Michael Ramirez for December 28, 2010

Change? What idiots voted for this “change”?

WhatthehellisMikeytalkin’about?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/business/economy/24econ.html?_r=1

So, American businesses had a pretty good third quarter… and yet all Mr. Ramirez sees are soup kitchens. I guess it’s because it’s Obama he has in mind - he has to fail, right?

Apparently it suddenly became oh so easy to get a credit. Don’t worry, your guys will soon be sworn in so they can take the credit for any recovery that occurs.

^^Would you rather they didn’t and keep unemployment up…Oh wait. You want Obama to fail. I forgot.

Actually, it appears more people were using cash or debit, not credit cards for their purchases. Though I don’t agree with some of the actions of the last two years to improve the economy, Ramirez and the right ARE in the “no good deed shall go unpunished” category. Now getting us INTO IRAQ and Afghanistan– that was a pair of real ExLax moments that the righties are now giving Obama all the credit for. right.

Ramirez thinks everything is Obama’s fault, no matter what he actually does or does not do.

Let’s see:

During much of the GWB’s failed 8-years we had a near theoretical full employment, in spite of $trillion hit of 9/11 …

After the 0bama’s successful multi-trillion borrowed ‘investments and stimuli’, the private economy is barely producing enough jobs to keep the unemployment rate to ascend above 10% …

Ergo, new definition of success / progress.

The first stimulus was under Bush. Repeating the falsehood that it was Obama does not make the falsehood true.

Bush’s $152 billion - direct infusion, checks to taxpayers …

0bama 1+ trillion, mostly squandered … mostly to unions and the likes …

I mean the first $700 billion stimulus was just before Bush left office.

Not everything is Obama’s fault … but it seems everything he puts his hand to becomes a huge mistake … why is that so?

In Peetey’s world wars are free and so are tax cuts.