The Blamer-in-Chief’s latest manipulations

By Tom Quiner

Here’s the threat: our Blamer-in-Chief says he’s going to hurt us if Republicans don’t cave on more taxes and spending.

He makes this threat even after getting the tax increases he insisted upon, and spending that has tripled the inflation rate during his reign.

The Blamer-in-Chief (BIC) is loudly proclaiming his desire to inflict grave damage on us regular

The Blamer-in-Chief is willing to hurt us for the sake of politics

The Blamer-in-Chief is willing to hurt us for the sake of politics

folks in the name of politics.

The sequester was Obama’s idea. Automatic deep cuts in spending are going to hit like a ton of bricks unless a reasonable budget is whipped together.

That’s not happening, so here comes the sequester.

BIC said there’s going to be food shortages.

We’re going to have three hour waits in airports to clear security.

We may have more Bengazi’s because he’ll have to cut back on embassy security.

More illegal immigrants are going to pour across our borders because we’ll have fewer border patrols.

Iran may take over the world because he’ll have to pull an aircraft carrier out of the Persian Gulf.

All of this because of the Republicans … or so he says.

BIC took $85 Billion out of the economy with his tax hike on America’s most productive workers last month.  He said that is good for the economy.

The sequester will take another $85 Billion out of the economy in excess government spending this year, but that is bad for the economy and will end America as we know it, so he suggests.

Let us be clear: BIC only cares about the “public economy” (Big Government). He doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the “private economy” (you and me).

Take food shortages. Food production is slowed if we don’t have enough meat inspectors to inspect the packing houses. J. Patrick Boyle, president of the American Meat Institute presents the solution:

“Rather than impose across-the-board furloughs that will lead to plant closures, it is incumbent upon the department to examine the options available to it, e.g., suspending certain non-essential programs and furloughing non-essential personnel within the 13 different offices (only one of which involves inspectors in plant) that makes up FSIS (Food Safety Inspection Service).”

BIC’s people say, nope, they can’t suspend non-essential (wasteful?) programs. They say cuts have to be made across-the-board.

Do you believe him?

Remember … this is the guy who threatened the same thing with Social Security a year-and-a-half ago, even though Social Security has its own trust fund.  He made it clear he would punish us by raiding the trust fund to spend on other government stuff if Republicans didn’t increase the debt ceiling.

The Department of Agriculture, which is in charge of the food inspectors, has more economists working for it than any other government agency.  Wouldn’t you furlough them first so folks could eat?

Nope, not when you’ve got a BIC running the country.

BIC is willing to hurt the little guy to make a point.  The point?  The point is to destroy the Republican brand.  The point is politics first, people second.

What it comes down to is this: BIC is a lousy manager.  Even more, his willingness to threaten the well-being of us common citizens suggests he’s not much of a human being either.

Some readers of this essay may think I’m being harsh calling the President of the United States a “blamer-in-chief.”  How about if I change it to the “Black-mailer-in-Chief.”

Either way, he’s a BIC.


  1. justturnright on February 17, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    Either term is appropriate, Tom.

    The sequester was, indeed, his idea. Woodward has it documented in his book all over the place. Obama just figures if he constantly repeats himself, he doesn’t have to deny it – he just assumes the press won’t call him on it.
    And, of course, he’s right about that.

    As far as the spending “cuts”: his flacks (Pelosi, et al..) are constantly saying we don’t have a “spending” problem. That way, Obama is able to grant himself permission to keep spending.
    Thus, when YOU say “stop spending our &^#%#!! money, then YOU are being extreme.
    Totally cynical, completely destructive, yet effective politically in the short term. It will destroy our economy …and he knows it.

    He really is a despicable human being, partner.

    • quinersdiner on February 17, 2013 at 4:26 pm

      Agreed. Thanks for writing.