Friday, January 20, 2012

Slipping the Economy a Mickey



After killing off tens of thousands of potential jobs by vetoing the Keystone oil pipeline (which his own State Department had twice pronounced to be no threat to the environment), Barack Obama traveled to Florida on Thursday to announce plans for a new pipeline which will create one million jobs!

Specifically, the president stood in front of the "Magic Castle" to announce that he wants to create a pipeline of foreign tourists coming to our country by making our borders even easier to cross (through an expedited visa process) so that they can visit Disneyworld and other parks.

Wow! Take that all of you Obama critics who say that he doesn't know how to create jobs!

The president's "Mickey Mouse Job Plan" is part of his new "We Can't Wait" initiative, in which he's making bold themepark-based executive decisions on his own to show up the "do nothing House Republicans" who unfortunately couldn't get to the theme park yesterday because they stayed in Washington to vote against raising the debt ceiling yet again. The slackards.

Of course, the president couldn't linger at Disneyworld very long either, because there's a lot of critically important work piling up on his desk. Piling up really, really high.

Which is why Air Force One flew past the Whitehouse and continued to New York for a "one-percenters only" $38,500 per plate fundraising dinner at Spike Lee's house.

Hey, he may be running a Mickey Mouse operation...but he's not Goofy enough to do his job when there's easy money for the taking.



"Gawrsh! Creatin' jobs is EASY! Hyuk-yuk-yuk-yuk!"
-

33 comments:

Pete(Detroit) said...

Sadly, there ARE people Goofy enough to buy into all this turd hurdling.
Still.
Pa - Friggin'- tehetic.

Colby said...

M-I-C
K-E-Y
O-U-S-O-B!

Chuck said...

And the media is cheering him on, attempting to pick the weakest GOP candidate for us … and a gullible, uninformed electorate is, I'm afraid, buying it. All many people get of the news between their sports, reality shows, celebrity worship, class-envy, race-baiting, baby-killing, job-exporting existence is leftist sound-bytes.

I haven’t been on any of the rides at Disney World in years, but I feel a need to hurl!

Chuck said...

@Colby - I thought it was:
F-U-C
K-E-D
A-G-A-I-N

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

As depressingly awful as Obama is, I'm still not sold on this "anybody but Obama" mentality. Look at the history of GW Bush. Despite some conservative leanings and ultimately forced to pick some good SCOTUS justices, he was a big-government progressive who expanded government greatly and chipped away at our constitutional freedoms (not as bad as Obama, granted). But he helped set the stage for Obama. Just imagine what an even more progressive, big-government Romney will set the stage for. Once he's done, the reincarnated Josef Stalin could be elected President (as a Democrat) because he will seem a "reasonable" alternative as pushed (and unvetted) by the socialist media. Think it can't happen? Before 2008, who thought Obama could happen? I'm trying to learn from history here. Why are we rushing to repeat it...out of desperation to replace Obama with anything? Kinda short-sighted, don't you think?

John the Econ said...

@Angry Hoosier Dad, I'm afraid I'm with you. As hideous as Obama's legacy will be to America, it's only incrementally worse that that left by GWB and the establishment GOP big-government squishies.

For example, listen to Romney's latest tax proposals; More complex, convoluted special-interest-driven economic micromanaging of the type that has brought us to the point we are at now. Employment certainty for those of us connected to the accounting and tax industries, but more destructive for the economy as a whole.

As long as the GOP insists on serving up "anybody-but" candidates, we will get "anybody-but" what this country really needs.

Mike Porter said...

AHD: Can't help but agree with the sentiment, but it seems to me that Bush more or less bumbled in the progressive direction, while Obama is in a real, determined hurry to get us all on board the trains headed for Hellsville. If Bush was a spreading rash, then Obama is a rapidly metastasize cancer that needs to be excised toot sweet, or we're all screwed beyond the point of return. I agree with Stilton on this one; let's just focus on putting out the fires first, then we'll have a little breathing room to begin reconstruction.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Remember folks, the Prez (in theory) does not WRITE laws, he merely SIGNS them. ANY Prez will be more or less (depending on how s/he feels about executive orders)at the beck of a truly conservative Congress (both houses).
That, then, is the Big Rub. Getting Micky out the WH is a good goal too, but if we do the job in House and Senate, who replaces him is much less relevant.
In Theory.

CenTexTim said...

Great title, Stilt. Very good stuff, as usual.

Reminds me of the old joke about Mickey Mouse filing for divorce from Minnie. The judge read through the paperwork and then called Mickey to court.

"Mr. Mouse, you gave as the reason for wanting a divorce the fact that your wife is crazy. I'm sorry, but that is not sufficient grounds for divorce."

Mickey replied, "I didn't say she was crazy, judge. I said she was f***ing Goofy."

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Pete(Detroit)- No doubt there ARE people who will point at this as an act of "creating" one million jobs. Of course, there won't be any measurable stats to prove it in the future - but that doesn't really matter, does it?

@Colby- Love it!

@Chuck- It seems like there should be a themepark-style sign preceding all MSM news shows saying "You must be THIS gullible to board the ride."

Regarding your memory of the lyrics to the Mickey Mouse theme, I believe the ones you cite are in the rarely heard second verse. Which makes them especially accurate if there is a second term.

@Angry Hoosier Dad- Believe me, I'm not happily or passively watching the GOP parade go by, tickled with "Anyone But Obama." I'm disappointed with the dwindling field, but I'm not going to let "perfect be the enemy of the good." Or even maybe, kinda, sorta good. As I've said before, we MUST get Obama out of office...and the presidency is a key piece of the puzzle, but not the whole puzzle. Any of the remaining GOP candidates could/would hopefully do good things if the House and Senate are sending them the legislation our country genuinely needs.

@John the Econ- I don't disagree with you or AHD. IF we end up with the same kind of GOP big government squishies (as you say) that we've previously had in the House, Senate, and Whitehouse then it will be almost as bad as another Obama term. The huge and critically important difference at that point is Supreme Court appointments. The Dems can (and do) attack the Constitution whenever possible, but only the Supreme Court can truly destroy the power and meaning of that document. We can not let that happen.

Do I want more and better than that? Hell yes. But I'll crawl to the polls over burning embers to vote for anyone who would deny Obama those Supreme Court picks.

@Mike Porter- I'd agree with you for agreeing with me, except it would seem self-indulgent (grin). But I like your analogy: Bush was a rash, but Obama is a quickly spreading cancer. And to stretch the analogy, the current GOP candidates are like chemotherapy - they may make us throw up, but could eventually do some good.

@Pete(Detroit)- Exactly.

@CenTexTim- I've always liked that joke, and it was certainly on my mind while working on today's cartoon and commentary...but there wasn't a good way to work it in. Until now!

DonSurber said...

Goofy.

Yup.

Unknown said...

"Chuck said...

@Colby - I thought it was:
F-U-C
K-E-D
A-G-A-I-N"



Nah That doesn't really work, but then again neither does Obama.

elcedar said...

Stilt...it's nice of you to acknowledge the new Themepark Ride, the WTF express! The theme of the ride is a fantastic journey through all 60 states (remember, he actually said that he had been to 57 and had one more to go, and he couldn't go to Alaska or Hawaii, so he never really said we had only 57 states :-) In each state he will inform Barry's little lambs, that having fleece as white as snow will get you barred from the polls unless you join the union.
In keeping with his Fantastic Journey ... the ad he's running where he claims to have created 2.7 Million jobs ... will be repeated by each of the MSM outlets, ad infinitum.
You are correct as well, about the Supreme Court ... but don't bet on any relief from a weak Republican. It was GHWB and John Sununu (you know, the guy pimping for Romney), who gave us Justice Souter (geez, talk about Goofy).
Another Obama term would kill America, but another weak Republican would still leave us mortally wounded.
In case you doubt my memory banks on the number of US States .... you could look it up ... or try this link :
http://www.reuters.com/video/2008/05/09/obama-ive-now-been-to-57-states?videoId=82127

Jazz said...

Well ... I guess in his way of seeing, "one million jobs" which are mostly part-time and mostly pay at or near minimum wage (keeping the job-holders dependent on the state) is better than tens of thousands well-paid jobs which may result in tens of thousands of families being able to shuck the foodstamp lifestyle they've been suffering of late.

It's not MY way of seeing things; but it seems to be HIS way of seeing things.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@DonSurber- Admit it, Barry looks pretty darn natural in that Goofy suit. And it's more subtle than most of the outfits his wife wears.

@Unknown- Hey, Obama works! Specifically, he works crowds of donors.

@elcedar- I like your description of the wild themepark ride that Obama is taking us on. And I agree that a term of GOP squishies is about as inviting (and hopeful) as sustaining a large, sucking chest wound.

And you're entirely right about the math on the number of states Obama thinks exist - 60. But I used the 57 figure for my bestselling and still remarkably inexpensive book "The Obama Sutra - An Illustrated Guide to 57 States of Ecstasy" because he actually said the words "I've been to 57 states."

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Jazz- Hey, a job is a job, right? Whether you're selling ice cream cones in a park, or you're a structural engineer. In fact, Obama probably prefers racking up a big number of meaningless jobs instead of a smaller number of real jobs - because it's all about HIM.

Meanwhile, he defended killing the Keystone pipeline by saying that extending unemployment benefits will create more jobs than the pipeline ever could. Seriously, the man is delusional.

Emmentaler "Pepper Jack" Limburger said...

@AHD: Instead of the mantra "Anybody But Øbama", how about this one: "Anybody But A Socialist, Environazi, Union Sympathizing, Apologetic, Pathetically Poor Excuse For A Human Being"? If we all vote that way, we get what we want and... we get what we want.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Emmentaler- If that gets turned into a bumper sticker, I'm going to need a wider car!

Colby said...

@Chuck,
I like your version a lot better; it really rolls off the tongue! And for some reason, I feel better about things if I repeat it enough times; sort of like singing the blues I guess.

And as far as voting "squishy," I've said it before and I'll say it again...

A) Imagine yourself in the voting booth next November 6, 2012. There are two boxes to check and you can only check one. Can you seriously say you will check the Obama box if the other is Romney?? Come on now, seriously? And if you think doing a vote boycott is the answer, please feel free to completely cave in and join the American Socialist party and start occupying Wall Street or something.

B) Mike Porter said it right. We could not be so fortuante to turn this wreck of a country around 180 degrees with one election. Let's stop the bleeding now and start planning for complete reversal in two more years. We have been on this path for 70+ years; it will not be fixed with one election.

C) Ther may be as many as three Supreme Court Justices picked by the next president. We are already one judge away from the Supreme Court completely controlling our country. If Barry O appoints the next judge or two, we can seriously start singing Chuck's version of the song.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Colby- Home run! Thanks for summing this up so well!

John the Econ said...

@Pete(Detroit) said "...the Prez (in theory) does not WRITE laws, he merely SIGNS them. ANY Prez will be more or less (depending on how s/he feels about executive orders)at the beck of a truly conservative Congress (both houses)

Not the case anymore, recent example being the non-recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. What has the GOP done about this blatant breech of a Constitutionally-defined process? Nothing that I can tell. The EPA has been walking roughshod beyond its mandate. And if Obama gets a second term, expect all government agencies to totally disregard the wills of the Congress, which can't even pass a budget.

@Stilton, you're right that the idea of Obama appointing more far-left judges is truly chilling. But what kind of judges can we expect from the cadre of squishies? After the fiasco with Bork over 20 years ago, I hold little hope of there ever being a worth-while Constitutionalist nominated for the bench ever again. Squishies on the bench are worse than squishies in congress.

@Jazz, you are correct. Although I have nothing against tourism, the vast majority of the jobs it creates are not the high-value-wage jobs that America needs to replace in order to be economically viable again. In fact, I'd argue that seeking to create tourism jobs actually is of little-to-no net benefit to the macro-economy, since, as you observed, most of those jobs are very low wage and often staffed by immigrant labor who are net-consumers of government resources.

Remember how Democrats used to mock low-wage "burger flipper" jobs as unworthy of Americans? How times change.

@Colby: As long as the GOP is convinced that we will make that choice the way they expect us to, they will continue to serve up the squishies.

Meanwhile, Obama's going to another five-figure fundraising dinner for the benefit of the 1%-ers. Why don't the Occutards ever show up at those?

My Dog Brewski said...

@ Colby:
Nice straw man you built there. Do you construct whisk brooms in your spare time? Seriously, if you have an argument to sway those who cannot see voting for a particular squish, make it. Calling them socialists or OWS'ers is hardly illuminating or instructive. It's just mean.

pryorguy said...

For obama to throw this out as something good and to show he cares about joblessness is totally insuling to anyone with any sense. Just goes to show what he really thinks of the 'little people' that he wants to hoodwink into giving him another four years!

BTW, laughed my butt off at some of the comments today! Way to go, guys!

Ementaler "Starvin' Marvin" Limburger said...

As a wise man once said: When one sits down to partake in a delicious meal of elephant, one must begin with just one bite.

Yes, the GOP wants you to vote for their squishy. HOWEVER, far, far more ominous: the DNC want you to vote for their titanium-core socialist dictator as well. I'll take the squishy in my first bite of elephant. Next bite, maybe we get to route some socialists and some squishies in congress. A sip of wine to cleanse the palate - now, in four years we have another helping of elephant, and mayhap eliminate the squishy GOP president or presidential candidate.

You're right: electing a squishy conditions the GOP to believe that they can run squishy after squishy and we'll pull the appropriate lever. Personally, I would like to see their collective face once the senate is hardened to the conservative side, and the next tasty piece of pachyderm is their squishy...

Come, now. Sit down with me to supper - and you don't have to eat the peas. Stilton? Please pass the gravy. Colby! Elbows off the table! ANGRY HOOSIER DAD!!! NO TALKING WITH YOUR MOUTH FULL. And stop dropping bits to your Dog Brewski - don't think I didn't see that... Who's got grace?

Hog Whitman said...

You had me at "Mickey Mouse Jobs". Sure, those jobs are important to the people who have them, but for most people, those are starter jobs, or maintenence jobs until they get a real education and find something better.

I don't want America to become a nation of waiters and waitresses. Is that so wrong?

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- Taking your points in order, I agree that if Obama is reelected then Constitutional process goes right out the window, one way or another. As far as a GOP president having the ability to nominate bad Supreme Court justices - yeah, I wish it wasn't the case, but it is. But I think we can/should at least assume that they won't be as bad as whatever Obama would (and has) come up with. Per "burger flipper" jobs, I've always respected them - because that used to be how people got on the bottom step of the employment ladder. The idea is to work your way up, though, and not to make sure that the most menial jobs pay enough to support a family of four. Regarding the squish factor, I completely agree that the old guard GOP will give us squish if we allow them to. We're making inroads with Tea Party people already, and we've got to do a lot more of it. And finally, OWS should be carrying on at EVERY millionaires-only function that Obama throws for himself.

@My Dog Brewski- I'll offer up a mea culpa and apologize for any ruffled feathers regarding the idea Colby floated that abstaining from voting against Obama is tantamount to becoming an OWS type or socialist. I assumed (and still do) he meant it colorfully. But that being said, it's rather unavoidable that a vote which is not cast against Obama will put him one vote further ahead than he would have been. Look at Iowa, where the first batch of results declared a winner by only 6 votes, and a recount sorta kinda changed the winner over a difference of 34 votes. It doesn't take a big number to make a big different in some cases. I think it's safe to say that none of us here is either in the Socialist or OWS camps. But neither do I think any of us really want to give Obama the pleasure of seeing us stay home on election day.

@Pryorguy- If you read the fine print, Obama is not only taking credit for creating "one million jobs," but that's an estimate of how many jobs could be created in the next ten years. In other words, his claim to job creation is much like his claim that he deserved the Nobel Peace prize: in both cases, he hasn't done a damn thing yet.

@Emmentaler- Good advice on how to eat an elephant AND reminding us that we're all friends and family here at the big HnC table.

John the Econ said...

@Ementaler "Starvin' Marvin" Limburger: What's the big difference between us becoming a socialist country within the next 4 years under Obama, or the next 8-10 years under the crony-capitalist squishies? Quite frankly, I was happier under Clinton than Bush. At least Clinton was kept somewhat under control.

@Stilton: I respect honest work as much as you do; be it burger flippers or CEOs. However, I'm not a fan of replacing the millions of high-value wealth creating jobs with low-wage service jobs. These are not the kinds of jobs that prosperous nations rely upon.

Also remember that the bottom 20% of workers pay a net-negative tax rate, (thanks to refundable tax credits) so those jobs do not significantly help the nation's fiscal situation either. America will not be able to address the trillions of dollars of currently unfunded liabilities with millions of service jobs.

Meanwhile, instead of paying any attention to Obama, I see the Occutards are busy trashing car dealerships and taking over buildings in San Francisco. Somehow, I seriously doubt they are interested in those millions of new hospitality jobs Obama is creating for them.

Emmentaler "Soapbox" Limburger said...

@John the Econ: You miss my point. Clinton was kept in check to a large degree by CONGRESS, wouldn't you agree? Bush was not because the same congress became complacent and very liberal. If we win congress, and place a squishy in the White House, there is a chance that the tide can be turned.

Yes, I have little faith in politicians of any stripe, but if we elect Øbama again, it really won't matter who is in congress as he pays no mind to them or the constitution and, to the disgrace of the remaining two branches, gets away with it. With a squishy, there's that hope of some degree of control.

In any case, I cannot mince words: such nihilistic comments, by intent or otherwise, are demoralizing to those who would work to turn the tide. Chin up, my friend. Keep the faith.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- If a doctor gave me the choice of living 4 years or 8 years, I'd go with the 8 years - because that keeps me around for 4 additional years during which someone might find a cure for my ailment.

Regarding Clinton, I never saw him as an ideologue like Obama is. Frankly, I felt (and feel) that his entire political career has been an extension of his fundamental, bone marrow-deep desire to get laid (and more broadly, loved and desired). I'm not kidding about this: politics and seduction use the same tools, and Bill is good at them. I don't think he ever wanted to change the structure of our country, and he was willing to get out in front of (and take credit for) anything which seemed it might add to his popularity (and therefore bedroom appeal).

On the burger flipper front, all jobs are not created equal, and for Obama to treat them otherwise (as if one million menial jobs represented any actual accomplishment at all) is a sad joke that this country has already gotten weary of. As you point out, we need REAL jobs with real salaries so this country could at least try to grow itself back to some sort of health. But the president's policies actively and (I believe) deliberately discourage such job creation.

As for OWS, it's really time they figured out that their 15 minues of fame is over.

@Emmentaler- Well said. I can't say I'm wildly happy about the next election, but I can't wait to get into the voting booth. Not to quote Obama's past campaign theme, but to me it's going to come down to choosing between "Some Hope" and "No Hope." Which isn't such a tough choice at all.

Anonymous said...

True Confessions: I voted for Clinton.

There. I said it. And … I’m sorry.

My Retirement certificate from the Army is actually auto-pen signed by Clinton. I do NOT display it.

I have/had no love for Clinton, but:
He was not bent on destroying the county; he was just in it for … Willie.
He was imperfect, but he was constrained (by Congress and WE THE PEOPLE).
Hillary-care had already been defeated!
He did not have sex with that woman … or maybe he did … who cares. I didn’t.
He was running against Bob Dole. Pu-leeze. Bob Dole?!? Seriously?!?

I decided to retire from the Army in 1994 BECAUSE of Bill Clinton and the way the tide was turning ... but by 1996, when the GOP offered up Dole … well, Bill was the lesser of two evils – in my mind.

I was wrong.
I will NOT make that mistake again.
I am ABØ.
I will vote.
I will NOT get the president I want, but we will, hopefully, buy time.

The stakes are much too high.

NØbama!

Chuck said...

Having problems with the new comment method and my own ineptitude. The Anon above is me.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Chuck- Yeah, the new comment system stinks. I'm still hoping that Blogger will fix it soon, and I appreciate everyone's patience in the meanwhile.

Per your hideous confession, I didn't vote for Clinton, but I did something just as bad: I voted for Ross Perot and helped give the election to Clinton. Before that? I voted for Carter. Yes, brothers and sisters, I was a lost lamb and an idiot.

Not because I'd weighed the merits of the parties and their arguments. Nope, I just bought all the BS that Democrats were the good guys, and Republicans the bad guys - so of course, I wanted to hang with the good guys!

But then I got married, bought a home, had a child...and I had to start paying attention to things like schools, and taxes, and the future of our country. And it didn't take long for me to see the error of my ways. And make no mistake, I'm still doing penance - but I'm pleased to have the opportunity to do so.

My own past reminds me that most liberals are well-intended. Sincerely well-intended. And they don't know they're on the wrong team because they don't dig for information, and the info that's pushed upon them is false. They just want to be the "good guys," but never really look at (or are shown) the harm they do.

I'm trying to change that in my very small way, as we ALL can: by challenging our liberal friends and family in a civil way, and changing their minds with facts rather than anger.

And no, it won't always (or even usually) work. But I think it's good for us to remember that most liberals aren't evil - they're simply and comfortably deceived and self-deceived.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Hog Whitman- Yikes, I accidentally overlooked your response earlier, sorry! (Folks, Hog is a friend from Sondrakistan.com which is a fun place to visit, as well as being a funny and talented singer-songwriter)

Per your actual point, I complete agree: starter jobs should be starter jobs, and our national goal shouldn't be full employment at minimum wage. But as long as Barry just keeps counting the numbers of jobs instead of the types of jobs, you can bet he'll put most of his energies into quantity and not quality.