Posted on 09/12/2011 4:40:52 AM PDT by Kaslin
What is there to say about Barack Obama's speech to Congress Thursday night and the so-called American Jobs Act he said Congress must pass? Several thoughts occur, all starting with P.
Projection. That's psychologist-speak term for projecting your own faults on others. "This isn't political grandstanding," Obama told members of Congress, as Republicans snickered (but thankfully resisted the temptation to shout, "You lie!"). "This isn't class warfare."
These sentences came four paragraphs after Obama insisted that "the most affluent citizens and corporations" should pay more taxes (which spurs job creation how?) and not long before he promised to "take that message to every corner of the country."
Lest there be an doubt about Obama's real intentions, consider that his speech was obviously modeled on Harry Truman's call for a special session of the Republican Congress in the summer of 1948 so he could campaign against it. And consider that Obama pointedly refused to rebuke Jim Hoffa's "let's take these sons of bitches out" -- meaning Republicans -- when he introduced him last Monday in Detroit.
Pragmatism. Perceptive writers like David Brooks of The New York Times told us in 2008 that Obama was basically a pragmatist, a slave to no ideology but simply a student of what works. Brooks was apparently impressed by Obama's mention of Edmund Burke and the sharp crease in his pants.
But a pragmatist would probably not choose to call for more of the policies that plainly haven't worked. Infrastructure spending (shovel ready, anyone?), subsidies of teachers' salaries, fixing roofs and windows on schools -- these were all in the 2009 stimulus package, which has led to the stagnant economy we have today.
A pragmatist doesn't keep pressing the same garage door button when the garage door doesn't open. He gets out of the car and tries to identify what's wrong.
Paid for. "Everything in this bill," Obama said in his eighth paragraph, "will be paid for. Everything."
By whom? Well, in the 24th paragraph he tells us that he is asking the 12-member super-committee Congress set up under the debt ceiling bill to add another $450,000,000,000 or so to the $1,500,000,000,000 in savings it is charged to come up with. The roving camera showed the ordinarily hardy super-committee member Sen. Jon Kyl looking queasy.
Obama is like the guy in the bar who says, "I'll stand drinks for everyone in the house," and then adds, "Those guys over there are going to pay for them."
What's fascinating here is that once again the supposedly pragmatic and sometimes professorial president is not making use of the first class professionals in the Office of Management and Budget to come up with specifics, but is leaving that to members of Congress, maybe in a midnight marathon session with deadlines pending. Same as on the stimulus package and Obamacare.
Pathetic promises. Perhaps he hoped people wouldn't notice, but Obama did put in two words -- "faster trains" -- as a plug for his pet project of high-speed rail. Liberal blogger Kevin Drum calls California's HSR project, the largest in the nation, "a fantastic boondoggle," likely to cost three or four times estimates and with ridership estimates that are "fantasies." "We have way better uses for this dough," Drum concludes.
Political payoffs. Nearly one-quarter of this latest stimulus package -- sorry, American Jobs Act -- is aid to state and local government, to keep teachers and other public employee union members on the job and paying dues to the unions. Altogether unions gave Democrats some $400 million in the 2008 election cycle. Pretty good return on their "investment," eh?
Pettifoggery. Obama impressed many conservative writers in 2008 with his ability to state their positions in fair terms -- which led some to think that surely he must agree with them. But he seems to have lost this knack.
Conservatives, according to this speech, want to "wipe out the basic protections that Americans have counted on for decades" and "simply cut most government spending and eliminate most government regulations."
"Most" means more than 50 percent. Does the White House have documentation for the claim that Republicans want to cut government spending by more than 50 percent? And what "basic protections" do they want to "wipe out"?
Barack Obama seemed like an unhappy warrior Thursday night, still unreconciled to the results of the 2010 elections, "seeming desperate and condescending at the same time," in the words of maverick liberal blogger Mickey Kaus. That darn garage door just won't open!
WHY would FEDERAL DOLLARS be paying for LOCAL Teachers, Firemen, and Police?????? This makes NO SENSE!!
If a community can't afford these people, then they should let them go!
The PENSIONS of these retirees that these people get are the reson that they can't keep the working ones!
The theory is that the government takes the extra money and uses it to create programs that provide or help people find jobs.
Of course, the government is wildly inefficient at this process, and "the most affluent" promptly take tax avoidance steps, which quickly does away with most the extra money anyway.
Bump
Porkulus ($1T) and Son of Porkulus ($Half-T)
The entire point is to gradually create a system in which no one can survive by “playing by the rules”. Once everyone can be charged with some kind of crime no one will dare speak out. Tyrants don’t want to hear it. Once the peasants are “docile” the tyrant is much more secure. Randomly slamming folks here and there keeps folks quiet. The tyrant and his thugs don’t need to waste effort “investigating” because they can rest assured that charges can be brought against anyone.
Reminds me of the Alcoholics Guide to Obamanomics:
Guy buys a bottle of Whiskey to get drunk.
Obama takes bottle and empties it into a bathtub
TurboTax Timmy turns on the tap and puts a couple of gallons
of water in the tub. He calls this Quantative Easing.
Obama then fills the bottle up from the tub and gives it back to the guy. He tells the guy that he still has his bottle of whiskey, so he can still get drunk.
Then Obama looks in the tub and marvels at all the extra whiskey he has to spread around, so others can get drunk as well.
Guy goes home and drinks his bottle, but doesn’t get drunk. He comes to the realization that he now needs to buy TWO bottles of whiskey to get drunk.
Then, Obama announces QE2!
Mr. Barone,
You left out "Pretend." As in, "Let's pretend there is a bill called the 'American Jobs Act.' You (Congress) must pass thiss bill now."
When Obama spoke to the joint session, and admonished them some 17 times to "Pass this bill," there was no actual bill yet.
Obama has moved beyond Pelosi. Pelosi said, "We have to pass the bill so you can see what's in it." That was highly unpopular, and probably was one of the biggest reasons she's no longer speaker. Obama went to Congress on September 8, 2011 and basically said, "You must pass this bill so we can write it."
What I don't understand is why didn't Boehner call his bluff on this? Why didn't Boehner ask Obama for the actual bill so that Congress can start working on it.
“WHY would FEDERAL DOLLARS be paying for LOCAL Teachers, Firemen, and Police?????? This makes NO SENSE!!”
It makes complete sense coming from a Leftist point of view of Federalism at its finest. It’s called the process of nationalization. You’d have a national teaching force, a national firemen’s force, and a national police force. The District of Criminals wants to take over and control EVERYTHING.
His net worth is only pathetic promises.
Barack Obama seemed like an unhappy warrior Thursday night, still unreconciled to the results of the 2010 elections, “seeming desperate and condescending at the same time,” in the words of maverick liberal blogger Mickey Kaus. That darn garage door just won’t open!
2010 was just the opening act...the main event takes place in November 2012.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.