Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Still not ready for prime time!
Did you see it? Did you watch President B. Hussein Obama's prime time Fear Factor, er, press conference? You know, for a guy who's supposedly the greatest American political rhetorician since Daniel Webster, he sure "ums" and "ahs" and "ers" and "koo-koos" a lot. (OK, so I made up the part about him koo-kooing.)
Some thoughts ...
Did you catch the part of the press conference when Obama said the Pelosi-Reid stimulus bill was devoid of earmarks? Either he was telling a bald-faced lie, or he hasn't actually read the bill and is thus a clueless boob. I vote for the former.
Let's recall that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years listening to his anti-American/Get Whitey sermons. When Wright's hateful nitwittery was exposed on the Internet and Fox News, Obama expressed shock. "He's not the man I once knew!" he shouted. I stated for the record back then that Obama must have pair the size of basketballs to expect any thinking, discerning individual to believe such crap.
But I digress. The stimulus bill currently on the cusp of making its way to an Obama signing ceremony includes such "stimulating" gems as $300 million for the gov'ment to purchase green golf carts, $2.8 billion goes to global warming advocacy programs, a couple-hundred million to promote programs to fight sexually transmitted diseases ... I could go on and on. Hell, Google "stimulus bill" and "pork" and you'll see dozens and dozens of budget-busting earmarks in a piece of legislation that supposed to be all about creating jobs. No earmarks, indeed!
That said, one particular comment by President Obama almost caused my right eyebrow to cock all the way over onto the back of my head when I heard it. Obama was asked to comment on the revelation that baseball superstar Alex Rodriguez was using steroids back in 2003. Obama said we should use A-Rod as an example to teach our children that taking shortcuts in life is inappropriate.
Now let me get this straight: Obama nominated several individuals to serve in his cabinet who hadn't paid all their taxes. When it came to light that Geitner, Daschle, et al. hadn't paid all their taxes, he stood by 'em 100 percent. But ain't not paying your taxes trying to take a shortcut in life?
As bad as Obama poo-pooing tax-dodging was, his issuing of "waivers" to former lobbyists to serve in high profile positions in his administration was even worse. If you recall, during his first day in office Obama made a big deal 'bout how former lobbyists would have no place in his administration, and folks who left his administration would have to wait years before they could come back to lobby his administration. Obama pissed on all that when he took a shortcut around his strict anti-lobbyist rules to place former lobbyists in important government posts. (Remember what I said about him having a pair the size of basketballs?!)
Finally, I would have given anything to hear one of the reporters at that press conference asked Obama this question:
"Hundreds of economists, including Nobel laureates and other prominent scholars, have signed a statement, which the Cato Institute has placed in major newspapers across the country, criticizing your assertion that government action, i.e., spending, is the only way to jumpstart our economy. The statement they signed said this:
"Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan's "lost decade" in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.
"Sir, do you know something about economics that this impressive list of economists and scholars does not? If you do, would you care to elaborate?"
Here's the Cato Institute ad:
Some thoughts ...
Did you catch the part of the press conference when Obama said the Pelosi-Reid stimulus bill was devoid of earmarks? Either he was telling a bald-faced lie, or he hasn't actually read the bill and is thus a clueless boob. I vote for the former.
Let's recall that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years listening to his anti-American/Get Whitey sermons. When Wright's hateful nitwittery was exposed on the Internet and Fox News, Obama expressed shock. "He's not the man I once knew!" he shouted. I stated for the record back then that Obama must have pair the size of basketballs to expect any thinking, discerning individual to believe such crap.
But I digress. The stimulus bill currently on the cusp of making its way to an Obama signing ceremony includes such "stimulating" gems as $300 million for the gov'ment to purchase green golf carts, $2.8 billion goes to global warming advocacy programs, a couple-hundred million to promote programs to fight sexually transmitted diseases ... I could go on and on. Hell, Google "stimulus bill" and "pork" and you'll see dozens and dozens of budget-busting earmarks in a piece of legislation that supposed to be all about creating jobs. No earmarks, indeed!
That said, one particular comment by President Obama almost caused my right eyebrow to cock all the way over onto the back of my head when I heard it. Obama was asked to comment on the revelation that baseball superstar Alex Rodriguez was using steroids back in 2003. Obama said we should use A-Rod as an example to teach our children that taking shortcuts in life is inappropriate.
Now let me get this straight: Obama nominated several individuals to serve in his cabinet who hadn't paid all their taxes. When it came to light that Geitner, Daschle, et al. hadn't paid all their taxes, he stood by 'em 100 percent. But ain't not paying your taxes trying to take a shortcut in life?
As bad as Obama poo-pooing tax-dodging was, his issuing of "waivers" to former lobbyists to serve in high profile positions in his administration was even worse. If you recall, during his first day in office Obama made a big deal 'bout how former lobbyists would have no place in his administration, and folks who left his administration would have to wait years before they could come back to lobby his administration. Obama pissed on all that when he took a shortcut around his strict anti-lobbyist rules to place former lobbyists in important government posts. (Remember what I said about him having a pair the size of basketballs?!)
Finally, I would have given anything to hear one of the reporters at that press conference asked Obama this question:
"Hundreds of economists, including Nobel laureates and other prominent scholars, have signed a statement, which the Cato Institute has placed in major newspapers across the country, criticizing your assertion that government action, i.e., spending, is the only way to jumpstart our economy. The statement they signed said this:
"Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan's "lost decade" in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.
"Sir, do you know something about economics that this impressive list of economists and scholars does not? If you do, would you care to elaborate?"
Here's the Cato Institute ad:
# posted by Joltin' Django @ Tuesday, February 10, 2009 
