Depends on what you want done and "undone"... Spending like a drunken sailor with the premise of helping the economy while only increasing government is not what my "unbiased" pov had in mind... Making things worse is not helping... TARP and bailouts were wrong (I don't care whose idea it was) and shouldn't have been passed... and yet we're told how well the economy is doing now... We're on the brink of spending even more money we don't have on healthScare and somehow this is OK as long as Barry wants it...
Well, the Dems own it now and are responsible for actions done after 1/20/2009 and the American people should judge thm on that...
What I see is that most economists for whom I have respect believe that in order to recover from the meltdown, that government needed to spend money. There aer many who would say they didn't spend enough to do it right and that they should have done a whole WPA type project and gotten people jobs doing shovel-ready projects. I happen to believe that the recovery would be stronger and quicker if they had followed that route.
I suppose in a way, the dems "own" it because the repubs forced their hands and made them do it unilaterally so that if it crashes and burns, they can say "oooh...oooooh...see...they failed" because ultimately, that's all the party of "no" wants, IMO. As a political strategy, it works, if, in fact, it fails. I just don't think it will. I don't think it does enough TO fail. And THAT is where they miscalcuated. Again-- in my opinion.
I figure the dems should be judged in month 11 the way bush was judged in month nine...
in other words, he wasn't. and, amazingly, for eight years, they claimed that clinton caused every problem of the bush presidency.
i assume you objected to that too?
and before the repubs have any success, they have to stop being extremists who exclude every person who isn't in lockstep.
