Inconguity, incongruity. Incongruity on its face!
A gentle reminder: “Bush’s Enron” was, in reality, much more “Clinton’s Enron.” Ken Lay golf-partnered with Bill Clinton and Lay, along with a number of Enron execs, traveled to India with Clinton and eventually profiting from the trip. And I mostly shrug about that. But I think it’s worth remembering that Clinton “dealt” with Ken Lay.
Bush frog-marched him. And somehow, yes, still got flayed for it.
CONGRESS AND INCONGRUITY: First Obama’s “jobs” speech was going to be major and (as usual) historic, and now, maybe it’s not so major; maybe it’s just a kickoff to more talking. My thought, on reading this, was the same as Allahpundit’s: there is something addle-brained and frankly incongruous about requiring the nations biggest venue in order to deliver a less-than-definitive policy speech on a less than definitive policy.
NO DRAMA OBAMA: I miss that model. Although, in fairness, it was the MSM and other Democrat Operatives who brought the “insult to the Office” drama.
WITH JOB GROWTH IN AUGUST ringing empty, like a penny dropped into an empty copper vat, we’re not supposed to ask about this, (or this) but let’s be bad: Why, when the president and his party had control of both houses, did their obsessions and energies rest on the job-wacking Obamacare, Obamacare, Obamacare (which he now admits will not lower costs), and destroying, among other things, jobs in the service/hospitality industries (he almost single-handedly depressed Las Vegas) jobs in auto sales, jobs in oil drilling and exploration, jobs in coal mining, jobs in construction, and jobs in guitar manufacturing? And now…the banks?
Some are asking if all of this is mere incompetence or a calculated and deliberate destruction? If its the former, and the president is simply in over his head, he should consider not running for re-election — you know, put country before ego. If it’s the latter, he will do anything and say anything to hold on to his office.
And maybe no one who wants the office that badly should have it.
It seems incongruous, to me, to expect a man who has demonstrated a profoundly anti-business mindset to get serious about actual, long-term job creation and growth.
And that’s a shame. Because — as the New York Times admitted, back in 2006 — when everyone is working, we “unexpectedly” enjoy record-setting tax revenues which pay down the deficit.
MAYBE HE IS WAKING UP: But I tend to think this move is about political expediency, and that alone. No one is going to be re-elected in a miserable economy, with no jobs and rolling blackouts, to boot.
Anyone who believes that re-electing Obama won’t simply encourage him to dig in and try to finish this “fundamental transformation of America” that he promised us needs to wake up, too.
Apparently only “haters” and “racists” were listening, and respectfully taking the man at his word.
From the tiresome “imaging the clamor if this were a GOP administration” department:
Who in the White House Knew?
White House received emails about Fast and Furious gun-trafficking operation
Demand for more answers in Fast and Furious Scandal