Are we better off after four years of Obama?
During an interview on Face the Nation, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley was asked by Bob Schieffer if the country was better off today that it was four years ago. O’Malley, who is thought to be looking at a presidential run in 2016, stunningly admitted that it’s not:
No,” replied O’Malley, a prominent Obama surrogate, adding “but that’s not the question of this election.”
“Without a doubt, we are not as well off as we were before George Bush brought us the Bush job losses, the Bush recessions, the Bush deficits, the series of desert wars, charged for the first time to credit cards — the national credit card,” he added, according to a transcript.
At least part of his initial response was honest, that being that the country isn’t better off. He’s since backed off that statement. But look, there is not question that Bush is responsible for huge budget deficits, but President Obama hasn’t exactly done anything to put an end to the river of red ink flowing from Washington. If fact, with four years of $1 trillion budget deficits, he’s made it worse.
No one denies that the country has had a hard time recovering from the recession, which occured at the end of Bush’s last term, but Obama has added to the regulatory state and passed laws, including ObamaCare, that makes it difficult for businesses to create jobs. Obama now wants to raise taxes, which creates uncertainty and causes entrepreneurs to invest less. And we can talk about Afghanistan and Iraq all days long, but Obama has been in office for four years, and yet, we still have a presence in those two countries.
Back during the 1980 election, Ronald Reagan asked Americans if they thought they were better off after four years of then-President Jimmy Carter. This is a question that Democrats are going to have a tough time answering, which is why they’re going to try to run against George W. Bush, not on President Obama’s own dismal economic record.