Obamanomics Part II

I didn't watch the debate last night and I neglected to record it, but from what I've read, Obama spent a lot of time criticizing Bush's economic policies. Obama said "We have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain." I was unaware that President Bush's economic policies had failed. Taking a look back at the last 8 years, I'm trying to find the high unemployment rates and high inflation that one would associate with failed economic policies and I can't find them. Unemployment has been 4-6% throughout the last 8 years, numbers within the range of what economists consider "full employment." Yes, we have a financial crisis and are currently experiencing slow growth (not a recession), but overall, the economy over the last 8 years has been strong. This is impressive, considering the recession Bush inherited, 9/11 and the Iraq War. I will fault President Bush for his spending but Obama would spend far more.

Obama blames the financial mess on Bush for corporate tax breaks and insufficient regulation. Just how did corporate tax breaks lead to the sub-prime meltdown? And what's wrong with corporate tax breaks? It's not like fat cat CEOs pay the corporate taxes, they are passed down to us through higher prices and lower salaries. Low taxes on corporations stimulates growth. Higher taxes does the opposite. Bush and McCain pushed for more regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and but were opposed by Democrats. Obama, who received the second most campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie in the Senate, did nothing to help.

Bush's tax cuts, which lowered everyone's taxes, are somehow portrayed as being bad for the middle class. In fact, even though their tax rates are lower, more of the tax burden has been shifted to the rich. After the tax cut, the top 20% went from paying 81% to paying 85% of taxes, The bottom 40% went from 0% to -4% (they now receive a net subsidy).

Obama's economic policies of protectionism, higher taxes on income and capital gains, anti-business labor-union rules, and massive entitlements are already on full display Europe. Obama's proposed taxes on the rich would be the second highest in the developed world, higher than Denmark and Sweden. These economic policies have already failed under Carter and in Europe and they are sure to fail again, but at least we would be more "equal" in our misery.

Memorial Day

President Bush's comments at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day:

Today, we gather to honor those who gave everything to preserve our way of life. The men and women we honor here served for liberty. They sacrificed for liberty. And in countless acts of courage, they died for liberty. From faraway lands, they were returned to cemeteries like this one, where broken hearts received their broken bodies -- they found peace beneath the white headstones in the land they fought to defend...

It is a solemn reminder of the cost of freedom that the number of headstones in a place such as this grows with every new Memorial Day. In a world where freedom is constantly under attack and in a world where our security is challenged, the joys of liberty are often purchased by the sacrifices of those who serve a cause greater than themselves. Today we mourn and remember all who have given their lives in the line of duty. Today we lift up our hearts especially those who've fallen in the past year...

I am humbled by those who have made the ultimate sacrifice that allow a free civilization to endure and flourish. It only remains for us, the heirs of their legacy, to have the courage and the character to follow their lead, to preserve America as the greatest nation on Earth, and the last, best hope for mankind.

And Senator Obama's comments:

On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong.

I had an uncle who was ... part of the first American troops to go into Auschwitz and liberate the concentration camps.

Um, someone should tell him what we mean by "fallen heroes." Also, while Obama's uncle did serve in World War II, he did so for the United States, not the Russians who liberated Auschwitz.

About Time, President Bush

President Bush's comments to Israel's legislative body, the Knesset, have prompted strong criticism from Obama and other Democrats, who didn't like the President's critique of their proposed foreign policy. This is what Obama has labeled a "false attack" on him:

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.

We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is—the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

Apparently the President is not allowed to criticize appeasement without being accused of "attacking" Obama. The Messiah retorted: "President Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."

Unfortunately, that's not really true. The Iranian Republican Guard has been declared a terrorist organization and Iran routinely funds and trains terrorists who then kill civilians and US troops. Obama has repeatedly promised to meet with Iran. Obama said he would meet with Hugo Chavez, who has given the FARC terrorist organization $300 million. He would also meet with Kim Jong-il who tried to help the Syrians start a nuclear weapons program.

President Bush is dead on. Hamas may be taken with Obama's vision for America (his campaign said they were "flattered" by Hamas' endorsement) but I don't think Obama has any "ingenious arguments" for the other terrorists.

"Misunderestimating" Bush and the Troops

Peace and security are spreading around Iraq. US fatalities are down to 21 in the past month, almost identical to March, 2003. Michael Barone offers several lessons we should learn in NationalReview.com. One of the lessons is that "societies can more easily be transformed from the bottom up than from the top down." The Democrats have focused their latest criticisms (now that the security issues are so much improved) on the Iraqi politicians' bickering. However:

The impetus for change has come from the bottom up, from tribal sheiks in Anbar province who got tired of the violence and oppression of al Qaeda in Iraq, from Shiites and Sunnis who, once confident of the protection of American forces and of the new Iraqi military, decided to quit killing each other. They did not wait for orders from Baghdad or for legislation to be passed with all the i’s dotted and t’s crossed.

In summary:

Some of George W. Bush’s critics seem to have relished the prospect of American defeat and some refuse to acknowledge the success that has been achieved. But it appears that they have “misunderestimated” him once again, and have “misunderestimated” the competence of the American military and of free peoples working from the bottom up to transform their societies for the better. It’s something to be thankful for as the new year begins.

Bush Does Something Right

The press is in a rage over President Bush commuting Scooter Libby's prison sentence (no word on the rumors that Bush thought he was issuing a statement offering to drive Libby to prison). I believe this is the right move. Depending on the outcome of Libby's appeal, Bush may pardon him entirely. It can't hurt his approval ratings. Everyone knows that Libby did not reveal Valerie Plame's identity to the press, that was Richard Armitage, who has no connection to the White House. Libby was technically convicted of perjury, making false statements, and obstruction of justice for recalling that Tim Russert first told him about Plame's identity when it was really Dick Cheney, but the D.C. jury just wanted someone to pay for the Plame non-scandal.

Compare this action by Bush to the President Clinton's pardons (see wikipedia). He pardoned several people in exchange for payments to relatives, but most egregiously, he commuted the sentences 16 Puerto Rican terrorists. They were members of FALN, which set off 120 bombs in New York and Chicago, killing 6 and maiming dozens. Clinton's action was condemned by a vote of 95-2 in the Senate and 311-41 in the House. Why would he do this? The most plausible theory to me is that he thought it would help Hillary get the Puerto Rican vote in her New York Senate race.