Sunday, October 24, 2010

Obama to focus on deficit? Where was this the last six years?

Leave it to the AP to spew this


WASHINGTON – Preparing for political life after a bruising election, President Barack Obama will put greater emphasis on fiscal discipline, a nod to a nation sick of spending and to a Congress poised to become more Republican, conservative and determined to stop him.

As I said in January, Obama's new awakening on fiscal matters is absolute bullshit. We had a record deficit since then.

Or as I said in 2009, Obama lecturing about Debt is like the Detroit Lions talking about winning.

This emphasis on "fiscal discipline" is from the clown who spend a crapload of money as a senator and as the resident of the white house the last two years. Bush was bad on fiscal matters. I called him out back then and supported the Pence plan as an alternative back in 2006. Obama makes Bush look about as fiscal conservative as Ron Paul. He's shattering the records with his budgets, bailout votes, and stimulus packages. If there's a poster boy for fiscal mismanagement, it is Barack Obama.

The president has signaled that at the start of the new year, he will speak more directly to the country about the financial choices ahead. "If we're going to get serious about the deficit, then we're going to have to look at everything: entitlements, defense spending, revenues. ... And that's going to be a tough conversation," he said.

It's one that will be framed by a bipartisan debt commission, whose ideas this December will give Obama political cover on where to suggest unpopular cuts.

Taxes. Of course. That's what Obama wants. He sure as hell isn't going to cut entitlements or his stimulus spending.

Obama says the most frustrating part of his presidency is that he had to keep spending money and adding to the deficit in his first six months in office "to save the economy." He has from the start called deficit reduction a goal, but one that had to get bumped in favor of sparking the economy.

Bullshit. Keynesian Economics is, was, and always will be a failure. It leads to stagflation, as proven during the Carter years. As for his suggestion on Commissions, they are also a joke. Always was, is, and will be. Federal Commissions are a bunch of politicians and has-been politicians with big egos who get together, run their mouths, and give themselves status to beltway people to get their bad policies passed. Look for tax increases to be proposed, pressure to come to the reps because of the commission being the ones to push this, and no real good solutions from them.

It's not that hard. Don't spend what you don't have. It takes 4th grade math to figure that out. It doesn't take a commission. It doesn't take a summit. It takes representatives to do their jobs and pass a balanced budget without tax increases. It's then the idiot in chief's job to sign that and not be an idiot anymore. It's not that hard. Even a caveman can do it.

6 comments:

Communications guru said...

If you want to talk about bullshit, where you when Bush turned a surplus into a record deficit that he turned over to Obama, who acutely put the two wars on the books?

Jersey McJones said...

CG is absolutely right! It occured to you in 2006 that Bush was misguided on spending? Bush the GOP do the opposite of Keynesianism, they fail miserably, and you say Keynesian economics are a failure? You attach that to Carter? What the heck are you even talking about? And this from a guy from Michigan, where Free Trade and capitalism rin amok have destroyed your state!

Man, you are just plain stupid.

JMJ

Republican Michigander said...

Actually you're the one that's stupid. Keynesian economics believes that government spending stimulates the economy in recessions. It does not work.
2006 was a bad year for spending thanks to Bush and Obama. I said that in the piece and said that Bush deserves part of the blame for spending too much. Obama spends even more than Bush following in Carter's stagflation footsteps.

As far as free trade goes, I oppose that, which was supported by the last four democrat presidential candidates. Clinton signed NAFTA. Gore campaigned for it against Perot. Kerry voted for NAFTA, and Obama talks out of both sides of his mouth on the issue.

Communications guru said...

Actually you're the one that's stupid. A depression and recession are by definition a shortfall of demand. So it goes to reason that to correct it is to spend more. Take the Bush recession, for example, the deepest and longest since the Great Depression. Business could spend more, but as we have seen they are holding on to their record profits. Individuals can spend, but Republicans have so scared them they are not spending. So the only one left is the government. That’s what lifted us out of the Great Depression and the Bush recession.

Seriously? “(sic) 2006 was a bad year for spending thanks to Bush and Obama?” What does Obama have to do with 2006?

You oppose free trade? I guess you’re not a conservative then. NAFTA is not bad thing, but Bush never enforced any of the agreements, and the trade was not free. The only one that “talks out of both sides of his mouth” are you and Republicans, and not just on this issue. By the way, it’s Democratic Party, not Democrat Party.

Republican Michigander said...

In 2006, Obama was part of Washington as a senator. There's three branches of government. There's the house, the senate, and the presidency. Civics 101. The Senate is actually worse than Obama's residency, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't oppose true free trade, but NAFTA wasn't it. I always opposed NAFTA and even worse, GATT, signed by Bill Clinton. Mexico's wages are impossible for the US to compete with. GATT was worse because it put the US under authority of the World Trade Organization, international unelected bureaucrats.

It was debt that led to the recession and job losses. More debt won't end it. Employment will, and this stimulus isn't creating jobs outside of short temporary gigs that are gone. Reduce the regulations and overhead costs, and more businesses will have jobs here in Michigan.

Communications guru said...

Oh, I see; President Obama was a junior Senator and one of a 100 Senators, bur he is responsible for the Bush recession and record deficits that you ignored.

NAFTA is free trade under a competent President; which Bush was not. It most certainly was not debt that led to the recession and job losses. Spending will end it, just like every other deep recession, not to mention the Great Depression.

It’s a fact that the stimulus created and saved jobs. Michigan has no higher taxes and regulation than other state. No business has ever moved somewhere just for low taxes.