BloggeRhythms

Once again, Maureen Dowd in her Op-ed column @nytimes.com has written about the POTUS defeat regarding the trade bill. The article’s titled, Flickering Greatness.

 

Ms Dowd writes: “At this pivotal moment for his legacy at home and abroad, his future reputation is mortgaged to past neglect.

 

“Like Prufrock, Obama must wonder if the moment of his greatness is flickering.

 

“The Democrats — even most of the Congressional Black Caucus, which Obama courted aggressively and which has been protective of him — showed their allegiance to themselves, their principles and their labor allies, and not to their aloof president.”

 

Ms Dowd, as usual is quite adept with the written word, describing the demise of the president’s “legacy” trade bill accurately. Her article's mentioned here, however, because in pondering the president’s performance in office to date, there isn’t any “moment of greatness,” that’s ever taken place to this writer’s knowledge. In fact, there’s been nothing but abject failure, regardless of the issue involved.   

 

Reader Ken, summed the POTUS’ performance, as follows: 

 

“It calls for psychological analysis, of which there will be much (endless) in coming years. A man half-formed by virtue of inexperience and egregious pandering. An ego elevated to ethereal heights. An ideologue who imagines ideas are fact. What would you expect. And, a person who instinctively enjoys his privacy and thinks (and prefers to act) alone. A personality better suited to artistry rather than presidency.
History will look on these eight years as the naive ones. Hope and change.”

 

As far as the comments in general are concerned -as to be expected from those regularly reading the New York Times- the writing is superior, intellectually far above average, with an abundance of supporting references, chosen to enhance their points. 

 

However, what’s most astonishing is that despite the towering intelligence obvious among the reader’s responding, how little they apparently know, or grasp, about how the nation’s economy actually works. The same holds true for foreign policy, health care, taxation and underlying causes of unemployment. In fact, for the most part, they seem to represent a faction that resides in a utopia that exists only in the liberal mind. But certainly not in the practical reality of how the world has functioned for the past 85 years.

 

As an example of lack of understanding economic reality,  reader JT FLORIDA wrote:

 

“5.7 million new job openings in April, the most in 15 years and an unemployment rate of 5.5 %. President Obama would be the first to say that he isn't satisfied with the pace of improvement for all Americans but given the obstructionism by a Congress opposed to a more robust jobs plan (infrastructure such as highways) the president is doing remarkably well.”

 

However, the fact of the matter is that unemployment’s at 5.5% because the the standard for reporting by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has been changed by the administration to omit the long-term unemployed. Were they to be included the “rate” would exceed 11%.

 

Furthermore, as of March 2015, the labor force participation rate fluctuated between 62.9 percent and 62.7 percent in the eleven months from April 2014 through February, and has been 62.9 percent or lower in 13 of the 17 months since October 2013.

 

Prior to that, the last time the rate was below 63 percent was 37 years ago, in March 1978 when it was 62.8 percent. At that time, the US economy was at its worst since the great depression, and anti-business Jimmy Carter, was president.

 

As far as those in the unemployment rolls, 92,898,000 Americans were not in the labor force in February 2015, also according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

And finally, referring back to reader JT FLORIDA’s comment, he stated that “given the obstructionism by a Congress opposed to a more robust jobs plan (infrastructure such as highways) the president is doing remarkably well.”

 

However, instead of typing what seems like a knee-jerk reaction, perhaps JT ought to give the issue a bit more thought. Because, the “highway” jobs entail swinging pick-axes, shoveling dirt and loading dump trucks. Which is a step down from slinging burgers in fast-food joints, the POTUS’s other premier example of full employment.

 

Along the same lines, illustrating the dismally poor understanding of how the economy works, Times reader Steve Armyspouse1988, wrote: “The first two things the Republican House did this year was try to pass the Keystone pipeline and try to repeal the estate tax.

Republicans represent the oil companies and the 1%.

That's it.”

 

In this case, the reader exposes the shame of the educational system in the US, and the Democrat party itself, for not teaching its constituents basic economic fundamentals. Choosing instead to politicize issues, rather than trying to grow the nation to everyone’s benefit.

 

As shale oil production has shown, lowering gasoline prices stimulates spending in other areas, thereby lifting the economy and creating job opportunities. 

 

Lowering the estate tax performs similarly by permitting those who earned the income to keep more of it. That not only stimulates spending, but also helps family owned businesses survive. But most importantly, rewards those who earned it, which certainly isn’t the government. 

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

 

Gail Sheehy wrote one of the most blatantly pandering columns extant @politico.com/magazine. The puff piece goes so far as to assume the presidency’s a far gone conclusion, as follows:

 

“But now, at 67, Clinton finally appears to be beyond carefully constructing her identities or letting her advisers to design the persona she presents. And it’s going to help her win what she wants most.”

 

Nonetheless, in promoting Bill’s wife, Ms Sheehy’s made the same mistake as reader JT FLORIDA in the previous item above, by including a quote from Bill’s wife without fully doing her homework.

 

Bill’s wife said, “I believe success isn’t measured by how many millions the wealthiest have, but how many children climb out of poverty, and how many families get ahead and stay ahead.”

 

However, the simple truth is that, other than her own husband who kept Republican Allen Greenspan on as head of the Federal Reserve to set the nation’s economic policy for eight years, every other Democrat president has been an unmitigated economic disaster. Including the guy in office now, that Bill’s wife worked for and supported wholeheartedly.

 

As for reader’s thoughts go, donna chang, wrote: “Vincent Foster and Ambassador Christopher Stevens could not be reached for comment.

 

Phil123e added, “Hillary is all about the middle class. She has decided to make the middle class the centerpiece of her campaign for president. But “Mrs. Middle Class” demands $300,000 for a one-hour speech and a Gulfstream private jet to take her there and back.

She also gets the Presidential Suite at a 5 star hotel, or she won’t show up.”

 

So, it seems that no matter how rosy a picture the press tries to paint of Bill’s wife, significant number of voters aren’t buying it. Which leads to the obvious question: Mayor Bloomberg, are you reading this?

 

That’s it for today folk.

 

Adios