-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
The Spectacle Blog
It really bugs me that the Romney ticket doesn’t fight back against B. Obama’s stock line about “the same failed policies that got us into this mess.” There must be a good way to craft a 60-second response to this. Part of the response should come from this excellent piece by my friend Jim Guirard.
Short version: The Bush economy was pretty much hunky-dory. Things started going to hell only after Pelosi and Reid took over Congress at the beginning of 2007.
Good stuff.
View all comments (27) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/10/12/good-points-for-romney-to-coun
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JeffP| 10.12.12 @ 7:57PM
I think you have an incomplete link. This should be the correct one: http://truespeak.org/contents/.....soprahland
Oldefarte| 10.12.12 @ 8:18PM
Hopefully the American people WITH BRAINS have already figured out the dire consequences of this economy due to the governmental policies of the last four years. To some it is rocket science, but to most it is not. They see the closed businesses, the neighbors out of work and defaulting on their houses, the lack of customers in retail stores; and don't need some old coot with hair plugs wound too tight to tell them that the Democrats will take care of them. They know better. Okay so they f**ked up 11/4/08, but it is the old story of FOOL ME ONCE........!!!!!!!!!!!
JD| 10.12.12 @ 9:18PM
Bush's economy wasn't hunky-dory. The housing bubble was looming throughout. But that was caused by the policies of Democrats, which Bush added-to with his efforts to expand Medicare and bail out big finance.
But Obama does far more of these bad things than Bush.
Oldefarte| 10.13.12 @ 11:25AM
No the "housing bubble" was initially/substantially caused by the CRA of 1977. Thereafter it was added to by Fannie/Freddie, HUD, Affirmative Action-AFFORDABLE HOMES, Frank, Dodd, etc........all """"""DEMOCRAT""""""legislated/
instigated policy programs. Bush weekly tried to tone it down but the """"""DEMOCRATS''''''' prevented same legislatively. Lets tell the TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TheSteelGeneral| 10.12.12 @ 9:27PM
oooh please use that. it's a really, really old line of defense that has been used before.
So ..... I guess it's open season on Boehner and the constantly filibustering McConnel then?
Who ACTUALLY are responsible for large parts of the current unemployment by blocking the American Jobs Act.
chuck| 10.13.12 @ 8:04AM
And what about the first two years when the Democrats ran everything? They got everything they wanted: stimulus, huge budget increases, Obamacare. Why isn't the economy booming?
It's because this sh!t doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work. But you idiots think the solution to any problem is to pass ANOTHER government program, tax the producer to pay for it, and throw huge amounts of money at it.
Almost 4 years later, we are being crushed by debt, strangled by regulations, and struggling through an economy that is not producing jobs at a pace even to keep up with population growth, let alone put people back to work.
Your empty chair false messiah, "the One we've all been waiting for", has failed.
Totally.
Miserably.
Time to correct the mistake of 2008.
TheSteelGeneral| 10.13.12 @ 10:18AM
Ooooh the mythical two years when Democrats had it all??
Never happened.
http://p.twimg.com/A3mVbuBCYAAn1hD.jpg
Obama's "Two-Year Super-Majority" has been widely Debunked
It was SIX WEEKS after Al Franken FINALLY got in and before Ted Kennedy died, that we had nominally 60 senators then it was 3 months later Scott Brown took that seat, which was of course, our fault entirely, I'll give you that.
Of course, you're completely forgetting about backstabbing ConservaDems, who betrayed us many times, Ben Nelson, that lady from Louisiana, etc.
As well as Liebermann!!!!
Dai Alanye | 10.14.12 @ 2:20PM
RustySteelGenesis is right. With only 59 Senators there's no way the Dems could pass their stimulus plan and Obamacare, two programs that would have rocket-assisted the US into record-breaking prosperity. Damn you, Mitch McConnell,for killing these glorious pieces of legislation.
TheSteelGeneral| 10.13.12 @ 10:54AM
Also, the crushing debt is ALL YOUR FAULT!
TWO, not one, but 2 wars on a credit card!
he didn't even declare them, so I guess that's FRAUD. also, the medicare prescription drugs failure.
squalis| 10.13.12 @ 11:09AM
What BS! As CIC, Obama could have pulled out of Iraq (overwhelmingly supported by Congressional Dems) or Afghanistan (promoted by candidate Obama) anytime he wanted!
squalis| 10.13.12 @ 11:39AM
Meant to read Iraq war overwhelmingly supported by Congressional Dems & Afghanistan war promoted by candidate Obama. The speed and intensity of contortionist lib thinking is faster than my ability to type.
Jimbobogie| 10.13.12 @ 2:21PM
Perhaps they were still looking for those "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Let's face it-Bush really meant to invade "Iran" and somebody made a typo. "EYE-RAK", "EYE-RAN", what's the difference, right?
spike59| 10.15.12 @ 6:28AM
Perhaps you were out of town..?
http://caseyhendrickson.wordpr.....refutable/
http://news.investors.com/ibd-.....htm?p=full
Oldefarte| 10.13.12 @ 11:34AM
Cut the GD typical bullexcrement! The "crushing debt" was ignored by THE BLACK JESUS & CREW/DEMOCRATS from un-stimulus, welfarecare, giving a finger to Keystone, playing golf 24-7, etc. Oh and I sick and f**king tired of hearing about "2 wars on a credit card" BS. The f**king Muslim terrorists attacked [and killed Americans] in their assaults of our foreign embassies, the first WTC bombing, the USS Cole bombing and then 9/11/01. Have your traitors forgotten that 3000 f**king innocents died on 9/11/01? Have you morons forgotten that Hussein [not the POTUS] invaded a soviegn country/Kuwait and that the the US HAD TO GO TO WAR AGAINST HIM IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE MUSLIM TAKEOVER THAT YA BOY IS NOW ALLOWING IN THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST? What f**king credit card paid for WWII DA???????????????????????
Tom Kyba| 10.13.12 @ 12:17PM
The force of your self-satisfied thumb-sucking ego doesn't change reality and neither would another silly liberal inspired program whose only practical result would be wasting more of other peoples' money. But that's pretty much your philosophy isn't it?
Indy| 10.13.12 @ 8:29PM
The Jobs Act is nothing but another union payoff. Hiring teachers and first responders is the function of the State / Local government, not the Feds. Infrastructure spending...been there before in the bloated stimulus bill which was another massive union / special interest payoff. No thanks, we are broke, unleash the energy sector and you will see job growth.
SYAsked| 10.12.12 @ 9:40PM
Barney Frank was doing his damage, the full time.
He is out of the mix, but like the evil men do, it far outlives him. I am sure there are still people suffering because they were enticed into mortgages they could not afford, and so many of them affected the entire home industry , to this day. And, to my knowledge, there were bullies pushing bank people to loan, or else.
geronl| 10.13.12 @ 12:16AM
Meet the Swing Voter, in a Swing District, in a Swing State that will decide this election:
http://asspos.blogspot.com/201.....-this.html
SYAsked| 10.13.12 @ 1:01AM
What got us into this mess was the Democratic control, starting in 2007, and people like Barney Frank, with their oversight of quasi governmental Fanny Mae type loans. Banks were forced or bullied into loaning to people who had no chance of making enough money to pay the mortgages.
TheSteelGeneral| 10.13.12 @ 10:23AM
Please show us where govt officials went and held guns to the heads of loan officers forcing them to give loans to poor (don't you mean black?) people...
The majority of foreclosures happened to middle income white families.
But ... blaming the LEAST powerfull group in the country, poor blacks, for the financial meltdown, is very amusing.
It's as mythical as Trickle Down, and Obama's Two-Year Super-Majority, and his Spending Binge.
THOSE NEVER EVER HAPPENED! says WSJ company Marketwatch
http://articles.marketwatch.co.....ken-sailor
TheSteelGeneral| 10.13.12 @ 10:51AM
Yes, I remember that time, when govt officials stormed the privately own banks, putting the GNZ to loan officers' heads forcing them to loan money to poor blacks! What a time that was .... during the Bush presidency!
Oldefarte| 10.13.12 @ 11:42AM
No you DA MF, the CRA of 1977 that was legislated by Democrats allowed their Democratic government to hold a GD gun to bankers heads to force their loaning to indigent blacks and others without two nickels in their GD pockets and without a dog's chance in hel of ever paying back those loans. Who do you suppose is now paying for those loans DA? You and all other taxpayers are DA! Yu can't give away ultra expensive assets to indigents and not cause major economic havoc [which finanally snowballed down hill and hit the f**king wall in 2008 DA]. The Gd banks [due to the CRA] were forced into creative financing methods [0 income downpayments, ARMs etc], bundling loans into salable bonds etc in order to make profits/money, DA! Banks or any other private business are no in the business to lose money DA! GD you're stupid!!!!!!!!!!
Tom Kyba| 10.13.12 @ 12:18PM
Apologies. I thought you had some semblance of a brain. Won't make that mistake again.
spike59| 10.15.12 @ 6:32AM
you mean the time when banks were snatching blacks off the street, forcing them at gunpoint to borrow money they couldn't repay????
btw, the government WAS pressuring lenders to make loans to poor people...
http://freedomoutpost.com/2012.....ime-loans/
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.13.12 @ 10:45AM
Yup!
I just wish W could have dug is heels in a little deeper.
Indy| 10.13.12 @ 8:34PM
Quin, I find it appalling that nobody in the GOP speaks out againt this lie. For years, the have allowed the Left to pound this message so that the poorly educated voter believes it. The work has all been done, Recklass Endangerment should be required reading for anyone in public office and anyone seeking public office.
There are many things Romney does not address, the one you mentioned is huge and another is the rising cost of tuition, the more money the Feds pump in, the higher tuition goes.
Jimbobogie| 10.14.12 @ 5:21AM
Bear in mind that, the way things work, as soon as a new President takes office, he/she is deemed to not only be responsible for everything on the desk, but is deemed to have been the one who brought it about in the first place. That’s why anything that Bush left in the last year or so of his administration, although the effects wouldn’t be seen until after he left, are deemed to have happened on Obama’s watch. Let’s assume that Romney wins-he has promised thousands and thousands of new jobs immediately. That means that the factories that will be hiring the workers have to be retooling NOW-during Obama’s watch, otherwise there will be a lag, meaning that the effects of any Romney policy won’t be seen until sometime after his first year-or two…and that’s assuming that the jobs will be created in the US. So far the “Job Creators” have taken their tax cuts and, using Economics 101, have created jobs in China and India-thank God for Global Free Trade, right? As I said, the effects of legislation aren’t normally seen until AT least one year after implementation, so, if Grover Norquist gets his way (and why isn’t he the Republican nominee-he’s calling the economic shots-in fact, why isn’t he running for office ANYWHERE???), the tax revenue base will shrink for at least one year BEFORE the positive effects of the “Romney Economy” come into play and that means...