March 27, 2010
Obama in Aggregate
"Chicago Does Socialism," that's what Victor Davis Hanson calls the aggregate effect of the Obama administration's year in office:
The president promises a state fix for health care; then student loans; and next energy. There are to be subsidies, credits, and always new entitlements for every problem, all requiring hordes of fresh technocrats and Civil Service employees. Like a perpetual teenager, who wants and buys but never produces, the president is focused on the acquisitive and consumptive urges, never on the productive — as in how all his magnanimous largesse is to be paid for by someone else. ...[With taxation, once] again, Obama never honestly connects the dots and comes clean with the American people about the net effect: On vast swaths of upper income, new state and federal taxes — aside from any rises in sales, property, capital-gains, or inheritance taxes — could confiscate an aggregate of 65 to 70 percent. ...
[On transparency and promises,] I could go on and on, but again the pattern is clear. Each time Obama prevaricates, we grant him an exemption because of his lofty rhetoric about bipartisanship and his soothing words about unity. Only later do we notice that in retrospect each untruth is part of a pattern of dissimulation within just a single year of governance. Obama has proven so far that in fact one can fool a lot of the people a lot of the time. ...
[With respect to international affairs,] again, connect these seemingly isolated dots and a picture emerges of a new radical foreign policy of "neutralism." Traditional allies are ignored, and old enemies are courted — until both are on the same moral and political plane. The one constant is that a socialist anti-Western philosophy abroad (which blames the West for a nation's own self-inflicted misery) wins sympathy with the Obama administration, while capitalist Western culture is seen as mostly passé.
His appropriate response to 9/11 excepted, President Bush's years in office nudged the nation in the wrong direction as his administration attempted to walk the line between bolstering the public sector and keeping the private sector alive, while anticipating and adjusting for foreign developments. Obama's years in office, unless they prove to be a repealable four-year binge, are going to be absolutely disastrous. As Mark Steyn puts it, after describing the inevitable decline ushered in with the healthcare usurpation and the foreign variables like "the price of oil when the Straits of Hormuz are under a de facto Iranian nuclear umbrella":
... right now the future lies somewhere between the certainty of decline and the probability of catastrophe. What can stop it? Not a lot.
>>>"his appropriate response to 9/11 excepted, President Bush's year"
So you are saying that the crazy hunts for terrorists under our beds, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the 2-3 Billion which will be spent, and the removal of many of our civil rights - the torture, etc.. were his GOOD actions???
Wow!
Luckily - or at least hopefully, you will not be able to rewrite that history.
Using a 1 to 10 numerical scale, I'd give Bush a 2 out of a 10, and Obama so far a 6 out of a 10.
In my book, that is a 300% improvement, which means a lot.
.
Fortunately for us all, the crazy imaginings of Stuart, our resident moonbat, did not happen. Might make a good plot, though. Hey, "24" has been cancelled - what are the chances that a moonbat version might make it on TV?
About the same as the fantastic commercial success that was Air America.
Posted by: BobN at March 27, 2010 10:51 AMActually, Bob, Stuart gives some pretty good insights into progressive fiscal thinking there -- make up numbers not really related to anything and declare an improvement!
Never watched 24, but don't worry Bob - soon the woman of your dreams, Sarah Palin, will be on Discovery Channel - so you can flip channels between Bjogowich and her for two who left their elected offices in shame.
We could not make this stuff up! Never. That's the great thing about America - the bigger of a loser and crook you are, the more money you get to make!
But not from me. I don't watch crap on TV.
I think the righties are really mad at what Bush and Newt and the others have done over the last couple of decades - but some of them don't know what to do with their anger, so they revert to the historical norm - blaming it on black men.
Works every time among those who enjoy that - but, unfortunately for you, the VOTE and will of the people makes you a minority.
Enjoy. Don't worry - you'll get another chance to ruin things, and I'm certain you will when that chance comes.
Posted by: Stuart at March 27, 2010 4:03 PMI have a shortcut to Anchor Rising on my desktop that years ago I named Chicken Little. I know, not very original, but it has always proved accurate. Up till now, it has been Justin's photoshoped head. I am thinking of a change. To honor the Tea Party, it will become an image of a wild-eyed head down, tail feathers up running chicken named Bobn, squawking "Baarackk brac brac Baarack brac brac".
Posted by: David S at March 27, 2010 4:06 PMStuart now imagines that Nancy Pelosi,Harry Reid,Chuck"The Schmuck"Schumer,Sheldon,etc.are Black men!!Without their connivance,Obama would stand alone.
Okay-Holder is a Black man.So??
Stuart is really crass-if you blame a person for something,and they're Black you're a bigot.That's ridiculous.
Joe, if you look closely you will probably be able to agree with me and many others on ONE thing.
That is, no matter WHAT Obama did or does, they would not like it - and, in fact, oppose it.
That is not fair by any means. If we had a GOP leader, and in the first year he:
1. Pretty much saved us from a depression.
2. Took out those pirates who held Americans.
3. Articulated strategies for many of our foreign adventures.
4. Took steps to put vast numbers of Americans to work.
5. Signed a nuclear reduction treaty with the Russians......
and much more.....
They'd be praising him as their next Hero. But because he is a Dem and he is Black and he is successful...or whatever else, they run and tell us the sky is falling.
To any honest person, that is disingenuous. But I wonder whether parts of the right care about such trivial things as honesty. They would rather rewrite history and tell us FDR was a bad guy (even though he is rated as one of the best 4 Presidents in history by most every historian).
We are each entitled to our opinions - but we are not entitled to our own facts.
Posted by: Stuart at March 27, 2010 6:01 PMStuart-it's too easy to counter with as many poor choices Obama has made.
The fact that you have to resort to the race card kind of makes this conversation a non-starter.
Stuart's Points:
1 & 3-too soon to tell what the results will be
4-really?Not from the unemployment figures I've seen.
2&5:okay