Ace of Spades HQ

January 08, 2009

Nearly 700,000 Jobs Lost in December; Far Worse Than Expected
— Ace

The perfect storm in Obama's favor, as he will ride the "Bush destroyed the economy, I can't be held responsible" horse until it dies of exhaustion.

As James Pethoukis points out, this will work... up to a point.

But can a repetitive "Blame Bush" mantra allow Democrats to hold their huge Congressional majorities in 2010 and get Obama reelected in 2012 if they economy is as bad they think it will be? The latest iteration of Obama's stimulus -- I mean "economic recovery" -- package indicates that Team Obama has its doubts about voter patience and the economy. The larger-than-expected tax cuts, even if they are really just disguised government spending, are an effort to rejigger the plan to provide more economic oomph this year. Indeed, as the CBO said when Obama adviser Peter Orszag ran the joint, using infrastructure spending to juice the economy is "totally impractical." There just aren't enough "shovel-ready projects" to make effective use of the hundreds of billions Obama wants to throw at the recession.
And Obama has good reason to doubt the patience of voters. Recall that bad economies propelled Ronald Regan and Bill Clinton to the White House -- and both gentlemen saw their respective parties suffer badly in the very next midterm election because of voter economic anxiety. To quote Oscar Rogers, the impatient "financial consultant" on Saturday Night Live, American voters want Washington to "Fix it!" and fix it fast.
And, really, how can Obama avoid taking responsibility when he will be so actively meddling in the economy? It will be his decision to forego deep and permanent new tax cuts, his decision to not extend the Bush tax cuts, his decision on how to spend the remaining $350 billion in TARP money, his decision to quasi-nationalize healthcare, his decision to push a cap-and-trade carbon emission program and his decision to spend hundreds of billions on a "green" industrial policy. It might even be his decision to try and reunionize the American laborforce. Obama will "own" the battered economy, perhaps almost literally, given Uncle Sam's bailout binge.
So what standard should voters hold Obama to? How about this one: The 1981-82 recession last lasted 16 months and was followed by an explosive recovery thanks largely to the Reagan tax cuts (even though they were slowly implemented). The current downturn, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, started in December 2007. Mr. Obama better hurry.

The expected deficit for this fiscal year (beginning late in 2008 ) is $1.2 TRILLION dollars. Supposedly deficits will get smaller in the following years, but I doubt that.

All restraints on spending have been lifted. This works like gangbusters in Obama's favor. Like a CEO who only cares about next year's bonus and not about what happens after he leaves the company, Obama can bust the budgets like there's no tomorrow to prove he's "doing something" about the economy, hoping the public doesn't realize that 1) he may actually be doing something bad to the economy and 2) that the price of his attempting to over-juice the economy with lots of newly printed bills in time for his reelection will be significantly reduced growth and significantly higher inflation and significantly higher interest rates and significantly higher inflation, not for the duration of a recession, even a long one, but perhaps for an entire generation.

20 years.

But he is fixed on 2012. He's not running in 2016 (or rather we hope he's not running in 2016). Or 2020. Or 2024. He can spend money we don't have and reduce the prosperity of this nation for 20 years as long as it buys him some traction for 2012.

Other presidents have this same fact driving them, of course. They too are, selfishly but understandably, looking their own reelection prospects and not the mess they'll leave ten or fifteen years down the road.

But most presidents face considerable checks on such impulses. In this crisis-all-the-time environment, this Greatest Depression Since the World Was Young era, economists are now claiming that Obama may, and should, spend like there's no tomorrow, because, as they claim, perhaps there won't be a tomorrow.

As difficult as it will be for Republicans to resist this superheated talk of impending doom, it is crucial we resist and at least put some check on these bankbreaking plans of "stimulating" the economy with $1 Trillion more, in addition to all the bailouts (also running in the near-trillion range). This isn't merely a partisan imperative. It isn't just to deny Obama his easy 2012 win, paid for by the misery and decline of the next generation. It's to save that next generation, and convince the public that a country which has come to a crisis due to overspending and too much fake money can't get out of it, at least not without serious damage to the economy later, by overspending more and flooding out even more fake money.

The calls to do something, do anything will be cacophonous and Cassandrian. But the GOP, if it is to survive at all, cannot allow Obama to spend trillions in newly-printed dollars each year simply to goose his chances for 2012.

Red Ink Unlike Anything Since WWII: A projected 8.3% deficit will shatter all records since the Good War.

Posted by: Ace at 09:34 AM | Comments (122)
Post contains 900 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Amen brother.

Posted by: Rocks at January 08, 2009 09:38 AM (Q1lie)

Soon they will actually release the 4th quater numbers AND if they show negative growth, then we will officially be in a recession.

it seems that in their efforts to call doom and gloom on the economy they have lost all sense of defintion and decorum.

Of course, when you are only a propaganda rag and not an actual news organization that is par for the course.

Posted by: Vic at January 08, 2009 09:41 AM (f6os6)

3
Um, you don't have to be an economic genius to know that spending our way out of this crisis is NOT going to work.

Even the unwashed masses know that the government is the biggest pilferer of America's treasury and government is the last one they want to "fix" the economy.

Posted by: Darling at January 08, 2009 09:41 AM (d/L0R)

4 I don't know why it was unexpected. As soon as the line of perception has been crossed that we are in a economic crisis, all companies will use this reasoning or excuse to reduce costs and cut perceived waste and increase the tasks of the remaining workers to make up for the cuts whether its really needed or not. Its a vicious cycle because demand will naturally go down as unemployment goes up.

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 09:44 AM (m2CN7)

5 Economic illiteracy and political opportunism will be the death of this country.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 08, 2009 09:45 AM (hlYel)

6
As soon as people hear what the Democrats have planned, it will be extremely unpopular. The trick for Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and the MSM will be to keep the details from the American people.

People will begin to ask questions, and that's not acceptable.

How is nationalized health care going to help the economy?

How is building new school buildings (which cost about $25-75 million) going to help the economy?

How is giving laptop computers to kids (to play games and surf prOn) going to help the economy?

How is funding a massive "green awareness" campaign going to help the economy?

How is amnesty for illegal aliens going to help the economy?

Posted by: Darling at January 08, 2009 09:48 AM (d/L0R)

7
Tell me about it.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 09:50 AM (LVT6e)

8 I anxiously await the repeal of the Republican tax com Jan 19th. No longer will there be depressing bread lines, and miserable orphans dying of leprosy in the streets. Soon it will all be government sponsored communal feasts and rosy-cheeked scamps with happy-limb-off disease. Unless they decide to ride the "It's all Bush's Fault" horse into the next election cycle. Which is entirely possible, now that I think about it.

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at January 08, 2009 09:50 AM (ltwze)

9 How much of that deficit spending is new spending and how much of it is funding Medicaid/Medicare? It went bankrupt last month, so it's way in the red. Or are they even counting entitlement programs in their budgets anymore?

I've noticed that they don't count printing money (Bernanke printed something like $5 trillion last quarter; I'd have to look up the exact number, but it was big; Paulson himself took $2 trillion on another occasion) as part of the bailout money or budget. Where is this all ending up on the books?

Posted by: Ella at January 08, 2009 09:51 AM (jeP9I)

10 Where is this all ending up on the books?

To paraphrase Leona Helmsley....books are for the little people.

Posted by: Ben and Hank at January 08, 2009 09:53 AM (hlYel)

11 It's only a flesh wound.

Posted by: The Black Knight at January 08, 2009 09:54 AM (7DB+a)

12
What's the first thing Obama is going to do?

He's going to raise the federal gas tax and tobacco tax. Then he's going to go after the SUVs, trucks, and big cars.

Obama is going to raise every single federal tax on the books except income tax.

Posted by: Darling at January 08, 2009 09:55 AM (d/L0R)

The media persists in eating what they are fed by Obama, processing it through their bloated corpses and shitting it out the other end to fertilize massive Obama love fields. So, Obama can say or do whatever he wants about the economy with absolutely no consequences because they will cover for him.

And I have to wonder about some of the jobs lost, especially small business-- were some caused by businesses choosing to downside because they feared what an Obama administration would mean for their bottom line? I recall reading various blogs where small business owners basically said outright they were laying people off so they wouldn't be taxed as much when Obama was in office.

Was that an urban legend or are some of these job losses because of that?

Posted by: ParanoidInSeattle at January 08, 2009 09:57 AM (AJ4xq)

14
The second thing Obama will do?

He's going to lift Bush's embargo on Palestinian aid $$. He'll just chalk that up to his economic stimulus plan, too

Posted by: Darling at January 08, 2009 09:58 AM (d/L0R)

15

Well, from what I know, and have been told, taxes are our way of saying thanks to our Government, and we need to pay our fair share.

Just us tho, actors are exempt, as are congressmen.

We are so fucked. Hey, maybe the Today show or Katie Coiage will do some hard-hitting journalism to find things, like, out about stuff, like, like this and junk.

Posted by: Sen. Gov. E. Buzz Miller, PhD at January 08, 2009 09:58 AM (sf4Oe)

16 America's pain is Democrats' gain.

Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?

Posted by: Good Lt at January 08, 2009 10:00 AM (jH17H)

17 "When people think of a portrait of Obama, they think of this image." When I think of a portrait of Obama, I think of this image. In fact, check out the whole site, comrades.

Posted by: A Plover In Every Pot! at January 08, 2009 10:05 AM (R9nd6)

But he is fixed on 2012. He's not running in 2016 (or rather we hope he's not running in 2016).

How dare you accuse Barack Obama of such shortsightedness.

In 2016, Michelle will be running.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at January 08, 2009 10:05 AM (2QFX4)

19
My Unicorn is constipated. Where are my Skittles®?

Cotton Candy farts, sure, but I need Skittles®!

Posted by: Dang at January 08, 2009 10:08 AM (Y5LIx)

20 The US is projected to have a 1.2 Trillion dollar deficit for 09, that's not counting the skittle shitter's "stimuli". There's no fucking way he's getting that money.

Posted by: Mighty Mick at January 08, 2009 10:10 AM (kOQDM)

The nearest analogy I can find to Obama's unlimited spending prescription for the economy is having endless amounts of unprotected sex in an attempt to cure your infection with AIDS.

Coming soon to a Congress near you! The Omnibus Bareback Buttfucking AIDS Cure Financial Bailout and Stimulous Package of 2009!

Posted by: Sharkman at January 08, 2009 10:14 AM (69J41)

22 This is why Michigan Governor Jenny "One State Depression" Granholm is an Obama economic advisor. She isn't telling him how to grow an economy, she's teaching him how to blame the previous administration and get re-elected after you screw the pooch.

It worked in Michigan.

There just aren't enough "shovel-ready projects" to make effective use of the hundreds of billions Obama wants to throw at the recession.

I am already effing sick of the buzzword "shovel-ready."

All restraints on spending have been lifted. This works like gangbusters in Obama's favor.

This is also a guy who has never run a business and never had an Executive position. Spending other people's money is all he knows how to do, and during the campaign, he had a bottomless cash reserve. He has never had to make hard choices.

Posted by: V the K at January 08, 2009 10:15 AM (PLvLS)

Nice finger trap for us and the Chicomms.

We have two alternatives--get someone to finance the debt or print money.

They have two alternatives--allow their export market to implode or let the dollar devalue and put a crimp in their forex holdings and their export market STILL implodes. Good for us!!! (Sarcasm.)

Someone said it this morning--the international financial system is now engaged in trying to put the shit back in the horse. I think I'll take Merle Haggard's sage advice and just sit here and drink.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at January 08, 2009 10:17 AM (B+qrE)

24 And this right here is why the Republicans continually lose the youth/young adult vote. Who wants to spend their years paying off debt run up by Mom and Dad and Gramps? Seriously. Is there no Republican who can make the case for very limited interference in the economy in the form of bailouts, tax cuts, and failure of poorly run corporations? Short term pain for long term gain? We have history on our side for cryin out loud. Are all Republicans spineless little weasels without an ounce of honor? Is everyone just waiting to dip their beaks in that big ole trillion dollar pot of pork?

Posted by: rinseandspit at January 08, 2009 10:19 AM (ao5cQ)

25 Foreign reporters dub Israel 'military dictatorship' He said the IDF was "unprofessional" and perhaps trying to hide something. "These are the characteristics of a military dictatorship," he said. When Israel prevents journalists from reporting it is aligning itself with countries such as Burma and Zimbabwe, Wood added. According to Charles Anderlin, who represents the France2 network, Israel wants the world to receive one-sided reports. He compared the Gaza to Sarajevo, where he claimed Russia prohibited journalists from covering the battles. Oh, no! They're not biased! You're kept out b/c: The IDF does not have the time to babysit you in the middle of a war. You will report their locations to Hamas. You are biased terrorist lovers. Gaza already had their own reporters and no communications are being blocked coming out of Gaza. Why do foreign reporters want to steal jobs from poor Gazan reporters trying to make a living? Racists!!!

Posted by: A Plover In Every Pot! at January 08, 2009 10:24 AM (R9nd6)

They have two alternatives--allow their export market to implode or let the dollar devalue and put a crimp in their forex holdings and their export market STILL implodes. Good for us!!!

They'll have some really nasty problems if/when this shit hits the fan. Expect an invasion of Taiwan...

Posted by: Rt. 7 at January 08, 2009 10:28 AM (W0B71)

Are all Republicans spineless little weasels without an ounce of honor? Is everyone just waiting to dip their beaks in that big ole trillion dollar pot of pork?

Oh, our beaks aren't the only thing we're dipping in that big shiny pot of pork.

Thanks, suckers. Now excuse me while I get the new $20 million dollar unicycle path I funded in my district named after myself.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 08, 2009 10:30 AM (rf03a)

28 It looks like he may have some problems.

Obama tax plan runs into opposition in Senate

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090108/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_taxes

Posted by: Dennis at January 08, 2009 10:30 AM (cdxgN)

We talked endlessly during the election about Cloward Piven and Saul Alinsky. There's a lot of verbiage around it but the basic strategy is to:

1 Organize at the (victim) grassroots level - ACORN, etc.

2 Use gov't institution and programs against themselves to overload the system - CRA, entitlements, etc.

3 Use ensuing failures in gov't to argue for change - ahem

4 Implement a new gov't based on spreading the wealth and fairness

Here we go.

Posted by: JackStraw at January 08, 2009 10:30 AM (VW9/y)

Expect an invasion of Taiwan..

Eh...they still can't do that. But if everyone is unnerved by the notion of an unstable Pakistan, China has 800 MILLION peasants.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at January 08, 2009 10:31 AM (B+qrE)

I do look forward to the media bemoaning Obama's record deficits every time they talk about the economy or new spending bills just as they did when Republicans controlled Congress and the White House.

Hey- what's so funny?

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 08, 2009 10:34 AM (rf03a)

32 That's it, time to win the lottery and buy an island.

What? That's as sound a strategy as spending your way out of a problem created by spending.

Posted by: DrewM. at January 08, 2009 10:34 AM (hlYel)

33 Isn't it about the time for Bush and Cheney institute martial law and declare themselves co-Presidents for life? I read this scenario several times on Kos, so you know it's true.

Posted by: FreakyBoy at January 08, 2009 10:35 AM (4s1it)

Even the unwashed masses know that the government is the biggest pilferer of America's treasury and government is the last one they want to "fix" the economy.

Yeah. Now if only that knowledge could filter up to the elites. Because they don't know it.

Posted by: flenser at January 08, 2009 10:38 AM (/2oBi)

35 Actually, wasn't there a House bill introduced yesterday that was calling for the repeal of the 22nd Amendment (I think) that limit's the number of terms a President may serve? Some Dem from NY I believe.

Posted by: CDR M at January 08, 2009 10:38 AM (TJoU6)

36 I suppose all of this means that Uncle Barack will be paying my mortgage and for my groceries next years.

WHERE'S MY BAILOUT AND MY UNICORN AND MY HEALTH CARE AND MY FREE STUFF?

Posted by: Good Lt at January 08, 2009 10:40 AM (jH17H)

37 Get ready for the Old Deal, the Barackalypse is upon us.

Posted by: zmdavid at January 08, 2009 10:41 AM (FWpcp)

The spending spree? This is reminiscent of watching the long dark metamorphosis of sheltered Catholic school girl to crackwhore on a large scale.

Obama is the metaphorical equivalent of switching from crack to meth.

Posted by: U.S.S. Yorktown at January 08, 2009 10:41 AM (5RlWq)

39 This economic crisis, that's the problem, oh, the end of the world because we finally hit a recession and, gasp, some economic deadwood is going to be pruned.

Instead, our idiotic treasury secretary screams bloody murder and our Chief Exec, a harvard MBA no less, believes him and throws money around like it's free.

So, first Bush decided to be post-partisan an own the "crisis" by letting Pelosi and company pin it on him and Mackerel.. Mackerel is also too swell of a guy to resist owning the disaster, so he loses the election.

And now, when cooler heads should prevail, Bush apparently hasn't talked to a reputable economist and has not bothered to do anything productive.

Yes, thanks for winning the war in Iraq and not taking credit on that. However, as PJ Orourke pointed out, conservatism isn't about global military expeditions but actually advocating and defending certain ideals we would identify as American or Conservative.

So, fuck. What is going to happen. As Anne Coulter pointed out, noone knows because noone bothered to really ask Obama what he believes in or what his record is. I thought he was a bat shit looney leftist, intent on nationalizing every business bigger than a breadbasket. Then again, to the idiot leftists, that's a feature.

Posted by: PETA at January 08, 2009 10:43 AM (QxSug)

40 Ya wanna bet they are also counting the thousands of college graduates from the December terms that never had a fucking job to start with? Two waitresses in the place my wife and I go to for breakfast every day just graduated with advanced degrees and can't get a job in their fields. Soooo ... unemployment or waiting tables.

Posted by: Bruce at January 08, 2009 10:44 AM (rdFaW)

41 Great post!

Would you like a Link Exchange with our new blog COMMON CENTS where we blog about the issues of the day??

http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

Posted by: Steve at January 08, 2009 10:44 AM (rpU0M)

Posted by: CDR M at January 08, 2009 03:38 PM (TJoU6)

Yep

Posted by: erik at January 08, 2009 10:48 AM (g9Yaz)

43 H.RES.9
Title: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the President of the United States should not issue pardons to senior members of his administration during the final 90 days of his term of office.

...is this about Scooter Libby? Or do they expect Barry's appointees to be crooks?

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 08, 2009 10:50 AM (fGDhl)

44
Great Post! Lick it steve.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 10:50 AM (LVT6e)

45 "As soon as people hear what the Democrats have planned, it will be extremely unpopular. The trick for Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and the MSM will be to keep the details from the American people. People will begin to ask questions, and that's not acceptable." The same people who didn't ask any question before handing over the keys to the government to that buffoon? Excuse me if I'm cynical that they will come to their senses. Give the barely educated middle class enough freebies and we are heading down the road to socialism. The way was set when the left got the monopoly on education and it won't turn back any time soon. Costa Rica's looking really good to me right now.

Posted by: Ann NY at January 08, 2009 10:50 AM (n82VB)

46 Cleanup on #41. I wish I had the rights, I'd delete that sucker.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 08, 2009 10:51 AM (FO+YO)

Yes, it is true that this is an easy excuse to cut a lot of fat and one of the reasons why the business cycle is so important. A recession permits firms to cut waste that they would otherwise be reluctant to cut in good economic times.

Of course, this also means that they have overcut; i.e., fired people who were only marginally inefficient. If we didn't have a moron in the White House, I would expect a quick recovery as firms that have overcut need to rehire to get more efficient and productive workers. The Keynsian redistribution of wealth will, of course, slow this whole process down.

Posted by: AmishDude at January 08, 2009 10:51 AM (T0NGe)

48 Aha! I found it!

H.J.RES.5
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Holy shit.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 08, 2009 10:51 AM (fGDhl)

49
Harumph! Muse.

Posted by: WonderWartHog at January 08, 2009 10:53 AM (LVT6e)

AmishDude at January 08, 2009 03:51 PM (T0NGe)

Thanks for adding to my posting on how we usually get out of that vicious cycle. I have the same worries as you do as the actions now proposed have been proven to have extended normal recession cycles.

Posted by: polynikes at January 08, 2009 11:01 AM (m2CN7)

51 But can a repetitive "Blame Bush" mantra allow Democrats to hold their huge Congressional majorities in 2010 and get Obama reelected in 2012 if they economy is as bad they think it will be?

Yes. Next question.

Posted by: OregonMuse at January 08, 2009 11:05 AM (FO+YO)

52 Can you blame them? Every executive in America should feel compelled to ask for "bailout" money simply because it's there and their competitors may wind up with some. They can't afford to stand on principal. Then again, I will never buy an auto from a bailed out company, and who knows, maybe i will set up my own little business enemies list.

700K lost, how may did Bush "create?" 2 million?

Posted by: joeindc44 at January 08, 2009 11:09 AM (QxSug)

53 Obama ran on the manta of Hope and Chnage.

So far, there is, at least by some people's measure, little Change and even less Hope.

Posted by: Neo at January 08, 2009 11:11 AM (Yozw9)

54 We have history on our side for cryin out loud. Are all Republicans spineless little weasels without an ounce of honor? Is everyone just waiting to dip their beaks in that big ole trillion dollar pot of pork?

Yes, because that's what crooks do. And our leaders are crooks.

Eventually, you become a crook, too, or you're a fool. That was the way of it in Soviet Russia.

Me, I'm not a crook. I'm a fool.

Posted by: Alana at January 08, 2009 11:13 AM (JE2zV)

55 there is at least some comfort in that we may more likely than not end up with Italian or Zimbabwean inflation instead of cradle to grave fascism. So, uh, just make sure you lock in these low interest rates before we hit triple digit inflation.

Posted by: joeindc44 at January 08, 2009 11:24 AM (QxSug)

56 maybe a couple hundred years from now, a forensic historian will try to track down where a trillion dollars plus melted away to

Posted by: joeindc44 at January 08, 2009 11:24 AM (QxSug)

57 I already contacted the incoming administration and landed a contract to house and feed the Unicorns that will be given out on the 20th. I'm rolling in the dough already.

Posted by: Jubal Anderson Early at January 08, 2009 11:28 AM (krKUp)

58 This kind of stunt has never worked. Didn't work in the 30s. Didn't work in Japan in the 90s. As was stated by someone above, a recession cleans up certain inefficiencies in an economy. Doesn't make them good, but they are occasionally a necessary component of a robust economy. The Obama plan will create a currency bubble that Obama and his advisors (presumably) believe will be solved by a vigorous recovery. But what kind of recovery will we have with Team Obama crowding out the private sector? Higher energy, food, and labor costs are a certainty. Who knows what else will be "stimulated."

Posted by: bunny boy at January 08, 2009 11:29 AM (YsSn7)

Wait a minute, WAIT A MINUTE, please HeatherRadish, please tell me you are making a joke, it is to laugh, right? There really isn't a house resolution to remove the limit of the number of terms someone can serve as President.

I am too afraid to go look for myself, I beg you, you are joking right?

Posted by: ParanoidInSeattle at January 08, 2009 11:42 AM (AJ4xq)

60 And this is why I opposed the 700B Bailout. By putting a republican stamp of approval on such reckless spending, we've lost our ability to complain about the upcoming 5 Trillion in reckless spending.

Oh, we'll complain, but every media outlet in the world will frame the debate as "something Bush started".

Posted by: erik at January 08, 2009 11:44 AM (tyGSd)

A quick look at a printout of the last 20 years of the Dow Jones with marks indicating who was elected President and when shows that the Dot Com Bubble burst in 2000 (under Clinton), finally reaching bottom in mid-2002/early-2003, 18 months into G.W. Bushs term, at 8000. The Dow then recovered and went to 14000 in late-2007, falling to 7600 in late 3Q 2008 with the housing bubble and the Freddie Mac / Fannie Mae meltdown

The S&P500, Wilshire 5000, Nasdaq and others have similar performance histories

In short, G.W. Bush inherited the Dot Com Bust, the market the recovered and went to 14,000 before the long-ago (and continuing) actions of others caused a problem.

We also have, during this same 20-year period:

- Bill Clintons name on the CRA amendments that . . .

- allowed ACORN, with litigator B. Hussein Obama and others, to sue to force banks to make loans expected to fail at a higher rate,

- Video of (A. Cuomo?) explicitly stating that the expected failure rate of these loans would be higher,

- The failure of Superior Bank, under the leadership of one P. Pritzker, billionaire, friend and supporter of one B. Hussein Obama, due to these sorts of loans (a flare-like signal),

- President G.W. Bush recommending (2003?) additional oversight and regulation of these sorts of loans,

- Congressmen B. Frank, Maxine Waters and others shooting down the attempt(s) at regulation as unnecessary, racist, etc., as Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac were fine,

- Senator J. McCain proposing corrective actions (2005/2006?) that might have prevented a sizeable proportion of the current problem,

and all the while one F. Raines raking in ~$90million in job performance bonuses for underwriting these loans.

Doubtless, theres much more information, and others have a better and more complete understanding. But, like him or not, none of this points to G.W. Bush being the culprit or cause.

Yet, for some reason, President G.W. Bush cant come out and say these things, and assign blame where it belongs

Obama sued to get this ball rolling, and Pritzker and Raines are friends of Obama. A casual review indicates that too much of the problem belongs to Obama, and this is even before Obama was elected.

The "Bush destroyed the economy, I can't be held responsible" horse will be a non-starter if these factual events are publicized and kept in the publics view.

Posted by: Arbalest at January 08, 2009 11:47 AM (pmAMk)

this will work... up to a point.

fixed

Posted by: Terry at January 08, 2009 11:50 AM (nl8zZ)

63 I am going to be like an ostrich and stick my head in the ground.

Posted by: Ginger at January 08, 2009 11:51 AM (M3d12)

64 Fuck me harder. washingtonwatch.com H. J. Res. 5, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President Version saved on January 7, 2009, 16:24:52, by webmaster: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 11:52 AM (/WLDq)

65 Let's all sing a round of "The Internationale" and then drink the new cyanide-flavored Unicorn Kool-Aid. How I detest the nation below Canada.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 11:53 AM (/WLDq)

Ahhhhhh. Why aren't your heads exploding? Do you all think H.J Res. 5 doesn't have a chance in hell of passing? Please tell me it doesn't.

Apparently, Ace, Obama is planning on running in 2016. And Congress is going to ensure that can happen.

There goes that song in my head again. "It's the end of the world as we know it."

Posted by: ParanoidInSeattle at January 08, 2009 11:58 AM (AJ4xq)

67 Posted by: Alana at January 08, 2009 04:13 PM (JE2zV) Yep, That's the most galling thing about this. I guess we foolish drones trying to live honestly are just dumbasses. It feels that way. Why work hard when you can just suck up to the right crook in gov't and be rolling in the cash? You know that's mostly what this trillion dollars is all about. Just another tax-fool funded piggybank for the Dims to raid. Like Freddie Mac and Fannie May. Again. Do the youth of America really want to send their whole lives paying back a debt the Boomers ran up just so their party wouldn't end? Can't any nationally known Republican make that case?

Posted by: rinseandspit at January 08, 2009 12:07 PM (ao5cQ)

68 ParanoidInSeattle,

Congress is not the final authority on amending the constitution.

I really don't think most of the states would sign off on that.

Posted by: Shill at January 08, 2009 12:09 PM (8jYMc)

69 Paranoid, calm down. There's nothing to worry about. We'll all be dead long before 2016.

Posted by: GOP at January 08, 2009 12:09 PM (ltwze)

70 I really don't think most of the states would sign off on that. Oh? Maybe you just don't believe in the Power of the Unicorn. You will be assimilated. Or taxed to death, one of the two. Do the youth of America really want to send their whole lives paying back a debt the Boomers ran up just so their party wouldn't end? Seems to be good enough for the youth of Western Europe, and that's where we are headed... if we are lucky. People don't give up gubmint sugar. What worries me is what if we end up more like Mexico? Don't dismiss it out of hand. I can see the Dummycrats becoming just like the PRI, and it had ironfisted control of Mexico for decades.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 12:16 PM (/WLDq)

71 Oh? Maybe you just don't believe in the Power of the Unicorn. You will be assimilated. Or taxed to death, one of the two.

I hope I'm right, but if I 'm wrong I will be first in line with pitchforks and torches. I'm pretty much taxed to death already. I mean, about half my money already goes to Uncle Sam... after Bush's EVIL tax cuts.

I really feel like fleeing the country, but the rest of the world is much worse.

Posted by: Shill at January 08, 2009 12:18 PM (8jYMc)

72 It wasn't just Reagan tax cuts, but also spending. The deficit soared with his increase in tax cuts and minimal (one) spending cuts.

It would be great if Obama could just cut taxes, but the reality is that taxes are lower than they were when Reagan took over and its not going to have the same impact.

We have to get out of this mess that Clinton, Frank, Gramm, Bush, Paulson and the lot caused, then address the spending issues.

The total payout for the bailout is almost $7 trillion now. Will be close to $8 trillion by the time any bill passes. If Obama asks for $700 billion, it will be less than 10% of the spending.

Posted by: George at January 08, 2009 12:20 PM (MN+T/)

73 Do the youth of America really want to send their whole lives paying back a debt the Boomers ran up just so their party wouldn't end? Seems to be good enough for the youth of Western Europe, and that's where we are headed... if we are lucky. People don't give up gubmint sugar.>>>

er, uh, the yutes of Europe realize that working is for suckers and they can live on the dole, spending their nights burning cars.

Posted by: joeindc44 at January 08, 2009 12:24 PM (QxSug)

74 George is right... is it even really a tax cut if you don't cut spending?

you have to pay for that spending someway, somehow. And of course the main way is through printing up more money and inflating my wealth away.

Instead of TAX CUTS being the GOP banner, it should be SPENDING CUTS. Obama basically ran as a republican by promising tax cuts for 95% of Americans (and of course, he was pretending income taxes were the only kind of tax there is). He knows that tax cuts are just another term for borrowing, unless the government shrinks perhaps to half its present size.

Posted by: Shill at January 08, 2009 12:25 PM (8jYMc)

75 I'm sick of the nation below Canada, but as you say, where can one go? If this "nation" slows down to zero growth (I don't even postulate negative GDP) for ten years, can you imagine what effect that will have on the world economy? If we inherit chronic 10-12% unemployment like Western Europe, how high will European unemployment go? If our stock market is just flat for a decade, what will happen to capital markets in less stable places like Asia? A small town ranch property, with 5 acres, a pair of Mossbersgs and a vegetable garden, sounds like good policy until mid-century.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 12:26 PM (/WLDq)

76 they can live on the dole, spending their nights burning cars. Thank Gaia good-natured sport and recreation hasn't died in the West.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 12:28 PM (/WLDq)

77 How much work does it take to run a veggie garden to the point where it will provide all the veggies I need for 4 people?

Just curious. I don't really think food will be a big deal, but it sounds cool.

Also, if we canceled Social Security retirement altogether, and replaced it will rationed health care, would that be a horrible plan? Why let people retire on the public dole if they are mostly still productive until 85?

Posted by: Shill at January 08, 2009 12:29 PM (8jYMc)

Just for a little perspective on the numbers we are talking about.

Based on Hubble Space Telescope observations and calculations, astronomers have estimated that the age of our universe is around 13.7 billion years.

Posted by: SamIam at January 08, 2009 12:32 PM (jl7C/)

The GOP helped create this disaster and no doubt will sign off on Obama's plans to destroy the economy. The GOP is as corrupt as the dhimmies.

Its time for a new party, free of RINOs and neocons. Free of those who worship at the altar of big government and tax and spend.

Posted by: Thomas Jackson at January 08, 2009 12:35 PM (0Qynq)

80 #78 Clearly, the Universe hasn't the scope to match the broad vision of The Presidential Unicorn.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 08, 2009 12:36 PM (/WLDq)

Ahhhhhh. Why aren't your heads exploding? Do you all think H.J Res. 5 doesn't have a chance in hell of passing? Please tell me it doesn't.

It doesn't. It has zero co-sponsors, just like most of the other dead-end bills he's recently proposed.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 08, 2009 01:39 PM (rf03a)

82 Popcorn Alert: Democrat Senators No Likee The One's Tax Cuts.

Posted by: V the K at January 08, 2009 01:44 PM (d2fuu)

83 This just proves that we need to sign an amnesty bill immediately so we can get workers in here to fill those lost jobs.

Posted by: Warden at January 08, 2009 02:39 PM (QoR4a)

84 #77: "How much work does it take to run a veggie garden to the point where it will provide all the veggies I need for 4 people?" Actually, not much. My garden this past summer was only about 1200 sq. ft., and I'm not into major physical effort, and I have all the vegetables I need for me and my kids for the year, and probably gave more than half of the produce away. Hint: Plant beets. Yeah, I know, but both the tops and the roots are edible, and even in Minnesota they can be harvested by early July, to make room for the other crops (you can stagger your rows.) Also, Brussels Sprouts. Rabbits and insects won't touch 'em. Low maintenance/high yield, rich in vitamins, and there are ways to make them actually taste good. And either learn to can, or buy a big freezer (I do both.)

Posted by: notropis. at January 08, 2009 02:54 PM (LDjL2)

85 It's coming on time for my policy of uncivil obedience. As soon as Obama takes his hand off that Bible and they extinguish the flames I'm signing up for every gummint goodie I even vaguely qualify for. And I'm going to thank every Democratic taxpayer I meet for their money.

Posted by: richard mcenroe at January 08, 2009 03:19 PM (yIy7z)

86 Change labor law to make the 3 day week end or the 32 hour work week the standard. That would give demand a healthy push. We are to the point we can make stuff faster than we can use it up. It's going to take outside the box thinking to get this thing turned around.

Posted by: Vincent Van Moe at January 08, 2009 03:42 PM (S7zPk)

87 Oh and mandate the kid's school week is 6 days while you're at it. And double teacher pay immediately. Kids are overindulged today and adults overworked.

Posted by: Vincent Van Moe at January 08, 2009 03:44 PM (S7zPk)

88 My question is...

...what happens when countries like China, etc. feel they can no longer buy up our debt?

Posted by: g at January 08, 2009 03:46 PM (FAYNo)

89 Are all Republicans spineless little weasels without an ounce of honor? Is everyone just waiting to dip their beaks in that big ole trillion dollar pot of pork?

Posted by: rinseandspit

yes and i'm just waiting to dip my balls in something. oh and btw the way i'm stealing the word barackalypse.

Posted by: e.koenig at January 08, 2009 03:47 PM (2J+Vs)

90 For 6 years Liberals whined incessantly about the deficit, the deficit... Now they want to have Trillion Dollar Annual Deficits for Years to Come on the theory that if Hundred Billion Dollar Deficits ruined the economy, then it's only logical to assume that Trillion Dollar Deficits will cure all that ails it, stop global warming, and harden every limp dick. Good luck with that, guys...

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 04:04 PM (iafWn)

91 88 My question is... ...what happens when countries like China, etc. feel they can no longer buy up our debt? Probably the best outcome: no more deficits. But somebody hide the printing press from Bernanke, PLEASE...

Posted by: CoolCzech at January 08, 2009 04:05 PM (iafWn)

92 I don't think people are mostly still productive until 85.

Posted by: Alana at January 08, 2009 05:13 PM (JE2zV)

93 Fuck both parties.

Posted by: MlR at January 08, 2009 05:17 PM (PLmsY)

"The calls to do something, do anything will be cacophonous and Cassandrian."

Ace - the Oresteia is an obsession of mine and I have a small bone to pick with you about Cassandra. She wasn't wrong, she just wasn't believed. There's a difference.

Her misfortune came from a curse put on her by the god Apollo. He wanted her, she couldn't make up her mind, then she stood him up. So he laid it down that her prophecies would never be believed as long as she lived. Which meant also that she would know the hour of her own death had come as soon as anyone believed her. And consequently no-one believed her, ever again, until just before she was murdered. She was a loser, in a way, but not on the merits, if you follow me.

Like I said, it's an obsession.

Posted by: marymcl at January 08, 2009 06:18 PM (NnzA4)

95 Who cares about inflation? Wouldn't you want to drive a hundred thousand dollar car? Live in a million dollar home, wear a 1000 set of jeansd and smoke 50 dollah cigar? Thats what inflation will do for everyone! (Sura2:29)

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at January 08, 2009 06:27 PM (rBuxg)

96
The calls to do something, do anything will be cacophonous and Cassandrian. But the GOP, if it is to survive at all, cannot allow Obama to spend trillions in newly-printed dollars each year simply to goose his chances for 2012.

Big Dick Cheney doesnt agree with you. He told the republican caucus that unless they approved the initial 750 billion for the rich bitches on Wall Street; theyd all go down as the second incarnation of Herbert Hoover!

So Aceis it possible that you are not exactly as erudite as you think you are?
Possibably you dont give a rats arse for Big Dicks opinion?
Whose progeny of a cousin are you?
You couldnt possibly have written that on your own
Is your Irish setter in the room?

Never mind any response. I realize you cannot abide, or allow too stand for an Iowa minute any differing opinions on you Webby award winning blog site

H&Ks Aceolde soldier sends!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 08, 2009 06:29 PM (fqCzl)

97 Passing out from hahsish and opium online. Camera is hooked up getting .. wooozy, fingers heavy. Hobo stew not sitting well with valu-rite ... going nehind dumpster ... (Sura 2:29)

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at January 08, 2009 06:31 PM (rBuxg)

98 '7HEAVENS,' you are ace, damn you!

J_Gocht, yeah, that was the one thing Cheney got wrong.

Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 06:40 PM (OifLN)

99
Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 11:40 PM (OifLN)

Hey Methos...how are the plans for the big wedding going?

Just one thing "Big Dick" got wrong?

How about shootin' that aged lawyer in the head?

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 08, 2009 06:46 PM (O5bmW)

100 69 Paranoid, calm down. There's nothing to worry about. We'll all be dead long before 2016.

Posted by: GOP at January 08, 2009 05:09 PM (ltwze)

Good stuff.

Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at January 08, 2009 07:17 PM (YSc/T)

101 J_Gocht, the aged lawyer is on record as having improperly failed to announce his position during the hunt. I might put some responsibility on the guy with the gun, but that's what the lawyer said.

As for the wedding, your invitation is in the mail.

Posted by: Methos at January 08, 2009 07:51 PM (OifLN)

102 "How about shootin' that aged lawyer in the head?" It was not wrong to shoot him in the head after waterboarding had failed, and given that rendition was not an option. Dude wasn't forthcoming on the location of the quail. Time was of the essence. Cheney's an important man. You're a worthless peon, and probably couldn't begin to understand. That's ok, though, since your comments will soon be enhanced and improved.

Posted by: notropis. at January 08, 2009 08:59 PM (LDjL2)

103 I call bullshit....Clinton inherited the best quarterly economic growth in four years! He wasn't elected because of a bad economy. If you critically analyze voting patterns, you will see Americans have been playing footsie with redistributionism since the early 1900's. With Bush they got a heaping plateful and now with duh1 they're gonna become bulimic.

We're doomed. Greed has won the day.

Posted by: torabora at January 09, 2009 04:55 AM (3cOcT)

104

No, he'll be riding his unicorn. Naked.

Great blog by the way.

Posted by: sjh at January 09, 2009 05:09 AM (GErKE)

105
I call bullshit....Clinton inherited the best quarterly economic growth in four years!...
I call double bovine feces, torabora !
The best last quarter yes what about the previous four dismal years?
Bubba pulled the rabbit out of the hat; by raising taxes on the rich, those that could afford it. His action propelled our economy into the best eight years of growth in our history.
Clinton left Little Bush with the first budget surplus in recent memory. Little Bush never, ever ran a successful business before he became President and now he has managed in just eight, rather very short years to run our great country into the biggest financial ditch in recorded history.
You say?

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 11:10 AM (jKhW+)

106 Clinton inherited an economy on the mend, Bush 43, not so much.

Real GDP growth

Posted by: toby928 at January 09, 2009 11:21 AM (PD1tk)

107
"107 Clinton inherited an economy on the mend, Bush 43, not so much."

OK ...toby928.

However; Bush 43, did start with a surplus in the hundreds of millions, a distinction not lost for historians and rather unique if not unprecedented!

They will also record that; Bush 43, has left Obama with and unbelievable deficit in the multiple trillions... trillions with a ...!

Bejeebus...!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 11:43 AM (3ZUJz)

108 The Clinton surplus was driven by an unexpected growth in capital gains taxes on the inflation of the tech bubble. When the bubble bursts, the taxes were gone.

Clinton never expected to balance the budget, but was happy to take the credit.

I don't want to defend Bush too much, he let me down by failing to get a permanent cut in the capital gains or the estate taxes, and spent too much on entitlements, but he was saddled with some bad mojo; the tech bubble bursting, 9/11, two wars, and, a Democratic Senate 2001-2003 and since 2006, a completely Democratic controlled congress.

What's really astonishing is how the Democratic Congress could destroy the economy in only two years, and then be rewarded with more time to finish the job.

Posted by: I'd hit it at January 09, 2009 11:57 AM (PD1tk)

109 dammit

Posted by: toby928 at January 09, 2009 11:58 AM (PD1tk)

110 dang, looks as if there is <a href='http://rawdawgb.blogspot.com/2009/01/no-end-in-sight.html'>No end in sight</a>

Posted by: rawdawgbuffalo at January 09, 2009 01:01 PM (QsXL3)

111 Posted by: I'd hit it at January 09, 2009 04:57 PM (PD1tk)
sie la vivera, sie la gerra...!
Olde uncle hunkers down...

January 21, 2009...

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 05:04 PM (jKhW+)

112
What's really astonishing is how the Democratic Congress could destroy the economy in only two years, and then be rewarded with more time to finish the job.

Posted by: I'd hit it at January 09, 2009 04:57 PM (PD1tk)

......................

What two years...?

We're just startin' to adjust your underwear...!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 05:21 PM (O5bmW)

113
101 J_Gocht, the aged lawyer is on record as having improperly failed to announce his position during the hunt. I might put some responsibility on the guy with the gun, but that's what the lawyer said.

As for the wedding, your invitation is in the mail.

Posted by: Methos at January 09, 2009 12:51 AM (OifLN)

Methos, I live in SW Wisconsin...

Are you certain Sir...!

You have the correct address...?

GOD luv yeah...!

Olde soldier sends...!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 05:41 PM (lf14X)

114 What two years...?

The last two, obviously.

We're just startin' to adjust your underwear...!

That's my worry

Posted by: toby928 at January 09, 2009 05:51 PM (PD1tk)

115 Posted by: toby928 at January 09, 2009 10:51 PM (PD1tk)

Icth canst so fiel...

...?

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 06:05 PM (jKhW+)

116 aneurysm?

Posted by: toby928 at January 09, 2009 06:08 PM (PD1tk)

117
multilingual...!

Hooaah...!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 06:25 PM (lf14X)

118

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 06:28 PM (/H+4I)

119
la differance...
only the "missing " will know...!

Posted by: J_Gocht at January 09, 2009 06:30 PM (/H+4I)

120 multilingual...!

In some alternate universe maybe, unless that's platz, 'cause Hochdeutsch, it aint.

Posted by: toby928 at January 10, 2009 03:58 AM (PD1tk)

121 Plattdeutsch

Dammit

Posted by: toby928 at January 10, 2009 04:01 AM (PD1tk)

122 Hello everyone. Early morning cheerfulness can be extremely obnoxious. Help me! Need information about: Anti asthma. I found only this - taking benadryl together with claritin. What are the anti epileptic medications? The allergic reaction. Be severe steven johnson and life threatening. Anti allergen services don when the responsiblecare system of anti allergen cleaning and treatment is that successfully managing allergic illness. :rolleyes: Thanks in advance. Damaris from Niger.

Posted by: Damaris at June 01, 2009 01:55 AM (NNxYx)

Hide Comments | Add Comment