Hopelessness And Stasis

posted at 1:58 am on September 21, 2010 by

President Obama kicked off his town hall meeting in Washington D.C. on Monday with the usual dreary whining that has made him such a bore to listen to.  “I think we have to go back to what was happening when I was first sworn in… something that took 10 years to create is going to take a little more time to solve.”  He sounds like a creepy little kid, taking great pains to make sure everyone is absolutely clear on his alibi before we start talking about the trillion dollars missing out of our cookie jar.

Once the ritual denunciations of his predecessor were out of the way, the President made a few revealing comments.  Responding to a question about the perception of business leaders that his policies are hostile toward them, Obama field tested a new meme about how the recession has really been over for a year:

Well, first of all, even though economists may say that the recession officially ended last year, obviously for the millions of people who are still out of work, people who have seen their home values decline, people who are struggling to pay the bills day to day, it’s still very real for them.

And I think we have to go back to what was happening when I was first sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. We went through the worst recession since the Great Depression. Nothing has come close. In fact, if you look at the consequences of the recession in the ‘80s, the recession in the ‘90s, and the recession in 2001, and you combine all three of those, it still wasn’t as bad as this recession that we went through.

Translation: Experts say we’re all being irrational.  The recession’s been over for a year!  We should stop being such ingrates to the dazzling heroes who saved us from the Bush Great Depression, and get back to our assigned duties of creating jobs and pumping out tax revenue.  By next week, this meme will go swirling down the memory hole, since it will dawn on Obama that he’s insisting the recession ended before he and his Congressional accomplices swindled us out of that trillion-dollar “stimulus.”

After the moderator served him up a softball about “fearful voters” mistrusting him due to racism and blind envy of his Ivy League education, Obama dropped this boilerplate onto the stage with a deafening thud:

The whole reason I ran was because my life is a testimony to the American Dream. And everything that we’ve been doing since I came into office is designed to make sure that that American Dream continues for future generations.

I think the challenge right now is that I’m thinking about the next generation and there are a lot of folks out there who are thinking about the next election. If I were making decisions based on November, then I wouldn’t have done some of the things that I did because I knew they weren’t popular. But they were the right thing to do. And that’s got to be my top priority.

“Future generations?”  You mean the kids who will be born into bankruptcy because of your irresponsible spending, Mr. President?  The truth is that Obama’s policies are entirely based on the concept of robbing future generations blind, to pay off current constituencies and expand government power.  There are intravenous tubes reaching into the future to suck blood from the next generation for the nourishment of ObamaCare.  Cap-and-trade energy policies will transform the mobility we take for granted into bedtime stories, which the children of 2020 will be told by candle light.  No President has cared less about the freedom and prosperity of future generations than Barack Obama.

The President stammered uncomfortably during exchanges about tax cuts, repeating the tired leftist cant about how we “can’t afford” to give tax cuts to “millionaires.”  By “millionaires” he means people who make over $250k per year, although they should be thankful to the government for trying to find them a little tax relief on that first two-fifty.  His attempt to defend sky-high taxes on top income earners reveals a staggering level of economic ignorance:

Now, what we’ve said is that we should extend tax cuts, tax relief, for middle-class Americans — like most of the audience here — because, first of all, you’re the ones who didn’t see your wages or income rise. Second of all, you’re the folks who are most likely to spend it on a new computer for your kids, or in some other fashion that would boost demand in the economy.

[…] What the Republicans are proposing is that we, in addition to that, provide tax relief to primarily millionaires and billionaires. It would cost us $700 billion to do it. On average, millionaires would get a check of $100,000.

And by the way, I would be helped by this, so I just want to be clear. I’m speaking against my own financial interests. This is a — it is a irresponsible thing for us to do. Those folks are the least likely to spend it and –

Let that sink in for a moment.  He thinks the vital medicine for healing this economy would come from low-end retail purchases.  The wealthy are “the least likely to spend money?”  Those bloated fat cats just sit in bathtubs full of treasure all day, scrubbing themselves with gold and gems.  The middle class can generate all necessary investment capital by saving its lunch money, and solve our unemployment woes by hiring each other… but they’d better make sure they don’t earn over $250k per year by doing so, or they’ll turn into revenue targets!

Obama’s most revealing moment came when he discussed the Tea Party movement:

The problem long term are the problems that I talked about earlier. We’ve got — we had two tax cuts that weren’t paid for, two wars that weren’t paid for. We’ve got a population that’s getting older. We’re all demanding services, but our taxes have actually substantially gone down.

And so the challenge, I think, for the Tea Party movement is to identify specifically what would you do. It’s not enough just to say, get control of spending. I think it’s important for you to say, I’m willing to cut veterans’ benefits, or I’m willing to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits, or I’m willing to see these taxes go up.

What you can’t do — which is what I’ve been hearing a lot from the other side — is say we’re going to control government spending, we’re going to propose $4 trillion of additional tax cuts, and that magically somehow things are going to work.

Mr. President, let me make this very clear for you: our freedom is not contingent on telling you exactly what we plan to do with it. Trillion-dollar spending plans are not the only acceptable alternatives to trillion-dollar spending plans.  Our Constitutional freedoms are not a primitive superstition you can dismiss with sneering insults.

Controlling government spending will be difficult indeed.  Step one is wiping out the Democrat Party, and replacing Barack Obama with a responsible chief executive.  The President and his Party have made it very clear that this will be a necessary precondition of meaningful reform.  The American spirit of individualism and limited government are wholly incompatible with their vision of the future… and since they haven’t been shy about imposing their vision through force, we would be foolish to leave them in a position of power.

Step two is dismantling the mechanisms of permanent State growth, like public employee unions, and unsustainable programs like ObamaCare.  After those steps are completed, the free people of the United States will set about solving their own problems, in a process of willing co-operation for mutual benefit that seems as “magical” to a socialist as space travel appears to a tribal shaman.

Isn’t it fascinating to hear the guy who ran as the avatar of Hope and Change attempt to shield himself from the rising tide of the Tea Party… by insisting the critical problems of his dying super-State are utterly hopeless, and our only course of action is stasis? Our only choices are supposed to be cutting veteran’s benefits, cutting Social Security and Medicare, or raising taxes?  What a pathetic lack of vision.

Cross-posted at www.doczero.org.

Doctor Zero: Year One now available from Amazon.com!

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

Remember this? Teh Won saved us a whole $100 million back in 2009. That has been about it for cutting spending. So much for going through the budget (what budget, you ask) line by line to eliminate waste.

If the recession has been over for over a year, why has it been necessary to extend UIB and bailout the states and teachers once again? Someone is lying big time, and it is easy to figure out who.

GnuBreed on September 21, 2010 at 7:37 AM

Mr. President, let me make this very clear for you: our freedom is not contingent on telling you exactly what we plan to do with it.

A++++

beachgirlusa on September 21, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Dear President BarryO,

My freedom and rights are not a grab bag for ANY government, group, or person to “have at”. I don’t give them away, sell them or rent them out. If you never learn another lesson in this life but one, learn that there are millions of people just like me that are completely capable of managing their own lives without direction or interference.

Go away.

Sincerely,

Robert

Robert17 on September 21, 2010 at 11:13 AM

What a whiny little s$#%!.

Just think how this would be taken if he acted this way as a CEO of a private company. He would have been thrown out after MONTHS.

Snarky, Snippy, Sarcastic, name-calling twit.

Not a Presidential bone in his skinny, chain-smoking frame.

“No President has cared less about the freedom and prosperity of future generations than Barack Obama.”

WELL SAID

Opposite Day on September 21, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Step 3 – get rid of the National Education Association, which has accomplished squat in terms of real educational improvement.

disa on September 21, 2010 at 4:33 PM

As usual, so sound and so beautifully said, Dr.

And I think we have to go back to what was happening when I was first sworn in as the 44th President of the United States.

Why this buffoon keeps repeating that he’s the president is really irritating. All in the world know this already.

What a twit!

Schadenfreude on September 21, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Those bloated fat cats just sit in bathtubs full of treasure all day, scrubbing themselves with gold and gems.

Don’t forget lighting their cigars with $5 bills.

Kafir on September 21, 2010 at 5:08 PM

“Future generations?” You mean the kids who will be born into bankruptcy because of your irresponsible spending, Mr. President?

No, he meant the future generations of Democrat voters bought by Obamacare.

So, yes, he’s correct. Democrats might lose one election cycle, but in the long-term the country is tilting to the left.

Niko on September 21, 2010 at 5:10 PM

Step two is dismantling the mechanisms of permanent State growth, like public employee unions, and unsustainable programs like ObamaCare.

Getting rid of wasteful and redundant agencies like the Department of Education. We should also sell the FDA to Underwriters Laboratories or privatize it into a similar organization.

Kafir on September 21, 2010 at 5:11 PM

Remember, Obama viciously criticized Bush for saying “stay the course” in Iraq.

fossten on September 21, 2010 at 5:12 PM

Obama Revamps Campaign Slogan Amidst Sagging Hopes

Mervis Winter on September 21, 2010 at 5:13 PM

IN ENGLISH
Obama
IS SPELLED
LOSER.

Lockstein13 on September 21, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Isn’t it fascinating to hear the guy who ran as the avatar of Hope and Change attempt to shield himself from the rising tide of the Tea Party… by insisting the critical problems of his dying super-State are utterly hopeless, and our only course of action is stasis? Our only choices are supposed to be cutting veteran’s benefits, cutting Social Security and Medicare, or raising taxes? What a pathetic lack of vision.

It’s also basically the plank jimmy Carter ran for re-election on in 1980: The nation and the world’s problems are systemic and intractable, and you can only hope to manage them because they’re impossible to solve, so why even think about putting the other guys in power? (those outside the campaign would also add the excuse that the presidency is just too big a job for one person to handle anymore — I thinbk I’ve heard that uttered once so far this year by one of the big media pundits, but you can expect to hear it trotted out even more the closer we get to the 2012 election).

jon1979 on September 21, 2010 at 5:26 PM

we had two tax cuts that weren’t paid for, two wars that weren’t paid for.

So tell me Mr. President, why do you keep spending more and more and never paying for it?

fourdeucer on September 21, 2010 at 5:28 PM

You can tell when Barry is lying, his lips are moving.

GarandFan on September 21, 2010 at 5:35 PM

Say I invented the better mousetrap and suddenly found myself a multi-millionaire. There are about four different things I can do with that money.

1. Give it to “my favorite charity” and help the “less fortunate.”

2. Put it in the bank, thereby providing investment captital for small business.

3. Spend it on a fancy sportscar and a big house, thereby creating jobs for auto workers, tire makers, gas station attendents, and carpenters.

4. Pile it in a room and roll around in it like Donald’s Uncle Scrooge, thereby lowering the demand, which will lower the price, on goods and service.

That LongLegged MackDaddy hasn’t got a clue.

davidk on September 21, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Fail to the Chief.

ronsfi on September 21, 2010 at 5:56 PM

IIRC there was a Spike Jones WWII song that used trombones and face effectively. Maybe some of you remember it.

Caststeel on September 21, 2010 at 6:05 PM

Kindly Doctor, the hits just keep on coming. Thank you!

Mason on September 21, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Well, first of all, even though economists may say that the recession officially ended last year,

The biggest problem with this is that “recession” only means that the economy is shrinking — but when it stops shrinking, you are still below were you were (or would have been), so the pain persists until it grows back to that level.

Count to 10 on September 21, 2010 at 6:36 PM

The single most damaging thing was from Orszag.

It boils down to “if we don’t take it now but wait a little while, there’ll be more to grab.”

If that perfectly sensible proposal was too generous to the rich — which it wasn’t, as O! and company made clear — ain’t nobody gonna move money around until there’s some sign the danger might pass.

Regards,
Ric

warlocketx on September 21, 2010 at 6:45 PM

Step three: 30% reduction in pay and benefits for the Federal, State and local bureaucracy.

Easy peasy.

PoliTech on September 21, 2010 at 6:51 PM

we had two tax cuts that weren’t paid for, two wars that weren’t paid for.

When Clinton got into office he replaced the social cuts by Reagan and Bush with a retroactive increase in our taxes. Like most Americans I had the standard deductions that usualy resulted in something left over after the taxes were paid. That year I owed more taxes that the deductions covered. I ended up paying an additional $100 a month to the IRS, in addition to a matching amount of new deductions. Bush tax cuts cut the Clinton tax increase.

Pay for a war? When we are attack are we suppose to see if we have money laying around that can pay for a war, and if not, do you run up the white flag? Of course you do if you are a democrate and the cost begins to interfer with new and expanded social programs and government.

Franklyn on September 21, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Step three: 30% reduction in pay and benefits for the Federal, State and local bureaucracy.

Easy peasy.

PoliTech on September 21, 2010 at 6:51 PM

No, a federal law mandating that all salaries and benefits of any government employee be 25% lower than that a similar job would pay in the private sector.

Canadian Infidel on September 21, 2010 at 7:43 PM

He thinks the vital medicine for healing this economy would come from low-end retail purchases.

Now the left wants us to be mindless over-consumers? He’s just lying. And he’s a bad liar.

Another cut, Mr. O: Department of Education. It was created 30 years ago. Is education better now?

PattyJ on September 21, 2010 at 7:59 PM

Step two is dismantling the mechanisms of permanent State growth, like public employee unions

It goes without saying that the task might be just wishful thinking, but it is possible to do it.

I once was deep into AFL-CIO union organizing. I represented my teachers. I sat on the union board of Directors and I chaired the contract negociation committee. I learned a thing or two about how to play ball in the game of politics and in the end decided I did not want anything more to do with it.

That did not mean I gave up being a union member. Being a member means you have instant legal representation if something arises. That often did not mean the teacher did something wrong, just someone needed to take the blame. They are the lowest factor when an administrator needs to find a scapegoat. Administrators in every school I taught kept a list of who is a union member so that they know who is safe to do the dirty deed to.

There are two different types of unions, at least in the public school teachers unions. Those that can negociate the money and those who only represent the teachers interest.

The later is the model that public unions should be structrued around. The teachers pay dues, their interest are protected and generally they avoid unfair situaitons or have help if they occur.

Representive unions have political power but they do not have the power to increase the cost of the public service or the power to dictate the conditions that their members will work under.

Forcing federal and state public unions to the representive only format would solve the federal and state public union problems, and allow the reduction in federal and state spending. Trying to remove the unions all together would be very difficult if even possible and not in the best interest of anyone.

Franklyn on September 21, 2010 at 8:15 PM

So, yes, he’s correct. Democrats might lose one election cycle, but in the long-term the country is tilting to the left.

Niko on September 21, 2010 at 5:10 PM

Thank you Captain Obvious. But I think you are missing the entire point of this upcoming election cycles, which is tilting it back to the right. It’s now, or never.

If you’ve completely lost all faith, that’s certainly understandable, but find something else to do with your time.

uknowmorethanme on September 21, 2010 at 8:59 PM

The later is the model that public unions should be structrued around. The teachers pay dues, their interest are protected and generally they avoid unfair situaitons or have help if they occur.

Outside of selling weed to or fondling the kids, a teacher essentially can’t get fired. Spare me the unfairness.

Government workers, no matter what stripe, have no business being unionized. And if that doesn’t work, then public sector Unions have no business taking dues from members’ salaries (which are my tax dollars) and giving it to partisan causes in the name of “members’ interests” or what have you.

It’s an end around to public funding of campaigns and it sickens the 87.7% of US workers who don’t belong to any kind of union. Unions represent 12.3% of working class people. They can suck it.

Union leadership and political corruption are the problem. Not individual members of unions themselves. Well, at least when they aren’t beating up black people and biting off people’s fingers.

uknowmorethanme on September 21, 2010 at 9:12 PM

This post has been promoted to HotAir.com.

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

Allahpundit on September 22, 2010 at 1:20 AM