Obama, like all pols, is wrapping up the midterm campaign season. He’s not exactly ending on a high note. As this report observes:
President Barack Obama closed out his 2010 campaign season here with a mocking rebuke of Republicans, in stark contrast to the lofty, hopeful rhetoric that marked his 2008 campaign. With Democrats facing potentially big losses on Election Day Tuesday, Mr. Obama has projected a rougher tone than he did two years ago. The bad economy? Blame Republicans, he said. Bipartisanship to solve problems? No, the president said, the GOP has no interest.
The inspiration is gone. So are the big crowds. The New York Times tells us:
President Obama wrapped up a weekend of last-minute campaigning in Ohio on Sunday, addressing Democrats in an indoor arena that, in a sign of the “enthusiasm gap” that the president is working so hard to close, was little more than half full. About 8,000 people attended the Democratic National Committee’s Moving America Forward’ rally at Cleveland State University’s Wolstein Center, a hall where the capacity is 13,000. The rafters were largely empty. Organizers noted the president was competing on a Sunday afternoon with church, football and Halloween.
Halloween? What Obama doesn’t lack are excuses.
He has two years to get his act together. Step one: find a more appealing demeanor to display in times of political adversity. The current one really isn’t cutting it.
“we wound up winning in Iraq”– Jennifer Rubin
Are you saying Gen. Petraeus is lying? He disagrees with this statement. Any rational person would. If we’ve won, why can’t we pull out troops?
This is why you are about to get crushed by a tsunami or anti-conservatism. You are delusional.
Maybe fundamentaly dishonest is a good work; he is a chameleon that puts a hat according to who’s he talking. He just says whatever would advance his ambition to climb further in the power ladder whenever necessary. He has no qualms flip-floping on important issues in a heart beat literally as convenient on that particular moment (ie. not that he “evolves” into a position getting convinced of something else and changing his mind; he does it within a day).
He has been trumpeting a populist theme for a very long time b/c it’s working.
“Is he pushing a tax increase because he’s addicted to wealth distribution or just cynically playing on his base’s appetite for class warfare?” — Rubin
First, Obama long ago said he would defer implementing his tax increase on the rich if it would hurt a weak economy.
Second, the reason he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy is simply to pay for tax cuts on the middle class. The alternative, since no one is actually going to reduce the size of government, is to fund tax cuts with debt, which is one of the reasons our deficit is so large and our economy is in the tank. Debt funded tax cuts are just deferred tax increases. Do you not believe the middle class needs a tax cut? One of the reasons Obama dominates McCain on questions of taxes is because Obama’s cuts are fiscally responsible and aimed at the people who need them.
Hmmmm.
“First, Obama long ago said he would defer implementing his tax increase on the rich if it would hurt a weak economy. ”
*laugh*.
“Second, the reason he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy is simply to pay for tax cuts on the middle class.”
Even bigger *laugh*.
…
Right. The “wealthy”. And as long as the economy is “good”.
Try this on for size. Consider the ramifications of someone who knows that raising taxes will adversely affect the economy, but who says he won’t unless the economy is “good”. Doesn’t that imply directly that raising taxes will adversely affect the economy regardless of it’s state? And doesn’t that also imply that raising taxes during a “good” economy will result in a crappy economy?
Oh yeah. Tax the rich. Good luck with that. Amazingly enough the “rich” seem to have enough money to hire really smart lawyers and accountants that will help them avoid the majority of those taxes.
Then where will Obama go for money to pay for his $trillion dollar programs?
*you*
If Obama wins the election, the first thing the dems will do is to call for public financing of all elections. They will rail against all the money spent in this years election and try to take the high ground , led by Obama , and eliminate all 527 spending. The unstated goal is to consolidate power and not let the backlash that will come from overthrowing them
Or, as the old saying goes…
“Don’t tax you, don’t tax me. Tax the fella behindthat tree.”
@4 Not to mention that the rich also are the people writing the tax codes. Furthermore in a global economy it will be easier for the “rich” to take their wealth and investments elsewhere – -there is no reason to keep it here anymore. It’s like Obama has been listening to the noted philosopher and economist Alvin Lee — “tax the rich, feed the poor, till there are no rich no more”. Only the rich aren’t like you and I, their wealth is mobile. And they will take it and go — look at the Beatles. Sorry — it’s just a musical Tuesday for me…
Paulson and Bernake like a WWF tagteam. Credit is the problem since we basicall broke
“For a guy with a supposedly superior intellect and a magnificent temperament this is all quite puzzling. ”
There is a special kind of stupid that only smart people can be. Obama is that kind of stupid.
On what basis has it been determined that Obama has a ‘superior intellect’? It’s obvious from his flubs on the campaign trail that he has little grasp of history – if dates, themes, policies.
We expect more from our public school teachers!
To enlarge on “that kind of stupid”: He believes that he knows everything he needs to know, and he believes that anything he doesn’t know is not worth knowing. This is why he seems so reluctant to acknowledge facts that don’t agree with what he knows.