Last Updated:August 28 @ 07:07 am

Limbaugh: Democrat Propaganda

By David Limbaugh

Recently, White House senior adviser David Plouffe made a comment that didn't receive the scrutiny it deserves. The statement demands attention because it frames President Obama's re-election campaign theme and illustrates how grounded in disinformation the theme is.

Apart from Team Obama's formidable community organizing skills aimed at demonizing Mitt Romney as a wealthy, compassionless corporate raider, Obama has nothing but lies and scapegoating to run on, given his abysmal record.

Plouffe said that Republicans "want to return us back to the same policies that caused the recession -- huge tax cuts for the wealthy, more war, more debt."

You have to give these people credit for chutzpah and for relentlessly staying on message, as warped as it is.

We should hold Obama to his earlier statement that he would not be re-elected if Americans weren't better off than they were when he took office.

But once it became clear that Obama's recovery would be permanently anemic, he shifted the goal posts. Obama told us the test would be not whether people are worse off than they were when he began his hope and change odyssey but whether they are better off than they would have been had he not been president.

This is an important distinction, not simply because it is another Obama deception but because it seeks to alter how the electorate judges presidential performances. This must not be allowed to stand, and it's important we not let him get away with it.

Before examining the veracity of Plouffe's statements, we should see how Obama has fared under his false re-election metric. Are we better off than we would have been had he not been elected?

The answer is no. All other recessions in the past half-century were followed by robust recoveries, with employment completely recovering within four years. But as I point out in my book "The Great Destroyer," in December 2011, payroll employment was 4 percent below its level in December 2007, when the Great Recession began.

Moreover, would other presidents have deliberately extended unemployment benefits as long as possible despite evidence that these extensions exacerbate unemployment? Would they have incentivized states to expand the food stamp program to make more people dependent on government assistance? Would they have amassed anti-business regulations at an unprecedented rate and presided over the largest tax increase in the nation's history, which is set to occur in January -- especially during tough economic times? Would they have engaged in the systematic undermining of our domestic energy resources, destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs and diverting billions of dollars to corrupt, doomed-to-fail green energy projects? Would they have imposed a new uber-entitlement -- Obamacare -- against the will of the American people on top of all our nationally bankrupting $100 trillion of unfunded liabilities? Would they have refused even to offer a plan to restructure our entitlements and otherwise reduce federal spending in an effort to avert what Rep. Paul Ryan has called the most preventable, predictable financial catastrophe in world history?

Of course not. In fact, liberal policies largely caused the recession that Obama keeps complaining about, not George W. Bush. But irrespective of who caused it, Obama has done everything in his presidential power to avoid fixing it. Indeed, he's made it much worse by burdening the economy with oppressive new debt and smothering the private sector instead of letting it breathe and then flourish on the way to recovery.

As for Plouffe's other statements, the Republicans don't want more wars. They only advocate military intervention when they reasonably believe our national security is at stake, as opposed to using it for social experiments and for trying to convince the world that the United States, under President Obama, will take its marching orders from international bodies, not Congress -- as he showed with his misguided intervention in Libya.

Also, the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars did not cause the recession -- nor did they cause the deficits. In 2007, Bush's deficit was $161 billion, despite both wars going on and the tax cuts, which actually increased total revenues, being in full operation.

The tax cuts, Mr. Plouffe, were not just for the wealthy. Every income group received tax cuts. Republicans aren't advocating tax cuts for the wealthy now, only that the rich not be singled out for punishment -- by eliminating the top rate that's been in place for almost a decade. How about some truth in advertising, Mr. Plouffe?

But speaking of truth, Mr. Plouffe, are you really serious that Republicans want more debt -- Republicans, the only ones who have put forth any plan to restructure entitlements and seriously reduce our spending?

It's time to stop the lies and the class warfare, Mr. Plouffe, and own up to your man's record in office. We understand why you don't want to do that, but November will force you to do so.

---

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book, "The Great Destroyer," is now available. Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.9/10 (39 votes cast)
Limbaugh: Democrat Propaganda, 9.9 out of 10 based on 39 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

14 Comments

  1. inluminatuoComment by inluminatuo
    July 6, 2012 @ 9:05 am

    Here’s a real campaign slogan for Obama….” I bled you less than my opponent would have.” Or “ I didn’t treat your economy like Osama Bin Laden, I just kept your jobs locked up overseas at GTMO.” Or “Never underestimate the government’s ability to spend you into bankruptcy faster than you can yourself.” Or “At least my pearly white teeth are not a Red Riding hooded “All the better to eat you with my Dear”

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.8/5 (10 votes cast)
  2. snattlerakeComment by snattlerake
    July 6, 2012 @ 9:58 am

    Romney needs to personally read this article.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (11 votes cast)
  3. genesalComment by genesal
    July 6, 2012 @ 10:02 am

    I’d just like to see a ‘Superman’ not a Clark Kent!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (7 votes cast)
  4. dalnbComment by dalnb
    July 6, 2012 @ 10:14 am

    The GOP certainly capitalized on Obama’s comments (— statement that he would not be re-elected if Americans weren’t better off than they were when he took office.) For three years they have aggressively applied every tactic they can to ensure failure and a one term occupancy of the White House by President Obama. It is fully understandable why things have not improved over the past three years.

    No administrator (Public or private sector) can succeed when they have uncontrollable anarchy in the ranks! In the private sector employee’s intent on destroying management would be fired. In the military they would be court-martialed; but in government it seems those who push failure the hardest and most aggressively (such as Mitch McConnell) seem to survive with no impunity.

    Ask any manager, and supervisor, any military leader – how long would anyone survive if they worked so hard to create failure. If you employed trouble makers intent on seeing you fail what would you do? How would you handle them? What can you expect if nothing is done to eliminate the problem? Is our Government so organized that such actions can be allowed without consequences, such actions can be encouraged by leaders, and accepted by their followers (Far too many elected officials in Washington have shown themselves to be far better followers than leaders)?

    Radical political leaders from either party need to be removed from office and all need to understand that America comes before party!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.4/5 (10 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      July 6, 2012 @ 1:12 pm

      “For three years they have aggressively applied every tactic they can to ensure failure and a one term occupancy of the White House by President Obama”

      The reason your argument has no credibility is because you ignored the fact that Democrats had control of both houses of Congress for two full years of Obama’s administration, and the only thing they worked on was Obamacare and spending $800 billion that did nothing but put us further into debt. In 2010, the Republicans took the majority in the House, but that does not explain WHY the first two years of the Obama administration didn’t do anything to solve the problems. The Democrats still have the Senate as well as the White House, and they refuse to even consider any bills passed by the House, so it’s obvious exactly who the obstructionists are–the Democrats.

      Your assertion that the Republicans are responsible for THREE YEARS of aggressive tactics is not only dishonest, but a falsehood.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (12 votes cast)
    • joelinpdxComment by joelinpdx
      July 6, 2012 @ 2:59 pm

      You know, the used to hospitalize people who were this delusional (I’m referring to dalnb ). Another failure of outplacement.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
  5. JDZComment by JDZ
    July 6, 2012 @ 10:15 am

    There is an excellent article in the WSJ this morning by Kimberly Strassel called “Obama’s Imperial Presidency” which summarizes some of the most egregious examples of how the adminstration has ignored our Constitution, the Congress, and existing due process and just does whatever it wants. For example, when Congress did not pass the President’s “Dream Act legislation”, he basically passed it through executive order. When Congress did not pass “Cap and Tax”, he gave the EPA the power to regulate carbon emissions and essentially created a “back door” cap and tax program. He has ignored standing laws in the “marriage act”, union desired “card check”, the “net neutrality” Internet regulations, immigration laws, etc. and it goes on basically unlimited.

    Obama uses the excuse “we tried working with Congress but it didn’t pan out, so we did what we had to do”. This is not only an admission that the President has subverted the legislative branch, but a revealing insight into Mr. Obama’s view of his own importance and authority.

    Regardless of anything else, like the economy, the fiscal deficit, the unemployment, etc. which are obviously important to all of us, the one thing we cannot allow is for someone to be President who behaves this way. It is totally unacceptable for our President to decide, because he lacks the leadership skills to work within our system and with the legislative branch, to decide to ignore existing laws and due process, and to force his policies onto the American people.

    This behavior is inexcusable and reflects a total disrespect for our rule of law and our governmental system. No one, regardless of how brilliant they may appear to be, can be allowed to basically put them self above the law and to create a dictatorship for themselves in the Presidency.

    The President, and his inner circle, including Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, Lisa Jackson, and other key cabinet leaders, are all complicent in allowing this to happen. They are allowing this dictatorship behavior to happen and are themselves a part of the problem. All of them should be arrested for law breaking, however, our “top cop” in Eric Holder is one of those that is, himself, breaking our laws and would have to arrest himself first of all, and he just arrogantly keeps doing whatever Obama wants done.

    THEY ALL MUST GO!

    The American people must wake up to this communist takeover of our country. I am convinced Obama is the modern version of the “Manchurian Candidate”.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (19 votes cast)
    • anangrygrammaComment by anangrygramma
      July 6, 2012 @ 12:12 pm

      “THEY ALL MUST GO!”
      That includes the current Congress who has allowed themselves to be circumvented at every turn & allowed this Marxist to not be vetted & come forth with what they know!
      And Romney, you should read this article! Get on the ball & stop ***** footing around! Take off the gloves & speak truth, not just concerning economic numbers. But speak of the Marxist regime in our W.H., & the truth about how it seeks to destroy our country!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • joelinpdxComment by joelinpdx
      July 6, 2012 @ 3:09 pm

      Consider what would happen if through some fluke this jerk were re-elected and then another Democlown was elected in 2016. By 2020 Executive Orders (more like Executive Mandates) would be the norm and there’d no longer be a need for a Congress, or even a Supreme Court. A return to the days of George III.

      Luckily for us, there’s no way Americans will be dumb enough to re-elect Obozo and reimpose a monarchical form of government on the US.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  6. salty94Comment by salty94
    July 6, 2012 @ 10:22 am

    Mitt Romney is allowing Obama to set the stage and lead him down the rosy garden path by reacting to the Health Care Fiasco. This article sets forth the real reasons why Obama must go — the imperial presidency that has been put in place. If we fail to root out this pestilence, we will have surrendered the country without a fight.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
  7. bna42Comment by bna42
    July 6, 2012 @ 11:02 am

    “. . .whether they are better off than they would have been had he not been president.”

    This is another example of Obama’s SOP. He uses the tactic of turning the focus to issues which can not be proven or rejected. He did it with “hope and change”, “jobs saved or created”, “recession would have been worse without the $800 billion stimulus”, etc.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (7 votes cast)
  8. Mort_fComment by Mort_f
    July 6, 2012 @ 11:35 am

    The anybody else would have done worse, was a case study in my management course on how to get ahead. A General dynamics vice president, who came within an inch of bankrupting General Dynamics, became the Assistant Secretary of Defense, MacNamaras assistant. It took a Melvin Laird to correct the damages that were done.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  9. joelinpdxComment by joelinpdx
    July 6, 2012 @ 3:14 pm

    “…whether they are better off than they would have been had he not been president.”"

    I know I would be better off than had he not been president. I’m sure I wouldn’t have had a heart attack if Obozo had not been elected Jerk-in-Chief…and I can say this with absolute certainty.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  10. middlegroundComment by middleground
    July 6, 2012 @ 5:04 pm

    We are in a war for national survival and our enemies seemingly selected our leadership and policies in this war. Like the frog being slowly boiled as the water in the pan gradually heats up, we don’t seem to realize the debt bomb of a president who has increased our nation’s debt from nine and a half trillion to 16.1 trillion in less than 4 years and promises to spend even more if re-elected.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)

Leave a Comment





Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer