Obama: Mopping up With an Ineffective Cleaning Solution
In his description of how the Democrats decided on the “stimulus,” Rand Simberg helps illustrate a problem I’ve discussed in previous posts. Borrowing from the President’s metaphor of picking up a mop to clean up the mess (which he repeatedly reminds us) he “inherited,” that astute blogger and recovering aerospace engineer offers:
But Barack and Nancy (and Harry) don’t seem to know much about floor cleaning. They seem better at exacerbating messes than cleaning them up. When the president took power in January, his very first act was not to grab an effective cleaning solution. Instead, he pulled an old one off the shelves that the Democrats had been wanting to use for years, even though it has always proven ineffective against the type of mess that we were in (the mess having been caused by it in the first place). In too much of a rush to read the label on the bottle (generously assuming that the label was accurate), they dumped the whole thing into the bucket without diluting it. Then, in their rush to use it, they tripped over the bucket and spilled it all over.
(H/t Instapundit)
14 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
and as cleaning pros know, a mop is but a paint brush, especially when you use red ink to “clean” with.
It’s gonna take years to disinfect the damage caused by his “faulty” cleaning.
Comment by JP — October 24, 2009 @ 1:58 am - October 24, 2009
It is more like they were using a sponge mop that had gone hard instead of one of the new generations mops.
I guess I am of the old school, I like the string mop because it can often do a better job. A sponge mop can get hard when it dries out and is no good to anybody.
Another possibility is using a mop on carpet instead of a vacuum cleaner.
Comment by straightAussie — October 24, 2009 @ 2:12 am - October 24, 2009
When he whined that too many people are standing around complaining that he’s not doing it right, he said “why don’t you grab a mop and help out?” or some such. I immediately wondered what kind of ass clown would pop off and tell his employer (the American public) with that nonsense. One doesn’t usually stay employed for long with that attitude.
Can we slash his salary by 90%?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 24, 2009 @ 2:17 am - October 24, 2009
Better yet, if he sucks at mopping, why is he getting paid more than minimum wage?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 24, 2009 @ 2:17 am - October 24, 2009
His lack of experience certainly dictates minimum wage.
Comment by American Elephant — October 24, 2009 @ 2:54 am - October 24, 2009
Bill Clinton was distracted too.
Black Hawk Down 16 years ago this Month.
People remember there was a GREEN President in the White House back in 1993, with no Military Background either.
We are presently in two theaters Iraq and Afghanistan. What could go wrong with the current President ignoring precedent.
While the White House goes to War with a News Network. We have Americans in Harms way, waiting for him to make a decision on Troop deployment build up in Afghanistan.
Lest we forget, we have people fighting for us on the front lines of Afghanistan. It was later determined that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, trained and funded the people who shot the Black Hawks Down, 3 Oct 1993 Mogadishu.
What is the President waiting for? An International Incident to give him political cover..al la Joe Biden. Gird Your Loins?
http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/10/black-hawk-down-somalia-3rd-october.html
Comment by keyboard Jockey — October 24, 2009 @ 10:19 am - October 24, 2009
Um.
He did inherit a trillion dollars in deficit.
that is quite a problem that needs cleaning.
(before any of you predictability try to deny this, remember bush did not include Iraq and Afganistan when he was calculating deficit)
Comment by gillie — October 24, 2009 @ 10:26 am - October 24, 2009
Sorry, I meant to ask “why did you put the word “inherited” in quotes?
Comment by gillie — October 24, 2009 @ 10:30 am - October 24, 2009
[...] reads: Michelle Malkin’s “Saturday Open Tread” - Gay Patriot’s “Obama: Mopping up With an Ineffective Cleaning Solution“ Leave a [...]
Pingback by Chicago style politics comes to Virginia – No good ‘Deeds’ goes unpunished. « Ztower — October 24, 2009 @ 11:07 am - October 24, 2009
Well, gillie, Barack was in the Senate, in the majority party, for a couple of years before he was elected president. He voted for TARP. He voted for the big deficit. His party voted for TARP. His party forced “risky loans” on mortgage lenders, starting back in the days of W.J. Clinton. His party refused to reform Fannie & Freddie (in return for huge campaign contributions). They accused Bush of hating poor people when he advocated limiting Fannie & Freddie. Maxine Waters accused those who wanted to rein in Fannie & Freddie of racism.
Now he’s limiting executives’ pay, hoping this will cause them to engage in less “risky behavior.” And it might, if Congress doesn’t, again, force them to engage in said “risky behavior.”
When Barack says he inherited this mess, it’s a little like Barney Frank, late in the game, saying that “some people should rent instead of owning their homes.” As if that had been his position all along. (I have video of Barney insisting that Fannie & Freddie must continue to back those risky loans, lest poor people be unable to own their own homes).
The Porkulus program was Barack’s (well, maybe Nancy’s, but Barack ordered it up, in whatever form Congress cared to fashion it). Nearly a trillion dollars in pork, added to Barack’s deficit.
Barack canceled drilling contracts, put in place by the Bush administration, for further study. All those jobs, all that tax revenue, all that energy independence–fuggetabouddit. His people just “protected” thousands of square miles of ocean off Alaska’s coast, putting that area off-limits to oil drilling–and jobs and taxes and energy independence–all in an alleged effort to protect the Polar Bears, whose population has been growing for years.
In what year of Barack’s reign will he “own” this mess?
Comment by polly — October 24, 2009 @ 11:08 am - October 24, 2009
Obama’s Fairy Palace!
http://naturalfake.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/barack-obamas-fairy-palace/
Comment by Steven E. Kalbach — October 24, 2009 @ 11:17 am - October 24, 2009
Nice, Steven.
Comment by polly — October 24, 2009 @ 12:28 pm - October 24, 2009
gillie – if we ignore the fact (pointed out above) that Obama’s record is one of expensive statism, I can agree that he inherited an economic mess. The economy didn’t go south in November… it’s been trending that way for a long time.
The issue is: he’s not cleaning the mess up… he’s making it worse. Much worse. I cannot see how saddling our wilting economy with hyper-expensive entitlements, crippling what’s left of our manufacturing sector with cap-and-tax (based on junk science), and all the rest will help (unless the goal is to remake the US into another Euro-style welfare basket case – which is the case IMHO).
And none of this is even Constitutional (Pelosi laughed off a question the other day about the Constitutional authority). Today I read that Obama is pissing away some millions of dollars (I know, pocket change) for a Muslim technology fund. So, despite trillions in debt, rising job losses (including a lot of tech workers), we scrounge up the money to give to the “burgeoning” tech sector in countries that hate our guts. I suspect Obama would laugh off any question as to the Constitutional authority for this.
Comment by SoCalRobert — October 24, 2009 @ 4:57 pm - October 24, 2009
Actually, Iraq & Afghanistan were included:
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 24, 2009 @ 7:34 pm - October 24, 2009