President Obama Gets Ripped For Oval Office Speech

[Gaspar]

Oh come on, it's been a year and a half- hardly enough time to make any major changes, especially considering the mess he was handed.

I will admit that at some point however, this administration has to start owning up and taking charge. It would be interesting to see what could happen with another term. It is looking less and less likely that he will have that opportunity.

As many analysts on both sides are now saying, without George Bush to point at and lavish blame on, President Obama is an empty vessel. The term "mess we inherited" has very little to do with current economic, foreign, and domestic crisis now.  Blame was always his ace.  Now he's left with a very poor hand. 

He is snake-bit and ill equipped to manage the poison.  Now we will see the most important people in his administration flee the ship before their political aspirations are dashed or they become the focus of the impending and inevitable scapgoatery.

This is a president who's very philosophy requires a focus of blame.

[Red Arrow]

It's not my fault.

[rwarn17588]

As many analysts on both sides are now saying, without George Bush to point at and lavish blame on, President Obama is an empty vessel. The term "mess we inherited" has very little to do with current economic, foreign, and domestic crisis now.  Blame was always his ace.  Now he's left with a very poor hand. 

He is snake-bit and ill equipped to manage the poison.  Now we will see the most important people in his administration flee the ship before their political aspirations are dashed or they become the focus of the impending and inevitable scapgoatery.

This is a president who's very philosophy requires a focus of blame.

Puh-lease.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you be saying these same things?

I recall Ronald Reagan repeatedly blaming Jimmy Carter and Democrats (rightfully so) for many of the problems he inherited until the economy turned around in 1983. Would you have ripped Reagan for criticizing his predecessor?

[Hoss]

Puh-lease.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you be saying these same things?

I recall Ronald Reagan repeatedly blaming Jimmy Carter and Democrats (rightfully so) for many of the problems he inherited until the economy turned around in 1983. Would you have ripped Reagan for criticizing his predecessor?

That's like asking if the Pope is an Atheist...

[Conan71]

Puh-lease.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you be saying these same things?

I recall Ronald Reagan repeatedly blaming Jimmy Carter and Democrats (rightfully so) for many of the problems he inherited until the economy turned around in 1983. Would you have ripped Reagan for criticizing his predecessor?

Better yet, instead of playing a little game of: "Would you be saying..." what can you point to which has shown leadership success on his part? If you remember correctly, Congress felt he was doing a crappy job at leading on HC reform. He's slowly
renegging on Afghanistan & Iraq, people are getting more and more upset with him over Israel, and the only job creation seems to be temporary census jobs with dubious figures like the jobs saved/created scam which suddenly became hard to enumerate then that count suddenly vanished.

I have no problem conceding he came into an unenviable economic environment but it was clear he was more interested in getting his legacy issues implimented instead of working on what Americans really needed which was jobs and some real hope. Unfortunately hope was just a catchy campaign slogan to someone who has been unemployed for 18 months.

I'm still waiting to see this magnificent leadership we were promised. It's been a disappointing wait. Please  

[Conan71]

Stupid iPhone.

Anyhow please point out some specific examples of great leadership on President Obama's part instead of telling how Reagan, Bush, or Clinton supposedly did it.

[nathanm]

Stupid iPhone.

Anyhow please point out some specific examples of great leadership on President Obama's part instead of telling how Reagan, Bush, or Clinton supposedly did it.

Convincing BP to allow $20 billion worth of their compensation to be put into escrow and administered by a third party was pretty bold.

Regarding your earlier jab about stimulus job numbers suddenly going away, you might want to double check that. There is a nice website run by the government that clearly states the number of jobs saved/created by the stimulus, in addition to detailing what projects are getting stimulus funding and how many jobs were associated with a particular grant of funds. The administration has been very transparent with this.

In Q1 2010, they calculate 682,370 jobs as a result of ARRA.

The numbers are updated quarterly, and the reporting period for Q1 closed a week or two ago. I believe the Q2 numbers will be released around September.

[rwarn17588]

Stupid iPhone.

Anyhow please point out some specific examples of great leadership on President Obama's part instead of telling how Reagan, Bush, or Clinton supposedly did it.

I'd say helping shepherd health-care reform to passage after it looked like it was DOA is a substantial accomplishment. He obviously didn't do all the heavy lifting, but such big legislation is never a one-man job.

And I think getting BP to pony up $20 billion isn't chump, either. BP could've blown the whole thing off.

And letting Timothy Geithner do his job and greatly stabilizing the financial markets (instead of Obama caving in to shrill and non-prescient criticism) was vastly underrated. The Atlantic magazine had a good recounting of this a few months ago. The banking system woes could have gotten a LOT uglier.

[RecycleMichael]

http://www.aba-ws.org/PresidentObama.pdf

[Gaspar]

Puh-lease.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you be saying these same things?

I recall Ronald Reagan repeatedly blaming Jimmy Carter and Democrats (rightfully so) for many of the problems he inherited until the economy turned around in 1983. Would you have ripped Reagan for criticizing his predecessor?

That's a great example.  During the campaign Reagan ripped Carter on policy, and rightfully so.  Once in office he made very little mention of it.  He just fixed it.  He used simple proven economic principals.  He allowed businesses to claim the rewards of capitalism, rather than punishing innovation and commerce.

In an interview after a year or two in office Reagan was asked about the unemployment rate and he did offer Carter's policies as the basis, but the numbers were already starting to turn and the economy was in a recovery cycle, so he really didn't need to keep Carter in the corner. 

Regan too increased the deficit, but he did it through lowering the tax burden on Americans rather than on expansionism.  These are two very different philosophies.  Lowering the tax burden creates an immediate effect on the deficit, but over time it produces a return in productivity.  Expansionism has a slow long term effect on the deficit and shows no return either immediate or long term.  Expansionism is a social measure used to increase control by increasing dependence on government. 

Don't get me wrong, both parties have been responsible for expansionist principals.  We have simply gotten to the point where the freedom for expansionist principals have reached critical mass.  1/3 of the way into his term, President Obama and the Pelosi Congress have successfully overloaded the system.  In doing so, they have not only taught the American People a valuable lesson, but they have caused severe damage to the liberal and progressive agenda.  It will take several terms for people to forget.

Additionally, opportunities now exist for the fracture of existing political parties and the emergence of realistic, and less corrupt philosophies. Obama's one legacy from this term, may be opening the door for the birth of Reason in American politics. 

[nathanm]

Regan too increased the deficit, but he did it through lowering the tax burden on Americans rather than on expansionism.  

I guess it only counts as expansionism when you spend vast sums on shoring up the economy, not when you're effecting one of the largest expansions of the military budget in US history. Sorry, Reagan and Bush the Younger both cut taxes and drastically expanded the budget. Nice try on the revisionism there, though!

Hard data:

       Revenues   Outlays
1979   463.3      504.0
1980   517.1      590.9
1981   599.3      678.2
1982   617.8      745.7
1983   600.6      808.4
1984   666.4      851.8
1985   734.0      946.3
1986   769.2      990.4
1987   854.3      1,004.0
1988   909.2      1,064.4
1989   991.1      1,143.7

Edited to add: Also, please provide support for your contention that the system has been "overloaded." The government's cost of borrowing is still exceptionally low. As I've mentioned before, these kinds of deficits can't run on for more than another year or two before it might become an issue, but they won't run on like that, given that ARRA spending only goes on for another year or two (and at reduced levels compared to this year and last) and the budgetary effects of TARP should be winding down pretty soon also.

I'm trying to understand where this doomsday scenario of being totally tapped out comes from. There's simply no evidence for it.

[rwarn17588]

Don't get me wrong, both parties have been responsible for expansionist principals.  We have simply gotten to the point where the freedom for expansionist principals have reached critical mass.  1/3 of the way into his term, President Obama and the Pelosi Congress have successfully overloaded the system.  In doing so, they have not only taught the American People a valuable lesson, but they have caused severe damage to the liberal and progressive agenda.  It will take several terms for people to forget.

You didn't answer the question.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you have been critical of a Republican president bringing these things up?

[Gaspar]

You didn't answer the question.

If a Democratic president had left such a huge mess after he left office for a Republican successor, would you have been critical of a Republican president bringing these things up?

Of course!  I'm not a member of either party.  It has nothing to do with political party.  Each time a leader responds with blame, it represents an excuse rather than a solution.

Excuses are a way to skirt an issue rather than dealing with it.  I find it akin to saying "that's not my job." 

By claiming that something is not your fault, you give up control over the situation.   Furthermore it gives some unscrupulous politicians a platform to take liberties in decision making that adds fuel to the fire (never let a crisis go to waste).

[rwarn17588]

Of course!  I'm not a member of either party.  It has nothing to do with political party. 

Your answer does not persuade, given your history on this forum.

[Conan71]

Excuses are the currency of those without sound reasons.

I'm not giving President Obama enough credit here. I just read in USA Today that he's made the laudable goal of landing humans on an asteroid up to 5mm miles away by 2025 after shitcanning Bush 43's $9 bln moon boondoggle.

Now that's sound leadership we can believe in.