Obama's Fearmongering is way out of hand

As we've complained here Obama is manipulating figures and exaggerating reality to gain the upper hand on ramming his trillion dollar Democrat wish list down the throats of American taxpayers. If you're a Democrat maybe that makes you smugly happy. It shouldn't. It's all a big lie. Recessions like the 1981-82 recession work themselves out with a minimum of government intervention and no resulting staggering debt.

Let's get the facts straight!

via the Wall Street Journal

This fearmongering may be good politics, but it is bad history and bad economics. It is bad history because our current economic woes don't come close to those of the 1930s. At worst, a comparison to the 1981-82 recession might be appropriate. Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites. In the last
year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs. That's a grim statistic for sure, but represents just 2.2% of the labor force. From November 1981 to October 1982, 2.4 million jobs were lost -- fewer in number than today, but the labor force
was smaller. So 1981-82 job losses totaled 2.2% of the labor force, the same as now. Job losses in the Great Depression were of an entirely different magnitude. In 1930, the economy shed 4.8% of the labor force. In 1931, 6.5%. And then in 1932, another 7.1%. Jobs were being lost at double or triple the rate of 2008-09 or 1981-82.

Read the whole thing.

The natural progression of economics would have gotten us out of this recession as it has 5 times since the 1930s anyway without this staggering debt package and a huge Democrat wish list that never got the full debate treatment that it deserves. Very clever, but it has no resemblance to democracy.

The media of course bought it hook, line and sinker.

And they haven't pointed out that it's worse EVERYWHERE than here.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Part 12

Obama promised no lobbyists in his administration. He' s only broken that promise 17 times so far. He promised transparency (Republicans were shut out of the Spendulus bill conference hearing). And he promised at least 5 days for the public to read any piece of legislation that would come across his desk. Try to find the bill before Tuesday (which of course would only be 3 days - all a part of a 3 day weekend).

This is a massive spending bill that will create few meaningful jobs, but will get alot of Democrats re-elected on the backs of the next generation's taxpayers. It is shameful, fascist politics carried out in the face of fearmongering.

I worried that Obama might be just another promise-breaking politician with an Evangelist's skillset. Unfortunately I was far more correct in my assumptions than I wish I was.

Welcome to Obamerica.

Change. It's here in the visage of Leon Panetta

Real change, as promised by Barack Obama. It takes a real change agent to select a man with no experience in the field of intelligence for CIA director - CIA DIRECTOR! Panetta was first a congressman and then chief of staff for Bill Clinton. Mr. Panetta was Monica Lewinsky's mentor at the White House. He testified before a grand jury that he knew nothing of their 8 month affair. Now those are the kinds of powers of observation you want the head of our most important intelligence agency to have. What Iran nukes?

Panetta was the first Democrat to tell Clinton to come clean. In my book he gets points for that. But not CIA DIRECTOR points.

Diane Feinstein, incoming Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee is none too pleased about this. She'll be getting a phone call tonight and things will be just swell by tomorrow.

California pork, coming right up!

Update: I hate to be an I told you so kinda guy but....

Maybe the Chicago Newspapers are Getting it

And the hits just keep on coming. Chicago Sun-Times laying the smack down on the new Attorney General nominee Eric Holder. Holder, of the "Marc Rich is perfectly pardonable, Mr Clinton" apparently isn't that keen on pointing out his fiduciary relationship with Blagojevich regarding casinoes in Illinois.

It's starting to look like Change We Can Deceive In.

An Eight Year President

It strikes me that the moves Barack Obama is making in naming his cabinet and reversing many campaign promises (see Change entries 1-8 below) are the moves of a President and a party that wants to stay in power for 8 years, not 4. Obama did not win a mandate. 53% to 47% is not a mandate, 60% to 40% or better, would have been. Many would argue with the media providing cover, with Republicans in disfavor, and with the gift of a collapsed economy just before the election - any democrat would have won with a margin of 15% by just getting out of bed!

Sorry Huff Po-ites, Kos Kids and MoveOn folks - though you may have provided the margin of victory for Barry, he's going to leave you behind. Change We Need, Change We Can Believe In, was all smoke and mirrors. Puppeteer Rahm is in charge now and the Democrat mega powers funded by big business don't want to rock the boat. Middle class, schmiddle class - about all the lefties might get is a center left Supreme Court justice, a $1.50 minimum wage increase, and modified immigration amnesty.

Pretty close to what McCain would have been all about, or for that matter - a third Bush term.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Part 8

Obama, after promising during his campaign (to deafening cheers) that he would impart severe windfall profits taxes on George "failed policies of the past" Bush's buddies - the oil companies, says...oh, nevermind.

Is this guy ever going to keep a campaign promise? It truly is at the laughable stage now. And of course the media isn't holding his feet to the fire on any of this. Maybe this has something to do with it.

Were I a Barack Obama supporter I would feel duped...again.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Parts 5,6&7

So you think the young, lefty vote will turn out for BHO next time?

Iraq war proponent Hillary Clinton is named Secretary of State.

Bush appointee William Gates is named Secretary of Defense.

Republican Jim Jones, proponent of the Iraq war named as National Security Advisor.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Part 4

President-elect Barack Obama may consider delaying a campaign promise - to roll back tax cuts on high-income Americans - as part of his economic recovery strategy, two aides said on Sunday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081123/pl_nm/us_usa_obama_taxes

If I had voted for Obama based on the promises he made I'd begin to think I was duped by a classic chicken-in-every-pot politician. I'd begin to wonder if he got his name "The One" based on the number of campaign promises he will actually keep.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Part 3

I think it was Dionne Warwick who sang..."Promises, promises this is where those promises promises end.." First it was Obama supporters helping take down Prop 8 and now this. I'm not sure that Obama is going to win the gay vote in the next election.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket, Part 2

A hat tip to National Review Online


Here’s some change that supporters of President-elect Obama may not want to see: all of the policy commitments on specific issues have been removed from his transition Web site.
On Nov. 7, global health advocates noticed that some of the details of Obama’s “fight global poverty” statement had been removed. Specifically, the site no longer promised to fully fund debt cancellation for the world’s poorest countries or provide the full U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
Activists already were concerned, since boosting foreign aid was the one thing Obama mentioned during the campaign when asked what proposals he’d have to scale back due to the faltering economy...
By this morning, all of the issue-specific pages on the transition site had been removed from the agenda section. In its place, a statement that mentioned details but provided none at all: “The Obama Administration has a comprehensive and detailed agenda to carry out its policies.”

A discovery that Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews et al will conveniently forget to mention.

Hate Bush all you want, but no one ever had to cleanse his websites or campaign papers of promises that he had made to get votes.

Change. Or is that just the jingling in your pocket Part 1

One of the loudest cheers that were always guaranteed as one of Obama's "rejecting the failed policies of the past" segments of his robo-speeches was "lobbyists will not find jobs in my white house". Oops.