It’s a tradition, I guess. The Washington Post reported the Watergate break-in and now, 39 years later, it is still dropping investigative bombshells:

Since the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 — which Obama and his advisers seem to have believed, incorrectly, would offer a self-perpetuating boost to the economy — Obama has experimented neither boldly nor persistently with programs on the scale of FDR’s initiatives.

Instead, he threw the stimulus money at the states to do with what they wanted. He has given in to prolonging the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy and is now considering more belt-tightening that would weaken entitlements. And he’s watched as the number of government jobs has shrunk by the thousands. In the budget negotiations, the president has signaled that he would sign off on cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

But we should have known all along. Unlike FDR, who vowed radical measures to fix the depressed economy during his presidential campaign, Obama offered vague bipartisan pledges. In his inaugural address, FDR asserted: “I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require.” Obama echoed nothing of the kind.

Yes, I kid the Post, but it really is a shame that its news “analyst” spent so much time and space stating facts that have been obvious — even the tardy analyst said so! — for two years to anyone who isn’t in total denial about Obama’s disastrously feeble style of governance.

Last night’s disaster: You may have guessed I watched  the Obama speech and thought it was almost as deplorable as the follow-up remarks by the loathsome John Boehner. Obama defended his own willingness  to compromise (I can think of a better word) and, later on, indicated he’d back Harry Reid’s alternative plan for raising the debt ceiling. What he didn’t say was that the Reid plan contains no provisions for raising revenue and is, in some respects, as much a cave-in as what Obama proposed prior to it.