Patterico's Pontifications

11/14/2008

Lefties: Predict Obama’s Successes

Filed under: Obama — Patterico @ 1:24 pm



This is the flip side of this morning’s post asking what dire things conservatives predict Obama will do.

There are plenty of lefties who read this site. More than one of you has suggested that Obama will be a tremendous success.

Great. Let’s make some firm predictions, with specific time frames.

What will Obama accomplish in his first three months? His first year? His first term?

Get your predictions in now, and we’ll revisit them when the appropriate time periods roll around.

Come on: put your reputations where your mouth is. If you think he’ll do great things, then tell us what, and by when.

87 Responses to “Lefties: Predict Obama’s Successes”

  1. Unicorns
    Fairy dust
    Leprechauns
    Peace

    JD (94c827)

  2. That gal on Youtube who said she wasn’t going to have to worry about putting gas in the car or paying her mortgage – Yeah! That stuff!

    You just need to believe!

    Hope/Change ’08

    TakeFive (7c6fd5)

  3. He will continue to make me feel good about myself.

    bigcity (b0fe29)

  4. He will change our national anthem to Depeche Mode’s Personal Jesus. That is all you need to know at the moment – further bulletins as events warrant. End communication.

    Dmac (e30284)

  5. Unicorns
    Fairy dust
    Leprechauns
    Peace

    A few additions:

    Affordable Arugula
    Atonement for our sins
    Outlawing of bowling
    Sea levels lowered
    Planet healed
    Bread and Circuses for all

    Dmac (e30284)

  6. The Cubs will win the World Series.

    Roland THTG (591376)

  7. Atonement for our sins

    Not going to happen. Our founding documents were stained with the original sin of racism.

    JD (94c827)

  8. Clearly, Roland has drunk the Kool-Aid. Someone call a paramedic …

    JD (94c827)

  9. The Cubs will win the World Series.

    Now, that’s just cruel.

    Dmac (e30284)

  10. He will succeed because the people think he will (at least 7 out of 10 do) and if we feel good about the future, tomorrow is going to be one fine day. And being a good American, even though I didn’t vote for him, I am going to root for him to succeed because I could sure stand to see my 401(k) recover what it lost during the disaster of the Bush presidency.

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  11. Where’s my slice of your pie?

    Just askin’.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  12. Mayor Daley will do something to annoy him and he will sic the Treasury and Justice Departments on Daley’s Swiss bank accounts.

    nk (87c95e)

  13. I am going to root for him to succeed because I could sure stand to see my 401(k) recover what it lost during the disaster of the Bush presidency.

    Could you be more selfish? I would gladly trade my 401K losses to ensure that Baracky’s stated policy choices do not take effect.

    JD (94c827)

  14. steve, does it make sense to blame Bush first for your 401k? He’s the president, after all. You might have more luck blaming congress and even yourself for taking risks, not that I’m, any wiser.

    Funny how everyone is telling me I have to root for Obama’s success. Few told me to root for Bush’s success. Bush won a huge war that has helped tens of millions of people, and Bush withstood a monumental struggle to make it happen (against the lies of naysayers who pretended Iraq was a quagmire or an intractable civil war). Obama will not surpass that accomplishment.

    I hope Obama and Pelosi do not impose absurd socialist-light policy, but if they do, it’s in our nation’s best interest for those policies to be disastrous quickly, so we learn our lesson.

    Obama has promised NOTHING specific to any of us, so his supporters cannot predict anything specific. The policies on his campaign website were BS, and we all know it. They change with the winds.

    I agree that optimism would be very helpful for our nation, but Obama doesn’ts tand for optimism. He stands for anger at Bush, and this idea that we’re in a depression. He will continue to call these past eight years an unrecoverable disaster in order to reduce expectations. We’re not going to be better off in four years.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  15. Fruit on the table (for the chirrun)
    .
    Pie.

    cboldt (3d73dd)

  16. JD: glad to see you’re so noble and willing to sacrifice your own wallet, but not so good that you are so eager to do the same with other people’s, jobs, investments and house values. Better they suffer than see the economy recover with Obama in office, right?

    It’s not as if the GOP has a prayer of getting any of its agenda done (whatever that may consist of), the best they can hope for is to be a pain in the rear while the Democrats, who aren’t going to sit still and let the economy recover on its own, go about enacting their agenda. How good are you going to feel if, by stymieing Obama, the result is a global depression, rioting in the street, human sacrifices, and dogs and cats living together?

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  17. I’m heading out to buy some hay because soon The Messiah will get me the pony I’ve been wishing for since childhood.

    Old Coot (8a493c)

  18. In seriousness, why not simply take the items from the detractors’ list, and put them here as positives? One man’s poison is another man’s pleasure and all that.
    .
    E.g., “Higher taxes on the upper 5%” – some say “Ick!” others say “Hooray!” Similar relating to restrictive, or even prohibitive firearms regulations. Similar with mandatory community service, and so on, down the list. “They’re all good,” to somebody’s way of thinking.

    cboldt (3d73dd)

  19. Sad to see so few taking the challenge seriously. I’m not a leftist, but I travel in those circles enough to fake it:

    1) By the end of 2009, the US military presense in Iraq will be no more than 50% of what it will be when he takes office.
    2) He will improve or at least slow the decline of the economy; the DJIA will be higher at the end of 2009 than it will be when he takes office. Unemployment and jobless rates will be lower.
    3) The bottom 75% of earners will pay a smaller percentage of their income as taxes in 2010 than the bottom 75% of earners in in 2008.
    4) A higher percentage of 18-20 year old high school graduates will attend college in 2010 than in 2008.
    5) Families, on average, will spend a smaller percentage of their income on health care in 2010 than in 2008.
    6) America’s carbon footprint, per person, will be lower at the end of 2010 than it will be when he takes office.
    7) The Obamas’ new puppy will stop peeing on the Oval Office carpet by the end of 2009.
    8) The country’s literacy rate will be higher at the end of his first term than it will be when he takes office.
    9) He will strengthen America’s confidence in progressivism; the 2010 elections will increase the Democratic majority in Congress.
    10) He will weaken racial stereotypes; the 2010 elections will put at least one more black person in Congress.
    11) He will close Gitmo by the end of 2009; all detainees, except those taken on an active battlefield, will be released or tried by the end of June 2010.

    Though personally, I don’t think many of the above will actually happen, and if #2 happens it will be despite, not because, of Obama’s policies.

    roy (a1e331)

  20. In a Chris Matthews note:

    He will send tingles up my leg and everyone will “feel” better!

    ML (14488c)

  21. Magic carpets will replace cars.
    Global climate change will turn into, “Global cool beanz, we chillin’ now, homey”.
    Everyone will be an instant millionare (and a million bucks will be worth about 500 dollars).

    Miracles performed like:
    Water into Kool-Aid
    Every day will be a new day (because your memory will be erased every midnight).
    A sudden ‘plague threat’ will be instantly ‘cured’ by a magic vaccine [read mind-controlling microchip].
    Pigs will sprout wings and fly and there will be a microwaveable hot pocket invented that actually tastes good.
    Aliens will land on earth and p-a-r-t-y with us bringing gifts like the apocalypse and other fancy stuff.
    It really will rain men. Hallelujah!
    Our daily soy rations will taste just like chicken.
    The concentration–er containment comps will be downright cozy.
    The song “Cult of Personality” by Living Colour will blast out of loud speakers 24/7.

    YIPPEE!

    TwinkleToes (a109fa)

  22. 1) – Surrender to Iran.
    2) – Surrender to Russia.
    3) – Abolish the Coal industry.
    4) – Restructure the auto industry so that unions have more control and higher wages.
    5) – Pack the courts with liberals.
    6) – Recognize Hamas’s right to destroy Israel.
    7) – Screw up health care.
    8) – Protect Americans from low gas prices by adding a large gasoline tax.
    9) – Make room on Mount Rushmore by removing slave-owning Presidents.
    10) – Morph Iraq from an ally to an enemy.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  23. Better they suffer than see the economy recover with Obama in office, right?

    You mean like the lefties who prayed for our failure in wartime, so that they could get their own preferred candidate in office? Do you consider those types of actions “selfless” in your own worldly viewpoint?

    Dmac (e30284)

  24. Those Obama supporters who expect Republicans to treat Obama better than Democrats treated George Bush certainly are showing an amusing side of their character.

    SPQR (72771e)

  25. Seeing as this thread has already gone to the dogs, his biggest success, should he appoint Hillary Secretary of State, will be to never be in the same place with Biden, Pelosi and Byrd’s successor at the same time.

    nk (87c95e)

  26. Better they suffer than see the economy recover with Obama in office, right?

    There is nothing, not one thing, to suggest than any of his economic plans to raise taxes on taxpayers, capital gains, etc … will help the economy recover.

    JD (94c827)

  27. Provide plenty of jobs for ex Clintonistas so as to assure an unopposed 2012 D-Primary.

    Da'Shiznit (089453)

  28. After reflection,

    Q: His Personal Succcess? Or success he creates for us?

    Da'Shiznit (089453)

  29. Month one: Economic bailout will be extended to blue-state urban mental health workers whose BSD-suffering patients cancelled their next 8 years of appointments on election day.

    m (59c3ec)

  30. SPQR, I will certainly treat Dear Leader better than the lefties treated Chimpy HaliBu$hitler (or whatever the hell the official name was). As I wrote last week, unlike the rabid left I still love my country even when I don’t care for its leadership, and I respect the office of the Presidency even when it is occupied by a cipher.

    JVW (89c289)

  31. JVW, and that’s what I expect from you. However, I can’t see where the Obama supporters have any right to expect it.

    SPQR (72771e)

  32. He won’t spew his seed all over some intern in the Oval Office.

    kaf (b34948)

  33. Comment by steve sturm — 11/14/2008 @ 2:04 pm

    My 401K was doing just fine until Chuckie Schumer drove IndyMacBank into failure.

    Another Drew (4f04a0)

  34. 25 any, er, accident would be an act of God. Imagine the conspriracy theories and race riots. Ok, Ron Brown’s plane crashed and there were all those mysterious deaths surrounding the minions of the Clintons in the whitewater era. But onbe hasd to wonder about the law of averages. Plenty of musicians, actors and athletes die in plane accidents. Why is Air Force One considered fail safe? Do stinger missiles discriminate? I don’t consider any President irreplaceable or worthy of worship. And whatever happened to that ominous every 20 years assassination hex?

    No matter what Obama does, the press will spin it to his advantage and blame all the world’s ills on Bush, like FDR had Hoover as a scapegoat for the Great Depression even though FDR’s policies failed to ameliorate the deleterious consequences in a timely manner.

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  35. Comment by Old Coot — 11/14/2008 @ 2:26 pm

    Try the room behind door #3…
    I realize it’s full of horse-shit, but there’s got to be a pony in there somewhere.

    Another Drew (4f04a0)

  36. I respect the office of the Presidency even when it is occupied by a cipher corrupt Chicago radical.

    Fixed that for you.

    BC (78c6b6)

  37. Comment by nk — 11/14/2008 @ 2:57 pm

    I know that Bobby KKK Byrd is stepping down from his Chairmanship of Appropriations, but isn’t he keeping the gig as President Pro-Tem?

    Another Drew (4f04a0)

  38. (Cheating a bit, here, as I’m not one of the invited “Lefties.”)

    In his first term, Obama will appoint three Supreme Court justices with an average age of 53. They will end up serving for an average of 32 years.

    He will appoint over 60% as many inferior-federal-court (Court of Appeals and District Court) judges in ONE term as Bush appointed in TWO.

    Mitch (890cbf)

  39. I am not a lefty…but I’m going to give it a go anyway. He will issue at least 20 executive orders overturning 20 of Bush’s executive orders in the first 30 days.

    After the three prong attack on Israel from Hamas in Lebanon, Iran and the Palestinians, he will abandon Israel.

    He will abandon Georgia to Russia…not our fight, since Georgia is not yet a NATO member.

    At the end of his first term he will still be hunting Bin Laden and at least two other high profile AQ members for the most recent attack on the US.

    At the end of his first term, the Dow will be under 5000 and unemployment will be in double figures. Private sector employment will have a net decrease.

    Honestly, I guess this is the wrong place to put this, but I don’t see anything positive that is going to occur. Someone help me here!

    rls (14b9d3)

  40. #38. Who are the three vacancies going to be? I’m not as worried about this in his first term as I don’t think any of the Constructionist Justices are going to be retiring soon.

    rls (14b9d3)

  41. Biden’s a leftie, right? O.k., then:

    Within the first six months, Obama is going to respond to an international crisis–generated maybe from the Middle East, the sub-continent, Russia–and his decisions will be tough, and it will not be initially apparent to his supporters that the decisions are right.

    “Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he’s gonna have to make some really tough – I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. . . . And he’s gonna need help. . . . Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they’re made if they work, then they weren’t viewed as a crisis. . . . So there’s gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia’s newly-emboldened position because they’re floating in a sea of oil.”

    m (59c3ec)

  42. I don’t know if he will accomplish all of this in the first 100 days, but here’s my bet on what he proposes, and some guesses on how it comes out of Congress:

    Taxes: Will raise top marginal tax rate about 5%, affecting top 5% of incomes. Will raise the FICA cut off limit. Will adjust the estate tax, probably immediately to the $1,000,000 exemption level/55% rate it is currently scheduled to hit in 2011. Congress will pass all this.

    Economic stimulus: Will extend unemployment benefits. Will announce a package of grants to States and local governments to avoid a cut in essential local services due to local level revenue crunches. Will announce additional bail-outs of the current Bush model to critical financial industries as they come up, but not the auto industry, and those bail-outs will include taking equity stakes that may eventually be redeemed by the involved companies so the taxpayers eventually break even or come out ahead. This will all pass.

    Iraq: Timetable for withdrawal announced, in agreement with Iraqi leaders, and treaty passed by both legislatures and signed by both executives in first 100 days. Significant but not total withdrawal by end of 2009. Nothing significant with Iran except perhaps mid-level talks.

    Afghanistan: Announcement of “surge” to increase commitment there. Congress will agree to it and find funding in a military funding bill that otherwise modifies cuts a modest amount (more like 10% than Barney Frank’s 25%) mostly targeted to cuts in development and maintenance of big, high tech systems we aren’t currently using.

    Energy: Will announce funding for alternative energy sources like wind and solar. Likely to announce an “Energy Czar” to coordinate this between Energy, Interior, EPA, and other agencies. Won’t open up off-shore or North Shore drilling or otherwise please the “drill baby drill” crowd. I expect this area to get a lot of Congressional meddling and modification (especially bullshit from the corn growing states to keep in biofuel subsidies) so that it might not be a 100 days law, but something will eventually pass.

    Health Care: He will announce a bold vision to modify the system and announce a commission or committee to look into it, but I don’t see any law passing even in his first year, unless the economy improves much more dramatically than I expect. He will seek an immediate vote on something close to the SCHIP child health care law that Bush vetoed, and it will pass and he’ll sign it.

    Labor: The Employee Free Choice Act (card checks) will pass and be signed by Obama in first 100 days.

    Embryonic stem cell research: Will allow federal funding, will narrowly pass Congress.

    Bush Executive Orders: Certainty that he will modify or revoke a bunch of them.

    Detention of foreign war on terror suspects: Will announce closure of Guantanemo prison, moving prisoners to some continental US base. Will stop practice of extraordinary rendition to third country torturers. Will abolish torture in all cases, and repudiate or modify any executive orders or memos authorizing torture. Will allow habeas corpus hearings for anyone in US custody. Probably won’t abolish military tribunals, but will require them to apply due process in a way that more closely resembles US criminal court system.

    General reversal of Bush expansion of executive power and constriction of privacy rights: Will announce disagreement with concept of unitary presidency and the extension of executive privilege over the wide scope of actions of executive branch claimed by Bush. Will announce he disagrees with concept of signing statements amending or modifying congressional laws. Will pledge to amend FISA and similar laws that allow surveillance of Americans without judicial or congressional committee oversight. Some of this will be done by executive orders within first 100 days, rest will be done by legislation that won’t be done in first 100 days as Congress mostly focuses on economy.

    Global warming: will call for some sort of new international conference directed toward crafing a treaty of the Kyoto type. Won’t be done in first 100 days.

    Other: Won’t make any move to reinstate Fairness Doctrine. Won’t institute draft, civilian or military. Will acquire a puppy.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  43. (I’m not really a member of the leftist illuminati, I just play one on Patterico)

    Like another poster said, everything that goes wrong in Obama’s first year of presidency will be blamed on G.W. and the liberal MSM will give him a free pass.

    Jeff (337860)

  44. Iraq: Timetable for withdrawal announced, in agreement with Iraqi leaders,

    Too bad that President Bush and Maliki have already reached an agreement. But I have no doubt that Baracky will take credit for President Bush’s win.

    JD (94c827)

  45. If Aplomb is right, we are fucked.

    JD (94c827)

  46. JD 44: but unless I missed it, do we have a treaty? I’m thinking Obama will get a treaty from the executive and legislature of both countries that removes the wiggle room from both sides, and establishes US basing rights and commitment to Iraqi security going forward while at the same time requiring a significant draw down of troops, not the open ended and modifiable schedule currently in place.

    JD 45: heh, we’ll see. Reviewing my post I think there’s way too much to expect Obama to actually get done in 100 days, but I do think that’s where he’s going in the first year and what he will be working on. And one man’s fucked is another man’s thrill that the last eight years are finally over.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  47. I would gladly trade my 401K losses to ensure that Baracky’s stated policy choices do not take effect.
    Comment by JD — 11/14/2008 @ 2:12 pm

    There is nothing, not one thing, to suggest than any of his economic plans to raise taxes on taxpayers, capital gains, etc … will help the economy recover.
    Comment by JD — 11/14/2008 @ 3:06 pm

    Dit-TO. On both counts.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  48. By midterms, some version of BHO’s health care plan. >50% approval ratings, and >50% thinking America is on the right track.

    jpe (5320bf)

  49. Like another poster said, everything that goes wrong in Obama’s first year of presidency will be blamed on G.W. and the liberal MSM will give him a free pass.

    Conservatives blamed everything bad that happened on W’s watch on Clinton. They did so at least into his 6th year.

    So I’m not buying your faux-outrage.

    jpe (5320bf)

  50. Aplomb in #46 is a perfect example of how Baracky and his supporters will try to take credit for Bush’s win. If they can bring themselves to call it a win. At another site, sniffles is hoping that the best we can do is a tie, and Baracky walking away at a tie should count as a win.

    JD (94c827)

  51. I thought Sniffy was banned at every site it had been posting on previously.

    Dmac (e30284)

  52. Dmac – It was banned there previously, under multiple names. Sniffles was a new one.

    JD (94c827)

  53. steve sturm wrote:

    He will succeed because the people think he will (at least 7 out of 10 do) and if we feel good about the future, tomorrow is going to be one fine day.

    OK, let’s count ’em down…

    Harmonic convergence-type wishful thinking … Check.

    And being a good American, even though I didn’t vote for him, I am going to root for him to succeed

    “Good American” mentality eerily reminiscent of a previous error era … Check.

    because I could sure stand to see my 401(k) recover what it lost during the disaster of the Bush presidency.

    Focusing on one’s own pocketbook rather than the dangers inherent when a charismatic leader promises to “fundamentally transform” the nation … *sigh* Check.

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  54. In the first year:
    His changes to the tax code will be enacted in some form that reflects congressional fingers in the pie.
    He will announce relatively ambitious programs on health care and climate change, but only push the most modest parts through initially because of the climate.
    Will bail out the auto companies and anyone else the unions tell him to.
    Will withdraw large amounts of troops from Iraq and inject large amounts of troops into Aghanistan.
    Will make an Israeli Palestinian peace process the focus of US Mideast policy again. At some point before 2012 he will realize that the Palestinians aren’t interested in peace and never have been, and will quietly abandon the whole charade, but not before Hamas and Fatah have been strengthened again.
    Preside over an amnesty program and liberalized immigration policies.
    Strengthen US positions and interests in Latin America, and leave Chavez and Co. gravely weakened, partly because of his immigration program, partly because, as the UnBush, Chavez and Co. won’t be able to depict the US as the villian of the last few years, and partly because of the failures of Chavezismo.
    Anything more than that I wouldn’t feel safe in predicting, because it would require predicting how various other players of dubious rationality and interests (the mullahs of Iran, Putin, whoever runs Korea, etc.)will act.

    kishnevi (feba14)

  55. Obama and his congress will move repeal the 22nd amendment since term limits should only apply to Presidents but certainly not The Messiah. I mean, if in fact, “We are the moment we have been waiting for,” then why cut it short, so to speak.

    PC14 (82e46c)

  56. Oh, and one thing he won’t do is abandon Bush’s theory of the unitary executive. He may make a show of it on the points that outrage libertarians the most, but he’ll keep the substance.

    kishnevi (feba14)

  57. He will succeed in losing the war in Iraq after it has been won. Then he will move on to Afghanistan where he will find that the Afghan people don’t like cowards and losers, and that the American military don’t fight as hard when they consider the CIC a coward and part of the enemy. He has pre dicked himself on the WOT.

    Now that he has been proven a liar, no foreign leader can possibly trust him in any way. His word is no good. Cooperate with him and end up getting screwed. It’ll be fun hearing any leader with a brain respond ‘well maybe’ to all of his proposals.

    Scrapiron (c36902)

  58. We know Barack can walk on water,
    Our First Lady couldn’t be hotter
    But I think that I see
    A tax raise for me
    And my savings will all go for naughter

    The Limerick Avenger (556f76)

  59. It seems to me that
    Barack will raise our taxes
    Hold on to wallet

    The Haiku Avenger (556f76)

  60. Allow Mexico to complete its annexation of America.

    Register 30 million illegal aliens in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Indiana, Nevada and North Carolina assuring a Democrat President for the next 50 years.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  61. #7

    Atonement for our sins

    Not going to happen. Our founding documents were stained with the original sin of racism.

    Comment by JD — 11/14/2008 @ 1:50 pm

    One problem with the analogy — original sin was always a sin. Slavery was acceptable throughout history.

    Projecting modern morality on the interpretation of historical events is perverting our understanding of history.

    LifeTrek (d258cb)

  62. LifeTrek – I understand that. I was using Baracky’s words.

    JD (94c827)

  63. “I think he will damage this country with bad policies.” He’ll raise taxes and appoint rotten judges. He will weaken our fight against terror. At times, he will use shady political tactics to achieve all sorts of wrongheaded, far-left goals. Pretty much what any Democrat would do as President.

    Well, first, I would like some more specificity from Patterico. Take the topic of taxes, for instance. It is indeed a pretty good bet that Obama will raise taxes on upper-income people (although maybe not right away). Am I supposed to take as given that in doing so, he will “damage this country” with this “bad policy”? Or is this a firm prediction that various numbers measuring the economic health of the country (e.g. unemployment rate, GDP growth, deficit as a % of GDP, etc.) will have worsened a couple of years after the hike on upper-income people is passed?

    Patterico describes this as “pretty much what any Democrat would do as President”. Clinton did indeed raise taxes on upper-income people in 1993. Am I to understand that it’s clear-cut (based on hard numbers) that in doing so, he damaged the country? I want to know, because I think I’m going to have a hard time coming to an agreement on what constitutes a meaningful, testable prediction about the consequences of tax policy with someone who contends that it’s obvious that Clinton’s tax hike damaged the country.

    Foo Bar (03f778)

  64. Actually, I think Clinton’s tax hikes worked out pretty well, and he was the best president for the economy in the last few decades.

    Also, were it not for the recession, I wouldn’t have a huge problem with raising taxes on upper-income people. I’d prefer to cut spending and taxes, but since we seem hellbent on spending like there’s no tomorrow, we might as well pay for it.

    Since we’re heading into a deep recession, however, I think jacking up taxes on upper-income people is a bad policy that will cause the recession to last longer than it otherwise would.

    It will be impossible to resolve a debate like that, however, since people still argue over the effect of various tax measures in the last several presidencies.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  65. Comment by Foo Bar — 11/15/2008 @ 9:35 am

    When you raise taxes on the “investment class” (the rich), you depress investment, which depresses economic activity.
    The first two years of the Clinton Administration were marked by those tax increases, and a stagnant GDP.
    The fabled Clinton Economic Surge, was instigated by the GOP Congress elected in 11/94, which pared back discretionary spending, and reduced taxes on investment (capital gains). This brought about the growth in the GDP, and an explosion in tax revenues to the gov’t, allowing WJC to have the lowest budget deficit in 40-years, or more, in his last term (IIRC, FY-99 or FY-2M) of just $16B!

    Of course, he squandered a good thing when he let the DoJ go after MS. When they announced the indictment in April, ’00, the NYSE and the NASDAQ promptly started to tank, as the dot-com bubble burst.

    Another Drew (bb1716)

  66. Patterico #64,

    The biggest overall tax hike in my life was by Reagan, in 1986, when capital gains and depreciation of assets became taxed as ordinary income. Although the tax rate on ordinary income had already been lowered by him, he greatly broadened the tax base.

    Also, I’m inclined to think that part of the boost in the economy under Clinton was the changing of the way $100.00 bills looked. People working in the underground economy took their money out of the mattress and spent it or found ways to invest it. What do you think?

    nk (87c95e)

  67. and he was the best president for the economy in the last few decades.

    …thanks to the dot-com bubble and all the synergy stirred up by the public investing in high-tech stocks (and the public’s awareness thereof) based on the assumption that one could rather easily become an overnight millionaire.

    In general, and regardless of one’s politics, nothing strikes me as more simpleminded (if not outright laughably superstitious—similar to a baseball player on a streak always wearing the same pair of underwear or spitting a certain way) than to assume that some politician sitting in the White House can have such profound impact on the nation’s, and, in turn, the world’s economy that fortunes or failures are dependent on that one individual. That assumption, of course, comes with the asterisk that the politician in question is not fanatical or deranged like a Hugo Chavez or Benito Mussolini.

    Mark (411533)

  68. He has already screwed up two foreign policy matters and he isn’t even president. He neglected to call India when he was making his 15 calls to important allies. Second, he has lied by telling Poland one thing and Russia another pertaining to the missile defense installations. Not a good start.

    Mike K (2a8114)

  69. … and he was the best president for the economy in the last few decades.

    Clinton’s economy benefited from an unprecedented expansion of credit card debt in the 1990s, a problem that could ultimately rival the mortgage crisis in severity. I don’t blame Clinton for this problem — Congress passed the laws that loosened consumer credit and American consumers used the credit cards — but the explosion of consumer credit is what jolted the Clinton economy, not his economic policies.

    DRJ (a50047)

  70. Aplomb:

    And one man’s fucked is another man’s thrill that the last eight years are finally over.

    Amen, to that Aplomb. I think you’re the closest yet to what an Obama presidency is going to accomplish and it’s a beautiful thing, indeed.

    I was hesitant to enumerate the tangible real-world goals and accomplishments an Obama administration would bring not because I’m afraid of being wrong, but that I think there’s something deeper, more profound and vastly more interesting going on here. Not so much post-racial as post-identity.

    There is going to be a focus on the collective, but it’s not going to be some the Maoist wet-ream of the right and will have nothing to do with subsuming of individuality and identity for the “greater good” or the “herd” or whatever you Ayn Rand jokers think of it as. It’s going to be an empowered “bottom-up,” pluralistic model that feeds off of and celebrates individual choices and autonomy, above even some sort of cultural identity, simply because cultural identity is so blurred now in most cases.

    And no, the two-thousand-teens(tm.), won’t be a replay of the sixties or the seventies and Obama won’t turn out to be Carter or Clinton, or any of the old-school democratic stereotypes the Right tried to paint him as before the election -and stridently continues to even now, with increasing desperation. It will be informed by those elements, as well as the Republican culture good and bad, of the last 30 years, this is unique to this time alone and comparable to more intense periods in this country’s history only in it’s significance.

    The next couple of years are going to be hard ones, but they’re also going to be exhilarating. There’s already been and will continue to be a release of energy and optimism, and intellectual capital, that’s going to be nothing short of astonishing. It will take a while for the results to show, but there’s going to be a renewed emphasis on education, technology and American innovation and a retooled internationalist American identity that’s going to be the envy and goal of nations all over the world.\

    It’s already a part of the culture of some of the best companies in the country: “Marxist” fly-by-night operations like IBM and Johnson & Johnson. Still working on understanding it better, but this is a good article by Bill George from Harvard Business School in BusinessWeek that helped me to synthesize these ideas.

    Barack Obama: A Leader for the ‘We’ Generation

    *Puts away the crystal ball for the day.*

    Peter (e70d1c)

  71. Peter,

    You would have loved the ’60s. It was very existential.

    Come to think of it, Obama would have loved it, too. Maybe that’s what he sees in Ayers.

    DRJ (a50047)

  72. The first two years of the Clinton Administration were marked by those tax increases, and a stagnant GDP.

    This is false. The real GDP growth rate in 1993 and 1994 was 2.7% and 4.0%. That’s slightly higher than the growth rates of 2.5% and 3.7% for 1995 and 1996, the 2 years following Republican takeover of Congress. The 4.0% growth rate for 1994 is also higher than for any year of GWB’s presidency. In any case, it’s not as only the first 2 years of Clinton’s presidency were “marked” by the tax increase. The income tax increase stayed in place for the entirety of his two terms.

    The fabled Clinton Economic Surge, was instigated by the GOP Congress elected in 11/94, which pared back discretionary spending, and reduced taxes on investment (capital gains)

    The capital gains cut (which I didn’t have a big problem with) didn’t pass until 1997. By that time, we had already had 4 and a half years of robust GDP growth, the unemployment rate had fallen from 7.3% to 4.9%, and the budget deficit had fallen from 4.7% of GDP in 1992 to 0.3% of GDP in 1997 (see pages 25 and 26 in the doc; page 30 in the pdf viewer). Also, spending on “human resources” (i.e. most of non-defense discretionary spending) was pretty stable at around 12.5% of GDP from 1993 to 1997 (i.e. before and after the GOP takeover). See pages 52 and 53 in the last link (56 and 57 in the pdf viewer). It did come down a little in the last few years of Clinton’s presidency as spending did not keep up with growth at the end of the boom.

    Foo Bar (03f778)

  73. Comment by Foo Bar — 11/15/2008 @ 10:55 am

    Well then, if I am so wrong in my memories of that time during which I struggled to maintain my small business, and everything was so fabulous, you will be happy when BHO replicates the economic policies that WJC instituted in ’93 won’t you?

    That being said, how does raising taxes into a recession not aggravate the severity of that recession?
    What economic policies has BHO advocated that will short-circuit the “Most severe economic conditions since the Great Depression”?
    Or, like that Dem icon FDR, will his policies actually prolong and worsen the recession into another iteration of that Great Depression?

    BTW, I remarked that the Gingrich Congress put controls on “discretionary” spending, a term that does not include entitlements, or as you label it, human resources. It was the walking-away from those controls that brought us the ear-mark scandals of the last few years.

    The only way to get overall Congressional spending under control in the future will be the institution of zero-based budgeting, and ending the madness of base-line budgeting.

    Another Drew (bb1716)

  74. Re: Comment by Aplomb — 11/14/2008 @ 4:20 pm

    Taxes: Will raise top marginal tax rate about 5%, affecting top 5% of incomes. [Try 10%, and note that a significant # of small businesses will be affected; for instance, the thousands of restaurant franchisees in this country.] Will raise the FICA cut off limit. [And will raise the amount that is deducted from everyone’s pay.] Will adjust the estate tax, probably immediately to the $1,000,000 exemption level/55% rate it is currently scheduled to hit in 2011. Congress will pass all this. [And that’s a good thing, is it?]

    Economic stimulus: Will extend unemployment benefits. [Because you know that nothing stimulates the economy more than paying people not to work — for a longer period of time.] Will announce a package of grants to States and local governments to avoid a cut in essential local services due to local level revenue crunches. [Well, then maybe the biggest crybaby looking for a handout, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon (a Democrat — shocka!) will become content, safely suckling at the enormous teat of his nanny-state.] Will announce additional bail-outs of the current Bush model to critical financial industries as they come up, but not the auto industry, and those bail-outs will include taking equity stakes that may eventually be redeemed by the involved companies so the taxpayers eventually break even or come out ahead. This will all pass. [Socialism 101: the state takes control of major businesses “for the good of the people”.]

    Iraq: Timetable for withdrawal announced, in agreement with Iraqi leaders, and treaty passed by both legislatures and signed by both executives in first 100 days. [Timetable for running away — got it. And by “legislature” you mean the Senate, right? I would be truly shocked (sarc.) to discover that you had not read the Constitution.] Significant but not total withdrawal by end of 2009. Nothing significant with Iran except perhaps mid-level talks. [No progress on Iran . . . this is an accomplishment?]

    Afghanistan: Announcement of “surge” to increase commitment there. [Don’t put it in quotes; just man-up and admit that McCain was right.] Congress will agree to it and find funding in a military funding bill that otherwise modifies cuts a modest amount (more like 10% than Barney Frank’s 25%) mostly targeted to cuts in development and maintenance of big, high tech systems we aren’t currently using. [And God forbid that instead of that idea we just start using those high-tech systems.]

    Energy: Will announce funding for alternative energy sources like wind and solar. [Funding = subsidies. And even T. Boone has backed off of wind-power. How about ‘funding’ sources that work, like nuclear?] Likely to announce an “Energy Czar” to coordinate this between Energy, Interior, EPA, and other agencies. [Likely? Any chance to increase the size of the bureaucracy he will take. ANY!] Won’t open up off-shore or North Shore drilling or otherwise please the “drill baby drill” crowd. [Once again, this is an accomplishment? Well, given how the Pelosi/Reid Congress has ‘succeeded’ at doing nothing for the past 2 years . . .] I expect this area to get a lot of Congressional meddling and modification (especially bullshit from the corn growing states to keep in biofuel subsidies) so that it might not be a 100 days law, but something will eventually pass. [Another area where McCain was right, and Obama WILL cave on those subsidies (Hell! He voted for them in the most recent farm bill.)]

    Health Care: He will announce a bold vision to modify the system and announce a commission or committee to look into it, but I don’t see any law passing even in his first year, unless the economy improves much more dramatically than I expect. [Unfortunately — for the country — you are wrong on this one. It will be one of the first things passed.] He will seek an immediate vote on something close to the SCHIP child health care law that Bush vetoed, and it will pass and he’ll sign it. [And the SCHIP spin continues.]

    Labor: The Employee Free Choice Act (card checks) will pass and be signed by Obama in first 100 days. [The elimination of secret ballot voting; how democratic of him. Let intimidation and coercion rein!]

    Embryonic stem cell research: Will allow federal funding, will narrowly pass Congress. [Not even an idealogical issue for him. If there’s more gov’t spending involved, he’s for it.]

    Bush Executive Orders: Certainty that he will modify or revoke a bunch of them. [Don’t forget all of the new ones that will be uniquely his own!]

    Detention of foreign war on terror suspects: Will announce closure of Guantanemo prison, [Will he make the name-change first?] moving prisoners to some continental US base. [Not a prison? Who’s going to look after them, MP’s?] Will stop practice of extraordinary rendition to third country torturers. [Will stop obtaining useful intelligence, got it.] Will abolish torture in all cases, and repudiate or modify any executive orders or memos authorizing torture. [Pretty sure that’s already been done, binky.] Will allow habeas corpus hearings for anyone in US custody. [Treat non-citizens like citizens; brilliant!] Probably won’t abolish military tribunals, but will require them to apply due process in a way that more closely resembles US criminal court system. [Isn’t allowed to abolish military tribunals. Seriously, it’s only a few pages long; take some time to read it someday.]

    General reversal of Bush expansion of executive power and constriction of privacy rights: Will announce disagreement with concept of unitary presidency and the extension of executive privilege over the wide scope of actions of executive branch claimed by Bush. [BULL-SHIT! He will not reverse the so-called “expansion of executive power” one iota. As for “privacy rights”, other than doing everything within his power to preserve the right of a mother to privately kill her baby, we will see.] Will announce he disagrees with concept of signing statements amending or modifying congressional laws. [Hahahahahahahaha! LMFAO!!! . . . NOT!] Will pledge to amend FISA and similar laws that allow surveillance of Americans without judicial or congressional committee oversight. [‘Amend’ it to what, not exist anymore?] Some of this will be done by executive orders within first 100 days, rest will be done by legislation that won’t be done in first 100 days as Congress mostly focuses on economy.

    Global warming: will call for some sort of new international conference directed toward crafing a treaty of the Kyoto type. Won’t be done in first 100 days. [He won’t simply sign the Kyoto Treaty himself? . . . You’re right; doing that would be too simple and wouldn’t waste enough of the people’s money.]

    Other: Won’t make any move to reinstate Fairness Doctrine. [No. Congress will do it and he will sign it. Less blood on his hands that way.] Won’t institute draft, civilian or military. [You don’t call “community service in exchange for college tuition” a draft?] Will acquire a puppy. [I don’t know. You might be going out on a limb with that one (you also might very well be WRONG, in that the puppy could arrive as a Xmas present & therefore would NOT be an accomplishment of his first term — leave it to a lib to fuck up a ‘gimme’)]

    Icy Truth (84d054)

  75. “There is going to be a focus on the collective”

    “It’s going to be an empowered “bottom-up,” pluralistic model that feeds off of and celebrates individual choices and autonomy”

    Peter – I’m having a hard time reconciling your statements, but that’s not unusual given your penchant for contradiction.

    Is mandatory community service a celebration of autonomy and individual choice or is that part of the collective thingee you are talking about that doesn’t subsume the individual?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  76. Peter meant to write “automatism”.

    Icy Truth (aedb2f)

  77. 1. Peace, bread, and roses (before he lifts his hand off of the Bible)

    2. Adding seven new states to the Union (oh, wait… he already did that).

    3. Placing our gains in Iraq in jeopardy (sometime soon).

    Pigilito (4ad4a7)

  78. Obama achieves peace in the Middle East by reducing Israel to its pre-1948 borders.

    Roy Mustang (ad5f36)

  79. The hilarious part of Clinton’s claims for his administration’s economic performance is that he’d claim credit for more months of economic expansion than he’d actually been in office.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  80. # 71

    Peter,

    You would have loved the ’60s. It was very existential.

    Come to think of it, Obama would have loved it, too. Maybe that’s what he sees in Ayers.

    Comment by DRJ — 11/15/2008 @ 10:53 am

    Drj, For such a nice smart person, I’m sometimes taken aback by the simplistic party flag waving you do. I’m sure it seems the same with me too, but that was a bit of a cheap shot about Ayers, no?

    I think the sixties were good and horrible in equal measure. Great art, great music, some great ideals put forth, but the country was no where near ready and ultimately it mostly endced up being a hedonistic, superficial mindf*ck.

    Ayers and his ilk were the worst aspect of it in that they thought they were revolutionaries, but they were simply only entitled and spoiled young consumers who couldn’t separate the cerebral from the real. Or cause from effect. And even Ayers himself, has admitted he was a narcissistic idiot back then and he’s dedicated himself to being a responsible citizen, regardless of what he should’ve gotten in terms of jail time etc….people are allowed to change and allowed to grow and redeem themselves, I would hope.

    No, Obama does not romanticize the Sixties, at least in any sort of real way, maybe in an ironic manner, as a lot of people do and you can see that from the way he lives his life.

    Daley, collective is the wrong word for me to use up above. I should have wrote collaborative.

    Anyhow, what I wrote is a sort of not so deep brainstorming thing, although I think there’s something to it.

    Guess we’ll just have to see what the future brings.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  81. and you can see that from the way he lives his life.*

    *Meaning, his values are very practical and grounded.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  82. Peter,

    Ayers hasn’t rejected what he did in the 60s, and Obama hasn’t rejected Ayers.

    DRJ (a50047)

  83. DRJ, details … details.

    SPQR (72771e)

  84. Pater,

    Anyway, my point wasn’t flag-waving. (I’m not even sure what you mean by that in this context.) My point is that the 60’s were very existential — everyone wanted to get in touch with their inner feelings and find the full meaning and purpose in their lives. Ayers hasn’t seemed to move beyond that, and Obama’s musings in his books and soliloquies share that feature.

    Feel free to disagree but Ayers and Obama remind me of real people I actually knew in the 60’s and 70’s who remain mired in that mindset.

    DRJ (a50047)

  85. There are two sets of people that firmly believe that the 60’s were of great value:
    Those that died from their overuse of pharmaceutical products and were not able to mature;
    Those that only experience the 60’s vicariously through the writings of others and have no idea of the nihilism underlying the “movement”.

    Another Drew (a9bf4b)

  86. Ayers hasn’t seemed to move beyond that, and Obama’s musings in his books and soliloquies share that feature.

    1. Ayers has had nothing to do with bombs in decades and he has admitted he was wrong and a narcissist.

    2. Obama and Ayers cannot be mentioned in the same breath except as a cheap political smear, or the fact that they live in the same Chicago neighborhood, taught at the same university and worked on an educational non-profit together. This is considered by no one a serious criteria by which to make a simplistic one to one parallel between the character of two entirely different individuals, from different economic backgrounds, different times and different cultures and ethnicities.

    And that is what I mean by the “flag-waving.” Now that the election is over is it not time to separate the BS from the truth? John McCain has, no? Why is Ayers even still an issue.

    63 millions people have spoken and given Obama a huge and decisive landslide win.

    What you call Obama’s “musings,” allowed him to reconcile contradictions in his background (American, Kenyan, Black, White, Poverty, Privilege) that some people never get beyond. He’s been able to take those contradictions and build from it a substance and an authenticity and truth that allowed him to overcome Hillary Clinton and John McCain and everything they could possibly throw at him and then some.

    If that’s some sort of silly sixties musing or getting in touch with inner feelings and find[ing] the full meaning and purpose in their lives
    then sign me up.

    Socrates wasn’t exactly some hippy dippy flower child faux-revolutionary narcissist when he wrote in Plato’s Republic:

    The unexamined life is not worth living.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  87. Naval-Gazing Alert!

    Another Drew (a9bf4b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1120 secs.