The New Yorker magazine still compares the 44th Presidency with the 43rd Presidency - President Obama needs to be able to be compared with his record. President George W. Bush and President-elect Barack Obama meet in the Oval Office of the White House Monday, November 10, 2008. Image Credit: Wikipedia
The New Yorker Magazine Performs A Disservice For The American People
THE NEW YORKER ENDORSES OBAMA in a four-page editorial, "The Choice," by "The Editors," taking up the full "The Talk of the Town" space:
"Obama ... did not always prove particularly adept at, or engaged by, the arts of retail persuasion, and his dream of bipartisanship collided with the reality of obstructionism. Perhaps inevitably, the President has disappointed some of his most ardent supporters. Part of their disappointment is a reflection of the fantastical expectations that attached to him. ... But the reelection of a President who has been progressive, competent, rational, decent, and, at times, visionary, is a serious matter. The President has achieved a run of ambitious legislative, social, and foreign-policy successes that relieved a large measure of the human suffering and national shame inflicted by the Bush Administration. Obama has renewed the honor of the office he holds. ...
"The Romney-Ryan ticket represents a constricted and backward-looking vision of America: the privatization of public good. ... The reelection of Barack Obama is a matter of great urgency. Not only are we in broad agreement with his policy directions; we also see in him what is absent in Mitt Romney - a first-rate political temperament and a deep sense of fairness and integrity. A two-term Obama Administration will leave an enduringly positive imprint on political life. It will bolster the idea of good governance and a social vision that tempers individualism with a concern for community. Every Presidential election involves a contest over the idea of America. Obama's America - one that progresses, however falteringly, toward social justice, tolerance, and equality - represents the future that this country deserves."
Ignored in the four-page editorial, "The Choice," by "The Editors are the economic facts created by Obama Administration policies through the last four years:
The highlight of presidential townhall style debate was Romney’s thorough, two-minute dismantling of the Obama record on the economy after Obama gave a tepid defense of his awful record. Never has the case against Obama been made so eloquently:
I think you know that these last four years haven't been so good as the president just described and that you don't feel like you’re confident that the next four years are going to be much better either. I can tell you that if you were to elect President Obama, you know what you're going to get. You're going to get a repeat of the last four years. We just can't afford four more years like the last four years.
He [President Obama] said that by now we'd have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans without work. I wasn't the one that said 5.4 percent. This was the president's plan. Didn't get there.
He [President Obama] said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform Medicare and Social Security, because he pointed out they're on the road to bankruptcy. He would reform them. He'd get that done. He hasn't even made a proposal on either one.
He [President Obama] said in his first year he'd put out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges. Didn't even file it.
This is a president [President Obama] who has not been able to do what he said he'd do. He said that he'd cut in half the deficit. He hasn't done that either. In fact, he doubled it. He said that by now middle-income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year. It's gone up by $2,500 a year. And if Obamacare is passed, or implemented -- it's already been passed -- if it's implemented fully, it'll be another $2,500 on top.
The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president [President Obama] who has not understood what it takes to get the economy working again. He keeps saying, "Look, I've created 5 million jobs." That's after losing 5 million jobs. The entire record is such that the unemployment has not been reduced in this country. The unemployment, the number of people who are still looking for work, is still 23 million Americans. There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in poverty.
How about food stamps? When he [President Obama] took office, 32 million people were on food stamps. Today, 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the growth of the economy? It's growing more slowly this year than last year, and more slowly last year than the year before.
The president [President Obama] wants to do well. I understand. But the policies he's put in place from Obamacare to Dodd-Frank to his tax policies to his regulatory policies, these policies combined have not let this economy take off and grow like it could have.
You might say, "Well, you got an example of one that worked better?" Yeah, in the Reagan recession where unemployment hit 10.8 percent, between that period -- the end of that recession and the equivalent of time to today, Ronald Reagan's recovery created twice as many jobs as this president's recovery. Five million jobs doesn't even keep up with our population growth. And the only reason the unemployment rate seems a little lower today is because of all the people that have dropped out of the workforce.
The president [President Obama] has tried, but his policies haven't worked. He's great as a -- as a -- as a speaker and describing his plans and his vision. That's wonderful, except we have a record to look at. And that record shows he just hasn't been able to cut the deficit, to put in place reforms for Medicare and Social Security to preserve them, to get us the rising incomes we need. Median income is down $4,300 a family and 23 million Americans out of work. That's what this election is about. It's about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they deserve.
One has to ask themselves, after looking at all of the facts (and there are many more that point to an overall degradation of the American economy due to the policies of the Obama Administration - Bond rating downgraded by two ratings agencies for example) how could the New Yorker actually say "that relieved a large measure of the human suffering" when this economy and its prospects for the future using the same policies will only make everyone's life more difficult?
This opinion and endorsement by The New Yorker magazine performs a disservice for the American people.
** Article first published as New Yorker Magazine Performs Disservice for the American People on Technorati **