There were three general criticisms of Obama’s style and message prior to his latest jobs bill: there was no evidence that his borrowed federal money programs created very many federal jobs; Obama’s always wanted to borrow now and figure out how to pay for it later; and he outsourced the details of his legislation to pork-barrel legislators that ensured they would not be “shovel-ready.”

Why then did he just announce yet another round of massive federal borrowing, with few details of its implementation, time his announcement before the bill’s details had even been known or submitted to Congress, and offer only a vague way of paying for it sometime in the distant future? It’s almost as if in spiteful fashion that he wants to prove that he will not be persuaded to back away from what has demonstrably failed, both the policy and the manner in which it is articulated and then implemented. (Doubly ironic when we remember Obama’s own warnings in 2005 to Bush to back away from Social Security reform measures, given popular discontent and the supposed role of “egos.”)

At a time of national insolvency, of EU meltdown, and of blue-state near bankruptcy, an Obama administration is doing more of the same massive borrowing, a Paul Krugman advocates more massive debt, green writers rush to explain that the problem is not the Solyndra model, but merely its details and our fears of not expanding it, and political pundits assure that the latest round of landmark special election results, following the 2010 tsunami, do not tell us much about popular anger.

Given all that, if the blindness continues, 2012 will trump a 1964 or 1984.