Exactly who’s “mess” is this?

At one of The Barack's latest campaign rallies, he stated part of Romney's agenda was "That we go right back to the policies that created this mess." I wonder what "mess", he might be referring to. Could it be the mess created by wasting away trillions of dollars of extra federal spending in the last three years? How about the mess created by the EPA attacking states and businesses using rules and procedures they apparently just make up as they go along? Oh, wait, I've got it, maybe he's referring to the mess that exists right now caused by liberal politicians ramming through a health care bill the American public clearly did not want. Since the health care issue is the one Obama is making thinly veiled threats towards the United States Supreme Court over, maybe this is the "mess" he's referring to when he speaks about Romney.Actually, since Romney did come up with something pretty similar to Obamacare in Massachusetts, I'm sure The Barack will try to sink Romney using that issue. I'm just not sure how he's going to try to spin it. Since any rock The Obama throws in Romney's direction regarding overpriced, overregulated, government controlled healthcare is going to come back to haunt him too, it's going to take some unique twisting of the topic to make that work. While I don't know exactly how the spin will go on that subject, I have faith the main stream media will jump in to help as and where needed.Hey, do you think it will be something as creative as when I heard a liberal democrat (on Meet the Press) claim the reason Anthony Weiner's (insert your own funny comment about his name and behavior here) house seat went to a Republican was because the Democratic voters of that district were trying to help Obama? I thought that one was pretty good. In fact that episode was right up there with former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm (another leftist) saying on the same show that Obama needed to get serious about the "war on jobs". In fact not only did she call it the war on jobs several times, but apparently, judging by the shape of jobs and unemployment in the United States, I would have to say The Barack was also watching that day and took her advice to heart. It appears to me that the "war on jobs" is indeed going quite well, and as near as I can figure, jobs are losing. It's a shame the left can't seem to have the same effect on the numbers of poor people as they do on the number of available jobs.Just for a short recap of the last Obama campaign, earmarks and government overspending were bad, and jobs were good. Now, three and half years later, earmarks are still alive and well, spending has reached unheard of (and previously unimaginable levels) and jobs are in very short supply. Gosh, I wonder how the left is going to spin all of that to make it sound good. Making any of that appealing is going to require verbal gymnastics on an Olympian level. Not to mention that the leaps of logic required are going to be beyond anything ever seen before. Maybe we need to add a new "political" category to the upcoming Olympics. If we do, we really should hold that particular competition in Chicago. However, going on past history, if we want to add this category to the Olympic competition, maybe we better send Romney to the Olympic committee instead of The Barack. Apparently the Olympic committee is not very impressed with The Barack, but they do have a history with Romney. Since I mentioned it, what do you think the odds are that Obama will not mention anything about the Olympics in the coming (actually here already) campaign?One thing I'm pretty sure The Obama is going to blame on Romney, is the fact that Obama himself has been unable to keep his campaign promise from last time to close down Gitmo. Now don't get me wrong, I think Gitmo should be kept open, but I didn't solemnly promise the American public that I would shut it down. First, The Barack is going to try to bring George W. Bush back into the Presidential campaign by blaming him (again) for the prison at Gitmo existing in the first place.Time out: I just want to make a point here. Even though The Barack successfully ran against George W. Bush instead of John McCain last time, he should be careful about that in this election cycle. After several years of Barack Obama, George W. Bush is looking better all the time, and if The Barack runs against him again, he might lose this time around. Heck as far as that goes, after a few years of The Barack, Jimmy Carter is starting to look like a pretty good President. Apparently, a little Barack goes quite a long way. For the very few liberals out there who have read this far, I just want to point out Jimmy Carter still has four years of eligibility left. The Democratic Convention isn't for several more months, so give it some thought.After The Barack gets done blaming George W. Bush (again and again) for Gitmo existing in the first place, he is then going to blame his seeming inability to close it on "Republican policies". You know, it's odd that I haven't heard The Barack blaming the islamic terrorists who attacked us and continue to attack us, and our troops, for actually creating the need for Gitmo or something like it. Since the President of the United States does seem to have the authority to take actions along the lines of closing Gitmo, and even if he didn't, lack of actual authority doesn't seem to bother The Obama, the fact is he could close Gitmo if he really wanted to. As far as the Gitmo issue goes, The Barack is spinning, and is going to spin this as an issue caused by the Republican policies I mentioned above. Not only does he present it that way, but with the cooperation of the liberal media, large numbers of people believe it. While that may be what the administration wants us to think, in reality the Republicans (dastardly people that they are) only control one half of one third of the current government. Not only that, but the control of one half of one third, or as a math student would call it, one sixth, of the government only came to them in the last midterm elections. Since for the first two years of his term, The Barack had solid control of the Legislative and Executive branches of our government (how do you think he rammed through Obamacare?), there was little he couldn't have accomplished, including closing Gitmo. The truth is, he could close Gitmo any time he wants to, but for reasons apparently known only to him, he doesn't.I do agree with one thing in The Barack's statement, and that is that bad policies have made a mess out of our current government. Where apparently he and I disagree, is where those policies currently originate. Books, nearly beyond number, can be and have been written about policies, practices, people, and methods which have been bad for the United States in the past. We could debate those subjects for years and never change a thing. However, if The Barack would like to fasten blame on the person behind "policies that created this mess" for the last three years, then I would suggest that he doesn't have to look past the end of his own nose.Bruce Kreitler is the author of Obamageddon (the Culmination of the Progressive Looting of America) and posts this and other articles at BruceKreitler.com.