 Pres. Obama |
It’s not my fault!
“That wasn’t me,” President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.
It actually was partly him _ and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years _ who shaped the latest in a string of precipitously out-of-balance budgets.
And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.
A look at some of his claims Wednesday:
OBAMA: “We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs.” _ from news conference.
THE FACTS: This assertion is flawed on several levels. For starters, the U.S. has lost more than 1.2 million jobs since Obama took office, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Even if Obama’s stimulus bill saved or created as many jobs as he says, that number is dwarfed by the number of recent job losses.
OBAMA: “Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit. … That wasn’t me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you’ve got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they’re big, and they’ll make our deficits go up over the next two years.” — in Missouri.
THE FACTS: Congress, under Democratic control in 2007 and 2008, controlled the purse strings that led to the deficit Obama inherited. A Republican president, George W. Bush, had a role, too: He signed the legislation.
Obama supported the emergency bailout package in Bush’s final months — a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger.
Another fact more spin than truth: He sad that the information obtained from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed through torture could have been obtained with other methods. He should have read the memos that his OLC put out.
#64–Loser==”Who in their right mind would believe they could afford a $350,000 home on a $70,000/yr GROSS income?” /// No one. Including the Bankers who so far are avoiding criminal prosecution.
We are far far away from personal responsibility.
# 69 bobbo said, “No one. Including the Bankers who so far are avoiding criminal prosecution.”
It’s a felony to loan to a sub par risk?
Government paid for new jobs ( not to mention the money is debt) is not going to significantly create long term jobs. Its going to put some to work for a period of time then unless more money from the governments is made available those jobs again will be gone. We a a signifcant money crisis is all governments in the US. You cannot solve it by borrowing more money. Yes, no doubt the Republican’s Mr Obama have rapidly overspent much of it over the Iraq war and 911. Noble causes but never the less a big hurt. But Mr President you are not helping matters by contributing to this massive debt and at the same time proposing more government programs. Someone will have to pay for these programs and no matter who you say that will be. It will be Americans!
#66 – Paddy-O,
So, in the final analysis, based on what tangible, measurable, statistics, is the country doing better than 3 months ago?
See post #62.
Sorry to see such a politically biased set of posts. Sure, some dems helped create the mess but let’s not look before 2007, shall we. Or look at the huge deficits that were created by previous presidents and congresses. And even though we have a good model of what to do when we get into these fiscal situations, let’s all just pretend that Keynesian economics don’t work in this situation and prattle on about how spending government money actually hurts us. Too bad we really aren’t pursuing true Keynesian economic philosophy right now but more right-wing influenced junk. If we actually move Obama to the left more we’d actually help the country more, not hurt it in the least.
Yes, there is blame to go around here, even if most of it is on the right side of the aisle. But implying that Obama is a liberal kook who’s screwing us all ignores the fact that we really do have a good model of what to do and it’s Keynesian and it’s liberal, not anything else.
#73 – gmknobl,
I agree. The blame is largely to the right. Unfortunately, both democraps and repugnicans are solidly to the right. Even Obama is mostly right leaning, though not as far as some others.
We haven’t had a significant number of liberals in office in a very long time. In fact, the Liberal party is dead, mostly at the hands of the democraps who allowed the word liberal to become a dirty word.
Take a look at where our choices in the last election fall on the political compass. Then try to blame our current situation on liberals. Good luck.
http://politicalcompass.org/uselection2008
#74 – pedro,
You just failed reading comprehension 101. Liberal != Democrat. Reread gmknobl’s post with that in mind.
Misanthropic Scott: Thank you for describing the Recession of 2000-2001 which Clinton handed Bush.
You also mentioned: “It is about a quarter of what W spent on a useless unwarranted war.”
Bush spent $0 on useless, unwarranted wars. However, he did spend money fighting back against two major terrorist regimes. Which was quite useful and quite justified. The only thing unwarranted would have been to let the terrorists go on attacking us, while doing nothing to stop it.
Here is one of the quotes from many Democrats who also told the truth about the terrorists:
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
#78 – dmarks,
Bush spent $0 on useless, unwarranted wars. However, he did spend money fighting back against two major terrorist regimes. Which was quite useful and quite justified. The only thing unwarranted would have been to let the terrorists go on attacking us, while doing nothing to stop it.
Funny. He told me they had weapons of mass destruction. They didn’t. He told me we’d be safer. 16 different intelligence reports from U.S. agencies said no.
http://tinyurl.com/6pslsm
>Or look at the huge deficits that were created by previous presidents and congresses.
So now we have a deficit 4 times bigger and that’s OK?
#77 – Mr. Fusion,
I promise this will be the last time I ever agree with pedro.
But, we did deliberately select a non-military target for Hiroshima.
I not only call that a war crime, I call it terrorism.
That said, it does not make further war crimes acceptable. A war crime is a war crime is a war crime. Each must be judged on its own.
The war crimes of the prior administration were abhorrent in the extreme for being extremely thoroughly and carefully thought out and justified and legalized with particularly despicable legal mumbo jumbo despite those employing both the mumbo and the jumbo knowing full well that they were breaking both U.S. law and the Geneva Convention.
That said, I will not compare those crimes to the crime of being the only nation in the world to ever drop nuclear weapons on live human beings, especially with forethought and consideration of whether to select a military or non-military target.
82, Scott,
Cow-Patty claimed Americans tortured civilians during WWII. He is being asked to account for that statement.
As for dropping atomic bombs on Japan, we will disagree. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military and industrial centers.
Most of Japanese military and industrial production was done in small shops interspersed in urban areas. Only top end assembly and high scale large enterprises such as ship building were large concerns. That people lived next to or above their machines is unfortunate, but a fact of life.
NOTE: I tried to post this but it was caught by the spam filter so I had to remove the cites.
# 62 Misanthropic Scott said,
“Today:
DOW: 8,185.73
S&P 500: 873.64
Nasdaq: 1,711.94”
That would be something if the entire economy (US production) hadn’t dropped like a stone in the 1st quarter. Down over 6%. Not that I blame that drop on Obama though. His policies, for good or ill, will take longer to show an effect on GDP.
#62–Scott: Which is the bigger war crime:
1. Killing 1 Million japanese by bullets and bayonets during an all out land invasion killing 10K’s Allied as well,
2. 100K Japanese by Firebomb?
Even without Fusions excellent factoids, Nagasaki and Hiroshima had not been bombed during the war as it was being saved to scientifically measure the destruction of the coming bomb. Testing/guaging the effectiveness of this new bomb was a military necessity.
I wish we had the format to really discuss any objection to dropping one Nuke on Japan. The second one, I won’t raise much of an arugment with, although I wouldn’t condemn it either.
The Japs deserved even more than they got for starting the whole thing regardless of subtitles AND they got treated in toto many times better than they ever treated anyone else.
Just a bunch of racist bastards those WW2 Militaristic Japs were. Times change, not all memories should.
#85 – Mr. Fusion,
I’ll admit that I am definitely no historian. My mediocre source has been updated and the statement that Hiroshima was not a military target has been removed. Damn wikipedia.
I will say this though …
In an alternate universe, we attacked Japan, hitting a perfectly valid military target of a naval base in an unprovoked attack. They developed the bomb first and hit the strategic centers of Detroit and Houston.
OK?
Whatever anyone thinks of Japan for having attacked us, they did hit a perfectly valid military target, Pearl Harbor.
As for bobbo’s comment, the ends don’t justify the means. Killing the numbers you cite, even if real, would still be predominantly military losses, not civilians. “All’s fair in love and war” is, as Heinlein noted, a contemptible lie.
“During World War II, Hiroshima was a city of considerable military importance. It contained the 2nd Army Headquarters, which commanded the defense of all of southern Japan.”
http://japan-101.com/history/hiroshima_city_japan_bomb_history.htm
# 89 Misanthropic Scott said, “All’s fair in love and war” is, as Heinlein noted, a contemptible lie.”
What is really interesting is that at the beginning of WW2, Germany & the UK were very careful to avoid bombing civilian targets. There is an interesting story about how that changed…
#92 – pedro,
The question in my mind is not about whether we had collateral damage, though an entire city may be unprecedented. The question in my mind is whether we deliberately targeted the civilians.
In this case, I’d say yes.
That’s what I find unconscionable.
If bobbo is correct, and I think he is, that we wanted a good scientific study of the damage, I don’t think that is worth human lives. Perhaps we could have gotten the info some other way. Perhaps we just didn’t need it that badly.
Sorry, I meant Paddy in my prior reply.
# 93 Misanthropic Scott said, “The question in my mind is whether we deliberately targeted the civilians.
In this case, I’d say yes.”
Could be, I’m not sure. I watched a couple interviews with Tibbits where he talked about the choosing of targets. The Japs had dispersed any manufacturing and major military targets were very close to civilian population centers. But, you could be right and we did it for the shock value on the leadership to pressure a surrender.
#96 – Mr. Fusion,
It’s a common pattern of Patty’s. He still never answered what made him think that the Obama health plan would be mandatory rather than merely an alternative either.
http://tinyurl.com/cyyls8
Paddy-tr-zero-ll??!!?
# 97 pedro said, “#96 Oy! Someone give the kid a lollipop, please?”
Don’t worry, it’s just obsessive compulsive disorder trigger by an inferiority complex.
#98, Scott,
Nor has Cow-Patty ever backed up his claim that Barney Frank blamed the voters for corruption in Washington.
#100 – Mr. Fusion,
I’m shocked I tell you shocked that people would claim Cow Patty does not know how to answer a question.
Yawn.