The Upside of Obama
By Johnny Roosh
When voters enter the booth tomorrow, Iraq won’t be much on their mind as a whole. Iraq is going so well (as wars go) that the media has turned a blind eye. Covering it after all would only benefit John McCain whose criticism of George Bush and promotion of the surge proved to be dead on.
In the days, hours and moments leading up to the moment of truth in the booth, it will be the economy, once again.
I have heard numerous comparisons of Barack Obama to Jimmy Carter in the sense that like Carter’s administration, an Obama era will create such an economic disaster that Americans’ short memories will be restored and an era of fiscal conservatism will be ushered in once again.
It’s a sad day when the upside is how bad things will be.
Then again, is this a lesson America needs to learn once and for all?
I tend to assume, for instance, that most Americans understand socialism is an evil, immoral system of economics and government.
But then occasionally, I get a letter from a young American who has been taught throughout his life that only the government can spread wealth fairly or that market economics is inherently corrupt.
So as I predicted in my most recent book, “None of the Above,” it likely will take some strong medicine to cure America of its infectious flirtation with socialism. I believe that medicine, believe it or not, is named Barack Obama.
Chances are, our economy is going to get a lot worse before it gets better no matter who ends up in the White House. Even Ronald Regan, if elected on Tuesday, wouldn’t be able foster an economic turnaround for at least a year if his presidency is any measure.
There is great cause for concern however that a President that has among his many ambitions a desire to further the Socialism experiment that has weaved its way through our history as a nation.
Raising taxes on the wealthy and giving it to the less-so, isn’t Socialism; but it is one of it’s major tenets. Forcing lenders to lend to borrowers not qualified to do so isn’t either but it it also smacks of Socialism and social engineering.
If Obama’s platform was to raise taxes for everyone and pay off the national debt, I would consider it but even then, he’d have to cut them first to stimulate the economy and stimulate job growth, wait for the result, and then raise taxes. This assumes that raising taxes is the means by which to pay down our debt – and that’s a stretch at best.
Then again, if he cut taxes, revenue to the government would increase dramatically, as has been proven time and again, and those dollars could then be funneled to pay down our debt. In order to stimulate our economy and pay down our national debt, it’s magnitude having become a national security issue, our nation faces the inevitable pain of our government cutting spending dramatically while at the same time cutting taxes to stimulate the economy.
This will happen by choice, if sooner; by force if later, under the weight of simple economics and mathematics. It’s coming friends, whether we like it or not.
Barack Obama lacks the character, leadership, experience and political inclination to make these tough choices, encourage temporary sacrifice and guide our nation through the most dire and precarious economic conditions in modern times.
John McCain on the other hand has the all of the above and a record to prove it. I will be voting for him because of the two, I think he has the best chance of steering us clear.
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:19 am
Mr Mayor
don’t expect the Barry/Nancy/Harry ménage à trois to use the word socialism any time soon. In fact expect them to vigorously deny it while touting their “new way forward” steady-state economics.
steady-state economics will expunge the sins of the Bush, bring stability to management labor relations, allow us once again to partner with the UN to bring goodness to the world, address compassionately the inequalities of the market, and most importantly, will form the economic structures necessary to reverse the effects of man made global warming via a world wide carbon trading system.
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:27 am
JRoosh predicted: “an Obama era will create such an economic disaster…”
That ship sailed a while ago, Roosh, sorry you missed it. The Bush administration was on deck, wearing straw boaters and throwing colorful streamers as the country shouted a collective “bon voyage!”
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:54 am
“John McCain on the other hand has the all of the above and a record to prove it.”
A record of voting with the sitting two-term president 90 percent of the time.
Change. Hope. Balloon animals.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:18 am
Bush was wrong on several points. Medicare expansion, Federal funding of Education expansion, he was way to willing to go along with liberals. In 2000 Texas Liberals warned us that GW was not very conservative. However, our choice at the time was Bush or McCain, then Bush or Gore, then Bush or Kerry.
Regretably we haven’t put forward a very conservative nominee in the past twenty years. This has allowed the opposition to go further left and move the center to the point where a liberal like JFK would be seen as to far right to get elected as a Republican.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:20 am
I put a Barry-Pelosi rule closer to Hoover Roosevelt:
Forced unionizatoin
Protectionist legislation
Forced higher prices
Less competittion
High corp income tax
Confiscate cash from private businesses and individuals
Draconion regulation of business
Roosevelt was so clueless, he thought the cause of the depression was too much competition. So he forced the break up of Wal-Mart….I mean A&P grocery, allowed collusion in the steal and other industries.
Hey AC, you should put down the new issue of Clown Porn Today and read an economists view of the depression.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:36 am
You mean a wingnut economist, of course, right Chuckwagon?
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Chuck = Smart
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Socialism doesn’t work, AC, It wouldn’t kill ya to open a history book once in a while.
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
> Socialism doesn’t work
That’s why I’m writing in Steve Forbes.
Maverick will cut high bracket marginal rates, sure, but he’s still in bed with the whole Socialist Workers Progressive Income Tax System, the rest is just window dressing.
Real Change means Real Flat Taxes for Real Americans.
/jc
November 3rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Ya know, I’m not one to agree very often with our favorite Mets fan, but he would be correct in pointing out that a number of economists do in fact support Obama.
Now while I’d agree with Dr. Walter Williams and point out that they are BAD economists prone to indulging fantasies like the “broken window” fallacy, I must simultaneously concede that a fair number of them do have tenure in some prestigious looking places.
But that conceded, AC, I’ve got to point out that Obama’s done everything but put on a sweater and talking about “malaise” in doing a spot on imitation of Jimmy Carter, including talk of a “windfall profits tax.” So I really don’t think it’s that odd to suggest that Senator Daley Rezko Wright Pfleger Ayers Khalidi Obama could make things far, far worse than they are now.
November 3rd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
BB, a lot of economist have also said what a disaster the Obama and his clones in Congress would be for our nation’s economy.
And remember, William Ayres and Ward Churchill put in tenure at prestigious places.
November 3rd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Bike Bubba-
I believe the Obama camp claims that 2/3 of economists support his economic policies over McCain’s.
That’s a pretty meaningless claim. There are economists who believe that the distribution of wealth is more important than the creation of wealth. Most professional economists are in academia or in banking which means there interests are actually quite narrow. Obamanomics could be good for academia & banks while the rest of us suffer from loss of wealth and diminished job prospects.
Then there is the question of how good these economists are. You can be a succesfull economist while being miserable at actually understanding how the American economy works *cough* Krugman *cough*.
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Yeah Bike Butthead. Remember, Boosh was our first MBA president. And he sucks.
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Clinton was not our first lawyer prez, but he didn’t seem to understand that the law applied to him.
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Well Obama want’s to shut down coal power in America while simultaneously freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil. No mean feat. Clownie may have to assume a cabinet position in an Obama Administration: Secretary of Juggling.
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:45 pm
And no drilling and no nuclear power.
I’m glad I live in Hawaii. If Obama is successful you all will be left shivering in the dark.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Sarah Palin is Vice President of Jiggling.
November 3rd, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Nah, the government-issued, Gilligan bicycle generators will help us keep our body heat up.
November 3rd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Even in Hawaii we don’t have those, Kermit.
Until the early 90’s, though, the power company used to burn a lot of bagasse. They were caught flat footed when the sugar plantations shutdown & so no more bagasse. We had rolling blackouts for a half-year or so until geo thermal came online.
The libs were against geothermal for environmental and cultural reasons. Funny thing about liberals. They are in favor of all these exotic means of generating power until it looks like it actually might happen. Then they drag out the negatives & want to stop that, too.
Yep. Shivering in the dark.
November 3rd, 2008 at 8:16 pm
The Gilligan bicycle generators will part of the mandatory Obama National Fitness Mandate. We’ll buy them from China in exchange for a buy down on our debt.
November 3rd, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Oh, and kermit, our power company is called ‘Helco’ (Hawaii Electric Light Company) and they charge residential users $0.44 KW/hr. That is between 4 & 5 times what you pay in MN, I think. The electric bill for my 1300 sq ft house with two people is between $150 & $200/ month, and I’ve got a propane water heater, clothes dryer & cook stove.
I hope you appreciate Minnesota’s 2 reliable & efficient nuclear power plants.
November 3rd, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Actually it’s $0.05870 per kwh (Winter), plus $0.002910 for “environment Iprvmnt rider”, and $0.022549 “Fuel Cost Adjustment”, with a “Resource Adjustment” of $1.47. Add the Basic Service Charge and the subtotal is $58.92. Fees and taxes bump that to $64.59 for October for 616 kWh.
I love nukes. We need a couple hundred more.
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Despair, wingnuts! Panic! Point the finger of blame at less wingnutty wingnuts!
Wheeee!
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Panic is for liberal weasels, clown. Conservatives prefer to work.
November 3rd, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Kermit-
I bet you pay less than $5/gallon for milk, too.
Where I live, up at 3600′ on kilauea, it’s cold at night. I burn around a gallon of propane each day to heat the place.
I live in Hawaii, but my energy costs are probably higher than your in MN. Of course the state has been run by a corrupt democrat machine for about fifty years . . .
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:15 pm
$5/gallon for milk
Around $3.68. $2.99 as a loss leader at some local drug stores. But we’ve got lots more cows that you do. If only we could move farther away from Eau Claire.
November 4th, 2008 at 12:20 am
Hey AC, looks like your guy lost in 2000 because he didn’t get enough votes in FL: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEEDB1338F931A25752C1A9679C8B63
Headline: EXAMINING THE VOTE: THE OVERVIEW; Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote
You better let Krugman know.