Thursday, February 5, 2009

So...Maybe Experience Really Does Matter

It's been a bit of a rocky start for Obama.

Peter Kirsanow at NRO's Corner writes:

Barely two weeks into his presidency, the media is bewildered by the daily snafus coming from the White House: the galactic mismanagement of the corrupt stimulus bill, the Daschle debacle, the Geithner outrage, the Zinni circus, the Killefer embarrassment. These are hardly the products of a well-oiled machine. Then there's the utter lack of seriousness conveyed by Obama's claim that we are at war with "some" terrorist organizations and his disingenuous handling of Gitmo and rendition.

Jeff Emmanuel at RedState writes:

I can’t recall an entering executive misfiring on so many issues — from his nomination of lawbreakers to high office, to breaking his own self-imposed ethics rules, to throwing away any and all goodwill he had from House Republicans with his “I won” retort, to his having to apologize to Old Europe for having a tin ear on protectionist trade policies, to being utterly surprised that his efforts to unilaterally and without precondition meet with the leaders of Iran were publicly perceived as a sign of weakness and defeat, to his driving portions of New Europe away from America and back towards the Russians — at one time as Mr. Obama has in just sixteen days as president.

Well, here we go...

Don't blame me, I voted for the only candidate with actual executive experience in the election ... from either party ... on the top or bottom of the ticket.

Oh, and yeah, I'll say this again...

You cannot spell



I   T-O-L-D   Y-O-U   S-O

But seriously, gird your loins, Obama. This country actually does need you to do better.


  1. As I posted yesterday with Bless Your Hearts,
    On a related note, he is finding that walking on water is difficult, if it includes getting 8 or 10 Republican votes for his package. Yesterday he showed a bit of frustration, saying:
    "In the past two days, I have heard criticisms of this plan that, frankly, echo the very same failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis in the first place," Obama said, before signing a children's health insurance bill. [I should add, the failed theories he is talking about don't include government intervention in the mortgage markets, which is the primary reason we are where we are. And the bill he was signing is the same garbage Bush vetoed, which effectively replaces middle income families' private insurance with public coverage, at taxpayer's expense.]

    He took aim at the "notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems" and warned against the idea that the economic crisis could be tackled with "half steps, and piecemeal measures and tinkering around the edges." [I agree - tax cuts/rebates won't fix this mess - cuts (to real taxpayers) are simply the best direct and immediate stimulus, and will allow small businesses to retain capital for expansion and job creation. Piecemeal approaches won't work, but they needn't be $500 Billion of pork, either. If we are going to be Keynesian, let's try it, but that requires central PLANNING, and careful assessment of the impact of every expenditure, not helter-skelter creation/expansion of some 50+ government programs with no relationship to economic stimulus]

    Obama also faulted unnamed opponents he said believe "that we can ignore the fundamental challenges like the high cost of healthcare and still expect our economy and country to thrive." [Again, he fails to mention that a substantial part of the rampant increases in healthcare costs are directly related to the government's massive intervention in this arena, through Medicare/Medicaid. Once government became the largest payor, it has allowed the cost of uncompensated care and overinvestment to be borne by private payors out of proportion to their economic benefit. Only the most careful and well-structured plans and programs can avoid the uncharacteristic inflation in this market - our company plans actually experienced a cost increase of only 2% this year, compared to the 11-14% increase in the general market. So, let's not ignore it, but let's address it with something other than a huge, expensive government bureaucracy that can only control costs by limiting access - rationing.]

    "I reject these theories, and by the way so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," the president said [In other words, I told a half-truth, these suckers believed it, and now they want me to deliver, so By God I will! Without sufficient data, I can only speculate, but my guess is maybe 1 in 10 voters who supported "hope and change" actually had any formal training in economics. Again, just a guess.]
    So, do you think the good President is more than a little teed off that he can't just dictate legislation because it's "change"? Oh yes, I think experience matters!

  2. Sorry, I hit the button twice. Anyone know how to remove?

  3. Took care of it General.

    Good comment....agreed...