I had the chance to visit with several people in the Charlotte-Douglas airport on Sunday night after our flights to various locations were cancelled. Having the opportunity to visit with my fellow stranded friends, we tried to pass the time by talking about various topics.

One topic that seemed to draw the most attention from people around us was the President’s handling of the economy. Though the crowd was as diverse as any crowd you may encounter on a flight, the opinions were as homogeneous as your milk. Charlotte was an appropriate setting for this conversation as few other cities in America are suffering worse than Charlotte under the current financial crisis. Yet, not one person we encountered was actually from or currently living in Charlotte.

While it is impossible to be scientific about the opinions I gathered, it was a strong anecdotal indication of the broader populous. We spoke about the issues that matter most: bank bailouts, funding for special spending projects (AKA “Porkulus”), impending tax increases, inflation, the war effort, and the President’s high-flying good times in Washington, D.C., while the rest of us fret over the future. As I said, we had some time to talk.

The gathered crowd concluded that we are on a fast track to a dead end street, driven by a reckless driver, who persuasively tells us it’s better to over-spend [edit: speed], and that everything is ‘okay’ as we race into oncoming traffic. Through this unscientific ‘right track/wrong track’ poll, it became apparent that most were disappointed with the direction we are headed. No one, not even those listening in from the periphery of our conversation could defend the President’s position on spending. How could they? Instead, I heard repeated, sarcastic statements saying, “Obama will fix it.” Some even questioned why President Obama wasn’t fixing our flight situation.

What was the parting impression? There is a solid public sentiment, that surprised even me, to not pursue this policy called, Obamanomics. Why? Because though it has a new name, ‘[socialism] by any other name’ smells just as putrid. A few people even quipped that it was a tall order to make former President Bush’s spending look favorable in such a short time period. I had to agree.

Sound off in the comments box, and let us know whether you think we are on the right track or wrong track.

Advertisements