Off Their Meds?

As we draw closer to Election Day, the voices from the Left have become more shrill and, to my ear, even less connected with reality. This is particularly evident in some of the various forums, blogs, and comments to opinion pieces I've been reading over the past few days. A few in particular stand out, making me wonder what world some of these folks are living in or whether they've cut back too much on their meds.

One troll totally disconnect from reality tried to make the case that everything was just hunky-dory and that Obama should remain in office to finish the job. Writes Paul Maakestad in response to this WSJ opinion piece:

Here are some broad themes:

* DJIA way up since Obama took office
* Consumer confidence way up since Obama took office
* Strong and growing energy sector, including less dependence on coal, since Obama took office
* Auto industry preserved since Obama took office
* Manufacturing growth since Obama took office
* Housing market on the rebound since Obama took office
* Number of federal employees down since Obama took office
* Economic bleeding stanched via $800B in stimulus funding since Obama took office
* Initial steps taken to address health care affordability and access issues since Obama took office
* Steady progress toward enabling/forcing Middle East countries to deal with their own problems since Obama took office
* Reductions in defense spending to pre-war levels since Obama took office

Sure, there's lots left to be done, but we're well on our way. We're doing our best to unleash the American entrepreneurial spirit, but as President Clinton said, who knew just how bad the mess was that Bush left behind?

We just need a little more time.

After all, success is a journey, not a destination.

Yes, some missteps have been made, but they're nothing we can't fix during a second term.

At first I thought he was being sarcastic. It certainly seemed like sarcasm and it sounded like sarcasm. But as I read more of his comments and searched his comment history I realized he meant every word. How sad. Yet I still find it interesting reading Paul's comments if for no other reason than it proves how deluded some poor folks on the Left have become.

One of the points he listed in his comments generated a response from James Beard, with whom I wholeheartedly agree:

Uh, two big companies bankrupt. BO's intervention preserved UAW privileged status, but that move may prove the undoing of Government Motors irrespective of how much the Administration is willing to lose in selling GM shares to friends and associates. Chrysler is now in foreign hands, and probably will not go bankrupt again for a while, but Government Motors may have to go through bankruptcy a second time to get wages and benefits down to the point that it will be viable.

GM is in trouble again as the President's unconstitutional intervention on GM's and Chrysler's behalf short circuited the usual bankruptcy proceedings. The bond holders who should have have been first in line were “ripped off”. On more than one occasion I've heard the economically illiterate make the comment that it was “only the rich” were affected and that they didn't need the money anyways. But who were a majority of those bondholders? Pension and retirement funds.

Obama ripped off retirees in order to pay back the unions for their generous support during his first run for president. And now it looks like GM is going to go under, again. Maybe during the next bankruptcy proceeding it will be done according to law and GM will be able to get out from under the onerous UAW stranglehold.

But wait, there's more!

Another Obamabot seems to be a mind reader and has told us everything Romney has planned. Never mind that his numbers don't even come close to adding up. He knows their true because they have to be! Otherwise the fantasy world in which he lives will crumble away and he'll have to face reality.

Do you really think that cutting the deficit and the National Debt is the top priority for Mitt Romney? ROFL.

Tax cuts for the super rich are Mitt's Priority #1, Priority #2, and Priority #3. They ALWAYS are the top priorities whenever a Republican gets elected President.

I guess spending insane amounts on the military is his Priority #4 even though they say they don't need $2 trillion more in defense spending. Priority #5 is doing the bidding of whatever industries and companies that he likes the most. Dealing with the deficit almost always goes to the bottom of their priority list.

Guess what? All of these things will run up the deficits and the National Debt sky high! Guaranteed.

A quote from one of those responding to the deluded troll:

Spending insane amounts on defense? Hmmm. Let's see. The budget outlay for FY 2012 for defense was 24% of the total budget. But entitlement spending (including welfare) during that same period was 56% for the federal budget. Defense is one of the few constitutionally mandated duties of the federal government. Entitlement spending is not. The total budget for FY2102 is $3.8 trillion. So defense spending was ~$910 billion. Entitlement spending was $2.1 trillion. With this in mind I have to ask you, this Jeff:

Did you just pull those numbers you cited out of your a**? If I had to guess, I'd say the answer is yes.

This Jeff guy figures it's OK to bankrupt the country paying for entitlements but thinks spending money to protect the gravy train is a bad idea?

This is but a tiny example of what I've been reading lately, and the above were from just one publication.

Does any of this tell you that the folks on the Left are disconnected from the harsh realities of life, particularly in the area of economics?