The American Spectator : Will the Unemployment Numbers Cost Obama His Job?

Text Size

The Obama Watch

Will the Unemployment Numbers Cost Obama His Job?

By Aaron Goldstein on 7.13.11 @ 6:08AM

Obama needs to start fighting for jobs -- namely, his own.

"A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. Recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his." -- Ronald Reagan, 1980

This message resonated with Americans who elected Reagan in a landslide. Of course, finding the way to recovery proved to be easier said than done for The Gipper. When the 1982 mid-term elections rolled around, the national unemployment rate was at 10.4%. Not surprisingly, there was a backlash against Reagan as more than 50 Republicans lost their seats in the House of Representatives that November. Reagan appeared destined to become yet another one-term wonder just like his predecessor.

Yet by November 1984, the unemployment rate had fallen three points to 7.4%. Forty-nine out of fifty states put their faith in Reagan and gave him a second term in office. If it wasn’t morning again in America, the sun was surely shining towards that city on a hill.

When the oceans began to recede following the election of Barack Obama in November 2008, the national unemployment rate stood at 6.6%. By the 2010 mid-term elections, unemployment had shot up more than three points to 9.7%. When the tides rose, a lot of Democratic Congressmen and Senators joined the ranks of the unemployed.

Though it would make sense for President Obama to look closely at how Reagan overcame tough economic times to regain the confidence of the American people, it doesn't appear that Obama has embraced the Reagan way. How could he? After all, Obama believes government can create jobs whereas Reagan believed government could create the conditions in which an economy could thrive. So it is hard to imagine Reagan presiding over a recovery plan that would have boasted job gains in non-existent congressional districts, browbeating Democrats as "enemies" to be punished and claiming that job losses are evidence that the stimulus plan is a success. Moreover, Reagan possessed neither the arrogance nor, dare I say, the audacity to insult the intelligence of the American people in that manner. How can Obama expect to possibly replicate Reagan's success? While Obama shakes vinegar, Reagan spread honey.

As of June 2011, the national unemployment rate stands at 9.2%. While this does represent a half-point decrease since the mid-term elections, Obama is going to need the unemployment numbers to fall further if he seriously wants to tout his economic policies to a skeptical American public whose high expectations he has thus far failed to satisfy.This isn't to say that Obama is a lame duck ready to be brought out of the oven. Incumbency brings many definitive advantages to go along with a sympathetic press, a billion-dollar war chest and a base that has not seen fit to back a challenger for the Democratic Party nomination.

But this too could change. In light of President Obama's proposed benefit reductions to Social Security, Moveon.org has begun to urge its members to withdraw financial support for Obama’s re-election bid. Nancy Pelosi is behaving like a jilted lover who has just uttered, "He loves me not" after pulling out the last petal. Now this might prove to be little more than posturing on the part of Moveon.org and Pelosi but it does demonstrate that this alliance is on less-than-solid footing.

Then, of course, there are those voters in nine states who took a chance on Obama after supporting George W. Bush in 2004. Four of those states (Colorado, Florida, Nevada and North Carolina) have reached all-time highs in unemployment during Obama's term in office. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate in Indiana has gone from 6.9% in October 2008 to 8.2% in April 2011. Unemployment has also increased by 1.3% in Iowa from 4.7% to 6.0% over the same period. In New Mexico, the unemployment rate went up by nearly two and a half percent from 5.2% to 7.6%. In April 2011, Ohio’s unemployment rate stood at 8.6%. When Obama was elected, it was 7.3%. The unemployment rate in Virginia has gone from 4.5% on election night to 6.1% in April 2011. If voters in these states aren't better off next November than they were in November 2008 why would they want another four years of Obama?

Of course, I am mindful that much could happen in the next sixteen months. The employment numbers could get better. Or Obama could rise to the occasion amidst an unforeseen national crisis. But what if those things don't happen? Suppose things don't get better. Then it will be a question of who the Republicans nominate. At this point, it remains to be seen if that candidate has thrown his or her hat into the ring. Will the American electorate take another leap of faith or will they stay with the devil they know? Will we stay an uncertain course or will we heed Ronald Reagan's advice and choose recovery by tossing President Obama out of work?

About the Author

Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (86) | Leave a comment

Mike Hawk| 7.13.11 @ 6:39AM

It isn't the unemployment, it's the whole deal. Gross incompetence, Socialism and radical acolytes to enhance the whole miserable mob of fools.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 4:18PM

you mean even if the US were to hypothetically full employment you would be opposed to Obama?
I guess Obama will lose next year if the opposition is so determined to unseat him.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 4:20PM

even if Obama magically erased all debt, facilitated full employment, cured cancer, ended homelessness, and mended every broken family, you would oppose him.
No one can accuse you guys of being non-partisan.

voted against carter| 7.13.11 @ 5:44PM

al brooks,..

Hello TROLL.

See you around the web

Your comprehension ability is suspect so I try and keep it simple.

You are an idiot. STOP proving it with every statement you.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 5:55PM

Point is, you will all screw it up yet again, you have bungled it since 1988 or '92-- and the knowledge of that makes you so angry you are reduced to writing 'idiot', 'idiot'.. 'stupid' 'stupid'.
And with a silly handle: "voted against carter"?? you are a yahoo with little education. You think you can intimidate by harsh words of such unimaginative quality to write 'idiot' and 'stupid'? You are the worst here. Even Clint takes the trouble to paste relevant statistics-- but you just bluster because you are the biggest punk here-- and BTW the only one I detest.

But not for what you write (there is no substance to criticize), not for your tone; the reason is you are a punk who is only worth snickering at.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 5:59PM

I'm not angry with you, only amused that someone your age (if you voted against Carter in '77, you are now middle-aged) would write so babyishly. "Idiot"
Why don't you write "doodyhead"!

You old punk.

Alan Brooks| 7.13.11 @ 6:02PM

I meant '76, if you voted against him in '76 you are far older than you appear to be-- you have to be at least 52 or 53.

Doorgunner| 7.13.11 @ 9:00PM

For god's sake, Brooks, get a hobby... get a life. I mean really, this is your retirement an old man internet crank? Jeez-louise, at least step outside once in a while to tell those damn kids to get off your lawn.

Southern_Comment| 7.14.11 @ 7:54AM

and your team did such a fine job? When was that?

Paul Nelson| 7.14.11 @ 3:59PM

Obama can repudiate the debt any time he wants to, after all it is only the full faith and credit of the US

shipley130| 7.15.11 @ 10:28PM

Dreams are not reality, Brooksie.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:49PM

Dear Mr. Brooks:

It is impossible to do that with his policies. It's like asking Ron Paul not to vote with Dennis Kucinich.

Dick Nome| 7.13.11 @ 9:52PM

Obama is an incompetent radical socialist ideologue and you are his useful idiot along with his WH hangerson.

emo| 7.17.11 @ 8:40AM

If we were at full employment, it would come about because Obama renounced all his previous political beliefs and embraced the GOP ala Clinton 1994-2000

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.13.11 @ 6:47AM

We are in the middle of a foreseeable crisis and Obama's leadership skills are lacking. The problem is the debt crisis and Obama is fumbling badly.

Obama shouldn't be too depressed though. The Republican leadership has no clear message here except for "It's the Presidents problem now."

I don't think that's a sustainable political cliche.

The public must see leadership here and although the Republicans are doing the right thing so far, there will be no forgiveness when the elderly don't get their social security checks.

The current environment in Washington is so filled with acid and acrimony you have to wonder what's coming next.

Even removing the debt crisis from the equation neither party is moving forward with solutions to change future outcomes.

Small business owners can only wonder what will happen next and that alone is preventing any real recovery.

After 50 years of publishing onerous and uncompromising laws which have hamstrung just about every business in America we are now reaping the end game.

The end game is no one wants to hire in such a litigious environment. The Republican Party has been there every step of the way.

If the Republicans have some luck perhaps the public will give them another opportunity to govern.

The last time Republicans governed they were Obama-lite.

oldfart| 7.13.11 @ 7:36AM

You forgot one phrase for the current occupant of 1600 Pa Ave - petulant child.

Southern_Comment| 7.14.11 @ 7:55AM

arrogant jerk
inept
ill intended
traitor
bungler
narcissism at it's finest
racist
failure
I think he forgot more than one.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:56PM

Souther, I'm guessing Heart of Dixie is your stomping ground---my favorite State in the South.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.13.11 @ 6:47AM

We are in the middle of a foreseeable crisis and Obama's leadership skills are lacking. The problem is the debt crisis and Obama is fumbling badly.

Obama shouldn't be too depressed though. The Republican leadership has no clear message here except for "It's the Presidents problem now."

I don't think that's a sustainable political cliche.

The public must see leadership here and although the Republicans are doing the right thing so far, there will be no forgiveness when the elderly don't get their social security checks.

The current environment in Washington is so filled with acid and acrimony you have to wonder what's coming next.

Even removing the debt crisis from the equation neither party is moving forward with solutions to change future outcomes.

Small business owners can only wonder what will happen next and that alone is preventing any real recovery.

After 50 years of publishing onerous and uncompromising laws which have hamstrung just about every business in America we are now reaping the end game.

The end game is no one wants to hire in such a litigious environment. The Republican Party has been there every step of the way.

If the Republicans have some luck perhaps the public will give them another opportunity to govern.

The last time Republicans governed they were Obama-lite.

casquette new era dc| 7.13.11 @ 7:13AM

sweet!

Jason| 7.13.11 @ 7:41AM

Simple solution. Business does it all the time. Each agency head is told: reduce your 2012 budget by 10% or we make you redundant. Same thing in 2013 and 2014. Federal budget cut by about 25-28% and the extra used for deficit reduction. This could be an annual day of celebration for Americans and could also continue indefinitely, finally getting our freedoms back.

Pecos Pete| 7.13.11 @ 8:05AM

Jason: You offer too much common sense.

Ned| 7.13.11 @ 10:48AM

Jason... would you mind forwarding this to some people? There's about 545 - is that the right number? - that come to mind... all of the House, all of the Senate, and the Supremes. This is so deep and profound it's obviously never occurred to ANY of them.

Don't bother sending it to the Lecturer-In-Chief (he was NEVER a Professor), reading isn't his thing... just talking.

buckeyeman| 7.13.11 @ 11:33AM

Sorry Jason, but this is quite stupid. Only incompetent CEO's would make across the board cuts like this. The intelligent move is to cut out unnecessary programs or employees completely and increase support for profitable ones. Real CEOs actually think about what they are doing.

Grzmlyk| 7.13.11 @ 12:03PM

Profitable government programs?

And those would be. . . . .

Your comment betrays liberal magical thinking at best and Keynesian mendacity at worst; every dollar of government spending is confiscated by force from the ever-shrinking group of producers and redistributed to the ever-growing group of takers. Period.

The are now more people in the cart than there are pulling the cart. Any idea how this story ends? Hint: The cart collapses.

You could cut every government program by 10% - hell, by 30% - and not affect anything. 70% of government that is not entitlement programs is redundant and/or unnecessary gravy train bloat - metastasized bureaucracy.

As for the entitlement programs, they simply are not sustainable. If sheer demographics don't spell out their fate, than surely the ever-burgeoning list of entitlements ought to.

Oh, wait: I forgot. As long as we have printing presses, there's plenty of money.

How's that working out in Europe again?

Redstateboy| 7.13.11 @ 8:09AM

It must be comforting being a Liber-ul Hussein supporter.. No matter how incompetent Hussein is, no matter how wrong headed, no matter how bad the economy gets.. Liber-uls find solace in... "it's Bush's fault."

Larry| 7.13.11 @ 8:11AM

Folks, government, federal and state and many locals have become behemoths. I don't think that we'll ever dig out from under them. They're too big, there are too many vested interests in keeping them huge. They are monsters who exist to feed in order to sustain themselves. They feed on us. They will never relinquish much if any hold on the grip by which they now hold us.

The only possible solution that I can see I see would require massive participation on the order of millions of Americans. How will we get that? We won't. People are too concerned with the latest ball scores, reality shows and every other bread and circus even that's thrown our way.

It's essentially, "Keep them occupied and distracted while we slowly kill them. They'll never know. "

scotchieguy| 7.13.11 @ 9:33AM

"Keep them occupied and distracted while we slowly kill them. They'll never know." Brilliant.

Redstateboy| 7.13.11 @ 8:20AM

my predicition?? On the campaign trail you'll see an angry, peevish, divisive, childish Hussein..
oh..?! and what's he going to promise this time?
Card Check? Amnesty? Jobs and Recovery? Seems to me he's out of ammunition.

emo| 7.13.11 @ 10:01AM

Dont forget Cap and Trade

Southern_Comment| 7.14.11 @ 8:01AM

Don't forget him telling the soldiers they should pay for their own insurance.
Don't forget his allowing other countries to drill in our waters, but not our own.
Don't forget his fairy tale view of every situation - he's goldilocks and everyone else is the evil villan (with the exception of debt talks, where he plays mediator and participant).
Don't forget jumping the gun and calling the police racists.
Don't forget his slimey deals.
Don't forget Obamacare.
Don't forget all of the aid he has pumped into countries like Pakistan.
Don't forget he handed over control of our troops to the UN.
Don't forget the Czars.
Don't forget the insulting bribe of our seniors.
Don't forget he had to interrupt his golf game to address the underwear bomber situation.
Don't forget the last 2 years and 7 months of his lies, insults, and incompetance.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:51PM

Southern---it wasn't the active soldiers, it was the Veterans---he wanted to extend insurance for everyone except those who earned it the most. In short, it was worse than what you said.

Minor point. Otherwise, absolutely correct.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 10:55AM

He still has racism and class warfare in his quiver, though the racism arrow is getting a bit dull.

Maddox| 7.13.11 @ 11:14AM

He still has ACORN, voter intimidation, union thugs, government owned banks and corporations, and the racism you mentioned. They are all being funded with our tax dollars.

Grzmlyk| 7.13.11 @ 1:05PM

Sadly, the racism card will never, ever be retired from the liberal bag of tricks, and it will work for all eternity.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were a movement afoot among the droolers at the Daily Kos or Media Matters or the DNC to enslave all white people at the hands of blacks in this country for the next 300 years - you know, just to make the playing field finally level, once and for all (nudge, nudge, wink wink).

Of course, "superior" liberals know that those "backward" blacks will require organizational expertise and funding from outside, so the elite white class will exempt themselves from their latest brilliant idea in social engineering (as always) in order to "help a brother out."

White guilt - and liberals bending over backward both personally and through institutional coercion to show the world how non-racist they are - is one of the very pillars of our post-modern society, which is tragic, because it is set in quicksand - it is in fact one of the major contributors in the collapse of Western Civilization, and it will not let up until its nihilistic work is done.

But so what if the empty husk of Western Civilization implodes for the sake of vanity? Liberals will be able to go to their graves patting themselves on the back, and you can't put a price on self-satisfaction.

Larry| 7.13.11 @ 8:24AM

His socialist puppet masters will not allow him to blame George Bush this time. Instead, we'll be hearing b*llshit rhetoric about "the 8 years before I was in office" and "I need 4 more years to complete the job."

REGIME CHANGE

Harry Russell| 7.13.11 @ 1:19PM

"I need 4 more years to complete the job."
Four more years of his Majesty will finish us off. If only more of the American people would open their eyes and not worship him. What can they possibly see that would make them want him for four more?

Harry the Horrible| 7.13.11 @ 8:45AM

Wishful thinking.
The only thing that can put Obama on the street for certain is a 'Pubbie who can campaign simultaneously for smaller, less intrusive, less expensive government, and make Americans feel proud of being Americans.
The former cuts in their power; the latter is too politically incorrect for most 'Pubbies.
But it it would be a heck of a show

Casey Abell| 7.13.11 @ 9:04AM

Assuming there's no miraculous economic recovery, Barry's strategy will probably be much the same as Jimmy's in 1980: demonize the opponent. Carter threw everything at Reagan, but the only thing that really stuck was the warmonger shtick. Reagan defused that by talking up "peace" while keeping his focus on Carter's miserable economy, culminating in the debate's "are you better off now than four years ago?"

So next year probably comes down to how demonizable the GOP nominee is. Barry would love somebody like Palin, who could be trashed as dumb, extreme, a reality TV creation. But I'm not sure Sarah will even run, and I can't see her getting the nomination. Gingrich would also be an easily demonizable opponent, as Clinton discovered. But Newt also has no chance at the nomination.

Somebody safe and boring like Romney or Pawlenty would probably be the least demonizable. But in a cycle where GOP voters want red meat, they may just be too bland to win the nomination.

Which leaves folks like Bachmann and Perry. They're both colorful types who would give some ammo to Barry's campaign. Perry would probably make the tougher opponent because he's run Texas for a long time and the state hasn't blown up. Michele hasn't run anything, and she has a long history of, uh, interesting comments on social issues.

Against a safe, boring type I really don't see how Barry wins if the economy stays bad. In fact, he's already falling behind Romney in the polls. Just for rooting interest I'd kinda like to see a more colorful character take on Obama. Would make for a more interesting race.

emo| 7.13.11 @ 10:00AM

Kinda like Dole, Ford and McCain were safe choices. Pawlenty is acceptable, however his campaign actually need to do something. Romney is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE and I refuse to vote for him...PERIOD.

Obama is falling behind Romney in the polls because the MSM hasnt attacked Romney yet, but they will especially about his religion.

Southern_Comment| 7.14.11 @ 5:49PM

The media wants Romney for the GOP candidate - after that they'll go back to full attack mode, no worries. Too bad Conservatives are not going to be directed by the media, and most are sitting back waiting to hear what they say, but yep I'm thinking it will be Perry that steps up to take a pledge. If nothing else that will drive the media INSANE.

PJ| 7.13.11 @ 10:25AM

Casey,
I like Perry alot & for the reasons you stated plus more! He's not perfect. I think he's the only credible candidate (maybe Bachmann also) who can say it like it is about & to Obama & not be ashamed of it.

JayDick| 7.13.11 @ 11:13AM

The most important criterion for a Republican nominee is how they would compete against Obama. Romney might do OK in this regard, but I don't see how he can argue against Obamacare. Plus, I think Romney is the worst of the contenders as far as his political convictions (or lack thereof) are concerned. Of the remaining possibilities, Perry seems the most promising to me, although we have plenty of time for things to develop.

Warrior| 7.13.11 @ 11:35AM

Romney is not now and never has been a conservative.

Casey Abell| 7.13.11 @ 12:41PM

If the economy stays rotten, Obamacare will be maybe the 37th priority among the indies who will decide the election. The first thirty-six will be that thing Carville talked about.

Mitt would beat Barry pretty easy on pocketbook issues, and would probably win without much trouble. Hey, Romney's already up in some polls, and we've got a lot more unemployment reports to go.

When you get to the more colorful types, things get dicier. If Bachmann wins the nom, Barry could get the conversation sidetracked onto, gee I dunno, pornography and slavery and whatnot. Michele's got to stop signing those pledges. Really, she's got to shut up about social issues, period. No upside for her in those issues, and plenty of trouble.

You're right that Perry may the best combo of red meat for the GOP faithful and acceptability to the indies who rule the general. Oddly, he's the only (possible) candidate in the race that I've ever actually voted for! Again, just for rooting interest, Obama-Perry might be the most fun matchup.

Casey Abell| 7.13.11 @ 12:49PM

Well, I did vote for Sarah on the ticket. But I really don't think she's going to run. Michele has pretty much stolen her section of the room.

I will say this, Palin's enrtrance into the race would be the best thing that could happen to Romney. Would fracture Bachmann's GOP primary vote a lot more than his own. Perry might have something of the same effect, though he might take a few more votes from Romney.

Rick V.| 7.13.11 @ 9:41AM

It's the ATM's fault. And that thing in the airport that spits out your ticket. And George Bush, don't forget him.

skip| 7.13.11 @ 1:40PM

And did anyone check the air in their tires? Huh?

for the want of a shot of air the tire was lost;
for the want of a tire the fuel mileage was lost;
for the want of fuel mileage the energy policy was lost;
for the want of an energy policy the automobile was lost;
for the want of an automobile transportation was lost;
for the want of transportation the economy was lost;
for the want of an economy the employment was lost;
for the want of employment the federal revenue was lost;
for the want of federal revenue the oceans ceased receding;
for the want of receding oceans the environment was lost;
for the want of the environment the world was lost;
for the want of the world the anointed one was lost;
for the want of the anointed one everyone's hope was lost;

All for the want of a shot of air...

Have you even touched your peas?

emo| 7.13.11 @ 9:57AM

Even in strong boom years, it is rare for the unemployment rate to fall more than 1% in a full year. So it is likely Obma will be facing re-election with an 8% unemployment rate at minimum. Making matters worse is that so many people dropped out of the labor force that unemployment will remain elevated even with decent monthly payroll growth.

PJ| 7.13.11 @ 10:08AM

"Will the Unemployment Numbers Cost Obama His Job?"

What a no-brainer question! But I'll answer it anyway for those who don't have a clue------YES, YES, YES, YES!
(Unless the election is rigged.)

Wes in MT| 7.13.11 @ 10:08AM

. . . . . and real recovery is when Sarah Palin moves into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, DC.
Go ahead, say she's dumb, unpolished, blah, blah.. . . look at her record of accomplishment in Alaska prior to being selected as McCain's running mate- I mean honestly examine it. 80+% approval rating among alaskans. I know she hasn't declared yet. . . Reagan did not declare until November of 1979. Why do we want to let the media control or push our selection process? We know who their candidate is. The only question that I want to ask everyone who is opposed to Obama is this: will you support the republican nominee in 2012? Will you support Palin if she is the nominee? I'm hoping the answere is a resounding YES! Now campaign for your favorite in the primary process so we don't get a RINO heading the ticket. And when the dust settles, support the nominee. My choice is Sarah Palin.

John Navratil| 7.13.11 @ 10:49AM

Wes in MT,

Of course we need to get behind the eventual nominee, no matter whom, to defeat this scourge on America. If, however, we run someone uninspiring (a McCain redux) the Dems can win. The power of the incumbency is strong and if Obama manages to blame his economic disasters on an instransigent Republican party, as he is doing, we will be in for an unpleasant November 7th. A RINO would be just the ticket for Obama; not because he wouldn't get the center, but because he would lose the base.

Doctor Right| 7.13.11 @ 10:26AM

Obama IS fighting for his job.

Unfortunately for us, the job he wants is NOT President of the United States.

Obama wants to Dictate, not Govern.

He has no time in his busy schedule (irony intended) for the untidiness of democracy. He does not believe in our Republic.

To that end, he is consciously, purposefully trying to destroy the Constitutional pillars that have supported our nation since it's inception.

To anyone who is actually paying attention to what Obama does, as opposed to what he says, this is painfully obvious. Yet we are surrounded by well-meaning people on our side-of-the-aisle, Conservatives even, who REFUSE to believe this simple truth.

I understand their dilemma. No one wants to believe that the man who holds the nation's highest office is an enemy of the Constitution he has sworn to uphold...

...And yet, it IS the truth. Obama is more than just another dim-witted liberal...He is the enemy, and he MUST be defeated politically in 2012.

Drunken Sailor| 7.13.11 @ 10:58AM

President Obama wants us to answer to and follow the UN. Then he wants that job. His ego knows no limits.

Al Adab| 7.13.11 @ 1:24PM

At what point do the urban riots rise to the instigation of martial law? ...and , oh yeah, the cancellation of those anoying elections.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:52PM

The job he wants is Sec-Gen of the UN. He wants to go there after 8 years of destroying the US, where it will then be the most powerful position on the Planet.

Mike Gabel| 7.13.11 @ 10:30AM

First, we must all understand that its not about "jobs", but economic growth, which in turn, produces jobs.
Next, it is clear to see that this president does nothing but demonize, and attempt to tax and regulate, the very drivers of economic growth (from people who earn more than 200K to millionaires, billionaires, propserous companies and industries).
We also need to understand the folly of Obama's liberal policies like welfare and entiltlement programs do nothing to incentivize the poor, but further enslaves them.
So, to sit and wonder why there is neither economic growth nor full employment, would be the exercise of an idiot.
The only logical conclusion is that this president is either the most stupid man who has ever taken office, or he is destroying this nation on purpose.

PJ| 7.13.11 @ 11:03AM

Your first statement is absolutely correct!

Unfortunately, for the dimwitted & for those who are desperately unemployed, I don't think they care where the jobs come from, ie govn't or private sector.

davelnaf| 7.13.11 @ 10:57AM

Republicans in Congress of course understand how dire the situation will be for them if they cave on more taxes or anything else that Obama really wants. A good part of the country will give up on them and start an alternative party. But if Republicans fear so much for their jobs in the conventional sense of dems portraying them as throwers-of-grannies-over-cliffs they will cave. So, for fear of the usual dem demagoguery they will give Obama what he wants and they get to keep their jobs for the next one or two election cycles and then they’re out of office forever. Not a good deal.

It is going to be difficult for Republicans, but they will have to deny Obama the deal that might help him get a second term. There really is no alternative at this point. Obama has got to go.

Slacker| 7.13.11 @ 11:17AM

If BHO wins....I don't want to think about it.

What if BHO loses? That may not be so pretty either.

If (when) he gets behind in the polls, we know the media will call racism. They can't resist. They truely belivie it. And, what else have they got?

This will be playing with fire. No, nitro glycerin. If he loses there is a strong probability our inner cities burn. The recent flash mobs are practice runs.

We're in a bad spot.

Warrior| 7.13.11 @ 11:38AM

Why not just drop in shipments of C4 and flame throwers to the inner cities in advance. I would call that a terrific start on urban renewal.

Doctor Right| 7.13.11 @ 1:00PM

I could not care less anymore about the Left's pathetic accusations.

martin j smith| 7.13.11 @ 11:48AM

Obama's concept can be seen by looking at his positioning on the debt ceiling debate and actually look at two things: What Obama says and what Obama does. I do not believe that unemployment numbers of 9.2 % are the true measure. But, even if they were the first question is this: Does Obama care ? About anything ( other than his re-election ) ? And here is where I land:
NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And this is crucial: This piece assumes that Obama
will do something to improve our economy. And, this is where I part company with some writers and posters. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT OBAMA GIVES A S--T ABOUT US,OUR ECONOMY OR ANYTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!EXCEPT HIS RE-ELECTION. And one other thing: HE WANTS TO DESTROY US. This is the point where many disagree--but at their and our peril.

Louis Jenkins| 7.13.11 @ 12:39PM

For a neophyte president, one who was to be the grandest president ever, the golden child, he sure has made a lot of mistakes, all of which does not tally against him. I don't need to go into details, you know them as well as the next person. Yet Obama has his core, and the MSM, who will support him no matter what. The Thinking-Reasoning crowd- ie Conservatives, have had their fill. The Loving-Let's Unite crowd say's wait! He will turn this country around. Give him a chance!

Well, today a big majority of voters are against raising the debt ceiling. They don't want it. I'd have to say they're the Thinking-Reasoning crowd. Do not believe though that it cannot occur. Cannot get elected again because of the un-employment numbers? It can occur. Second Amendment rights down the tube? It can occur. Thinking and Reasoning no longer have a place in government, and conservatives are pushed to the fringe. Get ready folks. Obama will have his way regardless of the consequences. Our country is in trouble big time, all because he refuses to see the writing on the wall.

Derek Leaberry| 7.13.11 @ 12:53PM

It looks like Obama has the good fortune to be running against Mitt Romney which will guarantee him victory in November, 2012. Millions of conservatives will sit on their hands if Romney is nominated.

Doctor Right| 7.13.11 @ 1:01PM

Romney will NOT be the nominee.

Mark my word.

Derek Leaberry| 7.13.11 @ 1:49PM

I hope you live up to your name, Doctor.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:53PM

Dr R---gosh, I hope you're right. Then again, I usually do. You are a joy to read.

Pat| 7.13.11 @ 12:55PM

Has Obama fumbled the ball, been observed goldbricking out behind the White House’s Jimmy Carter Tool Shed or repeatedly screwed the chief executive pooch? Nah! Ridiculous! Gimme a break here – because, according to the Democratic National Committee, Obama has set more individual records, broken more previously held records and through sheer athletic ability alone has outperformed every Democratic president since Shoeless Andy Jackson was pitching for the Potomac Demos. In his rookie year, Obama doled out more taxpayer dollars than either Clinton or LBJ, who were previously tied for “Giveaway Rookie of the Year”. In his first term alone, Obama has given away more of other people’s money than the “Borrow, Tax and Spend” record totals of FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton – combined!

His “Party Pork Score” may never be surpassed – there are new highways in California built a short 5 years ago which have since been repaved and re-landscaped 3 times thanks to Obama’s Stimulus dollars. In terms of patronage jobs, Obama’s “Friend of a Friend” average is .659 compared to hard hitting Bill Clinton’s average of .341 – to Democratic Party insiders who compile these stats, Obama is the Babe Ruth of stolen tax dollars, the Mickey Mantle of Bailouts and the Willie Mays of Stimulus Plans. So many Democrats and friends of Democrats have benefitted financially during Obama’s brief major league career, they’re thinking of naming a secret hideaway and congressional intern love nest after him – the Barack Obama Democratic Policy Institute and Health Spa located on Maui’s beautiful northwest coast.

Does this man sound like a failure to you, an underperforming right fielder who should be sent down to the minors – in Boise? Be reasonable here because all Republican voters and at least 17 Democrats in this country know for a fact presidents can’t create jobs. Presidents are supposed to remain in office while the private sector creates new jobs, sponsor meaningless full employment legislation and then take all the credit for every positive development in our nation’s economy. It was sheer bad luck the recession didn’t end in 2009, an unfortunate turn of events the unemployment rate soared to a record high. Obama has tried everything to break the bad Ju-Ju, he hasn’t changed his socks in 6 months, he wears his undershorts on backwards and eats blackstrap molasses at every meal, including state banquets for foreign ambassadors. Nothing seems to work, the slump persists, so Obama is reluctantly willing to take personal responsibility for his administration’s failure – he has agreed to dump Joe Biden before the start of his second term.

David| 7.13.11 @ 1:23PM

Do not underestimate the ability of Bam Bam, the network news, the unions (government employees, teachers, policemen, firemen, and railroad, auto, truckers, and other workers), ACORN, dead voters, and illegal immigrant voters, to completely STEAL the election.

Couple that with all of the ignorant voters who don't even know who the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is and what kind of so-called church he and his family attended for almost 20 years, and Bam Bam's chance of re-election is pretty good.

I still think the big surprise is that he will make Hillary his running mate and move Biden to Sec of State.

I would like to see a Perry/Bachmann, Perry/Cain, or Perry/Santorum ticket. Any of those would be great.

And remember, when any of us is called a racist simply because we disagree with the Grand One, to simply reply that "WE DON'T LIKE HIS WHITE HALF EITHER".

somnolence| 7.13.11 @ 1:46PM

The most viable GOP ticket, at least to me, and surely the one that will give Obama the most trouble, is Bachmann/Cain. I'm so confident this will be the ticket I have made it my Facebook profile picture.

irish19| 7.14.11 @ 12:29AM

Cain definitely. Bachmann-maybe yes, maybe no. I think I like her since the NY Times editorial board has its collective knickers in a twist over her and is already trying to savage her. So maybe more yes than no.
However, I will vote for anyone who promises to make John Bolton SecState.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:54PM

Irish, you are superb.

Occam's Tool| 7.17.11 @ 10:55PM

From your mouth to G-d's ears, somnolence.

Oldefarte| 7.13.11 @ 3:26PM

Aaron, I can only HOPE that your titled prediction comes true. This should now be recognized by the American public as a complete mistake by its voters. IMO, the werriness of the public's disgust over the middle east war caused them to radically attempt to grant political power to this unknown candidate that was being promoted by the Kennedyisk liberal branch of the Democratic Party. After Clinton, the internal strugle within same was between the Clinton [moderate/conservative] camp and the Kennedy [liberal/radical/camp. We all know which side eventually succeeded, and this presidency has been historical in its entremity. The once gradual approach of the DNC in instituting its liberal policies has now seen an out-of-the-closet type explosion in radical politics, and IMO the revulsion of the American public will be seen in November of next year over same!!!!!!!!

martin j smith| 7.13.11 @ 5:21PM

If I were counseling The Repub Leadership I would strongly advise setting up a a counsel for political strategy now to examine various moves that Obama might make and how to a) anticipate them and b) how to respond. There may yet be not only talk of but actually need for an impeachment process among other things

POST American| 7.13.11 @ 10:15PM

Unofficial (ie REAL) stats have unemployment
at 20% at a time when other unofficial figures
(--again probably accurate) est. 30 MILLION
illegal immigrants roam the landscape.

Remember ALLLL this during the round off
of the round off of the Gobalist RED China
TREASON op. ALLLL this as the Bush/Obama
police state grid is everywhere and in our face.

The 'continuity of agenda' since the CFR/RIIA
Chatham House front Bush Sr. has been impeccable on these wonderfully deteriorating
situations.

Nite| 7.13.11 @ 11:23PM

Obama and his minions have shown themselves to be unqualified the their current jobs. In fact, this is one of the worst administrations in my lifetime. Carter was bad, but Obama is far far worse. I hope the citizens who voted for him wise up and vote Republican unless they have their heads in the sand.

C.K. Amos| 7.14.11 @ 2:37AM

'Will the Unemployment Numbers Cost Obama His Job?"

We earnestly pray so.

The Sarcastic Cynic| 7.14.11 @ 1:52PM

Ojoba' s re-election depends on the American electorate and the in-the-tank media doing it's slobber fest. It must be true, a hand job is better than no job.

weddingdress| 7.15.11 @ 4:54AM

The 'continuity of agenda' since the CFR/RIIA
Chatham House front Bush Sr. has been impeccable on these wonderfully deteriorating
situations.

shipley130| 7.15.11 @ 10:27PM

There's a lot of sh*t that will cost Obama his job.

nike shoes UK| 8.8.11 @ 4:59AM

is good

Dried Fruits| 10.9.11 @ 2:22AM

What are you listening to? In fact, his tendency to focus on monetary issues has been frequently criticized. Your mind is so addled with Paul hate that it has impaired your ability to think rationally and see the world as it really is.