Jobs are the top priority. Republicans say it. Democrats say it. And most interestingly, President Obama says it.
From a policy perspective, this should mean that economic growth is the preeminent policy objective, trumping competing objectives. What, then, explains the recent performance of President Obama?
On Tuesday, he traveled to Osawatomie, Kansas to channel his inner Teddy Roosevelt. But instead of expressing TR’s faith in competitive markets and economic freedom, Obama unleashed an anti-success screed the must give pause to any entrepreneur tempted to expand, anycorporation sitting with cash on its balance sheets, or any bank tempted to make a loan. Why attack that which you need most?
Similarly, the president has steadfastly opposed moving ahead with the Keystone XL pipeline, a lock-solid job-creator that would also improve economic relations with the largest trading partner of the United States. Feigning a concern over unknown environmental implications — there is simply nothing to be learned over the next year — he has threatened to veto any legislative attempt to move ahead, even if it is paired with his proposed payroll tax cut.
He’s a one-man circular firing squad.
Fortunately, Speaker John Boehner has kept his eye on the jobs objective and will attempt to move through the Congress a bill that includes Keystone XL. Perhaps this will be the moment that finally reveals the president’s real motivation. Will he pursue the pro-growth objectives that presumably coincide with his need to have a stronger economy to get reelected? Or has he given up on the recovery and decided that the route to election is to divide America, pander to progressives, and relegate overall well-being to the back seat?
"What, then, explains the recent performance of President Obama?"
Um, he's a liar. Pretty simple, that.
Jobs have never, ever been a priority, much less a top priority for this man. Personal wealth and power are at the top of the list, followed by enacting a far-left policy agenda. Fortunately he's proven so incompetant that he's failed on much of the latter. Any jobs that happen to result are merely a happy coincidence of his pursuit of the above. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the far-left agenda is directly opposed to job creation, coincidental or otherwise.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJake you are spot on. For months Obama has demonstrated that he's running in 2012 as a hard Lefty and that he'll try to get enough black, liberal, union, and gay votes to survive. That won't work unless he holds down the Independent voters, and he'll try to do that by spending over a Billion on money he's raised and from Lefty 'independent' groups to demonize in the most despicable way his opponent. It will be the dirtiest campaign since Johnson in '64. Jobs? national interests? they mean nothing to Obama, they are obstacles to be overcome. nothing more to the narcissist in chief.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"It will be the dirtiest campaign since Johnson in '64."
I'm expecting that Obama/Axelrod will make the '64 campaign look like like an old ladies tea party.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusetoo true
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat are the chances that this actually gets to the President's desk? Will this get through the Senate?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"There is simply nothing to be learned over the next year."
That's not what Nebraska's Senator Johanns thinks:
External Link
Yeah, but you'd expect that from a Democratic hack politician whose deep red state the pipeline is to traverse. Oh wait . . . .
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMultiple scientific studies have concluded that the pipeline is no threat to the Ogallala Aquifer, and that the proposed route is the safest, least environmental intrusive popular.
So, what type of anti-science, backwards-looking, Republican trogolodyte opposes the pipeline... Oh, wait...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMikeB, you forgot to link to Senator Johanns most recent position on this subject...an oversight, I am sure:
External Link
"U.S. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) cosponsored a bill today to prevent unnecessary delays in the Keystone XL pipeline approval process. The legislation moves forward the President’s decision on the Keystone XL pipeline while still allowing for the Nebraska process to move the route around the Sand Hills."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMikeB exhibits a problem common with a lot of folks who want to attack a candidate or position, that of not first checking for more recent data or statements that contradict their talking point.
In this case, the text on the web page he references appears to tell the Senator's position as of July, 2011 (based on the most recent action mentioned in the text itself,) but there are subsequent press releases that update the text, and render his effort at snark moot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh wait - right back at you...
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseStop calling bluffs already, and get that extension passed. If people see their paychecks suddenly go down by about $100/month, they will blame the Republicans, pure and simple, whether or not they should. And if the Republicans try to stand on the principle that they refuse a tax increase, however miniscule, on the wealthiest, even if it means a de facto tax increase on the 50% who don't pay any other taxes besides payroll taxes, they will get slaughtered in the general election in 2012.
Pass it somehow, and then push the pipeline. No more games; no more grandstanding; no more bluffs made or called. Do the actual job you were elected to do.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSurely you must be one of those that wants everything for nothing, cannot focus on working, making a living, but can post comments that prove your knowledge and wisdom are lacking.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe job I voted for them to do was NOT to bail me or others out who are not doing that well, or to gratify people like Nortropis who profess to care about us, BUT TO GET THIS COUNTRY MOVING FORWARD AGAIN. That means winding down the debt (everyone on the whole has reduced living standards who cares how it is passed around not me); defeat the anti-modern Jihad…traditionalists and Environmentalists; reduce subsidy unfunded entitlements tax breaks tax rates government regulations; privative public services beyond War, State, Treasury, and Justice; use vouchers for publicly funded programs all of them. Restore choice growth savings work.
SO. Better the pipeline and NO unemployment benefits, than unemployment benefits and no pipeline. A combination is ok the unemployed did not cause this the GD government did.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, yes, MikeB. Let's not let facts get in the way, hmmm?
Looks like Sen. Johanns is fully on board with the pipeline after the proposed reroute.
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs I said in the thread on this yesterday,
Obama doesn't have to worry about vetoing this, b/c it simply won't pass the Senate in it's current form. The Dems are going to strip this (and other GOP sweeteners) out and send it right back to the House. What the heck is Boehner going to do then?
The tactic of 1/3rd of the active gov't (with the Senate and Exec being the other 2/3rds) trying to hold the other parts hostage simply isn't a winner. Boehner has tried it several times this year so far and it's failed every time. When are they going to learn?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe House passes a bill, the Senate doesn't pass that bill.
How exactly is that "trying to hold the other parts hostage"?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, let's see. The GOP in both houses wants the Payroll tax cut passed. The exec branch wants it passed. The Dems in both houses want it passed. So, everyone agrees on one thing - but the House GOP won't allow it to be passed on a clean bill; they will only allow it if the other two groups accede to things that they don't want.
What exactly would YOU call it? They are trying to hold the payroll tax cut hostage to their desires. It's clear as day - and somewhat reprehensible, as well as being ineffective. It's like tacking on a repeal of Obamacare to every bill that they pass; asinine and juvenile.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseactually it is the Senate Dems that don't want a clean bill ... get your facts straight ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan you provide any evidence to support this position? I highly doubt it. Reid specifically asked the House to send them a clean bill, which Boehner refused to do.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe dumocrats are requiring new tax receipts to pay for it. Hence the devolution of the Bush Tax cuts....
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse