The American Spectator : Obama Under Water

Text Size

Obama Under Water

By James P. Gannon on 10.24.11 @ 6:12AM

Living in housing he (and we) can scarcely afford.

If President Barack Obama were a legal document, he'd be a sub-prime home loan.

The nation's housing crisis seems an apt metaphor for the president and his political position one year before he stands for re-election.

Like nearly a quarter of the mortgage loans outstanding on U.S. homes, Obama is under water. His poll ratings are low and sinking. Gallup records 43 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval. Three-quarters of American voters think the country is on the wrong track under his leadership. In moving into the White House -- a very fancy address -- Obama bought a lot more house than he could afford, based on his ability and experience.

Obama finds himself in this upside-down state because his leadership skills simply aren't sufficient to make the payments on the big, questionable loan that the American voters made to him in 2008. Like those banks that were willing to extend mortgage loans to risky prospects without documenting their credit-worthiness, the voters gave the untested, inexperienced junior senator from Illinois the keys to the White House, simply because they were sick of the guy and the gang that had occupied that property for the prior eight years.

Obama was like the single mother with a part-time job at Wal-Mart who scored a no-doc, interest-only mortgage loan of $400,000 on a big suburban house to fulfill her "American dream" fantasy, only because the mortgage lender was throwing money at almost anyone with a pulse. Obama's pulse was "hope and change" and it looked good on paper when the voters were grasping at anything or anyone not named Bush.

But just as Americans have discovered that that home values can go down as well as up, they have learned that hope is not a strategy and change can be for the worse as well as for the better. In real estate, there's a well-known post-purchase emotion called buyer's remorse. So it is in politics, too -- ask almost any Democrat these days and you'll hear some variation of buyer's remorse. They thought they'd just love living in Obama Acres, but now they know they should have bought that other place on Hillary Hill.

As for the president, he's in that desperate state of denial exhibited by so many under-water homeowners. He can't make the payments (leadership, effectiveness, sincerity) so he's dashing around the country on campaign buses or running to fund-raisers, bashing the rich, the bankers and the Republicans, hoping nobody will notice he's a deadbeat deep in debt.

But it has become so obvious to all, and Americans are running out of patience. If he were like a lot of under-water homeowners these days, he could face up to reality, mail in the keys and move on. But Obama is too arrogant and stubborn for that, so we are going to have to foreclose on him about 12 months from now. 'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.

About the Author

James P. Gannon is a retired former Wall Street Journal reporter and newspaper editor. He lives in Virginia.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (116) | Leave a comment

Michael Tomlinson| 10.24.11 @ 6:48AM

This is what comes of electing an inexperienced political neophyte who can at times give a good speech so people can assuge the country of so-called "racial guilt."

Alan Brooks| 10.24.11 @ 10:33AM

McCain would have been a far worse POTUS.
We'd have had to listen to his Vietnam War anecdotes:
"my buddy the corporal had a leg blown off in '70, but we put a pencil between his teeth for him to bite down on..."

Des Animaux| 10.24.11 @ 11:15AM

Lyndon Johnson use to take his shirt off to show reporters his wounds.

He also liked to pick up his dogs by the ears and swing them around in circles.

Ned| 10.24.11 @ 4:33PM

Johnson never got closer than the base theater to actual war - his Silver Star was a phony he ginned up so that he could use it in future elections, jut like Kerry did years later - and the scars LBJ was showing off were from surgery - gall bladder, I think...

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 11:28AM

BULLEXCREMENT!!!!!!!!!!

Drunken Sailor| 10.24.11 @ 12:03PM

Alan, wipe your chin. Your becoming Obama's Lewinsky.

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 1:36PM

'Becoming'????????????

wolflen| 10.24.11 @ 2:01PM

well...ya ever see chris matthews in a blue dress...

jan| 10.24.11 @ 2:03PM

Are you kidding ANYBODY would have made a better pres.

play nice| 10.24.11 @ 2:44PM

A POTUS who thinks "just because we can doesn't mean we have to" would be nice.

idalily| 10.24.11 @ 2:27PM

Uh, no. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for McCain to do as much damage to our country in the same space of time Obama has had. Face it, Alan. Obama's ability to govern is and always was an illusion. He is completely incompetent. His presidency is the disastrous culmination of the liberal left and their fallacious notion that life can be made fair and equal if only we let government handle it. McCain would have been FAR better. That's not saying much though, since a...dare I say it?...lawn gnome would have been better, too.

SpiralArchitect| 10.24.11 @ 4:08PM

ROFL - you guys still read what Brooks posts!

Occam's Tool| 10.24.11 @ 4:47PM

Spiral---you ever pass a bad car accident while driving that you know you should ignore but there are all those flashing lights of different colors and your eyes are drawn to look regardless----

well, if you have, that's what Alan Brooks is like.

Dan| 10.24.11 @ 7:11PM

You are one sicko Brooks, making fun of Vietnam vets and their injuries.

W| 10.24.11 @ 7:13PM

NOBODY would have been worse than Obama. Case closed. Not even Algore or Jean Kerry.

Alan Brooks| 10.25.11 @ 3:35AM

I worship obama's anus. If loving obama is wrong, I don't want to be right.

Controse| 10.25.11 @ 11:44AM

Well that about says it all. Let's all leave some time for fuller more fruitful lives by skipping over any future Alan Brooks posts.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 10.24.11 @ 6:50AM

The fact that a con man like Barack Obama can get elected makes you realize, the problem is with the public, not Obama.

Gary B| 10.24.11 @ 6:58AM

The only force that could have overwhelmed Hillary in '08 was the mother of political correctness reflexes - the opportunity to elect a black man to show the world how diverse we had become. Not only was he black, but he hated America. How can you beat that for an excursion into the land of self-hating, liberal guilt?

WRTolkas| 10.24.11 @ 8:06AM

“Obama gives new meaning to the Phrase: “Anyone can become President.” G. Bruce Poe

russel| 10.24.11 @ 10:36AM

Agree B . Sure we can blame the LSM for their complete lack of vetting and their knee-padding , but they didn't vote in the slacker . Ouch if this country had to really knuckle down the way it did in 1941 .

jan| 10.24.11 @ 2:06PM

You're so right,
look at the voters of MA and MN, electing stuart schmally and barneys frank,
mind boggling, and who keeps re electing schmucky shumer!!!!

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 2:30PM

Really? The dems have a franchise on idiot candidates?

Watching the current GOP slate waddle and stumble is depressing, but a clear indicator that BHO did not get us into this mess, nor does he or anyone else have a solution to the problem without rolling back the legislative boondoggles since the Glass-Steagall repeal.

The rise of subprimes from 5% to 30% of all mortgages during the period from 1999 to 2008 is interesting in its correlation to the number of bad mortgages we have today - and the inane speculative markets in the desert southwest and Florida driven by this regulatory deliverance.

Both parties are intensely aware of this error and both have blood on their hands, thus the whitewashing of hard choices. The OWS group will get traction if they can centralize their venom on this specific area. Populists like Cain and Perry better get their rhetoric right or it may overwhelm them. Willard is already known as the banker and can keep a separation.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 5:00PM

oh BS. the groundwork for the financial debacle was basically laid during the early to mid 90s...and Democrats stood at the vanguard. where the Repubs failed is twofold: in playing a principle role in repealing Glass Steagall (as you mention); and, in not generating the fortitude and political muscle to prevent the deluge everyone knew was building by 1998-2000. the champion and principle drivers inside HUD, in the courts, legislatively..were primarily Dems.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 5:54PM

I don't remember bearded marxists populating the boards of Lehman and Stearns during this period. They ran the charade, got bitten badly and their buds at Goldman were quite happy to pick up the pieces at 10 cents on the dollar.

It was the uber-randian Greenspan that steered this wagon.

Everyone remembers who was in charge when the house came tumbling down. It is observers here that choose to run away from accountability and blame people that weren't within a million miles of policy power.

Paulson knew the deal. Boehner's teary pleas for TARP also were revealing. Bernanke, shackled by privilege today, knows the true story - and we'll know finally after he leaves the chair what Greenspan did to underwrite the "irrational exuberance" he so audaciously lamented, but offered no policy solution to.
If you want to assign blame, follow the money. It wasn't Frank that profited from this, it was Gramm and his ilk.
It was Junior and his ham-handed tax cuts to stanch a mortal wound with a band-aid. It was Junior putting the fox (Paulson) in charge of the henhouse.

Corey| 10.25.11 @ 3:52PM

You're kidding right? The vast majority of Wall Street is leftist. They LOVE democrats because democrats are most likely to sell themselves for influence.... Republicans do it to, to an extent, but look at the money being funneled from wallstreet to Obama, its like a Waterfall.. not even Romney can match the Wallstreet money being sent to Obama.

beebop2| 10.24.11 @ 6:08PM

I guess this is all you got? So and so is worse? What a fall from hope and change, no? And I have news for you: Liberal has become a dirty word and there won't be a snow balls chance in hell this will happen again ... thank God.

js| 10.25.11 @ 9:34AM

he started the whole housing fiasco in 1994 when he represented acorn, then gets rewaeater with the presidency

Shamus| 10.24.11 @ 7:24AM

Even with all his negatives, Obama still stands a fair chance of reelection. Media stands ready to provide as much free marketing as might be needed, while Republicans seem unable to provide a viable alternative.

Alice Moore| 10.24.11 @ 8:16AM

So, you're getting ready to vote for the Current Occupant rather than the GOP nominee? Staying at home or voting for a 3rd party candidate is a vote for Obama.

Shamus, ANY of the GOP would be a better President than what we have at this time. I say this with no ifs, ands, buts, or any other qualifications. Their tenure will bring some improvement.

Brian Mc| 10.24.11 @ 8:28AM

Most that read and agree with what is written here would never consider voting for the alien, Alice. The question is whether there will be an election at all and my bet is that for the first time in my life my vote really isn't going to matter. I am having serious doubts as to our ability to get that far. The mob rule mentality is superceding our Republic and Consitution. You cannot reason with bitterness, envy, jealousy, hatred, spitefulness, vengeance and on and on.

Tom Osterman| 10.24.11 @ 8:47AM

John "Maverick" McCain would have been a better choice, but he thumbed his nose at the GOP base and then lectured that the base would have to hold its nose and do the right thing. And he seemed to think he could take on a charismatic opponent with the press in his pocket.
Recall the situation sixteen years ago: Bill Clinton was damaged goods (remember Hillarycare?), and we all thought he'd be a one-termer. Then the GOP nominated Bob "E.D." Dole. Obama may not be Clinton, but the GOP may yet find the man who can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

PolishKnight| 10.24.11 @ 9:19AM

Exactly Tom. The arrogance of the country club Republican party leadership thinks that when a Democrat opponent is weak, it's a perfect time to put in a moderate. Or hell, anytime is a good time to put in a moderate!

I disagree with Alice and Tom that McCain or a moderate Republican would be better. In many ways, they're worse since they brand bad democrat policies (stimulus spending, amnesty for illegals, the status quo in DC) with a Republican administration and then the left can chuckle: "Deregulation and capitalism caused this!"

A McCain presidency would have gone like this, folks: First thing, amnesty for all the illegals! Think the welfare rolls are high now? Imagine 20 million more on them! Then, McCain would have met with Obama and then helped pass a similar stimulus but maybe instead of a trillion maybe only 900 billion. Because he's a maverick Republican you know!

I sadly voted for McCain and it didn't matter, Obama won. Next time, I won't bother voting for his successor.

Tom Osterman| 10.24.11 @ 10:12AM

"Better than" is a relative term. I meant that McCain would have been less bad than Obama. But you're right, he would still have been pretty bad.

Al Adab| 10.24.11 @ 11:25AM

This is why we must beware of a qRimney, for example. What is the point of electing one who will not reverse the policies of this administration? It does us no good to simply try and make government work more efficiently if its actions are wrong to start. It is time to reduce its size. Period.

As to public housing, how much longer can we afford to subsidize the current tenant in our public house?

Deborah D| 10.24.11 @ 12:10PM

Al, George Will said about Romney on ABC's This Week, "The GOP has found its Michael Dukakis." How true. He called him a "a technocratic Massachusetts governor running on competence, not ideology." You can watch it here: http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....omney.html Wake up, Republicans....

Al Adab| 10.24.11 @ 2:26PM

DD:
True indeed. We will regret it should he be the nominee.

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 11:34AM

Anyone indicating McCain would have been worse than this socialist, anti-American, anti-capitalist, labor union ars-kissing incompetitent moron-in-chief is in serious need of psychiatric assistance. This is the same type THINKING STUPIDLY that got us into this current mess by their actions or inactions on 11/4/08. May the Almighty help this country survive until a correction can be made on 11/4/12!!!!!

PolishKnight| 10.24.11 @ 1:58PM

In some ways, yes Oldefarte. Instead of being able to criticize Obama's policies, we'd be in the unenviable position of rationalizing similar but slightly less bad policies from McCain. Instead of considering a full reset in 2012, which is still possible, we'd be stuck with another 4 years of a continuation of policies since George Bush I.

Think about it, that's what we're dealing with here: The legacy of "read my lips, no new taxes" moderate country-club politician GHB who set in motion Carter-lite policies that we have lived with for 20 years. A lot of panzers can get over the speed bumps in 20 years!

I'd rather see a "radical extremist" run for election and maybe lose than hold me nose year after year for a lesser of two evils. If you think about it, that kind of action is unAmerican. It's the kind of settle-for-the-status-quo statist action of a European. Why have freedom if there's little good it can be used for anyway?

I want a real choice in 2012 I can feel good about making.

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 2:48PM

PK: With all due respect, you're assuming that this country is still in existence in another twelve months from today, and I'm saying the probability of that status is tentative at best. Granted McCain wasn't the second coming of JC, but at least he wasn't a trojun-horsed radical who is internally destroying this country economically, militarily, etc. It's now being reported that all Christians in the ME are fleeing for their lives due to this wonderful Arab Spring fostered by this administration; banks/financials are under assault from the Justice Dept and Dodd-Frank; Welfarecare is causing businesses to not hire and expand; the Justice Dept is suing individual states over their immigration laws and is threatning Swiss/foreign banks over US depositors' bank accounts; the Interior Dept is w/h needed oil drilling permits while the price of gasoline is climbing; the Justice Dept is refusing to enforce civil rights laws against minority perpetrators; etc. And you say that McCain would have instigated this type of governmental crap............give me a GD break please!!!!!!!!

DTOM| 10.24.11 @ 2:02PM

Olde one,

Ask yourself this question: Would John McCain have vetoed ObamaCare after Pelosi and Reid rammed it through Congress?

If McCain had won and both Houses of Congresses were the same, McCain would have had that bill on his desk and had to decide whether to sign it. Ultimately, he would have buckled in a flurry of bi-partisanship with the media screeching at him on all sides. Then they would have permanently stained it as "bi-partisan." It's not really not Obama's bill! It's only called that to spare the Congressional Democrats the incredible burden of having to run with it tied around their necks.

We have a chance, only a chance, to repeal it if we can elect an honest-to-god conservative who will not fold in the face of the upcoming media firestorm that will accompany repeal legislation to the Oval Office. A moderate, especially a moderate with bipartisan leanings will not be able to withstand the bad press.

Bank on it.

idalily| 10.24.11 @ 2:31PM

Actually, as much as I dislike McCain, I think he would have vetoed it. He would have had to consider the screeching and united opposition of the GOP members of Congress, and he would have vetoed. He might, though, have requested a watered down, more palatable version and gotten some of that bi-partisanship, but I doubt it. Thank you, Tea Party.

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 2:59PM

First of all, McCain likely would not have been faced with that choice [and if so, yes he would have vetoed it]. Obama came in with a wave of elected Democrats which gave Pilosi/Reid legislative firepower. If the voters hadn't been so stupid on 11/4/08 in electing these typically radical Democrats, then your scenerio would be moot. It's entirely the fault of the brain-dead voters as to why we're currently in the cesspool now, and if the morons would have used common sense on 11/4/08 and realized the extreme radicalness of these Democrats, our economy now would be improving, we wouldn't have WELFARECARE or Dodd-Frank; and we could debate running a conservative against a President McCain or either in putting tea-party political pressure upon him to bend him in a conservative direction. This country may not have a choice on 11/4/12, as it may become bankrupt or destroyed by an patriotic Arab country enhancing its Arab Spring agenda!!!!!!!!!

PolishKnight| 10.24.11 @ 4:43PM

DTOM, I disagree. The Obamacare bill barely made it to his desk hence all the kickbacks in it and exceptions for Democrat donors. If McCain was in the WH, they would have put off healthcare for another 4 years. And they would probably today be salivating at getting that chance in 2012! Because as ALL of us know, the economy today would only be slightly worse with McCain in office!

Instead, McCain would be bored and looking for something "Maverick" to do. How about the dream act? Why not? He would call all his Maverick buddies such as Pelosi and get it written up and passed in a matter of weeks.

Then it would be game over.

Shamus| 10.24.11 @ 11:20AM

I think I'll vote for Ron Paul in the primary, and then for whoever is nominated (Cain, Romney, Perry, etc.) But my vote won't be of great importance, since the state where I live will vote Republican. People in Iowa, Florida, Colorado, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and elsewhere will decide the race.

Al Adab| 10.24.11 @ 11:28AM

Right you are. The GOP will not lose a single state from its 2008 list. Add VA and NC to that column and then it becomes clear the election comes down to Ohio and Fla.

Ed| 10.24.11 @ 12:08PM

For what it's worth, Ohio went Republican in 2008 in the Governor and Senate races. I hope that we continue this trend in 2012.

Deborah D| 10.24.11 @ 12:15PM

NC -- usually votes Republican for president, but went with Obama in 2008. It usually votes Democrat for governor and legislature....the legislature went Republican for the first time since Reconstruction in 2010. We have a doofus for a governor (idiot who doesn't think we should have elections for Congress in 2010 -- Dem, natch). I think NC is ready for a Republican governor in 2012 and a do-over to make up for their 2008 idiotic vote for The One. At least I hope so!! So many dumb Northeastern transplants here -- let's hope they're awake enough.

Al Adab| 10.24.11 @ 4:10PM

The riots in Charlotte next summer at the DEM convention will turn off the NC voters big time. The Left is sowing seeds of its own demise with the radical OWS movement. What irony. The electoral votes of Ohio and Fla will decide the issue. It will be close.

BTW DD, I have a niece in Charlotte and yes, she works for one of the banks.

Deborah D| 10.25.11 @ 5:54AM

Oh no!! Your niece is a "bankster"! Bless her. Hope she survives the Democrat convention. It should be a lot of fun in Charlotte. If the OWS crowd gets crazy -- Southerners do not like people coming down here making trouble. It won't be good for The One in NC if they do.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 2:43PM

I don't think Shamus suggested he was voting for BHO, Alice.
Name one GOP candidate with a plan to extricate home-owners from bad mortgages that can work quickly? None? That's what I thought.

The US econ is nearly 70% consumer-consumption. Without addressing their #1 stressor, household debt, nothing will budge.

The "job creators" are flush with dough, have the lowest taxes in generations - thanks to BHO, and continue to offshore their cash for no other reason than they can with impunity. They do not spend to the same percentages as "real Americans", and are clearly hoarders that remove capital from markets, not make it more available.

They have a near complete mobility that 90% of Americans do not. I will vote for a candidate that enables Americans to be as mobile as the rich - with their mortgages, healthcare and jobs - with the similar minimal risks the rich possess.
The game is rigged, the GOP dares to utter a "level playing field" as punchlines in their rhetoric, but put up or shut up this time.

Claypoole| 10.24.11 @ 4:04PM

Canuckistani: It is not the responsibility of the taxpayers to pick up the mortgages of those who are caught in unpayable debt. Until the housing market is allowed to find its bottom, that large portion of our economy will not improve.

The job creators offshore their cash because repatriating it will bring them a huge tax bill.

And please consider that it is Republicans/conservatives who have proposed health insurance that is portable for all--not just the rich.

I am not rich, but I 'm happy for those who are--let's have lots more of them.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 5:29PM

If they truly believed in insurance portability, then they would have enacted it during Junior's regime.

There is no way that 10th Amendment Perry will use the commerce clause for ANYTHING other than derricks in every lawn, and Willard has run away from his record. Who are all these people that have a chance for the nom that are taking up your cause?

These "job creators" you speak of are actively avoiding their tax burdens and you coddle them?
What gives?
We have a nofly list for terrorists and track their every movement using tax dollars extraordinaire. Why not the c-level execs of tax dodgers as well?

They derive their fortune from the consumers of the US, use our financial infrastructure and populate our chi-chi neighborhoods under the protection of taxpayer funded police and services.
They import goods under the auspices of lax trade laws and retain all rights as Americans when the locals get wise to their robber-baron ways in foreign lands.

My preference is to get the tax dollars out of them, pay for some of our past bills and stop them from simply sitting on their money. You apparently do not agree.

Claypoole| 10.24.11 @ 6:49PM

Yes, it's their money. Not the government's. Taking advantage of tax laws to avoid giving government more of their money is legal and sensible, rational action taken by productive people.

Regarding their chi-chi neighborhoods: who do you think pays the real estate/township/city taxes that provide "police and services?" The welfare parasites?

Corey| 10.25.11 @ 3:55PM

The stated marginal tax rate is the lowest, but the effective tax rate is not.

You need to study the difference between the two... but then again, you are an Obama lackey, so facts are not something you care to bother yourself with.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 5:09PM

again...total BS. what planet do you live on? businesses that have made cash (other than the solyndras of the world... :-) ...) did so because they cut costs....not because BHO created propitious conditions for growth/investment.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 5:17PM

nor has he created conditions for them to not invest. It is baloney. Offshore debt began to rise rapidly for decades - because they could.

The problem is the 70% consumption sector and their mortgage stressors. Period.

We need a framework to work through this backlog, and making 1st mortgages as pliable as 2nd and 3rd mortgages is a start. It puts rich and not so rich in the same pot.

Willard's solution is to make us all renters again. Yippee.

Deborah D| 10.25.11 @ 6:01AM

All of this crap about "under water" mortgages is what makes me sick. We've all had (and unless your mortgage is paid off) and most of us have "under water" mortgages. If you bought a house before the crash -- your house is probably under water. We've had several houses that we've had to sell for less than we paid for them -- because we moved for a job and the housing market crashed. This has happened several times in our lives -- most recently -- October of 2009 when we moved from GA to NC. We sold below what we paid for it, but we also bought at lower than what our NC house was originally going for. That's the way it is. Get over it!

Gary B| 10.24.11 @ 8:26AM

I agree with Alice. Any of the Republican candidates is better qualified to be president and any of them would do a much better job. Why? Because they're Americans and they love America first.

Here's the most important qualification for POTUS: character. All else follows that.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 3:50PM

Baloney.
Willard has character? You question BHO like he was from Mars. He has done nothing but kill terrorists, end the Junior recession and created jobs in nearly every month of his presidency. ANYBODY in that job would have to be stacked up against that record, and you belive McCain would have been better? Not a chance.
McCain's circus sideshow during the banking meltdown was all I needed to know about his character. Palin as Veep would either be spayed and penned-up in an undisclosed location by now, or have shot her mouth off so many times that she would have quit that job, too.

Why the animosity towards BHO? His record does not match your illusions of him? The GOP house has stymied any pseudo-lib manoevers and exacted everything they wanted - Boehner's words - from him during each negotiation. This administration is hogtied and yet we are not putting people back to work. Please explain this phenomenon and how that translates into GOP votes next year.

I will vote for a president that clearly articulates their vision for America in the next 25 years, delineates must haves and nice to haves on the foreign policy front, and is prepared to stand tough on issues of principle - like the punishing of criminals of all collars, and the willingness to end this orgy of spending on elections by making individuals - with limits - the only acceptable donors.
Willard and Perry (ya know, the ones with an actual record) have run away from their records like the house was on fire to appease the unAmericans on the GOP fringes.

Newtie is scorched earth politically.
Cain is a talking head with ZERO record, and stumbling badly with just a pocket flashlight's glare on him.
Santorum is blathering on about sexual innuendoes everywhere - you know an admission is coming.
Huntsman truly has a decent, nuanced record of service unsurpassed by any of the lot - yet he gets nary a wink from the GOP. It's the Mormon thing, is it not?

Bachmann is an empty skirt with ZERO record and a dubious history of latching onto the federal teat when it suited her.

Paul is that creepy old dude that emerges from who-knows-where to prophesize about doom.

Not one candidate has offered one piece of legislation that commits the US to restrict imports from countires that do not respect US labor and environmental laws. Rhetoric yes, legislation, no. You want my vote? Show me you have the "character" to lead and legislate in this toxic environment.
Not one candidate has offered legislation that enables individuals to gain the necessary skills to fill available positions across the country without risking their current situation to do so.
Not one candidate has offered legislation that puts our new veterans to the front of the line when seeking an education or jobs.

BHO hasn't, but sure as Sunday, no GOPers have either.

Occam's Tool| 10.24.11 @ 4:49PM

One can hope for Allen West as VEEP. Then we will get our dude in 4-8 years.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 5:01PM

Interesting pick, but he has no record, either.

Being a light colonel, even a combat one, does not indicate any civilian leadership skills. In fact, his structured life - including his youth - would make him unfit to lead a country where 90% of his constiuents have lives completely foreign to him.

How he squares a completely socialized existence with full medical, pension, education and housing with his tea-party rhetoric smacks of opportunism and will be a limiter for him. Being a one-term congressman means he has no legislative record, has no proven statewide or national appeal and would be exposed rapidly to retail political realities.
His temperment, paired with the plateauing of his military career as light col, indicate he may not be ready for primetime.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 5:14PM

how true.....just as being a community organizer does not...as we have learned...serve as a good indicator of leadership skills.

once again....you run a convoluted, disingenuous argument. the man served in order to earn the benefits. that is the deal the government cut because...with all volunteer forces....that is what has to be done to entice and hold. not the socialist legerdemains you are trying to run.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 6:04PM

I did not vote for BHO, yet we use his scant record as the baseline for GOP candidates. I expect more from people attempting to be the president. Only Huntsman, Perry and Willard have clear demonstrable records of achievement where their signatures remain for posterity on laws, orders, death warrants and pardons.

I make no delineation between service members, coast guard, border patrol, customs officers, teachers, firefighters and police. In your words: that is deal the government cut in order to have people volunteer for these positions. I agree.

In fact, West became a high school teacher after he left the service. I applaud him for considering it - even if he tries to walk away from that choice.

His record does not disqualify him for seeking higher office, but it does not put him ahead of any of the candidates on the slate today.

As a light colonel - and a plateaued one at that - he is middle-management stock and he would be a useful tool as a congressional bench warmer.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 6:40PM

again...you don't know what you are talking about. or, better put, your argument trades on gross generalizations. it is very often the case that the best officers in the military either exit early or do not rise above a certain "plateau"..as you put it....for reasons other than native leadership abilities (or lack thereof). timing, luck, pedigree (e.g., an academy degree), personality all play huge roles and....increasingly....feeling and playing the political winds (not necessarily a banner quality on the battlefield). whether West seeks higher office or not is immaterial to me. Though I would adjoin that if he does...we'll have a deeper voting record to assess him by than a series of "present" hand waves.

I just ask that you cease passing these generalizations as received truth. whether BHO...who, as Suskind's book unintentionally highlights, had to be mentored every step of the way from his Senate days forward.....inherited daunting problems or not...he hasn't solved then let alone turn the corner. if one suffers a debilitating wound, the first priority is to heal the wound. then the process of restoring health can begin. BHO is a gaping wound.

Timothy L. Pennell| 10.24.11 @ 8:17AM

O'Stalin is correct. The American People are, #1: Not as smart as some like to claim. And, #2: Are IGNORANT and OBLIVIOUS to the things they should be the Most concerned with.
(Have you SEEN a T.V. Guide lately?)
They are Suckers for a Pretty Face, and a great Ad Campaign. (Have you ever HAD a Coors Light? A Bud Light?) Please.
But, they're not entirely at fault.
I wonder what the Vote would have been, had he been VETTED by the Press? I wonder how long he would have survived, had the Media, upon learning of his 20 Year relationship with a White Hating/Jew Hating/America Hating: Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his HATE Church, hounded him Day and Night, as they surely would have if he had been a White Republican, who spent ONE DAY in a Church of a WHITE Racist/Anti Semite/America Hater.
What if the White Republican had started his Political career in the Living Room of Timothy McVeigh, or some other Unrepentant Terrorists, like Obama did? What if he had all of his life history, locked away in a VAULT, on an Island in the middle of the Pacific, far away from any prying eyes? What if McCain had a Tony Rezko, instead of Obama? What if McCain's wife, had said that she had NEVER BEEN PROUD of this Country. (Shut up, with the "In my Adult Life, bullsh*t. She said it the other way, too. Look it up.)
The American People are getting STUPIDER, not Smarter than a 5th Grader.
However, given the right, PERTINENT INFORMATION, especially when buying a Big Ticket Item, they will get it right, most of the time.
In 2008, they were sold a Pig in a Poke, by a Media that went over to The Dark Side, a Looooong time ago.

Gary B| 10.24.11 @ 8:29AM

Anyone who offers something for nothing - the longtime Democrat strategy - has a message that will resonate with a large percentage of voters.

Personal responsibility is a tough sell, but it's the only trait a nation needs for long term success.

How long have we tried something for nothing? And, how has that worked for us? All of our money has been stolen and most of our freedom is gone.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 2:45PM

The comnpassionate conservative Junior jumped on Willie's freedom train and gave us upaid liabilities for tax cuts, drug bennies and two wars.

There are zero GOP platforms out there that reverses this trend. Zero.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 5:16PM

the wars came courtesy of Al Queda - neither happens absent 9/11. again...get your f'ing story straight. I have my own qualms with Bush...but I really harbor HUGE contempt for liars like you.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 6:14PM

Al Qaeda in Iraq again? Since when?
You must free yourself from the fantasy that Junior acted judiciously to attack this enemy. BHO has directly killed more Al Qaeda leadership with a few billion than Junior did in eight years
and 800B. Facts suck.

2M veterans of a faux conflict and you lie to yourself. I pity you.

I challenge you to show up Veteran's Day in a few weeks with more than a flag and punchline slogans, try bringing a job offer for the young men and women who bought into Junior's folly and paid a heavy price in time, health and just living.

I see it as my duty to interview and hire as many vets as possible. The more enlisted, the better.

How about you? How do you square Junior's ambivalence to facts during your civil war re-enactments?

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 6:47PM

again.....twisting the argument. if 9/11 doesn't happen...Bush has no pretext for Iraq.

and you're an idiot. and a dishonest one to boot. either that or clueless. BHO accomplishes nothing without the investment in intelligence programs, armaments, training facilities, drones and a myriad other initiatives in technology AND people. Bush made many mistakes....but BHO...horrible strategist that he is.....didn't create any of them. he benefitted from them...but doesn't have the graciousness to admit so. as we shall see...BHO will end up having greatly weakened America's security posture globally...especially in the ME.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 6:50PM

Bush made many mistakes. BHO...horrible strategist that he is.....didn't create any of the investment initiatives that he benefitted from........

W| 10.24.11 @ 7:17PM

Good for you canuck, but what is the name of your company for which you interview and hire.

Corey| 10.25.11 @ 3:58PM

Obama doesn't have a plan to fix the mortgage market himself.. because there is no fix.

The solution is to let it drop out and bottom so its on stronger footing going forward.

Housing prices need to collapse another 20% and then when new buyers feel houses have come back to reality, they will start buying up the distressed properties.. until then, your Obama's magical fairy dust of tax payer money wont fix anything, although Obama doesn't instead to do any good, he just needs the appearance of doing something to sell to voters.

You see, your boy Obama has a one track mind and thats keeping his job... the hell with the damage and debt being piled up... not like he has to worry about paying for it. America is his playground, and YOU are the suckers that bought his bill of goods.

Oldefarte| 10.24.11 @ 11:42AM

TLP, as always I wholeheartedly agree with your thoughts, but I slightly disagree with the notion that the MSM DID NOT know about him. They knew, and purposely covered it up from the reading/viewing public. The stupidity of the public was in not seeking/believing the truth about him from alternative new sources, which adequately reported concerning same. I knew about him, and if I and others did, then everyone should have sought/known the truth about who/what he was/is/forever will be. The public are daily brainwashed by the MSM, Hollywood and academia [and choose to be STUPIDLY]!!!!

Timothy L. Pennell| 10.24.11 @ 5:18PM

I never said that they DIDN'T KNOW about him. They DID KNOW. They just chose to sweep it under the rug. And, everybody knows that, I LIE of Omission, is still a LIE.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 5:19PM

of course they did. just as they knew about the backwater groups that had been working much of the policy that went into Obamacare, Frank Dodd, etc. I caught on to this when there was a slip about Sean Penn's travels circa 2007-2008 to many of these unexamined planning sessions that eventually spilled into what has become Obama.

davelnaf| 10.24.11 @ 8:31AM

Only a few weeks ago I would have replied with something about tiring of all this Obama bashing. But the Bamster is the gift that keeps on giving (as in one inanity after another) and I’ve gotten my second wind.

Still, I can wake up some mornings and think: ‘OMG, Barack Hussein Obama is president of the United States?’ Most of the time it’s just a glum acceptance of this fact; combined with a quiet belief that the country will survive Obama and his economy killing policies largely intact. Even fully awake, though, it’s felt a little bit like a bad dream, or is it just me?

emilio lizardo, PhD| 10.24.11 @ 8:57AM

No it's not you. The downward trajectory for all facets of American life has been more precipitous than anyone could have imagined since BHO took office, and existence has become nightmarish with no end in sight. Someone posted above that any of the GOP candidates would be better than BHO. Excepting Santorum and Bachmann this is true. The sad truth is that with the media in the tank for BHO, the stupidity of the American electorate and the liars among the Democrats, he is going to get reelected and then it really hits the fan.

POST American| 10.24.11 @ 9:15AM

-----CUT TO THE CHASE!

It was, is, and, until you no longer
stand for it, will remain ----a deteriorating
'by design' situation.

IT IS the Globalist RED China sellout,
set up, and, now, world TREASON OP.

----------------FACE REAL--'IT'--HE.

Mike Hawk| 10.24.11 @ 9:29AM

Huffing the Chloroform again??

irish19| 10.24.11 @ 10:32AM

And not sharing. More likely it's ether, though. Or maybe good old-fashioned model airplane glue.

Drunken Sailor| 10.24.11 @ 12:43PM

It definitely aint booze. I've read his rants sober and after a few adult beverages and still can't decipher them.

Occam's Tool| 10.24.11 @ 4:50PM

It is always dangerous to practice anaesthesia without a license. Hypoxemia causes permanent brain damage.

Dan Mathewson| 10.24.11 @ 5:03PM

POST American Alan Brooks, one and the same?

Mike Hawk| 10.24.11 @ 8:09PM

Go to past Friday, ' China's Cyber Militia' , and read the next post after Moe Blotz' question to P-A.

PolishKnight| 10.24.11 @ 9:22AM

I like the author's comparison of the left to the housing market. Indeed, most Republicans I know bought into housing mania that real estate could go up indefinitely and make everyone into millionaires without bothering to think: How will anyone be able to afford anything if everyone is a millionaire? It truly democracized the welfare class and many conservatives secretly welcomed the bank bailout. They all wanted to retire or, at least, not have to repay the HELOC they took out to pay for their daughters' overpriced college education.

Buck Ofama| 10.24.11 @ 11:57AM

So, your "most Republicans" are similar to the Wall St types that donated nearly double to Ovomit than to McCain.

PolishKnight| 10.24.11 @ 1:53PM

Buck, yes. Most republicans are looking the other way at tremendously bad policies either due to self-interest or sentiment. We can call the left names here just as the Huffington post bloggers chuckle among themselves at how superior they are, but it won't change anything. There are some hard, ugly truths that need confronting.

Kent Lyon| 10.24.11 @ 9:27AM

Let's add just a bit to all of these real estate metaphors: The fundamental transformation Obama is effecting for America is to change it from a "shining city on a hill" into a public-private low income housing project aka "Grove Parc Plaza" to enrich his cronies while reducing Americans to poverty and squalor in sub-standard living conditions with code vioilations so numerous no one can count them, threatening to leading to closure of the facility and condemnation of the property.

Deborah D| 10.24.11 @ 12:02PM

I believe you're correct, Kent. He wants the whole country as disfunctional as Detroit, as "politically correct" as California, and as dependent as Greece. Then the Left will have its dystopia, but, I'm sure, the planet will be saved....

Nancy in NC| 10.24.11 @ 9:33AM

I could have found more humor in this piece if it weren't so true.

For all those who think we have a chance to get rid of this Marxist, anti-American piece of crap, think again. Eric Holder will do his best to insure that doesn't happen. Expect to see more voter intimidation, voter fraud, and just pure shenanigans to insure four more years to tyranny, and then we can put a fork in this Nation.

So much time is being spent on Fast and Furious that no one wants to look into the left wing radicals in the Department of Injustice. Blacks and whites can do anything at the polling places and if the Democrat agenda is pushed forward, the DOJ will turn a blind eye...their complete focus is racial and getting even for past grievances against black voters. Does anyone expect racial attitudes to improve when we have Dems pushing the "getting even" mantra?

Buck Ofama| 10.24.11 @ 11:54AM

Suppose Cain is nominated.

Buck Ofama| 10.24.11 @ 10:32AM

O'Icarus has been plummeting earthward ever since the stinking pile of failure began squatting in the white house.

SPLAT!

William L. Gensert| 10.24.11 @ 10:52AM

Back Furack

OregonBuzz| 10.24.11 @ 12:13PM

"Like those banks that were willing to extend mortgage loans to risky prospects without documenting their credit-worthiness...."
Actually, due to the unflagging efforts of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton/Janet Reno, the banks didn't dare refuse those mortgage applicants. They could of course, but they would have faced huge penalties of up to $500,000 levied by the Feds for "discrimination".
Let's not forget who really caused the bad loans to be made.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 4:26PM

Baloney.
Last time I checked, the stock market has "crashed" under a GOP prez each time. Explain.

ARMs and subprimes went from 5% under Willie to over 30% when Junior left office. With typical 5-year triggers, most of the bad loans were written smack in the middle of Junior's regime - with his peeps in charge.

Let's summarize: Daddy endorsed the China MFN without conditions.
A weakened Willie signed GLB.
Greenspan's constant cheerleading on derivatives and Gramm's little gift in the 2000 budget bill exploded the voodoo market from an estimated 7-layer dip in 1992 to over 37-layers by 2008 when everything went "pop".
Goldman Sachs, Lehman et al convinced not only clients to dump their capital into this morass, but convinced countries, states and municipalities to do the same.

The ARMs and subprimes came due, and the 37-layer house of cards came tumbling down. The old regualtory framework was built for 5 maybe 6 layers, not 37.

And you blame Janet Reno?

The good ole days included logical controls on the greed of men, and forced bookkeepers to align assets with liabilities.
Perhaps we should reconsider?

Occam's Tool| 10.24.11 @ 4:52PM

Canuck---after the stock market crashed under Reagan, it started a massive run up.

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 6:19PM

Yes, but at 7 levels, not 37. When we hear the derivatives markets ballooned to 100T (more than the world's material wealth), we know clearly at that point it was not HUD and Fannie/Freddie.

No one could have imagined the lengths men will go to rip off eachother. Now we know.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 6:56PM

read Reckless Endangerment. then get back to us on the behind the scenes mechanics.

yawn.

Lizard King| 10.24.11 @ 12:34PM

What an apt analogy Mr Gannon. Hopefully the Obama/Holder Icarus has seen its zenith. The chaos and turmoil sown WILL haunt the WORLD for decades. These vermin deserve exterminatin'. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Freddie Fedup| 10.24.11 @ 1:01PM

My goodness, why can't we take away Obama's keys to the White House now? Can we not say he deserves to be impeached before he puts this great nation underwater?

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 4:29PM

Impeached for what?

Did he commit 2M troops on a lie?

Did he procure a BJ in the Oval office?

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 6:59PM

gross incompetence.

failure to enforce the law.

lying under oath (to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution).

for Fast and Furious deaths caused by his administration's actions.

for bankrupting the Republic.

Scott @ Engage America| 10.24.11 @ 1:06PM

We are over a year away from the next presidential election and both parties have abdicated governance, instead they are engaging in partisan gamesmanship that does little to help our economy. It won't matter who wins the election if the only ideas with bipartisan support are ones that won't create more jobs.

The part of Obama's jobs bill both parties support, payroll tax cuts, are unlikely to create more jobs (http://eng.am/nQFWgQ). And in the Republican plan, a proposal that could win bipartisan support is to permit U.S. companies to bring home $1.4 trillion in overseas profits that are kept offshore because of high corporate tax rates most likely will not lead to more hiring either (http://eng.am/ocUOUH).

With the economy struggling to grow and the private sector stagnate, investment for infrastructure, education, and the betterment of our future should have bipartisan support. However, because the current debt over $14 Trillion, and the Congressional Budget Office is projecting that by 2021 federal debt will be over $20 trillion more government spending could be counterproductive (http://eng.am/nviSti). According to Scott Mather, head of global bond portfolio management at Pimco as the "government takes on more debt, consumers may start saving even more as they anticipate higher taxes ahead" (eng.am/mVZC5U).

Not to mention the fact that more stimulus only prolongs the status quo, which once the stimulus ends will again be unsustainable.

martin j smith| 10.24.11 @ 1:40PM

Mr Gannon the question is this; How serious is the Republican Party not only about defeating Obama but equally important how serious are they about rolling back his total Socialist agenda. Looking at the candidates and also the debate format which allows the Socialists to control the " debate agenda" I wonder what thinking went into this ? I agree that another four years of Obama would be the end of us ( US ) . That said
it seems to me that the Establishment Republicans seem to want Socialism light which turns many voters off. That could lead to Obama for more years/ Is that want Republicans really want ? Your answer please. ( BTW Romney would represent Socialism light )

canuckistani| 10.24.11 @ 4:50PM

What socialist agenda?

Killing terrorists and forcing people to be responsible is socialist? Since when?

I'm already paying freeloaders for their healthcare. BHO's plan at least gets them identified and started on the road to unburdening me of their liabilities. More needs to be done, not less.
Nobody in the GOP "likely" list intends to repeal any of BHO's other policies - except Perry that wants a derrick on every lawn. How about on the pitcher's mound at the Ballpark?

How do you intend to raise capital for projects that private industry has been incapable of since ancient Egypt?

Ask "Swift Boat" Pickens. He's tried and now he's standing in line for a handout. Ask Gramm. He was a true believer as well, but I guess the pressure was too great - or was it seduction?

It is amusing that the biggest whores of government largesse are the very people that want to dismantle the "social" safety nets.

You forget it is the taxpayer, not Gramm or Pickens that make this country great, and it is the taxpayer that eats it when these "great" Americans cut and run.

carnot| 10.24.11 @ 7:04PM

again...extreme dishonesty.

the issue isn't the safety net...it is the level that safety net should be funded to and what benefits it should be comprised of. aside from being un-Constitutional...Obamacare is a financial AND healthcare disaster.

Ron| 10.24.11 @ 3:09PM

We should be afraid when the Lame Stream Media starts touting about what a good candidate the GOP has....

And do a comparison of who the donors have been and continue to be for NerObama and Mittens...You will see some obvious matches...

Marc Jeric| 10.24.11 @ 7:07PM

"Like those banks that were willing to extend mortgage loans to risky prospects without documenting their credit-worthiness" - well, that's a stretch. First, there was the Community Reinvestment Act by Carter, with the purpose to eliminate red-lining by banks and to facilitate home mortgages for "underserved minorities" - i.e., blacks. That Act was more or less moribund during Reagan and Bush 1, but was revived under that disbarred felon Clinton: the banks were forced by threats of huge fines to write mortgages to people with no hope of paying for them. The victimized bnks found a way to pass those toxic mortgages, at least some of them, to Fannie May and Freddy Mac. Threats of huge fines and prison issued by the Democrats, and led by Barney Frank and Criss Dodd, resulted in an avalanche of phony mortgages. The elections of 2006 brought absolute Democrat majorities to Congress - and then a true avalanche of phony mortgages ensued. Some mortgage companies and banks found a partial means of defense by packaging say 90 "good" mortgages and 10 "bad" ones to sell them as a new "safer" product, i.e., the so-called derivatives. Pushed and financed by Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Dodd, ACORN (among other such outfits) were "qualifying" new buyers on the basis of their welfare checks, value of food stamps, unemployment cheques, etc. to write "qualifications" for new buyers, mainly black minorities. ACORN Housing Corporation alone "sold" about 120,000 phony mortgages to banks under direct threats of demonstrations and physical harm to executives. Many such derivatives were passed to Fannie and Freddy, now nationalized and bankrupt even after repeated bailouts still rising over the $180 billion of taxpayers' money. After this flurry of criminal activities came the foreclosure crisis where Obama wants, by executive order, to print more worthless dollars to buy those houses for his black voting block.

Naturalborn Texicanette| 10.24.11 @ 8:56PM

Talk as much as you want about the past.

But the past is done. Over. Finished. And we can't change what has already come about.

The task at hand is to defeat Obummer and PUT HIM OUT OF A JOB!!!!!!!!

I will hold my nose and grit my teeth and vote for the Conservative pick, whomever that will be ...preferably Perry..... but at this point I'd vote for a stump over Obama.!!!

We must LEARN from the past and make the best possible conservative choice. American is slowly being changed for the worst by the current administration and the free, thinking, liberty loving people of this country MUST pull together to abolish the Demolisher In Chief during the coming election.....possibly the most important election in the history of this still great country.

May God bless the United States of America!!!!

Johnny Rotten| 10.25.11 @ 11:57AM

" ... at this point I'd vote for a stump over Obama.!!!"

I'm trying to draft by garbageman to seek the GOP nomination. After all, the trash guy knows more about how the private sector works than That One does.

POST American| 10.24.11 @ 11:33PM

-------------------BOTTOM LINE-----------------------

RETRO-active IMPEACHMENT of our
past 4 CFR-RIIA front op, administrations.

Open, audit, investigate, prosecute, and
dis-mantle the TAX FREE, 'bennie violent'
foundations and NGOs. AGAIN, the very
warmest prosecution.

Open, audit, prosecute and ABOLISH the
private, ILLEGAL, psychopathic, USURY feuled
'Federal' Reserve.

X--spell, defund and X---IT the
PRIVATE, banking and EUGENICS
Globalist UN ---with all possible speed.

-----------HUAC meets NUREMBERG 2012---------

Controse| 10.25.11 @ 11:47AM

My guess is the one historic accomplishment of the Obama, or who ever he is, presidency will be making affirmative action about as culturally acceptable as whites only water fountains.