Thursday, September 2, 2010

Christina Romer: We/Obama don't know what we are doing, wasted your money.....

by the Left Coast Rebel least that is what I have gleaned from the trending story about Christina Romer's exit stage left to the National Press Club last night. Christina Romer was the chair of White House Council of Economic Advisers. Dana Milbank, WaPo:

It wasn't the food; it was the entertainment. Christina Romer, chairman of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, was giving what was billed as her "valedictory" before she returns to teach at Berkeley, and she used the swan song to establish four points, each more unnerving than the last:

She had no idea how bad the economic collapse would be. She still doesn't understand exactly why it was so bad. The response to the collapse was inadequate. And she doesn't have much of an idea about how to fix things.

What she did have was a binder full of scary descriptions and warnings, offered with a perma-smile and singsong delivery: "Terrible recession. . . . Incredibly searing. . . . Dramatically below trend. . . . Suffering terribly. . . . Risk of making high unemployment permanent. . . . Economic nightmare."

Incredibly searing....Dramatically below trend....Suffering terribly....nightmare...

Funny, these words are perfectly applicable to the entire Obama machine that has no idea what they are doing and has been hell bent upon crippling our economy and nation.

Look a little closer in the WaPo article and you will find why Romer is no longer part of the White House economic team (other than the fact that they have unilaterally failed, failed, failed) :
And what to do about this? Here, Romer became uncharacteristically hesitant to make predictions. She suggested some "innovative, low-cost policies." But the examples she cited - a "national export initiative," new trade agreements and a "pragmatic approach to regulation" - aren't exactly blockbusters.

Oops, 'pragmatic regulation' isn't a slice of the income redistribution pie. 'Innovate, low cost policies' certainly do not fit into a radical Marxist agenda of power consolidation, an unprecedented freedom grab and plans to 'fundamentally transform' the nation into a European socialist state.

Romer - we don't know what we are doing, didn't know why we are doing what we are doing and shouldn't do what we are doing.

November, anyone?

Cross posted to Left Coast Rebel


  1. Oh Yeah....

    Nothing I want to do more than give back a totally screwed up economy back to the people that are responsible for screwing it up...

    I am sure Boehner knows how to fix the economy up in a jiffy and McConnell will get right in there and work his magic...because its going to be the small ol' ideas and faces leading the charge...

    Even Ayn Rand is laughing at the thought...

  2. Tao - I essentially agree with LCR's premise. The exception of course, and while I can't nor will I attempt to speak for LCR, I suspect he realizes the group that ran things before Obama was not so good either. It's just that early indications are things will get worse.

    As to Rand, I suppose she is laughing at the thought of either of these groups leading the country because I suspect she would see both avenues leading to further decline in our nations wealth and standard of living.

  3. LCR stated, "November, anyone?"

    Obviously, he either expects the return of the old team to be an improvement over the current team....


    He is excited about things going from bad to worse?

    What do you think Rational?

  4. TAO - Or perhaps he sees the going from bad to worse taking shape under the Obama administration. As many in the U.S. are beginning to see.

    Prhaps it's the desire to give the house a true dustin and a cleanin. That is certainly what I hope for.

    If I could vote for every Congressman in 2010 I think would vote the challenger, irespective of party label.

    Same with 1/3 of Senate seats up for graps in 2010.

    Think that might send a message if every registered votoer actually did that???

  5. Did that in 1994 didn't we?

    The challengers become incumbents and nothing changes...

    The only thing that will change the status quo is to challenge the two parties....right now, neither party represents the interests of the citizens that support them...

    Its time to challenge the two party system with TWO new parties, one on the left and one on the right...that way the Republicans and the Democrats will both find themselves threatened...

    Otherwise its more of "...the more things change the more they stay the same..."

    For now, I am voting third party every chance I get...that is the only way to threaten the status quo.

  6. TAO - You said;

    Its time to challenge the two party system with TWO new parties, one on the left and one on the right...that way the Republicans and the Democrats will both find themselves threatened..."

    On this you get no argument from me.

    And you said;

    "For now, I am voting third party every chance I get...that is the only way to threaten the status quo."

    As the republican nor the democratic party represents me I shall join you. Libertarian will be my choice if the candidates have merit. If not, since I cannot vote the Green Party or some offshoot of the communist or fascist socialism I shall simply write in "Mickey Mouse."

  7. As I have said for over thirty years vote:


    Since I already know that neither the repbulican nor the democratic candidate will have merit and will not change a thing it really makes no difference what other parties are available.

    I have actually only voted FOR one candidate in my life and that was for Gerald Ford...otherwise the last two times I voted I was voting AGAINST another candidate...

    But the last two times I voted I lived in Kentucky so my vote against was only a political statement not something that mattered...

  8. TAO - I also voted FOR Gerald Ford. It is indeed unfortunate he did not win. However given the political climate at the time I fully realize why he didn't.

    I will admit to voting for Ronald Reagan (twice) and I still hold he had many attributes America needs. However, I will go on record that his support for essentially Keynesian economics was in retrospect was to the countries detriment.

    Even given that he was by far better than Obama.

    Other than Ford and Reagan I too have voted AGAINST rather than for.

    I really do understand Randian Objectivism. And her theory of economics.

    Let me sum it up... For capitalism to be the engine of growth that creates wealth the increased standard of living made possible by capitalism must be shared across the broad spectrum of the society in which it is the operative economic system. These are my words and because I am not an economist I cannot wax eloquently on the matter.

    I am an Independent Conservative. What I wish to CONSERVE is... the Constitution, our Republic, Capitalism as it should be, LIBERTY FOR ALL, fiscal responsibility, and principled leadership that will distinguish us above all other nations.nations.

    If that makes me a right wing lunatic so be it.

    If that makes you a left wing commie so be it.

    If we both agree on the above we have common ground.

    As it stands now the ball is in your court.


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.