of lines about why you cannot touch social security and Medicaid and Medicare and you can not.
Deal with those in -- -- that touches that.
Negatively in any way saying they do not make us a nation of takers.
These programs free us to take the risks that make this country great.
What do you what do you make of that segment.
I think that is a rhetorical device.
Where you give a nod to -- the other side is saying.
Say yeah we've got to reduce health care because he said that in 2009.
He's done nothing about that in fact he's already invented.
A brand new entitlement Obama camp and expansion of social security and Medicare of the twentieth century so that's his first.
Hyper liberal legacy if you want these new great entitlement today and his second is using green energy -- -- but he says oh yes we got a problem here.
And then he -- -- -- -- Alex and he says I won't touch any entitlements.
I'll defend then that's the reactionary liberalism.
Defending the achievements of the -- even though they're now.
Obsolete if you -- given our demographics.
And the increase in Costa health care and he says you know that's what I'm gonna defend but then I'm -- expect.
So I I found this sort of unrelenting.
And you get a sense of a man who said all right.
I won my second election I never have to face electorate again.
I'm gonna be who I -- I wanna -- and I'm gonna change the ideological.
Trajectory of the country that's my job that's why I'm here historically.
And he sees himself as a world historical figure.
And this speech is sort of a declaration of it.
Charles you know he didn't it's true that he certainly -- make jobs.
And and the current unemployment figures and so on I think that the focus of his speech and he didn't specifically address the state of the economy but.
You know if you listen to what he said he seemed to be telegraphing something I mentioned earlier the continuing references to how.
We didn't replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of beef you.
He said our country cannot succeed with when a shrinking -- do very well on a growing many barely make it saying we believe America's prosperity.
Must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class.
I mean what -- really talking about there more tax hikes on the rich.
I think that's exactly right he's not terribly interested in the economic agenda you would think a country who have historically high unemployment.
We've never had -- chronic unemployment.
With a recovery that's the weakest since -- Second World War and would sixteen trillion dollars of debt.
Would address that in his inaugural address and the only extent he does as you mentioned right here.
Is this sort of class war -- what he seems to attributed.
To the selfishness of the race without giving -- any serious consideration.
So -- -- and you he's injected in the economy.
He will use it for a little class war for a little Adelaide.
I was -- and reduction of inequality.
But he's -- he's showing -- that's not his main interest.
The main interest is changing the nature of the relationship between citizen and stage where he restores the prestige of the government.
The importance of the government which he used to be in the -- in the heyday of the liberalism.
Before Ronald Reagan when you heard in condemning the name calling.
-- Capitol Hill.
Thoughts thoughts about that given what we've seen over the past year well I thought that was a low point in the speech and -- If you're looking at this -- ideological speech he could say it was a rather remarkable defense or advancement of traditional liberalism.
And this was an unnecessary and note that was a -- note that shouldn't be an inaugural address obviously it's a reference he things.
Until Republicans but as you pointed out when it comes to name calling I think he and his campaign was sort of a world heavyweight champions last year.
But I thought he did -- one touching note at the end he tries to say that I am.
With a man for the common man.
And in some ways they were elements of that in there.
And I liked the part where he said.
That I take the same both as a soldier -- -- -- an immigrant does -- a way of saying you mean this is one of the aspects.
His idea of who we are in this all together.
Of this essential equality in our devotion to nation men to the constitution.
So that was a note I thought was really nice but generally speaking when he speaks of me working together being responsible for each other.
He's now speaking of our common duties or even of civil society of the free associations.
He means government.
That's government does what he means by a week and that's an idea from the mid twentieth century and we -- hitter violence Charles --