There are dozens of baseless charges leveled against President Obama by his legions of haters. With the presidential election fast approaching, I expect we'll be hearing many more.
True or false: Under Obama, government spending has dramatically increased. Listen to enough Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, O'Reilly, Savage, et al and you would say true, Obama is just a tax and spend big government liberal who's bankrupting the nation, right?
Wrong. According to no less than Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal, from fiscal year 2010 to the present, government spending — including the stimulus bill — has risen at just a 1.4 percent annualized rate under Obama, slower than at any time since the 1950s. Under George W. Bush, by comparison, government spending grew 8.1 percent from 2006 to 2009. Under Ronald Reagan, from 1982 to 1985, it grew by 8.7 percent.
Why do conservatives make stuff up? Can't they just sell us on all the benefits conservatism has to offer without attacking progressives with easily debunked falsehoods?
No, conservatism can't tell you what it really is. Most Americans would never vote for any candidate calling himself a conservative if the truth were more widely known and accepted because conservatism is a political ideology based on deception. There are many examples of how this deception takes place ("Obama wasn't born in America" comes to mind), but look no further than "severely conservative" Mitt Romney for proof.
In 2002, Romney was a moderate Republican governor who publicly supported a wide variety of progressive positions such as a women's right to choose abortion, gun control, gay marriage, stem cell research and global warming. He was a 55-year-old man at the time. Most 55-year-old men I know have pretty fixed views that they've held most of their adult lives.
Yet Romney would have us believe he has undergone a metamorphosis of ideological thinking, perhaps through an amazing series of epiphanies that caused him to reverse virtually all his firmly held convictions of less than a decade ago. It's simply not plausible. Sorry, but Romney is trying to deceive you. He's practicing conservatism and it's as brazenly deceptive as Obama being characterized by the right as a big spender.
Follow us on Twitter!
The 1.4% growth factor comes from an article by Rex Nutting and considers growth beginning in 2010, notwithstanding the fact that Obama was handed the keys to the White House in 2009.
Here's the rub - who was responsible for the 2009 budget? Whether you assign the 2009 budget to Bush or Obama makes a huge difference.
The 2009 budget should be assigned to Obama because the FY2009 budget was not passed by the Democratic congress until after Obama was sworn in, specifically, Obama signed the FY2009 budget on March 12, 2009. Said differently, Bush never saw the FY2009 budget.
The misleading 1.4% growth number has been thoroughly debunked.
Google "Rex Nutting", "Obama", "spending" and "growth" to begin your education.
While I view him as a free market capitalist who will help the economy, I also see him as a moderate, so I hope he will be more capable of uniting Americans in general than the current administration has been able to do. After all, while President Obama has said he is not just the president of the blue states, he has never seemed all that interested in being the president of the red ones.
But then per your column, if you are to be held up as a person speaking for the average progressive like the president, progressives seem to think almost half of the electorate--almost half of your fellow citizens (this number derived from people who voted Republican last go around)--are a dastardly bunch of liars... or incomparable rubes.
While I disagree with you strongly on these points, and I feel that "spin" is endemic of Obama economics, I will assume that you actually believe what you are saying about Republicans and are therefore presenting information in an honorable way per your viewpoint. If this is the case--if Republican views are built solely in your mind on the sands of deception--why would you, or President Obama, ever compromise with a conservative? It seems to me that puts you in an intransigent position.
It is my opinion that regardless of who wins the election, this sort of thinking needs to be reconsidered. I don't think you're evil. But how can we meet in the middle ever if you're working off the premise that I am?
Anyway, just some thoughts. Glad the MDJ prints multiple viewpoints.
Perhaps what you're trying to imply instead is that Romney is in reality closer to YOUR core values than the tea party thinks because he is more left than he appears at first glance? He actually feels like YOU do about many social issues (abortion, gun control, stem cell research), and he has only "evolved" for the sake of political expediency to win his party's nomination?
In reality, doesn't that mean you're saying he's kinda progressive? If he gets into office, he won't actually act like a conservative? After all, while he's trying to "deceive" us into thinking his politics run "right," it's clear that they don't as he's surely a moderate?
Well then. Okay. Cool. All that must please you greatly. Glad he can count on your vote in November!!! ;)
Obama is on to Romney. He's blasting Mitt's "job creator" claim this week and gaining ground.