Beshear, like Obama, just blowing smoke

Jim Waters Published:

I’m not sure President Barack Obama asked for help with sharpening his campaign message, but Politico reports that Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear offered a couple of gems anyhow.

First, he advised Obama to cease accepting so much responsibility for our nation’s stalled economic recovery.

Apparently, Beshear believes that Americans’ – including Kentuckians’ – growing lack of confidence in the current administration has nothing to do with record unemployment, hundreds of billions in failed stimulus spending, forcing unsustainable energy sources on our communities or pushing the country down the treacherous road of socialized medicine.

Instead, the governor claims the reason for the public’s lack of faith in Obama is that “he’s allowed the other side to pin a lot of this economy, over which he’s had no control in terms of the recession occurring, on him.”

While, there’s no question that our nation’s economic problems began before Obama took the oath of office, to absolve this president of all responsibility while putting all of the blame on past leadership is about as reasonable as blaming silverware for obesity.

Former President George W. Bush, Obama’s predecessor, gets low marks for the disintegration of his administration’s economic policy into the realm of the delusional best exemplified when Bush revealed in a CNN television interview that he had “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.”

But that’s exactly why the nation’s shareholders – the American people – fired one party and hired a new chief executive. They wanted someone who would solve problems, not whine like a little kid on “The Nanny.”

Perhaps the more amazing part of Beshear’s advice to Obama was in prodding the president to, as Politico described it, “rediscover the stimulus” as part of his campaign.

“The voters he talks to in Kentucky know and respect the stimulus,” the article reported, to which Beshear added: “Most of the states, including Kentucky, would not be where they are today if we hadn’t received a lot of that money.”

Really? Our governor credits the current administration’s policies for the state of affairs Kentucky finds itself in today, and he actually does so in the positive sense of the word.

I wonder which part of the “where we are today” he likes best:

>Kentucky’s 8.6 percent unemployment rate, up from 5.6 percent the day Beshear took office.

>State government’s addiction to borrowing has more than doubled the debt-load amount for each individual Kentuckian during the past decade – from $996 in 2003 to around $2,100 today.

>The commonwealth has the fourth-worst funded pension plan in the country. Actuaries recommend that public retirement funds drop no lower than 80 percent. Kentucky’s system is only 54 percent funded.

>Kentuckians’ median household income has fallen since Beshear took office and now is more than $8,000 below national numbers.

nPromised – but nonexistent – jobs. The Lexington Herald-Leader checked with individual employers during last year’s election and found that many of the 19,500 jobs Beshear claimed to have “created or retained” to that point simply “do not exist.”

The governor likes to tout his prowess during these recessionary times, boasting that he was able to “balance the budget eight times in three years.”

Of course, Beshear fails to add that he did so by simply delaying the inevitable and using $3 billion in federal stimulus and other one-time funds to paper over our debt. This so-called solution will eventually require a tough choice: either cutting expenditures or replacing stimulus dollars with other funding sources

.

The governor seems much too busy blowing smoke right now to consider – much less make – such a decision.

Jim Waters is vice president of communications for the Bluegrass Institute.

Want to leave your comments?

Sign in or Register to comment.

  • Your backhanded reference to Mormanism is tacky and mean-spirited. Grow up.

  • Cheney said, that "Ronald Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter." What Cheney didn't say that he could have is that Reagan also taught the Republicans that it is OK to be selfish. In fact, Reagan was an ardent admirer of Ayn Rand, whose books such as 'The Virtue of Selfishness' and her philosophy celebrates self-interest and disdains altruism. Reagan and Ayn Rand before him had the uncanny ability to exploit the vulnerabilities of millions of young people so as to influence them not to care about anyone besides themselves? To justify and extol human greed and egotism is to my mind not only immoral (anti-Christian), but evil. Today, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Vice Presidential candidate credits Rand for inspiring him to go into politics...REALLY! His quest to be a Rand disciple can certainly has been evidenced by looking at the Ryan Plan that essentially ends Medicare as we know it. His motivation to do this is so that they can give more tax breaks to the ultra rich. There is something inherently evil about this too. We will all need "magic underwear" to protect us if these Republicans get into power and control all branches of government.

  • Wasn't it Cheney who said deficits don't matter?

  • If you think that Cheney wasn't in charge the whole 8 years, you were at best inattentive. Dubya was an idiot who was merely a pawn in the whole thing, and that was obvious from the very beginning. Bush Jr had a Republican majority in the House until 2007 when the Democrats gain a 233-198 majority. The Senate was split 50-50 at the beginning of his first term and 49-49-2 at the end of his second term. The Democrat party had control of both the the House and Senate, starting January 4th, 2007, when the recession began. But here's the kicker, Dubya had no vetoes during the time that the the big spending Republicans (McCain called them "drunken sailors") controlled the House and were running up the debt with unpaid wars, tax cuts for the rich and prescription drug plan, but he had 12 vetoes after January 2007. You really need to take a recent history lesson, but don't take my word for it. Speaking on the radio Thursday with KMOX’s Mark Reardon, National Review editor-at-large Jonah Goldberg described the Tea Parties partly as the “delayed backlash” against the Bush administration’s domestic spending: “A lot of conservatives gave Bush a pass because they found him to be an honorable man, they found his enemies to be so dishonorable and we were at war and so you had to prioritize where you were going to pick your political battles. But there was just an enormous frustration with the amount of money that was spent, particularly by the Republican congress under George W. Bush, and then the Tea Parties were asked to defend John McCain, who was another sort of big government conservative, so when Obama came in the Tea Parties had a free hand to finally say, ‘O.K., look, enough is enough, I’m not going to hold my nose anymore.’” Goldberg's tale is one of convenience as there is nothing troubling about Republicans protesting excessive domestic spending as long as the target of their “delayed backlash” can no longer be politically punished. No lies here, just the facts. I don't care if you respond or not..you have added nothing to this thread. Here is another Socialist thought for you in Mark 10:21-22 "Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions." If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it. You obviously just don't want to do it, and are a hypocrite about it to boot. You will be judged accordingly. Have a nice day!

  • Dont worry 1713...he wont respond to mine either.

  • 1713 LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You asked "whose side was I on." If you didn't know, why did you ask. Once again, HALF TRUTHS AND OUTRIGHT LIES, as I expected. It ISN'T "W"'s fault. GET OVER IT!!!!!!!! Your latest OUTRIGHT LIE, to start with, it wasn't "Cheney's Administration," LOL!!!!! Second, the latest HALF-TRUTH is when the debt started to go up, there was a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS. HMMMM!!!!! LASTLY, you need to listen to something other than CNN and MSNBC. FACT, your hereos, OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION, have run the public debt higher than ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION in history. Thank God, we now have a REPUBLICAN HOUSE has stopped THEM from running it HIGHER. Like I told someone else, debating with you is like a person(me) going to a duel to face an unarmed person(you). That is also a fact!!!!! I have only one regret. That is for giving you a continuing venue to spew your HATE, HALF-TRUTHS, AND OUTRIGHT LIES and using SOME of Jesus' Words to try to prove YOUR AGENDA. I'll let you in on something, it DIDN'T work because, FROM YOUR POSTS, I just MIGHT know more about Jesus than you do. Therefore, I will no longer respond to your posts. In the meantime, PLEASE READ A BIBLE, and get to know the real Jesus(A CONSERVATIVE). OH NOOOoooo. I will pray for you and wish you the BEST. BYE!!!!!!

  • 1713 LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You asked "whose side was I on." If you didn't know, why did you ask. Once again, HALF TRUTHS AND OUTRIGHT LIES, as I expected. It ISN'T "W"'s fault. GET OVER IT!!!!!!!! Your latest OUTRIGHT LIE, to start with, it wasn't "Cheney's Administration," LOL!!!!! Second, the latest HALF-TRUTH is when the debt started to go up, there was a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS. HMMMM!!!!! LASTLY, you need to listen to something other than CNN and MSNBC. FACT, your hereos, OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION, have run the public debt higher than ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION in history. Thank God, we now have a REPUBLICAN HOUSE has stopped THEM from running it HIGHER. Like I told someone else, debating with you is like a person(me) going to a duel to face an unarmed person(you). That is also a fact!!!!! I have only one regret. That is for giving you a continuing venue to spew your HATE, HALF-TRUTHS, AND OUTRIGHT LIES and using SOME of Jesus' Words to try to prove YOUR AGENDA. I'll let you in on something, it DIDN'T work because, FROM YOUR POSTS, I just MIGHT know more about Jesus than you do. Therefore, I will no longer respond to your posts. In the meantime, PLEASE READ A BIBLE, and get to know the real Jesus(A CONSERVATIVE). OH NOOOoooo. I will pray for you and wish you the BEST. BYE!!!!!!

  • Oh WOW, you are on the side of Abraham Lincoln and other "great" Presidents...so what? Who cares? That really isn't even the issue here. We are entering an election that none of those guys you cite could win in the Republican Primary...because they are ALL too liberal. Yes, even Ronald Reagan...even Barry Goldwater was too liberal for you guys. Were you also "for" George Dubya Bush? Who are you going to be "on the side" of in this election and why? Lemmee guess, I am betting on that slippery and unprincipled shape-shifter, Mitt Romney. His hogwash about controlling deficits is absolutely outlandish, carefully crafted, but baseless Republican talking points that are never born out in the reality that Republicans always avoid. A hat tip to everybody's favorite villain, Dick Cheney, who will long be remembered for telling us-- when his paws were on the spigot-- that "Ronald Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter." Cheney's administration put their our money where his mouth was, running up the largest debt in history, nearly bankrupting the country and millions of families and small businesses. Suddenly, when a new president is voted in to clean up the mess left behind by Bush, Cheney and congressional Republicans led by Boehner and McConnell, the binge spenders are hysterical over the very deficits that Bill Clinton had eliminated from the last run of GOP irresponsible redistribution of the wealth-- upwards-- by cutting taxes on the rich, subsidizing big corporations and military expansion and cutting essential services. His hogwash about controlling deficits is absolutely outlandish, carefully crafted, but baseless Republican talking points that are never born out in the reality that Republicans always avoid. That is more pertinent. Why don't you also tell us specifically what it was that I wrote that was "LIBERAL CRAP" and "HALF TRUTHS". Please be specific and not just spout off general platitudes like you have been. I guess your boy Dick Cheney, who will long be remembered for telling us (when his paws were on the spigot) that "Ronald Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter." Cheney's administration put their our money where his mouth was, running up the largest debt in history, nearly bankrupting the country and millions of families and small businesses. Suddenly, when a new president is voted in to clean up the mess left behind by Bush, Cheney and congressional Republicans led by Boehner and McConnell, the binge spenders are hysterical over the very deficits that Bill Clinton had eliminated from the last run of GOP irresponsible redistribution of the wealth-- upwards-- by cutting taxes on the rich, subsidizing big corporations and military expansion and cutting essential services. Is that what you are for, because that is what Mitt Romney will bring us, along with Great Depression 2.0.

  • 1713...I am a CONSERVATIVE, not a Democrat, Republican, or Independent. One again, you critize someone that you nothing about. I'm on the side of presidents, like Abraham Lincoln. OH NO, HE WAS A REPUBLICAN. OH WOW!!! I'm on the side of PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, who didn't go aroud the world apologizing for what AMERICA stands for. Now that's more like it, he was a DEMOCRAT. How about TEDDY ROOSEVELT? OH NO!!! HE WAS A REPUBLICAN, TOO. He HAD to be BAD, RIGHT. And there was RONALD REAGAN, another GREAT president. Woops, ANOTHER REPUBLICAN. And finally, I liked Jimmy Carter, but he surrounded himself with terrible advisors and it brought his presidency down. I'm also for people, like Martin Luther King, who once said "All labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance and should be undertaken with painstaking excellance." And at last, I'm for presidents, like Thomas Jefferson, that said, "A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities." I am not for a government, trying to take from those who can, and do, work and give it to those who can, but won't. I'm not for a government that is trying to make a person, that wants to work, join a union, before they are allowed to work. Therefore, making some poor "sap" pay union dues to fatten the pockets of union bosses. I, certainly, don't spew a lot of LIBERAL CRAP and HALF TRUTHS like you do. That's what I'm for.

  • That should be "scumball"...dang!

  • If someone else is at fault, why is 671 so willing to let them get away with it in the name of your party loyalty. Who's side are you on 671? The people's or some slimy politician's?

  • If GM and Chrysler had gone down, all of the industry would have suffered because they all use the same suppliers. Johnson Controls in G'town makes parts for Toyachi as well as Ford and the other domestic brands. Toyota came to GM and Chrysler's defense because they could not afford to lose their satellite parts companies. The big difference here is that the big three effect our economy much more than the foreign based companies. The foreign based companies are heavily subsidized by their home countries, which puts the domestic companies at a significant disadvantage. Nobody said that GM and Chrysler didn't suffer form bad management, and in fact, that was the whole purpose of the Chapter 11 reorganization. You use of the broad negative term "bailout" is really not very descriptive of what happened...they were loans. Loans that have been paid back with interest. They have a much better business model now and better management, and far fewer people were hurt because of the action that President Obama took. Action that Romney at first criticized and now tries to take credit for...he is such a shape-shifting cumball. Your comment, "I for one am sick of government bailouts to companies that are "too big to fail" is as overly simplistic as it is mean spirited. But what else can one expect from a good Republican. Watch this: http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/fact_kit.html

  • Need4speed, all of the LIBERALS, IN THIS COUNTRY, want to do is quote LIBERAL, HALF-TRUTH CRAP. And yeah, there are some Repubs that do the same thing. And one more thing, the LIBERALS seem to always use the "SOEDI" principle, you know, "Some one else did it."

  • PPS: Chrysler is a two time loser. They had to be bailed out in 1980 as well.

  • PS: I thought Obammie said that the private sector was doing fine...

  • I noticed that you didn't comment on Ford, Toyota, Nissan and Honda. All of their US operations kept rioght on going. Granted, their output was down, but the transplants kept their people coming in and on the payroll. How come only GM and Chrysler needed help? Can you say BAD MANAGEMENT? Sure I knew ya could. In a real business model they would have died, and a better, faster, stronger competitor would take their place. I for one am sick of government bailouts to companies that are "too big to fail"

  • Need4Speed: There is only so much a good President can do to stimulate private sector jobs, but there is a lot a BAD President did to be losing 800,000 a month...WOOOOOO! Good payin' jobs too. It is laughable that you contend that the auto industry "was doing fine"...according to who? The record indicates otherwise. They needed money and the private sector could not provide it. GM and Chrysler would have gone belly up without the loans, and now look at them. All the money has been paid back with interest BTW. Stay tuned to FOX News for more of your fun facts and report them as you see 'em. We will be waiting, and waiting, and...

  • WOOOOOO! 3 million jobs. My son had 2 of them. Really good ones they were. And the auto industry was doing fine. Except of course for GM and Chrysler who couldn't seem to get their financial house in order. Ford saw the writing on the wall and prepared accordingly. The transplants were losing business as well yet managed to hang on AND keep their people working...without the gummints help.

  • Anti-government people like Tea Party advocate Jim Waters do not have a command of the basic economic facts necessary to understand what has been going on over the last 3 years, much less critique it. I agree with the Governor that President Obama should not allow the Republicans to blame this economy on him, as America was deep in the crapper when he took office. It is not his fault. Since then, there has been an economic recovery program that has had a dramatic (compared to the 800,000 jobs a month that Bush was losing in 2008!!) turn-around with 28 consecutive months of private sector job growth and over 3 million jobs created. Jim didn't mention that, did he? Sure, there is more to be done which is why the President is fighting the obstructionists like Waters and the House Republicans for The American Jobs Act which would put even more people back to work now. That is why the President saved the auto industry preventing the direct loss of more than 1.4 million jobs AND the indirect loss of 12 million supporting jobs that would have gone down around the industry. The lowest closing price for the Dow in 2008 was $7,552.29 on November 20th. Right now, the DOW is at $13,139.38, +81.92‎ (0.63%‎). Jim Didn't tell you that either, huh? That is because Jim doesn't know these facts and apparently, he doesn't care. All he knows are the generalized lies and platitudes that he's heard on FOX NEWS or Rush Limbaugh talk radio. So, Jimbo, who is really blowing smoke?

  • always good to know who the authors are... http://pageonekentucky.com/2011/07/26/the-silly-bluegrass-institute-goes-full-teabagger/