“Obama Money”: Don’t Look a Gift President in the Mouth

President Obama’s championing of stimulus money caused a stir in Detroit and New York. Photo Credit: The White House

Shortly after President Barack Obama’s surprisingly resounding re-election just over three weeks ago, a desultory Mitt Romney didn’t mince words when it came to what he believed was the reason for his loss — “gifts.”

Speaking to a group of influential donors, Romney said, “The president’s campaign, if you will, focused on giving targeted groups a big gift. He made a big effort on small things.”

He subsequently enumerated what Obama allegedly gave his base and potential swing voters: free health care ‘in perpetuity’, partial forgiveness of college loan interest, the ability for a college student to remain on their parents’ health care plan until age 26, and free contraception for young women via Obamacare.

Romney also cited a proposed amnesty for the children of illegal immigrants as a cause célèbre that motivated Hispanic voters.

Romney’s rationalization has already been debated ad nauseam, with staunch positions taken on both sides. Some argued the Romney/Ryan tax cuts for the wealthy were the Republicans’ versions of “gifts.”

Others agreed with the vanquished candidate’s characterization, calling ours an “entitlement” society. A third group believed all elections contain express or implied promises of benefits for their constituencies, regardless of party or partisan politics. However, as a result of stimulus and other financial actions taken over the past four years, one buzz word harkening to managed economies has been bandied about as a significant pejorative following the automaker bailouts, repeated extension of unemployment benefits, Obamacare, tax credits and other varying stimulus programs: redistribution. The more colloquial phrase that has emerged in recent years is “Obama money.”

“Obama money” Etymology

In October, 2009, tens of thousands of people lined up in Detroit, Michigan, eager for a piece of a $15.2 million federal grant designed to save homeowners from foreclosure. Seven months ago, thousands more lined up in New York, once again looking for free stimulus money. In that instance, however, it was on a lark, as there was no grant being offered.

The following Glenn Beck report discusses the “Obama money” fervor that has hit some parts of the country since various economic stimulus programs were enacted, starting in 2009:

It’s clear that at least some of the population believes there is such a thing as “Obama money,” defined as free cash to help people survive the economic headwinds facing them. In the clip above, one woman confessed she was in line to get free money, leading to this exchange:

Host: What kind of money?

Woman: Obama money.

Host: Where’s it come from?

Woman: Obama.

Host: And where did Obama get it?

Woman: I don’t know. His stash? I don’t know. I don’t know where he got it from but he’s giving it to us to help us. We love him. That’s why we voted for him. Obama! Obama!

Click to Read Page Two: Is Obama Money Actually Available?

© Copyright 2012 Walter McLaughlin, All rights Reserved. Written For: Decoded Science

Pages: 1 2

  • chief tater

    Keep Obama in President

  • chief tater

    this lady don’t like no body playin’ with her Obamaphone

  • J. Chapin

    #1: Good point on the question “Where does that money come from?”
    #2: It should be illegal to offer perks to only some voters and based on their location. Everyone or no one.

  • phil

    You ain’t seen nuthin…
    When tax rates get back to where they should be we’ll have Romney money and Adelson money and Trump money to burn,

  • mdoweht

    Another bit of nonsense from the loser’s echo chamber. Pathetic.

  • OilerB

    Then we borrow it right back as soon as our creditors get their hands on it.

    Asia, for the most part provides us with everything we wear, drive, or listen to. But Asia If the money in circulation cannot keep up with the demand we create it from thin air. has no need or desire for our goods. For that reason it is beholding of us to take the money off their hands.

    It is as though we have a money tree. As soon as we pluck a dollar one grows right back.

    The money we pluck from the tree buys a half of the goods and services we use.

    The money tree funds all of our social services and national defense needs.

    I believe we have not come up with another name for it yet. I believe that calling it a money tree boggles the mind and turns people off. They seem to stay in denial that there could be such a thing. It seems that if we accept the idea that things would come apart and fall on our heads.

    I, myself, wonder about that, too.

    Do you think our denial could be behind all the confusion and bluster?

  • Laura

    Finding Obama money is easy. Just look at this nut . He has a whole blog on all the freebies.

  • Frank Smith

    Interesting. No mention of the gifts to Wall street in 2008. Except the decimal point was moved in their gifts. Billions. Or the tax cuts for the 1%. Are those not gifts? Admit the deficit was caused by the Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars. Then we can talk.

  • Frank Smith

    OH, I see you work in banking. That explains your attitude.

  • JohnnyPlankton

    The banks didn’t have to wait in line. But that’s as big a dose of welfare as you’re ever going to see. Using uneducated people as a way to demonize the president is pretty disingenuous. Corporate attorneys and lobbyists are very good at prying money from our government. Why goof on the poor?

  • Jay

    I suppose FDR won with gifts too? Actually, it’s called Keynsian Economics. When the economy has collapsed, demand collapses and the government steps in by creating demand via a stimulus.

    Even now, while interest rates are low but unemployment high, another stimulus in the form of infrastructure rebuilding is appropriate.

  • http://sgreffenius.com Steven Greffenius

    Obama money recalls the way it worked in medieval France: the king taxed the poor and gave the money to his friends and supporters. He also spent it on wars and other things that kings do. See Barbara Tuchman’s A Distant Mirror.

    We might as well note that this pattern is not characteristic only of medieval France and modern America. It is the pattern of corrupt governments throughout history, in all times.

    Good article!

  • Jay

    The top marginal tax rate was much higher for most of our history post WW2. It was over 50% for most of the Reagan years. Almost 40% under Clinton. So, rolling back the Bush tax cut for those earning $250,000 will not only raise much-needed revenue but restore our income tax system’s progressive design.

  • Charleston Red

    Obama is smart enough to know that he appeals to the middle class when he casts aspersions on the rich. All he has to do is continue to promote his love and care for the downtrodden and he will be able to do as he pleases. Timetable? If not in four years he will at least gurantee another eight for a democrat president and more seats in the house and senate. It’s already too late. America’s society will change and many are on the bandwagon. The so called downtrodden will find too late that the changes are not necessarily in their best interest.
    All politicians lie and spin to get what they want. Obama is a fantastic politician able to lie and make people WANT to believe it is the truth.

  • Husker78r

    So I see the libtards are out in force. You do realize that the 1% owns you right, they own the corporations, control the market etc? Close all the loopholes you want, tax them all you want and they will do three things, #1 terminate you, #2 raise their prices to cover the loss, #3 cut everyone back to below full time to avoid obiecare. So no matter how you look at it this is the largest tax on the middle class in our history, backdoor style!! Welcome to Jimma Carter on steroids!

  • Jon

    Yes, we agree it’s not Obama’s Money to give away, but that doesn’t change the fact that he’s the one who promised it. All of the Stimulus votes were passed on Party Lines, forced through by the Democrat Supermajority

  • tj

    Why do taxes need to be progressive? Would it not be the most fair just to have a flat tax rate with charity and homeownership deductions. This would raise tons of cash.

  • dennis

    Its understandable that benificiaries don’t know and don’t care where the money comes from but those of us who will pay the bill sooner or later better get a grip and soon. Keynsian ideas may make sense when our debt load is low. However, after we rescued big auto and banks, and the mentally challenged who never considered how they would repay, the well is dry.
    roke loaning money to
    P
    people who could not pay it back

  • RANDY

    Let us have our share of the pie; Republicans can go eat cake, sir!

  • yoda

    Those uneducated people that you are refering to ARE the ones that elected this president! Using them to “Demonize” this president is laughable as they are the people he courted and promised everything to. Now when the truth is shown you get all indignant like there has been some wrong done. The only wrong done in this country is being done by it’s leadership and to it’s people. Pretty soon we can erase the line “home of the free and the brave”.

    I am absolutely sick.

  • kevin

    Your source is Fox news? Seriously? You should stop drinking the fake news Koolaide. Coporate lobbyists have always gotten more political gifts than ordinary Amerians. Look at who’s donating the most money to a campaign. It’s not charity, it’s investment.

  • Larry

    The 1% are worth $1.7 Trillion.
    http://rt.com/usa/news/forbes-400-richest-americans-521/

    If we take it ALL, and, say, pay down the National Debt………90% of the debt will remain.
    National Debt Clock shows debt at $16.3 Trillion, and counting.
    Take all the wealth from the 1% ($1.7 Trillion away, and we still have $14.6 Trillion left.
    (Divide $14.6 by $16.3 to a result of 89.8%)

    It is an “article of Faith” for the Left that if we take from the rich, corporations, and the military, there will be plenty of money for “social programs”. A little simple math applied to readily available statistics demonstrates the fallacy of that position.

    (I did another search on the internet and found the annual income for all business – large and small. Added that to the annual military budget. If we took it ALL, it would not even pay the INTEREST on the debt.)

  • OilerB

    Is “Obama Money” the right name for the money tree?

    If the money in circulation cannot keep up with the demand we create it from thin air. Then we borrow it right back as soon as our creditors get their hands on it.

    Asia, for the most part provides us with everything we wear, drive, or listen to. But Asia has no need or desire for our goods. For that reason it is beholding of us to take the money off their hands.

    It is as though we have a money tree. As soon as we pluck a dollar one grows right back.

    The money we pluck from the tree buys a half of the goods and services we use.

    The money tree funds all of our social services and national defense needs.

    I believe we have not come up with another name for it yet. I believe that calling it a money tree boggles the mind and turns people off. We seem to be in denial that there could be such a thing.

    It seems that we believe in accepting the money tree notion that things would come apart and fall on our heads. I, myself, wonder about that, too.

    Do you think our denial could be behind all the confusion and bluster?

  • OilerB

    We have been plucking money from the money tree since the time of George Washington. People with money they do not wish to spend right away exchange it for our IOU’s.

    It was Jimmie Crater that began the big boom. He came up with the bogus idea that we will run out of oil in the nineteen nineties. That caused a flood of small cars from Japan and we created the money to purchase them. Japan wound up with big money and nowhere to spend it but here for our goods and services, which they had no use for. That was a problem and it was up to us to solve it. Ronald Regan borrowed the money back and used it to win the Cold War.

    In the nineteen nineties the idea of “technology Transfer” came up and we provided Asia, China in particular, with the production needs to produce our products as well as the customers to buy them (us). The money generated to buy those products was gobbled up. It was used to wage a war and pass the Medicaid Drug Benefit.

    We are gobbling the money today, big time, to dig ourselves out of a depression.

    Those IOU’s sit in Asian banks collecting dust, never to see the light of day again.