It is either ignorance or downright stupidity (or both) which always seems to get the better of the far-left. Lacking the proper education in meaningful fields (do you want fries with that degree in art history?), they come out with the wildest accusations which lack any basis in facts, but for one reason or another, these beliefs take hold throughout their delusional “ranks”. You hear them repeated on college and university campuses, hear them parroted in the news, you even hear the occasional misinformed politician quoting them as evidence to prop-up a weak claim they are making, and lately all this stupidity seems to revolve around the economy. Now we have seen a dramatic shift in both the domestic and international markets, we have seen “bubbles burst” at home and financial disasters abroad, we have seen the growth of economic power in the East and its impact on the West, and yet very few people seem willing to connect the dots as it were to understand how this has come about.
For example, two entirely different facts being molded together to create a wonderful piece of fiction. FACT: President George W. Bush has been in office since 2000. FACT: The economy has been on the downturn since 2000. FICTION: President George W. Bush was the cause of the economic downturn. Now anyone who has studied logic, especially those who have taken the LSATs, can see the logical fallacy of coincidence (the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy as some call it), that just because they followed one another, that the first incident must have cause the second. Pick any far-left blog or website and you can see this assertion being parroted over and over again by people who couldn’t tell you the difference between an expansion and a recession, let alone explain the actual causes behind the economic turmoil we are in. For example, every time CNN’s Paul Begala shows up on TV, he likes to remind everyone about this claim by parroting it on Larry King Live or in the Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, even blocking out people like Larry Elder who provide the facts to debunk his fiction. So let’s take some time right now and clear the air, get the truth out in the open for everyone to see. Let’s start at the beginning, explain how things have come to this…
The IT collapse – March of 2000 saw the climax of the dot-com bubble with the NASDAQ hitting 5132.52. It was by this time that investors knew something was wrong. The same bubble which fueled growth in the IT sector which brought about much of the economic growth that Clinton’s presidency was “famous” for (something which Begala and other delusional Democrats won’t let us forget) had reached its peak. The fast growth of the industry had fooled many investors for years, but once they decided to actually look at what they had bought into, realizing that the growth of these business were based for the most part (or in some cases the only part) on their sheer size and not productivity. The constant spending trend which followed the “get big or get lost” philosophy mentality had left many in deep debt, and once this was discovered, had revalued stock across the board. What was worth millions yesterday, was now only worth pennies. The effects of this were felt on both side of the border, especially in the collapse of Nortel Networks, who’s stock went from C$124 to C$0.47 almost overnight. This was nearly a decade in the making, the first stumbling block for the Bush administration, and no matter the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post say, “W” wasn’t the cause of it (blame unrestrained capitalism or simple human greed if you want).
9/11 and its economic impact – The September 11th attacks will always be remembered as horrendous displays of terrorist brutality which killed three thousand Americans. People, especially the far-left Democrats, like to forget that it had an effect on the economy. The destruction of the Twin Towers affected many aspects of the American economy, not just a sharp drop in airline travel and tourism. The deaths of many bg business CEOs left investors too cautious, leading to a significant drop in domestic investment. When people are putting their money in foreign companies, American jobs follow. It also doesn’t help when Wall Street, the financial hub of America, for the most part (the New York Stock Exchange), was closed for an entire week. So even if investors weren’t nervous about investing domestically, they pretty couldn’t if they wanted to. Not just this, but there was a sharp increase in the price of oil, and a sharp decrease in the demand for US currency (a reflection of investor confidence, both domestic and abroad, in the American economy). These weren’t the only impacts though.
The collapse of the towers and the deaths of so many, not to mention the loss of four aircraft and the countless number of survivors of the day’s attacks who still suffer from health, both physical and mental, related problems, led to a collapse in the insurance market. Over $30 billion in loses hitting mostly reinsurers like Berkshire Hathaway, Lloyd’s, Swiss Re, and Munich Re. Airline companies, as mentioned above, also took a hit following the 9/11 attacks. Many were forced to the brink of bankruptcy following the sharp drop in airline travel, thousands lost their jobs and Midway Arlines was forced to close its doors. With this drop came a drop in tourism, especially in the city of New York. The closure of landmarks and monuments like the Statue of Liberty cost the city billions in tourist revenue. It is no surprise to see that the American economy would take a plunge after all this, but what I do find surprising is that seven years these attacks, that Democrats, especially those on the far-left, refuse to acknowledge its economic impact, let alone admit that President Bush wasn’t to blame for it, especially since President Clinton had ample opportunity to deal with Osama bin Laden between cheating on his wife and lying to the American people about it (sorry Begala, but Bill definitely isn’t the most respectable man to sit in the Oval Office).
Hurricane Katrina – Contrary to popular belief, “W” doesn’t have control of the weather. While many “weatherologists” at Mudflats or the Daily Kos would say otherwise, this Category 1 hurricane was strengthened during its time in the Gulf of Mexico and not because of President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” Act or any other piece of legislation he passed during his time in office (amazing what some people will believe). When Katrina hit Buras, Louisiana as a Category 4 (just barely) and later New Orleans as a Category 3, it cause death and devastation at such a high level that is was ranked as the fifth most destructive hurricane in the history of the United States. Three days after hit, levies which were keeping the water at bay broke, causing even more damage to the battered state. Due to her own ineptitude, which cost the lives of thousands, Governor Kathleen Blanco resigned after admitting her fault in not properly preparing Louisiana for Katrina, something which President Bush noted was “not acceptable”. So now that we have properly educated those who might have other thoughts, let’s look at the economic impact.
It is no surprise that Katrina holds the top spot for being the costliest Atlantic hurricane to date, causing over $81 billion dollars in property damage. This doesn’t even count for other damages, so much that the Bush administration was asking Congress for over $105 billion for repair costs. The city of New Orleans, once a vibrant place to getaway too, had become a barren and flooded “ghost town”. Oil drilling on the Gulf Coast was crippled as the storm knocked out the power supply to the refineries, destroyed pipelines carrying natural gas, and sunk or set adrift at least twenty offshore platforms. Consumers are still feeling the “pinch at the pumps” from this disruption in supply of oil and gas. Once there is a cut to such an important resource, you see a “domino effect” across the entire board (higher fuel prices means higher costs for operating, which means less jobs, which means less money to invest, etc), and this is something many refuse to acknowledge, especially if they are so obsessed with blaming President Bush for this natural disaster (emphasis on NATURAL).
China and “Red Capitalism” – It was about a decade or so ago that The Peoples Republic of China decided to open its markets up to private businesses and foreign investment. These days you can walk into any store and find a variety of items manufactured in China by a domestically owned company, if not a Chinese company selling its goods in the domestic market. Matter of fact, we already see Chinese computers like Acer at our local electronics stores, and in the coming years, we will see Chinese cars at locally owned dealerships. Chinese goods are making it into our market for two reasons; A favourable exchange rate which allows the Chinese to flood foreign markets with their goods and a lower cost of labour due to a largely uneducated and untrained labour force. Both of which hurt markets around the world, not just the American ones.
Much like with Japan’s protectionist policies a decade ago, China is playing economic hardball with the Western world. Being such a large supplier of goods, it could sink a country’s economy simply by putting up barriers to trade with them. This fear was a driving force behind the latest election in Taiwan, where the people decided to maintain close relations with them, forgoing their ambitions of separation for economic success. With a weaker currency, China has been able to hold a trade surplus, benefiting them while hurting those they trade with. To counteract this, the American Central Bank allowed for a weaker “Green Back” to make American goods more affordable, increasing the country’s imports. From there China devalued its currency once again and the two economic giants began a “race to the bottom” which had a dramatic affect on various foreign markets. Due to uncertainty in the American dollar, India will no longer accept it from tourists. This also means investment in the American market will be reduced as investors, afraid of losing their money, will find other places to put it. This isn’t all though…
China’s economy needs fuel and they have no only bought up steel and other raw resources, but their ever growing country requires vast amounts of oil. This is the reason for the country’s alliances with various hostile states like Iran. Their demand has pushed up the price of oil, and because of it, world markets suffer. Higher costs of production drives up the price of various services, not simply airline travel and other services that are gas reliant. No matter which way you look at it, people suffer, and it isn’t President Bush’s fault.
With this new Barack Obama commercial where he is discussing the Bush’s economic failure, I would like to remind people about these issues which have caused much of the financial turmoil we have seen during these two terms. With the elections in November, while we will see an end to Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS), I fear far-left derangement will still continue. This breakdown should help many understand what is really going on, to understand what Larry Elders pointed out on Larry King, that the President shouldn’t be held responsible for things that were out of his control, but I don’t think everyone will be able to look past the fiction they have so willingly swallowed for so long to see these facts.
With that out of the way, what do we see now? The mortgage collapse and panic on Wall Street following years of Democratic protectionism. In 2003, Bush proposed a plan to supervise Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac, something the Democrats claimed wouldn’t happen. In 2005, McCain tried to propose legislation which would takes steps to prevent this, and once again we see Democrats and a few Republicans turning this down, claiming nothing was going to happen. I guess it is no surprise that two of Fannie-Mae’s CEOs were advising and fund raising for the Obama campaign, especially after the assistance his party has been giving them. It boggles the mind why people would think otherwise, especially with this. We know how he has played the political game, we know of his connections to Tony Rezko and others in the Chicago Machine and still people want to continue believing this fantasy.
UPDATE: Hot Air dug up a video of Republicans in 2004 trying to put regulations on Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac. Notice how the Democrats insist that nothing is wrong? Notice how they jumped to the defense of Franklin Raines? Members of the Obama’s campaign won’t even admit they talked to the man anymore, let alone admit they supported him and believed his fast talking. Pathetic, but yet is more upsetting since the majority of the public won’t even get a chance to see evidence like this when the MSM is protecting the Democrats in any way they can. It is funny since even CNN back in 2005 was aware of Republican efforts to prevent this, and yet right now they are spinning the facts to blame President Bush and his supports for what they fought in vain to stop.
What else bothers me is these people seem to think Barack has economic credibility. I was watching NFL Sunday on Fox when I caught an advertisement for Fox News Detroit, discussing Obama’s campaign stop in Michigan today. I waited, watched the segment and I was shocked. He rambles on about economic turmoil, about how Wall Street isn’t helping the common person, and then he attacks the Congressional Stimulus Bill he claimed to have pioneered earlier this month (Exposing Liberal Lies also covered this story). Op-Edna likes to believe this is all false, even deleting my comments which not only contradicted her “evidence” on Obama’s economic policies, but his foreign policies as well. He didn’t even show up to vote on it when many others, including Hillary Clinton and John McCain himself, did. He also took a swing at the bailout plan today, talking about how he is going to fight for people’s mortgages, fight for those on “Main Street” when others wouldn’t, ignoring that he and other Senate Democrats were pushing for an addition fifty billion in funding for things like student and car loans, as well as other irrelevant projects they want money for. Is that how you look after the tax payer Barack? I know many on the right aren’t happy with this bailout plan, but there are times when the government must act. Sometimes the “invisible hand” isn’t enough and government needs to act, and since House Republicans got their way and stripped the Frank-Dodd amendments to the original plan, many of them should be accepting this as a small victory instead of a big loss. You win some and you lose some Michelle Malkin, we should be happy that the Democrats didn’t get unlimited spending on this.
In one final correction, I would also like to take a shot at this “trickle down failure” Obama keeps bringing up. Returning to this new advertisement he has released, I would like to know where he got his proof for these allegations? Simple microeconomics Barack, if you make it easier for companies to operate domestically, they will keep jobs here. It is downright surprising he is going to make this statement, especially when he agreed with McCain during the debates on the fact that corporate taxes were relatively higher here then abroad. If you haven’t seen it, take a look at the ad “Overseas” which McCain’s campaign is still airing. The theory is simple, and he nails it on the head, showing that Obama’s actions to “fight for Main Street” has cost Michigan jobs. Add in the fact that renegotiating NAFTA will destroy GM and other auto plants which many Americans, not just Michigan workers, depend on for a livelihood, and you have a recipe for economic disaster. It is simple economics and STILL Obama doesn’t get it…
For Op-Edna and the rest of the far-left, including a majority of the MSM, who will take swipes at McCain and Palin for anything they can think of, remember that the rest of us are watching and we aren’t impressed. For someone who claims to be working for the middle class, neither Barack Obama nor Joe Biden seem to understand that their actions and the actions of many of their fellow Democrats are hurting the economy. People are suffering, they are being evicted from their houses, losing jobs, being forced onto the streets and they still want to play politics. Why did it take presidential action to get Obama to the table to help workout this bailout plan, and why are people criticizing McCain for putting America ahead of his ambitions when he went to Washington at the request of the Treasury Secretary? It shouldn’t be this difficult for people to understand… IT IS THE ECONOMY STUPID! When the election rolls around, I hope voters remember who it was who actually fought for them, and who was simply calling it in.
UPDATE: Wasn’t it McCain who has been speaking about the strong fundamentals of the American economy? I am just asking since Barack Obama is now taking credit for that as well. This coming only a few days after the debate where he slammed John on believing in these fundamentals. Flip and flop Obama, changing his position to meet his own needs.