Green Room

Democrats: You’re Stupid, So We’re Going to Blame Bush

posted at 10:05 am on July 29, 2009 by

With President Barack Obama’s poll numbers falling to earth, he’s decided to embark on a bold new initiative – blaming former President Bush for the country’s woes.

Didn’t see that coming. Democratic strategists are supporting the president in the only way they know how – engaging in mind-numbing spin:

“I’m not convinced that Obama and his supporters are bashing Bush as much as they are quite rightfully reminding people that our current economic mess and the wars were inherited from the Bush administration,” said Democratic strategist Bud Jackson. “It’s important to remind people of this because Republicans are now criticizing the Obama administration as if they had no role in how we got here.”

Democratic Party strategist Liz Chadderdon said the strategy of blaming the previous team has been effective.

“I think Bush-bashing has been alive and well since ’07 and, since it keeps working, why not use it?” she said. “Voters have short memories. The administration needs to remind people that things were way worse over the last four years than in the last six months.”

Read that bold section again. You’ve got to wonder how much cranial fecal impaction it takes for someone to believe that statement. First off, she implies that all of you are idiots who can’t remember what life was like three or four years ago. Second, her implication that the current economic conditions are worse than what we ‘suffered’ under George W. Hooverbush.

Let’s look at the facts, shall we?

The unemployment rate went from 5.2% in January 2005 to 7.2% in December 2008. Overall, the average in that time was 5.03% President Obama signed the stimulus package in February of 2009 when the unemployment rate was still at 7.6% He promised the spending would keep the rate from going above 8%. It is now 9.5%, with no signs that it will improve in the near future. The state numbers are even worse.

2.6 million people lost their jobs in 2008. 2 million more have lost jobs since Jan 09.

Obama has repeatedly blamed the high deficits on the Bush administration, but his policies will only increase the nation’s debt.

Average GDP
from Jan 05 to Dec 08 was 1.68% In the first quarter of Jan 09, it’s -5.5. There has been some moderate growth from the last quarter of Dec 08, but still far below the level warranting the level of hyperbole used by Ms. Chadderdon.

The Obama administration says we have to ‘spend money to keep from going bankrupt.’ They’re basing their faith in spending on the Keynsian multiplier effect, but even Keynes himself warned against combining recovery with economic reform:

…even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action, before you have had time to put other motives in their place…

Full text of Keynes letter here. Obama’s two signature proposals are cap-and-trade and healthcare reform. Neither will help the economy, and in fact, they may actually hurt it.

Had Ms. Chadderdon been less enamored with Bush-bashing and capable of more restraint in her speech, she could have said the first six months of the Obama administration have been better than the last six months of the Bush. Even that would have been something of a stretch, but it would have made her spin a bit more believable.

I say a bit because none of the spinners take into account what Obama’s policies will necessitate: higher taxes on the middle class. Candidate Obama may have promised that your taxes wouldn’t go up, but remember that every Obama promise comes with an expiration date.

Cross-posted at Ace of Spades HQ

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Let’s not forget that Congress has been in control of the Democrats since 2006, including our current President. Congress holds the purse strings and adds on all the pork into whatever bills have a blank page.

Any economic woes should be measured from the beginning of 2007 when they took office. I never quite understood the notion of tying the economy only to the President and not to the people that actually screw things to #3!!.

Tyrs Fury on July 29, 2009 at 10:22 AM

“Voters have short memories. The administration needs to remind people that things were way worse over the last four years than in the last six months.”

2.6 million people who have lost jobs since January might not agree with this!

rockmom on July 29, 2009 at 10:27 AM

Simple question.

“Was your life better in 2006 than it is now?”

To put it in perspective for Joe Sixpack, perhaps “Remember when the Steelers beat the Seahawks in Superbowl XL? Are you better or worse off now?”

Mew

acat on July 29, 2009 at 10:47 AM

Unfortunately, IMHO the Democratic strategists quoted are right. They use the “blame Bush” strategy not because it’s correct (it isn’t) but because it works. The voters really do have short memories — at least, enough of them to give a comfortable majority for the leftwingers. Remember how many of them didn’t even know the Democrats controlled Congress since January 2007? If they don’t even know that, how would they even begin to understand the Democrats’ treachery in not even passing a budget last year because they wanted to wait until their man was in the president’s office? And do we seriously believe the media will point out the factual errors in the “blame Bush” excuses?

jwolf on July 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM

In 2008, I had a JOB, since Obama’s election, I was laid off. So I am definitely worse off than I was a year ago and up to three years ago.

originalpechanga on July 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM

Obama during campaign:

The election isn’t about the last 8 years. It’s about whether or not you’ll be better off in the next 4 years.

lorien1973 on July 29, 2009 at 10:59 AM

Look at the out-year costs for the health proposals (most of which don’t start immediately anyway); look at the out-year costs of cap-and-trade (after the allowances are phased out). The “Après moi, le déluge” attitude is completely baked into those Obama Administration proposals. Obama KNOWS costs will explode after his term expires — he’s got CBO telling him so. Sticking whomever is elected in 2016 with this disaster is pretty much the plan.

He’s given up any right to lecture Dubya about anything.

DrSteve on July 29, 2009 at 11:00 AM

I never quite understood the notion of tying the economy only to the President and not to the people that actually screw things to #3!!.

Tyrs Fury on July 29, 2009 at 10:22 AM

It’s all about the message.
Republican in white house:
Good economy = democrats did their job and blocked bad republicans or got them to cave on bills.
Bad economy = President sucks and Republicans are morons that couldn’t add 2+2.

Democrat in white house:
Good economy = President is a genius and worked hand in hand with congress to get the right things done despite the hostile Republicans.

Bad economy = Last Republican President sucks and Republicans are a road block to getting anything done and are morons that couldn’t add 2+2.

jmarcure on July 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM

In 2008, I had a JOB, since Obama’s election, I was laid off. So I am definitely worse off than I was a year ago and up to three years ago.

originalpechanga on July 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM

Welcome to the club.

jmarcure on July 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM

Whomever s/b whoever. Sorry, Mr. Lavecchia, wherever you are!

DrSteve on July 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM

Gee, how surprising….sanctimonious drivel from the left. Who woulda thought?

scalleywag on July 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM

Unfortunately, IMHO the Democratic strategists quoted are right. They use the “blame Bush” strategy not because it’s correct (it isn’t) but because it works. The voters really do have short memories — at least, enough of them to give a comfortable majority for the leftwingers. Remember how many of them didn’t even know the Democrats controlled Congress since January 2007? If they don’t even know that, how would they even begin to understand the Democrats’ treachery in not even passing a budget last year because they wanted to wait until their man was in the president’s office? And do we seriously believe the media will point out the factual errors in the “blame Bush” excuses?

jwolf on July 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM

But the counter to that is, for better or worse, America is an immediate gratification society. We want it now, not later, and that attitude is only going to increase the closer we get to winter (and the Christmas shopping season). While the big media will be perfectly fine in going along with the “Blame Bush” spin, the public has been trained over the years not to have patience when something doesn’t happen right away, which is what this stategerie is attemping to provide for Obama.

In the wake of 9/11, Bush went on TV and said the War of Terror could last a decade or more, but Democrats were able to use the public’s same desire for immediate results to turn many against the idea of any war at all. Now they’re trying to get the public to change their habits, and give Obama and crew 2-3 years to turn things around. It’s not going to work outside of the hardcore Barak supporters, and when it doesn’t, expect the next action to be what’s starting to show up in the health care debate — liberals lashing out at the public for being stupid, because they won’t go along with Obama’s plans.

jon1979 on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

It’s not going to fly. As the months roll on the American people always blame the current administration. They want to hear solutions, you were elected for finger pointing.

Oil Can on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

I still have a job but no 2% raise this year, not the next, and it’s up in the air after that. But hey, that didn’t stop the president from taking his 16% annual increase!

scalleywag on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

how much cranial fecal impaction

That’s darn funny.

Weight of Glory on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

There has been some moderate growth from the last quarter of Dec 08

for real? I don’t think I understand exactly.

happyfeet on July 29, 2009 at 11:10 AM

The gig is up, Barack.

stenwin77 on July 29, 2009 at 11:14 AM

“Voters have short memories. The administration needs to remind people that things were way worse over the last four years than in the last six months.”

WTF????

drjohn on July 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM

for real? I don’t think I understand exactly.
happyfeet on July 29, 2009 at 11:10 AM

Well, ‘growth’ as in an arrest of the freefall. If GDP continues to go negative in the second quarter, that will be a further indictment of Obama’s policies.

Slublog on July 29, 2009 at 11:20 AM

Bush did it. La la la la la. I can’t hear you. La la la la la.

LibTired on July 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM

Speaking of that Keynesian multiplier effect, here’s a tool that anyone can use to work out for themselves how effective government stimulus spending might be.

The only trick is that you need to work out what reasonable and realistic assumptions might apply.

ironman on July 29, 2009 at 11:30 AM

The buck stops on Bush’s desk.

obladioblada on July 29, 2009 at 11:31 AM

Blame Bush can work only for so long. At some point Barry has to face up the voters and be held accountable for his totally ineffectiveness and bungling of the economy.

bayview on July 29, 2009 at 11:50 AM

First off, she implies that all of you are idiots who can’t remember what life was like three or four years ago.

Nothing new there. The entire Democrat philosophy is predicated on the notion that the average individual is an idiot. Therefore, they can’t and shouldn’t run their own lives without the intervention of the anointed.

They may have a point since so many idiots voted for Obama thinking he was something other than what a mountain of evidence said he was.

RadClown on July 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Let them eat cupcakes!

eforhan on July 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Blame Bush! In the past few days we’ve learned that 8,000 people at Verizon are to be laid off, Bank of America is closing 10% of it’s branches, and 450 jobs lost in Ohio (and the future health of a company threatened), directly attributable to Barack Obama and his idiot Energy Secretary, Stephen Chu.

Instead of “investing” in this clean energy company, we’re squandering $6 billion on AmericCorps, paying “volunteers” to weatherize windows. And that is not even part of the fraudulent “Stimulus” package but was separate legislation.

Buy Danish on July 29, 2009 at 12:34 PM

It’s not going to fly. As the months roll on the American people always blame the current administration. They want to hear solutions, you were elected for finger pointing.

Oil Can on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

I totally agree. Time’s awasting for the blame game. His numbers will sink farther down with that tactic. Especially since his solutions are “non-solutions”.

NJ Red on July 29, 2009 at 2:07 PM

But the counter to that is, for better or worse, America is an immediate gratification society. We want it now, not later, and that attitude is only going to increase the closer we get to winter (and the Christmas shopping season). While the big media will be perfectly fine in going along with the “Blame Bush” spin, the public has been trained over the years not to have patience when something doesn’t happen right away, which is what this stategerie is attemping to provide for Obama.

..the fecal matter will really hit the fan if the economy is still hemorrhaging jobs at Christmas like it has been since the The Boy King got elected. If little Timmy doesn’t get his “Tickle-me-Elmo” this year, you will see mobs with pitchforks and torches on Boxing Day.

VoyskaPVO on July 29, 2009 at 2:17 PM

It’s not going to fly. As the months roll on the American people always blame the current administration. They want to hear solutions, you were elected for finger pointing.

Oil Can on July 29, 2009 at 11:09 AM

I totally agree. Time’s awasting for the blame game. His numbers will sink farther down with that tactic. Especially since his solutions are “non-solutions”.

NJ Red on July 29, 2009 at 2:07 PM

In order to provide a solution, one must clearly identify the problem. Casting blame provides no description of a problem. Casting blame misstates the obvious. Personally, I’m charmed by his present course heading…

ericdijon on July 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM

Let them eat cupcakes!

eforhan on July 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Let them eat waffles.

MarkTheGreat on July 29, 2009 at 2:52 PM

What should be kept in mind is that natural unemployment is somewhere between 4% and 5%. Which means Obammy getting us up to 10% is far more craptastic than it may first appear…

ParisParamus on July 29, 2009 at 8:25 PM

This post has been promoted to HotAir.com.

Comments have been closed on this post but the discussion continues here.

Ed Morrissey on July 30, 2009 at 9:15 AM