Posted on 02/08/2009 5:23:02 PM PST by Steelfish
February 06, 2009
‘I Won,’ He Explained On the stimulus, when Obama says “I won,” he’s out of better arguments.
By Rich Lowry
Barack Obama, a reputed master of the persuasive art, has settled on his central argument for the stimulus bill: I won.
That Obama is reduced to this crude appeal is a symptom of the intellectual collapse of the case for his stimulus bill, a congressional spendfest untethered from its stated goal of providing a rapid “jolt” to the economy.
As far as political arguments go, “I won” has its power—provided it’s made on behalf of an agenda ratified by the American electorate. But Obama didn’t campaign on a sprawling, nearly $1 trillion new spending plan.
If he had pledged in October to double federal domestic discretionary spending in a matter of weeks—including increasing the budget of the National Endowment for the Arts by a third, spending hundreds of millions more on federal buildings and throwing tens of billions on every traditional liberal priority from job training to Pell Grants—he’d have been hard-pressed to win at all.
The president should read the transcript of the third presidential debate. He claimed his program represented “a net spending cut.” He called himself “a strong proponent of pay-as-you-go. Every dollar that I’ve proposed, I’ve proposed an additional cut so that it matches.” He added, “We need to eliminate a whole host of programs that don’t work.”
Now, circumstances change, and no president can adhere to every jot and tittle from his campaign, but the “I won” argument only works if the campaign program matches the governing program. Obama himself seems confused on what exactly “I won” means.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Obamanation was elected to the office of President of the United States (unfortunately).
Obama WAS NOT ELECTED AS KING, as Emperor, or elected to be Dictator —
“HIEL OBAMA” - I suppose the ‘Anointed One’ demands that we say...
Not me...
Sorry if I misread your post. My intention was to agree whole-hearedly with you and add my own emphasis.
You might want to check SNOPES for those statistics....and have your post removed....we don’t want people sending that around if it’s not correct...and just the fact that the states don’t add up is a problem
People have been fooled and have elected a shallow, Southside Chicago con man with a knowable record--only the Obama worshipers acted like the three monkeys who saw, heard and spoke no evil.
Wait until he starts on "affordable housing", one of his pet phrases in the past and the propaganda buzzword that signaled the spending of millions by his cronies in Chicago, for substandard housing which is now mostly empty and falling down for lack of repair. A fond marriage of govt. and private enterprise, this particular program enriched the woman who became his campaign finance chair and shafted the poor for whom it was supposedly intended.
The Boston Herald did a story on this housing a couple of months before the election. I believe it was on Youtube.
vaudine
“I won” is the longest statement he is capable of making without a telepromter!
OK, in that case I misinterpreted your meaning, and I apologize. I thought you were referring to my contention that “I won” is the argument of a ling.
But you were referring to my statement that Obama wasn’t elected king.
We’re cool.
He didn’t win nothing!
We lost because that aged asshole McCain thought it was his turn!
and all the republicans and 11 democrats who opposed it won THEIR elections too!
'Ed Driscoll: “change has apparently arrived to change the change that just arrived.”'Excellent quote!
That's it in a nutty (ACORN?) shell.
Perfect description of a little child that never grew up.
My original post #21 contains “facts” which Snopes claims actually are from the 2000 election! Some inventive emailer simply changed the dates and names to reflect the current election. My apologies.
From Snopes:
“The item cited above began circulating on the Internet since shortly after the 2000 U.S. presidential election, reappeared briefly after the 2004 presidential election, and saw a strong resurgence (in a modified form which replaced the names “Bush” and “Gore” with “McCain and “Obama”) after the 2008 presidential election.”
ALSO:
“The population of the counties and square miles of area won by each Bush and Gore appear to be accurate. They are consistent with the election-result published by USA Today on 20 November 2000.
The number of states won by each candidate is inaccurate. The numbers given (29 and 19) imply that the piece was written before the results of the Florida and New Mexico vote counts were determined. The final tallies were 30 states for Bush and 20 for Gore.”
http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp
Be nice if Rezko info gets leaked and we have some more pressure to put on this bum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.