Karl Rove responds to David Axelrod's intemperate clumsy attempts to defend Obama by finger-pointing blame back at George W. Bush:
Mr. Axelrod wrote that no one is entitled to his own facts, even as he argued that George W. Bush is responsible for Barack Obama's deficits. He argued that Mr. Bush forced the hand of this administration by leaving office in the midst of a sharp recession.
Axelrod fails to point out, of course, that the housing market collapse which led to the sharp recession was engendered by the Community Readjustment Act put in full strength by Clinton and A. Cuomo in 1995. This act, enforced by quasi-government enforcement activists like ACORN, eventually forced banks to make risky loans to Dem constituents without jobs or the work ethic to pursue jobs. When GWB and McCain recognized the long-term danger of CRA's risky loans, they were adamantly opposed by Democrats like Barney Frank and latterly Barack Obama, elected in 2004. As Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac became overwhelmed by the bad loans defaulting, loans forced on bank by CRA activists like ACORN which threatened litigation, financial markets crashed and GWB was left with a housing market and Wall Street in smoldering ruins. Liars like David Axelrod blame GWB, not Frank, Obama, Clinton, Cuomo, Janet from another planet Reno who threatened lawsuits and other Dem culprits. Rove:
That argument won't fly for two reasons. First, at some point this administration has to take responsibility for itself. It's also not even close to accurate. Consider that from Jan. 20, 2001, to Jan. 20, 2009, the debt held by the public grew $3 trillion under Mr. Bush—to $6.3 trillion from $3.3 trillion at a time when the national economy grew as well.
By comparison, from the day Mr. Obama took office last year to the end of the current fiscal year, according to the Office of Management and Budget, the debt held by the public will grow by $3.3 trillion. In 20 months, Mr. Obama will add as much debt as Mr. Bush ran up in eight years.
Obama's boundless recklessness was noticed in MA by lifelong Dems like "Marlene Connolly is a 73-year-old Massachusetts Democrat who cast her first vote for a Republican in supporting Scott Brown"...saying: "If Massachusetts puts Brown in, it's a message of 'that's enough.' Let's stop the giveaways and let's get jobs going," as quoted in the New York Times.
Mr. Obama's spending plan approved by Congress last February calls for doubling the national debt in five years and nearly tripling it in 10.
Mr. Bush's deficits ran an average of 3.2% of GDP, slightly above the post World War II average of 2.7%. Mr. Obama's plan calls for deficits that will average 4.2% over the next decade.
Team Obama has been on history's biggest spending spree, which has included a $787 billion stimulus, a $30 billion expansion of a child health-care program, and a $410 billion federal spending bill that increased nondefense discretionary spending 10% for the last half of fiscal year 2009. Mr. Obama also hiked nondefense discretionary spending another 12% for fiscal year 2010.
In contrast to the sneaky underhanded attempt by Obama and his dishonest colleagues Axelrod and Emanuel to undertake a government takeover of the economy by stealth and a Health Care debacle crafted in opaque backroom deals directly contradicting serial liar Obama's eight campaign promises for "negotiations conducted on C-Span," GWB had transparency:
Mr. Bush did move to give voters more control over their tax dollars. Both his Social Security reform ideas and the drug program he created offered templates for driving federal spending curves in the right direction, counter to what Democrats wanted to do.
Democrats, for example, proposed creating a prescription drug program as an alternative to the one Mr. Bush proposed that would have cost a projected $800 billion over 10 years. The Bush drug benefit was originally expected to cost half that amount and today costs a third less than what it was initially expected to cost because it uses market forces to drive prices down.
Using market forces is directly contradictory to the Democrats' drive to socialize and appropriate much of the economy, with corporatist Fascist-type deals with big corporate sectors emulating Mussolini and Hitler. Besides their long-term goal of marginalizing and eventually minimalizing the U.S. Constitution aimed at by Constitutional "Adjunct" Professor Obama, the Democrats' short term economic claims are subject to preliminary examination as completely inept and an abject failure:
Mr. Axelrod claims the pork-laden stimulus package has been a success. But Mr. Obama told Americans that if it were passed, unemployment wouldn't rise above 8%. It is now 10%. The president also said it would create 3.7 million jobs, 90% of which would be in the private sector. By Mr. Obama's standards, the stimulus failed miserably.
in contrast, GWB's TARP has already generated profits:
Mr. Bush did sign the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) into law and loaned $240 billion to banks. But those loans are being returned at a profit to the Treasury.
But Obama has reacted to the rejection of his administration's inept dishonest hyper-spending as described by Ms. Connelly above with a predictable seizure of the TARP profits to use as a political slush fund to his favorite constituencies:
Rather than using those funds to pay down the deficit, Mr. Obama wants to use them for new spending. What's more, he has lavished some $320 billion from TARP on car companies, union allies, and pet causes that will never be fully returned.
The final blow to Obama's serial political tomfoolery, double-dealing, and Chicago-style lies and exaggerations and deceptions came when, in a fit of what can only be called complete delusional thinking:
Mr. Axelrod boasts Mr. Obama's proposed health reforms will "not add to the federal deficit." But if that turns out to be true, it will only be because Massachusetts voters just elected a senator who promises to vote against those reforms.
The witless Axelrod may now be unable to continue the RICO-style Bernie Madoff looting of the American economy by the Chicago-style Ponzi apparatus called the Obama wing of the Democrat Party. Rove finishes Axelrod off with a coup de grace:
In going after Mr. Bush's fiscal record, Mr. Axelrod unwittingly revealed why Democrats are losing. Mr. Obama and congressional Democrats have made a mess of the nation's finances and are desperate to pin the blame on someone else. It's not likely to work.
Even in deep blue Massachusetts, voters aren't standing idly by while the administration puts the nation on a dangerous trajectory. When Democrats lose a state they carried by 26 points a little more than a year ago, very little is safe for Mr. Obama's party this fall.
Axelrod and Obama and their tiny obscene strawboss Rahm-bo Emanuel may just have had their private parts exposed in the Massachusetts slamdown of their reckless feckless dishonest midnight raids on the U.S. economy. Hopefully in November, the rest of the nation will listen to Scott Brown's victory speech calling for them to hack the exposed parts off and remove the cabal in the House and Senate which tried to turn Obama's assault on the Constitution into law.
Or as Peggy Noonan says in her take onMA and Scott Brown in her interesting editorial piece today:
For Mr. Brown now, everything depends on execution. He made the Olympics. Now he has to do the swan dive, with a billion people watching. And then he has to do it again....[Obama's Inauguration] feels like another era. Because America keeps moving, the plates keep shifting, and execution is everything. Everything.