Job creation: why now?

It’s interesting to note that President Obama’s so-called “job-creation” plan comes more than two years after the lack of jobs became an 800-lb gorilla. Foregoing the question of whether or not government is even capable of “creating” jobs, the question of the day is “why has it taken 33 months for the president to finally come up with a plan?”

Most sentient people can see an ulterior motive in the president’s plan, namely to ensure that he gains reelection next year so he can complete the “fundamental transformation of America,” as promised on election night of 2008. In short, the president’s “plan” is a crock, more an effort to convince the rubes that he’s as smart as they thought, than an actual fiscal policy that creates a climate of sustained growth. In a one-two strategy, the president also promises a reduction of at least $2 trillion in deficit reduction, which his acolytes acclaim as the “most sweeping and specific blueprint” for debt reduction on paper the president has ever provided. Imagine that! The president actually providing a written plan that can be scored by the Congressional Budget Office to actually reflect its actual effect on actual government spending.

---

It’s too bad he didn’t submit the Obamacare bill to Congress on paper, rather than delegating the task of writing it to Nancy Pelosi’s gnomes who worked round the clock for months to create a 2,000+ page monstrosity no one bothered reading prior to its passage. Perhaps if the bill had been debated in an open and democratic forum the country wouldn’t be stuck with unemployment nudging double digits, as it would never have passed in the first place and corporations wouldn’t have frozen hiring because they would have known in advance what each new hire was going to cost. But then, this would not have been conducive to the “fundamental transformation of America.” Oh, and while we’re on the subject of a $2 trillion deficit reduction plan, why did the president wait until the start of the 2012 presidential election cycle to introduce such a plan? Wouldn’t it have made more sense for him to have introduced this plan at the beginning of his term, while he still had the moral authority to condemn the “failed policies of the previous administration?” I mean if it’s all Bush’s fault that the economy is so bad, then why double and triple-down on those “failed policies?” Why not introduce those “new” policies in early 2010 and avoid all this pain? Imagine what the Obama presidency would look like today if the government hadn’t had to raise the debt ceiling several times to where it’s now nearing $16 trillion, which, when reached, will be on the order of 111% of GDP. Call me a skeptic, but I think there’s more at work here than an attempt to fix a ruined economy. It’s clear that none of the stimulus spending had an effect over the general welfare, save and except creating a slush fund the Democrats used to keep their friends from straying off the reservation. The only thing the massive TARP bailouts achieved was to make sure those “fat cat” bankers Obama rails against remain fat, all compliments of the American taxpayer. Remember him? He’s the guy still stupid enough to get up every morning and show up at a job so that he can make his mortgage payment and feed his family after Obama takes his cut out of his paycheck. And the number of those taxpayers is getting progressively smaller, as more and more join the ranks of the entitled. In my opinion there’s something nefariously Byzantine in the president’s motives for addressing the problem of unemployment and out of control deficit spending at this point in the game. It reflects a belief that voters are basically stupid and can be manipulated with simple and obvious ploys, such as the shiny baubles now being pulled out of the magician’s hat. Americans have realized that the president has been blaming everyone and anyone he can in efforts to cover his own incompetence. I’d say he’s a day late and a dollar short.