Some adults are beginning to show up at the Obama Inaugural Party (no, you didn't read that wrong, it's still going on). It's about time because the adolescent nature of the administration's message machine was sending paroxysms of doubt into the world's financial markets. Clever political schemes dreamed up by Carville, Emmanuel and others were seen by many voters and the markets as symptoms of a much more serious problem: cluelessness.
Last week David Broder began questioning the wisdom of the Obama administration's non stop rollout of one massive policy overhaul after another:
In its first six weeks in office, the administration has launched hugely expensive and ambitious programs, not only to spur employment and arrest a sickening slide in stocks, mortgages and profits, but to overhaul such complex and vital services as health care, education, and energy production and conservation.It has done this with a mere corporal's guard of key appointees in place. The White House itself is rather fully staffed, but the departments and agencies, where broad policies must be converted into real operations, have numerous openings....
Jack Welch had a more characteristically blunt take on the Obama administration's exceedingly broad agenda:
[Obama] is locked in another world. And he's throwing all these initiatives into this game in the middle of a crisis. Focus on the crisis! Focus on the economy!
Some Democrats must have gotten the message because the Washington Post is reporting that issues ranging from loosened sanctions on Cuba, eliminating charitable contribution deductions and cap and trade have created a divide between Democrats in Congress and the White House. It's a welcome relief that someone in Washington is paying attention to a White House that is determined to radically alter, in a matter of weeks, policy positions that are complexly intertwined with private sector productivity, funding, employment and federal tax policies.
The Obama administration seems oblivious to these realities. But, as Jennifer Rubin noted, "....fixing the economy is the hard part and doesn't necessarily lend itself to self-aggrandizing summits or campaign-type events." It may be that the lights are finally being switched off on the Obama Inaugural Bash by members of the president's own party, many of whom have had to win more than one contested election (and are acting like it).
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Barack Obama, Democrats, Harry Reid, Politicians, Politics
Comments (16)
And the buyer's re... (Below threshold)1. Posted by irongrampa | March 10, 2009 2:18 PM | Score: 19 (19 votes cast)
And the buyer's remorse escalates.
1. Posted by irongrampa | March 10, 2009 2:18 PM |
Score: 19 (19 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 14:18
2. Posted by joh | March 10, 2009 2:30 PM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
If by buyer's remorse you mean my neighbor bought a SUV using my credit cards, got drunk and crashed it into my living room, then yes, they have buyer's remorse.
2. Posted by joh | March 10, 2009 2:30 PM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 14:30
3. Posted by Franklin's Locke | March 10, 2009 3:50 PM | Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
money and driving up debt doesn't work. It would have been nice if they just read a history book and saw it did not work before (FDR and the New Deal) and think up something that does, like cutting taxes and limit spending. What else are they going to experiment with that was proven wrong and see if it works now? Price controls, maybe?
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
3. Posted by Franklin's Locke | March 10, 2009 3:50 PM |
Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 15:50
4. Posted by Steve Crickmore | March 10, 2009 3:53 PM | Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Dick Cheney huffed, "You know Paul, Reagan proved deficits don't matter..We won the midterms (congressional elections, 2002). This is our due." Bush and company fought two wars on a credit card. There were no words of criticsm or indignation from Republicans when Bush and the GOP who were the majority in Congress were spending and borrowing like drunken sailors and reversing the years of Clinton surpluses.
Indeed Bush 41 fired Paul O'Neil as Treasury Secretary, for warning of a financial crisis because of the growing national debt shortly after Cheney gave his ringing endorsement of the Bush policy of large defecits.
David Brooks, not exactly a Democract or Obama supporter, points out the obvious hypocrisy and irresponibility of the GOP.
4. Posted by Steve Crickmore | March 10, 2009 3:53 PM |
Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 15:53
5. Posted by HughS | March 10, 2009 4:28 PM | Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
David Brooks voted for Obama, Steve. Read a newspaper.
5. Posted by HughS | March 10, 2009 4:28 PM |
Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 16:28
6. Posted by Brian | March 10, 2009 4:40 PM | Score: -5 (7 votes cast)
But he's still "not exactly an Obama supporter". Even righty blogs say so.
Read a blog.
6. Posted by Brian | March 10, 2009 4:40 PM |
Score: -5 (7 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 16:40
7. Posted by cirby | March 10, 2009 5:12 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
"But he's still 'not exactly an Obama supporter'."
Well, not any more. He's just starting to wake up...
7. Posted by cirby | March 10, 2009 5:12 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 17:12
8. Posted by PTA Mom from Maryland | March 10, 2009 5:14 PM | Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
The earth is flat and Democrats are for poor people.
The "affordable" housing that Democrats pushed onto poor people included interest only and variable rate loans that are easier to default on and wreck your credit; when conventional wisdom for the middle class, even those with college degrees, is "never take out an interest only or variable rate mortgage".
The schools that Democrats push onto poor people graduate only half of the kids in Chicago and in Baltimore only 66% of the kids who want to graduate can pass 10th grade level tests. I've heard that 75% of African American males drop out of school in Baltimore City. They compete with illegal immigrants for jobs in 1 of the 4 states that allow illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses.
No, Democrats don't like poor people. They use poor people like a commodity to enrich their unions, enrich their buddies who bring "development" to the city, enrich their organizations who provide "services" to the poor, and enrich the businesses that save money and get around the Democrat's excessive regulation of the work place by hiring illegal immigrants.
In Chicago, the first Walmart opens in 2006 after intense union opposition, and 15,850 people apply for the 450 jobs.
If poor people had any idea how much money is supposedly spent on their behalf and NEVER reaches them, I believe they wouldn't vote for Democrats for a generation.
8. Posted by PTA Mom from Maryland | March 10, 2009 5:14 PM |
Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 17:14
9. Posted by hyperbolist | March 10, 2009 5:21 PM | Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
Christopher Buckley voted for Obama. Does that make him a liberal?
Did every conservative/right-leaning pundit (or any normal non-famous person for that matter) who voted for Obama transmogrify into a stoooopid liberal, even if they voted for the guy out of fear of Sarah Palin being the Vice President?
9. Posted by hyperbolist | March 10, 2009 5:21 PM |
Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 17:21
10. Posted by joh | March 10, 2009 6:08 PM | Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
Christopher Buckley voted for Obama. Does that make him a liberal?
No, it makes him a fool who sacrificed his common sense on the altar of elitism, in homage to the self proclaimed god-kings of academia.
His father famously said "I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University."
Christopher, and those of his ilk, always wish it to be otherwise.
10. Posted by joh | March 10, 2009 6:08 PM |
Score: 12 (12 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 18:08
11. Posted by retired military | March 10, 2009 7:09 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Hyper
No that makes them idiots. Sorta like you. Only maybe not quite as big.
11. Posted by retired military | March 10, 2009 7:09 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 19:09
12. Posted by Robert Scarzino | March 10, 2009 8:24 PM | Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
Lets face it, America made a big mistake electing this man, a community organizer with little or no experience doing anything meaningful in life. The man is a marxist sympathizer who must know that raising taxes in the middle of a recession and increasing spending to catastrophic levels will do nothing to improve our economy. His actions thus far will only serve to damage the economy and weaken our country in the long run. Perhaps he is the Manchurian canidate after all sent here to destroy America from within? Otherwise, if this guy is supposed to be so smart why does he seem so ignorant of history.
12. Posted by Robert Scarzino | March 10, 2009 8:24 PM |
Score: 10 (12 votes cast)
Posted on March 10, 2009 20:24
13. Posted by BAP | March 11, 2009 8:09 AM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
"There were no words of criticsm or indignation from Republicans when Bush and the GOP who were the majority in Congress were spending and borrowing like drunken sailors and reversing the years of Clinton surpluses."
I'm guessing you don't know many Republicans, Steve. The Republicans _I_ know were mad as hell about the way their "representatives" acted once they got into power. Even my normally mild-mannered father used some shockingly bad language when the GOP called seeking campaign donations.
There's a reason the Republicans lost, and it wasn't just because so many folks were infatuated with Barack Obama.
13. Posted by BAP | March 11, 2009 8:09 AM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on March 11, 2009 08:09
14. Posted by Joe Blow | March 11, 2009 8:23 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh yee 54 percent SUCKERS!
14. Posted by Joe Blow | March 11, 2009 8:23 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 11, 2009 08:23
15. Posted by john | March 11, 2009 8:40 AM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
I guess this was written before yesterday's big rally. Not that it had much directly to do with Obama anymore than the previous couple of weeks' slide but the fact the GOP and it's supporters are reduced to citing this sort of non sequitur activity shows the reality. Meanwhile the president is passing bills, turning back stem cell research bans and slowly stabilizing the financial system. We're going to have a year of poor economic performance as he attempts to right the ship after the shambles handed over to him which 84% of Americans clearly understand was created by Bush and the Republicans. He hasn't got much to worry about until mid 2010. If the economy is still in trouble he'll be in trouble,if it's on the mend he'll be FDR. Wake me then.
15. Posted by john | March 11, 2009 8:40 AM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on March 11, 2009 08:40
16. Posted by _Mike_ | March 11, 2009 1:03 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
I guess this was written before yesterday's big rally.
FYI.. Yesterday's "big rally" didn't even set a new high for March.
As to the topic, what Welch, Buffet, and other high profile Obama, the candidate, supporters are stating is that Obama is using the crisis to largely push programs that have little to nothing to do with economic recovery. As this fact becomes more obvious, it's going to get tough for Obama, the President, to maintain the facade.
16. Posted by _Mike_ | March 11, 2009 1:03 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on March 11, 2009 13:03