"'It frustrates people, understandably, when you've got an unemployment rate that is still too high, an economy that's not growing fast enough. And for me to argue, 'Look, we've actually made the right decisions, things would have been much worse has we not made those decisions,' that's not that satisfying if you don't have a job right now,' the president said. 'And I understand that, and I expect to be judged a year from now on whether or not things have continued to get better.'"
Well, the economy has not improved, Obama no longer wishes to be judged on his economic record, and he is now seeking to shift the blame by depicting Romney as a vulture capitalist. Moreover, in order to deflect criticism of his record, Obama is busy engaging in bald-faced lies concerning Romney's past at Bain Capital. I recommend reading Kimberley A. Strassel's Wall Street Journal article, "Vampire Capitalism? Please" (http://online.wsj.com/article/potomac_watch.html), and Alana Goodman's Commentary item, "Obama Launches New Bain Attack Ad" (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/05/21/obama-launches-new-bain-attack-ad/#more-794318).
Today, in his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "How Change Happens" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/22/opinion/brooks-how-change-happens.html), David Brooks scrutinizes Obama's campaign ads focusing upon Romney's Bain career, and also draws attention to Strassel's Wall Street Journal article. Claiming that private equity firms such as Bain have "forced a renaissance that revived American capitalism," Brooks writes:
"Forty years ago, corporate America was bloated, sluggish and losing ground to competitors in Japan and beyond. But then something astonishing happened. Financiers, private equity firms and bare-knuckled corporate executives initiated a series of reforms and transformations.
The process was brutal and involved streamlining and layoffs. But, at the end of it, American businesses emerged leaner, quicker and more efficient.
. . . .
Private equity firms like Bain acquire bad companies and often replace management, compel executives to own more stock in their own company and reform company operations.
Most of the time they succeed. Research from around the world clearly confirms that companies that have been acquired by private equity firms are more productive than comparable firms. "
Asking whether this transformation of the private sector can be extended to the public sector, Brooks concludes:
"In a country that desperately wants change, I have no idea why a party would not compete to be the party of change and transformation. For a candidate like Obama, who successfully ran an unconventional campaign that embodied and promised change, I have no idea why he would want to run a campaign this time that regurgitates the exact same ads and repeats the exact same arguments as so many Democratic campaigns from the ancient past."
Brooks really has "no idea" why the Democrats can no longer "compete to be the party of change and transformation"? Simple answer: Obama has failed to reform the banking and financial industry, as evidenced by JPMorgan Chase's recent multi-billion dollar trading loss, and has reneged on his 2008 campaign pledge to turn lobbyists away from the White House (see:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-visitor-logs-show-lobbying-going-strong/2012/05/20/gIQA2ok4dU_story.html?hpid=z2).
There has been no change, there is not going to be any change in the foreseeable future, and given the dismal state of the economy, it is remarkable that Obama remains neck and neck with Romney in the polls (see: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/07/news/la-pn-poll-obama-romney-neck-and-neck-six-months-ahead-of-election-20120507).
No comments:
Post a Comment