John Tamny over at Zero Hedge says, “no“:
…no doubt most in the media worship President Obama, and because they do they’ll strive mightily to create the impression that all is well, or at the very least that the economic malaise isn’t Obama’s fault. They would have a point, though for reasons none could articulate…
…Basically the Bush bailouts of banks and car companies “in the name of free markets” disallowed the initial economic cleansing necessary for a massive snapback, and then once in office, Obama’s economic team poured gasoline on the fire; most notably with policies meant to mimic the Bush economic disaster in the form of nosebleed spending and an even weaker dollar. The economy is weak, its weakness by definition has Washington and the Obama administration’s fingerprints all over it, and no matter how the media spin that which isn’t working, Obama is in serious trouble…
Much as I hate to say it, the author is right that the bailouts which started late in the Bush Administration were the first shot and borrowing and spending out way out of the crisis. Of course, President Bush was acting upon expert advice…and only a very few people raised their voices in objection at the time. Most people, even is wary, were willing to try just about anything to avert complete collapse. And, of course, it did avert complete collapse…for about three or four months, by which time Obama was in office.
It was a certainty that a liberal, Democrat President working with a liberal, Democrat Congress would try a round of spending to get things moving. It is built in, as it were – they really believe that it was government spending which solved the Great Depression, and so were certain a bit of it would solve the Great Recession. We can’t blame the liberals for doing it – it is what they do, and they had just won an historic victory. But that still doesn’t mean it was good policy – in fact, when coupled with Bernanke’s massive money printing, it became economic suicide.
By now, the fat is in the fire. Liberals can comfort themselves that some polls still show more people blaming Bush for the economy…but I caution against this. Such polls may only reflect the reality that the recession did, indeed, start when Bush was President. But such a poll does not mean “I don’t blame Obama”. Now that we’re two and a half years in to Obama, it is becoming increasingly difficult (and soon will become impossible) to pin the mess on Bush…at least in such a way as it helps Obama to get re-elected. Obama and his Democrats, in spite of their stout resistance, are being forced to own the economy. And as the linked article notes elsewhere, the most positive media spin in the world simply will not make people forget lost jobs, foreclosed homes, reduced pay and higher prices. The MSM spin for Obama will be astounding – more nakedly partisan for Obama than 2008; in fact probably the most partisan MSM reporting ever seen. But it won’t work – unless the real economy gets better, no amount of spin will change minds.
This doesn’t mean Obama is a sure loser – it just means that the MSM will not be able to carry him over the finish line. The MSM can help (and they will help Obama every chance they get) but it can’t decide…the nation is already too far gone in to revolutionary sentiment to fall for MSM propaganda.