Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
This is my first time posting on the Member Feed, so I hope I'm not violating any protocols. I just couldn't let this bit of red meat go unnoticed at Ricochet. Have you all read the TIME piece titled, The Counterfactual President: Obama Averted Disasters, but Getting Credit Is the Hard Part? Please get a firm grip on your reflective reality shield before you read this Medusan atrocity. At the risk of causing partial paralysis, here are a few outtakes.
In regard to the $787 billion stimulus:
"That the recovery remains soft is indisputable; that it would have been much softer or nonexistent without the stimulus turns out to be extremely disputable, even though it's an article of faith among most nonpartisan economists."
An article of faith? Sheesh, and here I thought the shift of capital from private savings and investment to public consumption had something to do with inhibiting economic growth in a meaningful way. But, I'm neither an economist nor a "nonpartisan economist", so what do I know?
In regard to Obamacare:
"His health care overhaul included serious efforts to rein in soaring costs, but they haven't kicked in yet — and when they do, they'll just make medical care somewhat less exorbitant."
Phhwahahah! "Serious effort"? Ahh - that's funny! What part of insuring more people and forcing insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions was supposed to rein in soaring costs? TIME must be referring to the health exchanges. Obviously they're not familiar with the old adage, "Government -- delivering less for more!"
I'll offer this last one as the ultimate bait.
In reference to fiscal responsibility:
He's been a paragon of fiscal responsibility compared with Bush, but he's still blamed for the megadeficits primarily created by Bush's tax cuts and the Great Recession.
Ding! Let me land the first one. This from the party which has increased the annual deficit ten-fold since the last Republican budget in 2007. This from the party which didn't bother to negotiate a budget last year, causing Republicans to have to fight for chump change "cuts" in continuing resolutions. This from the party which masterminded the housing bubble -- the party of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the CRA. This from the party of Cowboy Poetry! Is this the definition of shameless?
George Bush essentially had full-employment during his tenure, rapid economic recovery after 9/11 and reasonable deficits as a percent of GDP and Obama is "a paragon of fiscal responsibility." Really.
Read the article. Obama's friends admit his campaign slogan has gone from "Hope and Change" to "Meh. Things Could be Worse." When your political philosophy is more concerned with distribution than prosperity, this shouldn't come as a surprise. When your chief executive seems more interested in managing the decline, you shouldn't be disappointed when decline is what you get.
- Comment (15)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
This is perhaps of one the few cases in which one can actually accuse Time magazine of lying to its readers. Anyone with half a brain understands that Obama's efforts to expand the deficit far exceed those of Bush. This is a descriptive claim, not a normative claim. Again, Time is better served as toilet paper or kindling than as reading material.
Edited on Apr 4, 2011 at 6:42pmApr '11
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Is it possible that the writer of the time (deliberately not capitalized) article really believes what he has written? Thomas Sowell indicated that the news coorespondents today are woefully ignorant of basic economics, but what is worse than that is the basic voter is woefully ignorant too.
It is very possible that the average time reader will actually believe what he reads in time magazine.
Jun '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
More than forty years ago, when still in high school, I became a subscriber to Time Magazine. For thirty of those years, I looked forward to receiving it each week. In the last decade, I found that I usually just flipped through it, because each time I read an article its bias made me livid. Three years ago, I bid it adieu (though not a fond one) and used the money to subscribe to the Weekly Standard and Commentary--I already subscribed to The National Review.
Two things happened: I'm better informed and my blood pressure is much lower.
Henry Luce must be restless in his grave. His fine magazine has been turned into a big ball of blathering mush.
Edited on Apr 4, 2011 at 9:16pmSep '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Like many, this time article is written for the already saved. Nothing wrong with that, some on our side do it too. But I refuse to pay for it. Even taking the time is often too much of a cost; for example, why take time to read the idiot joe klein?
Jul '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
In order to assure the re-election of the first actual black president, whose irresponsible fiscal policies have failed not just this Regime, but every government to try them in the last century, the left's narrative must naturally adopt the counter-factual at this stage. They must lie, and lie big.
In 2008, the big story in the swing states was the youth vote. Everyone talks about the GOP that stayed home faced with a McCain-led ticket, including me, hit the issues where criticism is likelier to garner traction, after all. But the youth vote came out silly hard and went for Obama. In reward, Obama devised a healthcare reform that is a massive transfer of wealth from twenty-somethings struggling to establish themselves and the elderly, whose net assets and pensions, on average, are a fat multiple of the youth Obama wants supporting them.
This is a place where Bill Clinton blinked, and for good reason. This is the kind of fumble bumble that can lose a generation, or more, of elections. Or undermine the chain of prosperity altogether.
Time has been a weak read for a long, long time. This is just sheer, irresponsible nit wittery.
Oct '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Pure propaganda for the already convinced.
Thanks for the well written post, W.C..
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
They print garbage like this and then wonder why the number of subscribers declines. Time will soon go the way of Newsweek, which will soon go the way of all flesh.
May '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Read TIME Magazine? What, are you kidding?
May '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Thank you for reading Time so that I don't have to. When traveling off the first world beaten path and encountering nothing in English to read except Time & Newsweek - I go without. It has been many years since we parted and I feel much the better for the separation.
Sep '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
TIME Magazine has been a propaganda rag for years - and not just for all things Democrat, it is a PR brochure for the giant media corporation that owns it. In a previous Ricochet post I wrote about how I first discovered how corrupt they really are.
Oct '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
I wish Democrats made this their campaign message because it would just make it so easy to win elections.
By the way, welcome Western Chauvinist. You hit it with a great post right out of the gate. I look forward to reading more of your material going forward.
Dec '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Sisyphus:
Time has been a weak read for a long, long time. This is just sheer, irresponsible nit wittery. · Apr 5 at 10:41am
I do enjoy your way with words... "sheer, irresponsible nit wittery." I'm using that one - with attribution, of course.
Dec '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
I don't make a habit of it. Just found the link via Hot Air, I think.
Dec '10
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
What a pleasant surprise after chauffeuring 3rd graders around the natural history museum all day! Thanks to Ricochet editors for the bump and all your warm welcoming messages.
Apr '11
Re: Is Obama a Counterfactual President?
Western Chauvinist, I really enjoyed your thoughts on Time Magazine's propagandizing for The One. I was relieved to read that you only followed a link to this pathetic rag. I subscribed for years and finally realized that it was hopelessly lost. I'll look forward to more of your takes on contemporary matters. BTW. You should really give Time's letters to the editor page a bit of your bite!