Obama Fail Blog

Plenty of analysis has been done about the militant leftsts behind the Obama administration's social policy - Van Jones, Anita Dunn, Kevin Jenkins, Valerie Jarrett, Ezekiel Emanuel, Julius Genachowski, and so on...

But what about Obama's financial team? Surely, there must be some socialist dirt on Tiny Tim Geithner and Peter Orszag. Well, yes, there certainly is...

Check out this 2001 exchange between Orszag and interviewer Peter Robinson:

Peter Robinson: Why don't you just soak the rich? If you're concerned that these rich are getting richer too quickly…

Peter Orszag: There is a tradeoff that one has to find a balance between…

Peter Robinson: Ahh, okay, all right.

Peter Orszag: …in--in, uh, equality versus incentives. And at some point, one--one leans too hard and the disincentive effects are too large. The question is finding a balance between the--the incentives provided to produce, supply labor, take risks, and fairness.

Peter Robinson: So this would be difficult statistically, but the rule of thumb would be, we engage in redistribution, we cream off the top quintile and put it one the bottom qui--quintile, to the extent that we can without killing the economic engine--without smothering growth. Would that be about the rule of thumb that'd you go for?

Peter Orszag: I think that's about the rule of thumb, yes.

Peter Robinson: So…

Peter Orszag: It's all a matter of degree. How much reduction in--in economic activity are you willing to…

Peter Robinson: Right, and it could be difficult to find that balance…

Peter Orszag: Right.

Peter Robinson: …but that would be the aim.

Peter Orszag: That should be the aim, yes.

Source: Hoover Institution via JammieWearingFool

JammieWearingFool has more on the socialist leanings of Orszag's new bride Bianna Golodryga.

Why should anyone care about Orszag's wife? Why shouldn't she be allowed to live a private life as the wife of her dorky, meek, eggheaded socialist husband?

Well, because Bianna Golodryga is a financial reporter for ABC News. Her opinion shapes the tone of financial reporting at one of the largest news organizations in the world. And now that she is married to one of the most powerful socialist-leaning economists in the world, you have to wonder how much her stories will be influenced by the Obama administration - as if they weren't already...

Projecting weakness, Obama-style:

The Obama administration appears to be backing away from the phrase "global war on terror," a signature rhetorical legacy of its predecessor.

In a memo e-mailed this week to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department's office of security review noted that "this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.' "

Source: Washington Post

And to make matters worse, no one in the administration has the cajones to own up to the decision:

The memo said the direction came from the Office of Management and Budget, the executive-branch agency that reviews the public testimony of administration officials before it is delivered.

Not so, said Kenneth Baer, an OMB spokesman.

"There was no memo, no guidance," Baer said yesterday. "This is the opinion of a career civil servant."

Coincidentally or not, senior administration officials had been publicly using the phrase "overseas contingency operations" in a war context for roughly a month before the e-mail was sent.

Peter Orszag, the OMB director, turned to it Feb. 26 when discussing Obama's budget proposal at a news conference: "The budget shows the combined cost of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and any other overseas contingency operations that may be necessary."

Source: Washington Post

Fantastic. The War on Terror was unofficially surrendered by this guy.