Tags: obama | change

Stimulus: Not the Change You Voted For

Thursday, 19 Feb 2009 10:59 AM

By Scott Wheeler

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink

How will spending three quarters of a trillion dollars fix the economy?

No one had even taken the time to read the stimulus bill before it passed Congress, including the one who said it was absolutely necessary. “I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress,” Obama wrote in The Washington Post on Feb. 5. It must be in just the mere magic of saying we are going to spend that amount that fixes it.

I am not being facetious. No one had read the bill when the House and Senate voted on it and then passed it, yet we were told over and over that if Obama wasn’t given nearly a trillion dollars to spend immediately the country as we knew it was finished.

“Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse,” Obama wrote. It sounded more like an extortion racket, especially since Obama actually does have the power to tank the economy just by saying that it is the worst economy in our lifetime (which he has been saying).

So Obama has nearly a trillion dollars to pass out now to “fix” the economy, and no one is bothering to ask this question: What qualifies Obama to fix the economy, and if merely spending money fixes it, then the economy shouldn’t be broken, should it?

What experience does Obama have at fixing anything?

He has never run a state, city, company, or even a hot dog stand. The sidewalk vendors on the mall outside the White House literally have more business experience than Obama. Not that anyone would know that since the liberal media utterly ignored this lack of experience during the campaign and still failed to mention it while he was holding the economy hostage to get his $778 billion in spending money.

In addressing a question about whether increasing the deficit by nearly a trillion dollars would actually help the economy, Obama responded with a political attack on Bush referring to the deficit he inherited from the previous administration.

Shameful, considering Obama faithfully voted to increase that deficit while he was in the Senate — so much for the politics of “change.”

What this tells us is how Obama plans to use the economy he talked down before his stimulus package passed: If it improves, he will take credit for fixing it and cite government intervention as the solution; if it worsens, he has already laid the groundwork to blame Bush, capitalism, and free market economics.

Instructively revealing the administration’s true intentions, Obama’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel freely explained to The Wall Street Journal how the administration intends to exploit the recession. "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And this crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before." That sounds like an amateur’s conflation of Machiavelli and Hegel. Create a crisis for drastic consolidation of power in their hands.

Now they have all the legitimacy a trillion dollars will buy.

If it was really necessary to bum-rush the largest spending bill in history through Congress, why wasn’t Obama standing by to sign it as soon as it passed, instead of jetting off to his three-day weekend in Chicago to be seen in all the trendy spots?

Is it because saving the nation from economic disaster interfered with his social schedule?

For Obama, it is just all political theater — the words mean nothing — it’s all part of the show. That is how he is able to tell you one day how America is going to be over soon if he doesn’t get nearly a trillion dollars to hand out, and then go out on an excursion the next, using our Air Force and Marine Corps equipment as his personal amusement park rides.

He mocks the very idea that tax cuts stimulate the economy and productive Americans should get some say over how their hard-earned money is spent. Obama wrote, “I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change.” But Obama doesn’t represent change; he represents the very essence of the problems that our economy suffers from now, an alarming expansion of bureaucratic, freedom-smothering government.

The long march from lean liberty to socialism is now at a full gallop. This isn’t the change that productive Americans voted for.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Michigan Republicans Air 'Sharknado'-Themed Campaign Ad

Monday, 20 Oct 2014 17:57 PM

Michigan Republicans are aiming a 30-second 'Sharknado'-themed ad at Democratic Senate candidate Gary Peters that ties h . . .

Kevin Derby: Grimes 'Losing Ground,' Kentucky 'Trending Red'

Monday, 20 Oct 2014 15:31 PM

Kevin Derby, senior political reporter for The Sunshine State News joined "MidPoint" on Newsmax TV on Monday to discuss  . . .

Fading Star? Even Wendy Davis' Hometown Paper Endorses Abbott

Monday, 20 Oct 2014 14:52 PM

Time is running out and support continues to wane for the Texas gubernatorial campaign of Democrat Wendy Davis, Politico . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved