When our President is beholden to union special interests and a failed Keynesian economic dogma, most of us could have did predict his “recovery” plans would have been a complete FAIL.
From Ed Morrissey at HotAir.com:
When running for President, Barack Obama decried the decline of American household income, which certainly dropped during the 2007-2009 Great Recession. Since the recovery began in June 2009 — a recovery for which Obama has repeatedly claimed credit — that trend has gotten worse, not better. A new report shows that the percentage of decline in household income during the so-called recovery actually doubled that of the recession:
During the recession, which economists say lasted from Dec. 2007 to June 2009, the median annual household income fell by 3.2 percent, from $55,309 to $53,518, according to a report authored by two former U.S. Census Bureau officials. But in the post-recession period from June 2009 to June 2011, the figure fell by 6.7 percent, from $53,518 in June 2009 to $49,909 in June 2011. …
The study found that during the post-recessionary period, families with just a male or female head with no spouse present saw a 7.3 percent decline in income compared to the 4.5 percent drop for married-couple households. Income for households with a head under the age of 25 fell by 9.5 percent, significantly more than the 5.5 percent decline for households with a head who is 45 to 54 years old.
Again, I repeat: Our President Spent $787 Billion Dollars Of Our Money And We Got Was This Lousy 9.1% Unemployment Rate (Forever…)
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
I think it’s high time (especially with all those OWS protestors getting high) for Obama to admit that He has absolutely no idea what He’s doing.
The entire Obamacrat Plan for Fiscal and Economic Recovery comes down to five words… “… and then, a miracle happens.”
ILC,
Unfortunately, Obama knows exactly what he is doing. The “fundamentally transformed America” will be dull citizens being indifferent to one another as they while away their government job and settle for social justice, social security and decaying infrastructure.
The captains of government will replace the captains of industry. The people will give up hope and turn to vodka and black market income padding.
When you do the math of “equalizing” the masses, the low man on the totem pole gets a fair amount more, the upper limit poverty man stays marginally the same and everyone else gets burned.
The reeducation camp will teach you to swim with the polit-buro sharks and the secret knowledge you will learn is to bite first and, if bitten, don’t bleed.
Obama is a psychopath. To normal people, psychopaths are extremely disturbed people. To the psychopath, when he disturbs normal people, he is being satisfyingly successful and he is gratified by his actions. Obama is a serial free market, democracy rapist and killer. And he is strictly amoral.
On a related note: Congressional Democrats push bill to seal Obama’s Presidential records. So, history will never know just how major a SCOAMF he actually was.
And yet he’s still gonna get reelected because he’s good at reading speeches off a teleprompter. I love this country but sometimes I just wanna smack the crap out of the people living in it.
#3 – That’s the kind of bold talk that results in a tracking device implant…………..
Richard,
Is that why my head buzzes when I go near a microwave?
#7 – I’m sorry, I don’t think I know you…..Do I?…….No………………perhaps you’ve confused me with someone else………………Yes, that’s it.
This election-cycle the GOP needs to forcibly insist that Pres. Obama “owns” these results…not get away with pleading he was left with the mess, and it’s all Bush’s fault.
And no, I don’t want a t-shirt.
A link that was just dropped at Ace’s: Thomas Sargent, the new Nobel prize winner in economics, was/is against Obanomics, Krugman and teh “stimulus”.
Does it matter? Economists (including Krugman) are still ignorant jackasses after all, and the Nobel prize still doesn’t mean much. It matters only in refuting a specific lefty talking point that runs like this: “All mainstream economists favored Obama’s stimulus in 2009 / favor Obama’s new stimulus.” No, they didn’t/don’t. The TP has always been untrue. Sargent’s win allows for a pithier retort, though: “Like that guy who just won the Nobel Prize? Riiiiiight.”
The article gives some interesting color on Sargent’s views:
So, they lied.
Alarm bells should be going off in your head, right there.
Sargent sounds like my kinda guy overall; he says some things I’ve been saying:
And now for some AP headline bias: Senate Republicans likely to kill Obama jobs bill
Why bias? Because Senate Democrats are about to kill Obama’s jobs bill. They have a majority. They could pass the bill, if they wanted it. They don’t want it. If a filibuster is a real issue, they could appeal to
the RINOsthe Snowe-type “moderates”. They don’t care to.The lede is as biased as the headline:
Should read:
Is there anything the AP can’t distort? They’re so good at it! Near the bottom of the article, though, they need more material and turn to the facts, as a kind of filler:
I posted Hot Air’s link on the ‘jobs’ bill vote with the comment, “Bipartisanship you can believe in.”