Obama’s tawdry cardboard theatrics 1

 … and a worthless speech.

Not worth deep analysis, but Power Line dusts it off effectively:

Fireworks! The perfect end to an evening of BS slinging of historic proportions. Barack Obama is a demagogue who will stoop to any lie or distortion; the question is how many people he can fool. On that, the jury is out. The answer will emerge between now and November.

It will take some time to dissect all of the foolishness we heard tonight, but here are a few observations:

Obama outlined, in the vaguest terms possible, countless billions or trillions of new federal spending. How would he pay for it? By "closing corporate loopholes"–like what? The idea that Obama’s orgy of spending can be funded by "closing corporate loopholes" is frankly childish. By increasing taxes on the top 5% of taxpayers, i.e., precisely those who are grossly over-taxed already. The top 5% already pay 60% of all federal income taxes. And by "eliminating programs that no longer work." Really? Which ones? No one seriously imagines that Obama–let alone the Democratic Congress!–has any intention of eliminating any significant government programs.

Obama says he wants to become independent of foreign oil in ten years. How? By tapping natural gas reserves. I wonder whether Obama, unlike Nancy Pelosi, understands that natural gas is a fossil fuel for which we must drill offshore, in ANWR, etc. There was perhaps some news here: Obama also came out for developing nuclear energy, yet another flip-flop. But does anyone imagine that nuclear energy development would go forward in a Democratic Congress and White House? In one of his many cheap shots, Obama said that we import three times as much foreign oil as when John McCain went to Washington. That’s no doubt true, because the Democratic Party has enacted legislation that makes it illegal to develop our domestic resources.

Obama said he is happy to debate John McCain about who has the judgment and temperament to guide foreign policy. Of course, he has had many opportunities to do so, and has ducked them. Does this mean that Obama will now accept McCain’s challenge to a series of town hall appearances? But what about Obama’s foreign policy judgment? He barely mentioned Iraq–once, in the distant past, his signature issue–but never referred at all to the surge. Obama was dead wrong on the most important foreign policy issue that has arisen during his time in the Senate, and he failed even to mention it, let alone try to justify his error.

Rather weirdly, Obama attacked McCain for alleged unwillingness to "follow Osama bin Laden to the cave where he lives." If this means anything, it means that Obama is still in favor of invading Pakistan. Again, no one really believes Obama will do this; it’s just another example of how he doesn’t feel any obligation to conform his words to reality.

He says we "don’t deter Iran by talking tough," so how, then, do we deter Iran? Obama offers no clue. Likewise with Georgia; "talking tough" won’t stop the Russians. True enough; deterring the Russians requires military capability. Yet Obama has pledged to reduce our military capability. So how, exactly, are the Russians to be stopped?

Obama is utterly unreliable every time he recites a statistic. Examples could be multiplied endlessly; to take just one, he said tonight that "the average American family saw its income go down $2,000 under George Bush." That is untrue. Here are the real median household income figures from the Census Bureau; click to enlarge:

Inflation-adjusted median income during the Bush administration is up, not "down $2,000" since 2001, and it increased again last year.

Of course, Obama has no intention of appealing to the well-informed. Like other Democrats, he feeds on ignorance. Whether a majority of voters are ignorant enough to swallow Obama’s whoppers is, as yet, unknown.

             One last thought: was there a single sentence in Obama’s speech that could not have come from Jimmy Carter?

 

Posted under Commentary by Jillian Becker on Friday, August 29, 2008

Tagged with

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink
  • Obama is a Huge Economic Liability

    Ah, Obama, the biggest democratic ideologist there is. I think that when you attempt to change too many variables all at once at the federal level in this 50 state legislation experiment that we proudly call America, you run the risk of crashing the economy or at least leaving it incapacitated. Don’t get me wrong, Obama has some good ideas, but because of his inexperience in Washington he does not realize that bad things start happening when you try to gamble with too many things and you start taking risks.

    In all actuality, that risk management is exactly why Washington is a Beauracracy. It is because there is the checks and balances of the House and the Senate that he can not so easily implement the changes that he is promising to bring, nor would he really want to. The thing that Washington needs is less government at the federal level and more government at the state and local levels where individuals can represent themselves and have more of a voice of their own.

    For instance, a national healthcare policy where every citizen is taken care of does not benefit all of the states but just the states that have lower incomes. It actually would be detrimental to states that have both higher incomes and a higher cost of living due to the additional tax burden placed on them. If he truly thinks that he can raise taxes on the people who make more than $200,000 a year then he has another thing coming from the delegates of the higher average income and lower populace states.

    Similarly, it is generally intelligeable to leave federal tax dollars out of higher risk investments, and that is exactly what investing in alternative energy programs at the federal level entails. There is obviously risk involved in any business venture, and there is especially high risk in trying to make the leap to alternative energy sources where the technology is still in the theoretical stages. Every single prototype that doesn’t work would be a loss of federal money, and you can bet there would be a lot of corruption with people seeking federal grants for research projects that should never be approved due to fiscal, technological, or incompetence problems. Hey, it’s Uncle Sam, right!? It’s a bunch of ideological legal students making the financial decisions with tax dollars instead of trained businessmen and woman or engineers. To top it off, Obama is wanting to do that all without first using the tried and true methods of drilling in Alaska or implementing nuclear energy as an ecconomic safegaurd in the time being.

    With that risk, Obama also wants to support abortion as well. Economically speaking, abortion is costly when you have a nationalized healthcare system. Oh sure, why not give out federal grants for other research projects in biology and stem cell research? Might as well cure people from their horrible illnesses so they live longer and can mooch off of welfare and healthcare at the expense of the….wait a second, how about taxing the middle class and the lower class to fix the federal budget at this point!? It’s only fair to do that, since the people earning higher incomes are already being extensively taxed.

    Maybe we ought to bring our businesses back to America too!? Yeah, we can afford to tax businesses that send people overseas until they go bankrupt. Why not, those jobs should be here in the USA given to the corrupt unions so that blue collar workers can sit on their asses and demand higher pay. Sure, the unions won’t be taxed so they can afford to pay more money to the union members, money that comes from the fresh scabs paying their high union dues.

    Oh sure, might as well give more grants to students in college too, also while making the classwork easier so that anybody can graduate. Then the companies that recieve these fresh out of college interns should have to front a much larger learning curve which translates into wasted time and inefficient progress in the American R&D departments. By that time India, Russia, and China would be so far ahead of us in business due to their nationalized slave labor vs our nationalized unions.

    I think Obama is suffering from ideology delusion, and possibly so is the rest of America too. If he gets in, the chances are he will make all sorts of executive mistakes in foriegn affairs due to his inexperience and trusting in NATO and the UN, which we really should get out of. We don’t need to be swindled by foriegners just because Obama wants to be diplomatic.