Gay Patriot Header Image

Obama’s Mandate for Change:
Spending Increases Paid for by Spending Cuts

It seems a standard fallback position for defenders of the President to resort to the argument he first used in the early days of Administration when facing resistance from elected Republicans to the “so-called stimulus.”  They merely repeat the mantra that he won.

To be sure, he did win.  But, if his victory means he is entitled to win passage of all his legislative initiatives, well, then, let’s first have all these folks apologize for blocking George W. Bush’s proposals in 2005-06 and move immediately to confirm all the federal judges he nominated.

Just because a candidate wins election doesn’t mean the majority (or plurality, in some cases) who backed him favors every policy he puts forward.  And anyway, in our republican form of government, the legislature must first approve said policies.

Many Democrats are balking at the president’s latest proposals because they recognize that the American people don’t show the same enthusiasm for Obama’s policies as they once did for Obama the candidate.  In order to generate that enthusiasm, he distinguished himself from the freespending Republican incumbent.

Yes, he proposed new spending schemes, but did so in the context of a “net spending cut.”  He was going to pay for new programs by cutting existing ones.  But, when he assumed office, he proposed new federal programs while increasing the outlays for existing ones.  Obama’s ability to win over wavering independent voters was contingent on his commitment to reining in federal spending (that he continues to talk about holding the line of federal spending shows that he still recognizes the power of this notion).

In short, he convinced a majority of the American people to back his candidacy by making clear that the change advocated was not radical and the spending increases he proposed would be paid for with spending cuts.  That he has not delivered on those promises show his current actions at odds with his electoral mandate.  They show as well why he is losing favor with the American people.



  1. All I can say is:
    – Bush deficits: $100-400 billion.
    – Obama deficits: $1.8 trillion.

    Oh and let’s see – $700B for Porkulus, plus $700B in bailout spending (that Obama could have cancelled, but intensified instead) equals $1400 billion, the difference between Bush’s last deficit and Obama’s. Coincidence?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 18, 2009 @ 7:09 pm - August 18, 2009

  2. I want to believe that the “hopey-changey” crowd is finally awake in the United States of America. However, I have personally met a number of “dopey-hopey” citizens who believed that a Black Man couldnt behave like his White predecessors – Democrat or Republican. Those of you in the audience need to start to realize that Obama’s childhood did not somehow produce a morally upright, mature individual that was capable of helping out the little guy. Nor did his higher education produce a more intelligent individual with a better world view. His inability to connect with his poorer relatives in Africa points to a basic flaw in his character – its all about him. His inability to even pretend to behave in a way that befits his Office also reinforces my belief in his flawed character. His predilection to pretend to be better than the people he is supposed to govern also forces him to “speak it and believe it.” Unfortunately, he doesnt believe his own press – that is why he cant articulate his stance on issues without the aid of the teleprompter. He doesnt have it inside of himself to proclaim. Hence, his need for handlers and orchestrated events that “appear” to demonstrate his inner sincerity. I cannot wait to hear him proclaim that Native Americans have too much money (because of Casinos) and urge Congress to pass legislation to take their unjust earnings and distribute it to inner minorities.

    Comment by Duffy - Native Intelligence — August 18, 2009 @ 9:48 pm - August 18, 2009

  3. I am a Catholic and last Sunday I had the privilege of our Archbishop saying our Mass and preaching. The point that he made about Wisdom was not lost upon me.

    A person can have “intelligence” and can get a degree but that does not mean that a person has Wisdom.

    Reflecting upon what the Archbishop stated in the homily, or at least what I can remember, if I applied that to Obummer, then I can see the logic in what was stated.

    After Obummer won, all I heard from your libtard progressives was all about how the people standing on the podium were so intelligent because they were all Yale and Harvard graduates. Yet, one can easily say “big deal” or “so what”, because getting a degree from those institutions does not make them any better than a graduate from Notre Dame or any of the other fine universities in the USA or elsewhere. In fact if these individuals were Rhodes Scholars they would be deemed as more intelligent – but I digress for a moment.

    In Australia we had a former Prime Minister who was a Rhodes Scholar. There is no doubt that he had quite a brilliant mind, yet in the end Bob Hawke was a lousy Prime Minister. He was succeeded by a man who did not have a university degree, and that man even with his biting tongue and hateful mannerism was in fact a lot sharper in how he understood what was going on around him. Even today as I still despise Paul Keating, I have to acknowledge that he got one thing right – Tim Geithner mucked up the Japanese economy despite his so called intellectual brilliance.

    This gets me back to the point about intelligence and Wisdom. You can be learned and yet not have Wisdom. This is the real problem with Obummer and his political hacks. They lack the Wisdom to run your country at a standard that the POTUS deserves.

    Comment by thestraightaussie — August 18, 2009 @ 10:14 pm - August 18, 2009

  4. He won and you’re a racist SOB for daring to question him. Just who do you think you are?

    Anyways, it’ll be interesting to see if he vetos any of those pork laden defense bills as he promised.

    Comment by Rob Schellinger — August 19, 2009 @ 2:02 am - August 19, 2009

  5. […] this serve to remind us yet again about Barack Obama’s real mandate–and why an increasing number of Americans strongly disapprove of the way he is doing his […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Obama Promised Fiscal Discipline, Delivered Fiscal Recklesness, Lost the Good Will of the American People — August 24, 2009 @ 3:18 am - August 24, 2009

  6. I’m so sick of this guy. He is a Marxist plan and simple abeit a ‘soft’ one. Smart is as smart does.

    Comment by DownU — August 24, 2009 @ 6:21 am - August 24, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.