Democratic Convention 2012

Obama DNC Speech Reactions: He Played Football and Baseball, With No Meat

|

President Barack Obama addresses the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

Associated Press
[Senior Obama adviser Robert] Gibbs says being a president is a "humbling" thing and Obama understands that "we still have a long way to go" to rebuild the economy.

Stu Bykofsky, Philadelphia Daily News
Obama's speech a hit, not a home run

Patrick Martin, World Socialist Web Site
When Obama claimed US manufacturing is on the upswing "not because our workers make lower pay" but because they're more productive, he was telling a brazen lie. The auto bailout set the pace for wage slashing throughout corporate America, and against public employees as well.

Douglas E. Schoen, Fox News
As one of the advisers in the president's circle told me immediately after the speech, it was straightforward…and pedestrian. Meaning that there was nothing new, nothing bold and nothing in Mr. Obama's acceptance speech that will be remembered much past Sunday.

Kevin Drum, Mother Jones
[Discussing Obama's one-liner, "Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning!"] That's a good riff. But it came early in the speech, and after a couple of pro forma sentences about tax cuts for millionaires (he's against them) Obama was off an entirely unrelated riff about common effort, shared responsibility, and bold, persistent experimentation. Then he was off to the car industry. Then energy. Then a throwaway line about global warming. And all of these riffs were just that: short collections of platitudes with no real meat behind them and no promise of what a second term might bring.

Todd Spangler, Detroit Free Press
Detroit's automakers played a prominent role throughout the Democratic convention, with speakers noting Obama's decision to invest billions of dollars in General Motors and Chrysler, both of which are now profitable and automakers as a whole have added 160,000 jobs since June 2009. Though government still stands to lose $19-billion or more out off the total $82-billion put into the companies, Democrats repeatedly said through the week it may have saved a million jobs nationwide.

Andrea Saul, Romney campaign spokesperson
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will deliver a new direction that jumpstarts our economy and helps the middle-class families who have been left behind under President Obama.

Spencer Ackerman, Wired
By word count, Obama devoted twice as much of his speech to national security as Romney did last week. But Obama failed to articulate an agenda for America on the world stage over the next four years.

Greg Sargent, Washington Post
He mounted a spirited, extensive defense of the safety net, and of the moral imperative of prioritizing it over more tax cuts for the rich. Core Dem constituencies — women, minorities, young voters — tend to respond strongly to messages about protecting the vulnerable. And he attacked Romney for wanting to increase defense spending — not something Dems have historically done — and crucially, he cast it as fiscally reckless.

Michael Tomasky, Daily Beast
This was the rhetorical equivalent, forgive the football metaphor, of running out the clock: Obama clearly thinks he's ahead and just doesn't need to make mistakes. But when football teams do that, it often turns out to be the biggest mistake of all, and they lose.

Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal
Four years later the shooting liberal star, as we called him then, has come down to earth. What should have been a buoyant recovery coming out of a deep recession was lackluster to start and has grown weaker. The partisanship he claimed to want to dampen has become more fierce. The middle-class incomes he sought to lift have fallen. These results aren't bad luck or the lingering effects of a crash four years ago. They flow directly from his "transforming" purposes.

Marc Anthony ?@MarcAnthony
Será un gran honor cantar nuestro himno nacional hoy en el estadio lleno de partidarios de #Obama2002 en Charlotte. #DNC2012

Georgia State Sen. Emanuel Jones (D-Decatur), DNC delegate
The president laid out exactly what he's going to do in the next four years. What excited me the most was his passion, sincerity and convictions for America and Americans.

Joe Scarborough, ?@JoeNBC
The President said nothing in his speech tonight. But he said it so much better than Mitt Romney when he said nothing in Tampa.

Advertisement

NEXT: South Africa Ends Fracking Ban

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. WSJ: “What should have been a buoyant recovery coming out of a deep recession was lackluster to start and has grown weaker.”
    _
    so the the groundwork for a world-wide “buoyant recovery” was established by the gop when they crashed the economy?

    1. It’s silly to argue policy with people who either don’t know or won’t admit that there’s an economic cycle.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_cycle

      1. Remind me again who sets spending? Senator Obama voted against all those bad things, right?

        1. In an environment where the economy is starving for credit amid a credit crunch, heaping regulation on the financial sector making it harder for people to get credit and harder for banks to give credit?

          That’s profoundly stupid.

          But that’s exactly what Obama did.

          1. I heard a short clip that said something about how great it would be “when people can’t be tricked into signing mortgages they can’t afford”. Yes, the government supports banks giving mortgages to at risk people for years, and now the banks are the problem. In same cases, Obama himself was suing banks to give mortgages to people that couldn’t afford it.

            1. Want an innovative solution?

              How ’bout passing a law prohibiting the government from bailing out banks–except for letting the FDIC reimburse depositors?

              Why wasn’t that ever even proposed?

              I don’t care who banks lend to. I don’t care about the borrowers, and I don’t care about the lenders–so long as I never have to pay for it!

              If you took out a home loan you can’t pay? You and the bank that lent to you deserve each other! Why do the rest of us have to pay?

              And I’m not just talking about me having to pay through taxes–why do I have to pay in terms of regulation? If I’m a risky borrower, why should the government prohibit me from a getting a loan–that someone wants to give me?

              And, hell, the model where you charge people higher interest rates for being risky borrowers–and make up for the defaulters by charging higher interest rates? That’s been a good business model for a long, long time–either that or the credit card industry has never been profitable.

              I wish we’d had another investment bank or two go the way of Bear and Lehman–rather than have to suffer trying to claw our way back out of the downturn becasue of Obama’s regulation. And believe it, the slow motion recovery will continue to be hamstrung until we repeal Obama’s wrongheaded regulation.

              1. I wouldn’t have proposed it because I wouldn’t have thought it was necessary. I underestimated the stupidity of the government.

                1. I understand the logic…

                  If I have to pay for your mistakes, then I get to choose what risks you take.

                  The solution to that is to make sure I never have to pay for your mistakes.

                  Hell, Obama forced people to take TARP money they didn’t want! For a long time, Obama refused to let the banks pay the TARP money back–before the regulation was in place–because that way, they might have escaped the regulation!

                  For a long time, Obama wouldn’t let the banks pay the TARP money back.

                  How screwed up is that thinking? It’s taking what I said at the top of this comment and standing it on its head. I said:

                  “If I have to pay for your mistakes, then I get to choose what risks you take.”

                  Obama said:

                  “You have to let the taxpayers pay for your mistakes; otherwise, I won’t get to choose which risks you take.”

                  He did the exact opposite of what he should have done, and it’s an excellent reason to throw him out on his ass come November. Obama may very well have good intentions, but he just doesn’t know what he’s doing–or how it continues to harm the economy.

      2. WIKI: “Despite being termed cycles, these fluctuations in economic activity do not follow a mechanical or predictable periodic pattern.”
        _
        it triez moar harder

        1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…..igure3.jpg

          Looks pretty regular to me.

          1. Not to mention the business cycle was more volitile during the Post-War Era than during the Great Moderation.

            Maybe Joe Schumpeter was on to something…

        2. it triez moar harder

          That’s exactly right. It does not follow a regular pattern.

          You cannot stop the economic cycle from making downturns.

          Regulation will not stop the economic cycle from taking downturns periodically–not regular periods, but every once in a while…

          And if Barack Obama truly believes that regulation will stop future downturns in the economic cycle from happening? Then he’s an ignoramus.

          Regulation does make it more difficult to claw our way out of an economic downturn! It does prolong economic downturns! And if Obama doesn’t recognize that–even after he’s foisted such a prolonged downturn on his with his regulation?

          Then he’s so dumb, he unqualified for a second term.

      3. Well the nameless WSJ ed writer either is one of those people or has a weak grasp of the scope and size of the cycle. To say we would have had a buoyant recovery without much steeper drops in wages, real estate prices and CPI than we have had so far is, I think, delusional. This was a misallocation at least 30 years in the making, involving four- to five-fold price increases, yet we’re still pretending a 31% drop in Case-Schiller gets us to the bottom?

      4. It’s silly to argue policy with people who either don’t know or won’t admit that there’s an economic cycle.

        It’s even sillier to argue with people who don’t know or won’t admit what causes them.

  2. How was Mumbles Menino?

    1. He informed us that Martin Luther King Jr had a sister named Martha.

  3. The president laid out exactly what he’s going to do in the next four years.

    I recall similar exactitude 4 years ago.

    While I may be a tad cynical, I find it hard to believe these journos say this shit without some kind of soul crushing shame.

    Maybe my assumptions about the dignity of the average person are too generous.

    1. How many rounds of golf will he play once he’s a lame duck? I’m guessing 4 a week.

    2. I find it hard to believe these journos say this shit without some kind of soul crushing shame.

      That wasn’t a journo, that was “Georgia State Sen. Emanuel Jones (D-Decatur), DNC delegate”. A politician, who of course have no measurable sense of shame. Not that journos are much better.

      Maybe my assumptions about the dignity of the average person are too generous.

      Yes.

      1. I was just asking a friend how these people can sleep at night. Is being a politician so important to them that they can just blatantly lie non stop like this? Do they surgically have the shame gene removed when they decide to run for office?
        As a victim of the latest Recovery Summer, maybe I can learn some interviewing techniques from these thugs.
        “In my prior position, I saved or created $4.5 million, and if you hire me I promise to provide free contraception to my female colleagues because I LOVES THE WOMENS. And oh yeah, ROADZ, TEACHERS and FIREMENS.”

  4. Obama was off an entirely unrelated riff about common effort, shared responsibility, and bold, persistent experimentation.

    More of the the same.

    Even when Obama’s going against tax cutting, deregulation, etc., he’s just offering more of the same.

    He has nothing to offer but more of the same.

    1. so obama’s “offering” another global crash?

      1. so obama’s “offering” another global crash?

        No. He’s offering 1.7% GDP growth and 8.3% unemployment.

        What part of “more of the same” don’t you understand?

        1. My bad. It’s actually 11.7% unemployment.

          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/…..its-record

        2. Mr Whipple| 9.7.12 @ 10:44AM |#

          so obama’s “offering” another global crash?

          No. He’s offering 1.7% GDP growth and 8.3% unemployment.

          erm, you ferget the fiscal cliff sequestration, which estimates put around 1% of GDP each… so, mores like -0.3% recession 2013

      2. Good point. Obama has nowhere to go but up. Which is why the economy is static.

      3. Is he offering more regulation?

        Is he offering more nationalization of industry like when he nationalized two-thirds of the American auto industry?

        Is he offering more of the same as in having the government effectively take over the healthcare system?

        There’s nothing new or innovative about regulating industry. There’s nothing new or innovative about nationalizing an industrial giant. There’s nothing new or innovative about government’s taking over something like the the healthcare system.

        It’s all more of the same.

        If you think what Obama has done over the past four years has done anything to make the economy better–then by all means, vote for more of the same. ’cause that’s exactly what we’re gonna get with another Obama term.

        We should remember that he moderated himself, too, after the Tea Party victory in the midterms. If he wins reelection? I’d be the gloves are coming off. We’re not gonna see the relatively moderate Obama anymore if he wins reelection. We’ll get the Obama circa 2008 and 2009 again–with no fear of ever having to face reelection again.

        We’re gonna get more of the same squared.

        1. From status quo plus with G. H. Bush, to status quo squared with Obama. Ain’t that a fact. Bush was a straight up Keynesian, and though Obama has not the sophistication to distinguish between rival schools of thought, he is pretty damn sure industrial planning works because, damn it, why wouldn’t it? Shouldn’t you plan ahead, and the greater the scale you do so the better the results will be? Bwahahahaha!

  5. And he attacked Romney for wanting to increase defense spending ? not something Dems have historically done ? and crucially, he cast it as fiscally reckless.

    If true, this is one of the few things he got correct. So does that mean Obama is going to decrease, or at least freeze, defense spending? Or is it more like, “I’m going to increase it, but not as much as that guy, because my increase amount is the right amount, and his amount is too much.”

    1. If the sequestration goes through, we may aqctually get a cut, and then a big rise in spending.

  6. Watch it, Tim. All these links go to sites other than reason24/7.

  7. Anyone that actually listened to the entire thing, please chime in here and set me straight as I only managed to catch a few fleeting sound bites. Did he at one point actually say something that effectively translated to, “Please re-elect me because I have no marketable skills that would enable me to do anything else,” or were my ears playing tricks on me?

    1. No, but he continually called out Mitt Romney for the same things that Republicans called him out for in 2008: lack of foreign policy experience, in bed with special interests, flip flopping on policy ideas.

      1. I heard a mention during my drive in about Obama calling out Romney for his lack of foreign policy credentials and thought “Really? From the guy who announced his presidential candidacy after 2 years in the Senate?”

        But then I remembered that while he was junior senator with no executive experience running for the presidency he was successful in attacking a sitting governor and former mayor running for the vice presidency as inexperienced.

        1. yea i gotta admit that meme was strange

        2. Uh, credentials, not experience!

          Obama has a nobel peace prize, you see.

        3. That’s what Biden was for. And now Obama’s had 4 years of the most relevant foreign policy experience imaginable. If it was a legitimate attack then it is now.

          1. That’s what Biden was for.

            Wow. Just fucking wow.

            1. Sometimes Tony even tops himself.

              1. Liberals really do beleive that Biden is a foreign policy guru. It would be cutely pathetic if it wasn’t so scary.

                Throw in the disaster that Obama’s foreign policy over the last four years and we’d be better off with someone who has none but at least displays a modicum of critical thinking ability.

            2. To be fair, that is what Biden was for – to make Obama look well-informed and competent by comparison.

              1. Fair enough – Biden makes a demented ferret on crack look well-informed and competent by comparison.

                1. Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma!

          2. And now Obama’s had 4 years of the most relevant foreign policy experience imaginable

            Yes, doubling down on the asinine COIN strategy in Afganistan, twiddling thumbs while the middle east went through a chain reaction of civil wars, another undeclared-war/intervention in Libya which we were happy to call a ‘success’ for the brave act of dropping a few bombs but then promptly ignored because our ‘help’ hasn’t really ‘helped’ particularly, drone assassinations in yemen et al…

            yes, ‘experience’ aplenty. reminds me of when I tell people I studied Italian for 3 years. Impressive! Then i tell them my grades.

      2. He’s got a point. Look what happened the last time we elected a guy with no experience, we got Obama.

        1. Go with the failure you know.

      3. After tossing the Department of State to Hillary Clinton as a consolation prize, Obama has NO room at all to knock anyone else on foreign policy experience.

        That appointment was his second major dereliction of duty as president. The first was picking that imbecile Joe Biden as the next in the line of succession.

        -jcr

        1. Joe Biden was assasination insurance.

        2. The funny thing is that Biden was supposed to be the foreign policy expert that BO needed to learn at the feet of.

    2. Don’t worry, he won’t starve. Foreigners still love him and no doubt will support him and his ears for years to come via book sales, lectures, and some bullshit elder statesman sinecure

      1. Don’t worry, he won’t starve

        I’m sure he’ll just multiply some bread and fish when he gets low on food.

        1. i prefer water into wine thank you

          1. If that is your diet it could help explain your posting history.

        2. He’s already multiplied the bread and fish lines.

          1. Oh, is THAT how the multiplier works?

      2. “How I Would Have Saved The Planet If Not For Those Meddling Republicans”, by Barack Obama.

        1. Next on Scooby Doo….

      3. Like how they loved him so much, they’d give Chicago the Olympics.

    3. The whole thing was fleeting sound bites.

  8. This was the rhetorical equivalent, forgive the football metaphor, of running out the clock: Obama clearly thinks he’s ahead and just doesn’t need to make mistakes. But when football teams do that, it often turns out to be the biggest mistake of all, and they lose.

    What?? Has Tomasky ever watched a football game in his life? Football teams in the lead who run up the gut or take a knee end up losing the game?

    1. The prevent defense is an abomination.

      1. Perhaps, but it works. TheMarketHasSpoken.

        1. I think it is the right call, even if letting the other team get that touchdown in exchange for 5 minutes of clock time is annoying as hell, but just because a lot of coaches do it doesn’t mean it’s the best long term strategy. See 2 point conversions or going for it on 4th down. Coaches aren’t all the best at math, and the second the unconventional strategy fails they’ll get way more crap than if they took the (statistically inferior) conventional route and it failed.

          1. id take brass balls to let the other team score to preserve clock

            1. It’s the other way around, for when you’re up by more than 1 touchdown. You run the prevent, knowing that they are far more likely to score on the drive than if you ran a regular defense. However, they have to burn a bunch of clock to do it because of all the short passes that result in being tackled in the middle. Now they’ve close the score gap, but they used up a ton of the time left.

              id take brass balls to let the other team score to preserve clock

              That pretty much happened in the Super Bowl.

              1. Yep it doesn’t happen every other week or anything but from time to time, you’ll see a situation that calls for it. Plus everyone probably remembers when Brian Westbrook went to a knee on the 2 yard line with a lead and daylight in front of him.

      2. But that’s not running out the clock. The issue a lot of teams get into is getting cute and throwing when the other team has no time-outs and gifting them 40 seconds.

        1. It’s how you run out the clock while your defense is on the field.

          1. Not in a close game. Prevent is if you’re up a couple of scores and want to avoid quick scores. In a close game, which for this metaphor this is, you’re going to play base defense.

            1. Not in a close game.

              Depends how much time is left.

      3. The prevent defense is an abomination.

        The prevent defense prevents you from winning. Book it.

        1. Seem to be several Easterbrook fans here.

    2. An important part of that quote might be:

      Obama clearly thinks he’s ahead

      To be fair, teams normally check the scoreboard to make sure they’re ahead before taking a knee.

    3. My senior year of high school, our football team’s coach didn’t realize how many timeouts the other team had, and he took three knees near the end of the game when we were up by a few points. The other team ended up getting the ball back and on the last play of the game, threw a 70 yard touchdown pass to win the game. It was one of those things that you literally couldn’t believe had happened, even after witnessing it with your own eyes

      1. I don’t think I saw a total of 70 yards passing in an entire year at my high school.

        1. Also that should have been filmed so it could have made it onto ESPN’s Not Top 10… (which probably didn’t exist at the time).

          1. I’m 19 so this was only two years ago. It didn’t make ESPN but it does have nearly 1.5 million views on youtube. And I guess it was actually 80 yards.

            (The squirrels won’t let me post the link. Go to youtube and search “KHS Final Play Against SLO”)

            1. Holy shit. That was better than Hail Flutie.

            2. I’m sad that the video didn’t have the 3 knees that preceded it.

              1. Our team wasn’t very good the year before and the other team had won two consecutive CIF titles (and would go on to win that year) so this would have been a huge upset. I was so pissed and in utter shock, not because I cared THAT much about hs football, but because of how absurd the whole thing was

    4. Just be happy that pinkos have finally stopped trying to establish their all-American cred by pretending to be big baseball fans. It’s progress that they’ve finally gotten around to America’s actual sport. (And don’t expect them ever to start acting like they like the NBA: The players are too entrepreneurial.)

    5. Typically, no. But once in a while….

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M…..eadowlands

  9. Joe Scarborough translation: Obama’s speech was vapid and near-disastrous, but it says NBC on my paycheck so I know what I have to say.

    1. i believe sockless top-sider joe said *BOTH* romney and obama used empty rhetoric.

        1. That’s the sound the wind makes blowing through urine’s head.

  10. But when football teams do that, it often turns out to be the biggest mistake of all, and they lose.

    This is a myth. The games where a team attempts to run out the clock and winds up losing are very memorable. When running out the clock works, nothing memorable happens (which is kind of the point). This leads to an exaggerated perception of how likely it is for running out the clock to fail.

    1. The better analogy would be “prevent defense”. He’s not on offense, and he’s just trying to not fuck up. As someone who lived through Mickey Andrew’s later years at FSU, I can tell you that the only thing the prevent defense prevents is winning.

    2. What does happen–as a Redskins fan I know it all too well–is when teams start to “run out the clock” too early.

      Switching to a conservative offensive strategy too early essentially lets the other team get off their heels and get back into the game. Joe Gibbs, however good a coach he was in other ways, was notorious for going to the ground-and-pound in the 3rd quarter and turning a runaway victory back into a squeaker or even a loss.

  11. I don’t think he thinks he is ahead and running out the clock. I don’t think he knows anything else to do or say than what he is doing.

  12. If anything Romney is running out the clock. Just keep your head down and let Obama keep doing and saying stupid and vapid shit.

  13. My takeaway from the speech was Obama bragging how much less “foreign” oil we’re using since he became president.Must be all the telecommuting to the welfare and unemployment offices. I could imagine the Norks’ leader touts how much less foreign food the people are consuming too.

      1. The greatest tragedy of the past half century has been our Juche gap! Only Great Leader Obama can reduce it!

        1. I’m not cutting my hair in the Approved Socialist Fashion, thanks.

    1. My takeaway from the speech was Obama bragging how much less “foreign” oil we’re using since he became president.

      Of course we’re using less. Have you seen the price of gas? The high unemployment aside, when gas prices go this high even those who can afford it buy less of it.

      1. Do you really think he understands supply and demand?
        If something is happening, it’s because TOP MEN in positions of authoritah made it happen.

  14. Gibbs says being a president is a ”humbling” thing

    Just wait- with any luck, he’ll find out how humbling being an EX-President is.

  15. Marc Anthony’s comment wasn’t actually about the speech. I think he was just saying that he was going to be singing the national anthem. But my espa?ol isn’t very good, so I could be wrong.

    1. and he sang it well…in anglo…this time

    2. He’s saying it was a great honor to sing our national anthem today…

  16. Obama 2012 reminds me of Obama 2008. Same style happy talk only this time the novelty has worn off.

    1. It is like he is running against the sorry record of President Romney.

      1. Apparently this is one area that he can’t evolve.

  17. When you claim the power to assassinate American citizens without due process and that pesky Constitution thing, I’m not sure how “humble” you really need to be.

    1. But he’s so humble he sometimes listens to advice on who should be assassinated.

      1. I’m sure he sometimes prays to God to only kill the right people. And whoever they’re currently surrounded by, of course.

        1. Well obviously those are the right people too. If they weren’t, why were they so close to the right people?

            1. Politics is easy when you don’t have to think of people as individuals.

  18. “Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning!”

    Spoken like an asshole who’s never had to deal with complex tax code without the benefit of insider access or had to deal with complex regulations while trying to keep a business afloat.

    1. Or someone who can’t count.

      1. Or someone who thinks “get rest and fluids and ameliorate your symptoms” isn’t often good advice for illnesses.

        That said, if the economic right had a medical quote for the economy, I think it would be the punchline “Then stop doing it!”

    2. Leftists keep talking about deregulation, yet anyone I’ve spoken to in these industries has told me that no rules were rolled back. Rather that thousands of pages were added each year.

      Which is it?

      If the financial industry was deregulated, what rules were rolled back?

      Can anyone give me any specifics?

      1. I’m sure there were some rules rolled back. At the same time that 3 others were added.

        1. If you eliminate one rule, and add three, that’s a 25% cutback from the potential four rules you could’ve had, clear deregulation. Same math they use for the federal budget.

      2. I used to work at one of the big banks, and the SOX audits alone were such a drain on us.
        This meme that Bush deregulated the banks drives me nuts.

        1. Me, too. I’m a former banking guy, and the idea that there was deregulation is a fucking joke. There were a shitload of new laws and regulations to deal with during that time. To the extent that there was some loosening of restrictions for bank holding companies and the like, the truth is that those changes weren’t taken advantage of on a large scale and had virtually nothing to do with the financial crises that occurred later on.

          1. Everyone in banking who I’ve spoken to on the subject says that every week they had a stack of new rules to comply with.

            Does deregulation mean the stack was smaller than it may have otherwise been? I don’t get it.

            Then again I’m basically an honest person, so I’ve never been good at social manipulation through half truths and outright lies.

      3. George W. Bush, the great deregulator:

        Economic regulation expanded rapidly during the Bush administration. President Bush is quoted as the biggest regulator since President Richard Nixon.[68] Bush administration increased the number of new pages in the Federal Registry, a proxy for economic regulation, from 64,438 new pages in 2001 to 78,090 in new pages in 2007, a record amount of regulation.[68] Economically significant regulations, defined as regulations which cost more than $100 million a year, increased by 70%.[68]
        Spending on regulation increased by 62% from $26.4 billion to $42.7 billion.[68]

        source

        1. I might have to bookmark this.

          1. I used to post on my local paper’s site. Whenever people start ranting about Bush’s deregulation, that cite shuts ’em up quicklike.

  19. I didn’t–and don’t plan to–watch the speech, but was it anything like this? Especially the part about giving him money?

    1. I laughed at that yesterday, especially the part about thanking the doctors that subdue Biden each night.

    2. I really though Jerry Lawler was going to come out and challenge Biden to wrestle a man for once. When does this con finally end?

      1. You know Kaufman–he never admits to the scam.

  20. And all of these riffs were just that: short collections of platitudes with no real meat behind them and no promise of what a second term might bring.

    Doesn’t this describe pretty much every campaign speech Obama has ever given?

    Patrick Martin, World Socialist Web Site
    … The auto bailout set the pace for wage slashing throughout corporate America, and against public employees as well.

    I knew socialists were stupid, but holy shit that’s WMD grade stupidity right there. We should find a way to bottle that shit and drop it onto terrorist camps.

    1. Doesn’t this describe pretty much every campaign speech Obama has ever given?

      Obama’s speeches resonated with people a lot more when he was THE anti-war candidate.

      But that’s when he was almost the lone voice in politics saying what people were thinking–after a long period when the leadership of the Democratic Party wouldn’t even speak out against the war.

      So, back then, Obama was one of the few people marketing what a lot of people already wanted to buy. He wasn’t trying to create demand out of nothing.

      But that’s what Obama’s trying to do now–create demand out of nothing. He’s got the public employee vote. He’s got the UAW vote. But outside of them?

      More of the same economic policy isn’t ever gonna sell like when he was the only viable game in town selling opposition to a war people were tired of.

      1. He’s also got the looter vote, which is why he can’t lose.

  21. Though government still stands to lose $19-billion or more out off the total $82-billion put into the companies, Democrats repeatedly said through the week it may have saved a million jobs nationwide.”

    Hey, why not say it may have created a gazillion jobs nationwide? And fed and clothed a trillion homeless gay puppies?

    1. Paul Krugman can’t fit numbers like that on a graph?

  22. The speech Obama needed to make last night should have been made after the 10 mid terms. Obama needed to pivot and work with the Republicans and subvert their reasons for being. He didn’t do that. He doubled down on stupid. Now it is too late. If he had made a speech that said something other than the banality of 2008, he would have sounded even more ridiculous than he did. That would have been the equivalent of the “But I love you baby” speech after giving America the clap.

    1. Obama: “Just give me another chance, America. I can change, I swear! I’ll take anger management and quit drinking. Just take me back, please?”

      1. America: I know he’s a bastard but I can change him!

      2. It was just booze. I didn’t mean to hit you. I found Jesus. I am a changed man. Just don’t change the locks on the doors.

        1. It’s nothing, i just walked into a door

    2. He doubled down on stupid.

      I think he dialed it back a lot after the Tea Party gave him a spanking in the midterms.

      If he gets reelected, Obama’s taking the gloves off.

      He’s gonna go full retard.

    3. Too late? I’m betting he wins re-election and fairly easy (in electoral vote terms). Never overestimate the intelligence of the American voter.
      The “buzz” today among my pro-Obama colleagues is that he made a strong case for giving him time for his policies to work and that the GOP candidates are scary. That’s the only theme the Dems have to pound on for the next 60 days – no specifics, no wonkery,
      no nuttin’. And the 10% who are still undecided will probably buy it.

      1. I reserve the option to change my mind as the facts change, but at this point my money has to be on Obama. All polling data and electoral mathematics make abundantly clear that this election, to an even greater degree than usual, is going to be determined by people who decide how to vote based upon what they see on television during the week prior. This strongly favors the incumbent, especially a liberal Democrat incumbent facing an extraordinarily lame challenger, under nearly all scenarios. I can think of only two exceptions – either of which would have to come to full flower in or about that week – an Obama-specific scandal of the caught in bed with dead woman or live man variety, or a repeat (or worse) of the 2008 economic pile-up. Neither, of course, is impossible, but the former is not particularly likely, and the latter, while inevitable, probably isn’t going to happen before the election.

  23. “When Obama claimed US manufacturing is on the upswing “not because our workers make lower pay” but because they’re more productive, he was telling a brazen lie.

    Good call, Mr. Socialist. When a worker’s output triples not because he is any more skilled or hardworking, but because a good portion of his job has been automated, it a lie to say that American workers are more productive. It would be more honest to say that American capitalists are more productive.

  24. In what universe are GM and Chrysler profitable?

    Also, the American Tax Payer getting short shifted for 20B (25% of what we fucking gave them) IS NOT OKAY ASSHOLE!!!

    1. In what universe are GM and Chrysler profitable?

      EVery liberal I know brags about how Obama has saved the auto industry.

      1. “…we reinvented a dying auto industry that’s back on top of the world.”

        Not only saved, but reinvented!

    2. They are making a profit.

      From memory, last I saw, though, GM’s profit sank by some 40% last quarter.

      Things keep going the way they’re going, and they won’t be profitable for long.

      And GM’s stock price is down some 30% or more from when they refloated it.

  25. Kaptious Kristen: I was having way too much fun at Fashion’s Night Out in Alexandria to be bothered with this fuckery. And Project Runway was on.

    1. So you actually watch the Deathtime Channel?

  26. To me, it doesn’t really even seem like he wants 4 more years of this. I think he’s playing out the string because he likes the adulation he still gets during campaign appearances, but he doesn’t like the actual job. He’s throwing out the same platitudes that have failed for the last 4 years and giving his ardent zealots enough meat that they’ll keep buying his books and paying to hear his bullshit for the rest of his life while blaming Republicans if the unemployment rate isn’t 3% by January 31st of next year. If he loses, he thinks he’ll get no blame for the past 4 years, because he gave himself an “incomplete.” Why the hell else would he have kept Biden on the ticket?

    1. I dunno. I thought he was getting sick of the job too last year, and even thought he might volunteer not to run.

      But he’s done several things that a guy who was just going through the motions wouldn’t do. Those constant emails asking for $5 are not the mark of a guy who doesn’t want to keep his job.

      1. They’re the hallmark of a guy who’s already spent more money than he has.

      2. They’re the mark of a guy who gets to keep any leftover campaign cash after the election is over. They’re also not coming from him, and I’m not sure he’s even aware of them. All the detail work is done by zealots who are still fully committed to the cause.

  27. “When a worker’s output triples not because he is any more skilled or hardworking”

    I can’t resist this, sorry. Perhaps manufacturing production has increased because of Latino immigration because they tend to be more hardworking.

  28. he likes the adulation he still gets during campaign appearances, but he doesn’t like the actual job.

    Exactly. (At least one) Somebody wrote an article saying, “Somebody should tell that guy he already HAS the job right now; maybe he should take a break from campaigning and do it” a while back.

    1. To be honest, a hardworking Obama is probably worse for the country than one spending all his time on the links. Neglect is our ally, as the priest said.

  29. I’m surprised Michael Tomaskey didn’t ejaculate all over himself.

  30. My FB feed is remarkably quiet this morning, unlike the day after Bubba’s speech.

    1. His speech was perfect, inspirational, fusing philosophy, science, and the arts in one cosmic beam of light. It is we who have failed to grasp its epoch-making significance, and it is right that we fall silent in shame

    2. Unfortunately mine isn’t. The funny thing is, it’s mostly my Iranian friends that are all aglow over The Anointed One. I’ve been biting back snapping at them that he’s just as likely (if not more so) to fuck with Iran as Romniac is.

      Also, Reason please fix the login so I don’t have to keep doing it everytime I go to a new article.

  31. Patrick Martin, World Socialist Web Site
    When Obama claimed US manufacturing is on the upswing “not because our workers make lower pay” but because they’re more productive, he was telling a brazen lie. The auto bailout set the pace for wage slashing throughout corporate America, and against public employees as well.

    When the socialists are the only ones being honest about the bailouts you know you are fucked.

  32. a hardworking Obama is probably worse for the country than one spending all his time on the links. Neglect is our ally, as the priest said.

    Except for Exhibit A of his “benign” neglect, Obamacare.

    We need him in the trenches as an inspiration to our favorite obstructionists.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.