Enter your keyword

Monday, November 23, 2009

Where Are All the Jobs?

These days even Saturday Night Live is mocking Obama's failed job creation programs, mainly because the stench of Barry's economic failure has become a little too pungent to ignore. But then again Obama's programs were never designed to create jobs in the first place. As far back as 2008, I pointed out that Obama's proposal put the environment first and jobs a distance third if at all, emphasizing environment efficiency and infrastructure programs, neither of which had any serious likelihood of creating permanent jobs. And unsurprisingly they didn't.

Obama has inflated the bureaucracy at taxpayer expense, but he has not actually created jobs. Had he cut taxes by the same amount that he spent or just outright put the money to granting tax breaks to companies willing to move jobs to the United States, he could have boasted some actual job creation numbers. But Obama has no interest in creating jobs. As a former Community Organizer, read Poverty Pimp, Obama is not interested in promoting, what his mentor Jeremiah Wright called, "Middle Classedness". What he wanted and wants is to create government dependency.

Poverty Pimps do not get ahead by creating jobs, but by taking them away and replacing them with programs under their control. Community Organizers do not want people working, they want people with their hand stretched out to them. They spread misery and unemployment by shaking down businesses, blackmailing them if they will pay and driving them out of the neighborhood if they won't. Employed people have a degree of independence that unemployed people do not. And Poverty Pimps are not in the market for independence.

Instead of creating jobs, Obama created more misery. And that was always the plan. Now that he has sensed enough of the backlash to shift from talking about job creation, which his policies have failed miserably at, to talking about deficit reduction, which is a lot like Elliot Spitzer giving a lecture on ethics, but the endgame has never changed. Obama has created a monstrous deficit and every program on his agenda is meant to increase it further. For the White House which is pushing a trillion dollar government health insurance package to talk about deficit reduction is the sum of all hypocrisy.

Meanwhile Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman is busy arguing in his New York Times that the stimulus was too small and we need a much bigger stimulus plan to save the economy. But as the court jester of the Democratic economic apocalypse knows quite well, more government spending will not lead to job growth anywhere outside the civil service. The government can only create jobs under its own control and those jobs cost far more to create than private sector jobs and are built on the backs of an already overtaxed public. What government spending does is increasingly dry up the ability of companies and small businesses to create new jobs.

While the public increasingly blames the White House for the economic situation, the Obamas and Krugmans of the left blamed unregulated free enterprise. Their solution is to transform America into a centralized and planned economy, an approach that even most Communist countries have abandoned. But the liberal approach as always is to presume that it simply wasn't done right and that having all the bright boys in one room running the country would be an improvement over having businessmen run their own companies. That kind of thinking is what put a 31 year old campaign worker in charge of running the US Auto industry, with predictably disastrous results.

The Brightest Boys in the room policy goes back to the JFK Administration, where the brightest boys in the room helped give us such successes as the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam. In the Obama Administration though the boys part is sadly literal where the premium is not on experience or qualifications, neither of those being qualities that Obama himself possesses, but political allegiance. That same sense of liberal moral invulnerability promised that Obama would be able to handle Iraq and Afghanistan better than Bush, when in fact it is becoming increasingly clear that he doesn't even understand it. It also presumed that Obama could handle an economic crisis better than Bush, but in fact all Obama has done is played Poverty Pimp with hundreds of billions of dollars.

What Republicans must do in 2010 and 2012 is make clear that the chief problem with the economy is the government and the best solution is freedom. Government spending cannot create jobs, all it can do is inhibit the economic recovery that is a natural part of the economic cycles. Today more and more Americans are rejecting the idea of government dependency as an economic solution. Meanwhile when even Saturday Night Live can spell out the unpleasant economic truth that the only place that the government takeover of the economy is leading is to wildly useless spending and a sharecropper society run by our creditors from abroad-- it is clear that Obama's legislative victories carry the makings of his own political defeat.

But defeating Obama politically may well be a Pyrrhic victory if it leaves the edifice he is busy constructing intact. With falling numbers, Obama has not tried to do what Clinton did early on when he retreated from the unpopularity of his policies to try and seize the center, instead he has only tacked further left. Obama and those behind him are not satisfied with the slow revolution from within pushed by the likes of Clinton, instead they are gambling everything on the ability to transform America quickly, to replace free enterprise with socialism, and American independence with multilateral co-dependence.

And so even in the absence of jobs and growing public opposition, Obama and his people are pushing hard left, and gambling that the same factors which got them ahead in 2008, namely a tame media corps, voter fraud and the tattered remains of Obama's charisma will save them again in 2010 and 2012. And that means we can expect a growing escalation on both sides as Obama and the Democrats forge on regardless of public opinion working to create a state in which Republicans can only survive by being liberals. 


  1. Poverty pimps! Love that. It describe 'em perfectly.

    Personally, I think by the time 2010 rolls around Obama will have become a laughing stock. He rose to power (ominous sounding phrase, rose to power)largely on charisma and celebrity. When the entertainment media turns on him, he loses his power and becomes a joke.

    SNL could be leading the way.

    Whoever his opponent is in the next election will probably hammer him on the lack of job creation. That, along with his delayed response to the riots in Iran.

    Where are the jobs, Mr. President? Why did it take so long to comment on Iran, Mr. President? Yep. I can see the TV ads and hear the voice over asking those questions.

    Great article.

  2. What an excellent exposition of the situation! Should be required reading for all who are on the right (not the wrong) side and do not want America go under.

  3. Anonymous24/11/09

    Without relentless exposure by the media (yeah, right)it will not work. I know people who don't receive Fox News (Canada) and they have no idea how bad the situation is. Whomever is reading the conventional media or watching the conventional news, even in USA has no chance to be aware, hence 46% approvement in general.

  4. I honestly believe their endgame is once they run the dollar into the ground, they will force the U.S. to accept that global currency (probably after they give up our sovereignty), that is controlled by an international and central bank. Once they have that, controlling the world will be that much easier.

    I hope we kick their ass in 2010 and soon.



Blog Archive