President Obama swings through North Carolina today, where he’ll be “selling the advantages of his 2009 stimulus packages for green jobs,” according to a Fox News report.
This is a vicious insult against the good people of North Carolina, since the President apparently thinks the state is packed with imbeciles who haven’t noticed that much of the stimulus loot vanished into thin air, unemployment is far higher than Obama said it would be without the stimulus, and there aren’t any “green jobs.” It would have been more interesting to watch Obama sell this twaddle to people in South Carolina, where it would be easy to pack an auditorium with people whose jobs Obama and his union pals are actively working to destroy.
Recovery Summer II kicked off with an Obama defense of his General Motors bailout so transparently fraudulent that even friendly media outlets felt compelled to call him on it. Now the President is abandoning any pretense of actually doing his job to fly off on a big fund-raising tour, and tout his “achievements” in a desperate attempt to win big-money Wall Street donors back.
One of those achievements was supposed to be the wonderful outgrowth of green jobs Obama fertilized with $30 million in taxpayer money at eco-friendly light bulb manufacturer Cree of North Carolina. As Fox News points out, “the company’s growth seems mostly to be happening in China, where more than 50 percent of the company’s workforce now resides,” leading Republicans to point out that “Cree took money borrowed from China at the expense of American taxpayers to subsidize Chinese jobs.”
Just last Friday, Obama touted all of the wonderful job growth his big auto bailout supposedly created in peripheral industries, such as Chet’s Restaurant in Toledo. Chet’s Restaurant promptly went out of business. Even without this darkly comical demonstration of Obama’s economic death touch, the point he was trying to make was bizarre and offensive. Are we supposed to be happy about a future in which we all work at low-wage service jobs, to provide food and comfort for the lucky winners King Obama and his royal court choose to subsidize with our tax money?
We serfs, on the other hand, will be lucky if we can afford to eat anywhere better than McDonalds, which was single-handedly responsible for half of the job growth in the already horrifying May unemployment report, and fully a quarter of the jobs created in the month before that. And the man who engineered all this is taking a victory lap?
Obama is also trying to build political support for another “stimulus” spending spree. Obama surrogate Larry Summers, who used to be one of the President’s top economic advisors, is pumping out op-ed pieces warning that we need another huge round of Keynesian deficit spending to avoid falling into a “Lost Decade,” where presumably not even McDonald’s will be hiring. Apparently only the previous trillion-dollar slush fund saved us from a Great Depression. Summers should probably wait a little longer before claiming we avoided that depression.
Fox News tells us Summers is also “trying to buck up disheartened donors by promising that the unemployment rate could be as low as 8 percent by Election Day.” Eight percent? Wow! Obamanomics… catch the fever! I thought conventional wisdom said unemployment over 7% doomed a president’s re-election chances. Is this the beginning of an effort to move the goalposts for Obama?
Republicans should make it clear to this Administration that it will not be trusted with any more “stimulus” money, given more regulatory power, or allowed to spin its way out of the catastrophic economy it has created. The only thing we need from Barack Obama, besides accepting responsibility for his actions and cancelling all the recreational and fund-raising nonsense drawing him away from the duties of the Presidency, is his plan to cut government spending back to 2008 levels, before he got his hands on Uncle Sam’s credit cards. Such spending cuts would not be good enough to deal with the current crisis – not by a long shot – but there is no reason for Americans to pay any further attention to him until he displays minimal concessions to reality and accountability.
I’ve got a proposal for the people who think we should run up the national debt even more, so we can have another round of “stimulus” spending. We’re always told that pro-growth tax cuts would “cost” the Treasury too much in lost tax revenue. Let’s put it to the test. Instead of betting more money on the President who failed miserably last time, let’s bet on the private sector for a change.
Give us dramatic tax simplification and big pro-growth tax cuts, and let’s watch what actually happens to tax revenues. The worst that could happen would be incurring the kind of “cost” liberals want to blow on more stimulus spending anyway… and at least we’d be taking a chance on something new, instead of pouring billions more into the same leaky Keynesian plumbing that left us both insolvent and unemployed.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter