Thus, we finally now know what makes up "hope" and "change". Snippy come backs (a la "I won"). The refusal to answer the press' questions ("I just came down to meet you guys"). Nominating lobbyists even if he said he wouldn't (wait, that is change...). And, most substantively, spending a lot of money.



(For the record, I would like my Democrat brethren to take everything Obama says, pretend Bush said it, and replay it in your head and then decide if you like it. I think we would be hearing a lot more about "divisiveness" and "arrogance" at the moment, but that's just me).

So, really, Obama is taking Bush's spending habits, the most liberal in recent memory, and doubling down. There is a change in magnitude, but not in direction. I suppose, technically, that is change. The deficit projected for this next fiscal year will reach approximately 7.5% of GDP. Folks, that is a big number, and does not count what may come from Obama's spending spree.

Here is why I call it a spree. Look at the raw numbers themselves. Obama claims the plan will create 4 million jobs. Some of these jobs (supposedly) are to come from infrastructure improvement work. At present, the estimated cost is $830 billion. That means each job created by the fiscal fairy dust of the federal government will cost the taxpayer $207,500.00 - in debt.

There are also significant subsidies for alternative fuel development. Since studies have shown that subsidies are responsible for approximately 70% of the record increase in food commodity prices over the last five years, perhaps this sort of thing needs to be re-thought.

Of course, Bush didn't spend a few hundred million on condoms and have his House leader claim it would stimulate the economy. It may stimulate something, perhaps, but not the economy. No one's perfect.

If we are going to try to spend this kind of money, it needs to be targeted. As of now, it is a smattering of social spending payouts with little discernible rhyme or reason. More pre-K funds are not going to stimulate the economy. On the other hand, the proposal to allow businesses greater write-offs on losses is a good thing. Then again, a few hundred million on condoms is stupid (on the upside, maybe you'll get a new Trojan plant in your town).

To be fair, there are places where there has been real change. We have seen the (somewhat) closing of Guantanamo Bay. There is the desire to ban space weapons (why in the world would we want to employ our competitive technological advantages to bolster our defenses? I know! I know! It will make the Russians and Chinese mad. If only Obama would look into Medvedev's soul - not Hu Jintao's, since he is still technically communist and all... ). And finally, lifting Bush's executive order keeping federal money from government and NGO abortion funds.

It's been a big first week, really.

I would prefer to see Obama work on expanding free trade, moving past the stated goals of the dead Doha talks and working to get the Yuan and the myriad protected currencies of Middle Eastern oil producers floated. This sort of effort would do more to provide real and sustainable economic growth faster than anything that's been talked about thus far. Alas, it's just not as sexy as buying contraceptives by the pallet.

* for those of you who got the reference to Terrell Owens' publicist. Kudoes!