It’s Obama’s Economy. Hold Him Responsible For It.

June 8, 2011 12:00 A.M.
It’s Obama’s Economy, Stupid
Jonah Goldberg
No president “runs” the U.S. economy, but this president talks like he does.

Now, my administration has a job to do as well, and that job is to get this economy back on its feet,” President Obama declared on July 14, 2009, in Warren, Mich. “That’s my job, and it’s a job I gladly accept. I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, well, this is Obama’s economy. That’s fine. Give it to me.”

OK. It’s yours.

The unemployment rate then was 9.5 percent. It’s now 9.1 percent, well above the 8 percent cap that the administration’s advisers projected under the stimulus bill. But that’s not the amazing part. According to a White House report written by economic advisers Jared Bernstein and Christina Romer in January 2009 in support of the bill, if we had passed no stimulus package at all, the unemployment rate would have topped out at around 8.8 percent in the last quarter of 2010.

If only.

Instead, we got Obama’s vital “investments.” Since his speech in Warren, we’ve spent another $2.8 trillion in borrowed money. Presumably, we could have cut the unemployment rate by four-tenths of a percentage point more cheaply than that?

Meanwhile, we’ve accrued a total of $3.7 trillion in debt on Obama’s watch, while losing 2.8 million jobs. That doesn’t sound ideal either.

But what do I know?

The more salient point is that Obama acts like he knows everything. From Day One, this White House has been cocksure about how to get us out of the economic ditch. In every major relevant speech, Obama has stuck with a consistent message: We know what to do and the Republicans don’t. “I will not sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs,” Obama insisted yet again in his April budget speech.

So what does this guy have to do to get the blame for the bad economy? Mark Halperin, an analyst for MSNBC and Time magazine, was asked on the Today show over the weekend about the political impact of the bad economy. He assured viewers that the president was totally engaged in the need for job creation. “The Republicans, though, have the onus on them to come forward with some ideas. The president’s ideas are still a little bit up in the air.”

A little bit up in the air? They’re in concrete. From his April 14, 2009, “New Foundation” speech at Georgetown University to his latest campaign stop, Obama has insisted he knows exactly what he’s doing. He stands by “Obamacare” as a boon for the economy. He still sees the “green revolution” — and all the crony capitalism that comes with it — as the solution to our woes. (That’s why he nominated John Bryson, a former utility CEO, subsidy-seeking entrepreneur, and environmental activist, to be his next commerce secretary.)

But is there any evidence it’s helped create jobs? Consider that when President Reagan oversaw a huge jobs boom, the media recycled the untrue claim that these were all low-paying “hamburger flipper” jobs.

Well, McDonald’s alone may be responsible for a quarter to a half of the new jobs created in the last month. And that hiring probably wouldn’t have happened if Mickey D’s hadn’t been given a waiver from Obamacare.

And then there’s the stimulus, which the White House still touts as an unqualified success. Well, during Obama’s first year in office, more than half (119,000) of all the new jobs in the United States were created in business-friendly Texas, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If Obama created those jobs, why’d he put so many of them in, of all places, George W. Bush’s home state?

No president “runs” the U.S. economy, but this president talks like he does more than any I can remember. And yet, none of his economic promises or predictions has panned out. (Remember the long, hot “recovery summer” when 250,000 to 500,000 new jobs a month that the vice president promised turned out to be mirages?)

How does the media react? Not by taking him at his word when he says he wants it to be “Obama’s economy.” Instead, they’re ferociously truth-squadding Sarah Palin’s comments on Paul Revere and following her bus around like they’re in a remake of It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.

And maybe it is.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 Responses to “It’s Obama’s Economy. Hold Him Responsible For It.”

  1. The Dauntless Conservative Says:

    I heard Mitt Romney called out obamarx and said it it is his economy. I’m not all that impressed with Romney, but he is right on this one to call out obamarx. Obamarx did not inherit the economy, he volunteered for it.

  2. Michael Eden Says:


    I have presented the factual argument that Democrats CAUSED this economy by first creating Fannie and Freddie – which dominated the housing market and engaged in unreal shenanigans; second by passing things like the Cummunity Reinvestment Act; third by dramatically increasing these insane and reckless mortgage policies at the tail end of the Clinton administration; and fourth by preventing the Republicans who tried over and over again from being able to reform Fannie and Freddie when there was still time to avert disaster.

    Obama was in this mess up to his eyeballs through ACORN. And he took more campaign money from corrupt Fannie and Freddie (not to mention outfits like Lehman Bros) than ANYBODY.

    Obama’s fingerprints were actually ALL OVER this mess. The media simply didn’t care.

    But you’re right. Obama said “Give the economy to me,” before saying, “It was all Bush’s fault!”

  3. Jim Says:

    Its encouraging that Romney is taking it to Obama – nonetheless Romney care and his man made global warming stance makes him this year’s establishment republican. (another is Newt)

    I think Romney was only a viable candidate for the R nomination (2008) when the other choices were Huckaphoney and McCain (hero for his military service – his political service is rino-ish).

    Bachmann, Cain, Santorum, Pawlenty (and soooon Palin!) are candidates worth talking about.

  4. Michael Eden Says:


    I’m also really hoping that Rick Perry (Gov of Texas) enters the race.

    Perry is all the bennies of Romney without the Mormon, RomneyCare and waffling crap.

    Texas created 38% of ALL American jobs in 2010 while Obama was ruining the rest of the nation. THAT’S a record to run on.

    I would obviously support Romney if he’s the nominee, but I won’t be voting for him in the primary.

    But you’re right. We’ve already got a strong field.

  5. Robbie Says:

    One negative on Pawlenty would be his support of cap and trade two years ago – a constitutional position on healthcare and environment are essential.

    I think he has walked back his cap and trade stance – how can any conservative initially support something as orwellian as cap and trade? a child could figure out it was a bad idea!

    Herman Cain has come out and said homosexuality is a sin and a choice – which it is.

    America is once again becoming American. I was worred in 2008 ago while watching one of the news networks and a lib guest was trying to convince the host that “America is becoming more liberal, more gay, more environmentally aware….”

    I thought to myself this is either the end of our Republic or the seeds of its re-founding.

  6. Robbie Says:

    Yeah wouldn’t that be interesting Obama’s record vs Perry’s record. A country ruined and the great state Texas exploding with opportunity!

    Hows would the in the tank Obama media splain that to America?

    A Tale of Two Political Ideologies!

  7. Anonymous Says:

    MichaelE/Jim/Robbie: I have a question for the left: if obamarx is soooooooo smart as the left claims, then why can he not fix the economy as he claimed he would? What scares me more than obamarx and his ilk is the people that vote for them. And, to think that there are not socialist in Congress is a lie.

  8. The Dauntless Conservative Says:

    MichaelE/Jim/Robbie: I have a question for the left: If obamarx is soooooooooo smart, then why can’t he fix the economy? There is a socialist/progressive caucus in Congress:

    What scares me the most is the people that vote these clowns in.

  9. Michael Eden Says:


    My response is that the more intellectually intelligent a liberal is, the more morally stupid he or she becomes.

    We are not talking about intelligence in the IQ sense here; we are talking about moral intelligence. And liberals are morally stupid people.

    It’s a matter of worldviews. If you have a biblical worldview, you see the world through the “God’s-eyes” perspective. If you are a liberal, you see the world through the filters of garbage like Marxism, socialism and fascism. And you cannot possibly see the world as it is. Not only are you denying the ONLY real way of seeing the world – the God’s eye way – but you are instead replacing that with theories that are utterly refuted by history.

    That is what makes Obama stupid. It is what makes a liberal with twenty PhDs stupid.

  10. Michael Eden Says:


    I really hope that Rick Perry enters.

    Right now Romney is the default candidate. But that man carries all kinds of baggage that will turn off conservatives.

    Perry can offer the same “master of the economy” bonafides and more. He also doesn’t have all the wafflings and RomneyCare issues.

    We’ve actually got some good candidates, but there’s a question if candidates like Tim Pawlenty can gain traction against Romney’s machine.

  11. The Dauntless Conservative Says:

    MichaelE; sorry about the double post; the anonymous was mine @ 12:42…didn’t realize I was not logged in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: