I don’t know what’s worse: The fact that Time magazine devoted an entire page to trying to determine whether Coke or Pepsi was the Obama administration’s beverage of choice, or the fact that contained within the piece was the news that Pepsi has now taken to using Obama slogans and logos as part of an advertising campaign used to demonstrate the drink’s “hipness”:
Why thank Bush? For authorizing the surge plan – you know, the one President Obama opposed as a junior Senator and still opposed as a candidate for president (even after it was blatantly evident that the violence and killings had dramatically decreased) – that eventually helped the security situation in Iraq stabilize and the political reconciliation process begin to take place to the point that the Commander in Chief after him could put in place a realistic withdrawal plan, approved by top military brass as well as supported by top Republicans, that would allow our troops an honorable exit from Iraq within 19 months with a certain number of forces sticking around just in case?
That’s Ed Morrissey’s characterization of Obama’s plan to “revitalize the economy.”
The Chi-Tribune reminds its readers that President Obama, in his speech Tuesday night, told Americans that his admnistration had found $2 trillion in spending that they could “cut”:
The WSJ’s Dan Henninger pens a sobering piece today that talks at length about Barack Obama’s now-obvious attempts at making the private sector take second place behind government “solutions” that will only “empower” people to depend and rely more and more on the federal government to “resolve” economic and financial problems rather than the private sector by throwing billions of $$ and over-regulation at it in hopes that it will “cure” our problems. Not to mention the massive amounts of $$ Obama plans to spend on “entitlement programs” which won’t just be paid for by the “super-rich.”
