Tuesday, February 10, 2009

I caught some of the presidential address last night.

I can't help it, but when I listen to Obama his choice of words frequently seems condescending or patronizing. 

He kept referring to "his" Secretary of the Treasury.  I thought the Secretary of the Treasury was "our" Secretary.

When speaking about bi-partisanship, or the lack of it surrounding the current stimulus bill, he said,"I can't afford to see congress play the usual political games...", instead of "we" can't afford it.

When justifying his stimulus bill he said, "I think what I've said is what other economists have said..."  Other economists?  Is Obama an economist now?

When referring to the economic crisis he repeatedly pointed the finger at Republicans, who definitely are responsible for some bad decisions, but are surely not the only people who had their hands in the cookie jar.

The economic crisis is an American crisis, not a partisan crisis; yet over and over Obama kept lambasting the past administration as a "failure", being sure to make little digs here and there.

The worst example to use for the stimulus package:

Part of the problem in Elkhart that I heard about today was the fact that -- this is the R.V. [recreational vehicle] capital of America. You've got a bunch of R.V. companies that have customers who want to purchase R.V.s, but even though their credit is good, they can't get the loan.

Oh no! Retirees can't buy their giant-size RV's! They don't have the money to buy their behemoth cruisers.  Shouldn't that be a good thing? Wouldn't that help Obamam's energy policy? 

Joking aside, bemoaning the inability of people to buy what most would consider a luxury item seems like double talk.  We are in a mess because credit was extended to people who couldn't afford it.  Now, banks have changed their policies and are being more careful with their credit policies, because they can't afford to lose any more money.  And yet, in the midst of recognizing what a mess this has created, it seems like the message is "loosen those credit markets up", "consumers need to have money to spend and consume products with".

That's part of the problem with the current state of our economy...it's based on consumption and not production.  It's based on trying to keep the status quo, rather than letting the market sort itself out.

It bugs me.  Maybe it's nitpicking, but it bugs me.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Me too!


-gina-

steve martin said...

This guy is leading us further and further into the morass of Big Govt.

We are in big trouble.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

Not all conservatives are rooting against him out here, but he's got to stop whining. C'mon man, step up.

Boethius said...

Terri:

Great observation of his word choices. I missed some of his usage and now that you have pointed it out, yes, it does sound arrogant.

Another interesting point I heard on the news this morning is that he is using the "fear" card to bully Congress to give him what he wants. Did he not criticize Bush for using the "fear" card?

Things are so different when one gets elected.