Obama is "in over his head"

[Tex]

That, from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a 22-minute interview a couple of weeks ago. The full video of the interview is here, with a summary column in the WSJ here, from which I quote:

The "philosophical starting point" of today's Democrats, as Mr. Cantor sees it, is that they "believe in a welfare state before they believe in capitalism. They promote economic programs of redistribution to close the gap of the disparity between the classes. That's what they're about: redistributive politics." The Virginian's contempt is obvious in his Tidewater drawl. "The assumption . . . is that there is some kind of perpetual engine of economic prosperity in America that is going to just continue. And therefore they are able to take from those who create and give to those who don't. We just have a fundamentally different view."

...

By contrast, he says, "Never was there ever an underlying economic argument" from Democrats. "It was all about social justice. Honestly, one of them said to me, 'Some people just make too much money.'"

And this:

"It's almost as if someone cannot have another opinion that is different from his. He becomes visibly agitated. . . . He does not like to be challenged on policy grounds."

...

In a mid-July Cabinet Room meeting, Mr. Cantor made a suggestion that Mr. Obama and other Democrats took as impertinent. "How dare I," Mr. Cantor recalls of the liberal sentiment in the room. He was sitting between Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, "and they were in absolute agreement that [the president] was such a saint for having endured all this."

Libs vacuously believe that people like me just oppose Obama because he's a Democrat (the more hateful one's say it's because he's black), but these quotes illustrate what it's really about. And a better characterization of the President is hard to find. Cantor's interview can be boiled down to 2 fundamental problems:

1. Obama has a hyperinflated image of self. He believes his own rhetoric about his Messiahship to save America, whereas in reality, he really is "in over his head." He does not understand nor does he care what really makes the American economic engine work.
   
2. He has a radically different view about what America should be than I do ... and I would argue, than a majority of Americans do. He--and his party--are about (pick your term): social justice, the welfare state, redistributive politics.

This approach is captured both in the "stimulus" and in Obamacare, and (I think) will ultimately be the undoing of his presidency. His nonsensical "hope and change" fooled a majority of voters last time around, but I don't think they'll be fooled again.

One can only ... hope.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

That, from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a 22-minute interview a couple of weeks ago. The full video of the interview is here, with a summary column in the WSJ here, from which I quote:



And this:



Libs vacuously believe that people like me just oppose Obama because he's a Democrat (the more hateful one's say it's because he's black), but these quotes illustrate what it's really about. And a better characterization of the President is hard to find. Cantor's interview can be boiled down to 2 fundamental problems:

1. Obama has a hyperinflated image of self. He believes his own rhetoric about his Messiahship to save America, whereas in reality, he really is "in over his head." He does not understand nor does he care what really makes the American economic engine work.
   
2. He has a radically different view about what America should be than I do ... and I would argue, than a majority of Americans do. He--and his party--are about (pick your term): social justice, the welfare state, redistributive politics.

This approach is captured both in the "stimulus" and in Obamacare, and (I think) will ultimately be the undoing of his presidency. His nonsensical "hope and change" fooled a majority of voters last time around, but I don't think they'll be fooled again.

One can only ... hope.

"And a better characterization of the President is hard to find." Probably true- if you only read Powerlineblog or Red State or the National Review.

Tex, if you have truly gotten to the point where you take Cantor's words as substantive rather than political, well- it won't help to spoon feed you the conclusion of what that says about you.

Step outside of the hyperpartisan box you live in. Leave all politics alone for 5 minutes. Focus exclusively on policy. I'm genuinely interested in how you would respond to the following:

1. Do you believe tax increases are always (or even almost always) bad?
2. What tax increases and under what circumstances would you favor?
3. Would you support a bill with 10-1 revenue cuts to tax increases? If not, what's the ratio you would increase?
4. Do you believe spending must be cut right now (both short and long term)?
5. If yes to 4, what amount of spending right now is needed and how should we get there?
6. If yes to 4, what do you see as the difference between tax cuts and spending during a recession to stimulate the economy, if any?

Think through the questions and please respond when you have time. You can put 6 to me as well that I will answer (all policy questions- no politics).

Something tells me you aren't even going to make an attempt at this.