Betsy Newmark writes that flexibility and Obama are mutually exclusive terms — he definitely stays on target no matter what the damage his plans may cause; arguably because collateral damage to the economy is a feature, not a bug in his mind (reference his bankrupting the coal industry rhetoric):
Nina Eason makes the point that Obama was masterful during the campaign to stay on message. He didn’t change that message no matter what.
Barack Obama promised universal health care and a mass conversion to green energy when he launched his presidential campaign. On that frigid February day in 2007, the economy was growing at a 2.8% clip. Obama stuck to the same promises a year later when he won Iowa, as the housing market was slumping into recession. And energy and health care were the twin pillars of his acceptance speech in Denver, 18 days before Lehman Brothers collapsed.
But now the question is whether his audacious plans, which might have been less questionable when the economy was doing well, would actually sink any hope of recovery. And the answer seems clear that piling up massive future debts as well as putting new burdens on business are lousy moves to make during a deep economic decline.
As one of the most disciplined, on-message politicians of our time, President Obama hasn’t wavered from his audacious plans to remake entire business sectors. But when wavering is what the U.S. economy seems to do best these days, the President confronts a new question: Does his own agenda threaten to choke off the economic recovery that he also promises — and that will define much of his legacy? Both of his legislative campaigns for the fall, health-care reform and the cap-and-trade plan to curb carbon emissions, could put new burdens on a weak economy.
Well, duh! But what’s a bit of common sense about how to avoid hurting the economy when the President has to stay on message and rack up big legislative scalps to hang on his belt?
In contrast, his subordinates are not quite as cool and calm under the harsh pressure of reality:
“They are the villains in this,” Pelosi said of private insurers. “They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening. And the public has to know that. They can disguise their arguments any way they want, but the fact is that they don’t want the competition.”…
“It’s almost immoral what they are doing,” added Pelosi, who stood outside her office long after her press conference ended to continue speaking to reporters, even as aides tried in vain to usher her inside. “Of course they’ve been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure with pre-existing conditions, you know, the litany of it all.”
Emphasis above via Allahpundit, who adds:
Take one of the most unpopular politicians in America, have her go off half-cocked in a crude attempt to satisfy Democratic demands for a villain to demagogue in selling ObamaCare, then wait for the backlash. Bonus points for using the same Orwellian rhetorical device Paul Ryan called Katrina Vanden Heuvel on last night, namely, exploiting the language of competition to push one of the most anti-competitive domestic measures in American history.
Not to mention the notion that this is coming from someone who no doubt sees the idea of “villains” and “morals” as dated rhetoric in the postmodern world, where one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, and the like.
Update: Michelle Malkin adds, “opposition to Hope and Change™ is starting to take its toll. Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic, and the descent into paranoid madness is somewhat reminiscent of Captain Queeg on the witness stand in The Caine Mutiny.”
Then: “The Strawberries.” Now: “Palomino!”
“As one of the most disciplined, on-message politicians of our time, President Obama hasn’t wavered from his audacious plans to remake entire business sectors.”
Yeah, Obama is “disciplined”…just like those disciplined British generals of WW I who continually ordered their disciplined troops to carry out disciplined charges into No Man’s Land only to be repeatedly slaughtered in droves by equally disciplined German machine gunners. Last charge didn’t work? So sorry, old boy. Try, try again.
Shucks, I’m not sure Lord Zero is even capable of firing up the reverse thrusters on Battlestar Obamatica. To do so, in his mind at least, would a) show weakness and b) indicate, for all the world to see, that The One maybe, possibly, could just be WRONG on a whole host of issues.
Can’t have that now, can we?
Obama is scary in numerous ways, not the least of which is that he shows all the signs of having an “Apres moi, le deluge” view of himself.
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
That part where you quote Malkin about poisoning the Speaker of the House! Woooo boy is that funny!
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
Especially after that anthrax thing that nobody could solve, the idea of poisoning a member of congress is so far fetched it is pure comedy gold!
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
Poisoning duly elected representatives because you don’t like their policies is so un-un american!
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
How patriotic to “joke” about killing your opposition after you lose a fair election!
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
Private insurance companies are evil. Which is a fact that you can only deny if you’ve haven’t been sick or known anyone who got sick in the last 10 years. Hell I get 4 different bills everytime I get me teeth cleaned.
Democrats campaigned on it, got elected and now they are trying to fulfill their promise of universal health care.
I forget anyone crying about the debt when W gave his 2001 tax cut to the rich at the end of a economic downturn. (that trillion plus would have paid for healthcare for 10 years, but then the Cayman Island money launderers would have suffered)
Would you say giving a politician arsenic would be the act of a “freedom fighter” or a “terrorist”? I ask because you seem to claim a monopoly on morality.
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
Here’s a traditioinal american moral christian suggestion:
Instead of “joking” about poisoning Ms. Pelosi, why don’t you try beating her in an election?
Ed: Read it again, Feckless. Michelle wrote, “Nancy Pelosi is starting to act like somebody spiked her Botox with traces of arsenic”, not that somebody should actually do that. But you know that, right?
(Hint- misogynistic ad-hominem attacks won’t sway people like they did in the 90′s, try addressing the substance of what people say, not just their appearance, skin color, religion, income etc)
and for “common sense” about government spending during a recession, google “John Maynard Keynes” and he will explain to you how massive government spending during WWII ended the great depression.
Do you really want your frycook to have the swine flu/ hepatitis/ herpes and no health insurance?
ding ding school is out.
Ed: No, it’s detention for you!
I love it when a lefty like Feckless trots his talking points, but has no idea what they mean.
For example, I have UNH and my wife has Aetna. We have been very happy with the coverage and ease of dealing with both companies. And, yes, we have had to use the coverage.
No, Obama did not campaign in the general on universal. He campaigned on never defined “a few common sense” plans and “if you like your current health care, you can keep it”. Not many voters thought that meant the monstrosity proposed in the House.
Bush’s tax cut was meant as a stimulus. Unlike the Obama/Pelosi/Reid stimulus, it took effect almost immediately. Feckless must also have missed Wednesday release of tax data. It turns out the top 1% pay 40% of the income tax. The bottom 95% pay 39.4%. Those figures are a change from 1987 when the top 1% paid 24.8% while the bottom 95% paid 58%. So this talking point of “tax cuts for the rich” just does not hunt.
Feckless also misunderstands Keynes. First, Keynesian economics did not end the depression. WWII was not only accompanied by government spending, it was accompanied by rationing and decreased consumption by those at home. Keynesian Economics did not work for Japan, nor will it work for us. Some, like Krugman, in the face of $2 trillion deficit are calling for more stimulus. It would be interesting to have Feckless tell us why it would not be even better to stimulated the economy during good times. Then, we could disregard the business cycle and let the good times roll forever.
Feckless tells us school is out, but it turns out Feckless is still taking that 20 mile hike, uphill, in the snow, and has not arrived at school yet.
Rick