Our Petulant and Inept President
The negotiations about raising the debt ceiling remain extremely fluid, and it’s still too early to draw any definitive conclusions at this stage. But just a week away from the August 2 deadline, a few things do seem clear.
The first is THE PRESIDENT’S ANGRY AND NARCISSISTIC PRESS CONFERENCE ON FRIDAY BADLY DAMAGED THE PRESIDENT, even with those, like David Brooks, who have been sympathetic to Obama’s substantive position.
It’s been clear to some of us for a while that Barack Obama is a man of uncommon self-admiration, quite thin-skinned, and increasingly consumed by his grievances. Obama has masked these traits pretty well so far, but ON FRIDAY HIS MASK SLIPPED MORE THAN IT EVER HAS. AND THAT IS BOUND TO HURT HIM.
Second, DEMOCRATS ON CAPITOL HILL ARE RAPIDLY LOSING CONFIDENCE IN THE PRESIDENT’S COMPETENCE AS A NEGOTIATOR. Obama’s conduct during the debt ceiling negotiations – FROM HIS FLIP-FLOPS TO HIS IRRELEVANT DEADLINES TO HIS BACKTRACKING ON HIS AGREEMENTS WITH VARIOUS PARTIES – has been so erratic and uneven that his own party has decided the best hope of reaching an agreement is to sideline him….
Obama’s fate is pretty well sealed long before the 2012 election. He will join Bush 41 and Jimmy Carter as the third most recent one term president.
Bill Kristol: Obama talks down to Americans
I was struck by these sentences in President Obama’s speech:
Now, what makes today’s stalemate so dangerous is that it has been tied to something known as the debt ceiling – a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.
Understand – RAISING THE DEBT CEILING DOES NOT ALLOW CONGRESS TO SPEND MORE MONEY. IT SIMPLY GIVES OUR COUNTRY THE ABILITY TO PAY THE BILLS THAT CONGRESS HAS ALREADY RACKED UP.
Consider the condescension implicit in the president’s statement—“a term that most people outside of Washington have probably never heard of before.” These “people outside of Washington” are not little children being lectured on an obscure subject by a worldly adult.
Actually this wasn’t just condensing, it was a lie. The country does have enough money to pay the bills it has already racked up. What it doesn’t have is enough money to continue to spend at the current level. That’s what the Republicans are saying and demanding. We must cut spending.
Jimmy Carter’s smiling
Which is to say, it’s a pathetic joke:
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs’ PRONOUNCEMENT TODAY THAT LIBYA IS A “STALEMATE” would, I think, have gotten a bit more attention but for the debt debate.
We recently passed the four-month anniversary of “Operation Odyssey Dawn,” the U.S.-led air assault on Moammar Qaddafi’s regime. NOW, 128 DAYS LATER, WE’VE GOT A “STALEMATE.”
JUST AS THEY DON’T TEACH ECONOMICS AT HARVARD LAW, I GUESS THEY DON’T TEACH MILITARY HISTORY THERE, EITHER. So we pissed away hundreds of billions in neo-Keynesian “stimulus” spending without creating a recovery, and now we’ve wasted hundreds of millions in bombs and missiles without defeating the enemy — who, it’s worth pointing out, posed no threat to the U.S. or its allies.
You know who’s smiling now? Jimmy Carter.
Is it time to give back that Peace Prize? Just asking.
Are You Better Off Today Than Jan. 20, 2009?
…A SLIM 15% CLAIM TO BE "GETTING AHEAD FINANCIALLY," half what it was in 2006. Fully 27% say they're falling behind financially. That's up 6 points since February.
A SIGNIFICANT MAJORITY (54%) SAYS THEY'VE BEEN FORCED TO CHANGE THEIR LIFESTYLE SIGNIFICANTLY as a result of the economic times -- and 60% of them are angry, up from 44%.
To be sure, 30 months after he returned to home cooking, George W. Bush still gets majority blame for the economy.
But here's the breaking news for hopeful Democrats: George W. Bush isn't running for anything except exercise.
"MORE THAN A THIRD OF AMERICANS NOW BELIEVE THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA’S POLICIES ARE HURTING THE ECONOMY, AND CONFIDENCE IN HIS ABILITY TO CREATE JOBS IS SHARPLY ERODING AMONG HIS BASE," the Post reports….
These are the kinds of facts that make Obama’s reelection chances slip from slim to none.
We Need Tectonic Changes…
What has long been clear to many constitutional scholars is now intuitively obvious to Americans of all stripes: THE RELENTLESS EXPANSION OF FEDERAL POWER IS DESTROYING SELF-GOVERNMENT AT EVERY LEVEL OF SOCIETY BESIDES THE NATIONAL ONE — and with it, the self-reliance and independence that made this country great. It is difficult any longer to see what stands between us and a statist tyranny of the majority. Supporters of the balanced-budget amendment are trying to erect a shield against unrestrained federal power. Conservative skeptics should to do more than say, “Well, that won’t work.”
As Arthur Brooks writes in an instant classic on what’s really at stake in the debt-ceiling talks, “WE NEED TECTONIC CHANGES, NOT MINOR FIDDLING.” If not a constitutional amendment, then what? Arthur Brooks’s column is a call to action — “hard work for at least a decade.” But what exactly is our objective, if not TO REVIVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AGAINST THE VAST ACCUMULATION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT POWER THAT THE FRAMERS EQUATED WITH TYRANNY, and which Brooks terms “statism” and “the welfare state”? Brooks supports Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan — but it would require supreme political will to carry that plan through, and as soon as we let our guard down, we’d be right back where we are now. That’s because tectonic changes over the past 70 years have taken us away from a Constitution of limited powers and toward a dynamic of unlimited federal expansion
Liberals look at the world as one of scarcity. Conservatives look at it as one of opportunity. Liberals trust the Government. Conservatives trust individuals.
Boehner’s Explains It All To You
House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) followed President Obama’s speech Monday evening with one of his one, in which HE IMPLORED WASHINGTON TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT ITS SPENDING PROBLEM. “IN WASHINGTON MORE SPENDING AND MORE DEBT IS BUSINESS AS USUAL,” HE SAID. “I’VE GOT NEWS FOR WASHINTON — THOSE DAYS ARE OVER.”
President Obama is not merely asking for another routine debt increase, the speaker explained, but rather “THE LARGEST DEBT INCREASE IN AMERICAN HISTORY, ON THE HEELS OF THE LARGEST SPENDING BINGE IN AMERICAN HISTORY,” which yielded nothing apart from an unpopular, unsustainable new health-care law, a failed $1 trillion stimulus package, and a skyrocketing deficit and debt.
I see a lot of Democrats whine that the Republicans lifted the Debt Limit 8 times during Bush’s presidency without any arguments. It’s time to turn that around on them. It appears Obama doesn’t want to discuss this during an election year and had the last debt ceiling increase run so it wouldn’t be an issue in 2010 and wants to do the same thing for 2012. We know what he’s afraid of.
Another Reason Obama Will Lose in 2012
PRESIDENT OBAMA IS GOING TO LOSE HIS BID FOR RE-ELECTION. Not just because of the anemic recovery, stubborn unemployment, runaway spending, staggering deficits, lack of public faith in his ability as commander-in-chief, his hostility towards Israel's government, the rise of the Tea Party, or the Republican-favoring implications of redistricting on the electoral map. Those are all factors, and the coming months will provide endless columns discussing each. (Of this I am sure, for I intend to write some of them.)
But there is a more fundamental reason he'll lose: Barack Obama, once perceived as extraordinary, now just seems extra-ordinary. HE HAS GOTTEN POLITICALLY BORING. AND AMERICA DOES NOT RE-ELECT BORING PRESIDENTS.
Obama isn't boring in the same conventional, square, policy-wonk manner of so many other politicians; he still acts cool, plays basketball, and parties with Hollywood's A-list. But as a president he has become boring: HE IS TIRESOME, UNPERSUASIVE, DIVISIVE, REPETITIVE, PREDICTABLE, AND CYNICAL -- IMPORTANTLY, THE OPPOSITE OF EVERYTHING ADVERTISED HIMSELF TO BE….
Obama has gone from soaring to boring. When was the last time you thought one of his speeches was really extraordinary?
Math comes to Washington
Do you feel it?
The tempo has changed and well understood rules no longer seem to apply to anything any longer. JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, ALL WE HEARD WAS THE RUSH TO SPEND MONEY. TARP, STIMULUS, BAILOUTS, OBAMACARE...ALL MULTI BILLION DOLLAR EXPENSES.
It's funny how THE COLD BREATH OF THE LAWS OF MATHEMATICS CHANGES EVERYTHING. THE LAWS OF MATHEMATICS AND ECONOMICS ARE THE LIBERALS' HANGMAN'S NOOSE, focusing their mind on survival of Big Government. Change is in the air, and many people now can sense that there is a seismic shift in the established order of things.
This article is well worth reading. It covers the economy, consumer debt, energy costs, unemployment, housing and my favorite, Peak Government (I loved this because the libs are always talking about peak oil).
Wisconsin: Unions are good for the employees who are left
Emily Koczela had been anxiously waiting for months for Wisconsin governor Scott Walker’s controversial budget repair bill to take effect. Koczela, the finance director for the Brown Deer school district, had been negotiating with the local union, trying to get it to accept concessions in order to make up for a $1 million budget shortfall. But the union wouldn’t budge.
“We laid off 27 [teachers] as a precautionary measure,” Koczela told me. “They were crying. Some of these people are my friends.”
On June 29 at 12:01 a.m., Koczela could finally breathe a sigh of relief. The budget repair bill—delayed for months by protests, runaway state senators, and a legal challenge that made its way to the state’s supreme court—was law. The 27 teachers on the chopping block were spared….
I watch as unions drove manufacturers out of my home town into non-union cities in the South. Unions are good for the employees who survive, but not so good if you don’t have a lot of seniority.
7 Lessons for Liberals
IT'S NO SECRET THAT LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES DON'T GET ALONG. But, if there's any one thing that we've learned from the liberal love of sensitivity classes and situation comedies, it's that once people get to know each other and learn about each other's beliefs and concerns, all legitimate differences melt away. So, with that in mind, I'd like to relieve the concerns of our liberal pals by telling them what we conservatives are really like. Think of it as sensitivity class – for liberals….
….1) I DON'T HATE BLACK AMERICANS, HISPANIC AMERICANS, GAY AMERICANS, JEWISH AMERICANS, MUSLIMS, OR ANY OF THE OTHER GROUPS THAT LIBERALS OBSESSIVELY CLAIM THAT CONSERVATIVES HATE. In all fairness, you could probably make a great case that I strongly dislike Nazis, Satanists, Fred Phelps’ clan full of weirdos, and Noam Chomsky, but who doesn't?...
Liberals seem to have replaced critical thinking with critical name calling. Devoid of ideas, they try to build themselves up, by tearing conservatives down.