Posts Tagged ‘downgrade’

Twelve Reasons Why Barack Obama Is Nearly COMPLETELY Responsible For The Downgrade

August 16, 2011

There is plenty of blaming and finger-pointing going on right now as to just who is responsible for the downgrade.  The White House and the Democrat Party have been saying two contradictory things: 1) that the downgrade is a meaningless and baseless act of a discredited Standard & Poor’s and it’s ‘flawed math’; and that 2) that it is all the Tea Party’s fault.  I know there are liberals reading this, so I shall explain what should be obvious: why blame the Tea Party for S & P’s flawed math?  Or why blame S & P for the Tea Party’s ‘terrorism’???  What you see here is a Democrat Party and a White House who have nothing left but demonization and who are playing every card whether those cards contradict one another or not.

As an example, take Senator John Kerry (who coincidentally is one of the Democrat picks to be on the debt commission), who demonized the Republican Party and its “tea party downgrade” moments before proceeding to ” lament how Republicans insist on pointing fingers and assigning blame in this national crisis.”  You’d think his head would explode from trying to contain all the contradictions, but he’s clearly long since become immune to such a malfunction of mal-logic, illustrated by his self-righteously lecturing Republicans that the rich need to pay their “fair share” in taxes while he was trying to avoid paying his fair share on his yacht and while he and his billionaire heiress wife paid less in taxes than the average American family.

For the record, “a top Moody’s analyst reiterated that the United States is running out of time to reduce its debt burden before his company, too, would downgrade the country’s debt.”  And Moody’s is basically saying, “We still might downgrade the U.S., too.”  Which is to say that MOODY’S is just about to make a math mistake, too.

And yesterday Moody’s just officially lowered its outlook for the United States.  Which means a big “oopsie” for Democrats who demonized S & P.

This downgrade was fundamentally due to out-of-control spending:

S&P downgrades US credit rating from AAA
Posted: Aug 05, 2011 7:14 PM PDT Updated: Aug 05, 2011 9:54 PM PDT
AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) – The United States has lost its sterling credit rating from Standard & Poor’s.

The credit rating agency on Friday lowered the nation’s AAA rating for the first time since granting it in 1917. The move came less than a week after a gridlocked Congress finally agreed to spending cuts that would reduce the debt by more than $2 trillion – a tumultuous process that contributed to convulsions in financial markets. The promised cuts were not enough to satisfy S&P.

The drop in the rating by one notch to AA-plus was telegraphed as a possibility back in April. The three main credit agencies, which also include Moody’s Investor Service and Fitch, had warned during the budget fight that if Congress did not cut spending far enough, the country faced a downgrade. Moody’s said it was keeping its AAA rating on the nation’s debt, but that it might still lower it.

And the Democrat Party are acting like drug addicts who are lashing out at anybody who gets between them and their next spending fix.

The Democrats are now treating Standard & Poor’s like Republicans, and of course they’ve ALREADY BEEN treating Republicans like “terrorists.”

This whole “Tea Party-terrorist” thing is beyond ridiculous.  Especially if the Democrats were to look in a mirror.  Here are twelve reasons that put the blame for this disaster precisely where the blame belongs:

1. Obama’s reckless and irresponsible spending was the primary reason for the downgradeLet me simply state as a fact that the Democrats who demonized Bush for reckless spending have been hypocrites without shame or decency in the Obama era from the very beginning.  We find that Obama’s deficit spending DWARFS Bush’s.  We find that Obama is pouring more than TWO-AND-A-HALF TIMES as much red ink on top of this country as Bush ever did.

And America has now crossed the insane threshold under Obama of having debt that actually exceeds the gross domestic product of the entire nation.

At some point any sane human being must say STOP!!!  But Obama and his Democrats simply are not sane human beings.

2.  Obama demanded the LARGEST debt ceiling increase in the history of the entire human race:

$2.4 Trillion Would Be Largest Debt-Limit Increase in U.S. History
Monday, August 01, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey

( – The bill to increase the federal debt limit that has been put before Congress today would increase that limit by up to $2.4 trillion, which would be the largest increase in the debt limit in U.S. history by a margin of half a trillion dollars, according to records published by the Government Accountability Office and the Congressional Research Service.
In fact, according to records published by the Congressional Research Service, if the current bill is passed and the debt limit is increased by $2.4 trillion, the two largest debt-limit increases in U.S. history would come in back-to-back years, both during the presidency of Barack Obama.
Up until now, the largest increase in the debt limit was the $1.9 trillion increase passed by Congress and signed by President Obama on Feb. 12, 2010. That law increased the debt limit from $12.394 trillion to $14.294 trillion.
Up until now, the second largest historical increase in the debt limit was enacted on March 27, 2003, when President George W. Bush signed a law that lifted the limit by $984 billion—from $6.400 trillion to $7.384 trillion.

I’ll wait until my third point to develop the ramifications of this.  But suffice it to say, considering that the landslide Republican takeover of the House of Representatives resulted from a fundamental GOP promise to reign in Obama’s reckless spending, raise your hand if you DON”T think Obama’s demand for back-to-back historic debt ceiling increases did NOT guarantee total war.

3.  Obama categorically stated that he would not sign ANY short term debt ceiling extension:

Sperling Says Obama Would Veto Short-Term Debt Ceiling Increase
Tuesday, July 26, 2011

July 26 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama would veto a short-term, six-month increase in the debt ceiling, the director of the White House National Economic Council said.

“The president has been pretty clear that he does not find that acceptable,” Gene Sperling said in an interview on MSNBC today. Sperling said “a faction” of House Republicans is blocking “this type of compromise, this balance that could get us there” in raising the debt ceiling and avoiding default.

It is without any question a pure demagogic talking point on the part of the left that Republicans or the Tea Party were “terrorists” who held America hostage.  BARACK OBAMA HELD AMERICA HOSTAGE.  In refusing to sign ANY short-term compromise extension, Obama said he wanted to either get it all, or send this country over a cliff to it’s fiery and bloody doom.  That’s one thing.  Furthermore, by demanding the largest debt ceiling increase in history AFTER GETTING THE PREVIOUS LARGEST DEBT CEILING INCREASE IN HISTORY, combined with this demand for no short-term extension, if you want to claim you are even a reasonably intelligent human being explain to me how Obama was NOT setting up America for an INCREDIBLY NASTY FIGHT THAT WOULD DRAG ON AND ON.

If you are arguing that this fight was somehow the Republicans’ fault or the Tea Party’s fault, you are frankly either stupid or you are insane.

4.  Obama refused to produce ANY plan of his own.  A president is supposed to lead.  And Obama not only failed to lead, he REFUSED to lead.

Republicans were BEGGING Obama to submit a plan so that the country could have some frame of reference to negotiate from:

Obama has set forth no plan to deal with anything whatsoever regarding the budget/debt ceiling crisis:

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): Where’s the president’s plan? When is he going to lay his cards on the table?

Senator Marco Rubio understood this when he utterly destroyed Bob Schieffer on CBS’ “Face The Nation” program after Schieffer – in his masquerade as a “neutral reporter” cited the Obama talking point as the “objective” view:

OK, so where’s the plan? Where’s the president’s plan? I’ve never seen a piece of paper with the president’s name on it that’s his plan to solve this crisis. I’ve seen press conferences. I’ve seen lectures that he’s given to the Congress. I’ve seen these press avails where the camera comes in and takes a bunch of pictures. I haven’t seen a plan. Where is the president’s plan?

And President Obama’s failure to lead is undermining negotiations. From ABC’s “This Week”:

MS. AMANPOUR: You also heard what Jack Lew said if there was part of a big deal, it would involve entitlements –

SEN. KYL: But we have no idea what he’s talking about. That’s the problem. Republicans are not willing to make a deal based upon some vague commitment that, sometime in the future, the president might be willing to look at something that he won’t identify.

By refusing to offer any kind of plan of his own, and for being like jello and taking one position one day, and a contrary position the next, Barack Obama created this crisis.  Republicans offered several plans, and they PASSED two bills that would have averted a credit downgrade.

5.  Obama REPEATEDLY fearmongered the debt negotiations and used reckless and false rhetoric such as “default.”  There is absolutely no question that Barack Obama quite literally FORCED this downgrade by using demagogic and flat-out false rhetoric.

The fact of the matter is that Obama repeatedly raised the public spectre of a “default” even as he tried to privately assure the banks that there was no way the U.S. would ever default.  What do you call that if not quintessential demagoguery???  Meanwhile, the actual facts of the matter – that the $200 billion in monthly revenue the U.S. was receiving was easily enough to pay all of America’s sovereign debt obligations with enough to pay out on Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, VA benefits and active duty military pay – proved that Barack Obama was playing an incredibly dangerous game.  Just what the hell were the ratings agencies to do about the fact that the sitting president of the United States repeatedly said that the nation might actually DEFAULT on its debt???

Obama repeatedly and in public raised the possibility that the United States might default.  And if default was ever even a possibility, our credit worthiness was in question.

Republicans tried to assure the nation, the markets and the world that the United States would NOT default.  Unfortunately, the president did everything he could to undermine that confidence.

Meanwhile, Obama was caught red-handed publicly frightening the American people with default talk while privately assuring the banks that there would be no default.

A Politico hit piece written on August 11th took a remark by an S & P official who specifically did NOT blame Republicans and then distorted it to blame Republicans:

Without specifically mentioning Republicans, S&P senior director Joydeep Mukherji said the stability and effectiveness of American political institutions were undermined by the fact that “people in the political arena were even talking about a potential default,” Mukherji said.

“That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable,” he added. “This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns.”

 Politico is trying to make it sound like it was the Republicans who hyped the fear of a default.  That is a flat-out LIE.  It was Obama and Geithner and the Democrat Party that continually raised the fear of “default,” even as Republicans continually assured the country that the U.S. could and would continue to make timely payment of principal and interest on its debt throughout any impasse.  Just as the U.S. government did the LAST time the government was shut down.

I pointed this fearmongering tactic out on July 18.  And on July 23, I pointed out that Obama’s fearmongering with the threat of “default” could very well lead to disaster.  I wrote:

This wouldn’t have been such a terrible crisis if Obama had been honest and promised that the U.S. would and could meet its obligations. Instead he used the debt ceiling deadline (said “deadline” already having been changed three previous times) to dishonestly demagogue and fearmonger the crisis ala Rahm Emanuel’s “never let a serious crisis go to waste” advice. In short, OBAMA LARGELY MANUFACTURED THIS CRISIS. Because all the rating agencies have done is take Obama’s demagogic rhetoric seriously.

So it’s just a little damn late for liberals to now try to blame Republicans for something that Obama started doing and then did often.

6.  Obama IRRESPONSIBLY did NOTHING for nearly three years while this went from a problem to a crisis to a disaster.  Why didn’t Democrats raise the debt ceiling in December after the election when Democrats still had total power over all three political branches in Washington?  Look at what Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said here:

Why Didn’t Democrats Raise The Debt Ceiling Last December?
Doug Mataconis   ·   Thursday, July 28, 2011

As we hurdle toward uncertainly, it’s worth noting, I think, that the Democrats passed on the opportunity to deal with the debt ceiling back in December 2010 when they still had control of Congress. Why, you might ask? I’ll let Harry Reid explain:

Briefing reporters yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he’s glad the debt ceiling was left out of this tax package. And he was unusually blunt about why.

“That’s something that we talked about,” Reid said. “My personal feeling is that I’m not sure — and a lot of my caucus doesn’t agree on this — but I think it may be better to do the debt ceiling, raise it next year rather than now.”


“I want the Republicans to have some buy-in on the debt,” he said. “They’re going to have a majority in the House. I think they should have some kind of a buy-in on the debt. I don’t think it should be when we have a heavily Democratic Senate, a heavily Democratic House and a Democratic president.”

Reid was responding to questions being raised as to why he wouldn’t attach the debt ceiling increase to the bill to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, a bill the GOP would be unlikely to vote against. His reason? Pure politics. Not shocking to those of us who have watched Washington for a long time, but it’s worth noting that neither side is innocent here.

Basically, Harry Reid was saying, “I want a huge fight.  I want to play a big game of chicken with America’s credit and its future.  I want a fight to the death so I can turn out my shrill rabid leftwing hate machine out.”

And the Democrats got EXACTLY what they wanted, didn’t they?

There is absolutely no question whatsoever that the Democrat Party engineered this crisis.  They should get to wear the result (the downgrade) like an albatross around their necks. 

7. Obama REFUSED to consider plans such as the House-passed Ryan Budget and the Cut, Cap and Balance bill.  Had we passed the Ryan budget that was passed by the House of Representatives, we would not have been downgraded:

Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Paul Ryan responded to Standard & Poor’s downgrading of America’s long-term debt by explaining to host Chris Wallace that Republicans in the House “passed a budget, which according to somebody from S&P yesterday, would have prevented this downgrade from happening in the first place.”

That budget had more than $6 trillion in cuts.  But Obama would have vetoed that bill even if the Democrats in the Senate had voted for it.

Had we passed the cut, cap and balance bill that was also passed by the House of Representatives, we would not have been downgraded:

Mr. Beers of the S&P said on FNC, ”Cut, cap and balance would have averted the downgrade since it is the only serious outlook on the debt.”

Harry Reid played a procedural game to prevent that bill from even coming up for an actual vote.  And – again – Obama said he would veto it if it came to his desk.  And when Obama made that announcement, the long-term bond market just went right down the toilet.

But it is REPUBLICANS’ faults that we were downgraded? Versus Obama, who at absolutely no time offered an actual plan of his own?

Someone pointed out that blaming the Tea Party for the downgrade is rather like blaming the Betty Ford Clinic for alcoholism.

8.  Obama’s reckless Federal Reserve policies forced this downgrade.

Japan was downgraded by S & P back in January and that fact would have lit a fire under the feet of a wise American president.  But nope.

Among other factors in Japan’s credit downgrade was its policy of quantitative easing.  We’ve already done QE twice (essentially creating $1.2 trillion dollars out of thin air) and are all but promising to do it a third time. 

Quantitative easing reduces the value of the dollar (making each dollar worth less and undermining saving) and sets up obvious future inflation and even hyperinflation if the economy actually begins to revive and more dollars begin chasing the same amount of finite goods and services.

QE was one giant step toward collapsing the U.S. dollar.

Don’t think that such reckless short-sighted fiscal policies didn’t hurt us and won’t hurt us even more in the future.

9. Obama REFUSED to sign a balanced budget amendment that would have prevented a downgrade.  Democrats offer the following as a refutation of this premise, saying that a top S & P official said that a balanced budget amendment would NOT have helped.  But what S & P’s John Chambers said was that:

“In general, we think that fiscal rules like these just diminish the flexibility of the government to respond. Also, when Congress has a long track record of trying to bind itself with various rules…But when push comes to shove, they don’t bind very much. So even if you had a Balanced Budget Amendment, you’d have some questions about it’s credibility, and it would just reduce your flexibility in a crisis.”

Here are the facts, however: 1) We most certainly COULD structure a balanced budget amendment that has a “way out” in case of true emergency with some high but not outrageous vote threshold granting an exception.  2) We most certainly COULD structure a balanced budget that was otherwise binding apart from such a declared emergency/crisis.  3.  Fourteen states – Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming – have AAA bond ratings in America.  And all fourteen of those states have particularly rigorous balanced budget requirements in addition to maintaining budgets that do not rely heavily on borrowing.  And while their balanced budget requirements are not the official reason for their high bond rating, it is because of that requirement that they do not excessively borrow.

Obama openly mocked a balanced budget.

It is morally insane to continue to blame Republicans for massive spending when Republicans want a balanced budget requirement that would prevent massive spending.  But the very same Democrats who refuse to allow a balanced budget requirement that would curtail federal spending to get off the ground continue to blame the Republicans who are doing everything they possibly can to curtail spending.

10. Obama CONTINUED to demand tax increases even after the Democrat-controlled Senate abandoned tax hikes.  Frankly, Obama has been all over the board on tax hikes, which further demonstrates why John Boehner’s frustration in trying to negotiate with a man who had all the consistency of jello that had been left out of the refrigerator was correct.  He’s wanted tax hikes until he didn’t want them only to want them again.

In August 2009, Obama said, “you don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

Well, here we are with an economy that is on the verge of going into a severe double-dip recession – which economists say would be even worse than the last one that we allegedly just got out of – and Obama begins harping on tax hikes and pushing a class warfare agenda as a condition for getting a debt ceiling increase.

Until he backed Harry Reid’s kind-of sort-of plan that didn’t have any tax hikes in it.  Until he changed his mind and began to call for tax hikes only hours after backing a plan that called for no tax hikes:

In his White House speech tonight, President Obama renewed his call for a debt-ceiling impasse solution which requires “the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their breaks in the tax code and special deductions.” In other words, he wants tax increases, even though earlier in the day, he backed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s “plan” (using the term loosely, as explained here and here) which, according to two separate reports (USAT; ABC), includes no tax increases.

In other words, the President, from all appearances, changed his mind — again. Calling the President’s performance in the debt-ceiling matter during the past several weeks “Jello-like” would appear to be an insult to the referenced food product.

What on earth is Obama’s position?  Which was different yesterday and which will very likely be different again tomorrow and then different from that the next day?

One other thing on this point: Democrats were demanding that the Republican House increase taxes when DEMOCRATS didn’t have the political will to raise taxes in late 2010 when they had control of all three political branches.  How was demanding that Republicans do the very thing they ran on not doing when even DEMOCRATS wouldn’t do that very thing just a few months earlier doing anything other than deliberately creating a crisis?

11. Obama allowed vile and poisonous rhetoric to poison the climate.  Hey, I’ll tell you what.  I’m going to be talking about yo’ mamma.  I’m going to publicly say that yo’ mamma is a whore and a slut, and that yo’ mamma has no idea who yo’ daddy is because she was doing the nasty with like 300 guys the week you were conceived.  But, you know what, after that I hope you sit down with me for a nice quiet negotiation and display a willingness to compromise.

And do you know what kind of “willingness” you’re going to show me?  How about the willingness to punch me in the face about a thousand times?

Democrats called us “terrorists” and “bomb throwers.”  They compared us to Hezbollah and Hamas and accused us of taking America hostage.  Obama’s very own vice preseident called Republicans “terrorists.”  And then they’re somehow surprised that we didn’t cheerfully show up at the negotiating table every day with an attitude of “let’s work together”???  And the same people who just rabidly demonized us were saying, “Why won’t they work with us?” 

How about because you’re about a hundred million gazillion years from evolving into slime for starters?

The Democrat Party poisoned the negotiations.  As I’ve already documented, they could have averted this entire mess to begin with by doing their jobs last year.  THEY DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY SET UP THIS FIGHTThey wanted this poison pit.  And they put their fangs on and started spitting out venom right away.

And Barack Obama sat back and let them do it.

For the record, in terms of which party was “terrorist,” consider how the Democrats voted for the bill that increased the debt ceiling and averted the shutdown.  We find that not only was the Democrat Party as a whole more “terrorist” than the Republican Party, but in fact that the Democrat Party was even more “terrorist” than THE TEA PARTY CAUCUS all by itself.  Which is to say that every single time Democrats point a finger at Republicans and label them “terrorist,” there are in fact three terrorist fingers pointing back at Democrats.

12. The Obama administration arrogantly and irresponsibly refused to deal with reality.  There’s the way you wish real hard upon a star that the world would be, and then there’s the way the world actually is.  Which world do you want the president of the United States of America to live in?

If you picked the real world, you should agree with me that it is time to get a new administration.  Because the one we’ve got lives in some combination of Never Never Land and fantasy land.

Look at what Obama’s handpicked tax cheating Treasury Secretary had to say about the possibility of a rating downgrade before he proved to be so completely wrong:

Geithner Downgrades His Own Credibility to Junk
By Jonathan Weil- Apr 20, 2011 4:00 PM PT

Fox Business reporter Peter Barnes began his televised interview with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner two days ago with this question:“Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?”

Geithner’s response: “No risk of that.”

“No risk?” Barnes asked.

“No risk,” Geithner said.

It’s enough to make you wonder: How could Geithner know this to be true? The short answer is he couldn’t.

And keep in mind that Weil was pointing out that Timothy Geithner had forfeited any credibility BEFORE the downgrade so disastrously proved him completely wrong.  It was an utterly inexcusable thing to do.

This is hardly the kind of leadership we need.  When our house is about to burn down, a confident assurance that there isn’t any fire is beyond stupid.

That’s twelve reasons why the American people should be blaming the man who ought to have a big “The buck stops here” plaque on his desk anyway.  And some of them are pretty damnable reasons, indeed.


Obama As The Stupidest Genius President Ever

August 10, 2011

Well, at least he’s not arrogant, right?

The aircraft was large, modern and considered among the world’s safest. But that night it was flying straight into a huge thunderstorm. Turbulence was extreme, and airspeed indicators may not have been functioning properly. Worse, the pilots were incompetent. As the plane threatened to stall they panicked by pointing the nose up, losing speed when they ought to have done the opposite. It was all over in minutes.

Was this the fate of Flight 447, the Air France jet that plunged mysteriously into the Atlantic a couple of years ago? Could be. What I’m talking about here is the Obama presidency.

When it comes to piloting, Barack Obama seems to think he’s the political equivalent of Charles Lindbergh, Chuck Yeager and—in a “Fly Me to the Moon” sort of way—Nat King Cole rolled into one. “I think I’m a better speech writer than my speech writers,” he reportedly told an aide in 2008. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m . . . a better political director than my political director.”

On another occasion—at the 2004 Democratic convention—Mr. Obama explained to a Chicago Tribune reporter that “I’m LeBron, baby. I can play at this level. I got game.”

Of course, it’s tempting to be immodest when your admirers are so immodest about you. How many times have we heard it said that Mr. Obama is the smartest president ever? Even when he’s criticized, his failures are usually chalked up to his supposed brilliance. Liberals say he’s too cerebral for the Beltway rough-and-tumble; conservatives often seem to think his blunders, foreign and domestic, are all part of a cunning scheme to turn the U.S. into a combination of Finland, Cuba and Saudi Arabia.

I don’t buy it. I just think the president isn’t very bright.

Socrates taught that wisdom begins in the recognition of how little we know. Mr. Obama is perpetually intent on telling us how much he knows. Aristotle wrote that the type of intelligence most needed in politics is prudence, which in turn requires experience. Mr. Obama came to office with no experience. Plutarch warned that flattery “makes itself an obstacle and pestilence to great houses and great affairs.” Today’s White House, more so than any in memory, is stuffed with flatterers.

Much is made of the president’s rhetorical gifts. This is the sort of thing that can be credited only by people who think that a command of English syntax is a mark of great intellectual distinction. Can anyone recall a memorable phrase from one of Mr. Obama’s big speeches that didn’t amount to cliché? As for the small speeches, such as the one we were kept waiting 50 minutes for yesterday, we get Triple-A bromides about America remaining a “Triple-A country.” Which, when it comes to long-term sovereign debt, is precisely what we no longer are under Mr. Obama.

Then there is Mr. Obama as political tactician. He makes predictions that prove false. He makes promises he cannot honor. He raises expectations he cannot meet. He reneges on commitments made in private. He surrenders positions staked in public. He is absent from issues in which he has a duty to be involved. He is overbearing when he ought to be absent. At the height of the financial panic of 1907, Teddy Roosevelt, who had done much to bring the panic about by inveighing against big business, at least had the good sense to stick to his bear hunt and let J.P. Morgan sort things out. Not so this president, who puts a new twist on an old put-down: Every time he opens his mouth, he subtracts from the sum total of financial capital.

Then there’s his habit of never trimming his sails, much less tacking to the prevailing wind. When Bill Clinton got hammered on health care, he reverted to centrist course and passed welfare reform. When it looked like the Iraq war was going to be lost, George Bush fired Don Rumsfeld and ordered the surge.

Mr. Obama, by contrast, appears to consider himself immune from error. Perhaps this explains why he has now doubled down on Heckuva Job Geithner. It also explains his insulting and politically inept habit of suggesting—whether the issue is health care, or Arab-Israeli peace, or change we can believe in at some point in God’s good time—that the fault always lies in the failure of his audiences to listen attentively. It doesn’t. In politics, a failure of communication is always the fault of the communicator.

Much of the media has spent the past decade obsessing about the malapropisms of George W. Bush, the ignorance of Sarah Palin, and perhaps soon the stupidity of Rick Perry. Nothing is so typical of middling minds than to harp on the intellectual deficiencies of the slightly less smart and considerably more successful.

But it takes actual smarts to understand that glibness and self-belief are not sufficient proof of genuine intelligence. Stupid is as stupid does, said the great philosopher Forrest Gump. The presidency of Barack Obama is a case study in stupid does.

Oh, well. Never mind about that thing about him not being pretty much the world’s most self-exalted specimen in the history of the human race.

By some strange coincidence (or by some mystical alignment revealing the essence of Obama for the foolish fraud that he is), the same day the above article emerged the following Dilbert cartoon came out:

Note the stunning similarity in character: yes, the narcissist is a complete screw-up, but somehow he believes himself to be absolutely magnificent.

Have you ever encountered one of those punk kids who was just as certain that he was smarter than everybody else as he was that he was God’s gift to the entire universe?  Usually these arrogant little vermin end up in prison because they just keep going farther and farther and getting away with crap until they finally take that one giant step too far.  But occasionally they get elected president before the truth emerges about them.

When that happens, in the words of former chair of Obama’s council of economic advisers Christina Romer, we are all “pretty darned f—ked.”  At least, that is, until somebody finally does something to control the irritating little turd.

We Need A Leader. Unfortunately We’ve Got A Fool-in-Chief

August 9, 2011

I wrote up my own comments in an article I wrote yesterday titled “Obama On Downgrade, Market Plunge: The Buck Stops With (Anyone BUT) Me.”  But Judith Miller’s systematic take-down on Obama’s speech should be preserved.

In Debt Downgrade Aftermath, Obama Serves Up a Silly Speech
By Judith Miller
Published August 08, 2011 |

First, do no harm. That is a useful injunction for doctors, lawyers, and, it turns out, U.S. presidents.
But President Obama’s useless speech Monday about the basic soundness of the American economy managed to reinforce all the concerns Americans on the left and right have about his stewardship of the country.
The speech did at least temporary harm. As soon as he finished speaking, the already jittery financial markets plunged.
Americans didn’t want to hear that we’re fine people or that Warren Buffett thinks that we should have an impeccable credit rating.

They didn’t want him to repeat his basic talking points: the need to marshal the “political will” to extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance benefits, or create an infrastructure bank.

They didn’t want to hear his perfectly reasonable desire to solve the debt crisis over time by cutting spending after the economy recovers and by raising more revenue from what the president now calls “tax reform” rather than new taxes.

Americans wanted to hear what President Obama was planning to do to create jobs and stop our economy from slipping over an economic abyss into a double-dip recession.

His calm, passionless, “voice of reason” message, without a single new proposal except his pledge to make specific proposals in the future and work with the Congressionally designated super-committee to address the deficit and debt crises – “leading from behind again” – actually panicked the markets. And no wonder.  Americans were looking for a leader, and what we got was the professor again.

One must sympathize with the president. Last week was his worst week ever in the job.

First, he turned 50, usually traumatic for most people, even politicians.

Then he became the first president to have a downgrading of America’s credit worthiness on his watch – an action taken by Standard & Poor’s, a company that made a two trillion dollar mistake in its own budget calculations and which gave the highest credit rating to Lehman Brothers on the verge of bankruptcy and to the mortgage-backed securities that helped cause the 2008 financial crisis. How do you spell “chutzpah” on Wall Street?

Then he presided over the deadliest day in Afghanistan– the loss of 30 Americans soldiers, most of them Navy Seal commandos, some from the same unit that killed Usama Bin Laden. (He lauded their courage and sacrifice in the only convincing part of his today’s speech – at the end of that speech, which he introduced with the world’s most awkward transition: “One More Thing.”)

Then markets plunged.

The president has now managed to deepen the alienation of the right – which I believe unfairly accuses him of being a free-wheeling tax and spender whose profligacy is responsible for the nation’s slow growth and falling credit worthiness.

Now, the left of his party, too, is in full rebellion. On Sunday, Drew Westen, a professor of psychology at Emory, articulated the fury of liberal Democrats in a New York Times Sunday Review essay.

He excoriated Obama for failing to provide a “counternarrative” to that of the right and for engaging in “the politics of appeasement” with the Tea Party. The public, he wrote, was desperate for a Roosevelt who would name names and assign blame – to his predecessors. (Hasn’t Obama done a lot of that?) Instead, it got more rhetoric. Instead of indicting his predecessors’ economic policies that had eliminated eight million jobs, “in the most damaging of the tic-like gestures of compromise that have become the hallmark of his presidency,” Westen wrote, “he backed away from his advisers who proposed a big stimulus, and then diluted it with tax cuts that had already been shown to be inert.” The predictable result was a “half-stimulus that half-stimulated the economy.”

How can one explain this lack of leadership? Westen offered several harsh theories. Perhaps Obama is, as conservatives have alleged, too inexperienced and hence, incompetent. Obama, he wrote, “had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state.” He had a “singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography.” Finally, before joining the Senate, he had voted “present” rather than “yea” or “nay” 130 times, “sometimes dodging difficult issues.”

But wait. Westen has an even harsher explanation, namely that America is being “held hostage not just by an extremist Republican Party but also by a president who either does not know what he believes or is willing to take whatever position he thinks will lead to his re-election.”

Ouch. No wonder Mr. Obama looked so very shaken during a speech that was intended to boost the nation’s confidence.

Obama came on television when we needed a leader.  And of course all we got was a clueless clown.

“Here’s my plan.”  “Here’s what we need to do.”  You’re not going to get anything like that from THIS Disgrace.

Obama is THE POSTER BOY for the phrase “all talk, no action.”  All this man ever offers is another useless speech.

I’m still waiting for Obama to give his “My work here is done” speech:

But it appears he thinks he can still do more to destroy America.

Obama On Downgrade, Market Plunge: ‘The Buck Stops With (Anyone BUT) Me’

August 8, 2011

A quote from Fox News Special Report on Obama’s remarks today:

“He didn’t offer much new or take responsibility for the exploding debt. …  The White House doesn’t seem to want to admit it’s been adding to that debt handily.”

Turbo Tax Timothy Geithner (that’s the guy who wasn’t smart enough or honest enough to pay his own taxes before taking a job making him responsible for everyone else paying their taxes) was asked if the White House accepted any responsibility for this disaster.  And nope (see also here for video):

Harwood: Do you feel that you or the administration’s policies are in any way responsible for this downgrade?

GEITHNER: Absolutely not. You’ve seen the president work incredibly hard and make really amazing progress trying to heal the damage caused by this terrible crisis. And you saw him work his heart out to try and bring both parties together to reach agreement on a long-term fiscal deal. Made some progress, didn’t solve it all, but a very good down payment.

Mind you, this is the same utterly clueless idiot – who represents the arrogance and stupidity of the Obama administration – who said there was “No risk” that the U.S. would be downgraded to begin with.

Nothing to see here folks.  The White House had nothing to do with any of this.  Don’t look to us for any answers.  Go talk to President Bush and blame HIM three years into the Obama administration. 

At the White House press conference, Jay Carney repeated the party line that no one should look to the White House to be responsible for anything.

On the TV circuit, Democrats repeatedly trotted (or is that “Trotsky’d”???) out the poll-tested talking point that this is the “Tea Party downgrade” because the Tea Party wanted to reduce America’s debt which is clearly stupid in any debt crisis, right?  I mean, so what if America’s debt just crossed the tipping point threshold of being more than its ENTIRE gross domestic product?!?!?

Democrats are crawling out to any mainstream media venue that allows cockroaches (that’s pretty much any mainstream media venue, mind you) and calls the Tea Party “terrorists.”  But the vote on the debt ceiling extension combined with the fact that Democrats never bothered to offer any plan of their own on top of the fact that they still haven’t come up with an F-ING BUDGET after 832 days really ought to point out that when they point a finger at us and call us “terrorists” three fingers are pointing back at themselves.

Democrats would have to quadruple in maturity to even qualify as “infantile.”

Sadly, Bush is the only president who is responsible for anything these days.  Did I mention we’re well into the third year of the failed Obama presidency?

Here are a few write-ups in the blog world that I found interesting:

50 Minutes Late Obama FINALLY Speaks About S&P,He Takes NO Responsibility More Lecturing and Blames Congress!

Barack Obama says the U.S. always is and always has been a triple-A country, despite its rating agency downgrade.

He said also the U.S. didn’t need a rating agency to tell it that it’s political system was having trouble functioning.

Speaking at the White House on the Standard & Poor’s downgrade, Obama renewed a plea to Congress to take action in September of help create jobs and cushion Americans from a still weak economy.

Obama said financial markets around the world “still believe our credit is triple-A.  I and the world’s investor’s agree.”

Well, if “agree” means “panic-selling that puts us into bear-market territory” with a 635 point smackdown that constitutes the sixth largest loss on the Dow in history, then Obama ISN’T completely out-of-touch with reality.

Obama offered no solutions whatsoever.  That after not bothering to speak at ALL for the entire weekened after the downgrade was announced on Friday, and apparently after showing up fifty minutes late to his own pony show.  The markets were down when Obama started speaking, and after he reasurred the world the markets pretty much said, “That’s it; we’re outa here.”

Obama’s Address to the Nation: Draws line in sand, there must be no lines in sand other than the ones I draw
Posted by William A. Jacobson   Monday, August 8, 2011 at 2:03pm

Barack Obama read a statement today, my paraphrases and quick transcription:
Disputes downgrade. Quotes Warren Buffett that U.S. should have AAAA rating.
 Need “balanced long term approach” — needed “day I took office.” Blames “prolonged debate over debt ceiling” for downgrade, and string of economic disruptions in Japan, Europe and the Middle East.
Solution is simple: “Tax reform that will ask those who can afford it to pay their fair share.” And “modest adjustments” to entitlements.
Not a lack of plans, “insistence on drawing lines in the sand.”
Most immediate concern of Americans is slow pace of recovery coming out of “worst recession” in our lifetimes. Extend payroll tax cut as soon as possible, and extend unemployment insurance payments. One million fewer jobs if don’t do this. Plus, more infrastructure spending.
These are proposals Republicans had agreed to in the past and should agree to now.
“This is the United States of America, no matter what some ratings agency says, we will always be a AAA country.”

So put on your make-believe pirate hats, boys and girls.  Because we’re going to live in a fun pretend world where we AREN’T downgraded and all of Obama’s utterly failed policies are just working swell.

I like the way the headline brings out that only Obama’s line in the sand demanding tax hikes will be accepted.  If you have your own ideas, you’re responsible for the crisis because OBAMA IS HE WHO MUST NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE.

Obama set this crisis up in two ways: 1) he demanded the largest debt ceiling increase in history which in turn forced Republicans to demand concessionsn (see here for the historic asininity of that demand).  Just so he could get through the 2012 election for his own political ambition at the expense of the country; and 2) He NEVER offered his own plan and took any personal leadership whatsoever; and 3) he repeatedly used the horrific spectre of a “default” which forced Standard & Poors to take his idiot fool warning seriously.  Republicans repeatedly tried to assure the nation that we were never in any risk of default; on top of the fact that we had enough revenue coming in to pay all of our fundamental obligations, we could simply print more money if we truly had to.  But Obama chose to fearmonger and demonize us into this credit downgrade.

Mind you, I am asking the question that if “making the people who are already paying ALL the taxes pay their ‘fair’ share” is the answer, THEN WHY THE HELL IS SOCIALIST TAX-HELL EUROPE going down the toilet and out into the stinky sea?

Barack Obama NEVER bothered to offer a plan so that anybody could have any idea where he was at any point to actually intelligently negotiate with him.  His budget was such a sick, pathetic DISGRACE that it got voted down 97-0 in his own Democrat-controlled SenateAnd did I mention that Democrats STILL HAVEN’T BOTHERED TO SUBMIT A BUDGET AFTER 832 DAYS?!?!?

This downgrade is a national disgrace.  And the man with whom the buck stops whether he’ll ever actually accept any responsibility or not is the FIRST DOWNGRADED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY.  What I said remains true: this entire fiasco proves that Obama is dishonest, polarizing and in over his head.  And at no time has Obama ever once demonstrated ANY leadership whatsoever.

Let me ask you something.  I’ve said repeatedly that Barack Obama – the president of God damn America and the symbol of God’s wrath on this nation until this disgrace leaves office IN disgrace – would lead us into a Great Depression with his reckless and depraved spending.  Meanwhile, Obama, the Democrat Party and the left said that Obama would lead us unto a glorious recovery.

I’ve been pointing out since December 2008 right after Obama was elected that we would be staring into the abyss of a Great Depression due to this evil man’s failed policies.  I pointed out in that article that the Great Depression began with a market tank, followed by a series of failed liberal-progressive policies that were like sugar for a diabetic; at first things seemed to get better, and then we had the real crash.  You look at what I wrote in that article and tell me that we aren’t right on schedule. 

We have the worst economy since the LAST time a failed socialist ran it into the ground in the 1930s.  Surprise, surprise.

Let me point out that as early as October of 2008 I was pointing out the FACTS that CEOs “went as far as to say that “some of his programs would bankrupt the country within three years, if implemented.”  Let me point out that I pointed out that same fact again in February 2009 after Obama’s foolish and wicked policies started taking shape.

Who was right?  And who has been totally full of CRAP from the getgo?

Conservatives have been right again and again and again and Democrats have continued to demonize us even as their own failed policies have kept failing just like we said they would.

‘No Risk’ Of US Credit Downgrade? Clueless Timothy Geithner Has GOT To Go

August 8, 2011

Let the words of Turbo Tax (so named because the man who would be charged with enforcing US tax laws and policy failed to pay his own damned taxes and then blamed it on Turbo Tax) Timothy Geithner now resonate throughout the land:

That now proven-to-be-utterly stupid pronouncement was not what people who had something of an actual clue were saying prior to the debt deal:

Analysis: U.S. credit downgrade ‘inevitable’
By Daniel Stone | The Daily Beast – Mon, Jul 25, 2011

Only seven days stand between the U.S. and the effects of a credit default. But a downgrade of the nation’s stellar AAA credit rating seems a lot more likely, and a lot sooner.

The White House had been alerted repeatedly over the past month by rating agencies that without a strong, long-term plan to restructure the country’s debt, they would lower America’s credit rating as soon as this Friday, according to two officials familiar with the process. The White House was warned that the deal would have to be significant—and not a short-term fix over the next few days to avoid a credit drop.

Which makes it worth asking: Just what DOES this fool actually understand?  And why on earth should anyone believe anything he says after this???

Notice that the following article was questioning Geithner’s basic intelligence well before the S & P decision to downgrade the US credit rating Friday at a time when maybe Geithner could have turned out to be correct.

Geithner Downgrades His Own Credibility to Junk: Jonathan Weil
By Jonathan Weil- Apr 20, 2011 4:00 PM PT

Fox Business reporter Peter Barnesbegan his televised interview with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner two days ago with this question: “Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?”

Geithner’s response: “No risk of that.”

“No risk?” Barnes asked.

“No risk,” Geithner said.

It’s enough to make you wonder: How could Geithner know this to be true? The short answer is he couldn’t.

All you have to do is read the research report Standard & Poor’s published on April 18 about its sovereign-credit rating for the U.S., and you will see it estimated the risk of a downgrade quite succinctly. “We believe there is at least a one-in-three likelihood that we could lower our long-term rating on the U.S. within two years,” said S&P, which reduced its outlook on the government’s debt to “negative” from“stable.”

There you have it: Geithner says the chance of a downgrade is zero. S&P says the odds it will cut its rating might be greater than one out of three.  So who are you going to believe? Geithner? Or the people at S&P who actually will be deciding what S&P will do about S&P’s own rating of U.S. sovereign debt?

It would be one thing to express the view that a downgrade would be unwarranted, or that the chance of it happening is remote. Either of these positions would be defensible. Geithner went beyond that and staked out an absolutist stance that reeks of raw arrogance: There is no risk a rating cut will occur. He left no room for a trace of a possibility, ever.

Battling Barney

The mystery is why Geithner would say such a thing. What’s he going to do if S&P or some other rating company winds up disagreeing with him? Send Barney Frank to beat them up?  The problem for leaders who make indefensible claims like this one is that, after a while, nobody knows whether to believe anything they say. Just remember all those government officials inGreece, Ireland and Portugal who kept saying their countries didn’t need bailouts, long after it became clear they did.

This was the same answer Geithner gave during an ABC News interview in February 2010, when asked if the U.S. might lose its AAA rating. “Absolutely not,” he said. “That will never happen to this country.” So, an asteroid could destroy the entire Eastern seaboard 100 years from now. And, in the world according to Geithner, we’re supposed to believe America’s top rating would be safe.

Perhaps Geithner would be well-positioned to make such assessments if he were the only person on the planet with the authority to grade sovereign debt — and if there were zero risk that he would ever die. Not only is Geithner mortal, he doesn’t even work for a nationally recognized statistical rating organization.


Timothy Geithner needs to go.  He needs to go like three years ago.

Geithner is the epitome of just how profoundly out-of-touch and arrogant Barack Obama and his failed administration is.

Case closed.  Geithner has got to go.

Barack Obama, America’s First Downgraded President

August 6, 2011

Barack Obama is our first black president (he’s only half black, actually, but it’s still a first).  And that makes him “historic.”

But it turns out being the “first” at something or being “historic” is NOT necessarily a good thing.

For example, Barack Obama is now our first downgraded president, too:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has lost its sterling credit rating from Standard & Poor’s.

The credit rating agency on Friday lowered the nation’s AAA rating for the first time since granting it in 1917. The move came less than a week after a gridlocked Congress finally agreed to spending cuts that would reduce the debt by more than $2 trillion — a tumultuous process that contributed to convulsions in financial markets. The promised cuts were not enough to satisfy S&P.

The drop in the rating by one notch to AA-plus was telegraphed as a possibility back in April. The three main credit agencies, which also include Moody’s Investor Service and Fitch, had warned during the budget fight that if Congress did not cut spending far enough, the country faced a downgrade. Moody’s said it was keeping its AAA rating on the nation’s debt, but that it might still lower it.

And let’s see. WHICH Party was trying to cut spending (hint: their symbol is an elephant) and WHICH Party fought them at every turn (hint: their symbol is a jackass)???

Because this downgrade – and S & P is already warning of another downgrade – is ALL about Democrats’ inability to cut their addiction to SPENDING:

One day after lowering the nation’s platinum triple-A credit rating, Standard & Poor’s analysts warned Saturday that the U.S. government could face a second downgrade if the economy continues to struggle and the government fails to make the cuts outlined in the debt ceiling agreement.

This is a legitimate and serious concern because Democrats have REPEATEDLY promised to cut spending and then reneged on their promises.

The history is crystal clear: Republicans have tried to cut spending since the people gave them power in the House of Representatives in January; Democrats have resisted all efforts in spite of their false promises.

At this time allow me to add that Obama actually already WAS the first downgraded president – since November 2010 (i.e., before the Republicans controlled anything), according to our #1 lender, China:

Beijing (CNN) — Although the United States narrowly avoided an unprecedented default following congressional approval of a last-minute compromise plan to raise the debt ceiling, China’s leading credit rating agency Wednesday [August 2] downgraded U.S. sovereign debt after putting it on negative watch last month.

The Dagong Global Credit Rating Company, which lowered the United States to A+ last November after the U.S. Federal Reserve decided to continue loosening its monetary policy, announced a further downgrade to A, indicating heightened doubts over Washington’s long-term ability to repay its debts.

It said the gloomy assessment — much lower than the AAA ratings given by the so-called “big three” Western agencies Moody’s, Fitch, and Standard and Poor’s — was inevitable given the level of market concern generated by the stalemate between Democrats and Republicans over the debt ceiling

We got our first downgrade when Republicans had no power over anything.  And it was Republicans who tried to prevent this disgrace.  And if it hadn’t been for Democrats – who were the world’s most vile party when they fought the Civil War to keep slavery and are STILL the most vile party today – this disgrace would not have happened.  So to blame the credit downgrade on Republicans is the act of wicked and pathologically dishonest Democrats.

Understand, our AAA credit rating had stood through the enemies we’d faced during World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, the entire Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, the 9/11 attack, Afghanistan and Iraq.  But sadly it could not withstand a determined assault from our worst enemy defeating us from within: Barack Hussein Obama.

In the same way, the United States Postal Service has been around since July 26, 1775.  And while “Neither rain, nor snow, nor sleet, nor hail shall keep the postmen from their appointed rounds,” it now appears that the sheer unmitigated incompetence and spending addiction of Barack Hussein Obama sure can.  It’s on the verge of going belly-up along with the rest of the country.

I guess I’d call that fiasco “historic.”

Democrats who refused to do ANYTHING about seriously cutting debt (realize they rejected a plan that would have entailed just making a 1% cut a year in the budget for 6 years) are blaming Republicans for whom cutting debt was their sole focus.  It’s beyond amazing.  And stupid and depraved people will believe it, because stupid and depraved people have ALWAYS believed lies and supported the most wicked ideology.

That should further contribute to the sheer demagogic and hateful lunacy of Democrats, who actually had the vicious and vile chutzpah to blame the Tea Party for the huge stock drop on Thursday, August 4:

“Today, the stock market tumbled 512 points, wiping away billions of dollars from the retirement and education savings of middle class Americans. Every American should be concerned about the very real possibility of sliding into a ‘Tea Party recession.’

“Tea Party Republicans took the entire U.S. economy hostage over the debt ceiling increase and used this crisis to force trillions in cuts at a time when more, not less investment in the U.S. economy is needed. The destructive default politics and machete budget cutting of the Tea Party Republicans in Congress is exactly the wrong medicine for the ailing U.S. economy.

“The Republican obsession with slashing government investment is totally counterproductive. The Tea Party’s default crisis created enormous, unnecessary uncertainty in global markets. Congress should have raised the debt ceiling months ago and spent the summer working together in Congress on a growth agenda for the country.

Obama and the Democrats are like addicts, blaming everybody but themselves for their failures and the chaos and disaster those failures have caused.  The obvious fact of the matter is that the stock market took a huge hit for two reasons which both have “Democrat Party” written all over them: 1) the utter failure of European socialism at a time when Obama and the Democrats are still determined to follow this completely failed model here:

Markets worldwide were on edge over fiscal weakness in Italy and Spain and the eurozone’s ability to contain more crisis, as the two countries’ borrowing costs surged in recent days.”

and 2) the “let’s just create more money out of thin air” model otherwise known by the technical name of quantitative easing (i.e., QE1, QE2, and apparently soon-to-be QE3).  Here’s how THAT very NON-Tea Party bankrupt and bankrupting policy will end:

We have officially crossed into the realm of abject fiscal and moral lunacy under Obama.  We are now borrowing more than our entire economy is worth.   Obama is borrowing 43 cents out of every dollar he is spending; he is deficit-spending $4.1 billion every single DAY; he has increased the size of government by 27% over George Bush (according to the CBO) and he is utterly determined to keep spending more and more and more.

In May of this year, Obama submitted a budget that would have added $12 trillion to our debt.  It was so insane in so many ways that not even one single DEMOCRAT would vote for it in the Democrat-controlled Senate.  Obama’s reckless and immoral budget failed by a vote of 97-0.

That’s not some right-wing talking point.  That’s the TRUTH.  Obama is an embarrassment.  He is a disgrace.

Let’s take a moment to contemplate what Obama has done:

  • Tripled budget deficits since he took office
  • Gave us a failed $862 Billion stimulus package that the CBO said actually cost taxpayers $3.27 TRILLION.
  • Spent tens of billions in GM/Chrysler bailouts that were basically fascist (the corporatist state).  See here and here.
  • Increased the size of government by 25%
  • Gave us chronic unemployment at Great Depression levels of 18%
  • Gave us a Debt/GDP ratio WORSE than the Great Depression
  • That in addition to two EXTRA wars in addition to the two he promised to get us out of and lied. The Libya war that he said would take “days, not weeks” has now dragged on for more than five months with no sign of ending
  • And now he’s given us a credit downgrade for the first time in American history

Obama will say ANYTHING.  He is an abject liar and a fool who says one thing and then does another before saying something else entirely.  Unfortunately, the pathologically biased mainstream media reports Obama’s constantly shifting rhetoric as if it had anything whatsoever to do with actual reality.

As an example, Obama repeatedly called for huge tax hikes in this debt ceiling deal on top of the $500 billion in tax hikes he got as part of ObamaCare.  But listen to his own words in 2009: “You don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

The fact of history is crystal clear: Tax Cuts INCREASE Revenues; They Have ALWAYS Increased Revenues.  Versus tax hikes, which reduce revenues and reduce GDP.  As the National Bureau of Economic Research put it, “Tax changes have very large effects: an exogenous tax increase of 1 percent of GDP lowers real GDP by roughly 2 to 3 percent.”

And yet what do Obama and the Democrats keep doing?  Obama is back to the same utterly failed Marxist class warfare tactics that have failed before. In the 1990s, Democrats imposed a “luxury tax” on items such as yachts, believing that the wealthy “could afford it.” Maybe they could and maybe they couldn’t, but the FACT was that the rich STOPPED buying yachts. As in stopped completely. As in NOBODY bought a yachtwith that damn tax on it. The Democrats finally rescinded that stupid tax two years later after destroying the yacht building and yacht maintenance industries and killing over 100,000 jobs. Rich people weren’t hurt at all; ordinary people were devastated.

And now Obama wants to do the same thing with corporate jets that previous Democrats did to yachts. And they only people who will get hurt if Obama gets his way are the companies that hire people to build and maintain those jets and the workers themselves who will lose their jobs and their livelihoods. And the only thing that is stopping this rape of businesses, workers and the economy that depends on workers and businesses are Republicans.  Even if many of the very people who are most hurt by Democrats Marxist class warfare policies are too stupid to know it.

Barack Obama is the first downgraded president in American history.  And the American people will pay for that pathetic reality for years to come in higher interest rates.

I had a vision of the hell that Barack Obama would inflict upon America.  That was what got me off my you-know-what into the world of political blogging; I wanted to warn people of what was coming, and I wanted to leave behind a record of what happened while this evil fool was ruining the late great USA.  And now we are just that much closer to everything I saw coming to pass.

The Terrifying Truth: As America Nears Brink Of Disaster, Obama Demonstrates That He Has No Leadership Ability Whatsoever

July 27, 2011

What is the situation facing America?  Here’s what the White House Communications Director said on July 26:

WH Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer: “We are seven days away from an unprecedented financial event in this country’s history. One that could potentially put us towards a depression because the House Republicans, led by Speaker Boehner, are unwilling to compromise one inch.”

Is it that bad, or is this a rare degree of fearmongering and demagoguing?  And if it IS that bad, shouldn’t Barack Obama have SOME KIND OF DAMN PLAN OF HIS OWN TO PROVIDE ANY KIND OF GUIDANCE OR LEADERSHIP AT ALL?!?!?

The problem is hardly Republicans.  This country has had Republicans ever since Abraham Lincoln led this nation through the Civil War.  If you actually want to look at Republicans, THEY’RE THE ONLY ONES WHO’VE HAD ANY ACTUAL PLANS AT ALL; THEY’RE THE ONLY ONES WHO ACTUALLY VOTED ON AND PASSED A PLAN THAT WOULD ACTUALLY SAVE US FROM A CREDIT RATING DOWNGRADE.  The problem is that we have an abject failure of a president who is clearly way in over his head.

Obama has set forth no plan to deal with anything whatsoever regarding the budget/debt ceiling crisis:

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): Where’s the president’s plan? When is he going to lay his cards on the table?

Senator Marco Rubio understood this when he utterly destroyed Bob Schieffer on CBS’ “Face The Nation” program after Schieffer – in his masquerade as a “neutral reporter” cited the Obama talking point as the “objective” view:

OK, so where’s the plan?  Where’s the president’s plan?  I’ve never seen a piece of paper with the president’s name on it that’s his plan to solve this crisis.  I’ve seen press conferences.  I’ve seen lectures that he’s given to the Congress.  I’ve seen these press avails where the camera comes in and takes a bunch of pictures.  I haven’t seen a plan.  Where is the president’s plan?

And President Obama’s failure to lead is undermining negotiations.  From ABC’s “This Week”:

MS. AMANPOUR: You also heard what Jack Lew said if there was part of a big deal, it would involve entitlements –

SEN. KYL: But we have no idea what he’s talking about.  That’s the problem. Republicans are not willing to make a deal based upon some vague commitment that, sometime in the future, the president might be willing to look at something that he won’t identify.

The following exhange in the White House Press Corps is simply utterly astounding:

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: …If you basically have this Boehner plan that you say can’t get through the Senate and you’ve got a Reid plan that the Republicans don’t think you can get through the Senate or the House and you’re saying we want a compromise, what was the point of giving a prime-time address to the nation without an Obama plan and say neither of these other plans can work? Where’s his plan?


JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I understand the idea that there is not an Obama plan is like point…

HENRY: But there’s not one on paper.

CARNEY: …point No. 1 on the talking points issued by the Republican Party. I get it.


HENRY: No, no, no. That’s not a talking point. Show us the plan. It’s not a talking point. That’s unfair. Where’s the plan?


CARNEY: First of all, the president put forward in detail his principles at George Washington University…


HENRY: Principles. Right. That’s not a plan.

CARNEY: …quite a lot of detail. The president stood before you, I can’t remember if you were here Friday night, some of you  weren’t because you cut out early, but a lot of you were (GROANS FROM THE PRESS) and he put forward in detail with numbers what he’s willing to do. He then referred from the podium to the fact that White House officials would be briefing in detail.

It continued on with other reporters and it didn’t get any better for Carney or for Obama:

Today, under intense pressure to produce the President’s debt limit plan, the White House asked, “Do you need something printed for you?” House Republicans have put forth multiple plans (posted online and yes, available in print) to avoid default and get our fiscal house in order by cutting spending and implementing serious budget reforms.

We are seven days out from August 2nd and the Administration has yet to release a plan.


Chuck Todd: Why not release the last offer that Boehner made you? You said if you don’t want to release your own plan, release that one. If that’s the last deal he made and you are willing to go back with a few minor tweaks release it.

Jay Carney: We have shown a lot of leg on what we were proposing.

Chuck Todd: Where?

Jay Carney: From the podium, right here.


Todd: Why not just release that plan?

Carney: You need something printed for you? You can’t write it down? There is ample detail.

Jake Tapper: That’s not a plan. It was details of a plan, but it wasn’t a plan in the same way we are getting a plan on the House side or on the Senate side.

Chuck Todd: We don’t know what the Medicare thing is, we don’t know what the Social Security part of this is …

Chuck Todd: Why not put it out there? You guys went before the American people last night and said call your Members of Congress we want a compromise. Well you had a plan you were making the case for, that sounded like the compromise.  Release it to the public.

Watch the Full Exchange Here


And Obama is refusing to lead, but instead cynically waiting for the Republicans to do so (because SOMEBODY has got to!) and then rallying his special interests to demonize the Republicans for offering specific proposals.  He himself has offered NOTHING.

Obama has no plan whatsoever.  He has come out with absolutely nothing specific whatsoever that can serve as any kind of a template.  He has completely abdicated any leadership whatsoever.  Several months ago offered a laughable budget that was so ridiculous (it would have added $12 trillion to the debt) that not even ONE DEMOCRATS would vote for it.  It failed 97-0 in the Democrat-controlled SenateJust how massive a failure is Obama?  And since then he has offered NOTHING but fearmongering and demonization.

Well over a year ago I wrote regarding another issue:

But Barack Obama and the Democrats are tyrants, not leaders.  They want to rule, not govern.  They want to impose a system that will result in a European socialist-style government until our country implodes from massive and unsustainable deficits and debts…. Nothing else will get done, and this country will drift

Earlier this year there was a story in which Hillary Clinton expressed her disgust of Obama’s complete failure of leadership.  There was this great quote [that article appears here]:

“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.”

Even HILLARY CLINTON said that Obama is a wretched and utterly failed leader who can’t make up his mind.

And I said in that article:

I remember several years ago watching a fascination PBS program on presidential leadership.  The documentary’s poster-boy for pathetic presidential leadership was Jimmy Carter.  Obviously the man was intelligent, but the experts on leadership said “intelligence” does not a leader make.  Jimmy Carter was particularly faulted for not empowering his subordinates with enough power to do their jobs; he micromanaged and undermined through a tiny cadre of close advisors.  And as a result the nation drifted like a ship without a rudder.  That is clearly what is being described by Hillary Clinton now.

Obama clearly has an “inner circle” problem.  Even DEMOCRATS acknowledge it.

The PBS program did not make mention of the fact that Jimmy Carter was (and clearly still is) a fool with a totally bogus worldview.  A false worldview makes it impossible to act intelligently because, no matter how intelligent one is, one cannot possibly comprehend reality.  And I would submit that Both Carter and Obama have tragically and truly flawed views of the world.  Both of these men view the world through a set of theories that are simply totally false.  And from their poor foundations, all of their intelligence goes into the fruitless process of endlessly rationalizing and justifying their erroneous worldview.

And I was so right about this fraud.

This is beyond frightening.  There was NEVER anything about Obama’s story that indicated that the man had ever developed any kind of actual leadership ability whatsoever.  He was a community organizer who became a state senator who voted “present” more than he voted aye or nay.  He served in the United States Senate for 142 days before breaking his promise to serve his first Senate term.  And as president he has never done anything more than campaign.  Even during this debt ceiling fiasco, Obama was gone an average of every three days doing another damned fundraiser.

And now we are in a situation in which we desperately need a leader and we do not have one.

Barack Obama, Fearmonger And Demagogue Extraordinaire Gutting America’s Credibility With His Lies

July 27, 2011

When Obama was lying and making false promises to shove his so-called “stimulus” boondoggle through Congress, the Wall Street Journal wrote:

“President Barack Obama has turned fearmongering into an art form. He has repeatedly raised the specter of another Great Depression. First, he did so to win votes in the November election. He has done so again recently to sway congressional votes for his stimulus package.”

History now proves that everything Obama said about his $862 billion (actually $3.27 TRILLION, according to the CBO) was false.  Not only did unemployment not stay under 8%, as was promised, but in fact unemployment actually went HIGHER than Obama said it would have if we hadn’t ever done his incredibly stupid and incredibly wasteful porkulus to begin with!

But early in his presidency, Obama learned that he could get what he wanted if he fearmongered a situation and demonized his opponents enough.  And whether he was lying while his opponents were telling the truth was of little import.

As I (along with a few million other conservatives) pointed out, Barack Obama was lying and fearmongering the economy when he repeatedly claimed that the United States would default on its debt if we didn’t pass a debt ceiling hike (which he would only allow to pass on his terms, of course).  The facts said otherwise.  Republicans filled the airwaves pointing out that Obama was lying and that the United States could and would continue to meet its obligations to its debt.

Now we find out that Obama KNEW he was lying when he has repeatedly talked about default:

Obama to Banks: We’re Not Defaulting
By Charlie Gasparino
Published July 25, 2011

While officials from the Obama Administration raised their rhetoric over the weekend about the possibility of a debt default if the debt ceiling isn’t raised, they privately have been telling top executives at major U.S. banks that such an event won’t happen, FOX Business has learned.

In a series of phone calls, administration officials have told bankers that the administration will not allow a default to happen even if the debt cap isn’t raised by the August 2 date.  Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says the government will run out of money to pay all its bills, including obligations to bond holders. Geithner made the rounds on the Sunday talk shows saying a default is imminent if the debt ceiling isn’t raised, and President Obama issued a similar warning during a Friday press conference after budget negotiations with House Republicans broke down.

While the negotiations to craft a budget remain at an impasse, Republicans and Democrats on Monday began crafting their own plans to cut spending that could lead to an agreement to raise the debt ceiling. It’s unclear if a broad agreement can be reached any time soon, but even if a deal is struck, a complicating issue for lawmakers and the administration is the possibility of a downgrade to the US debt rating, which would cut the triple-A rating on the nation’s debt to a lower level.

Major ratings firms — namely Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s — have said even if the country raises the debt ceiling and doesn’t default, there’s a strong likelihood that the triple-A bond rating will be cut to double-A unless a budget can be crafted that results in $4 trillion in savings, the result of the massive debt load the country has accumulated in recent years. The nation’s outstanding debt is more than $14 trillion.

A senior banking official told FOX Business that administration officials have provided guidance to them that even though a default is off the table, a downgrade “is a real possibility for no other reason than S&P and Moody’s have to cover (themselves) since they’ve been speaking out on the debt cap so much.”

This guidance is a big reason why Wall Street has largely dismissed the possibility of default, and though the markets have been jittery amid the talk of default, they haven’t imploded as would be the case, many economists fear, if the nation missed a payment on its debt.

The banking official said the administration understands that if there were to be a default, it would likely spark another financial crisis.

“They also know they can pay the debt with cash on hand,” this official told FOX Business. The Treasury collects around $2 trillion in tax revenues, and is scheduled to pay out $200 billion in interest to bond holders. In order to meet its obligations to contractors, social security recipients and others, the administration would have to raise another $1 trillion either through cuts, higher tax revenues, the issuance of debt or a combination of all three.

Congressional Republicans believe that the Administration is raising the possibility of a default as a way to ramp up pressure on Republicans to agree to a budget deal that includes tax increases, which they oppose.

A Treasury spokesman said that “when we exhaust our borrowing authority, as we will on August 2nd, there is no way to guarantee that we will be able to pay all of our bills. Any suggestion to the contrary is simply false.”

Even without a default, banks expect some market turbulence if the triple-A sovereign-debt rating is cut, sources tell FOX Business. While bank officials do not believe there will be a “catastrophic” effect to a downgrade, that’s not to say there won’t be negative ripple effects, notably to bond deals and derivatives priced off triple-A-rated  Treasurys.

So Obama was privately trying to say one thing to the bondholders to reassure them while publicly saying the exact opposite thing to fearmonger the crisis.

Does it make you feel better to know that Barack Obama is not a profoundly stupid man, or does it make you feel worse to know that he is so dishonest and so cynical that he would actually deliberately fearmonger his nation – and push credit agencies to seriously consider downgrading U.S. credit given the president of the United States’ own constant warnings that the U.S. would default on its debt – in order to push his rabidly leftist agenda???

Here’s Obama’s tax-cheating Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner predicting the US would default on its debt while ideologically trying to demonize Republicans for said default:

“Speaking to a New York audience, Geithner said that Republicans would bear responsibility for the first debt default in the nation’s history if they insist they will not vote for an increase in the $14.3 billion borrowing limit unless they win approval of a House Republican budget plan.

“If Republicans try to impose that plan on this country as a condition for raising the debt limit, then they will own the responsibility for the first default in our history, with devastating consequences,” Geithner said in a speech to the Harvard Club of New York” (by Pallavi Gogoi in the Associated Press, 5/18/2011)

Here’s the SAME tax-cheating Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner assuring that the US would NOT default on the debt due to Republicans, as he had falsely claimed would happen:

“It’s not going to happen,” Geithner predicted, amid a warning from US ally Britain that “right-wing nutters” were posing a bigger threat to the world economy than the eurozone crisis.

And now let me return to a statement from the credit agencies that is highly illustrative:

A senior banking official told FOX Business that administration officials have  provided guidance to them that even though a default is off the table, a  downgrade “is a real possibility for no other reason than S&P and Moody’s  have to cover (themselves) since they’ve been speaking out on the debt cap so  much.”

So why are the credit rating agencies seriously considering downgrading American credit?  Because they “have to cover themselves since they’ve [that’s Barack Obama, Timothy Geithner and numerous Democrats] have been speaking out on the debt cap so much”

The sheer cynical depravity of Barack Obama and his administration and his entire Democrat Party is simply beyond astonishing.

Who are the people who are most playing with fire?  Republicans have been saying PUBLICLY the truth even as Barack Obama and his top officials repeatedly lied and fearmongered and demonized.  And the credit agencies had to listen to Barack Obama’s public lies and take what he was saying into account.

If America’s credit rating is downgraded – which is actually now likely – Obama will demonize Republicans for it.  But OBAMA WILL BE THE REASON.  HIS REPEATED PUBLIC STATEMENTS, ALONG WITH THE STATEMENTS OF HIS TOP OFFICIALS LIKE TIMOTHY GEITHNER, WILL HAVE FORCED THE RATING AGENCIES’ HANDS.

During the 1995 budget battle, the debt ceiling was not raised for something like five months, and there was no serious talk of reducing America’s credit worthiness.  Why?  Because Bill Clinton did not resort to the despicable degree of fearmongering that Obama has.

What should Obama have been telling the world?  That no matter what happened, the US could and would continue to pay its primary obligations and that there would be no default under any circumstances.

But what are we getting?  Here’s an example from the White House Communications Director on July 26:

WH Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer: “We are seven days away from an unprecedented financial event in this country’s history. One that could potentially put us towards a depression because the House Republicans, led by Speaker Boehner, are unwilling to compromise one inch.”

Pfeiffer spoke to CBS News Radio on Tuesday morning.

Because of dishonest fearmongering like this, the credit agencies are duty-bound to downgrade our credit rating.  If you were a credit evaluator, wouldn’t YOU listen to such official pronouncements of doom?

I’m sure I’ll be quoting myself in the months ahead.  But if – or more likely when – the United States AAA credit rating is downgraded, it will ALL be on Barack Hussein Obama.   HE is the president, and HE is the one who made all the false and demagogic and fearmongering statements that lenders repeatedly heard him make.

I’ll also point out one final fact: Barack Obama’s presidency has been an abject failure.  He took a bad situation and he made it far, FAR worse.  He has nothing – NOTHING! – to run on but demonization of his opponents.  On my view, Obama is literally hoping for the very worst outcome for America so he can blame Republicans for it with yet more lies and more demonization and more fearmongering.  Because that’s pretty much his only hope of getting re-elected.