Barack Obama loves to say the financial crisis is the “final verdict” on “eight years of failed Bush policies”.
Which Bush policies hurt the economy?
Since O’Reilly had only a half hour with Obama and the rest of the media has given him a pass, we still don’t have the details about what Obama meant by that sound-bite. I think Obama’s a closet socialist so he may think Bush didn’t grow government enough. However, Senator McCaskill assures us Obama will “camp in the middle”, so perhaps Obama just disagreed with Bush about priorities.
To keep things simple, I’ll just take a guess which five areas the public might think of when they hear the phase, “eight years of failed Bush policies.”
Tax cuts? Often, Democrats blame the Bush tax cuts for the booming deficit. Problem is tax receipts are much higher since the tax cuts passed. Let me repeat – tax revenue is higher. The Bush tax cuts worked so well to stimulate the economy that the U.S. economy has kept growing despite the worst terrorist attack (9/11) and natural disaster (Katrina) in U.S. history and two long wars. So, there’s no evidence the tax cuts hurt the economy – to the contrary, they helped a great deal, which is why McCain wants to keep taxes low and offer some additional cuts.
Foreign Trade? Nope. Exports, including U.S. manufactured goods are way up under Bush. If anything, Obama’s more protectionist, pro-labor policies would have hurt the economy.
Spending? Yes, Bush has spent a lot to pay for 9/11, to increase security, to restore Clinton cuts in military spending, to help the Gulf Coast after Katrina, Ike, etc… and to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In addition, Bush has increased spending on programs like the one to to help ex-convicts integrate back into society. It’s true that Bush has allowed a lot of pork spending, but often that was necessary to secure votes to fund national security programs, and wars, that have kept us safe. Sadly, Democrats would have withheld their support otherwise. In any event, if too much spending is the problem, Obama will make things worse. If you think Bush did not spend enough – you should probably go to bed without a cookie. Bad Socialist – no cookie.
Iraq? One thing Democrats say is not a priority is the Iraq War. Set aside the fact that the Iraq war cost less than 5% of the total budget, much lower than other important wars. Also set aside the fact that the World is much better off with a Democracy in place of Saddam (see Joe’s Right About Iraq War). How can Democrats complain about the cost of the Iraq war when they voted for it? Obama often says he’ll save $10 billion / month by pulling troops out of Iraq. How is that possible when he says he’ll increase troops in Afghanistan? And if Obama pulls out of Iraq too early, odds are that the problems that follow will require us to come back at a higher cost (in blood and treasure) than if we just stayed and finished the job right (McCain’s plan).
De-regulation? This fits the Obama narrative that de-regulation caused the credit crisis. I agree that regulations need to be updated to adequately monitor some of the new exotic Wall Street products but blaming deregulation is like blaming the police for property damage after the Detroit Pistons won their first national championship. Would there have been less damage if there were more police? Of course. However, the real culprits are the criminal jerks who celebrate championships by lighting cars on fire. The criminal jerks in this case are Chris Dodd, Barney Frank & Hank Paulson and Democrats in general.
I don’t need need to wait for history’s judgement – I can think this through myself. Obama’s claims that our current economic problems are Bush’s fault says more about Obama’s desire to manipulate you than about Bush. Contrast that with McCain’s readiness to admit where Republicans have failed. Obama says a lot of things that don’t stand up under scrutiny.
Someone who doesn’t back up what they say, probably can’t.
