Au Contraire, Timmy: It Ain't Clinton's Economic Policy

Hennessey provides a fair look at Obama's economic policy by ignoring the Bush years. He demonstrates that while the Obama/Geithner rhetoric SAYS they're returning to the "Clinton" policies (really the policies shoved down Clinton's throat by the (R) Congress), the ObamaBoyzzz are doing nothing of the sort.

Geithner, of course, contrasts "Clinton" against Bush, and claims Clintonism as the Obama way.

That's not true.

...This is not, however, a debate between two economic philosophies, but instead a debate among three: Clinton, Bush, and Obama. The Secretary makes an important mistake by suggesting that the Obama Administration is returning to the fiscal policies of the Clinton Administration.

Geithner did not make "a mistake." He Turbo-Taxed, hoping that nobody would notice.

The Hennessey post provides both charts and graphs which won't be replicated here, but I'll provide some key numbers.

Whereas the "Clinton" spending/GDP was 19.6%, the Obama figure will be 23.5%.

Whereas the "Clinton" deficit/GDP was 0.4%, the Obama figure will be 6.0%.

Whereas the "Clinton" deficit/GDP (less interest payments) was 3.3%, Obama's will be 3.8%.

Average real GDP growth during "Clinton" policy was 3.9%; Obama forecasts 1.4%.

Most ominous:

Whereas the "Clinton" unemployment rate averaged 5.2%, Teh Won's will average 7.6%.

(All the Obama projections are drawn from his own Administration's forecasts.)

Now you know why Kudlow describes the White House as "in a panic" over the unemployment numbers...