Strutting Budget Peacocks

Filed in National by on July 13, 2010

Budget peacock is a term coined by the Center for American Progress. It’s a term to describe that unique species of legislator that likes to talk about the deficit but doesn’t want to actually do anything about it. It’s all about looking good.

And then there is another species of deficit bird all together: the deficit peacock. Deficit peacocks like to preen and call attention to themselves, but are not sincerely interested in taking the difficult but necessary steps toward a balanced budget. Peacocks prefer scoring political points to solving problems.

How can you tell the difference between deficit hawks, those who are serious about the dangers posed by persistent, large deficits and deficit peacocks, those who only use those dangers to preen and score political points? It’s actually fairly simple. Here are four easy ways to tell when someone isn’t taking our budget problems seriously.

1. They never mention revenues.
2. They offer easy answers.
3. They support policies that make the long-term deficit problem worse.
4. They think our budget woes appeared suddenly in January 2009.

So, the budget peacocks have been tut-tutting over our deficit. They’ve gone so far as to deny unemployment benefits to unemployed workers during one of the worst downturns in history. The cost of the unemployment insurance extension – $33 billion. The deficit right now is $1 trillion. The major contributing factors to the deficit are the Bush tax cuts, the economic downturn and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

All of this is why this clip of John Kyl is completely insane. At least he’s being honest – he has absolutely no concern for the deficit. His concern is only for tax cuts for the rich.

Kyl has no idea how to pay for $679 billion in tax cuts and he has no plan to. Tax cuts are magical! Just like wars, they are actually free!

WALLACE: We’re running out of time, so how are you going to pay $678 billion just on the tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 a year?

KYL: You should never raise taxes in order to cut taxes. Surely congress has the authority and it would be right, if we decide we want to cut taxes to spur the economy, not to have to raise taxes in order to offset those costs. You do need to offset the cost of increased spending. And that’s what republicans object to. But you should never have to offset cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans.

The GOP economic plan is a big dose of Herbert Hoover, mixed with Marie Antoinette. The sad thing is the GOP will probably make big gains and will help to drag out the economic pain.

Tags: , ,

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (62)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. jason330 says:

    The Republicans really are astonishingly brazen. They get away with, however, because we have no functioning opposition party.

  2. Rebecca says:

    Love the analogy to Marie Antoinette! Good one U.I.

  3. Yeah Rebecca. I heard Tom Corbett yesterday talking about all these jobs out there that unemployed people just arent’ taking because they live the glamorous life on unemployment.

    Jason, I agree that “vote for us, we’re powerless in the face of Republican obstruction” is not the strongest message. Democrats were screwed this year by Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman. No doubt about it.

    Actually I think the Republicans actually positioned themselves (accidentally) perfectly with respect to the stimulus. The stimulus passed, so they can talk about big-spending Democrats, but the Snowe-Collins-Specter brigade weakened the stimulus enough so that it wasn’t as effective as it should have been. Right now we should be talking about more stimulus. Instead we’re talking about the deficit and how the unemployed are lazy.

    As far as Obama goes, he’s actually been giving really good speeches explaining this and laying it all out. Just check out his weekly addresses. He just isn’t getting heard above the Republican noise machine. Instead we hear how unfair it is to blame Bush for all the problems caused by Bush and the Republican Congress.

  4. jason330 says:

    They have an entire army of dedicated, well funded operatives consistently pushing their message on the American public and we have a clever wordsmithing. Yippee!!

    Sorry Rebecca & UI. I’m a little bit frazzled by the inability (unwillingness?) of the Democrats to mount a token resistance to the Republican take over. …(for the record I don’t think Axelrod and Gibbs going on TV to tell me to be scared and send money to the DNC or the bad Republicans will take over Congress as a legitimate resistance.)

  5. jason330 says:

    UI – At this point it is all over. If this weekend is all they have, Democrats should not even show up in November. It is done. Sorry everybody. Republicans have won again, and this time we gave it away.

    Obama blew a once in a century chance to rebuild the Democratic Party and set us on a course for just and fair economic growth.

    Blew it. Blew it. Blew it.

    A1 was right. I was wrong. It is as simple as that.

  6. skippertee says:

    Yea,well I’m fed up with the President and the lack of ANYONE with testicles in the Senate or Congress except Nancy Pelosi.I’d take a bullet for her.I wrote to the President.This is what I said:
    Dear Mr. President,
    Your press secretary,over the weekend,expressed concern that the
    Democrats may lose the house and senate majorities in mid term elections.
    While I don’t place the blame for this at your feet,I do place the blame
    of failure to pass meaningful legislation,besides what I consider a
    seriously flawed health-care bill,at them.
    I didn’t vote for a BLACK man but I THOUGHT I was electing a MAN! Your
    gross failure to ride herd and HARD when you had a DEMOCRATIC majority is
    your undoing.By letting the CONSERVADEMS run the show,you have lost me.
    I am a life-time union man and a long time advocate for a MORE MUSCULAR
    Progressive movement.
    By god,all the bankers seem to be back to work and making money hand over
    fist.Yet,the millions of American workers whose savings,pension plans and
    IRA’s took massive reductions to bail out those same bankers are in dire
    straits.
    What,in god’s name,are your advisors telling you? Are they out of their
    collective minds ?
    One of these days the American workers WILL wake up and face the fact
    that even DEMOCRATS will strangle them with their own hands!
    I hope I’m alive to see THAT revolution.It will make the Civil War look
    like a high-school debate.

  7. Jason it’s because there’s enough Democrats who get wobbly knees and say “OMG, go right!” It happens time and time again. These people who think that Democratic losses in November is actually going to make the party go left have been sniffing glue, IMO.

    I’m also puzzled by Democrats’ unwillingness to exercise their power. For one, Democrats don’t exercise party discipline. Republicans require their members to vote with leadership on certain votes (like sustaining filibusters). Democrats don’t. It was actually Ben Nelson + Republicans who were able to block unemployment benefits by filibuster. Why is Nelson able to get away with voting with Republicans on the filibuster? What punishment will he face? None as far as I can see.

    Sen. Whitehouse actually had a great idea that would have been easy to do – do not allow the Senate to recess without passing the unemployment extension. Leadership chose not to do this. I have no idea why they don’t want a dramatic showdown showing they are there for working folks. Instead, the stories in the paper was that Congress went home without extending unemployment insurance.

    Vote for us because Republicans are scary is not a strong message. They should be touting their accomplishments. Instead they’re acting scared and are refusing to do anything. It’s a shame because this is one of the most accomplished legislative sessions but their inability to face the multiple problems facing this country make them look ineffective. It’s a weird dichotomy.

  8. jason330 says:

    Skipper, Great points. We can’t blame Joe Lieberman. This is Obama’s failure by design. As terrible as that truth is to face, we must all now face it.

    “These people who think that Democratic losses in November is actually going to make the party go left have been sniffing glue, IMO.”

    I agree. There is no appetite for looking left. There is no willingness among Democrats to even join the fight.

    So, what’s next? I have no idea. We all live in Potterville now. It is all shades of gray, and trying to ignore the misery.

  9. Again, I’m not seeing what magical powers Obama has to make Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman less assholish. People need to start looking at Senate Democrats and their failures instead of blaming it all on Obama.

  10. jason330 says:

    *sign*

    No magical powers. How about a little leadership? It is called being a President.

    Jason out. This is bullshit. We seem to deserve Republican leadership.

  11. jason330 says:

    One more thing. Rebbecca – I know you are reading this. Is this REALLY the Democratic party that Howard Dean spoke about in the winter of 2003? Is this what you and I expect Democratic leadership to look like?

  12. anonone says:

    Giving up on THE REVEAL, jason?

  13. jason330 says:

    What do you think dumbass?

  14. anonone says:

    I think that it is about time. Instead of “dumbass,” think of me as your personal iconoclast.

  15. jason330 says:

    Go fuck yourself.

  16. Rebecca says:

    It’s the economy stupid! That’s all joe and jane care about. They can’t go to Walmart and buy all that Chinese crap anymore. That circus has left town.

    Thanks to Governor Markell and his team we might actually stand a chance here in Delaware come November. The rest of the country, not so much.

    Jack for President!

  17. I’m serious here. The advice of some progressives was to give up and start over on hcr. Really? And they think they would get a different outcome?

    I think the advice people have been giving to Obama has been incoherent. It’s been stand up and not compromise and at the same time why isn’t he getting the mythical liberal/moderate Republicans to vote with him. The Democratic party has quite a few conservatives in it, and he needed every vote to get anything done. He managed to do things that no Democratic president in 100 years has been able to do and yet some of the base still turns their nose up at it.

    Obama’s so-called allies turned on him within months of getting in office because he just wasn’t fast enough to solve every problem simultaneously and implement their pet issues. Then they criticize him using the Republicans criticism and say they’re helping him.

    The hard truth is that change is much, much harder than most of us realized and taking your ball and going home will not get you what you want.

  18. Rebecca says:

    Ah Jason,

    Yes I am reading this and no, this isn’t what I hoped for back in my Deaniac days. But I never had any illusions that Obama would be another Dean. Ya only had to look at his healthcare reform plans to tell he wasn’t enamoured of being at the front of the pack. Then, after we elected him, his cabinet and top advisor choices sure looked moderate. And all that bi-partisan crap. He’s playing to the middle, or even slightly right-of-center, and it isn’t working because of the economy. Nothing is going to work until we get people back to work.

  19. jason330 says:

    It does not make me happy to say that your day is coming too UI. When is it okay to let the truth about Obama in?

    It is different for every Democrat I guess. Mine came this weekend when I got a glimpse of the brilliant mid-term strategy. A1’s and Firedog Lake’s even earlier.

    Yours is coming.

  20. skippertee says:

    No,UI,I’m saying OBAMA should have takin’ CONSERVADEMS into the OVAL OFFICE early and made it CLEAR to them that HE WOULD make it VERY HARD on them if they didn’t SUPPORT the DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM.He was the de-facto LEADER of the DEMOCRATIC party! MAKE them REAL DEMOCRATS or let them SWITCH to what they must really be.Republicans.They are in fact:DINOS.Democrats in name only.

  21. Rebecca says:

    And Jason,

    What is our choice? All I see is that we’ve got to keep pulling to the left. You’re doing that. Good on ya! And where can you pull to the left in this country except in the Democratic Party? I’ve seen change here in Delaware over the past seven years. Small and slow but change. Dean left his mark on many of us. Like U.I. says, it is much harder and slower than any of us anticipated. But we’ve gotta keep showing up and bringing our best game. Heck, it’s our patriotic duty unless we want the corporations to take over.

  22. Having the conservadems switch would have gotten Obama absolutely nothing he wanted. You do understand that there’s a power differential between people who want to get things done and those that don’t care about getting stuff done. Those who don’t want to do anything and are willing to block have a lot more power.

    I see the weaknesses just fine, Jason. I don’t blame Obama for the pre-existing weakness in the Democratic caucus. I see someone who has been trying to get things done with an unprecedented amount of obstruction.

  23. anonone says:

    U.I., I am serious here, too. Obama lied to the American people over and over again, but you want to blame the progressives for believing the things he said. In so many areas, he either did not even fight for what he promised or he did exactly the opposite of what he had promised.

    It wasn’t Obama’s allies deserting him. It was Obama deserting his own promises and his own political base.

    I hope that sooner than later people wake up to the fact that THE REVEAL ain’t gonna happen and we can nominate a different Democrat in 2012.

  24. jason330 says:

    Rebecca, Yeah. I used to think all of that. At this point, to be a part of the Democratic Party is to be an accomplice to fraud. It is too late. We had a shot and it is all over.

    They have won. I quit. I’m a quitter, I guess. I tried to have faith, but it didn’t work.

  25. anonone says:

    Jason is like a religious fanatic who still hates atheists even after he discovered for himself that there is no god.

    Don’t worry, jason. In the grief recovery process, anger is the second step after denial.

  26. PBaumbach says:

    as The West Wing’s character President Bartlett said to his chief of staff, “how’s the view from the cheap seats?”

    OMG, are you guys off your medication?

    You think that green President Obama could order the ahole conservadems into the Oval Office and successfully browbeat them, and if he had done so we would have ANY healthcare reform, ANY financial reform?

    Did you guys somehow forget the Republican Party of No voting to fillibuster all legislation? Hmm, let me think, what would the effect be of one egotistical Conservadem who felt insulted by Obama’s treatment of them in the Oval Office?

    Get f’ing real. This isn’t some chalkboard exercise. Burning bridges with the US Senate in his first months in office would make great drama, and a great show, but it would have led to a complete shutdown of ANY progress for the rest of his one-term presidency, and would have not only led to awful losses in the mid-term, but a miserable loss for the party in 2012, where even an idiot like Palin could have walked into the White House.

    Leadership means getting good things done. Obama has gotten good things done, despite immense headwinds. Certainly there are a zillion ways that what he did could have been better, in a theoretical world that didn’t include the party of no and lobbyists and a staunchly conservative Supreme Court. Having a temper tantrum early in his administration would have doomed him and the country.

    98% of the voting public has no clue about what Gibbs said this weekend. As Rebecca noted, it’s the economy stupid, not the Sunday morning talk shows. The voting public does (or will know in the coming months) know that health insurance is possible for the previously uninsurable, a change I can believe in, and a change that would have been impossible if Obama had followed any of the advice listed above.

    Your free advice is worth every cent.

    Have at me. I’m tuning out from this idiotic thread.

  27. Rebecca says:

    You are no quitter Jason! I can vouch for that and so can everyone else in this community.

    There is good cause for despair, things are well and truly messed up. And joe and jane don’t instill a whole lot of faith in our electorate. And then there’s the media. And then there’s the party leadership. And then there’s the Supreme Court. And then there’s BP. And the 401K is looking bleak. And we all have at least one friend or family member who is out of work, and has been for a long time. And the list just goes on. Somedays it is tough to get out of bed.

    If I had a magic wand I’d wave it. But all I’ve got is dogged determination that this isn’t the way it has to be. So I’ll keep talking to you Jason and telling you that it has nothing to do with faith and everything to do with being the most stubborn person in the fight.

  28. jason330 says:

    PBaumbach = Me 6 months ago.

  29. Amen, Paul. Obama’s supposed allies gave bad advice. We wouldn’t have accomplished what he has doing it differently. I certainly agree that especially in the beginning Obama pre-compromised too much, but I don’t know that he wouldn’t have gotten a better result.

    Like Rebecca said, real change takes real work. It’s not enough to elect a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress. We have to keep pestering them. And we have to find a way to make the media pay attention. The teabaggers were absolute geniuses at that.

  30. liberalgeek says:

    Paul – for the record, only Jason is off of his meds, the rest of them are as-yet-undiagnosed.

  31. anonone says:

    U.I. and L.G. seem to be doing gymnastics to try and avoid putting the blame where it lies: Obama himself. There are many many decisions that he has made that have nothing to do with the Senate or Congress, including his decisions as Commander in Chief, who he has picked as White House and economic advisors, policies at the Justice department, management of the BP fiasco, and the Head of the DNC, just to name a few.

    Furthermore, he has discredited himself by his own dishonesty and failure to lead.

    You can try to blame everybody but him, but that dog just doesn’t hunt anymore.

    If Obama won’t deliver the hope and change that he promised, then we need to find somebody who can. Making excuses for him and blaming others isn’t going to right the ship.

  32. anon says:

    Again, I’m not seeing what magical powers Obama has to make Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman less assholish.

    It’s like the old joke where the mother drops her kid off at camp and says “He’s very sensitive, so if he acts up, just slap the kid next to him.”

    In Arkansas, Obama had the perfect chance to slap the kid next to Lieberman and Nelson (Blanche Lincoln). He chose the wrong door.

  33. anon says:

    I voted for Obama with only one expectation: that he would allow the Bush tax cuts for the rich to expire. The jury’s still out on that.

    Retaining a Dem majority would be nice too, but maybe that is too much to ask.

  34. liberalgeek says:

    I am doing no gymnastics. The options that I see are:

    a) get nothing done but be seen shaking your fist vigorously.

    b) get stuff done, but piss off anonone.

    I’m glad he chose b.

    Nancy Pelosi has done some amazing things with Barack Obama. They are on the verge of passing financial reform. They have a great running start on healthcare (way further than Bill & Hillary ever got). Fixed some glaring pork in student loans (and ended up getting a huge influx of jobs to Delaware in the process).

    Are there things that he still has to do? Sure. I want Gitmo closed. I want DOMA reversed. I want healthcare reform to go further. I want us out of Afghanistan and Iraq. I want a cap & trade program for emissions.

    You and I both claim to be realists, except that one of us is actually a pessimist.

  35. Exactly, lg. Getting something done is much harder than talking about getting something done. It involves compromise and he had to work with the Senate he had, not the one he wish to have. I’m with you that there’s still a lot of things on my wish list but I see getting them done less and less likely because we’re going to get an obstructionist Congress with more Republicans.

    A lot of Democrats’ woes go to the poor economy and many self-inflicted wounds. Obama does not get credit for the things he’s done, only criticism from his so-called allies.

  36. jason330 says:

    Those are not the only options and Geek is a smart guy, so he know that already. You guys will come around. I’m not as angry about all of it as A1. I’m just sad. Potterville sucks. Bedford Falls was nice while it lasted.

  37. jason330 says:

    Let me ask the defenders of Mr. Obama’s efficacy. When will it be okay for Democrats to bail on the President? Until recently my response to that was – never. But then the Obama team made it’s mid-term strategy painfully clear.

    I’m wondering if UI has a sense of what her breaking point is.

  38. anon says:

    The options that I see are:
    a) get nothing done but be seen shaking your fist vigorously.
    b) get stuff done, but piss off anonone.

    Voters reward people who shake their fists vigorously. Now, we are left with:

    c) Voters elect Republicans who shake their fists vigorously, and
    d) Republicans undo stuff Obama did in (b)

    With a little more fistshaking, maybe we can avoid c) and d).

    Oh, and anonone will still be pissed off no matter what happens.

  39. I agree anon, probably a combination of a) and b) would work better.

    I actually have complete confidence that Senate gridlock will ensure 1) Bush’s tax cuts expire and 2) the inheretence tax comes back next year.

    A dealbreaker for me would be if Obama signed a bill raising the Social Security retirement age or cutting benefits in another way. That’s pure budget peacockery and stealing from the poor & middle class as far as I’m concerned.

  40. jason330 says:

    Be prepared to bail or move your goalposts.

  41. anon says:

    I actually have complete confidence that Senate gridlock will ensure 1) Bush’s tax cuts expire and 2) the inheretence tax comes back next year.

    Worst case is Democrats introduce a bill to keep Bush tax cuts for those under $250K, and Repubs block it until the tax cuts for the rich are put back in. The Senate folds, and liberals shrug and say “What can Obama do?”

    After what we have seen, do you really think that scenario is so unlikely?

    That for me would be the complete failure of the Obama administration. I’d have nothing left to be happy about except keeping status quo on the Supreme Court.

    A dealbreaker for me would be if Obama signed a bill raising the Social Security retirement age or cutting benefits in another way.

    A means test on the other hand would be a good idea. Boehner already floated it; Obama should call his bluff.

  42. delacrat says:

    UI,

    “Getting something done is much harder than talking about getting something done.”

    Does it occur to you that maybe, just maybe, he’s not interested in doing anything for us.

    A drone strike in Pakistan 3 days into his administration should tell you something. Do you seriously believe that the Congress or the GOP made him do that?

    Do his 5 senate votes to fund the Iraq war, constitute “getting something done” for his anti-war base, or for someone else?

    Voting for telecom immunity after saying he’d filibuster the bill. Does that constitute “getting something done” for our civil liberties, or the serveillance state?

    “getting something done” to Obama and his acolytes amounts to no more than asserting
    his faux helplessness and carrying water for the GOP base.

    Ask why you voted for him, when there was overwhelming evidence that you should not have.

  43. jason330 says:

    Great points. I might add that if conservadems are the problem – why does the President work so hard for people like Ben Nelson and Blanche Lincoln?

  44. anon says:

    Ben Nelson a Yes on Wall Street Reform…. (possibly) for the concession of blackballing Elizabeth Warren from CFPA.

  45. anon says:

    Reagan’s approval rating was 37% after his first two years in office.

  46. anonone says:

    UI and LG:

    HCR was a sell-out to pharma and the insurance companies at the expense of the citizens. You don’t believe me yet, but wait until people are forced to buy insurance to cover the continuing-to- skyrocket costs of health care (and then can’t actually pay their deductibles or doctors). There will be hell-to-pay. You will see. Maybe then we’ll get a public option, but not if the repubs get back in charge.

    The financial reform legislation does nothing to address “too big to fail” nor is it strong enough to prevent another meltdown like we just had. Ask Volker. Another sell-out to corporatism.

    We have 9.5% unemployment yet Obama wants to spend $33 billion to kill Afghanis. For what?

    Meanwhile, you both (understandably) fail to address any of the items in regards to Obama’s leadership failures, dishonesty, personnel choices, and executive decisions that have nothing to do with Congress or the Senate. I guess it causes too much cognitive dissonance.

    Joe Biden would have been a much better President.

  47. anonone says:

    So, please tell me how you can read stuff like this and not be furious:

    “The Obama administration has declined to launch an investigation into illegal activities carried out during the Bush administration — such as the practice of waterboarding, which is widely considered a form of torture, on terror suspects.

    “If you don’t prosecute, or if you don’t investigate, then what you’re saying is government can do anything,” Nadler argued. “And that’s a formula for tyranny. So I think it’s very important.” As for looking forward and not backwards? “By that standard you’d never prosecute any crime.”

    White House officials and some analysts fear that a drawn-out investigation, which would be virulently fought by Republicans, would drain the capacity of Democrats to advance their domestic agenda.”

    Under Obomba, we get neither the prosecution of the war criminals nor the advance of our domestic agenda.

    http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0713/rep-nadler-investigate-torture-face-road-tyranny/

  48. jason330 says:

    Dumbass, Go sit on a Fushigi ball.

  49. liberalgeek says:

    HCR needs changes in order to do what it should do. But those changes will be discrete and there will be political will to do it. You see it as a timebomb, fine, I think it will be a political fait accompli when it comes time.

    FinReg has a number of features that will tighten things up on big banks. Elizabeth Warren supports it. It extends regulation to non-bank financial institutions. Republicans hate it. So I guess it isn’t all bad.

    As for Afghanistan, he never said that he was leaving when he became President. You may not like it, and I may not like it, but he was clear that that was the warfront for fighting al Qaida and the Taliban.

    Did he pick some people that I wouldn’t have picked? Sure, but Obama has surrounded himself with a variety of opinions and people from whom he can learn. It’s great that you have some wild-eyed progressive that would be better as SecTreas or Chief of Staff, or whatever. It doesn’t really matter. I think we are all clear about how you would “lead” if given the opportunity.

    I disagree that Biden would be a better President. He needs Obama to make him better. Have you ever seen Biden change his mind?

  50. anonone says:

    The plain and simple truth is that when Obama does the same things that you excoriated Bush for, you just shrug your shoulders and make excuses.

    And it has nothing to do with “how [I] would “lead” if given the opportunity.” That is merely a deflection. It has everything to do with how Obama is actually leading, and that you can’t face the fact that we (Dems) are facing another failed presidency of a Jimmy Carter magnitude.

    That Biden would make a better President is only a reflection of how bad Obama is. Biden would be withdrawing from Afghanistan.

    Oh, and cheer up, jason. There is power in truth.

  51. anon says:

    HCR needs changes in order to do what it should do. But those changes will be discrete and there will be political will to do it. You see it as a timebomb, fine, I think it will be a political fait accompli when it comes time.

    The REVEAL!!

    What discourages me the most is that after 8 years of GOP rule and 18 months of Democrats, Republicans are very likely going to pin the economy on Obama and ride the wave back into power.

    The only way Americans will swallow that pile of crap is if they wanted to all along.

  52. skippertee says:

    You people JUST DON’T GET IT! The time has come! The time is NOW! QUIT FIGHTING the inevitable! INVEST in REMINGTON,GLOCK,WINCHESTER etc.STOP agitating for gun laws.It’s over,man.
    Buy as many as you can and all the ammunition you can store.We libs and progs got to be able to protect ourselves from the trogs on the right,man.
    What did Voltaire say about God being on the side of the one with the most battalions?

  53. Phil says:

    A1, I’m glad you see through HCR to what it truly was. In the news journal today, there was a quote from BCBSDE about how they are looking forward to everyone having mandatory insurance. If that doesn’t send up a red flag, I don’t know what will.

    It is hard to believe that Obama was bought and paid for by big business, but the facts speak for themselves.. The stimulus has done nothing for the average person except increase their share of the national debt.

    Even Obama’s offenses against the constitution and civil liberties probably make Bush cringe. I will be really suprised if we don’t aren’t heading into Iran or NKorea by 2011-12.

  54. jason330 says:

    It has been a wasted 18 months. Worse than wasted – it has been 18 months spent empowering and emboldening the worst elements of our society. Democrats are going into these house races demoralized and it was totally avoidable.

    If Skip is going for comical hyperbole, it is lost on me.

  55. anonone says:

    We need to cut the line to Obama and start looking at a replacement for 2012. Otherwise, it could easily be President Gingrich or Romney.

  56. jason330 says:

    Man oh man you are dumb.

  57. delacrat says:

    Cynthia McKinney

  58. anonone says:

    Better dumb and right than smart and wrong. But y’all just stay on your deck chairs as the water comes over the deck.

    “The adviser, who asked to remain anonymous, said the public did not know what Mr Obama really believed. Examples include his lukewarm support last year for a public option in the healthcare bill and his equally lukewarm support today for a Senate bill that would extend unemployment insurance and aid state governments to keep teachers in their jobs.

    In both cases, Mr Obama has offered only token, negotiable, support. “I never thought I would say this, but even I’m unsure what President Obama really believes,” says the adviser. “Instead of outsourcing decisions to Congress, he should spell out his bottom line. That is what leaders are for.”

    “Outsourcing decisions to Congress.” Indeed.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/434315b2-8ea6-11df-8a67-00144feab49a.html

  59. delacrat says:

    Obama and the dems will jump the shark this Nov.

    If Obama (and Joe) has any vestige of care for his country or party, he’ll do an LBJ.

  60. anon says:

    Jeez, now everybody is bashing Obama:

    Harry Reid: Obama Should be “More Firm” With GOP
    (link)

    Could the irony be any thicker?