In my most recent article I mentioned Bush's massive deficit spending and jokingly asked, "Is the argument that that isn't enough government spending and the only reason we're not doing better is because the government hasn't spent more?" It looks like, apparently, Obama might believe precisely that. In a CBS Interview on Sunday, Obama told the country not to worry about the deficit for a couple of years.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/16/security-economy-precedence-obama-tells-cbs/

In the CBS interview, Obama also said Americans shouldn't worry about the federal deficit for the next couple of years.

"The most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession," he said.

So apparently when Clinton runs a non-existent surplus for a few years and then Bush runs record deficits to stave off the 2001 Clinton recession and fight two wars, that's bad and reckless. But when Obama becomes president and runs deficits to stave off a potential 2009 recession we're supposed to look the other way? I'm sensing a double standard.

I'm also sensing that Obama might be planning to go ahead with his plans despite the economic crisis. Until now I had been thinking that if there was a silver lining to the economic crisis it was that it might prevent Obama from implementing his liberal economic policies due to lack of available dollars--but with comments like the quote above it seems that Obama might actually be planning on continuing with his plans regardless of the economic environment.

This could get interesting before it gets better.