Letter to the Editor, response to George Chandler’s comment: I respectfully disagree with your rosy view of Obama’s reign, George, and feel compelled to respond.
Obama did not “end” two wars; he simply ended the US involvement in Iraq by withdrawing our troops on an arbitrary publicized schedule. That turned out to be disastrous for Iraq, as well as the Middle East and the World because the ensuing turmoil undoubtedly aided the growth of ISIS. Even though he reversed that policy in Afghanistan, he did not leave enough troops there to stabilize the country.
“He saved the auto industry.” The auto bailout, started under Bush by the way, was a qualified success. However, in Obama’s typical authoritarian fashion, he circumvented bankruptcy law and gave extraordinary preference to unions over non-union workers and investors. Another example of this dichotomous treatment is the transformation of the National Labor Relations Board from an independent unbiased arbiter of labor disputes to a highly partisan promoter of unions.
You are right, the stock market has done well since the Great Recession, largely because of the free money provided by the Fed. However, the US economy has generally suffered under Obama. The recovery of the GDP has been the weakest in history, thanks to a vast increase in governmental regulations imposed by Obama. Median household income has dropped 8% since 2007. Our
national debt will have doubled during Obama’s administration, adding around $30,000 to the liability of each of us.
Obamacare was “pushed through,” as you put it, through Congressional subterfuge, abetted by untruths, such as “you can keep your healthcare plan, your doctor.” Even now, after years of claimed “success,” a majority of Americans disapprove of Obamacare.
As for your description of what Democrats stand for, I simply don’t see those worthy traits in Obama, Clinton, or any of their leadership.