Words

You’d think that President Obama would be at the forefront of those who would oppose an increase in the debt limit without a concomitant reduction in Federal spending. After all, his re-election pivots on the economy. But Barack Obama is driven by a “big government” ideology that grows the scope and control of the federal government. In order to achieve his extreme view of social justice, he must spend, let the debt be damned.

This week’s economic numbers continue to be dismal. In an editorial, Investor’s Business Daily quotes Michael Pento, senior economist at Euro Pacific Capital, "genuine government stimulus comes from low taxes, stable prices, reduced regulation and low debt. Our economic policymakers have scrupulously avoided such remedies."

Not only has the Obama administration and its supporters “avoided” these things, they have viciously attacked those who recommend them. Worse, they have been profligate spenders.

Again from IBD:

From 2008 to 2010, the U.S. borrowed over $3.1 trillion. It will borrow another $1.5 trillion this year.

At the same time, the Fed has added $2 trillion to its balance sheet, mostly to buy all that new debt.

There are dozens of economic indicators, and virtually all of them present bad news, some suggesting that we’re headed for a double-dip recession. And who gets hurt the most? The President’s core constituencies, that’s who. College students graduated last month and cannot find jobs. Minorities have unemployment rates that are 5 to 10 points higher than the already staggering national average of 9 percent. The poor watch state programs being cut because business activity is sluggish and sales tax revenues are down. Union members see jobs evaporate, and private sector job growth remains almost non-existent. And the President tells us he cares.

If that we the case, he’d forget about “taxing the rich” and growing the debt and take the steps that Michael Pento suggests. He and his surrogates give speeches intended to frighten the most vulnerable so they’ll oppose measures that are not only necessary but crucial for their own long-term interests.

Daniel Henninger comments:

The day before that speech [Obama’s major economic address at GWU in April], all Washington expected Mr. Obama to make a major policy statement about the big deficit-reduction debate then unfolding. Agree or disagree, Paul Ryan's budget released the week before was all about policy. The Republicans were actually offering to take part-ownership of the economy by spending the year in dense discussions about the deficit and spending.

Expectations raised, the president contributed nothing. Instead he dumped ridicule and derision on the Republican leadership seated before him. With that speech, Mr. Obama kicked off his 2012 presidential campaign, and in so doing politicized the economy.

It seems that our President thinks that words are all that matter. But he’s wrong. Solid plans, concrete actions, and presidential leadership are what matter. Where are they?