The Note, 2/24: Reset Session — Obama seeks to connect the dots — but can the picture be his again?
Email By RICK KLEIN Is it time for hope, or time for change (or just worry)? Who gets to judge effective governance — Wall Street or Washington? Will he recapture the narrative, or narrate confusion? President Obama enters the House chamber Tuesday night coming off of a dizzying first month in office, looking for some steadiness. He had a big win, but not quite the win he wanted. He’s offered a new way of doing business, but one that sometimes looks like the old. It’s been an orderly administration, save for some chaotic tendencies. The public is with him, but the markets are not. He cares deeply about deficits, and is crusading against earmarks — but only after signing the largest fiscal stimulus package in history, while Congress brings back the pork in its next spending dish. (Won’t his fresh focus on fiscal discipline give Republicans an excuse to oppose just about anything the president puts forward — citing his own edicts?) Now comes the time to piece it all together — to remind the public of why they went with this president at this time, and of all the things he still wants to do. (With the big assumption that any of us will have the money to do it.) “President Obama will express confidence that we can get ourselves of this mess, but that we need to do it together and make some tough choices,” ABC’s Jake Tapper reported on “Good Morning America” Tuesday. “It is a very tall order for this young president.” White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told ABC’s Chris Cuomo to expect a “sober assessment.” “But listen to the end and I think you’ll hear the president tell Americans that this country’s met many big challenges before and he believes we’re on the path to meeting those challenges,” Gibbs said. (He added: “Nobody envisions nationalizing banks.”) Finally, with the stimulus done, the president gets to talk about what he wants to talk about. Expect more talk of the need to move beyond political differences — though always with a reminder that give and take ride together. It still may be an uneasy fit: “Obama will come armed with proposals and pitches that could further erode the comity that he seeks to make a hallmark of his administration,” Roll Call’s Keith Koffler writes. “Obama has sent clear signals in recent days that he has no plans to back away from campaign promises to revamp the nation’s health care system and create new sources of clean energy, both of which cost money, at least in the short term.” “He’ll face a challenge familiar to his predecessors: how to balance inspiration and exhortation with detail and specifics — a challenge made more difficult by the moment at which he arrives in the House chamber,” Politico’s Jonathan Martin writes. “He’ll key in on education, health care, energy and reducing the budget deficit — and attempt to tie them together into a larger discussion about his vision for the economic growth of the country.” Among the challenges: “President Barack Obama, who spent the last month warning of the dangers facing the U.S. economy to win support for his recovery plan, is under pressure to begin fostering public optimism,” Bloomberg’s Edwin Chen and Kim Chipman write. Support he can bank on: Obama’s approval rating stands at an early-Reaganesque 68 percent — with a 25-point edge over Republicans in trust to handle the economy, per the new ABC News/Washington Post poll. But: “Backing for his economic stimulus is more broad than deep, with somewhat muted expectations for its success. And concerns about the federal budget deficit are running high,” ABC Polling Director Gary Langer writes. “If Obama’s hopes for a post-partisan presidency are falling short, he does get credit for trying — another area in which he far outpoints the opposition. Seventy-three percent of Americans say he’s been trying to compromise with Republican leaders in Congress on important issues. Fewer than half as many, 34 percent, say the Republicans are trying to compromise with him.” The coattails: “Half of all poll respondents said they approve of how congressional Democrats are doing their jobs, up 15 points from July and the highest marks they have received in nearly two years. Congressional Republicans also are being viewed more favorably, with 38 percent approving of their job performance, a 13-point improvement since the middle of last year,” Michael A. Fletcher and Jon Cohen write in The Washington Post. A mandate, perhaps, and a warning on the other side: “A majority of people surveyed in both parties said Mr. Obama was striving to work in a bipartisan way, but most faulted Republicans for their response to the president, saying the party had objected to the $787 billion economic stimulus plan for political reasons,” Jeff Zeleny and Megan Thee-Brenan write in their write-up of The New York Times/CBS poll. “Most said Mr. Obama should pursue the priorities he campaigned on, the poll found, rather than seek middle ground with Republicans.” CNN’s poll shows the greatness of expectations: 72 percent say Tuesday’s speech will be “good” or “excellent,” and 62 percent say they think they’ll be more confident about the economy afterward. A harsher reality, with the Dow at levels not seen since 1997: “The government and markets have a communication problem,” per The Wall Street Journal’s Jeff D. Opdyke. “Financial markets have clung to every word from policy makers’ mouths throughout the raging financial crisis, with poor results. Stocks rebound on hopes the government will save everything, then fall on the realization it can’t.” “The root of the problem is a cultural disconnect. Washington and Wall Street simply have not come to terms with how people in one sphere of power tend to talk and how people in the other sphere tend to react,” John F. Harris and Mike Allen write for Politico. “In due course, Wall Street may be becoming somewhat more immune to Washington’s daily torrent of words.” (Is that good or bad for the president?) Did someone say, “disconnect”? “Holding a ‘fiscal responsibility summit’ at the White House in the middle of a government spending spree is a bit like having an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting at a frat house on homecoming weekend,” Dana Milbank writes in his Washington Post column. (Great detail, from the Financial Times’ Edward Luce: “Although Lawrence Summers, head of the National Economic Council, fell asleep on the podium, most attendees, including Republicans, appear to have appreciated the exercise.”) Tuesday’s main event comes at 9 pm ET in the House chamber, with the GOP response to follow, from man-of-the-moment Gov. Bobby Jindal, R-La., speaking from Baton Rouge. “Tonight’s speech before a joint session of Congress and a nationwide television audience will give the new 47-year-old president an opportunity to make his case, not just for his already-signed but still controversial economic stimulus package but for his own evolving style of executive leadership,” Andrew Malcolm blogs for the Los Angeles Times. A good format for this particular practitioner: “He’s following a television-driven tradition in which new presidents use their first speech in the ornate House chamber to rally support for their ideas,” USA Today’s David Jackson writes. A policy hint, from Monday’s summit: “A White House summit that opened discussions on how to make sweeping changes in entitlement programs concluded yesterday with a pledge to immediately pursue an effort to provide health insurance to most Americans, which could increase spending in the short term but would be designed to save money later,” Michael Kranish and Lisa Wangsness report in The Boston Globe. “But in the markets, continued worries about the recession appeared to trump Obama’s pledges to cut government deficits.” “President Obama will make reforming the U.S. health-care system his top fiscal priority this year, administration officials said yesterday, contending that reining in skyrocketing medical costs is critical to saving the nation from bankruptcy,” The Washington Post’s Lori Montgomery and Amy Goldstein report. Squaring a circle: “When President Barack Obama delivers his initial speech to Congress Tuesday night, a giant and unresolved question will hang over the proceedings: What’s the proper role for the government in today’s troubled economy?” Gerald Seib writes in his Wall Street Journal column. “It is increasingly clear that neither the lawmakers the president will be addressing, nor the nation beyond them, have come close to consensus on an answer. Look up and down Pennsylvania Avenue this week and you can see how the issue is dividing not just the two political parties, but factions within them.” The worry: “The people in the administration are surrounded by a galaxy of unknowns, and yet they see this economic crisis as an opportunity to expand their reach, to take bigger risks and, as Obama said on Saturday, to tackle every major problem at once,” David Brooks writes in his New York Times column. “All in all, I can see why the markets are nervous and dropping. And it’s also clear that we’re on the cusp of the biggest political experiment of our lifetimes.” Then there’s the big, big worries: More money: “The government faced mounting pressure on Monday to put billions more in some of the nation’s biggest banks, two of the biggest automakers and the biggest insurance company, despite the billions it has already committed to rescuing them,” per The New York times. “The government’s boldest rescue to date, its $150 billion commitment for the insurance giant American International Group, is foundering. A.I.G. indicated on Monday it was now negotiating for tens of billions of dollars in additional assistance as losses have mounted. Separately, the Obama administration confirmed it was in discussions to aid Citigroup, the recipient of $45 billion so far, that could raise the government’s stake in the banking company to as much as 40 percent.” Wall Street will just love: “The Obama administration yesterday revamped the terms of its emergency aid to troubled financial firms, setting a course that could culminate with the government nationalizing some of the country’s largest banks by taking a controlling ownership stake,” The Washington Post’s Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho report. Politico’s Jonathan Martin and his sharp eye: “The incoming chairman of Citigroup, Richard Parsons, showed up at the White House Monday, fueling talk that the federal government might take a massive ownership stake in the troubled banking behemoth. Parsons’ appointment was to see Valerie Jarrett, one of President Barack Obama’s closest West Wing confidants.” Who’s in charge? “Despite the urgent call to action, the agency leading the way is understaffed and overburdened as it confronts the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression, government analysts say. The Treasury Department still has numerous job vacancies that need to be filled, leaving Secretary Tim Geithner working on his own, according to Darrell West, head of government studies at Brookings Institution,” ABC’s Matthew Jaffe reports. Gitmo blowback: A military families’ group is protesting the Obama admnistration’s release of Binyam Mohamed from Guantanamo Bay, ABC’s Jake Tapper reports. “With a buy it says is in the mid six figure range, the group Military Families United says it will launch a new TV ad, as soon as [tonight], on national cable stations.” A Senate test vote Tuesday on representation for the District of Columbia — the votes look like they’re there, but the legal challenges may last a while. The new ABC News/Washington Post poll: “Six in 10 Americans favor voting rights in the U.S. House of Representatives for Washington, D.C. — an issue on the boil for decades, if not since the district’s creation 208 years ago, and now given its best-yet shot at clearing the Congress,” per ABC’s Shannon N. Geis and Gary Langer. “Support peaks among ‘strong’ Democrats, at 74 percent, and liberal Democrats, at 73 percent; it bottoms out at 46 percent among conservative Republicans and likewise at 46 percent in another politically conservative group, evangelical white Protestants.” Meet your omnibus appropriations bill — now with 5 percent less earmarks! “The House Appropriations Committee just posted its $410 billion 2009 Omnibus spending bill. It’s a doozy,” per ABC’s Jonathan Karl. “It’s larded with thousands (so many, I can’t count them all yet) of earmarks and adds up an increase in overall discretionary spending of more than 8 percent, the biggest one year increase since 1978 (with the exception of the spending boost after the September 11 attacks).” That would include some choice requests from a familiar name. Just a few requests submitted by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, back when he was a Republican congressman from Illinois: Research funding for the Midwest Poultry Consortium; planetarium equipment for the Lakeview Museum of Arts and Sciences; equipment for the Lincoln, Ill., Police Department; research funding for the “National MarketMaker Network” at the University of Ilinois at Urbana-Champaign; and funding for the Soybean Disease Biotechnology Center and the Livestock Genome Sequencing Initiative in Champaign, Ill. The Wall Street Journal’s Naftali Bendavid: “The omnibus package, which would cut funding for some Bush administration priorities, would raise overall spending by 8.7% from 2008. Some Republicans immediately criticized the bill as ‘out-of-control spending,’ but it appeared unlikely to face serious resistance in Congress.” Third time’s a Locke: “President Barack Obama’s likely third pick for Commerce secretary is former Washington Gov. Gary Locke, a senior administration official said Monday,” per the AP’s Liz Sidoti: “Locke, a Democrat, was the nation’s first Chinese-American governor when he served two terms in the Washington statehouse from 1997 to 2005. Obama’s expected choice of Locke arose less than two weeks after his most recent pick, Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, backed out.” “If former Gov. Gary Locke is formally nominated as U.S. commerce secretary, he would bring a squeaky-clean image and experience with global trade to a job that President Obama has found difficult to fill,” Andrew Garber and Kristi Heim write in the Seattle Times. Separation of powers? “White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel’s Washington lodging arrangements, a rent-free basement room in a Capitol Hill home owned by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn) and her pollster husband, have inspired debate among tax experts and in Republican-leaning parts of the blogosphere,” Andrew Zajac writes for the Chicago Tribune. “One issue is whether Emanuel, who served in the House with DeLauro until early January, should have listed the room either as a gift or as income on his congressional financial disclosure forms. . . . A murkier question is whether Emanuel has a tax liability for the arrangement. The matter may have particular sensitivity in the early days of an Obama administration in which at least four picks for high posts have had confirmations delayed or derailed by tax irregularities.” Obama’s most important ally? “[Sen. Dick] Durbin’s early support — and his willingness to subsume his own ambitions — have helped turn the 64-year-old lawmaker into the new president’s unofficial First Friend on Capitol Hill, playing a leading part in delivering on the administration’s agenda,” Bloomberg’s Heidi Przybyla writes. “Durbin helped Obama, 47, achieve his first major legislative success, the $787 billion economic-stimulus bill. Durbin was in constant contact with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, brokering talks among the president’s team, the three Republican senators who supported the bill and the legislators drafting it.” Republicans’ most influential leader? Time’s Jay Newton-Small, on Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va.: “The party’s chief vote counter whipped his colleagues into united opposition of President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan. Taking on the relatively unpopular congressional Democrats is one thing, but flagrantly opposing a wildly popular new President is risky, especially when any payoff could take years. But the move energized the GOP for the first time in a long while, inspiring six Republican governors — all rumored 2012 wannabes like Cantor himself — to threaten to decline some of the stimulus money.” George Clooney, White House spokesman. ABC’s Karen Travers: “George Clooney met with President Obama and Vice President Biden separately tonight at the White House and they told him they would appoint a full-time, high-level envoy on Darfur that would report directly to the White House, he said. ‘They assured me and wanted to assure the rest, whoever else is listening, this is high on their agenda,’ the Academy Award-winning actor told reporters following the meetings. ‘This is a huge policy step for us.’ ” The Kicker: “The helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me. Of course, I’ve never had a helicopter before. So, you know, maybe — maybe I’ve been deprived and I didn’t know it.” — President Obama, agreeing with Sen. John McCain’s suggestion that the new presidential chopper may not be the best use of taxpayer dollars. “I apologize if my comments offended Justice Ginsberg [sic].” — Sen. Jim Bunning, two days after saying that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg would probably die within the next nine months. Viewing Guide: ABC News’ coverage of President Obama’s address begins with “World News with Charles Gibson,” and extends through “Nightline.” ABC NewsNOW coverage, which will stream live on ABCNews.com, starts at 8 pm ET, hosted by Sam Donaldson, Rick Klein, and Yunji de Nies. New Tuesday — “Nightline Now,” a new partnership between ABCNews.com, ABC NewsNOW, and Twitter: “ABC News ‘Nightline’ will provide in-depth analysis of the speech as part of the launch of a new and unprecedented venture on the Web. ‘Nightline’ will team up with ABCNEWS.com, ABC News NOW and Twitter for a shared conversation to take place online and on television. As President Obama addresses Congress, web users will be invited to post their reactions to the President’s speech on Twitter and have them appear on ABCNEWS.com. Additionally, beginning at 8:30 PM EST, ABCNEWS.com will live stream ABC News NOW’s coverage of the President’s address.” “Beginning at 10:30 PM EST, co-anchor Terry Moran will appear live on ABCNEWS.com and ABC News NOW to respond to viewer comments, tweets, and messages. Viewer reaction will be uploaded onto the homepage of ABCNEWS.com and discussed simultaneously on ABC News NOW. ABC’s White House correspondent Yunji de Nies will moderate the discussion. ‘Politics Live’ anchor Sam Donaldson, along with senior political reporter Rick Klein, will join Mr. Moran in the analysis. “Mr. Moran will continue to share viewer reaction to the speech during ‘Nightline’ at 11:35 PM EST and later at 12:05 AM EST on ABCNEWS.com. This new online shared user experience is part of ‘Nightline’s’ commitment to building its audience through its growing presence on the web.” Bookmark the link below to get The Note’s daily morning analysis:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/the_note/index.html For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/ Follow The Note on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Tonite it would be great to see Pres. Obama regain some of the soaring confidence of his campaign speeches. I heard this morning however commetns about needing to strees once again the problems for those who do not understand. Lets face it guys, if you do not understand we are in trouble now you NEVER will. We need that hope again.
If Pres Obama does not give us hope, Gov Jindal has a HUGE opportunity to change the tone in Washington and for the GOP.
http://federalistblogs.wordpress.com
Posted by: FederalistBlogs | February 24, 2009, 8:23 am 8:23 am
How long will it take before Republicans realize that the public trusts Obama and really doesn’t have any regrets about handing the GOP a landslide loss last November?
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | February 24, 2009, 8:24 am 8:24 am
Obama promised “hope you can believe in.” So far his message has been doom and gloom. Doesn’t exactly build confidence, does it?
Posted by: Patrick | February 24, 2009, 8:41 am 8:41 am
The public is with him, but the markets are not.
That pretty mush says it all. The smart money is not but it, plain and simply.
Posted by: billy bob | February 24, 2009, 8:46 am 8:46 am
The public is with him, but the markets are not.
That pretty mush says it all. The smart money is not buying it, plain and simply.
Posted by: billy bob | February 24, 2009, 8:47 am 8:47 am
“President Obama will express confidence that we can get ourselves of this mess, but that we need to do it together and make some tough choices,” +++++ Seems like he didn’t keep his end of the bargain with tough choices. How come he couldn’t stop the Spend-o-crats from adding on all the weird and stupid spending in the Stimulus Package. I’m tired of being told that it doesn’t add up to much and you can’t keep it all out of the package. If Obama kept his campaign promises on earmarks, he would have. How many times is he going to ring that dinner bell for the Spend-o-crats to come running in to eat more of our tax dollars. Enough is Enough!
Posted by: Willy | February 24, 2009, 8:54 am 8:54 am
The only “hope & change” I’m hearing from Obama and his people and doom and gloom and hate the rich! What experience does Obama have in starting/running/controlling a business? No wonder the market doesnt trust him.
Posted by: Mphilly | February 24, 2009, 8:56 am 8:56 am
Doom and gloom or realist?
He new the economy was in dire straights before he took office but didn’t know the magnitude of the problem until his first day on the job. He has not sugar coated anything, because is not going to dupe us like the last administration did.
I, myself have great confidence in a person who is not wasting a second in trying to get this country on the right track.
Posted by: opentosuggestion | February 24, 2009, 8:57 am 8:57 am
PLEASE TAKE TIME TO RESERCH: “Cloward-Piven Strategy” Part 1,2,3 of Manufactured Crisis.
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 8:59 am 8:59 am
Here is my letter to the IRS this year.—-Dear IRS,
I am sorry to inform you that I will not be able to pay taxes owed
April 15, but all is not lost.
I have paid these taxes: accounts receivable tax, building permit tax,
CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog license tax, federal
income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting license tax,
fishing license tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax,
liquor tax, luxury tax, Medicare tax, city, school and county property tax
(up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road
usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational
vehicle tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal
excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone
minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility
tax, vehicle license registration tax, capitol gains tax, lease severance
tax, oil and gas assessment tax, Colorado property tax, Texas,
Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma and New Mexico sales tax, and many more that I can’t
recall but I have run out of space and money.
When you do not receive my check April 15, just know that it is an
honest mistake. Please treat me the same way you treated Congressmen Charles Rangle, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and ex-Congressman Tom
Dashelle and, of course, your boss Timothy Geithner. No penalties and no interest.
Sincerely,
Posted by: CAW | February 24, 2009, 8:59 am 8:59 am
Keep the garbage coming GOP. No body’s listening and it keeps you off the streets!!! Obama’s doing a fantastic job trying to fix your mess of the last 8 years!!
Posted by: ohmy | February 24, 2009, 9:06 am 9:06 am
Ya know I like Obammy! I REALLY do!!! I’m happy that I voted for him!!! BUT all this television appearance is just getting on my last nerve! Similar to Bushie-Boy, towards the end of his term, who seemed to be on the tube every 5 minutes. What will President Obama say tonight? “We are in a crises;” “We must work together;” “America’s brighter days are ahead?” …Have we not heard this already? Face it! Some people refuse to work together (you know who they are) So, just leave them behind and let’s move forward! Mr. President! Less television time and more governing and legislation! Now, let’s get back to work!
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 9:07 am 9:07 am
Do any of you know why certain governors are thinking of rejecting money from the stimulus plan? I will suggest that you read the fine print on the unemployment money of the stimulus plan. After the federal money runs out, BUSINESS taxes will be raised to pay for the unemployment in their state. NO more federal money will be given to the states. That is WHY several governors are thinking about rejecting the unemployment part of the stimulus plan. Oh yea, Pelosi added the fine print that will penaltized business for their states unemployment.
Posted by: camp50 | February 24, 2009, 9:09 am 9:09 am
CAW..great post…I feel the same way. I wonder what would happen if 90% of the American people REFUSED to file their income tax on April 15th. Boston Tea Party time…
Posted by: camp50 | February 24, 2009, 9:12 am 9:12 am
I have looked everywhere and the only site mentioning the NEW 410 BILLION Dollar bill that the Democrats now want is Drudge! 410 Billion MORE, folks! I have e-mailed every congressman and senator whose site allows it. This has GOT TO STOP! They are going crazy up there and it will completely DESTROY America if they are not stopped. Impeach, recall, something. Get those people out of there. This is what happens when you have ONE PARTY RULE – ESPECIALLY WHEN THAT PARTY IS A SPENDING DEMOCRAT!!!
Posted by: M. Summer | February 24, 2009, 9:13 am 9:13 am
I believe that towards the end of Obama’s 4 years, the effective tax rate, including cutting back on some deductions, will be back up to nearly 28% for single tax payers with taxable income over $70-80K. Somewhat less for married and heads of household. The (un)earned income tax credit will probably rise a very little. It’s all part of the plan people. You asked for it.
Posted by: LongT | February 24, 2009, 9:18 am 9:18 am
www howobamagotelected
Posted by: pink stocks are a scam | February 24, 2009, 9:19 am 9:19 am
BHO approval rating today is 38%…….http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Obama is the most unqualified President elected in history!
Posted by: Michelle | February 24, 2009, 9:19 am 9:19 am
M. Summer is right! Here it is!http://finance.yahoo.com/news/House-Democrats-propose-410B-apf-14450221.html
Posted by: LongT | February 24, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am
How can the American people gave the seat of the most powerfull man on earth to a total in-experienced guy ?? This guy does not even walk like a man,he walks like a street pimp ! Whe are borrowing money that we don’t have !! and Hillary is going to the Middle East to give over 500 billion dollars to the Palestinians to rebuilt their homes ?? Excuse me !! isn’t these people the ones I see by the thousands chanting ” death to America” ????? Ohh pleeeasseeee somebody help me understand this grose lack of intelligence and responsibility on the part of “change we can believe ” team ???
Posted by: Frank | February 24, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am
I am happy with the job President Obama has done so far. I think the Republicans missed the boat on working with him. They could have come across as wise, benevolent friends to Barack, increasing the respect the country might have accorded to them if they had behaved maturely. Instead, the Republicans turned in a shrill, hysterical, “Know Nothing”, ridiculous performance. The only Republicans who appear to put country before Party are Arnold, Crist, Snow, Spector and Collins.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
Don’t cite polling data if you don’t know what it means. “Strong approval” is monumentally different from “approval” in the world of political polling. In fact, a 38% strong approval rating is good, particularly considering how much he’s rocking the boat.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am
“I believe that towards the end of Obama’s 4 years, the effective tax rate, including cutting back on some deductions, will be back up to nearly 28% for single tax payers with taxable income over $70-80K. Somewhat less for married and heads of household. The (un)earned income tax credit will probably rise a very little. It’s all part of the plan people. You asked for it.”
I love this. You totally speculate on something that you think will happen four years from now, which you have no way of knowing, and then tell us that we asked for it? Uh…okay.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:31 am 9:31 am
Matt–”Landslide” being defined at 54% of the voters is like “bi-partisan” being determined to mean only 3-4 GOP signed on to this hoax of a stimulus bill. The sky is blue no matter how many times we’re told its green.
Posted by: Mia | February 24, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am
It was an electoral landslide, which is what’s important in a general election.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
“How long will it take before Republicans realize that the public trusts Obama and really doesn’t have any regrets about handing the GOP a landslide loss last November?”
http://www.political-buzz.com/”
==============================================================
Hogwash. That story line has also run its course. Obama won by a small 9% simple majority and that delta is slipping fast. Try again, it didn’t work this time.
Posted by: rplat | February 24, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
PLEASE TAKE TIME TO RESERCH: “Cloward-Piven Strategy” Part 1,2,3 of Manufactured Crisis.
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 9:38 am 9:38 am
“It was an electoral landslide, which is what’s important in a general election.”
==================================================================
No, that baloney won’t sell. It was a small 9% simple majority not a landslide. Keep it up, perhaps you can reaffirm to some of the Obama cultists reading this blog.
Posted by: rplat | February 24, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am
LOL. So now Obama orchestrated the collapse of the banking industry in order to get some hybrid cars and rebuild Detroit schools.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am
“No, that baloney won’t sell. It was a small 9% simple majority not a landslide.”
You could use a math lesson. The final tally was 365 to 173. That’s an electoral landslide. In this country, the Presidental election is decided by Electoral College.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am
If the popular vote mattered, we’d have been spared the disaster of the last 8 years.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am
I don’t understand why “The public is with him, but the markets are not.” Isn’t “the markets” also “the public”?
Posted by: Julie | February 24, 2009, 9:45 am 9:45 am
Hypocrisy in motion, Obama lectures mayors and governors on spending “stimulus” money wisely after just ramming the pork filled package down the throats of the American taxpayer. Does anyone really wonder why the market is tanking? Smart money has no confidence in this man and his Dems in power, and neither do many Americans. His actions belie his pretty words, time after time after time.
Posted by: Babs | February 24, 2009, 9:46 am 9:46 am
I am pretty sure the President is going to connect with people during his speech tonight. Unfortunately Jindal is waiting to eat him alive immediately after his speech. Its “slum dog” everywhere, in Hollywood and in Politics!
Posted by: RS | February 24, 2009, 9:46 am 9:46 am
President OBummer inspires little confidence.
Posted by: NewCongress2010 | February 24, 2009, 9:49 am 9:49 am
“Does anyone really wonder why the market is tanking?”
Because we’re in a recession and people’s confidence hasn’t been restored yet?
“Smart money has no confidence in this man and his Dems in power”
“Smart money” is a bunch of skitish, paranoid freaks right now and they’re laying low and waiting to see what happens. The same would be happening under any other plan. The market was in a nose-dive long before Obama and that trend was going to run it’s course with or without him, until credit starts to flow again. That’ obvious.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am
OMG!!! Pink Socks! This is a must see and it makes me ill. I saw cuts of it before but now knowing what he is doing to our country and seeing it again!!! The Media should be sued for their incompotence
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am
www howobamagotelected
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
>Isn’t “the markets” also “the public”?
Hi Julie…That is what WallStreet wants you to believe. However, there is such a mess down here because you have had people lose sight of building alue and more attune to amassing wealth. There is nothing wrong with being wealthy at all!!! However, when you lose sight of value and building a solid foundation, you have lots of trouble. I think it is rather funny and ironic, how WallStreet fears Mr. Obama and his “liberal” whatever, yet it is AIG, Citicorp, BoFA and many others approaching the government for help. Doesn’t sound very capitalistic to me.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am
ABCNews is totally ignoring the new $410 Billion spending bill that Congress announced today. The Liberal media needs to stop this bias reporting on behalf of the Obama administration.
Posted by: dr | February 24, 2009, 10:03 am 10:03 am
News of that bill is everywhere. What are you talking about?
LIBERAL MEDIA! MESSIAH! KOOL-AID! NOBAMA! POOOOOORK!!!!
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
“silky” must have received an email alert from Obama this morning to stay on the blog today.
Posted by: Michelle | February 24, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am
dr – It’s not only ABC new ignoring the 410 billion spending bill – no one but Drudge has this on their website today. The liberal media blitz is alive and well once again!
Posted by: M. Summer | February 24, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am
So in addition Julie, (and the remainder of you are holding that last drift wood of partisan politics)there is lot’s of blame to go around especially among the government. What has bothered me the most is that there is no new solutions to fix the systemic problems – no arrest of the leaders that caused this mess, no change in board of directors resposnibility, the ratng agencies were entirely corrupted, where are the class action law suits that NEED to be filed to counter balance the greed of these corporate leaders — Lehman, Merrill, Goldman, Morgan, Bear – all the board members and executives should be sued, if not imprisoned. Lives were ruined and you can’t blame Mr. Obama for that. The real bottom line is that industries’s internal controls were overridden by executives in collusion with the lack of government regulation. This is what (IMHO) we should all be concerned with instead of the petty politics still going on.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 10:15 am 10:15 am
“His actions belie his pretty words, time after time after time.”
If you are so upset about the stimulus package, contact your representatives and demand they refuse money for your state. You don’t want your unemployment benefits extended if you lose your job, you’re OK with cutting cops and teachers from your state’s budget, and you don’t want federal dollars used to repair roads or build high speed rail in your state. Now THAT would be putting action behind your words.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am
“Line by line, Item by Item” -
That lasted until Jan 20th
Posted by: dr | February 24, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am
Silky; Obama did win by an electoral landslide. He did it with the densely populated inner city votes. He won by a 3% margin of the popular vote and only carried 21 of the 50 states.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
“”silky” must have received an email alert from Obama this morning to stay on the blog today.”
No, but it’s clear you got your instructions to copy and paste today’s disinformation campaign posting.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
“Silky; Obama did win by an electoral landslide. He did it with the densely populated inner city votes. He won by a 3% margin of the popular vote and only carried 21 of the 50 states.”
He took the rules of the game, played by them, and won by a landslide according to the rules. I’d say that’s a landslide victory, no? Again, if the popular vote matter, we’d have been spared the debacle of the last 8 years. The popular vote totals matter about as much as the gerbil vote.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Another, “It is the end of the world so accept Communism” speech tonight. Oh Joy!…think I will pass.
Posted by: sam | February 24, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Silky: Our inner cities are broken and in need of fixing or elimination or something. I just don’t understand why everyone from rural areas has to finance the whole affair. Apparently the brilliant city folks have made a big old mess of their lives and where they live. Now they are saying it’s the federal government’s problem and the federal government is committed to spend as much of our money as it takes to bring things up to snuff, only to watch it fall apart over and again. It’s not the place. It’s the people who live there and mismanage the cities that have dropped the ball. So now there are no jobs. The whole thing befuddles rational thought.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Silky; Well assessed. I think he fudged here and there but he stayed within the rules except for some highly questionable foreign based and bundled campaign contributions. Still he won. My whole point is that he is in charge, in charge of representing all of us. I’m hoping the changes his crew is making will lead us out of this quagmire and into a new era of hope for everyone. If his experiment doesn’t work we all suffer together. It’s at best risky business to rearrarange so many interdependent components.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 10:49 am 10:49 am
It doesn’t befuddle rational thought. Cities are essential to the existence of this country. Always have been, always will be.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:53 am 10:53 am
“If his experiment doesn’t work we all suffer together.”
That much is clear.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am
silky. take a look at this www howobamagotelected. Half the people that voted for him can’t even tell you why, more then half are dependent on government I’m sure why the heck else would you vote for him. He is a snake oil salesman.
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am
silky. take a look at this www howobamagotelected. Half the people that voted for him can’t even tell you why, more then half are dependent on government I’m sure why the heck else would you vote for him. He is a snake oil salesman.
Posted by: Mags | February 24, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am
What am I looking at on that website? I know how Obama got elected. I don’t need Sean Hannity to tell me.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
“Obama did win by an electoral landslide. He did it with the densely populated inner city votes.”
I just have to chuckle.
I guess you could say I live in the “inner city” of Portland, Maine. Saw a skunk crossing the road the other night, but its true we have more than two traffic lights. And it’s true, the even less densely populated center of the state voted for McCain. But, overall, Maine went for Obama by 57.6%, and this in a 96% White, rural state. Kind of like Iowa, the state that put Obama on the road to the White House in the first place. What did we see in Obama? First of all, an end to Bush style politics, a return to the moderate center (Collins won her reelection on that platform), and a guy we could be proud to call our President. McCain was too conservative, too politics as usual and his VP was divisive and unqualified.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am
The Republicans Have a 37 Percent Approval! And the People do not trust them to handle the Economy, HA HA LOL If they keep it up their Ratings will go lower then W! The people do not want and do not trust the Party that got us into this mess to fix it. Your going down Republicans keep Fighting President Obama keep it up!
Posted by: Angie | February 24, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am
MICHELLE
You clearly are Confused dear thats the Republicans approval Ratings!
Posted by: Angie | February 24, 2009, 11:07 am 11:07 am
Silky; I personally think big cities are dinosaurs. The industries that built them…manufacturing, auto, steel, textiles, furniture are dead or gone or dead and gone and all their support businesses went with them. Now the impoverished major cities have little purpose other than fulfilling the human drive to herd. I see cities as being much like Bangladesh. People insist on staying where they were born but there will never be enough food in the desert.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am
“more then half are dependent on government”
Please link to your source.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am
What do you propose people do then, monroe? The jobs are in the cities.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:16 am 11:16 am
Of the places I have lived and am willing to live, most are cities. DC, SF, and NYC. Most of the rural and suburban areas of this country are far too boring and culturally vacant for my tastes.
And there are plenty of people in cities whose money goes to subsidize farmers and pay for roads in the heartland.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am
Amy; Of the two candidates Obama is the more charismatic. The Republicans simply didn’t stand a chance this time out. Didn’t offer a viable candidate. Still it was/is my opinion that Obama was merely the default choice that emerged from the lack of competition. Well, that along with get out the vote efforts in the major cities. I do expect the kind of changes Obama is making (big spending and big government) will get the attention of a lot of voters who didn’t bother to follow this election and therefore didn’t vote. There is still a huge block of voters who don’t pay attention to politics on any regularr basis. That group is commonly known as the silent majority. Expect to hear from them in 2010 and 2012.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am
If Obama did win by landslide, where are his supporters now? They should go out spending money, buying stocks, a new car, a home … so our economy can be revived.
Posted by: Dan | February 24, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am
“Well, that along with get out the vote efforts in the major cities.”
The get out the vote efforts were everywhere. The moveon.org voter registration drive was massive.
“If Obama did win by landslide, where are his supporters now? They should go out spending money, buying stocks, a new car, a home … so our economy can be revived.”
This makes no sense whatsoever.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am
Silky; The best jobs have traditionally been in the major cities. Now there are less every day. Big cities are our cultural and entertainment centers, also they are our port cities, but I don’t see the mega industries locating in the major cities any more. Even the Big 3 have built their newest plants in relatively rural areas. The foreign manufacturers, who are the vast majority of new startups, are locating in the south and in the south’s midsized towns to be specific. Meanwhile, the majority cities are experiencing major unemployment numbers, decreasing property values and thereby less revenue to support the needs of local governments.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 11:39 am 11:39 am
mmonroeliveson
Is that the same silent majority that gave us Nixon/Agnew? (I’m not as young as I like to pretend.)The silent majority was what those crooks claimed to represent. If you are going to argue the Nixon years were good for our country, this conversation is over.
Several people in my office voted for McCain. Nice people, who don’t follow politics and don’t necessarily understand the issues. (One woman in my office voted for McCain without being too sure who his running mate was.)
But every single person I respect voted for Obama. The people who understood where the Republicans drove us, voted for Obama. I don’t expect the Democrats to have a lock on all elections from here on out, and that wouldn’t be good for our democracy, but, God, after eight years of incompetent, divisive, far right, crazy rule, can’t we enjoy our Democratic President for awhile? Can’t you give us that?
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Silky is a paid Obama blogger
Posted by: Samuel Adams | February 24, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Silky; The get out the vote efforts were everywhere only in the sense that they were in all major cities. The drive was massive and that’s why Obama won. Any 3rd grader can look at a map of the U.S. colored in red and blue and see who elected him. It was inner city voters.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 11:47 am 11:47 am
Samual Adams is a brain-damaged mouth-breather who needs our encouragement.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:47 am 11:47 am
“It was inner city voters.”
Well, metropolitan areas. I wouldn’t say “inner city”, although, he clearly got the inner city vote. I live in a small town in northeast Florida and I had two visits to my house from moveon.org volunteers.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am
The world spins around so fast that Obama cannot sit on top of it for very long. He is at the end of his rope so far.
Posted by: Silver | February 24, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
Amy; Nixon, like Obama, felt entitlement to the post. Both engineered their elections, Nixon illegally and Obama marginally within the law using non-profit tax payer funded partisan voter registration specialists to blanket the inner cities. The result is that we now have a shadow government driven by a block of special needs voters. Nixon inherited an unpopular war that consumed his presidency. But other than a little cheating to get elected to the office, Nixon wasn’t such a bad president. I have trouble distinguishing between felonies. Which is worse, a conspiracy to break and enter the Democratic national headquarters to steal party secrets or federal income tax evasion?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
When will America realize that they have been had by the far-left media? Impeach barry now!
He is reverend wright with better marketing and his socialist policies will take years to correct.
Posted by: BOSTINKS | February 24, 2009, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm
Silky; I spent most of my adult life in big cities but not the likes of your experience. Jacksonville, Fl. Birmingham, Al. Columbia, S.C., Chattanooga, Tenn. But for the last several years I’ve lived well outside of town at the end of a dead end county road. It’s nice having true privacy, not being able to see the neighbor’s house or hearing their stereo or toilet flush. Nothing but trees and sky, clean fresh air and well water. Deer and wild turkeys come to my pond daily. I’d never again be comfortable in an apartment or the suburbs. If I have a taste for the city it’s only 25 minutes away. It’s where I work daily and I’m always ready to leave at the end of the day. People in the country are wealthy in a way you’ll never know, even those of us who aren’t rich. I’ve been a part of big city “success.” It’s a lifestyle that left my cup in need of a refill at the end of every day. I’ll take the simple life.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
SILKY – why are you always on the defensive. You sound like a pretty negative person, just like your hero Obama…..Your on here everyday, would be nice to have some proper debates with you and not the usual left wing propoganda.
Posted by: Lou | February 24, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
“SILKY – why are you always on the defensive.”
For example? And where have I EVER come anywhere near “propoganda?”
And I’m not at all a negative person in real life. But then again, I don’t encounter the level of knuckleheadedness in real life that I do on mainstream websites like this. Maybe I would be if I did.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 12:47 pm 12:47 pm
Silky is a PAID SOCIALIST MARXIST blogger EMPLOYED BY OBAMA as part of his ACORN ARMY
How are the wife and kids, Silky?
Looking forward to the propaganda, uh, I mean, speech tonight, brother?
What will YOU do with YOUR $ 13.
You should have been a Salt Marsh Mouse!
Your cut from the stimulus would have been much better than whatever Obama pays you to blog for him
Posted by: John Hancock | February 24, 2009, 12:49 pm 12:49 pm
Silky,
What do you do WHEN Obama gets impeached?
Posted by: James Madison | February 24, 2009, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm
Leave our guy Silky alone.
Posted by: Acorn All The Way! | February 24, 2009, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm
Silky- In the real world liberals and republicans can chat, we all have our points of view. You just respond to everybodies post that disagrees with obama and go back to the blame game/negativity…there isnt much substance.
I understand your probably being paid a fair amoutn per hour to do this though????
Posted by: Lou | February 24, 2009, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm
Right, I’m being paid by the Obama Administration to post on the abcnews.com website. It’s really no wonder we ended up with George Bush for 8 years, y’know.
Where have I been defensive, though? I respond to people’s posts. I responded to Michelle’s post. I responded to monroe’s posts. I resonded to the guy crying about he new bill not getting press. I really don’t understand your point. And feel free to put forth some content, yourself.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Feb 24, 2009 11:47:32 AM;
Monroe, you said; “Silky; The get out the vote efforts were everywhere only in the sense that they were in all major cities. The drive was massive and that’s why Obama won. Any 3rd grader can look at a map of the U.S. colored in red and blue and see who elected him. It was inner city voters.” ……
____________________________
Monroe, I hope this doesn’t “rain on your parade.” But I guess you’d reference Dallas (and environs) a ‘major city.’ President Obama carried Dallas AND the more affluent Northern Suburbs which are Easily 85% well educated, affluent and “happen to be” Caucasian. While it’s true the minority vote, increased substantially it’s clear the Caucasian vote was the major factor in Barack Obama winning both Dallas and Collin Counties (major population center in North Central TX.) Incidentally, had it not been that virtually every Rural Market in Texas supported the Republican ticket, Barack Obama would have Won Texas!!! The vote count, was actually that close. (There’s a realistic projection that Texas will move from “Red” to “Blue” by 2012.)
Posted by: bobj72 | February 24, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
“Silky- In the real world liberals and republicans can chat,”
Lou, I think you have me confused with somebody else. Where have I done anything to railroad any dialogue?
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
mmonroeliveson
I have higher expectations for elected officials than you do, obviously. For instance that they uphold the constitution and are law abiding. I remember Nixon. Nixon was a crook, and Cheney is his pathological offspring.
I grew up in the country but my family thinks I live in the “Big City” now. I love Portland. I love the cultural events, being near colleges, the ocean, and, yes “the stores!” (As ZaZa Gabor would say.) Truthfully, Portland is a pretty small city. My brother lives in that central area of Maine that voted for McCain, although he himself voted for the Libertarian candidate, because my brother is a political whack job nut case.
I have Democratic sisters, Republican cousins, and my beloved Dad was Republican. I think we all have pretty much the same values, and levels of intelligence, just different viewpoints. I don’t see Obama as some kind of alien creep, trying to socialize the country. He looks like the kind of guy who made this country great to begin with: smart, innovative, active and decent. I support him.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
“We always did feel the same, we just saw it from a different point of view…”
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm
Bobj72; Thanks for bringing up the race card. Not! Can’t let it rest can you? You are obsessed with color.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
Willy, really the “spend-o-crats”? What about the republi-cants? They lied to us for the past 8 years about our national debt. They just conveniently left out any of the defense spending. Just because they wouldn’t admit to spending it, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Oh, I agree, leave Silky alone. You people just need to be bullys. Not that Silky needs anyone to stand up for him…..He doesn’t. But you people make me sick. And you wonder why most of the nation are tired of all of you. Get a life. Let people with real intelligence handle the mess we are in.
Posted by: scentsofroses | February 24, 2009, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
Dylan, ha ha. I remember him too.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
Amy, I guess I’m a political nut job wack case like your brother. I didn’t vote for Ron Paul because I didn’t want to waste my vote on an individual that was a non factor. He has good ideas that wouldn’t work in the midst of Washington politics. Have you ever considered what he has to say? He’s actually a John Lennon sort of thinker only with an overdose of patriotism.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm
WHY is it That President Obama’s opposition continually accuse “silky” of being a “Paid Blogger?” This is not the first time such an aimless accusation has been leveled against an articulate, intelligent, well informed and effective Debater. (mmonroeliveson knows the young man I reference.) The INTIMIDATION is obvious for those who make the accusations. It’s unfortunate the accusers are unaware that the accusation, if nothing else is a “Badge Of Honor” and a real compliment to “silky’s” effectiveness. All he really “brings to the game” is a sharp intellect, a spirit of competition, the maturity to admit IF he’s wrong, a willingness to confront and seemingly a desire to be fair in his judgements.
It’s a REAL LOSER who doesn’t have the ‘smarts’ to realize when he/she is OVERMATCHED!!!
Posted by: bobj72 | February 24, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
mmonroeliveson
The liberals are the ones who ALWAYS bring up the race card. They refuse to drop it, which is why democrats remain in power and the blacks in America remain bound by welfare chains.
Posted by: BOSTINKS | February 24, 2009, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Feb 24, 2009 1:27:54 PM
You said; “Bobj72; Thanks for bringing up the race card. Not! Can’t let it rest can you? You are obsessed with color.”
I say; “Man, what is wrong with you???” I offer you some Facts, I thought might be of some value to you (and possibly others.) And here you come, with that “race card crap!” Your sensitivity to race “is like an infected Open Sore!” Unfortunate…..
Are you REALLY THAT ASHAMED OF BEING BLACK??? With all due respect, My Brother.
Posted by: bobj72 | February 24, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm
Amy, my brother and sister-in-law both voted for Ron Paul. They too, are really over the top in politics. (Whack jobs) They think there are conspiracies everywhere. They have become totally paranoid. It is actually kind of sad. I told them they were dreaming if they thought Ron Paul really had a chance and they really got mad at me. Oh well.
Isn’t it refreshing to listen to our President,now? It doesn’t matter to me if he is “doom and gloom” or optimistic. I just like that I can really listen to him and I know our country is the best hands possible right now. No one else could handle it like I think Obama can. He is young and energetic, extremely hard working and very intelligent. There isn’t much more than that to ask for in our President. Who else could possibly handle the mess that Bush left us? McCain? LOL
Posted by: scentsofroses | February 24, 2009, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
mmonroeliveson
It wasn’t Ron Paul, it was the other one. Can’t remember his name. I like Ron Paul, I think he says lots of sensible things. No, my brother voted for the Libertarian candidate. He doesn’t believe in laws. Or very few laws. hmmmm
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 1:51 pm 1:51 pm
Bob Barr! That’s the Libertarian my whack job nut case brother voted for(I mean that lovingly, my brother is a nice guy, but his political orientation is different. It’s not a choice, I do believe he was born that way.)
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
The market was in a nose-dive long before Obama and that trend was going to run it’s course with or without him, until credit starts to flow again. That’ obvious.
—————————————-
silky,
I see you need help again. Very simple go to yahoo – finanace click on the dow jones graph, a new page will come up, click on the graph again…it will take you to a nice graph where you can look at a single day to more tham 5yrs on a sinlge graph.
The DJ was at 13,000 in the middle of last of last May! Your assumption that the markets were “in a nose-dive long before Obama” is completely WRONG!
actually if you look at the graph, a case can made that more likely it bacame that Obama would be president, the worse the market got! He locked up the nomintion in early June, the market was roughly at 12,500, yesterday we ended at what 7100 or so.
Obviously all of this is not due to the emergence of Obama, but it is a lie to say the dive was taking place long before him!
The trend since the election though has indeed been influenced greatly by Obama, his policies & his “the sky is falling” rhetoric.
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 2:00 pm 2:00 pm
scentsofroses
Was your Thanksgiving dinner as uncomfortable as mine?
Yes, I am overjoyed listening to Obama. Did you see him joking with McCain about “never having a helicopter before?” McCain said Obama didn’t need a fancier helicopter, and Obama said the one he has is just fine with him, but then again, he’s never had a helicopter before. I thought that was cute. How nice not to be yelling at the TV whenever the President, or Vice President or Secretary of State is on. These people are NORMAL.
Posted by: Amy | February 24, 2009, 2:01 pm 2:01 pm
Monroe, I again reread my 1:13:21 PM Post, and ANYONE with a nominal degree of intelligence, who would choose to follow the content, logic and interpretive intent of my comment – would Find It Difficult to suggest or conclude that it was about “Race”, in general or specifically.
I would really prefer NOT to delve into
the ‘causal factors’ of Black-On-Black “Racial Challenges & Attacks”, namely; ‘The Southern Black Experience’, the Black Social Psychology or The Sociology of miscegenation. So I strongly suggest you “Back Off.” I’m really not up to ‘Baby Sitting’ today!
Posted by: bobj72 | February 24, 2009, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm
“He locked up the nomintion in early June, the market was roughly at 12,500, yesterday we ended at what 7100 or so.”
Right, and Obama didn’t win the election until November 4th.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm
LOL!!!!! Mike_C!!! I’m in the business and YOU are absolutely wrong. I called a 11,300 June/July Dow back in October 2007. My colleagues thought me insane. Bottom line: They’re out of business and (knock wood), I’m still plugging along. We are ALL at fault for this mess. It has been building years on top of years, on top of years.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm
LOL Silky, Silky,….remember not to stare at the Obama to long, you will go blind!
Now I realize at times I have to hand hold you through these things, but its ok, I dont mind voluteering to help the “politically handicapped”….
When did he lock up the Dem. Nomination…June 3rd or so, the DJ = 12,400
The Dem. Convention ends Aug 28, DJ = 11,715
The Market has not seen a DJ that high since that day!
Since he took office until yesterday…24 business days and 15 of them were negative days.
Including the “Geithner Fiasco” drop of 389 pts!
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
LOL!!!!! Mike_C!!! I’m in the business and YOU are absolutely wrong. I called a 11,300 June/July Dow back in October 2007.
LOL, interesting if not incredibly vague statment.
A. what am I wrong about?
B. What does your calling for the Dow to be at 11,300 have to do with anything?
The context here was that silky”claimed” the market was in a nosedive “long before Obama” There is ZERO evidence to point to that. Absolutely ZERO!
As I stated, look at the graph… One COULD agrue that as Obama’s political star rose, the Market went down. Obviously there are other factors involved as well, but the Graph shows exactly that!
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Bobj72; I was making reference to your repeated mention of caucasians. Let’s face it we’re a nation of curs. We are the spawn of political and religious refugees, slaves, the starving, those displaced by war, pitifully poor people who served indentures, all the misfits and losers of the world. My current home state, Georgia started out as a penal colony for goodness sake. My skin is black. My ancestors, at least most of them, were black. Go far enough back and they were black slaves. I don’t hold a grudge. I’m not at all ashamed. Because above it all I am American. Is that O.K. with you or do I have to push a political party and demand special treatment and reparations to be included in your assessment of what is a good black American? Our inner cities and rural areas are made up of people seeking opportunity. They are of every imagineable national origin, political persuasion and color. All I ask for is a government that will consider all men equally and govern with minimal fiscal expenditures. I don’t expect anything from the government other than a level playing field. I’m content to earn everything I get and support the government at the same time. I do have a problem when the government commits my income to the betterment of a voter base. You do get my hackles up with your constant allegations of insufficient reverse prejudice or inadequate black pride. I’m a proud American with all the same wants and needs as every other American. We’re all in the same boat. No matter what challenges and hardships we’ve endured to get here, we have arrived. It’s time to stop whining and pursue the American Dream. I don’t know what all this American Promise is about. Sounds disgustingly like some sense of entitlement.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
Yes, Amy, Thanksgiving was a HOOT! Some couldn’t even show their faces. Damn shame.
Yes, it is nice not having to have my blood pressure affected in every way imaginable. LOL I don’t have to worry if he’s someone I would feel comfortable out having a beer with. When I am out and having a beer, Obama is working to help us afford it. Poor guy. He does have my thoughts and prayers and I hope he can handle this. This is some mess, and only a real angel would have the nerve to jump in and try to fix it.
Posted by: scentsofroses | February 24, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Mike C……there you go trying to pin it on Obama even before he was President. Typical of you not so nice people. Maybe, just maybe, the market had something to do with the lies about our national debt, kept from the public. The omissions of all of the debt incurred with the Bush admistration. I hear those poor people can’t even get jobs. LOL Who in the heck would hire them. His cabinet had better lie some more about the last 8 years just to get a job……..
Posted by: scentsofroses | February 24, 2009, 2:59 pm 2:59 pm
“LOL Silky, Silky,….remember not to stare at the Obama to long, you will go blind!”
People who “LOL” at things that aren’t funny on the internet are creepy.
Mike, he wasn’t a lock. He didn’t win the election until November 4th. Did the potential of him becoming President have *some* impact on some investors decision-making…of course. But the market is the product of the Bearn Stearns and Lehman collapses and the credit issue, not to mention the jobs reports. The market was well on it’s way long before Obama became President.
Posted by: silky | February 24, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm
Well Mike C, Silky is absolutely correct (maybe nosedive might be a bit hysterical) Just like many do with the bible, it is very easy to take things out of context and manipulate them to fit one’s argument. Without giving the technical analysis… just go back to stories of companies such as WalMart positioning themselves for this period. Did Mr. Obama have anything to do with the collapse of BSC–sorry, Bear Sterns, or Lehman? All of this was germinating way before anyone ever heard of Barack Obama. The reason some WallStreeters are blaming BO is because they are totally uninformed, ill read, embarrasedly ill trained in the fundamentals of the markets, and many were caught with their pants down. The market (as it is now) became less of an investment vehicle and more akin to Atlantic City. WAY too many derivative products, and too much “fast” money being made without any sound fundamental reasoning. To help you… just think back to a time when you took note that everything seemed as if it was rising EXCEPT salaries. You will find the beginning of this mess at that period.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
Silky; Mike_C doesn’t know what really makes men go blind.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
Scentsofroses; How are you today? I’d like to point out that being paranoid doesn’t necessarily mean there’s nobody out to get you. There’s healthy paranoia too. Some conspiracy theories are about conspiracies.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
What’s funny–well, not really…they have a story stating that Bernanke (however you spell his name) claims that this will be over by year’s end. LOL!!!! This from the same guy who did not admit that we were in recession until October 2008? Nah…. I believe we are at the bottom BUT it is going to be a BLOODY 6 months (Of which it is proving to be unfortunately), and it will be more closer to 2 years before we are somewhat out of it. Hey! Just in time for Mr. Obama’s re-election!
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm
FS; In my scope of recognition the time when everything was rising except salaries would be the late sixties/early seventies. Another pronounced cost of living deficit occurred in the mid eighties and another in the early nineties. Which one are you making reference to?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
Who in the heck would hire them. His cabinet had better lie some more about the last 8 years just to get a job……..
————————————
scentsofroses,
Cute, … does this indepth analysis also apply to “Golden Boy” Geithner?
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
mmonroeliveson: Oh! Of course in the nineties. More like the latter part. You had the internet burst which actually was the beginning of what we see today (IMHO) At that time, you had companies that just had outrageous valuations which made no sense at all. How do you value the internet? You tube which is one of the greatest things ever created and receives an ENORMOUS amount of “hits,” has yet to come anywhere near profitablity. I mean real-estate just followed suit. If you consider that only 2% of the US population makes over 80K per year, (not combined income), the cost of living just made no sense at all. So, what were people and companies doing? Leveraging! So, MikeC, I hate to burst your glee BUT this problem was not created or accelerated by Mr. Obama. Its time to pay the Piper.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
fs; How much affect do you think “flipping” had on the inflated value of real estate? How much affect do you think internet day trading has had on the stock market’s inflation?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | February 24, 2009, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
mmonroeliveson: There is an old saying down here; “When everyone starts doing the same thing, its time to get out.” Of course flipping real estate and DEFINITELY day trading has contributed to this mess. I have encountered so-called financial professionals (who manage money) that have no clue of how to even read a balance sheet! I have met CEO’s who had no ethical remorse in admitting that they were out to enrich themselves rather than work on behalf of the shareholders. The final straw (for me anyway) was the selection of BabyDoll err… Governor Palin who really has a success story, (she does), but was woefully unprepared to assume the position she was running for. That’s not how I work. I believe you must have some vision/plan plus competence to at least put on the table. In my thinking, there is not one person or party responsible for this mess. There is more than enough for everyone to take some blame. That is why it is just nonsense for all this partianship (IMHO) I’m not a big fan of this stimulus bill because in my experience whenever you just throw a large sum of money at a problem, it just opens the door for abuse and corruption. Some could cite the financial bail-outs as examples. However, the Obama administration has stated that they plan to demand accountability (and so should we)for these funds. I’m willing to give this new administration a chance. I don’t expect a turn-around in a few weeks but I know that it is better to try and support it along with constructively criticising things that I don’t like rather than attacking it because of personality and ideology.
Posted by: FS | February 24, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Feb 24, 2009 2:49:53 PM
Monroe, you are the epitome of “A real Puppet!” You make a concerted attempt to use PC cliches to curry the favor of others. You endlessly seek adoration and acceptance by straining to project intelligence, moderation and a broad based of knowledge.
Finally, you are a tireless sycophant, who makes it obvious you “look down your nose” at anyone you are able to identify as a Proud Black Person. Note some of your “trademark identifiers”;
* your repeated mention of caucasians. (I don’t have a problem with this, as I’m very comfortable TODAY admitting my Mom was 50% Caucasian.)
* Georgia started out as a penal colony for goodness sake. My skin is black. (Anyone who seriously considered American History should be aware that the colony now Georgia was originally populated by individuals from the British prisons.
* Is that O.K. with you or do I have to push a political party and demand special treatment and reparations to be included in your assessment of what is a good black American? (Are you suggesting I push a political party & demand special treatment and reparations? This Sounds like YOUR GENERAL OPINION OF BLACK FOLKS!!!) Which obviously I WILL NOT sit idly by to allow you to make such demeaning and unacceptable charges.)
* I don’t expect anything from the government other than a level playing field. (Again, I suppose this is addresses “The Free Ride most Black Folks expect, huh? And by the way, it may be awhile before that elusive “level playing field” is attained by minorities AND females, in general. We really need to first reach a point where we ALL accept each other as equals. Black folks are also in dire need of accomplishing this amongst our own people!
* You do get my hackles up with your constant allegations of insufficient reverse prejudice or inadequate black pride. (This will sound a bit crude, but “What in Hell are you talking about? I really don’t have a clue as to what you mean – sounds like gibberish to me. TRY to clarify for me if you’re serious.)
* It’s time to stop whining and pursue the American Dream. I don’t know what all this American Promise is about. Sounds disgustingly like some sense of entitlement. (Now I KNOW you’ll understand this. This has got to be a Political Mantra; whinning, American
Dream, American Promise and sense of entitlement all of which “I Read” as being directed at Black folks – and maybe some other minorities? It ALL evolves from the Playbook of Dembaugh, Hannutty, O’Really & Rover. “Sense of entitlement, reparations….. negro, Plleeeesse!!!”
Posted by: bobj72 | February 24, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
I checked up on the various serviced office available and their prices are pretty competitive. Any recommendations?
Posted by: savantadmin | February 25, 2009, 10:33 pm 10:33 pm