>We don't know yet whether they will work and I am sure Obama would be the first to agree with that. We are in uncharted territory. Maybe the early 1980s were about as bad, and we know the Great Depression was, but how many of the current policymakers have the benefit of meaningful experience then? For sure it's a more complex world now, much more interconnected and faster moving. A news cycle is now considered to be a substantial unit of time.

Well Mike that is disconcerting if president Obama doesn't know about his own policies. He only have to look at California to know that just throwing money, money they don't have, at something doesn't mean it's going to work. California is about to go belly up and the future doesn't look any brighter.

>
>I don't think a huge government budget now is necessarily a problem. It is in fact the solution, according to Keynesian economics. I do wish Obama had insisted the pork be removed. Some key Democrats (rhymes with Pelosi) have reacted to his election with elation, time to strut about and bring back the old favorites. I know I just said this here the other day but the phrase sticks in my mind (from a conservative columnist, imagine that) -- Obama needs to realize that when he's sitting around a table with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he's not among friends. They have their own agendas.

Doesn't Obama have the power of veto if he has any doubts?


>
>>That's true. But is Obama's policies making things worse?
>>He has said numerous times that it will take a few years. Heck, if he would have done nothing it would have taken a few years... but without spending TRIILLIONS.
>>
>>I'm like you Mike... wait and see and hope we can recover