I will stop you right here because this is the Obama economy, not anyone other administrations economy.
No, sorry, you HAVE to look at what happened in the past to try and figure out why things are going the way they are now. We need to look at how the Bush administration handled the economy-if it took eight years for us to go from a surplus to being so far in debt, then naturally one should expect that the incoming president would have a long uphill battle to get us out of such a hole and as a result we need to do a compare/contrast scenario. We're in way deeper than I think most people realize, no way in hell would this ever have been solved as quickly as people think it should have been.
We should definitely scrutinize Obama's policies on fixing things, yes, and critique him when we think his ideas aren't going to aid in recovery. But he could be doing every single thing right in terms of economic policy, and yet it'd STILL take a long time for things to be back to normal. They might come back a bit quicker than they would otherwise in that scenario, but it's going to be a while. Sorry to say it, but it's true.
Whatever happened to HOPE & CHANGE and CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN?
Obama ran on turning things around...he hasn't. This is his economy and his war....his success and his failures. End of story.
Again, you are obsessing over
campaign slogans. EVERY single politician is going to have an inspirational campaign slogan. EVERY single politician runs on, "I will change things and make this country better." That's what helps them get elected. Sure, it'd be great if someone had a more realistic slogan, or realistic suggestions, but those don't get people all charged up and don't always lead to more votes.
I was hopeful with those slogans, too, yes, but I also wasn't naive enough to think it'd all be solved by the day after his inaguration or whatever. If someone had unrealistically high expectations upon hearing Obama speak, well, that's their issue to deal with.
You don't think I want to wake up tomorrow morning and see everyone in prosperous jobs and comfortable homes and our debt eliminated? Of course I do. But I also know that, like I said above, we're in so far in debt that no matter what happens, it's going to be a while before things start truly looking up. I know that's not news anyone WANTS to hear-my family's struggled and it's sure as hell not anything I'm happy to hear about, but it's the truth.
First off, we're not talking about FDR. This is Obama general discussion. Obama is running for re-election, with his economic record. Not FDR, or Bush, or anyone else.
SO did Obama lie then when he said this?
FLASHBACK: Obama: My Presidency Will Be 'A One-Term Proposition' If Economy Doesn't Turn In 3 Years - YouTube
I think you missed my point. I was using an example of another president who had to deal with similar situations as Obama (though arguably a lot worse). He managed to fix things eventually, yes, but it took a lot of time and a few screwups along the way. It took a good number of years. There have been many comparisons between the two presidents over the years, so if the comparisons are valid, then it stands to reason that as FDR had problems fixing the economic situation of his day, so too does Obama now.
No, I don't think he lied. I think he was making a truthful observation-even if he is trying to do his best, he's fully aware that the American people will be expecting improvement by the time his re-election comes around, and if they don't see it in
their lives, they'll project that onto him and his re-election chances will not be as airtight. And he's right.
So Obama has 50,000 things on his plate he needs to fix, please tell me why he's found time to play 94 rounds of golf then? Or appear on every late night talk show? Or take several week long vacations in Hawaii? Did he think this was going to be a 4 year vacation? I realize he was a community organizer and an absent senator....what was he expecting though when he came to Washington?
That you make a fair point on and I don't disagree with you. The talk shows...well, apparently that's the new way to try and win people over. And the Republicans have been appearing on shows, too, instead of working on their campaigns and coming up with proper solutions to the problems they would be inheriting should they become president, though, so hey. Seems everyone on Capitol Hill is more interested in getting the hell away from D.C. than staying there and working for any length of time on anything of substance.
The fact does remain, though, that everyone wants Obama to fix this and fix that (when they're not calling him a socialist commie Nazi who's trying to control our lives), and I ask those people then, what do you want him to take care of first? He can't solve all these problems at once, nor can he solve them alone. So what do you want him to do, and what are you willing to do to help him get there?
What Mr. Obama needs to do, is help create an environment where business will thrive and grow, and not raise taxes on the job creators to the extent where they throw in the towel. Meanwhile half of the country doesn't even pay income taxes. Not create a society where people can collect unemployment insurance for 99 weeks or whatever that figure is, perfectly healthy people depend on stamps and "Obama bucks" because its readily available and they are too lazy to work. The only people he's really really helped is the welfare folks and the wall street execs who got the big bonuses. Everyone else (those of us who pay taxes, that is) gets to pay for him and Michelle to jet set around the world at our expense. Yep, all this for a damn flag.
I really am getting tired of the "too lazy to work" stuff that people keep coming up with. Seriously. I know there are some people who fit that description, but how many times do I have to explain that not everyone is like that? You remember my posts about my family from recent pages, right, how we didn't fit that stereotype of people on welfare you seem to keep repeating constantly? Please stop with that insinuation, because it's really getting beyond insulting.
And as for the "job creators"-if they're job creators, why are jobs being shipped overseas? Why are CEOs getting big bonuses while average employees aren't getting raises or paid more in minimum wage or whatever? Why are "overqualified" or "underqualified" people being rejected for perfectly simple work that it shouldn't be too hard to train anyone to do? I work a part-time job at a small Midwestern chain bookstore, and the higher-ups are so cheap, nobody gets raises there and they're very hesitant to shell out money for anything, including someone to help out my manager so that when she's gone, we have someone else to help us out when we need it, to help train new people and such. The only full-time job is that of my manager. We had 6 people quit within this last month because they found better-paying jobs elsewhere. And those that stay have to take on a second job because of the low pay of the one they're at.
Hell, ask my mom what happened when she worked at KMart and those stores started shutting down. The CEO walked off with a big bonus. My mom, however? Got nothing. And they had to close the store because they were struggling financially...well, apparently they weren't struggling TOO much if that CEO was able to get his millions in bonuses. And so on and so on. Job creators, my ass.
If we can prove a business is actually creating jobs, yes, they should get breaks for that. But if they're not willing to help keep their employees with any of what I mentioned above, they're not job creators and they're not deserving of any breaks. I like how those of us who are underemployed are called lazy for not paying much, if anything, in taxes, but if the "job creators" have to do it, it's "damaging" to them and their business. Really? If I'm expected to pony up money, so are the job creators. If I have to sacrifice, they do, too, so they can shut it and quit their whining.
Obama DOES want a world where people are getting prosperous jobs. Unfortunately, again,
any attempts he makes to do so get blocked by idiot Republican politicians who are saying he's plotting an evil government takeover. So how do you respond to that problem? What's your suggestion on how Obama should deal with those people who block, or try to block, any plans of Obama's from going through? I'm so far beyond tired of the Republican line about protecting job creators and alternately bitching because Obama isn't fixing everything yet saying his policies are akin to socialist Nazi whatever BS. You can't have it both ways, guys, get a clue already.
Also, anitram, EXCELLENT post. Interestingly enough, my parents have said the same thing for years.