Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers

Former President Bush walked a very tight line last night speaking to manufacturers in Erie Pa. (a state he lost twice) where he (and how bad does this tell you the buyer's remorse on the current guy is) got a larger ovation than...

Wait for it...

Joe Paterno!

Perhaps in light of the current non-solutions that are spiking unemployment instead of bringing it down, and perhaps in light of the fact that potential for building wealth by the average American is shrinking instead of growing, and perhaps the fact that the only one's benefiting in any way presently are elected officials who are swallowing up more and more power a la Hugo Chavez, perhaps in light of all these developments... the principles in former President Bush's speech didn't sound so bad after all:

On this blog space I have lamented the decisions made by Bush that I disagreed with. His decision to create the largest Government entitlement--the Drug plan--in more than a generation was his largest first term mistake. His willingness to make concessions on bailing out industry sectors towards the conclusion of his second term was his biggest mistake in the second term. (Both were significant spending measures/increases.) His stance on immigration and border security and not shifting from Rumsfeld's battle-plan to Gen. Petraeus' quickly enough in Iraq were his biggest foreign policy mistakes.

Keeping us safe for the duration of his time in office, keeping our enemies on the run, pushing freedom and democracy to the corners of the globe will be his legacy. That along with Justices Roberts and Alito as well as unparalleled economic growth in light of two wars -- for seven straight years will be his domestic agenda historical notes.

As I mentioned there has been much buyer's remorse, for while the people of America still like President Obama on a personal level, the restlessness on his policy direction is bubbling up, 10% national unemployment (twice the worst rate ever seen under Bush), the inflationary effect of spending three trillion dollars before he authorized his first budget (Bush had not spent three trillion dollars in seven years, with two wars), and the undisguisable move to radically nationalize much of the private sector of industry, banking, market management, and production, are all causing people to scratch their heads.

Moves like putting a young thirty something who's never owned a car in charge of a car company seems very nepotistic. Refusing to label our great conflict a war against those who are committing terror, and telling jihadists at a Muslim university that America and Islam are one and the same are utter foolishness.

I was the first one to predict President Obama's election. (Even the guttersnipe trolls who are addicted to my blog have to admit that...) But I was also the first to criticize Bush when he wandered away from the larger principles of sound governance. So let me also clearly state that the rearview mirror of history will treat President Bush very kind.

Because if the worst your enemies can say about you is that you went to every length possible to protect your citizens, even if it meant little Ahmad got a little water on his face (just like our troops do in training), then you're in pretty good shape compared to the hole that the present "O"ministration insists upon digging.

Of course none of the rabid supporters of the top elected official of one of the world's largest muslim nations, a man who claims there are 7 million muslims in his nation when there are at most 1.4 million, will see anything being reported about the new economy as measurement of his own accountability.

Then again some of his supporters didn't know that he felt bigger priorities for him included important proclamations of naming June official "homosexual, lesbian, bisexual, transgender month," or that his nominations were aimed at "Queering the elementary schools in America" or most glaringly that he believes the Constitution now defines one of his most important duties "as President" is to "defend Islam" from being attacked.

I wonder if President Bush had ever said one of his chief responsibilities as president would be to defend evangelical Christianity from attack what the response would have been?

But I digress...

Back to one of the side issue distractions that is more or less a waste of time for a sitting President... the economy...

Multiple news sources, from a wide variety of editorial/political opinion, are reporting  back room tension amongst Obama's economic advisors. And it appears they are doing so because the unemployment rate (as I predicted) is, as part of the response to Obama's policies (all of which have been previously tried and had the same effect--as I've pointed out), EXPLODING. And (as I also predicted) the outcome of the massive spending to try to control and "fix" nearly every sector of the American economy is (guess what) have the OPPOSITE effect of the stated desired outcome.

I guess Rahm Emmanuel's advice of "never wasting a crisis" has been expanded to mean that if you at all can "expand a crisis" to make it even worse. (While of course attempting to correct the economy, but only through "recognizing all of the poltical factors.")

Congrats President Obama, not only did you tell seismic whoppers to our enemies on their soil... You are managing to create faultlines within your own advisory team, and actually (as again I predicted) managing to further worsen and hurt the American family and worker in the process.

Hope and Change add up to empowering our enemies and demoralizing Americans...

Who would've known?

Oh wait... I DID!

This headline should have a lot of people worried today!

With the downturn in the economy it is now more urgent than ever previously known that the government get a form of genuine tax relief into the pockets of real WORKERS (not slugs who aren't producing.)

In getting taxes lowered REVENUES would go up - as they did under the Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts.

But this is not the plan for Obama et al. Nope, he's going to raise taxes, which will further put a choke hold on the slugs and workers alike.

It's basic Economics 101, but as with many of the issues he's facing in the first term, these complexities are turning out to be "above his paygrade."

AND NOW: From that bastion of right-wing extremism... The Washington Post... comes the "National Sales Tax!"

Today, on the Ed Morrissey Show (3 pm ET), I will be checking in again with Ed to discuss the intersection of faith and politics. We'll talk about my column this week, and why ELASTICITY is the right thing for the good of the economy but why Obama's policies will fail. Ed also wants to touch on Democrats choosing fish over farmworkers? Should “sexting” be an offense that follows the perp/victim for a lifetime? And Ed announces the Obamateurism of the Week, briefly, since it was a foregone conclusion.

With just one more sign that President Obama has not yet realized he won the election and can stop campaigning he was back on the trail today sounding upbeat about an economy that he's proven he has no clue about.

And oh yeah... he still thinks Energy, Education, and Health Care were to blame for the original economic crisis.

"But i's all good homies... just slap $1.7 trillion on da credit card and call it day... Now... who's up for some hoops man, I got my sneakers in my tripped out caddy!"

In my syndicated column yesterday I attempted to prove a very provocative thesis. One that if correct bears horrible outcomes for us all. (Pretty much as my prediction that Obama would be President has as well...)

But now Mr. President is blaming odd folks for the reason the economy continues to be a stinker... He also attempts to pretend he has no clue when it will rebound:

Addressing the fear and uncertainty among Americans as job losses mount and stock markets sink, Obama urged Americans to "be prudent" in their personal financial decisions, but not to hunker down so much that it would further slow the recovery.

"What I don't think people should do is suddenly stuff money in their mattresses and pull back completely from spending," he said.

Still, he avoided guessing when the situation might begin to turn around. "Our belief and expectation is that we will get all the pillars in place for recovery this year," he said. "How long it will take before recovery actually translates into stronger job markets and so forth is going to depend on a whole range of factors."

He added that "part of what you're seeing now is weaknesses in Europe that are actually greater than some weaknesses here, bouncing back and having an impact on our markets."

Obama's uncertain forecast about when the economy will begin to rebound contrasted with the projections embedded in the budget he recently released.

That plan rested on the assumption that the economy would shrink by 1.2 percent this year, a projection that many economists, including some in his administration, consider overly optimistic because it implies the economy would bounce back in the second half of this year.

Now food for thought...

If the New York Times... who did everything they possibly could to get you elected, begins saying you're not being quite honest and that you're plan is too optimistic...

The rest of us are really in huge, catastrophic kind of trouble...

I have so many friends who will disagree with me when I say that it is Obama's insistence on doing nothing (helpful) that is killing this country.

"B-b-b-b-ut he p-p-p-p-passed a stimulus bill," a guy named Munck will no doubt proffer in the comment section.

But hear me out on this.

President Obama, said he wanted a stimulus bill that was going to put people to work. The "put people back to work" part of the package by most economists' estimations is roughly 3% of the total package. Everything else was earmarks, pork projects, and pay-offs for his campaign win.

President Bush, eight years ago also inherited a recession. His first move was to free up capital and get the people of the United States some of their own money back. He passed $1,350,000,000,000 in tax-cuts--allowing people to keep the money that THEY earned. It was his first act in office. It was done with bi-partisan support. What followed was seven years of average unemployment rates of 4.5%, the DOW at its height in the summer of 2007 hit 14,000 (30% higher than where it started in 2001) and the average household income grew roughly $2000 from 2001-2007 as well.

Full disclosure here the national debt also went from $5.6 trillion to $11.6 trillion. Some of this debt occurred because of the massive spending that the Global War on Terror demanded, for instance the required us to do for reorganization of Homeland Security, the war operations, etc.. Some of it was brought on because of the creation of the largest entitlement package granted by a Republican administration by way of the drug benefit program. (Are we getting a safer nation, better security communication and screening, or cheaper drugs from Obama's spending?)

Yet despite a war being fought on two fronts, an overhaul of some 96 intelligence agencies and re-organization, and the biggest Government give-away in a generation or two, the economy continued to grow for seven uninterrupted years. Unemployment also remained LOW on average roughly 4.5%.

President Bush was far too willing to use the power of big government once the housing crisis began to materialize. Allowing businesses to hit the skids that had failed is what should have happened from the beginning. And Bush's willingness to try to bail out some (remember his administration did allow others to go bankrupt) only mitigated the pain of what was coming for a brief while. (Of course had Fannie and Freddie had any degree of oversight from Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus--instead of screaming "racist" when conservatives were warning everyone of what was to come--it might have helped too.) The government SHOULD have disciplined the joker who made off with 90 million in his pocket, Franklin Raines, and SHOULD have allowed Fannie and Freddie to fall flat on their nose as well.

So with Bush paving the way, Obama comes to power willing to use the scheme of bailout/stimulus to make a-bunch-o-brothers in the political "hood" very happy with post election day handouts. It's just the way they roll on da Sout-Side yo!

His stimulus plan SPENDS $1,300,000,000,000 that will take from the American people (instead of returning it to them) and then he goes and adds roughly $3,500,000,000,000 in his first budget. All of this we are told will fix the economy.

But NO ONE of reputation within American economic circles believes it will. And the DOW begins bleeding thousands of points each week that Obama is in office. Every plan the Obama administration puts forward, they seem shaky about. And on the single biggest need for action--the plan on the banking system--there is still NO plan nearly a month after he promised one "the next morning."

The perception in financial circles is that Obama's policies punish investment (which they do). And that stifles growth (which it always will). And without investors seeing the upside to taking risk and pushing for growth - no new jobs will materialize (never, ever). And this causes an economy that needs elasticity to become very contracted into itself and compressed into a state of sheer "hunker down."

And what's the result of Obama's 100% opposite reaction to a recession than Bush's? ($1.3 trillion taken from the people as opposed to $1.3 given back to the people?)

8.1% - Unemployment
651,000 - First time unemployment claims
31,000,000 - On food-stamps

The more President Obama desires to grow a powerful government that punishes producers in the economy, the longer this trend will extend.

If his desire is to become Hugo Chavez, then he's on the right path.

If his desire is to be a great, and distinctively American president... well... from the looks of things... at this moment... he's trailiing Jimmy Carter.

So what is going on at the White House, while America's economy continues to burn? Well if it's Wednesday then it must be party-time-excellent!

But after one more day in which the market sank further than it has been in over ten years the issue of how long the economy will be allowed to tank before something serious is done is being asked by... well... pretty much everyone who ISN'T being invited to "get down tonight" at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Tonight as the Lovely Bride and I were watching Special Report's all-star panel a thought struck me. All of the pundits, left, right, and center pointed to the fact that the Obama administration has no plan to improve the economy, thought they've continued to promise to have one again and again. When Obama gave his prime time news conference weeks ago he pledged that a detailed plan to aid the banking system would be revealed the next morning.

It wasn't.

He spoke again in broad strokes of generalities but with no specifics in his address to the Congress, but still no plan has emerged.

And tonight I sat wondering... If Obama is this uber-intellectual who supposedly can observe a problem from multiple angles and discern the different options of solutions and arrive at the best one. Why hasn't he done that with the economy.

Why hasn't the President, who is OBVIOUSLY in over his head with the economy, invited the top economists from Harvard and the Ivy League, from Michigan and Ohio State from the midwest, and from Stanford and other elite economic programs out west to come to the White House, to have them espouse their top theories for what the solution is to the economic challenge. And once he has dismissed them, implement their suggestions.

The reason is simple and far more obvious than I should've realized. Economists on nearly every major university campus would agree that in order to rescue the economy the nation has to see economic growth. Economic growth means deregulation, reduction in taxes and punitive policies, and incentives to grow, create jobs, etc.

The problem is... everything he is looking for by way of economic growth would force his hand to abandon his own plan for taxation, and seizure of control over the flow of the economy.

In other words, what the economists from around the nation have been saying publicly on television they would say to his face, and he is unwilling to listen.

In fact he is moving on to issues of education and health care while the financial house is burning to the ground. It's not that education and health care aren't important, but to act as though they are anywhere near equal to the impact of the economy at this very moment is c'est ridicule...

Ultimately all economists know that they only way to fix the problem is to reduce taxes on corporation, encourage the market to take risks, and to allow themselves as companies to reap the joys or consequences of those risks. To stop the bailouts, and to allow the market to be the market - is the right thing to do.

But President Obama is not interested in fixing it, thus why he's having a summit this week on the issue of health, and of course he's partying down Wednesday.

The one thing he is NOT planning on doing is entertaining the necessary policy to fix the economy, and his refusal to do sentences more Americans to go without.

No we can't... in this case... is far more accurate being described as... no we won't!