How President Obama Has "Failed" Liberals

It's the kind of headline designed to drive traffic to a website: "14 Things President Obama Doesn't Want You To Know".  The fact that it was posted by a liberal website like The Huffington Post makes it even more interesting--and I admit when I saw it on Twitter I clicked through to read more. 

www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/slideshow/1855172/248454?icid=hp_business_gallery

The headline makes it sound like we were going to learn about ways the President has "failed" his liberal supporters--but when you read further into it, you find out it's actually about the ways Obama has succeeded in advancing the liberal agenda.  Here's what I mean:

Supposed "Failures": Prosecutions for financial fraud hit a 20-year low during the Obama Administration, Goldman and other Wall St firms have largely escaped punishment for their roles in the financial crisis, and "Too Big To Fail" banks have grown under Obama.

Actual Liberal "Successes":  It's easy to say that "Wall Street Fat Cats and Greedy Bankers stole Americans money"--but it's much more difficult to prove it.  And if you go ahead and try to bring charges and don't get prosecutions, there goes your biggest economic talking point.  Besides, liberals always need someone else to blame for your problems--so the "Fat Cats" need to stay in place to serve that purpose.

Supposed "Failures": Obama wants to lower the corporate tax rate, Many top Obama donors are employees of major corporations, Democrats received a lot of money from Bain and The revolving is alive and well under Obama.

Actual Liberal "Successes":  Here's a shocker, there are liberal rich people as well.  And there are corporations that will benefit greatly from increased government spending. And if Cabinet and White House staff members are going right into lobbying positions--won't they be advancing the agenda--in an even more influential role?  And while liberals may be offended that corporations might pay less than the highest tax rates in the Western World currently require, they can rest assured that many of the nation's biggest employers will still be taking it in the shorts thanks to the Affordable Health Care Act.  Sky rocketing health insurance premiums will require some form of relief somewhere else--just to keep the Stock Market from tanking--which has been the one decent part of the so called "recovery" the past two years.

Which brings us to our next Supposed "Failure":  Health care reform won't make health care cheaper for Americans.

Actual Liberal "Success":  Let's be honest, liberals won't be happy until their is a single-payer, government-funded health care system in the US.  While ObamaCare doesn't get us to that point, it does set the groundwork for failure of the current private health insurance industry.  Not allowing insurance firms to limit risk to the pool by requiring coverage of pre-existing conditions, considering people "minors" up to the age of 26 and requiring nearly all employers to provide health insurance is guaranteed to jack up the cost for everyone involved in the process--all but ensuring the failure of private carriers, or adding to the frustration of most voters to the point where they will accept a government takeover of health care with few complaints.

Supposed "Failures":  Income inequality is worse under Obaman than under Bush, The US has gained a lot of low wage jobs during the recovery and Incomes declined more during the recovery than during the recession.

Actual Liberal "Successes":  In the Reagan Recovery of the early '80's, millions of Americans went back to work at major factories with huge "Carbon Footprints" fueled by cheap gas and inexpensive coal-produced electricity.  In the attempted "Obama Recovery", those plants are gone--driven off by "Cap and Trade" limitations on emissions and more expensive electricity coming from utilities that must meet arbitrary percentages of renewable energy required by governments.  What's more, generations of Americans being told that menial labor is "below them" and how they should strive only for higher education has left us with a workforce unqualified to handle the manufacturing jobs that tend to pay more. 

As we mentioned with the Wall Street "failures", the libs need to keep their red herring "enemies"--and if the rich aren't getting richer and the poor aren't getting poorer, who should be taking the blame for our economic problems.  And let's not forget, the more poor people there are (or those getting closer to poor), the more the demand for public assistance programs that get Democrats elected.

So before we start calling President Obama a "failure"--let's consider what he actually has "succeeded" in doing the last four years.