His shameful behavior reveals just how much he cares about the people he pretends to help and the country he pretends to lead.
President Obama is inept, mendacious and destructive. In my opinion, his has been a failed presidency. Jimmy Carter must be relieved to be off the hook as “worst president of my lifetime.” For the rest of us, however, we must suffer through the consequences of another four years of this incompetent impostor. At the end, hopefully we have both a country and some freedom left.
There are some who believe the facade cannot last for another four years. We are in a recession (regardless of what the NBER says) and are not going to come out of it under Obama. His economically and socially irresponsible policies should be apparent to any thoughtful person who has escaped the educational indoctrination of our public schools and overcome any training in the fallacies of Keynesian economics. Sadly, that appears to represent a minority of our population, at least as judged by the last election.
Ruling out mass hypnosis, how does this charlatan retain any positive approval ratings? Two factors seem responsible:
- Create greater dependency as a means to buy votes.
- Blame anyone but himself for his failures.
The dependency issue seems self-evident. It has been a key play in the Democrat election strategy since the 1930s. Obama has merely taken it to new levels with his unemployment benefit extensions, expansion of food stamps and the ease in which people can claim disability. His shameful behavior reveals just how much he cares about the people he pretends to help and the country he pretends to lead.
The blame game has been played brilliantly by Obama. It is as if he was not around during the last four years. It was Bush’s fault, a Japanese storm, etc. etc. Nothing bad that happened did so on his watch. Interestingly, he claims no good things either — except when he is practicing interest-group politics. Then he goes to the gays, women, unions, immigrants, unemployed, or left-handed daughters of those who are descended from slavery with some vote-tested scheme. Even health-care cannot be claimed as an achievement as its horrors slowly emerge. Ultimately even that may be blamed on George Bush, given this guy’s ability to flaunt truth and reality.
But George Bush is wearing thin as the blame target. After four years it becomes more difficult to continue to blame this modern-day Democrat version of Satan. Obama desperately needs something/someone else to blame as things continue to deteriorate. The economy, for example, is beginning to decline again, although that would be difficult to accept if you listened only to the mainstream media as they run interference for their guy.
Massive stimulus can no longer hide the distortions and mis-allocations that preclude any recovery without a complete and total wash-out of these impediments. That is coming. Obama’s policies have only made matters worse. There is not a thing he can do to prevent what will be termed a “double-dip recession.” The truth is that we never got out of the original downturn, which will eventually become this country’s next Great Depression. I doubt whether that can be hidden for the next four years.
So, how will Obama wiggle out of this one? According to Dick Morris, that is what sequestration is all about. Mr. Morris believes that Obama’s bizarre behavior regarding sequestration is a brilliant strategy that allows the president his only hope of escaping a debacle in 2014 and a bigger one in the annals of history. Bush may be gone, but not those nasty old Republican lieutenants who, through their stinginess carry on his “failed economic policies” and will be blamed for the economic hell that lies ahead.
I think Mr. Morris gives Obama and his team too much credit for developing such a strategy, although possibly there is some master planner behind the scenes who has more smarts than surface behavior suggests. More than likely, it is a conditioned instinctual response, one that Obama has used throughout his life to never be responsible for anything. It was evident in his pre-political life and continued to be so in his early days of politics when he frequently voted “Present” rather than commit to a position in the Illinois legislature. It has continued throughout his political life on the national level with Benghazi representing the latest and most blatant example. It seems to be almost an animal instinct rather than a designed strategy.
Regardless, Mr. Morris identifies what he believes is a strategy, although he does not believe it will succeed. I am not so sure given his current popularity in what is a desperate economic time.
As an aside, wouldn’t it be delightful to watch a debate on this subject between H. L. Mencken and Morris. Such a contest would be a mismatch of the largest order. Mencken would wipe the floor with Mr. Morris (or any other so-called current-day pundit). Mencken would base his argument on the fatal fallacy in Mr. Morris’ position — the assumed intelligence of the American electorate.
In any case, here is Mr. Morris’ thinking:
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | President Obama and his media allies are pushing the notion that sequester will destroy Western Civilization. States are saying that the cuts will devastate the economy; the Pentagon insists they will “hollow out” President Obama’s massive and voluble campaign against the sequester has a deep political motivation that is not apparent on the surface. He is engaging in a battle he knows he’ll lose. Republicans are not going to budge on agreeing to tax hikes to avoid the sequester’s spending cuts, and Democrats won’t opt for entitlement cuts to avoid it, either. So why is he fighting so hard when he has no leverage and battling a measure that will take effect on March 1 if Congress does nothing — something it does rather well?
Here’s the answer: He knows the economy is tanking. He realizes that we are headed for a double-dip recession. He expects unemployment to soar. He understands that his almost $300 billion in tax increases this year will drive us into recession. So he needs an out.
That’s where sequestration fits in: If it goes into effect, he can blame Republican budget cuts for the economic disaster that will probably unfold this year.
It will be the GOP’s fault. All the warnings of the dire impact of these across-the-board budget cuts — including a New York Times article about how states fear the economic impact of sequester — are designed to set up a massive blame game in which he excoriates Republicans for the recession.
Such a stance will, of course, be totally phony. Having raised payroll taxes by $200 billion; income taxes by $65 billion; health insurance premiums by 10-20 percent this year alone; and capital gains taxes by 9 percent; as well as having imposed a home sales tax of 4 percent, a package well north of $300 billion — Obama will blame sequester, amounting to $85 billion, for all the fallout his taxes will cause.
Obama has always survived by using excuses. The recession and unemployment were George W. Bush’s fault. The slow recovery was because of the tsunami in Japan, the collapse of Greece was uncertainty over the debt limit, political gridlock in Washington is Republican threats to shut down the government. His policies are always blameless.
But now his failed policies are really coming up for a pasting. With the economy about to slip into a double-dip recession (we are likely already there) and then fall some more, he needs a super-excuse. It’s hard to say that a spending cut of one-half of 1 percent of gross domestic product will be responsible.
So the big lie bears repeating again and again and again.
First it emerges as a policy statement, then as a warning and prediction, and finally it becomes an explanation and a justification — a poor substitute for a correct policy in the first place.
Obama realizes he is running out of time and excuses. Now into his second term, a falloff in the economy is less likely to be blamed on Bush and more likely to kindle discontent with Obama’s policies. In bad economic times, we tend to blame the president, not his predecessor.
Obama is looking to the Hoover/Roosevelt model in which the continuing high unemployment rate in Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first term was universally — and correctly — ascribed to Herbert Hoover’s impact on the economy. But throughout FDR’s first term, unemployment dropped from a high of 26 percent in 1933 down to 13 percent in 1936.
FDR faced his own double dip when the economy crashed in 1937 and joblessness rose back up above 20 percent. The causes were the imposition of the Social Security tax — no benefits were paid out until 1940 — and the Wagner Act, which gave unions new power and radically increased wages. FDR couldn’t blame Hoover anymore. So he blamed the “economic royalists.” He said “the economic royalists hate me and I welcome their hatred.”
So Obama is copying the FDR playbook to avoid being identified with the second dip.
It didn’t work for FDR. He suffered huge losses in Congress in 1938 and only won again in 1940 because of the looming threat of war.
Obama’s blame game won’t work either. Voters will pay him back for his economic stewardship in 2014. Big time.