The Crisis in Confidence is in Obama

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Jul 5, 2004
13,399
1,706
245
There is a crisis of confidence in this country. The lack of confidence is not in the free market. It is a lack of confidence in the Obama administration...is it any wonder? The Obama administration has quickly proven they have no idea why we are in this mess, refuse to admit any mistakes, and clearly aren’t sure what to do about it. Their lack of understanding was especially noticeable when I watched the Sunday shows.

Obama spokesmen Larry Summers, Austan Goolsbee, and Christina Romer -all academics or bureaucrats – have little to no credibility on the issue, and it shows. None of them have run a business. None of them have had to make a payroll. None of them have had to make a sale. None of them have had to make a fiduciary decision that would impact their own money. Their worldviews are not capable of understanding the fundamentals of a free market. You add Secretary Geithner and President Obama to the list and you can see why the future looks bleak.

Austan Goolsbee on Fox News Sunday: “the market for credit to small businesses has completely frozen”. False. I have spoken to business owners and bankers around the country, and they tell me that banks are making loans, but there are simply new standards for these loans. Instead of lending to people who can’t afford it, those who have good credit are getting the loans. Also very few businesses are simply not asking for increased lines of credit when President Obama is threatening higher taxes and more regulations. They’re business-minded, after all, and they know his policies will harm small businesses in the long run.

Christina Romer on Meet the Press: “we have our eyes on the fundamentals” of the economy. If there was any truth to that, then why are they driving up the federal debt by astronomical amounts, and driving business out of the capital markets? Inflation and interest rates will go through the roof. Why are they expanding the welfare state? Why are they raising taxes during a recession? Why are they threatening oppressive regulations in the face of a recession? Why are they tilting our labor markets toward the socialist union controls?

Larry Summers on This Week: "we need to have a so-called regulation regime” that allow the federal government to make business decisions for private companies. Now this is crazy, even for the liberals. Never in our history has it been suggested that the federal government should start vetoing decisions or directly influencing the private sector to the extent Summers is suggesting. Regulation of fraud and safety concerns can be debated, but regulating pure market forces? What a catastrophe. That will create even more disaster for our economy.

The economic fundamentals of freedom, freedom, and more freedom are the only way to ensure capital and market forces join together to grow us out of this mess. The only way to get out of this recession is to get the government out of the way. Less taxation, smaller government, fewer regulations…confidence will return and our recovery will be quick. But I, like the rest of America, have no confidence in this administration to get it right.

Townhall.com::Blog

Meet Obama's Newest Billionaire Cheerleader
March 22

WASHINGTON - Mayor Bloomberg pumped the pom-poms for President Obama's economic war plan today, cheering the White House for helping Americans "get through this."

Brushing aside anger over the $165 million in taxpayer-funded bonuses for undeserving AIG executives, Bloomberg said Obama must "galvanize" Congress and the public by leading from the front.

"The political will issue is the President's single greatest challenge. There is a crisis of confidence in this country," Bloomberg told NBC's "Meet the Press."

Meet Obama's newest billionaire cheerleader: Bloomberg touts president's economic play
 
There is a crisis of confidence in this country. The lack of confidence is not in the free market. It is a lack of confidence in the Obama administration...

Who would want to partner with the government when they punish you for doing what they have already approved of? Look at the public flogging of AIG’s Liddy last week; a man devoting his time to solve the problems of a flailing company for a symbolic dollar a year, and is treated like a dog by the congress in hearings. All of this is for public consumption, the least noble of reasons, but a part of the public will be needed to work on these issues in the near very future.

A part of this reticence out there, to join this monstrosity, is manifest in the unwillingness of responsible people to join Geithner at Treasury. I actually feel pity for the man. Who with a potential future and responsibilities would step up and do that? But because we can’t get any one to do it for noble reasons we’re likely to get someone for ignoble reasons, and flawed credentials. All of this does harm to the US economy and US policy, and makes it harder to fix it later.
 
Last edited:
I tried to tell you guys they had elected a marxist.. yep, I did.



I was watching a Ramassun report also. 80% of this country considers themselves "populist"--meaning they have more faith in the people of this country than they do government. A few other questions regarding all these bail-outs were given & overwhelmingly this group stated we should have never bailed out anyone--with only a small percentage stating we should have.

Only 7% consider themselves "politic" meaning they have more faith in government than they do people. A very stark answer to the question of bail-out & government spending--they believe anything government does is correct & the support it 100%.

The remaining are uncertain as to what they are.

The question remains--how in the heck did all these populist people come up with a President who represents only the 7% of this country that believes government can do anything & should be involved in everything?"
 
I tried to tell you guys they had elected a marxist.. yep, I did.



I was watching a Ramassun report also. 80% of this country considers themselves "populist"--meaning they have more faith in the people of this country than they do government. A few other questions regarding all these bail-outs were given & overwhelmingly this group stated we should have never bailed out anyone--with only a small percentage stating we should have.

Only 7% consider themselves "politic" meaning they have more faith in government than they do people. A very stark answer to the question of bail-out & government spending--they believe anything government does is correct & the support it 100%.

The remaining are uncertain as to what they are.

The question remains--how in the heck did all these populist people come up with a President who represents only the 7% of this country that believes government can do anything & should be involved in everything?"
this is why McLame blew it by not opposing the bail outs
if he had, he would be POTUS now, by a landslide
 

Forum List

Back
Top