Is this guy ever going to own his presidency? In 2012, is he going to run his campaign with the same “Blame Bush” playbook that got him elected in the first place?
So the Dems have owned Congress since '06, have been in the White House for over a year now and it’s STILL Bush’s fault huh
Yep, Obama’s a strong leader alright …
And Biden is touting Iraq as Obama’s “greatest achievement”…LOL. The stupidity of that dude is just priceless.
That’s perfect Katz! Obama = no credit, Bush = no blame. Perfect narrative!!!
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
That’s perfect Katz! Obama = no credit, Bush = no blame. Perfect narrative!!![/quote]
Well, on the other hand, if you accept that things were bush’s fault when he was in office, shouldn’t you start accepting that things are now obama’s fault?
That graphic is beautiful.
You can not drive a car looking in the rear view mirror. Obama is the President, and if he can not look forward and try to make the present and future better all we will be doing is crashing into a tree.
I am young, but I read history books. Why do you think President Ford pardoned Nixon? We had to move forward as a nation and until Nixon was pardoned nothing would move forward. Obama move on and show us what hope and change is. I just dont think you can do that. You are not a leader you are a follower.
What I find funny is how people will blame Bush for Obama’s attempt at bribing politician, stax exemptions for unions, cash for suckers, etc.
OP I love that picture : )
Obama has had a great presidency! Let’s check off all he has done, oh wait, nothing . . . .
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
You can not drive a car looking in the rear view mirror. Obama is the President, and if he can not look forward and try to make the present and future better all we will be doing is crashing into a tree.
I am young, but I read history books. Why do you think President Ford pardoned Nixon? We had to move forward as a nation and until Nixon was pardoned nothing would move forward. Obama move on and show us what hope and change is. I just dont think you can do that. You are not a leader you are a follower.[/quote]
Yeah well, if both houses and a large part of the American public refuse to follow Obama is not much of a leader either.
When the GOP lost control of the House and Senate, the annual budget deficit was $161 billion. Obama’s budget for next year, with no stimulus and no TARP, calls for $1.6 trillion in red ink. He is a fiscal disaster with an enabling congress. Unemployment rose substantially under Obama, not Bush. Business is afraid to expand because of the policies that he is advocating for.
Thus in three years of democratic control the deficit has swell from 161 billion to 1,600 billion.
That is one party rule by the party of massive spending and unlimited pork.
Not to mention the fact that Obama is perceived as weak to the point of being dangerous by our allies. Our enemies can’t believe their good fortune…4 years of running the table against a fool.
If he is only as bad as Carter we will be lucky. Unfortunately his arrogance is only equaled by his ineptitude in the ability to lead. I think he’ll be much worse for the country that Carter.
Carter actually had accomplishments prior to being elected (besides getting a degree and winning a lawsuit against Citibank for supposedly not lending “enough” to blacks – Obama did achieve those things.)
So if he proves the superior President of the two, that shouldn’t be much of a surprise.
I’m not a big Obama fan, but most of the posts so far are completely asinine. Has Obama fixed things? No, but the huge deficit he has helped to create is part of a solution to a problem. Will it work? It isn’t right now, but it may. The economy is just like driving a car. When it’s going well and thriving (ie moving fast), you simply take your foot off the gas/deficit spending, hit cruise control and try not to run off the road. When the car is stopped, you step on the gas to get it moving.
Whether or not his tactics will work remains to be seen, but putting the blame for the economy’s condition squarely on his shoulders without seriously examining the disastrous fiscal policies of the Bush administration (essentially increasing spending while decreasing taxes) is like suing the doctor who botched your surgery after you got shot while neglecting to identify your shooter for the police.
As for his emphasis on promoting the use of green technology and so forth, why the fuck not? Who cares if global warming may be a fraud? The production and implementation of green technology (along with biotechnology, which the Bush administration significantly set us behind in due to attempts to limit stemcell research) is the next major industry in this country and could be a very viable source of jobs for this country in the future.
Besides, global warming IS occurring at an accelerated rate that far surpasses any natural processes the Earth has gone through in the past, so the industry as a whole is legit to begin with. Who cares if Al Gore gets rich off of it? Good for him. Maybe Bush and Cheney will get a piece of that pie too.
Monetary policy has a time lag of between 9-12 months.
Fiscal policy has a time lag of 1-5 years.
Make of that what you will.
Double post.
Good point, Joe.
Bill - You choose not to recognize discriminatory and predatory lending practices. Oh, that’s because you’re “colorblind”, right?
I suppose you actually think it is a valid rhetorical technique to falsely put words in another person’s mouth, not to mention trying to smear me with an implication of racism.
Your posts for some time have been boring me and totally wasting my time anyway. With this latest effort of yours, Welcome to my Ignore list.
[quote]artw wrote:
I’m not a big Obama fan, but most of the posts so far are completely asinine. Has Obama fixed things? No, but the huge deficit he has helped to create is part of a solution to a problem. Will it work? It isn’t right now, but it may. The economy is just like driving a car. When it’s going well and thriving (ie moving fast), you simply take your foot off the gas/deficit spending, hit cruise control and try not to run off the road. When the car is stopped, you step on the gas to get it moving.
Whether or not his tactics will work remains to be seen, but putting the blame for the economy’s condition squarely on his shoulders without seriously examining the disastrous fiscal policies of the Bush administration (essentially increasing spending while decreasing taxes) is like suing the doctor who botched your surgery after you got shot while neglecting to identify your shooter for the police.
As for his emphasis on promoting the use of green technology and so forth, why the fuck not? Who cares if global warming may be a fraud? The production and implementation of green technology (along with biotechnology, which the Bush administration significantly set us behind in due to attempts to limit stemcell research) is the next major industry in this country and could be a very viable source of jobs for this country in the future.
Besides, global warming IS occurring at an accelerated rate that far surpasses any natural processes the Earth has gone through in the past, so the industry as a whole is legit to begin with. Who cares if Al Gore gets rich off of it? Good for him. Maybe Bush and Cheney will get a piece of that pie too. [/quote]
no offense atrw, but that has got to be the worst metaphor for fiscal policy I’ve ever heard. Ceterus parabus, you have complete control of a car, but you can’t control the invisible hand you can only hope to influence it in some way…
[quote]polo77j wrote:
[quote]artw wrote:
I’m not a big Obama fan, but most of the posts so far are completely asinine. Has Obama fixed things? No, but the huge deficit he has helped to create is part of a solution to a problem. Will it work? It isn’t right now, but it may. The economy is just like driving a car. When it’s going well and thriving (ie moving fast), you simply take your foot off the gas/deficit spending, hit cruise control and try not to run off the road. When the car is stopped, you step on the gas to get it moving.
Whether or not his tactics will work remains to be seen, but putting the blame for the economy’s condition squarely on his shoulders without seriously examining the disastrous fiscal policies of the Bush administration (essentially increasing spending while decreasing taxes) is like suing the doctor who botched your surgery after you got shot while neglecting to identify your shooter for the police.
As for his emphasis on promoting the use of green technology and so forth, why the fuck not? Who cares if global warming may be a fraud? The production and implementation of green technology (along with biotechnology, which the Bush administration significantly set us behind in due to attempts to limit stemcell research) is the next major industry in this country and could be a very viable source of jobs for this country in the future.
Besides, global warming IS occurring at an accelerated rate that far surpasses any natural processes the Earth has gone through in the past, so the industry as a whole is legit to begin with. Who cares if Al Gore gets rich off of it? Good for him. Maybe Bush and Cheney will get a piece of that pie too. [/quote]
no offense atrw, but that has got to be the worst metaphor for fiscal policy I’ve ever heard. Ceterus parabus, you have complete control of a car, but you can’t control the invisible hand you can only hope to influence it in some way…[/quote]
Actually, the analogy is perfect, albeit simplistic. That’s why it’s taught in virtually any economics class. What the fuck is this “invisible hand” you talk of, and do you really think you ever have complete control of a car?
I don’t like the huge deficit any more than most people on this thread, but it went through the roof in an attempt to fix the results of the previous administration’s disastrous policies. This criticism of Obama’s attempts to fix an economic problem more severe than anything any other President this side of FDR has had to deal with is pointless. We won’t see the results of his “fixes” for several years. The Depression took over ten years to reverse. The current situation may take almost as long. Some fixes aren’t even designed to benefit this generation as much as they are designed to benefit the next generation of Americans.
I’ll gladly live with high unemployment rates, high taxes, high deficits and so on if it means that later on down the road my children and grandchildren can enjoy a better standard of living than this generation does. Now all of this may never happen and this deficit spending may end up being a total nightmare (and I certainly don’t downplay the highly negative impact our debt has on our foreign policies toward China), but let’s wait and see before we start lambasting Obama for being a blamesome crybaby.
After all, were the same people deriding Obama’s criticism of Bush deriding Bush equally hard when he blamed 9/11 on Clinton? I don’t think so. It’s all ridiculous. Shit, people are starting to have the same passion and subjectivity for politics (not a good thing) that football fans have for their teams. A 49ers fan would never say or acknowledge anything good about the Raiders and vice versa, and the political landscape in this country has ended up the same way. It’s a shame.
Can you explain to me how the fix for excessive spending increases during the Bush Administration is a trillion dollars in yet further increased spending on unneeded, non-“shovel-ready” projects?
Or how the fix for the Congressional-oversight Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac encouraging issuance of mortgages to persons unqualifed to pay is to continue demanding credit for the uncreditworthy (by traditional standards)?