But the words were from Obama himself in his latest weekly radio address. "I wish I could tell you there was a quick fix to our economic problems," he said. "But the truth is we didn't get into this mess overnight, and we won't get out of it overnight. It's going to take time."
Obama has repeated this line ad nauseam ever since it became impossible to deny that reality had shattered his arrogant guarantee, more than two years ago, that he would keep unemployment below 8 percent if we would just pass his $800 billion "stimulus" package.
At the same time, he also introduced his phantom metric of "creating or saving" 3.5 million jobs -- a device that was as bloated with sophistry as Bill Clinton's verbal gyrations with the word "is." Though the claim is as improvable as it is immeasurable, our sustained horrendous unemployment levels nevertheless render it insultingly ludicrous on its face.
Obama apparently has no plays in his playbook other than to call for more government intervention and further blame his predecessor. He believes economic growth can only be rekindled through government intervention at the direction of his band of central planners.
So what type of grandiose government plan does he have in store for us now? He has proposed -- and been met with fierce opposition to -- further "stimulus" bills and a separate high-speed rail program that he is convinced we need even though the American people and the states disagree.
Undeterred, he's pursuing other government programs to stimulate economic activity, such as smothering oil drilling in the Gulf, extending unemployment benefits, promoting quixotic alternative energy sources and new automobile emission standards, higher tax rates for the evil rich, a government takeover of health care, further bailouts for Greece, and obstructing entitlement reform. Oh, wait, those wouldn't stimulate the economy.
What about Obama's Ivy League economic advisers, who know how to make an economy hum -- the theoretical, classroom widget-centered economy, that is. Not the real world. For in the real world, they're fresh out of ideas and full of excuses.
Instead, they just keep quitting -- not amid the shame they've earned, but in counterfactual triumph -- and returning to their cushy jobs in academia, where on their obedient blackboards they map out compliant economic models "proving" that government spending would trigger those fabled multipliers and cause their phantom economies to explode.