Obama gives hat tip to Gates over new job
September 6th, 2011
11:34 AM ET

Obama gives hat tip to Gates over new job

President Obama is praising Robert Gates after the former Secretary of Defense landed a new gig as Chancellor of the College of William & Mary.

Full statement from Obama:

I congratulate Robert Gates on his selection as the twenty-fourth Chancellor of the College of William & Mary. In Bob, one of our nation’s oldest colleges has found one of our nation’s finest public servants. I’m confident that Bob will bring to this new role the same sense of duty and personal integrity that I and other Presidents valued during his distinguished career in government. As he did at Texas A&M and the Department of Defense, Bob will again help lead an institution devoted to our nation’s most precious resource—our young men and women. I wish Bob the very best as he begins this new chapter at his alma mater, which helped to inspire his commitment to public service five decades ago.


Topics: President Obama • The News

soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. Len

    Two individuals with class and dignity.

    September 6, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
  2. Howard

    SAVE AMERICA ... DUMP OBAMA NOW !!!

    September 6, 2011 at 1:13 pm |
    • Juan

      Pres Obama isn't going anywhere. I should dump your a** somewhere.

      September 6, 2011 at 7:21 pm |
      • Pete

        danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president

        September 7, 2011 at 9:50 am |
    • Realitybites

      How about we begin to save America by dumping you and your ilk in another country.

      September 7, 2011 at 8:41 am |
  3. Barbara

    Gates has been one of our finest in government service, a man who understood what public service means. I am sure he will do William & Mary proud, as he has done as one of it alumni. Obama, a man in whom Gates saw qualities to admire, continues his difficult tenure as our most underrated president in modern times. If only those in Congress who give allegiance to their ideology over their duty as public servants would learn something, we might have a chance to accomplish something good for our country. Right now, it looks as if the crazies have it and if so, there are dark days ahead as the rich get richer and the rest of us continue to suffer.

    September 6, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
  4. Liz Carter in Georgia

    LOL! I do wish you could Juan! There are so many posters on this blog whose a**es need to be dumped.

    September 7, 2011 at 2:55 am |
  5. Pete

    Obama is the shepherd I did not want.
    He leadeth me beside the still factories.
    He restoreth my faith in the Republican party.
    He guideth me in the path of unemployment for his

    party's sake.
    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the bread

    line, I shall fear no hunger, for his bailouts are with

    me. He has anointed my income with taxes,

    My expenses runneth over.
    Surely, poverty and hard living will follow me all

    the days of my life, And I will live in a mortgaged

    home forever.

    September 7, 2011 at 7:46 am |
    • Realitybites

      I think you're confusing Obama with your savior Boy King Bush

      September 7, 2011 at 8:43 am |
  6. Pete

    The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president

    September 7, 2011 at 9:50 am |
    • Bruce

      Too bad there are a grand total of zero candidates (perhaps one in Jon Huntsman, but he's a long-shot at best between now and March 2012) vying for the GOP nomination who will be better-prepared for the Presidency than President Obama was in 2008.

      Also, NONE of them will have the 4 years of on-the-job-experience that the President will have when January of 2013 rolls around.

      It's one thing to be against someone, to take pot-shots from the cheap seats. It's quite another to be FOR someone.

      September 7, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
  7. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Again? Who wrote this piece for you? Even though I've understood the content of your messages in each of your posts that I've read, I've never seen this many well-structured, spell-checked, grammatically articulate sentences from you. Although I do resent your claim, it is worded pretty well. I suppose I'll need to get myself a writer, according to the english professor/spelling police; the Scrutinizer. LOL!

    September 7, 2011 at 12:34 pm |
    • Pete

      Arguably, Democrat Jimmy Carter — with his work toward decimating the US economy and his past and apparently current support of the Islamist enemies of the USA and humanity — was the first anti-American (if not anti-democracy) President of the United States. Almost single-handedly, Carter also destabilized the Middle East by working to allow the overthrow of the pro-US Shah of Iran, in order to create a power vacuum that permitted radical Islamists to take over that country. Carter was also instrumental in causing radical Islam to seize the US Embassy and its staff in Iran, which resulted in the 14-month Hostage Crisis. The Carter-created hostage disaster ended only after Republican Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States — replacing the feckless Carter. Carter, with all of his positions and actions during his single-term presidency — and beyond — may have been our first truly anti-American president.

      However, Barack Obama ma prove to be our second.

      The candidate's wife Michelle Obama, during a recent speech in Milwaukee, told the fawning crowd that only with her husband's candidacy for president of the United States was she finally proud to be an American. It appears that she had never been before. Her exact words are: "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country." Please bear in mind that because both Michelle and Barack Obama were raised in the USA, they were able to attend the best in Ivy League schools. Michelle graduated from Princeton University and Harvard Law School, while Barack graduated both Columbia University and Harvard Law School. Dreadfully, as with too many liberals these days, both Michelle and Barack Obama seem to have used the advantages inherent within the USA for their own personal gain and aggrandizement and now take delight in trashing their country.

      Despite the fact that We-the-People — both Democrats and Republicans — have demanded that both houses of Congress not pass an Amnesty bill for illegals and, instead, work to shut down the border, Obama has said he doesn't agree with us. Instead, last Thursday Candidate Obama expressed his disdain with the Secure Fence Act of 2006. Obama wants to — and advises that he will — implement his own version of Open Borders. And what about the already passed Secure Fence act? Obama said: "And so I will reverse that policy!" So much for Obama's stand on National Security. Obama would allow and support the continuation of invasion by illegals, terrorists and drug dealers into the United States.

      Obama also wants to work with the world's Communist leaders and the heads of radical Islamic countries — the same countries that have vowed to destroy the US and all democracies and view any negotiations and dialogue as weakness. Unfortunately, it appears that to all too many Democrats and ostensible "Independents" weakness is seen as Obama's "strength."

      So, what will the country get with an Obama presidency? Let's take a look.

      No Border Fence. Instead, the US will receive Open Borders (with perhaps some "virtual fencing" for "show") and the continued incursion of terrorists, drug dealers and other illegal aliens

      The USA sitting down with its Communist enemies — with no preset conditions — to discuss how the United States of America can acquiesce to them

      The USA removing its troops from Iraq and then sitting down with radical Islamist countries — with no preset conditions — to discuss how the United States of America can best submit to their demands. Note: Remember — within extremist Islam, diplomacy is considered weakness

      An additional and equally insane promise from Obama includes 'solving the illegal immigrant problem by correcting and improving Mexico's economy' — although Mexican leaders have been unable or unwilling to affect this for generations. Note: Besides, it's easier and more economical for that country to export its problems to "El Norte" rather than trying to correct them, By the way, Obama plans to supernaturally create a "new Mexico" (not to be confused with the current US state) while refusing to trade with that country unless it adheres to US trade standards. Hmmm. Is Obama planning to annex Mexico?

      It has been and is being said by his supporters that 'Obama makes us feel good.' HUH??? How can anyone feel good about continuing to lose their livelihoods to illegals and then being forced to continue paying for their medical care and schooling, facing the dire consequences of yielding to our and our country's destroyers and eliminating any last hope of border security? From his own mouth, this is what Obama tells us we'll get with his presidency.

      September 7, 2011 at 1:17 pm |
    • Pete

      Liz, Did you ever try writing with a Blackberry, up to yesterday all my posts were via a hand held device. try it some time before you comment on someones ability to post on the move.

      September 7, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
  8. Liz Carter in Georgia

    BTW, Barack H Obama IS the President of The United States of America, whether it's truly 'united' or not. I've known for a while we weren't, and that fact has really presented itself daily, since he started campaigning for the Presidency. When he was ELECTED President, OMG! Are you an American? If you are, he's your President too. He WON, OK? Get over it already and stop hating...! It will make you sick! BTW, there was a diverse citizenry base that put him into the WH. All of us couldn't have been fools!

    September 7, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
  9. Pete

    When President Reagan entered office in 1981, he faced actually much worse economic problems than President Obama faced in 2009. Three worsening recessions starting in 1969 were about to culminate in the worst of all in 1981-1982, with unemployment soaring into double digits at a peak of 10.8%. At the same time America suffered roaring double-digit inflation, with the CPI registering at 11.3% in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980 (25% in two years). The Washington establishment at the time argued that this inflation was now endemic to the American economy, and could not be stopped, at least not without a calamitous economic collapse.
    All of the above was accompanied by double -igit interest rates, with the prime rate peaking at 21.5% in 1980. The poverty rate started increasing in 1978, eventually climbing by an astounding 33%, from 11.4% to 15.2%. A fall in real median family income that began in 1978 snowballed to a decline of almost 10% by 1982. In addition, from 1968 to 1982, the Dow Jones industrial average lost 70% of its real value, reflecting an overall collapse of stocks.
    President Reagan campaigned on an explicitly articulated, four-point economic program to reverse this slow motion collapse of the American economy:
    1. Cut tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth, which was implemented first with a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across-the-board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%.
    2. Spending reductions, including a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $175 billion in spending cuts for the year today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%.
    3. Anti-inflation monetary policy restraining money supply growth compared to demand, to maintain a stronger, more stable dollar value.
    4. Deregulation, which saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and aided by a strong dollar the price of oil declined by more than 50%.
    These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.
    During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.
    The shocking rise in inflation during the Nixon and Carter years was reversed. Astoundingly, inflation from 1980 was reduced by more than half by 1982, to 6.2%. It was cut in half again for 1983, to 3.2%, never to be heard from again until recently. The contractionary, tight-money policies needed to kill this inflation inexorably created the steep recession of 1981 to 1982, which is why Reagan did not suffer politically catastrophic blame for that recession.
    Real per-capita disposable income increased by 18% from 1982 to 1989, meaning the American standard of living increased by almost 20% in just seven years. The poverty rate declined every year from 1984 to 1989, dropping by one-sixth from its peak. The stock market more than tripled in value from 1980 to 1990, a larger increase than in any previous decade.
    In The End of Prosperity, supply side guru Art Laffer and Wall Street Journal chief financial writer Steve Moore point out that this Reagan recovery grew into a 25-year boom, with just slight interruptions by shallow, short recessions in 1990 and 2001. They wrote:
    We call this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom–the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, … net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years.
    What is so striking about Obamanomics is how it so doggedly pursues the opposite of every one of these planks of Reaganomics. Instead of reducing tax rates, President Obama is committed to raising the top tax rates of virtually every major federal tax. As already enacted into current law, in 2013 the top two income tax rates will rise by nearly 20%, counting as well Obama’s proposed deduction phase-outs.
    The capital gains tax rate will soar by nearly 60%, counting the new Obamacare taxes going into effect that year. The total tax rate on corporate dividends would increase by nearly three times. The Medicare payroll tax would increase by 62% for the nation’s job creators and investors. The death tax rate would go back up to 55%. In his 2012 budget and his recent national budget speech, President Obama proposes still more tax increases.
    Instead of coming into office with spending cuts, President Obama’s first act was a nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill. In his first two years in office he has already increased federal spending by 28%, and his 2012 budget proposes to increase federal spending by another 57% by 2021.
    His monetary policy is just the opposite as well. Instead of restraining the money supply to match money demand for a stable dollar, slaying an historic inflation, we have QE1 and QE2 and a steadily collapsing dollar, arguably creating a historic reflation.
    And instead of deregulation we have across-the-board re-regulation, from health care to finance to energy, and elsewhere. While Reagan used to say that his energy policy was to “unleash the private sector,” Obama’s energy policy can be described as precisely to leash the private sector in service to Obama’s central planning “green energy” dictates.
    As a result, while the Reagan recovery averaged 7.1% economic growth over the first seven quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. After seven quarters of the Reagan recovery, unemployment had fallen 3.3 percentage points from its peak to 7.5%, with only 18% unemployed long-term for 27 weeks or more. After seven quarters of the Obama recovery, unemployment has fallen only 1.3 percentage points from its peak, with a postwar record 45% long-term unemployed.
    Previously the average recession since World War II lasted 10 months, with the longest at 16 months. Yet today, 40 months after the last recession started, unemployment is still 8.8%, with America suffering the longest period of unemployment that high since the Great Depression. Based on the historic precedents America should be enjoying the second year of a roaring economic recovery by now, especially since, historically, the worse the downturn, the stronger the recovery. Yet while in the Reagan recovery the economy soared past the previous GDP peak after six months, in the Obama recovery that didn’t happen for three years. Last year the Census Bureau reported that the total number of Americans in poverty was the highest in the 51 years that Census has been recording the data.
    Moreover, the Reagan recovery was achieved while taming a historic inflation, for a period that continued for more than 25 years. By contrast, the less-than-half-hearted Obama recovery seems to be recreating inflation, with the latest Producer Price Index data showing double-digit inflation again, and the latest CPI growing already half as much.
    These are the reasons why economist John Lott has rightly said, “For the last couple of years, President Obama keeps claiming that the recession was the worst economy since the Great Depression. But this is not correct. This is the worst “recovery” since the Great Depression.”
    However, the Reagan Recovery took off once the tax rate cuts were fully phased in. Similarly, the full results of Obamanomics won’t be in until his historic, comprehensive tax rate increases of 2013 become effective. While the Reagan Recovery kicked off a historic 25-year economic boom, will the opposite policies of Obamanomics, once fully phased in, kick off 25 years of economic stagnation, unless reversed?

    September 7, 2011 at 1:37 pm |
    • Bruce

      "As already enacted into current law, in 2013 the top two income tax rates will rise by nearly 20%"

      You are talking about the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which were extended by President Obama and a Democrat-controlled House and a Democrat-controlled Senate for two years, and pretending that nothing will happen between now and the end of 2012 when the Republicans control the House, with regards to fundamental tax reform....

      And you are calling that "Obamanomics" and treating this "tax hike" as if it has already happened.

      Seriously now, how do you look yourself in the mirror? Does your intellectual dishonesty pervade your entire psyche such that you are not aware of it, or are you truly cynical enough to pretend that people don't notice these things?

      And in all the many many words you put in these comments, I don't see a single name representing a person we can actually vote for to replace President Obama starting in January 2013. Not a single one. Should we all just write-in "Not Obama" and see what happens?

      September 7, 2011 at 2:37 pm |
  10. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Pete, Yes. I've been posting from a hand held device (a cell phone) for about 2 1/2 years. I know exactly how much work that takes. I wasn't complaining or making fun of your posts; I was just shocked at the total change of accuracy in your sentence structure, grammar, content, and even spelling. I agreed that I might need to get a writer, since another poster jumped on me about those exact same things! However, your calling all OBAMA-supporters a confederacy of fools is totally ignorant and rejected by me.

    September 7, 2011 at 4:39 pm |