Is Obama Doing A Terrible Job?

Let me first qualify that I am not a racist. At least I don't think I am. Also, I voted for him. I supported him over Hillary early on. I undoubtedly have some white liberal guilt, even though I'm not white. Or liberal.

But I am a blogger and a contrarian, so I must ask questions such as these: Is Obama doing a terrible job?

Let's get one thing out of the way - the idea that Obama inherited all these problems from his predecessor, George Bush. Whether or not this is true, all Presidents inherit problems from their predecessors. Bush inherited the Al Queda problem, the Iraq problem (he did not create Saddam Hussein), and the infrastructure problems in New Orleans. But we do not let Bush off the hook for how he handled these problems, despite the fact that they in many ways, were all inherited or put upon him by other outside circumstances. We should therefore not be too kind or full of excuses for Obama. Yes, he inherited an economy in shambles and troublesome insurgencies. So what? The question is how he is handling those problems.

First, and most important, the economy. In many ways, Obama has captured the worst of both worlds. He has created enough private sector uncertainty with his ambitious healthcare proposal, unclear regulatory ideas, and all but certain tax increases, that he is further killing private sector growth. His "fundamental reorganization" of how America does business and does politics is concerning for all the folks who actually know what they are doing. These are the producers and the people we need to help steer us out of recession. It gives "hope" to the people who don't know shit about how to run a business or create wealth, the wishful thinkers and the dreamers and the frauds, because hell, they think anything is better than the current situation. And for them, maybe they are right. After all, misery loves company.

On the flipside, Obama has not increased public sector growth enough to compensate for private sector loss. For that, the stimulus was too small. Working for two months as a census taker really doesn't provide any long term promise for those employed. It certainly doesn't help the economy back on track. The stimulus helped stop the bleeding. But it didn't kick-start anything in the way the New Deal public works projects (or WW2) did. We extended unemployment benefits, bailed out banks without any meaningful new regulations to prevent "too big to fail," and kept the unemployment rate hovering around 10% instead of allowing it to dip to 15%. We didn't stimulate any growth. It should have been called "the band aid."

So...what we have is the worst of both worlds - debt and no growth. This is the whole problem with the "third way" Democrats post-Clinton. They think we can have our cake and eat it to. They think there is a "third way" where everyone can be happy, the banks, the homeowners, the business owners, the unemployed, etc. They think we don't need to make hard, painful choices. They think you can be married, respectable, loved, and get blow jobs from interns. You can't. You either believe that government's fundamental job is to secure property rights and freedom and that economic growth will be driven by the free market and sensible, easy to understand regulation or you believe government's job is to promote stability and equality amongst the citizenry and wealth ought to be redistributed along "fair" guidelines. But there are pills to swallow on both options. If you believe in free markets, you must allow for pain. You must allow for chaos and lack of stability. You must accept that you will not be bailed out when you take a risk. If you believe in equality and redistribution, you must be willing to sacrifice innovation, wealth, and unfairly burden the most productive in society. You will be Europe, in short.

The same essential issue applies to how we are fighting this WOT right now. But I cannot write any more at the moment.