Even An Obama Advisor Understands FDR's New Deal Approach Wasn't Working Very Well

Progressives have been trying to convince us for 2 1/2 years under Obama's presidency that government-created job programs fix an ailing economy. A job is a job is a job to them. Not so fast.

How has it worked out so far for Obama? Stimulus after stimulus, spending on top of record spending has gotten us where exactly in the 2 1/2 years his policies have been pursued? 9.2% unemployment 2 years after full implementation of his economic policies and an economy that's no better off than it was 2 1/2 years ago.

By this time after full implementation of the Bush approach on May 28, 2003, unemployment was back down to 4.4% and federal revenue was a record(!) $2.5 Trillion. How can a rational person say these differences don't matter and that Bush's economic policies failed? To do so defies logic and denies factual truth.

Obama's approach is completely in line with FDR's. Remember the New Deal and government 'works' programs? Before you regurgitate the progressive history-twisting line that FDR's progressive programs worked, check out a quote from one of Obama's own advisors, Larry Summers: "Never forget that if Hitler had not come along, Franklin Roosevelt would have left office in 1941 with an unemployment rate in excess of 15% and an economic recovery strategy that had basically failed."

Of course, conservatives, especially Tea Party types have been saying that for years but when a key advisor to Obama, the most progressive president in America's history, says FDR's highly-touted New Deal government-created jobs progressivism didn't work, it deserves some consideration by Americans, including supporters of Obama's approach doesn't it? After all, Obama has been hard at work proving all over again that it doesn't work.

At what point do we seriously consider that incentives to spur on private sector employment instead of government jobs work best, not by a little bit but by far? Bush and FDR ... and now Obama(!) ... have proved that's true. Or do you irrationally think that historical fact is irrelevant?