« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Barack Obama Throws Bill Clinton Under the Bus

Historically when the left takes power in a country they begin to rewrite their history. Barack Obama, a quintessential leftist, has started doing that in the run up to his re-election. In his speech in Kansas last week, Obama claimed that at no time in our history had we ever spurred economic growth and prosperity by cutting taxes and deregulating.

He conveniently had to overlook John F. Kennedy’s tax cutting in the 1960′s. But more importantly and more relevantly, he had to ignore the Reagan Revolution of the 1980′s that brought about an explosion of economic growth. As Newt Gingrich pointed out yesterday, in one month in 1983 the Reagan Recovery generated more than one million new jobs.

Barack Obama and the Left must dismiss and gloss over this point. They must fixate on income inequality. They must fixate on poverty. Never mind that all levels of society saw benefit from the Reagan Revolution. While it was not equal, the overwhelming number of Americans alive at the time saw their standard of living go up.

The left would respond by arguing that it went up too much for some and not enough for others. What they are actually saying is that they’d rather it had not gone up at all then to see some get even richer. While, as Reagan noted, the right measures the success of a welfare program by how many people are able to get off it, the left measures the success of welfare programs by how many people get on it.

And so it is that Barack Obama has to throw Bill Clinton under the bus to make his case for re-election. In an interview with WVEC-TV, Barack Obama claims he has no responsibility for the present economic mess. In addition to the rise of ATM’s and the internet killing jobs, he said, “We didn’t create the condition. We haven’t solved it fully yet because it was three decades in the making.”

Three decades back was 1981, the year Ronald Reagan came to office. And that “three decades in the making” covers Bill Clinton’s term, which until yesterday had been heralded as a success by the Democrats.

But it cannot be a success to Barack Obama. It must be written out of the history books and pretended to have never happened.

Obama must do this because, as I noted, the left measures the success of government welfare programs by the number of people who are on them. The welfare rolls in this country have been growing exponentially. As Newt Gingrich called him, Barack Obama is a food stamp President and Obama is really, really proud of it. He views the social safety net as working.

But Bill Clinton did not. Clinton, to win re-election, swung right. He cut the welfare rolls and reformed welfare. The Democrats have been chomping at the bit ever since to undo those reforms and, during the two years where Obama had a Democrat controlled Congress, they succeeded in part.

It’s not just that though. In addition to reforming welfare, Clinton and the GOP balanced the budget — a feat Obama has been unable to do. Bill Clinton actually cut spending to balance the budget — something Barack Obama is unwilling to do.

Confronted with expanding welfare rolls and a budget growing steadily more off kilter, Barack Obama has decided he has to blame Ronald Reagan and pretend the Reagan recovery never happened. But to pretend the Reagan recovery never happened, Obama must also pretend Bill Clinton never happened because we would have never gotten the late 90′s reforms leading to continued growth had we not had the Reagan tax cuts and deregulations serving as a foundation.

Barack Obama must pretend Ronald Reagan never happened. But to do that, he must also pretend Bill Clinton never happened.

COMMENTS

  • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

    Is President Clinton prickly enough to call him on it or are the leftists cohesive enough as a group to prefer to let the implied insult to one of their own pass?

  • rannan3

    IF the media types would do their JOBS, they would respectfully call him on his lies. But NO — most don’t utter one challenging word !
    That leaves Obama’s crap out there, and the uninformed listener
    retains a lot of it — as fact.

    AS for the Left rebutting any of it, dream on !
    Just like the fact that the Afghan Taliban will ultimately be the victors , because lets’ face it — they have nowhere else to go ! They will still be around when any conflict ends.
    So then will the Left support Obama — no matter what.
    THEY TOO, have nowhere else to go !

  • warrior300

    Sorry Eric, I normally agree with you, but not this time. You are guilty of some historical revisionism of your own: First, you make no mention of the tax increases that also took place during the Reagan years. Second, there was the egregiously faux prosperity of the late 90′s, which led to the dot.com bubble. A bubble brought about by massive stock speculation which hysterically raised the value of stocks simply on the belief that companies with no earnings, but the promise of projected earnings somewhere down the road in the future would magically materialize, or over-valued stocks way beyond their earnings were delivering false prosperity that only temporarily filled the coffers of Wall Street and government revenues thereof. Not to mention the usual slight of hand for which politicians are famous with their typical accounting gimmicks, where social security was not included in the budget to give the illusion that we had a balance budget.

    The infamous repeal of Glass-Steagall, which was pushed by the Republican congress and signed into law by the Democratic Bill Clinton, setup the egregious laisse-faire economic policy that allowed the creation and proliferation of hedge funds and derivatives, which have done so much in their contribution to the destruction of our economy and of the middle class. The fact the conservatives, and Democrats as well, speak out against the stock market as “casino gambling”, but are not willing to restore Glass-Stegall or any other regulation which would actually control the wild speculation that still continues in the market today demonstrates why neither party is sincere about curbing the abuses, and why most voters, at least those who know the score, have no use for either party.

    The libertarian mentality of ideological purity to no government regulations of almost anything, let alone the abuses by Wall Street, is just another reason why the Tea Party is viewed with distrust by so many independents, and why none of the Republican candidates are not currently exhibiting what should be landslide leads against the worse and most dangerous President in our lifetimes, if not in the history of our country. Both parties are so deeply controlled by Wall Street and the financial institutions. Unfortunately, what awaits us since none of the current Wall Street puppets of either party can be trusted, will lead to cataclysmic repercussions over the next five years.

  • renl57

    The view of the Left (as can be seen on Paul Krugman’s blog and other lefty sources) is to regard the entire period from 1981 through 2008 as a historical aberration. That is, those decades were just a temporary speed bump on America’s inevitable road to Social Democracy similar to what they have in Western Europe and Canada.

    The Left despises Reagan for having created that historical aberration.

    They just believe that a “sustainable” (i.e. stagnant) society with total equality is superior to a vibrant rapidly growing society with inequality. That’s their moral belief.

    Arguing moral philosophy is futile. They have their moral code and we have ours.

    You can only look at results. Obama and his liberal supporters have to attack the last 30-plus years (and anything else they can think of attacking) to deflect attention from their own track record.

  • gar54

    Helen Hayes said, “Love me or hate me, but, please, don’t ignore me” I think Ron Paul deserves an apology. To the uninitiated observer of your comments Ron Paul isn’t running for the Republican nomination…he doesn’t exist. Why, Eric? Is he too old, too conservative, too honest? Unelectable? You don’t have enough influence with him?

    We all know that it is the embedded civil servants in any Washington office on whom any newly elected official must rely. Consider what they did to our present Commander-in-Chief: (I shudder when I type that!) They manipulated this relatively innocent, inexperienced and vulnerable human being (I think he’s human) into a position of being almost a charicature of everything the most powerful person in the world should be. He has set back Black Americans a hundred years.

    If Ron Paul were elected, his advisers would convince him that if he wanted to succeed at all, he would have to achieve his Libertarian objectives quietly, intelligently and patiently. Yes, he states where this country should be headed with too much emphasis on an attitude of “do it now”, but that would be softened by the powers presently ensconced in Washington.

    Ron Paul is the only honest politician who has emerged from the morass of hypocrisy which now and has forever pervaded Washington. At least, have the guts to recognize his potential.

  • davesinsanantonio

    trying to make a point, not teach the sum total of all history.

    He was refuting Obummer’s claim that this recession “was thirty years in the making”. Showing that Obummer is willing to lie about one of his supporters to try to make political hay. And, maybe trying to goad that supporter into setting Obummer straight, or at least informing the voters.

  • michaelbowler

    ” As Newt Gingrich pointed out yesterday, in one month in 1983 the Reagan Recovery generated more than one million new jobs.”

    Reagan created no jobs, he forced the congress to give him tax cuts to boost the economy. The economy created jobs in the wake of this. Job creators are buoyed with greater optimism when they see systemic changes to their favor in the tax code. Obama has tried temporary fixes to the tax code, intended to have this effect, but since job creators know those fixes are going away, especially if their is any positive movement…they’re not budging.

    Government and politicians DON’T CREATE JOBS, the only power to that end that they have is to create a less hostile environment. Obama is hell bent on suppressing any group or business not on board with his agenda…ergo bad environment and no jobs.

    warrior 300 says, disingenuously, that Reagan raised taxes. The dumbcrap congress was able to force him to give back a little of the taxes he cut. Over his presidency there was a NET CUT in taxes…a big one.

    Let’s be careful not to couch our arguments in their language, it leaves us at a disadvantage.

  • davesinsanantonio

    to address all politicians.

    If you think it is important to make a case for Ron Paul, start your own thread, please don’t hijack someone else’s.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Saying Reagan created jobs is a sort of shorthand for the longer, more accurate statement that he pressured Congress into acting for the good of those who do create jobs.

    Sometimes you have to use “their language” to point out their fallacies.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    And you are also correct about the temporary nature of tax cuts.

    In fact the Reagan recovery would have happened 18 months sooner if the democrats had not forced the tax cuts into being staggered. It seems that businesses wait until the last cut takes effect before they do anything.

    But another often overlooked problem is regulation. Right now I do not think a tax cut will help this economy all that much since our taxes are already pretty low.

    It is the crushing rise of business, energy, and medical care regulation that will kill all economic activity, Coupled with the huge borrowing that is crowding out capital and creating regime uncertainty.

  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    One-bama has to perform more magic than David Copperfield to get himself reelected. He must make huge chunk of history, or more than that, make huge chunks of reality disappear. Income inequality is bogus, but it is straight out of the community agitators play book. Create tension and co-opt the mobs and get them to march in the streets. It has always been done this way.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    that you cannot sustain even a high unemployment stable society based upon envy and theft. As Thatcher said, sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.

  • dandolo

    nt

  • gunslingr45

    throws everyone under the bus. Look how he is doing it to America right now.
    And we are suprised?

    “For those who have fought for it freedom has a sweet taste the protected will never know”

  • jrfromdallas

    Nothing is ever his fault and it is always someone else’s fault. How can people still support this guy after 3 years of this? It is unbelievable but that’s what happens when you have an entitlement society. We as a country are heading down the wrong direction and are going to be like Greece if we don’t elect an adult to fix entitlements and that adult should be Rick Perry.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Obama also has to ignore Bill Clinton’s successes because he did it while working with a potential adversary. Clinton actually worked with Congress (something Obama has utterly failed at) to achieve this success, and he did it with Newt Gingrich would could very well be his opponent next year.

  • williamjameson

    and the same RP who wants open borders so illegals can walk in at will.

    RP is 76, I bet you thought McCain was too old at the age of 71.

    RP also voted for gov guaranteed bank loans to companies exporting while saying no to freddie and fannie mae loan guarantees to citizens……I’m against both. If RP were the only honest pol he’d tell you the truth about his record and why we can trust Iran with nukes.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    when I have heard it (from non-Obama’s, he is just repeating what other people have said) typically refers to the increase in debt and leverage that has occurred over the last 30 years and that is practically indisputable. What we are seeing now is a massive deleveraging in the economy as a whole that is trying to work off the excess of roughly 30 years.

  • Common_Cents

    nt

  • Common_Cents

    obama is creating a greek tragedy of America.

  • Wayne

    cronyism got us to where we are in this economy. All without the slightest regard for the consequences to our country and its “ordinary” citizens by both parties. This is why the independent vote is such a deciding factor in 2012. One can point out the inconsistencies of each party relative to the sacred oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Those here that ridicule “Libertarian” views are as guilty as the next of ignoring the fact that they are fundamentally about adhering to the Constitution and neither party warms up to that concept because of the consequences to their “special interests”.

    Whomever is elected in this next cycle will have the greatest economic challenge of all previous presidents, but it will be in the house and Senate that the true work needs to be done. Regardless of leadership at the top. Stating that there is a Distrust for the Tea Party and what it stands for by the Independents is denying recognition of the force that has ignited a not so silent revolution across this land by both main parties and independents alike. All of whom are members of the TP.

    Even BO cannot ignore the TP. He, as Clinton did, will have to move or promise to move to the middle to get reelected. I personally believe his reelection is not out of the question, but would be a horrible blow to our economy if he is. Any Republican would be an improvement with the possible exception of MR who is the RP’s version of OB.

    Lastly, there is nothing new about this fight except the close proximity of the consequences if the wrong representatives and President are elected. Those will be materialized within the 1st 4 years of the next administration.

  • wumingren

    Don’t forget that Reagan was duped into raising taxes on a Democrat promise to cut spending. They never cut the spending and it was Charlie Brown falling flat on his back all over again. We will not allows any such promises to be considered ever again! We will never believe any words that emerge from the pie holes of Democrats ever again! All Democrats are liars and thieves. Compromise is an abomination. I will never, ever work with a Democrat, but I will henceforth and forever oppose everything that Democrats think, say, or do. Democrats are filth.

  • geah

    all the words of the pundits on this site, I have a perfect man to run for Prez, no woman can make a claim on him he is perfect, none can make an false claim, I speak of Jesus Christ of course, please stop hanging the poor men before election day, we all have faults
    made stupid moves in the past, I am old I remember a lot of things, rather have a forgiven man with a lip, or an old RP,as long as they are fighters on the right, the old ones in the tribe would say schwa even.
    and I understand this site if for enlightment and that is good, but hanging them high seems a bit much,

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I’m sure he knew there was a good chance that they wouldn’t pass the cuts, but at the time we needed to outspend the Soviet Union on defense.

    Can you even fathom how much an actual war would’ve cost with them, not only in dollars but lives? Reagan took them out without firing a single shot, and all it cost was a tax increase. I would’ve paid double!

    As for not allowing such promises to be considered ever again!…you’re joking, right?

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Damn voodoo economics.

  • renl57

    The Left believes specifically that Reaganomics was the culprit.

    Go ask them.

  • renl57

    An Reagan explained in his own bio of those days,

    House Speaker Tip O’Neill, who was liberal and opposed to everything Reagan wanted to do, had to be dealt with. The deal they came up with was for Reagan to get his tax cuts and defense buildup–but no cuts to entitlements whatsoever.

  • wumingren

    And, no, I’m not kidding. We should never, ever consider a compromise in which one side says they’ll give in now and the other side will give in later. If there is to be any giving and taking, it must be all at once, or not at all.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I could count on both hands (wait a minute, I don’t have that many hands) the number of times it’s been done since then. Republicans cave in to Democrats all the time. I see nothing to lead me to believe that will change any time in the near future.

  • drsheilahere

    All Obama has left are his lies. “Obama Won’t Be Re-Elected; Don’t Spend Money On HIs WarChest.” and other anti-Obama musings:

    http://contributor.yahoo.com/user/1017868/sheila_dunnells_phd.html

  • unitedwestood

    Occupy the media. Hold them to their lies, point them out and set up camp till they cave and actually DO their jobs!

    Could you imagine Chris Matthews going by an angry mob each day trying to get to work… all the nasty things they would say about us.. but not one person being arrested and not one shrub being killed.

    I think it would be even better if we did that to presidents and candidates. You lie to us, you dupe us, we’re recalling you and you can go home! That would sure change the way’s things are done in Washington. Funny, the liberals will hold recalls on people that are honestly trying to do what is right for their state, but conservatives just sit by and allow things to go passed us, wonder why that is?!

    I’m tied of moderates, I’m tired of the dispicable running for office and I’m tired of us picking the lessor of two evils … What happen to honor? What happen to intergrity? What happen to taking pride in your job? What’s happening to us!?

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    The causation is to interest rates and easy access to credit, while some can try to correlate it to Reagan that is mere coincidence with the fact that Volcker killed inflation at the beginning of Reagan’s term and that interest rates have been in a downtrend ever since. The over-leveraging began with the recovery in the early 80s and continued/accelerated as computer technology allowed for more complex securitizations and (an obviously false) reduction in risk to lenders. It is going to take a while to get the economy back on track after the extreme over-leveraging we had over the last 30 years (including government spending).

  • johnt

    Our child/leftists are only responsible for the good things, whatever they may be. Baby O is the prototypical child, utterly and truly incapable of an adults weighing of good and bad personal action.
    This is widespread today in the playpens & kindergartens, in the romper rooms and playpens where the left cavorts, the mental Maginot Line where mistakes never happen, everything works, and only the other guys commit errors.
    Obama will probably end up going back to Herbert Hoover, but like the rest of the diseased left, will shun adulthood and the possibility of imperfection. The man has real mental problems.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I can subtract.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    That the early 80s isn’t when interest rates began to come down? That it isn’t when the savings rate began to decline? The fact is that it was about 30 years ago (I would personally date it to the beginning of 83) that our over leveraging really took off.

  • lucitee

    Personal and hopefully profitable “sermons” can show what is in a persons “HEART” but can NEVER replace FACTS!

    Personal opinions are an “OPTION”!
    FACTS are a “GIVEN”!

  • ihateliberals

    Things were going good and Regan was making headway with the Russian, O’Neill then lied to Reagan about the cuts and Reagan trusted O’Neill to be a man of his word. Never, I repeat Never trust a liberal to do anything they say they will do unless they can see direct benefit to themselves.

    Reagan’s policies after Carter destroyed the economy force Volcker into lowering interest rates and freeing up credit so that businesses could borrow more money to expand and create job’s. This in connection with the tax cuts made a very robust economy. I know i was owner of a business at the time and did just that. I was able to expand and go from a 10 person company to a 35 person company. This all lasted until George W Bush took office. The economy dipped after Reagan because George H W Bush is a Liberal Republican. Clinton while he ws horrible form the social programs side he was a fiscal Conservative. he followed Reagan’s model much closer than Bush did. Then Bush Jr. hit the scene who was a Liberal Republican and the economy would have dipped worst had it not been for the Iraq war. Then in 2008 combined with the lending reform of Clinton the banking and housing market collapsed Obama then proceeded to finance the down fall by giving the Stimulus package and increasing spending to record levels.

    The wr on the Rich is a bogus claim by the Liberal Socialist in this country and abroad. Their claim to fame is that the “Rich get Richer and the Poor get poorer”. One thing I learned from Reagan is that is total “Bull Stuff”. Let’s put it this way if the “Rich don’t get Richer then no one else does”. It’s the VooDoo economics that Bush said wouldn’t work, it’s called “The Trickle Down Theory”. Whenever you punish the Rich for being that way they just take their money and go elsewhere. In other words when taxes go up for the Rich investments stop and they stop creating jobs. Reagan knew that and made the model he did based on the Rich getting Richer. It works and it works every time. The real key is tht the Rich will always get Richer and they can either do t on-shore or off-shore. When taxes re high and investment in USA business isn’t profitable to them they go where it is and the wil send their Riches there. That is what is happening now under the Dummbercrat administration.

    One last problem to note. With the exception of the “Contract with America” years the congress has been mostly under control by Liberals. Now you say that the House has been under Republican control since January. Don’t forget that republicans can be Liberals too. There are three categories of Republicans. RINO’s, True Liberals and conservatives. Right now the House is still under control of liberals and RINO’s. So far this year the House has only voted 44% of the time conservative. That means that under Republican control the House is voting on average 56% of the time as Liberals. Tht’s because states like AZ, Maine etc keep sending RINO’s like McCain back to the senate and House. We citizens have to remember that no longer does Republican stand for conservatism as it did in the days of Reagan. We have to start electing true Conservatives not RINO’s or Liberals like Olympia Snowe.

  • gwbramhall

    Why does everything have to be a lie? I remember seeing and
    peeling off all stickers that used to be posted all around town
    “Bush Lied so Soldiers Died” That is no way to win an argument.
    The left likes to twist their argument around to justyify their persective
    and I’m sure we could find many cases where the right has joined
    in this exercise, too. There are plenty of ways to blow up their
    argument without calling them liars and losing the debate with the
    intended audience that is deaf to such rhetoric. This name callin is
    so childish.

  • jeffperren

    The author makes some very good points (JFKs tax cuts, Reagan’s policies, etc) but there’s an important piece missing and credit misapplied in one serious respect.

    Politicians – especially at the Federal level – do NOT create jobs or wealth. The best they can do is protect property rights, prevent foreign invasion, and then get out of the way of producers. In short, they can forego pillaging the efforts of the private sector (by government, mostly).

    Neither JFK, Reagan, nor anyone other President in the 20th century ever generated the ideas and actions that led to economic prosperity.

  • michaelbowler

    I will not disagree with you, Kyle. In fact I’ll have to second your assertion.

  • michaelbowler

    and you have said it, Common_Cents

  • gunsrus

    you gots to be kidding

  • gunsrus

    we might be doing just that.
    The news shows on network TV recruit writers at the National Enquirer.
    I buy the Washington Post to line the Bird cage (they know how to treat it).

  • http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com nathanalbright

    …so why not, if she wants to make a primary run and sees Obama as toast.