Sunday, February 5, 2012

O-Man the Destroyer

We conservatives get queasier by the day watching the slow-mo car wreck that is the GOP primary.  We don't all agree on who the nominee should be, but that's OK.  That's what primaries are all about.  I want to take a break from the internecine rock throwing and refocus our attention on what a dismal failure President Obama and his Obamanomics have been for this country.

Obama is a Jobs Destroyer

Thanks to the usual partisan government statistical manipulation, the unemployment rate supposedly inched lower, but the Obama economy remains a wreck.  Maggie at Maggie’s Notebook smells cooked books as well.  Check it out to understand the statistical games the Obamacrats are playing to hide just how bad the unemployment crisis really is.

Zero Hedge does an excellent job breaking it down it down as well.  The secret to Obama's jobs numbers is that the workforce has shrunk by millions, keeping the official unemployment rate artificially low.

Obama is a job destroyer, and he is on track to be the first president to have a net job loss during his tenure.    An impressive feat given the Democrat presidencies of FDR and Jimmy Carter.  The press will try to talk up the still sagging Obama economy, but that will only get him so far.  People out of work can't eat hope and change, although the OWS'ers are rolling it up and smoking it...

It’s no wonder Gallup’s electoral projection map that is based upon Obama approval reveals a vast sea of red dotted on the fringes by a few small blue islands of ignorance.

What’s Obama going to run on?  

Wasting billions on green energy failures?

Stealing $23 billion from taxpayers to reward failed Detroit Automobile tycoons and their Union Cronies?

Maybe he can run on giving us the Worst Economic Recovery Since the Great Depression, and we can all sing “Crappy Days are Here Again!”

For even more evidence that Obama is the Worst President in the History of The United States, see Daniel J. Mitchell's Obamanomics vs Reaganomics.  Reagan had America on a skyrocketing trajectory by this point in his presidency, and the reason is simple.  He did the opposite of what our Bumbler in Chief Obama is doing.

If you're still hungry for more evidence that Barack Hussein Obama is Caligula on Crack, read Quin Hillyer's His Abominations Accelerate.

Yes, Newt is a Republican progressive who makes my ears bleed, Romney and Santorum are big government statists, and Ron Paul is playing to the OWS rabble, but it's even worse for the Democrats.  Obama is all they got.


Always On Watch said...

I'll be linking to this post tomorrow morning.

Ducky's here said...

Let's see, here's 'ol trickle down Saint Ronnie Raygun in an era before NAFTA and the massive deregulation he put in motion bumping up the Federal deficit, raising middle class taxes and you sing his praises.

Just the fact that your article mentions giveaways to auto unions shows you as a doctrinaire drone blowing smoke out of your ass. Utter nonsense.

A lot of us, not the fringe right, have been looking at the workforce participation figure to gauge employment changes. It's readily available.

He's a miserable president for sure but worse than Reagan, Clinton and Bush? No, just in their conservative lineage.

And it's not going to change till you wise up.

MikeMatthewsny said...

Remember the Limbo? The party song and dance-game from the 60's ? You would take a bambo stick bend back and the lyric would say 'How low can low you go' ? That is Obamas new theme song. Quotes the Bible at the National Prayer breakfast. Which I am sure some staffer got the quote for him. And calls himself a Christian. How low can he go ? Thats how low.

Silverfiddle said...

"Saint Ronnie Raygun!" Hahaha! Oh, that really cracks me up... Ho ho ho! So funny and so original!

You can't argue with Reagan's economic prosperity and job creation, so you go off on these ridiculous tangents.

Obama's payoffs to the the automakers and their union partners in crime is a fact. Your refusal to view events as they really are is the nonsense.

You're the one who needs to wise up. Even more bigger expensiver government is not the answer, and that is all the intellectually-bereft left is offering.

Bunkerville said...

Well that sure looked good.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

That fantasy electoral college projection map looks good for a Republican candidate.

It's a shame we'll probably run a RINO like Romney instead.

Then it'll look like the outcome of Obama vs. McCain, except for a few additional states in Obama's favor (like Oregon, Alaska, West Virginia, North Dakota, Wyoming, and Coloroado)

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

Colorado... dang touch screen..

Finntann said...

"Just the fact that your article mentions giveaways to auto unions shows you as a doctrinaire drone blowing smoke out of your ass. Utter nonsense."

One cannot dispute the seizure of GM and Chrysler by the federal government preempting existing bankruptcy law resulting in the following ownership of both companies following reorganiation.

GM stock ownership following reorg:

US Govt: 60%
UAW: 17%
Canadian Govt: 12%

Chrysler stock ownership:

UAW: 55%
Fiat: 20%
US Govt: 8%
Canadian Govt: 2%

One can argue whether or not the US government should have spent taxpayer's dollars in the bailout of GM and Chrysler, but that is only one issue. The other issue is government seizing the legitmate property of shareholders and creditors and transferring the value of those assets to itself and the UAW.

Viva la Republica de los Bananas!

Hugh Farnham said...

Every time I see the official employment numbers I blow a gasket because any honest economist knows they are completely fake.

The employment numbers have been massaged upward for the last two decades, beginning with the Clinton administration.

You are being lied to by Obama's bureaucrats.

Are you ready to take the red pill? Paste this URL into your browser:

By adjusting the "birth-death" model for small business startups and writing millions off the available workforce this evil administration has jawboned down the unemployment to 8%.

SGS estimate for real unemployment: 22%+

It used to be that you could walk up to someone with a clipboard: "Are you employed? No? Would you normally have a job at this point? Yes? I'll put you down as unemployed." That was the old, simple, and honest way of doing business. Now these liars use every trick in the book to press down the unemployment figures.


Imagine someone at the Bureau of Labor Statistics who made up these official lies lived next door to you. How would you treat them? Invite them over for Sunday BBQ? Or shun them as government paid criminals?

Ducky's here said...

Well, Silverfiddle, most would credit Volcker with squeezing out the bad money and getting inflation under control. Raygun did NOTHING except of course firing Volcker for not deregulating.
Of course we all no where that ended up with Greenspan. Ron Paul rather liked Volcker. Liked him a good deal more than the profligate Raygun (high on a list of worst presidents). Again, Raygun did NOTHING except raise middle class taxes and take out the credit card. Only he promoted income transfer not real growth.

The UAW made quite a few concessions to get the deal made and it's working out.

Hugh Farnham said...


Let's talk about Ronnie Raygun. Reagan was a bit more astute and sophisticated than you liberals give him credit for.

A good friend of mine used to work on the Space Based Laser program back in the 1980's as an USAF engineer. His view was Star Wars Defense was Reagan's ploy, a bluff, to bring the evil empire to the bargaining table or perhaps even to its knees.

It did both.

Looking back at the state of technology at the time space-based defense like this had little chance of being effective (except perhaps for x-ray laser satellites).

Like the Soviets, American liberals were also duped into thinking this was a real program. Hence the mocking term Ronnie Raygun.

Silverfiddle said...

You're scraping bottom now, Ducky. No real growth?

I'd love to see the statistic some loony lefty has devised to measure that.

The very fact you are trying to argue that the Reagan-Clinton economic growth was some kind of a mirage shows just how unhinged and out of touch you are.

Also, we're onto your game of always finding the one bit of manure in a bed of roses. It's getting old.

This post is about economic growth and jobs. Reagan's record beats the holy crap out of Obama's.

Sure, go off on tangents about deregulation or whatever, but we're onto you. You're trying to change the subject.

BB-Idaho said...

The fact is, the Reagan raised the number of civilian Federal employees
from 2.8 million to 3.06 million
and boosted the military up to
2.176 million. Under Obama, there
are 2.7 million civilian employees
and 1.6 million military. That's the facts. For opinion...well,
history will note that Reagan invented the neat trick of lowering taxes while increasing spending..a trick that following
administrations followed. (with
predictable results)

Anonymous said...

It's High Time someone developed a Final Solution to The Leftish Problem -- don'tcha think?

~ FT (Short for Feduptotha Teethe)

Ducky's here said...

Hugh Farnham, if Communism is a failed system, which it is, then it collapses by its own internal contradictions. No need to piss away a bundle on Magic Missile nonsense.

But what really galls me is this American ego trip that ignores groups like Solidarnosc who did the heavy lifting while we pulled our dicks and fed the military industrial complex.

Raygun was a stinking fraud.

Hugh Farnham said...


Yes, Communism was going to die a natural death - someday. Instead of sending aid, like Carter, Raygun smothered it with a pillow until dead. And he smiled when he did it.

Just because an enemies' system has fatal flaws doesn't mean we shouldn't hasten its demise. Think of all those people trapped in the system - we set them free years before Communism would have naturally died.

I know this as I lived in what was once a Soviet satellite state - after the Velvet Revolution.

I came to revere Lech Walesa (who I met in person while in college) and Vaclav Havel - a hero of mine.

The truth is the Soviet Union may not have been as dangerous as we were told. Indeed, I don't believe we were well served by our intelligence organs - who were quite surprised by the Velvet Revolution when it happened.

So. Like Communism, our Socialist system of government cannot endure forever. Who among us can see the next system of government after this one? Will it return to the Constitution or be yet another type of tyranny with a human face?

(((Thought Criminal))) said...


You're ignoring history and reality.

Nations with failed or failing economic systems will tend to seek to expand their resources with military force or lash out militarily, which was why Soviet Communism was a military threat in its last 30 years of life.

Communism was contained, then rolled back. That wouldn't have happened under the threat of paper waving from leftists.

Silverfiddle said...

I can collaborate Hugh's stories. I still have envelopes with the eastern European post marks.

Ducky's here said...

It's unfortunate, Hugh. You have insight and are generally level headed and then you start talking about our "Socialist" system. Utter nonsense and at that point any attempt at dialogue is impossible.

Bromides about "back to the Constitution" as if it solves the problems of a complex dynamic world aren't going to cut it.

The state is here, will always be here. What do we do about it?

Anonymous said...

Yesh shir!

We need a Final Solution to the Leftish Problem.

Thash what we need.

Them leftish fellers have whutt eddicated folks call a shoporifick effect on convursayshun.


~ FT

Hugh Farnham said...


One thing that Vaclav Havel railed against was the Communist's penchant to distort the meaning of words.


1) A political and economic theory that advocates the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the State.
2) In Marxist theory, a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

Both seems to fit our government and situation. But, wait, there's more:


Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power. (Benito Mussolini)

I'm attempting to show you things you do not want to see, and lead you to where you are not willing to go.

I'm trying to show you a future free from governmental excesses and overweening power; where Society takes on many of the roles of Government; where every man has weaned himself from childlike trust of agencies and bureaucrats.

Only then can we take on the responsibilities of living in a Republic.

As to my earlier question, what form of government will follow this one? Here's the answer, by de Maistre: "Every country has the government it deserves."

I'm attempting to awaken people so we will deserve better than what we have today in D.C.

Finntann said...

"The UAW made quite a few concessions to get the deal made and it's working out"

So if I make concessions to the government, can I have your stuff?

The act of placing the UAW, an unsecured creditor ahead of secured creditors was a circumvention of the rule of and equality under the law, and was strictly a political ploy to curry favor.

As I said...

Viva la Republica de los Bananas!

Silverfiddle said...

@ Finn: So if I make concessions to the government, can I have your stuff?


BB-Idaho. Jobs expanded something like 20 million (don't have the exact number handy) so those government and military jobs you mention are a drop in the bucket, accounting for only a small percentage of job growth.

Also, the job growth was accompanied by economic expansion, an impossibility if all the job growth comes from government.

Anonymous said...

I've been listening to Washington Journal (C-Span) since it started at 7:00 Am EST. The calls have been coming in about 8 to 1 in favor of a second term for Obama.

Of course, I've long suspected C-Span, despite their ostentatious attempts to display "fairness" to all points of view, is squarely in the Democrats' Corner. Isn't just about everybody in The District of Columbia and environs?

At any rate, I'm morally certain the generally dismal performance put on by the Republicans vying for the nomination -- and the manifest lack of enthusiasm for ANY of the potential candidates -- is working in Obama's favor. And of course, most of the Statistic Mills and Polling organizations are not honest. I'm sure they're fudging things every which way to give Obama the edge. And we KNOW the "major media" is dedicated to the proposition that maximizing centralized power is the ONLY way to go.

Not much hope for a rosy future out there. BUT, as they say, a LOT can happen in the next few months.

A week is a lifetime in the game of politics.

All we can do is watch and pray -- and once again vote for the lesser of two evils. Hobson's Choice really.

If the evidence given by the "random" callers to C-Span is any indication, however, most people are not rational -- and apparently incapable of becoming so. "Democracy" has proved itself to be a colossal failure.

An electorate made up almost entirely of warring splinter factions deliberately kept in the dark by an evil media cannot govern itself, and will soon lapse into dictatorship.

It's beyond sad -- it's tragic.

~ FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

By the way, here's another name to add to your Enmies List:

THOMAS FRANK -- a regular contributor to Harper's.

Another snide, supercilious, know-it-all Red with a polite accent in a suit and tie. Disgusting!

Another offering gleaned from C-Span's Book TV yesterday.

~ FT

dmarks said...

Ducky said: "The UAW made quite a few concessions to get the deal made and it's working out."

The auto companies would truly thrive without the UAW involved at all. And workers would benefit. They'd be able to keep all of their money (instead of hundreds being stolen every year to go to political campaigns against their interest) and a LOT more of them would be hired.

Look at what it was like before there were any UAW concessions. When the union had its way, what did we have?

1) Massive layoffs due to the UAW forcing the auto companies to close factories and/or locate them in more worker-friendly states in the South or outside the country altogether.

2) The few workers left being paid $70, which is unsustainable and more than three times the actual value of such work.

3) While you'd think such high pay might mean a high product, you'd be wrong. The Big 3 products, as a result of shoddy work by these workers, have mostly been dead last in quality for ages.

BB-Idaho said...

Silverfiddle, a job growth summary is sort of interesting. We note the high percentage of jobs created during the Carter administration...and
wonder whether there is much correlation between the hither of
politics and the yon of job creation...

Silverfiddle said...

Congress passed tax breaks for businesses that hired people during the Carter years.

If you want to argue that the Carter years were better than the Reagan years, good luck with that...

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Liberalmann said...

Most people are smart enough to realize you won't hear about the vast range of accomplishments ny Obama on Fox News.

Saving the economy, saving GM, Beginning true Health Care Reform, Ending Iraq is pretty good start!

Liberalmann said...

This article is just laughably pathetic. THIS is the best you can do, to dredge up a list of "Obamaminations"? Complaining about rescuing GM? Defending a Citizens United court decision which is turning the United States from an informal to a formal oligarchy? Banging on about this Justice Department (led by a black man, of course) - when you did not make a WHISPER of protest when the PREVIOUS Justice Dept. justified torture!??

The fact is, this administration has done its best to mop up the foreign policy MESS which YOU are complicit in creating! How ludicrous that you complain about his 'relationships with foreign leaders,' YOU who championed George W. who gave the finger to the international community. Oh, wait, I forgot - he saw into Putin's "soul." I guess being in league with a leader the likes of Putin is good foreign policy for you Cons - who are all authoritarians at heart.

Never mind that Obama helped take out bin Laden and Khaddafi (or wait, are you guys defending the dictator, now? I can't keep up with your hypocrisy) in the same year. What you are also blind to, is that the Arab Spring is not being stamped with anti-Americanism (which is a serious risk considering all our meddling in the region and support of local autocrats). Obama is extricating us, intelligently and carefully, from our the military quagmires which YOU brought on us.

Unlike YOU, we don't make stupid demigods out of our leaders; Obama isn't perfect, but he's by a damn sight a better president than YOU deserve.

Fact is, I sympathize. I felt about W., EXACTLY as you feel about Obama. I, too, though the world was going to end when he got re-elected. Now, it's YOUR turn.

Silverfiddle said...

"How ludicrous that you complain about his 'relationships with foreign leaders,'

Huh? You must have been reading a different article.

This is not complaining. It is stating facts. It's not my fault you can't accept them.

We do agree that Bush was not a good president, but you know how Bush and Obama are different? Bush has a better economic record!

Sincerely, Liberalmann, I thank you for providing substantive comments instead of the usual drive-by post shot.