Is Barack Obama Officially Taking on Too Much at Once?
July 7, 2009 4 Comments

I think one of the cautions that has to be given to the president – and I’ve talked to some of his people about this – is that you can’t have so many things on the table that you can’t absorb it all. And we can’t pay for it all. And I never would have believed that we would have budgets that are running into the multi-trillions of dollars, and we are amassing a huge, huge national debt that, if we don’t pay for in our lifetime, our kids and grandkids and great grandchildren will have to pay for it.”
—Colin Powell, Former Secretary of State; RINO
ATLANTA— So I’m reading the news on my blackberry on the fourth of July, as we head towards the park to watch the Lakeland Flying Tigers take on the Tampa Yankees. And a headline catches my eye and I’m stunned: Colin Powell worries Obama tackling too much.
So Colin Powell is worried that Barack Obama is “taking on too much” without “considering the costs.” Fine time to come to this realization, traitor.
Had Colin Powell been reading the American Missive last fall, prior to election day, he would have realized that Mr. Obama was promising to take on too much and that Mr. Obama showed no concern for the federal deficit way back then.
Instead Mr. Powell stated after the Sarah Palin nomination that there was basically a gap between Barack Obama and John McCain in terms of judgment- and that Mr. Obama exhibited better judgment for the office of president. Accordingly, Mr. Powell endorsed Mr. Obama and this proved to be the final nail in a largely sealed coffin for Mr. McCain’s presidential campaign.
Funny thing is, I do not recall John McCain having a presidential agenda that was even close to that of Mr. Obama in terms of reckless fiscal ambition. All I remember Mr. McCain saying was that he wanted to root out government waste and that he wanted to freeze unnecessary government spending, in an effort to close the deficit gap. But as I recall, it was Mr. Obama who promised he would pursue nationalized healthcare, massive tax increases and income redistribution schemes, trade protectionism, pervasive regulatory reform, clean energy policies, and myriad other economic policies all without a clear care for the price tag.
In retrospect, and in light of the above quote, it was an interesting analysis by Mr. Powell— and sadly ironic.
My basic frustration with Mr. Powell is the same frustration I’m having with some other former Obama supporters I am hearing about in recent weeks. They are disappointed (and some are shocked) at the policy choices Barack Obama has made. They are appalled at the rate of government spending. Stunned by the takeover of General Motors. Aghast that he shoved through a $787 billion stimulus package, and that members of his administration are already talking about more.
I am frustrated because everything Barack Obama has done I have basically expected. I find it all entirely consistent with the principles he revealed about himself last year during the campaign.
I am frustrated because I seem to be among a minority of people that took the man at his word. It was because I took Barack Obama at his word that I did not vote for him.
I wonder how many other people would not have voted for him if they had taken him at his word last fall? (Or if they had listened to him at all to begin with)?
As to Colin Powell’s points above, yes- Mr. Obama is taking on too much.
Whatever — we’re stuck with the guy now (in a very small part, thanks to Mr. Powell himself).
But alas, we can’t stop Barack Obama.
…we can only hope to contain him.
Good missive. However, how do you reconcile your prevasive powers of perception with what many, including the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, cite as a long list of double standards from Mr. Obama…
The person that is able to define the terms in a debate is able to win it. As TP points out with his link Obama is defining his terms, what an intelligent person like your partner there is able to do is look at the definition not the term itself.
Most shallow American’s only listen to the sound bite on the TV (i.e. the term) and not the definition. Unfortunately it seems like this is what Colin Powell has done as well.
For example, a man takes a women on a date he says that he “loves” her. Now the “smart” women is going to look for the definition? Because the man could mean one of two things either he loves her and wants to marry her and father children with her OR he want’s to bed her.
What American’s have done is except Obama’s terms without asking for his definitions. What the AmericanMissive.com has done is understand how Obama defines his terms. Those that have read the AmericanMissive.com will wake up aware of the situation having avoided the painful situation of being used.
As for the average American (as it turns out Colin Powell is one) are starting to wake-up regetting not asking their lover what he meant by the term “love” the night before.
TP: Yeah, I read that article yesterday. That was a good one. The basic difference b/w that article and what I’m saying above is that above I’m talking about Obama’s “principles” whereas that article is referencing specific policy matters. I think it was fairly evident last fall that in principle, Obama did not trust free markets, that in principle he believed in the power of government to bring lasting prosperity, that he believed we should sacrifice economic growth for the sake of the greater good of climate change, etc. etc. I agree he frequently doesn’t do what he says on policy matters- but you’ll notice it’s always the direction of what I’m saying. Meaning, he will tell you he doesn’t want nationalized health care, then he pushes for a “government option” that would effectively nationalize healthcare by the end of the next decade. He is against government running private companies, then he takes over General Motors and is micromanaging their reorganization. His specific policy choices are always in the direction of the principles I just mentioned. His words are frequently in the opposite direction- and I think that stems from his peculiar political genious wherein he recognizes most Americans won’t like what he really wants to do, so he tells them he’s going to do something different.
anyway- that’s my rambling thought on that.
FT: Good perspective, I think you are right. I think there a whole lot of people that weren’t paying close enough attention last fall. Incredibly disappointing.