iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Richard Grenell

Richard Grenell

Posted: January 27, 2010 11:18 PM

'It's Not My Fault But I'll Keep Spending'

What's Your Reaction:

It is hard to believe a President that says "...I am not interested in re-litigating the past" after he just spent 60 minutes of his First State of the Union Address re-litigating the past and blaming Bush for his problems.

It is hard to take a President seriously when he speaks 116 words describing how he wants to get rid of nuclear weapons but only 38 words uttered on the biggest violator of those principles: Iran. It is hard to understand why Obama and his Administration have wasted this past year by not increasing the sanctions on Iran and building on the Bush Administration's 3 UN resolutions sanctioning Iran for their continued illegal uranium enrichment.

It's hard to take a President seriously when he says we will take the fight to al Qaeda but then brings al Qaeda to the U.S. to be tried in an American court. It's hard to understand a President who sends the lawyers to a terrorist to tell him that he has the right to remain silent but then brags that he is tough on terrorists.

And if you thought Obama had learned a lesson from the recent Scott Brown election in Massachusetts, think again. From the moment he started his address to the Nation, Obama made it perfectly clear that all of his problems were Bush's fault.

"One year ago I took office in the midst of 2 wars, a bad economy..." blah, blah, blah. "One year later the worst of the storm has passed but the devastation remains....," Obama said in the first minutes of his speech. The problem with the President's continued excuse is that since he has taken office unemployment has surged, the deficit has skyrocketed and Washington's spending has gotten even more out of control. But to hear the President speak, his reckless spending has had nothing to do with our financial problems or highest unemployment rates in decades. But time has run out on Obama's excuses. The American people are fed up and the President's poll numbers are in the tank. The Democrats have had an overwhelming majority in the House and Senate and yet, Obama's first year has been one of the worst first year's for any President in history. For all of Obama's big talk about change, very little has been done despite the fact that his Party controls all of Washington and has the ability to make change immediately. It doesn't make sense for the President to blame Republicans for his first year failures. He has only his majority party to blame.

If you thought Obama was ready to stop spending billions of dollars we don't have, think again. Tonight, Obama went on a spending spree that would make Nancy Pelosi happy. The President's new #1 focus is now on creating jobs, he says. It's no longer health care. More than 42 minutes into his speech not a word had been uttered about health care. But there was plenty said on how to spend your tax dollars even though we are already behind on paying our bills. There was $30 billion for community banks to give to small businesses, billions for infrastructure projects to put unions to work, millions for clean energy businesses, millions for community colleges, millions for more pell grants, millions for child care credits, billions for new home owners, millions for farmers and veterans and the list continues. While a case can be made for helping each and every one of these groups, there has been no regard for who will pay for these new programs or whether now is the time to spend this money.

As Obama's speech continued, there was more blaming Bush for the problems and more spending from his Administration. But what was most shocking to watch was President Obama double down on partisanship. Obama wasn't humble or conciliatory, he was antagonistic and cocky. But for a President who promised change and has the votes in Congress to deliver it, it was a disappointing night. It was more of the same from Washington.

And then an hour into his speech the President suddenly changed his tone. It was like he suddenly remembered that the state of Massachusetts just voted for a Republican to fill Ted Kennedy's seat. President Obama became the out-reacher-in-chief. If Obama had delivered the last 20 minutes of his speech first, and cut out the political jabs from the first 60 minutes of the speech then he would have been better received.

In the end, Obama speech reminded us that he isn't leading his party or the nation. For a President starting his term with a massive majority in Congress and sky-high approval ratings, he has squandered a ton of political capital with nothing to show for it.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 216
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
03:42 PM on 01/28/2010
It seems the government only mucks things up when run by Conservatives. Why would anyone vote in a group of people to run a government they say doesn't work and whose philosophy the government doesn't work. Seems Republicans have a vested interest in making sure it DOESN'T work. So why vote them in when they are already of the idea the federal government doesn't work? If they made it work then it would prove the liberals right so seems to me the Conservatives are going to make sure the government doesn't work so they can claim they are right.

Would you hire someone to tutor your child in math when their philosophy is tutoring doesn't work?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jannsmoor
05:51 PM on 01/28/2010
I couldn't agree more. I have posted the exact same thing on numberous occasions. Nice to see someone who will post it also. We need to create a movement of enlightenment.
03:30 PM on 01/28/2010
What hyperbole! The reason the president even mentioned the last administration is because it seems that Republicans have awful memories and have obliterated these facts:

1. President Bush came in with a surplus and left with a huge deficit.
2. Bush prosecuted two wars (one through deception), and both without asking our country to sacrifice--usually wars have to be paid for by increased taxes.
3. 9/11 happened on Bush's watch!
4. The Bank rescue plan came out of the Bush Administration.

I could go on and on. Please, stop trying to change history and please quit the exaggeration--Obama did not spend 60 minutes blaming others.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
marco01
03:22 PM on 01/28/2010
LOL, this is the same guy who made this prediction back in Nov 4, 2008:

"Why Obama Will Lose Today..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-grenell/why-obama-will-lose-today_b_140948.html
lightnessandjoy
Is micro-bio a new disease?
03:19 PM on 01/28/2010
They are Bush's fault and it's very important Obama keeps that thought in the forefront. Eight years of George Bush and ruinous Republican policy-making brought our country to its financial knees. Twelve months after President Obama's election you folks are trying to place it all at his doorstep.

One other point. What is it with all you chickenhawks and your fear of bringing our enemies to justice on American soil? It's land of the free, home of the BRAVE. You've clearly stepped hard on the first clause over the past eight years, but really, your total lack of courage is pathetic.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deminmo
just looking for answers
03:15 PM on 01/28/2010
President Bush was in office for 8 years, and during that time
he didn't bother to include two wars in his budget. Maybe President
Obama hasn't lived up to hype, but he came into a mess left by
the previous administration, not one he caused, at least not
yet. Oh, forgot , President Bush began the first bailout
of Wall Street, he kept taxes low for the wealthiest not the middle
class, and the bank crisis began before President Obama took
over.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:05 PM on 01/28/2010
Neo cons:

"this darn president, he says he'll be fair, but he does nothing to change the fact that he's black"
01:49 PM on 01/28/2010
Oh and also how the Republicans still blame Clinton for 9/11.

Too bad they can't blame the end of the Clinton surpluses into deficits on the Dems because the GOP controlled Congress for Bush's entire first term and half of his second ( minus the one year when the Vermont Senator left the GOP, making the Senate a tie).

All the have to do is look how the GOP governed when they had the WH and Congress to see how they will govern in the future, all rhetoric aside.

Actually, it would be funny to see them take back Congress and have to clean up their own mess. That would be entertaining.
01:34 PM on 01/28/2010
If you were spokesman for the last four UN ambassadors then you were the mouthpiece for John Bolton who spent a bulk of his career running the arms control and disarmament agency of the State Department into the ground, driving out those employees who believed in their mission and replacing them with neo con moles who continue his work to foil any attempt at implementing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. This is largel;y responsible for the acceptance of faulty intelligence and the refusal of the Bush junta to let the UN inspectors finish their work of looking for WMD's in Iraq. This allowed Bush to invade Iraq before it became public knowledge that Saddam had no WMD's.

Do you really expect to be taken seriously with a background like that?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
HC4BO
Far-Left Socialist
01:23 PM on 01/28/2010
It's hard to believe a party that for 8 years caused a country to collapse can now say THEY have all the ideas to lead the country into recovery ... !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ganapati
Don't you mess with my Wheel
01:06 PM on 01/28/2010
Go away Republican
We voted you out, so GO AWAY already
(and while you are at it, please shut up too, we are tired of your failed slogan rhetoric)
01:06 PM on 01/28/2010
Please, sir, read Ronald Regan's first sotu speech....he blamed the dems for EVERYTHING wrong with the world and certainly all that he inherited. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
01:10 PM on 01/28/2010
Yep, and remember the GOP blaming the 2001 recession on Clinton even though they controlled Congress since 1995?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:19 PM on 01/28/2010
Thank you...

It's that old line from the right: It's OK If A Republican Does It.
01:02 PM on 01/28/2010
I'm a small business owner and since the bottom line from the Income Statement for my business has seen it's better days, I think I'm going to adopt O'Bama's strategy to see if I can get things turned around. I thought it made sense in the past to try to increase sales ("tax revenue") by reducing my prices ("taxes) which would help to produce more sales volume. It never occurred to me that the better approach was to increase my prices ("tax rates") to my best customers ("highest marginal tax bracket tax payers") and decrease my prices top my worse ("lowest marginal tax bracket tax payers"). I had thought that taking that approach would produce less revenue ("tax revenue"), as my best customers would just quit buying ("Producing tax revenue"), but O'Bama is a political genius so it must be true.

It also never occurred to me that seeing that my cash flow is tight that I should spend more rather than spend less. To cover the increased spending I would need to borrow it ("sale T bills to the Chinese"), but that must be ok as that is the approach O'Bama believes is right.

One question, If I end up with an unpaid tax debt because of not setting aside funds for taxes, is it ok to tell IRS collections that I plan on making a change to my spending budget next year so that I might be able to squeeze out that payment for that bill then?
02:59 PM on 01/28/2010
Sounds logical in a "nuanced" sort of way. However, this Obamalogic is no way to run a household budget nor a business, let alone the entire national budget. As a small businessperson, Lordhelpusall, I share your frustration. Amoungst the network of small businesspeople in our metro area, I have yet to speak to one who feels like the president has the remotest idea what he is doing. We aren't calling out for gov. intervention. We don't want more "stimulus" money thrown away. Stop strangling us with massive taxation and regulations, step back and watch how the economy flourishes. As it stands now, most of us are just trying to keep our heads above water.
lightnessandjoy
Is micro-bio a new disease?
03:39 PM on 01/28/2010
"Massive taxation?" You folks need a serious reality check. You might also support greater taxation on large corporations and the wealthy instead of shouldering their burden for them.
lightnessandjoy
Is micro-bio a new disease?
03:41 PM on 01/28/2010
PS If your comment wasn't so sad it would be funny. After eight years of massive tax cuts and considerable deregulation, I don't think anyone would use the word "flourishing" to describe the state of our economy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
03:22 PM on 01/28/2010
Let's see, ... 1:02 PM. Shouldn't you be at work?
12:47 PM on 01/28/2010
If John McCain had done the exact same things over the past year and gave the exact same speech this guy would be raving. He's not because Obama is a democrat. They stereotype him to be a big spending socialist.......is that really true??

Can you say Yankees Red Sox anyone. This isn't about action, this isn't about policy this is about hating the Vikings if I'm a Green Bay Packers fan. It's about bias.

GWB tried three conspiring terrorists in civilian courts, he set the precedent. Hypocrisy!!
12:46 PM on 01/28/2010
The continued spending must be frustrating for Republican strategists, who did their best to drain the US treasury and the entire country of its wealth before handing the wreckage off to the Democrats.

Bush 43, the worst president in history, should not simply be "blamed." He and his entire crime family should be in prison.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CindiT
12:56 PM on 01/28/2010
I agree with you 100%!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jannsmoor
12:58 PM on 01/28/2010
I agree with your sentiments entirely. However, I'm not so sure Republican strategists are all that frustrated. Their theory is to grind government to a halt and that seems to be working. By doing so, they believe they can alienate the 'independents' from the democrat's agenda to save the middle class. And oddly enough, that seems to be working also.
12:20 PM on 01/28/2010
It's hard to take the Republicans seriously when they offer tax cuts as the be-all, end-all of economic recovery and they sit on their hands when the President reminds them that he included broad tax-cuts in his stimulus legislation.

It's hard to take the Republicans seriously when they cry about deficits when the bulk of the current deficits were generated under a Republican president with the support of a Republican congress. None of these jokers were crying about deficits when the voted for Bush's tax cuts, war spending, Medicare drug program all of which were paid for by deficit spending. Remember Cheney's famous quote "Deficits don't matter". I guess they don't, unless a Democratic president increases them to try to avoid a depresssion.

It's hard to take the Republicans seriously when they criticize Obama for trying to use the criminal justice system to punish terrorists and would-be terrorists when they have used the same approach in the past (Richard Reid, Ramsey Yousef, etc.).

It's hard to take the Republicans seriously when you have several of them trying to revise history and say that 9/11 didn't happen on Bush's watch. I'm pretty sure that is an indisputable fact.

Overall it's hard to take Republicans seriously at all. The writer and other Republicans can try their revisionist history all they want. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not your own facts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CindiT
12:39 PM on 01/28/2010
You've got your first fan! Good post, dnbailey - keep on posting!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Jannsmoor
12:51 PM on 01/28/2010
I second your comments. Well said.