If you want to know how screwed up the Obama Administration is on matters economic,  this is the perfect example.   I don’t find it the least bit surprising,   since Romer and Summers are both currently taking positions quite contrary to their past opinions.

As for His Oneness,   his supporters really can’t have it both ways.   He is either a genius who understands economics and is therefore deliberately damaging the economy,   or he is clueless and has surrounded himself with academics who are devoted to theories rather than reality.

I didn’t listen to more than a couple of minutes of the  acceptance speech — there is a limit!    But I have read it,  while listening to those surprised that he made any defense of any war at all.   I take their point, but if you read the speech,  what you actually see is Obama’s perennial habit of taking every side of every issue so that at a later time he can declare  “As I have always said….”     It’s a neat political trick,   but it’s also profoundly dishonest,   even for a politician.

I counted only 29 “I”s,  though I may have missed one or two,  which probably puts him below his customary average.   On the bit I heard His Oneness was using that professorial tone which so annoys me.    He mentioned liberal icons such as Mandela,  but the Cold War simply “ended”.    Most disappointing was his failure to mention by name the  Iranians and  North Koreans so courageously speaking out against their tyrannical rulers.

UPDATE:   I don’t imagine the citizens of Oslo enjoyed having their city turned into an  armed camp either.

Norwegians don’t like the basket of snubs His Oneness has handed out to them,  the Nobel committee,  and their King.

How churlish of them.   Don’t they know how brilliant he is and how superbly crafted his foreign policy is?

Another reason for the sudden interest of His Oneness and Democrats in job creation is that the peculiarities and vagaries of the government means of estimating jobs requires that certain assumptions be made,  based on magical formulae developed in a windowless chamber of the Labor Department and applied to a certain amount of actual raw data after suitable incantations and specialized rituals are employed.

There is a re-set button on all these educated guesses,  and it is punched in January,  so that the numbers which emerge in early February are the only “real” numbers which appear annually,  being somewhat immune from the infection of previous additions and subtractions.

John Crudele  does an  excellent job of explaining the dilemma of His Oneness in having to subtract another 800,000 jobs from the economy without getting blamed for it.

If you’re still unconvinced that His Oneness has no deadly agenda,  perhaps  this will convince you,  courtesy of Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government site.

If you find yourself in need of some good news regarding Iran, read  this.   One should not be surprised that His Oneness doesn’t grasp that the more internal strife there is inside Iran,  the more the mullahs will try to project an image of strength abroad.

And give full credit to the Iranian people who are standing up to their theocracy despite Obama having consigned them to the undercarriage section of the bus.     There is  live-blogging,  some  video and more  here and some thoughts from Michael Ledeen  here.

We can thank Amb. Louis Susman for  confirming to us all that the Obama Administration neither knows nor cares about actual science, only about using it as a weapon with which to silence critics and acquire power.

What other excuse could  His Oneness have for ignoring the fact that the emails suggest that the  raw data was  error-filled and manipulated,  and therefor is unreliable for scientific purposes,  not to mention that the computer  source code used is third-rate.

And give a cheer for the two brave  Canadians who discovered faulty calculations in some of the key scientific studies underlying the UN’s Climate reports.

And this wouldn’t be the first time  scientists eager for grant money reached the conclusion wanted by the money bags instead of actually following the evidence.

Stay tuned,  folks — this is going to get a lot more interesting!

I’d say West Point cadets understand  terrorism a lot better than the commander-in-chief does.

I hate listening to Obama when he’s being professorial,  which he is, giving us his version of recent Afghan history,  including the side-pointing finger.    A small shout-out for the military, which gathers applause,  as you would expect at West Point.

Does he think we don’t know that the president signs a condolence letter to the family of each military member killed,  or does he think he’s somehow special because HE is doing it?    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton looks bored out of her mind,  as do many others.

His Oneness actually used the word “defeat” in speaking about the Taliban,  but I’m not holding my breath until I hear “win.”     He’s announcing 30,000 troops,  which MSM is telling you is near the 40,000 Gen.  McChrystal wanted,  but a number of reports say 40,000 was the MINIMUM McChrystal wanted.

I am unsurprised by the repetition of all  done wrong under Bush,  or by the rather whining , defensive tone Obama is using.    In remarks about the  “ongoing struggle against  violent extremism”  why are we also hearing  about  “the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression” ?    But it was interesting that he mentioned the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars  “approached a trillion dollars “  by the time he took office,   and said he’d address  “the costs openly and honestly.”    Gee,   if we kill the health reform bill,  we will have paid for the wars,  won’t we?

He excuses his inclusion of a withdrawal timetable by claiming it’s needed to instill a sense of urgency in the Afghan government,  but in the preceding sentence he had said Afghan security was important for the world.    Of course he mentioned Vietnam  — how could he not?   We can’t prosper by military might alone – –  so he wants to expand Homeland Security,   a worthless enterprise in my view,  but it will serve to expand the government.

Now we’re on to closing Gitmo, and he’s claiming we’ll speak out against tyranny  — so where was Obama when Iranian dissidents in the streets of Tehran called out for him,  borrowing Pres. George W.  Bush’s phrase,  “You’re either with us or against us”?   Our president has been a “Nowhere Man” on promoting democracy.

His strategy is basically:  a military surge,  a civilian surge,  and a new relationship with Pakistan,  even though he didn’t articulate them.   Of course, if you don’t defeat the Taliban,  the other two won’t happen.     And what is this new relationship with the Muslim world he’s claiming to have brought about?   Is he mistaking the sound of laughter for applause?

Now he is lamenting the  “rancor and cynicism and partisanship that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse.”     Since he is directly responsible for the foregoing,  including  calling Americans who disagree with him un-American,   I have no faith in his willingness to overcome all that.

Overall,   I found it a weird speech,  peppered with items not at all on point.    He never really explained the strategy,   probably because he is absolutely clueless about military strategy.   It was a curiously passionless oratorical event and full of  the rhetorical fence-straddling he has performed all his life.    As a call to action it was a big,  fat F.

And no,  he never used the word “victory”.

UPDATE:  Here’s  a link to the text of the speech.   And here is a comparison of Obama’s speech to that of LBJ’s on Vietnam.

I’ve long said liberals don’t think logically.    Read this headline and sub-head from MSNBC:

Is Obama’s star dimming as U.S. stock drops?

His celebrity is not enough to reverse an erosion of our global dominance

This makes sense only if you are unable to connect His Oneness being a celebrity campaigning instead of a president leading with the erosion in our standing,  a feat obviously quite beyond Howard Fineman.  Oh, he senses something is amiss  — perhaps Obama doesn’t have enough celebrityhood?  — but can’t quite put his finger on it.

David Bass at The American Spectator  weighs in on the topic,   and here’s a  link to the Politico list of stories His Oneness doesn’t want mentioned.