The largest portion of the Chinese stimulus package went towards building infrastructure; over a third of the U.S. stimulus was in the form of tax cuts, which is an inefficient form of stimulus but was necessary to placate the Republicans.

In short, the Chinese stimulus worked and ours was inadequate. So, yeah, they did things right and we didn’t.

Unfortunately, we need another stimulus but Congress wants to fix the deficit rather than the economy. As usual we have the cart before the horse. After WWII the debt was at 120% of the GDP, larger than the current 100%. Did we pay that off that debt? No — we grew the economy.

I know Republicans like to claim that Obama was responsible for the deficit starting the day he took office, but George Bush passed the budget for the fiscal year ending in October 2009. That $1.4 trillion deficit goes to Bush. And the deficit for the year before that was $455 billion, so even if we gave you credit for an innocent mistake, you’re off by a factor of 3.

- Wrecked the economy.

I think Chris covered that one.

- downgrade the credit rating of the United States of America

Presidents don’t set the credit rating. And S & P has a pretty poor record on that front.

- The fine was deliberately set to entice companies to drop their insurance coverage.

Companies have been dropping insurance coverage for decades. That’s the main reason health care was a big issue in the 2008 election.

- Unemployed and underemployed between 16 and 20 percent?

Job losses peaked at 700,000 the month Obama took office. Again, this is months before he was able to get any legislation passed through Congress. Obama inherited a devastated economy from Bush, who had the worst track record on jobs ever recorded, according to the WSJ.

And of course, you’re talking about rates that were typical of the Reagan years.

- The fact it’s safer for a black man between 18 and 50 to be in prison than on the street?

Violent crime is at historic lows right now, even in the inner city. Maybe you should avoid the more racist sites when getting your news.

- The belief that if people took risks and worked hard they would have a future they could pass on to their children gone for a generation or more?

Speak for yourself.

- A communist government lecturing us on how to run an economy?

They’ve been doing that since Lenin.

- Higher interest rates?

Interest rates are around 4.5% for 30 year mortgages. The federal funds rate is near the zero lower bound. Are you borrowing from loan sharks or pawn shops?

- More expensive food, clothing and medical care?

Inflation rates are also at historic lows. For food and medical care it’s around 3%. For clothing it’s less than 2%. Did I miss the Bush era of 0% inflation?

No, he was spending like a conservative. George W. Bush was a perfect, prototypical conservative. Conservatism stands for increasing the size, expense, and intrusiveness of big government, as well as social engineering and the redistribution of wealth.

Don’t bother telling me what they *believe,* because I’ve lived through enough of what they actually *do* to be able to tell the difference. It’s just like when campus Marxists swear we can’t judge the perfect philosophy by insignificant little failures of mortal men.

For example, SLP states that Obama has increased Bush’s deficit by 10-fold each year. But that figure is utterly fiction and demonstrably false, as this economic data from the New York Times indicates: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html

Further, SLP blames Obama for “managing to downgrade the US credit rating.” Understanding of the complexity of the political situation would indicate that Obama played a minor role in this. Duels between the hard-line Republicans and Democrats in the legislature led to the downgrade–it had very little to do with the president.

In what way is Obama running a “communist government that lectures us on how to run the economy?” Every single type of government determines economic policy: communist, socialist, capitalist, etc.–that’s the job of the government. Saying that Obama is somehow communist because he is attempting to determine economic policy is a statement of egregious naivete.

I could mention the complexity inherent behind each of SLP’s simple statements; most of them are simply wrong, misleading, or naively one-sided. But the point is, if something is a good soundbite: “Obama wrecked the economy,” chances are it’s never that simple.

Yeah, none of that existed prior to Obama.

You’re projecting, big time.

But since you had no other comments about the post…Your actions (or lack thereof) speak so loudly I can’t hear what your saying.

“THE real conundrum is why the president seems so compelled to take both sides of every issue”

Once elected to office, he is not the President of the Democrats, he is President of the entire country. He represents *ALL* of us and not just one party’s special interests.

I don’t really consider him as having failed. I actually think he has been doing a pretty good job considering the constraints he is under. The only thing questionable I can think of is his authorization of involvement in Libya which he was really under obligation to support through NATO.

United States politics is odd in that the President gets all the blame and glory (depending) when the real decisions are made by the legislature. The President’s office does not make up the banking regulations. The President does not make up the budget. He can beg, demand or however he wants to request funds in the budget for whatever reason he desires but it is the Congress who holds the purse strings. He just doesn’t have that much discretion.