--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <do.rf...@...> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ShempMcGurk" shempmcgurk@ > wrote: > > > > Give ME money I don't have and I'll spend it like a drunken sailor, > too! > > > > No one -- and I mean no one -- has spent more money more quickly than > this president. > > > Bananas.
ha ha ha ha ha. Thanks SO much for finding and reproducing the graph below (sorry if it doesn't reproduce from John's post) because it simply proves the point I have been trying to make since Obama became president: IT IS NOT CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IT, IT IS UNCHANGE FROM BUSH'S POLICIES AND, INDEED, EXPANSION OF THEM. Look at how little the slice of the pie is for "Obama's agenda" and how large the collective slices are for "Bush policies", "Extension of Bush policies" and "Stimulus bill"! The "Obama Agenda" slice is the teeniest, tiniest of all the slices, singularly or collectively! As I just posted to Judy's response to me: you can't have it both ways. Either it is change you can believe it or it isn't. In this case it isn't as your graph clearly indicates. There is a T-Shirt advertised on the Drudge Report that says "Welcome Back Carter" with the Obama campaign symbol accompanying it. During the campaign, in response to Obama's claim to McCain that his presidency would be Bush's third term, McCain responded that Obama's would be Carter's second. But, to be honest and consistent we must conclude that, so far, it is Obama's presidency that has turned out to be Bush's third term...oh, and that's BEFORE we even discuss the Nobel Peace Prize winner's expansion of the war in Afghanistan. I'd say that makes Obama like LBJ and Vietnam but it's more like Nixon and Vietnam, isn't it? Because Vietnam wasn't Nixon's war -- he inherited from his two Democrat predecessors -- yet the Left made sure to publicly call it Nixon's war...and now we have Obama inheriting the Afghanistan war from a two-term Republican and, to be consistent, we shall have to now refer to it as Obama's war, especially since he is, if the press is to be believed, going to greatly expand the war effort in the coming weeks. > > What Caused the Budget Deficit? > > David Leonhardt has a nice article breaking down the sources > <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?hp> > of the growth in the budget deficit. Since Leonhardt works for The New > York Times rather than USA Today, they didn't see fit to illustrate > his article with a pie chart, but I made one myself: > [deficit] > "The first category the business cycle accounts > for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing." > > Second, Bush-era legislation "like his tax cuts and the > Medicare prescription drug benefit, [that] not only continue to cost the > government but have also increased interest payments on the national > debt." > > Third, "Obama's main contribution to the deficit is his > extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for > households making less than $250,000 [...] 20 percent of the swing." > > Fourth, "About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. > Obama signed in February." > > Fifth, "only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama's agenda on > health care, education, energy and other areas." > > In other words, the very high deficits are not Obama's fault according > to any normal way of assessing political blame... > > More here: http://snipurl.com/rtyig <http://snipurl.com/rtyig> > [yglesias_thinkprogress_org] > > > > > > > > > But I guess that's what you get when you elect a community organiser for > president. > > > > What do community organisers do? Why, they knock on the doors of > various levels of government with hand extended asking for money. > That's pretty much a full time job for those in the upper echelons of > community organisations. > > > > So when this guy became president and is now on the OTHER side of the > door he naturally thinks that his job is to give money to people on the > other side of it...and the more he gives out, the better a job he thinks > he is doing. After all, isn't that what he wanted government to do when > he was on the asking side of the door? > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" do.rflex@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > Obama's Brilliant First Year > > > By January, he will have accomplished more than any first-year > president > > > since Franklin Roosevelt.By Jacob Weisberg > > > > > > [Barack Obama. Click image to expand.] > > > <http://www.slate.com/id/2236712/> > > > > > > Barack Obama > > > > > > > > > About one thing, left and right seem to agree these days: > Obama > > > hasn't done anything yet. Maureen Dowd > > > <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opinion/22dowd.html?_r=1%26em> > and > > > Dick Cheney > > > > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/21/AR20091\ \ > \ > > > 02104242.html> have found common ground in scoffing at the > president's > > > "dithering." Newsweek recently ran a sympathetic cover story titled, > > > "Yes He Can (But He Sure Hasn't Yet)." > > > > > > > > > The sarcasm brigade thinks it's finally found an Achilles' heel in > his > > > lack of accomplishments. "When you look at my record, it's very > clear > > > what I've done so far and that is nothing. Nada. Almost one year and > > > nothing to show for it," Obama stand-in Fred Armisen recently riffed > on > > > Saturday Night Live. "It's chow time > > > <http://www.afterelton.com/blog/edkennedy/daily-show-10-06-09> ," > Jon > > > Stewart asserts, for a president who hasn't followed through on his > > > promises. > > > > > > This conventional wisdom about Obama's first year isn't just > > > prematureit's sure to be flipped on its head by the anniversary > of > > > his inauguration on Jan. 20. > > > > > > > > > If, as seems increasingly likely, Obama wins passage of a health > care > > > reform a bill by that date, he will deliver his first State of the > Union > > > address having accomplished more than any other postwar American > > > president at a comparable point in his presidency. This isn't an > > > ideological point or one that depends on agreement with his > policies. > > > It's a neutral assessment of his emerging recordhow many big, > > > transformational things Obama is likely to have made happen in his > first > > > 12 months in office. > > > > > > The case for Obama's successful freshman year rests above all on the > > > health care legislation now awaiting action in the Senate. > > > > > > > > > Democrats have been trying to pass national health insurance for 60 > > > years. Past presidents who tried to make it happen and failed > include > > > Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton. > Through > > > the summer, Obama caught flak <http://www.slate.com/id/2224026/> > for > > > letting Congress lead the process, as opposed to setting out his own > > > proposal. Now his political strategy is being vindicated. > > > > > > > > > The bill he signs may be flawed in any number of waysweak on > cost > > > control, too tied to the employer-based system, and inadequate in > terms > > > of consumer choice. But given the vastness of the enterprise and the > > > political obstacles, passing an imperfect behemoth and improving it > > > later is probably the only way to succeed where his predecessors > failed. > > > > > > We are so submerged in the details of this debatewhether the > bill > > > will include a "public option," limit coverage for abortion, or tax > > > Botox <http://www.slate.com/id/2236447/> that it's easy to lose > > > sight of the magnitude of the impending change. For the federal > > > government to take responsibility for health coverage will be a > > > transformation of the American social contract and the single > biggest > > > change in government's role since the New Deal. > > > > > > > > > If Obama governs for four or eight years and accomplishes nothing > else, > > > he may be judged the most consequential domestic president since > LBJ. He > > > will also undermine the view that Ronald Reagan permanently reversed > a > > > 50-year tide of American liberalism. > > > Obama's claim to a fertile first year doesn't rest on health care > alone. > > > There's mounting evidence that the $787 billion economic stimulus he > > > signed in Februarycombined with the bank bailout > > > packageprevented an economic depression. > > > > > > Should the stimulus have been larger? Should it have been more > weighted > > > to short-term spending, as opposed to long-term tax cuts? Would a > second > > > round be a good idea? > > > > > > Pundits and policymakers will argue these questions for years to > come. > > > But few mainstream economists seriously dispute that Obama's > decisive > > > action prevented a much deeper downturn and restored economic growth > in > > > the third quarter. > > > > > > The New York Times > > > > <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/business/economy/21stimulus.html?scp=\ \ > \ > > > 3%26sq=obama%2520economic%2520stimulus%26st=cse> recently quoted > Mark > > > Zandi, who was one of candidate John McCain's economic advisers, on > this > > > point: "The stimulus is doing what it was supposed to doit is > > > contributing to ending the recession," he said. "In my view, without > the > > > stimulus, G.D.P would still be negative and unemployment would be > firmly > > > over 11 percent." > > > When it comes to foreign policy, Obama's accomplishment has been > less > > > tangible but hardly less significant: He has put America on a new > > > footing with the rest of the world. > > > > > > > > > In a series of foreign trips and speeches, which critics deride as > trips > > > and speeches, he replaced George W. Bush's unilateral, moralistic > > > militarism with an approach that is multilateral, pragmatic, and > > > conciliatory. > > > > > > > > > Obama has already significantly reoriented policy toward Iran, > China, > > > Russia, Iraq, Israel, and the Islamic world. Next week, after a > > > much-disparaged period of review, he will announce a new strategy in > > > Afghanistan. No, the results do not yet merit his Nobel Peace Prize. > But > > > not since Reagan has a new president so swiftly and determinedly > > > remodeled America's global role. > > > > > > Obama has wisely deferred some smaller, politically hazardous > battles > > > over issues such as closing Guantanamo, ending "Don't Ask, Don't > Tell," > > > and fighting the expansion of Israel's West Bank settlements > > > <http://www.slate.com/id/2220309/> . Instead, he has saved his fire > for > > > his most urgent prioritiespreventing a depression, remaking > > > America's global image, and winning universal health insurance. Chow > > > time indeed, if you ask me. > > > > > > > > > http://www.slate.com/id/2236708/ > > > > > >
