Three Challenges for President Obama Tonight
EmailThree tasks President needs to accomplish tonight in his address to a joint session of Congress:
1) Explain where we are
This is a tough rhetorical challenge for the president because he needs to explain the gravity of the situation we’re in yet not convey pessimism and that our best days are behind us.
Administration sources say the President will express confidence that the nation can work through this mess, but also that he knows it’s not going to happen without some tough decisions.
2) Explain short term solutions
Administration sources say the president will take this opportunity to talk in much more global way about the economy; that the stimulus is just one piece of the puzzle. He’ll need to explain the housing bill, opening up credit markets, stabilizing the financial system, and regulatory reform.
This will need to include his explanations as to why the government is obtaining shares of banks like Citigroup and Bank of America even as his administration says the nationalization of the banks is not its goal.
There is a lot of uncertainty — especially on Wall Street — about of the administration’s ultimate goals on some of these issues and he will need to offer clarity.
Administration sources say he will convey why we have to do what we have to do and how we have to do it together.
3) Explain the road ahead
Here the president will need to not only talk about long term goals like education, health care, energy, but also some of the tougher choices ahead in terms of reducing the deficit, Social Security reform, and getting control over the budget process — matters that require discipline and difficult decisions.
He will also need to explain why his short term prescription — tax cuts and spending increases — are the exact opposite f his long term proposals: tax increases and spending cuts.
It’s all a tall order
What do you want to hear from the president tonight?
- jpt
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
I would like to hear that he really doesn’t know if this will work or not, that this is uncharted waters, that well will ever go off the edge of the earth or find the new world or be eaten by sea monsters (the likes we have never even envisioned before). I’m tired of his pat answers and political meanderings. I think the biggest message to loyal followers should be that we should not expect government to solve this problem, people have to show resolve and work harder and smarter.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | February 24, 2009, 7:51 am 7:51 am
DontGet818OnMeNow, you wrote
“I’m tired”
I agree.
Posted by: Omentum | February 24, 2009, 8:07 am 8:07 am
I thought Bush was full of it, but the only thing
that has changed in Washington, is the geometric
rise in the volume of B.S. coming out of the
Whitehouse. Only Barack Obama could throw more than
THREE QUARTERS OF A TRILLION Dollars out the window,
and then announce a Referendum on Deficit Spending.
How can I stop laughing? Saturday Night Live
couldn’t make this cr*p up. who, Obewan, is the bigger
fool: the fool, or the fools who follow him? Forget
SNL, Barack and the Obamacrats are, by far, the best
joke in America.
Posted by: Jerry | February 24, 2009, 8:19 am 8:19 am
Jake was wrong on this one.
The number 1 challenge for our Greatest Smartest Clueless Leader is to stop fancy speeches that help tanking the stockmarket.
Unfortunately, the chance of Pb0 stopping talking is zero. So he will fulfill his ecconomic and wealth equalization of the middle class and the rich another step further by bring down the Dow after and before tonight’s speech.
Dow predictor: down 250 (3%) thanks to pb0 for making another speech.
Posted by: kat | February 24, 2009, 8:28 am 8:28 am
Honestly, I’m tired of hearing and seeing him every 15 minutes, period, and wish he’d give it a rest. It’s not helping anything. Since there is no chance of that happening anytime soon, I wish he’d stop campaigning and admit he doesn’t know if any of this is going to work. No one in the world knows if this is going to work, so it would be disingenuous for him to state otherwise. Stop the blame game. It is possible to do this without sucking what confidence, if any, is left. I’m not sure at this point it is possible to instill confidence, but he can stop the bleeding. The best way to do that is to just stop talking for a while. The more he talks, the worse things get.
Oh yeah, and stop with the sophomoric afternoon summits with break out sessions, sheesh!
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 8:29 am 8:29 am
I am scared – very scared.
BHO is everything we suspected he was – an empty suit who can give great speeches. Shame on America for electing this rookie.
Posted by: jlpillinois | February 24, 2009, 9:10 am 9:10 am
I am confident–very confident.
BHO is everything we thought he was: smart, savvy man with a plan.
Congratulations, America, for electing this visionary leader.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:18 am 9:18 am
Actually Obama’s challenge is to tell viewers why we shouldn’t be concerned that staggering amounts of wealth has been lost in the responsible people’s 401(k’s) and IRA’s since he took office.
Maybe he could also tell us why irresponsible homeowners are more worthy of a bailout than people who planned for their future knowing Social Security was broke and are watching their savings disappear aren’t being bailed out.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 9:18 am 9:18 am
Forgive me for asking, but if you do not raise taxes and do not cut spending to balance the budget, how do you make money to pay for the adventure Mr. President?
Mr. Obama, the stock market is “everything”
Posted by: Average Joe | February 24, 2009, 9:19 am 9:19 am
I would like to hear the truth from him with no spin or equivocating.
I would like to hear clear and concise statements and specific plans instead of an empty speech.
I probably won’t even watch Obama because I don’t believe a word he says.
I don’t think he truly cares about the American people; I sense he cares only about himself and his own political power.
Obama lied to the average workers at Caterpillar
just to get his way. That says a lot to me.
Posted by: Michelle | February 24, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am
I too have a really bad case of Obama Fatigue. Someone in the White House needs to wake up to how overexposed he is. Since he doesn’t seem to know what he’s doing, and drives the market down further every time he opens his mouth, let’s load him and a few hundred pounds of wagyu beef on to Air Force One and keep him in orbit for the next four years. He’ll be where he seems to be happiest, and we’ll be spared the sight and sound of him.
Posted by: MaryD | February 24, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am
President Obama intends to fix unemployment. This is his plan:
a) raise corporate taxes so maybe more corporations will go overseas or lay off more employees who will then depend on the dear government to take care of them; and then
b) we’re going to raise taxes on the wealthy because so many poor people have jobs to offer that we don’t need the wealthy anymore.
Of course, this is about as sensible as his refrain that “we’re broke, so we’re going to spend more money.”
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am
Michelle: you are spinning the CAT story to suit your own biased beliefs. Obama repeated at CAT, what he had been told by the CEO of CAT. That CEO the next day contradicted himself, and then on the second day was doing the two-step trying to tap dance around the fact that he said two different things. To claim that Obama “lied” to CAT workers is outrageous and you are WRONG!
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:25 am 9:25 am
Peach: please cite the source of your “facts.”
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:26 am 9:26 am
Bottom Line: 68% job approval rating after one month. Average for the last five presidents after one month: 62%
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:28 am 9:28 am
This is Obama’s speech tonight in a nutshell:
“We’re broke so we’re going to spend more money.”
That makes sense only to the insensible.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 9:29 am 9:29 am
Obama would do well to read the diary of FDR’s treasury secretary who wrote that they threw money at the depression and it didn’t work and in fact made things worse.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 9:30 am 9:30 am
President Obama should avoid playing the victim game, e.g. “I inherited this mess…” Get over it. He should sound presidential and not like he’s giving a campaign speech. Not sure he can.
Posted by: WriterX | February 24, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am
Ultimately it comes down to the fact that you right-wing cynics and haters cannot stand the fact that 1) He Won and 2) he has such a high job approval rating, and 3) More Americans (60%) trust him to fix the economy than the Republiecans.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:38 am 9:38 am
To William J. LePetomane,
We’re you present when Obama and the CAT CEO had their conversation? Didn’t think so. So, you blindly believe whatever Obama says. Has the CEO of CAT ever lied to you? Me neither, but Obama has. Therefore, I’m going with the CAT CEO’s word.
BTW, O’s approval rating is down to 63%, making him average with the other presidents and his disapproval ratings have doubled.
Your attempt at spin failed.
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am
That he fire giethner & co
That will stop gloom &doom talk
That he will STOP campaigning andwill start governing
Posted by: Farid | February 24, 2009, 9:41 am 9:41 am
ABC News poll yesterday, 68% Jennifer. Your lies failed again.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:45 am 9:45 am
“President Obama should avoid playing the victim game, e.g. “I inherited this mess…” Get over it. He should sound presidential and not like he’s giving a campaign speech. Not sure he can.”
Posted by: WriterX | Feb 24, 2009 9:33:50 AM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You’re exactly right, WriterX. The more he does that, the more he appears to have been ill prepared to take on the job. He didn’t inherit the job, he ran for it for 2 years. He should have either stayed off the tube for the last week or so, or should have put this speech off another week and studied up on the subject before going before the American people again. There is a direct correlation between him being on TV, the stock market dropping and his disapproval ratings going up. The people and the market are losing confidence in the guy at record pace.
Doom and gloom we can believe in?
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am
More on last night’s poll: 64% approve of the stimulus package
Obama vs. Republicans is 61% to 26% on being trusted to handle the economy
On which party can be trusted to handle the country’s main problems: D=56%, R=30%
73% think that Obama is trying to work with the GOP while a dismal 34% think the GOP is trying to work with him.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am
The GOP seems determined to act like lemmings diving over a cliff.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
The stock market is the true poll in these hard economic times.
Numbers tell the true – hard cash numbers that is..
Posted by: Average Joe | February 24, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
Good time to buy, joe.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am
William,
Gallup Daily Tracking: 62%; disapproval up to 25% from 12%
Rasmussen: 60% approval.
You’re getting dizzy from the spin. What’s next, you do your own poll and show he has 114% approval rating?
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 10:00 am 10:00 am
61% to 26%, Obama vs. Republiecans on being trusted to manage the economy.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:03 am 10:03 am
Jennifer, I would not make up my own poll–I’m not a Bushite Republican liar.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:04 am 10:04 am
The stock market is the true poll in these hard economic times.
Numbers tell the true – hard cash numbers that is..
Posted by: Average Joe | Feb 24, 2009 9:56:55 AM
***********
Exactly. As it became obvious Hillary wasn’t going to win the nomination, Wall Street started to prepare for the Obama take over.
Has there ever been a financial or corporate sector he hasn’t demonized?
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 10:07 am 10:07 am
In Obama, we are witnessing the biggest learning curve in American history.
And an expensive one at that.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
Jennifert7 wrote: “Honestly, I’m tired of hearing and seeing him every 15 minutes, period, and wish he’d give it a rest…just stop talking for a while.”
I agree! However, even I know–and I didn’t even vote for him–that President Obama’s greatest strength is his oratory ability. I frequently heard, “At least he is extremely articulate,” during the campaign. A lot of people voted for Obama because he is so charismatic and eloquent. Now that he is President of the United States, why in the world would he give up his greatest (if not his only) asset?
Posted by: James Danley | February 24, 2009, 10:09 am 10:09 am
Obama has treated the stock market as if it were some sort of foreign thing..he needs to wake up. stock market is everything. poll numbers mean nothing for the retirement funds, 401k, companies big and small. when stock prices go down companies don’t hire people.. maybe he can create some jobs in the government with the big pile of debt he is putting on us.. Demand that mr. Obama addresses the the stock market
Posted by: Average Joe | February 24, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am
To William:
Have you lost half of your 401K? Are you retired? Have you lost your job?
Are you willing to pay mortgages for other people? Do you have grandchildren who will have to pay this money back? Have you ever owned a small business, and understand how hard it is to make money? etc., etc., etc.
Or, are you for all of his entitlement pork projects for a good reason?
Posted by: jlpillinois | February 24, 2009, 10:12 am 10:12 am
Obama has treated the stock market as if it were some sort of foreign thing..he needs to wake up. stock market is everything. poll numbers mean nothing for the retirement funds, 401k, companies big and small. when stock prices go down companies don’t hire people.. maybe he can create some jobs in the government with the big pile of debt he is putting on us.. Demand that mr. Obama addresses the the stock market
Posted by: Average Joe | Feb 24, 2009 10:12:34 AM
*********
The guy hates capitalism. he admitted in one of his memoirs that his favorite professors were Marxists.
And he DID warn us he was going to redistribute the wealth. What did people think that meant?
Of course, he’s done such a horrible job there won’t be any wealth left to distribute.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am
jlpillinois: I moved my investments from the more speculative stuff into the safer, less risky. Lost very little. It WILL come back, just as it has before. I am opposed to earmarks, unless they come to IL where our roads are the worst in the nation, seemingly.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
All of you need to answer this question honetly: Were you all this critical of Bush after his first month in office 8 years ago?
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am
“A lot of people voted for Obama because he is so charismatic and eloquent. Now that he is President of the United States, why in the world would he give up his greatest (if not his only) asset? ”
Posted by: James Danley | Feb 24, 2009 10:09:20
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Because it’s no longer an asset. He has gone from ,”we are the one we have been waiting for” to Mr. Catastrophe on a daily basis for the last month. He can’t just go back now.
What works well with young college students during a campaign doesn’t necessarily follow through in the real world of governing, as is now evident. He read some good speeches from a teleprompter and that’s where his talent started and, unfortunately, stops. He simply doesn’t understand what he is dealing with here. He may do a good job tonight of reading off a screen, but that won’t help a single person get a job.
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Jennifer – you nailed it. Excellent post and observations.
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am
William:
I am happy for you that you have not lost anything; however, there are millions of people in this country who are losing jobs, and will continue to lose jobs when businesses layoff and do not hire. Wall Street does not have confidence in Obama. End of story. This is not good news for jobs in the future.
I agree with Peach we are going down a slippery slope of socialism – redistribution of wealth. It doesn’t work. The USA is in the process of being destroyed – it bigger than roads and bridges, William.
Posted by: jlpillinois | February 24, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
“All of you need to answer this question honetly: Were you all this critical of Bush after his first month in office 8 years ago?”
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | Feb 24, 2009 10:22:34 AM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No, I wasn’t. He didn’t ask me to pay your mortgage. If he had, I would have been. If the stock market would have dropped like a lead balloon as a reaction to his policies, then I would have been, but it didn’t.
Now, how about you be honest about how adoring you were with Bush after his first month in office. Spare me the “I was a republican all my life until Bush……blah, blah, blah.”
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am
I actually gave Bush the benefit of the doubt all the way until the WMDs failed to materialize, “Misson Accomplished,” Rendition, warrantless wire-tapping, the outing of Valerie Plame, etc. etc. etc. But for sure I gave him more than one month.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:34 am 10:34 am
Here is the bottom line:
If you are a socialist, and strongly believe in redistribution of wealth – just say so. But, do not pretend Obama is anything but what he really is.
Just say the truth -
Posted by: jlpillinois | February 24, 2009, 10:37 am 10:37 am
jlpillinois: if you believe that we are headed down the road to socialism, you have the last act of George W. for that one. He effectively nationalized the banks with TARP money with no accountability.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am
I ask you who gave campaign funds to Bush and Obama? George Soros
Posted by: jlpillinois | February 24, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am
I am a died-in-the-wool capitalist, moderate independant voter who has never voted a straight ticket in my life. But I believe that desperate times require bold action and not just doing nothing. Even if the G were to take over partial interest in banks, which could happen, the G would eventually be paid back and get out. Does anyone here actually believe that the market will NEVER come back? Study history.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am
William J. LePetomane,
Are you going to be so quick with those poll numbers when they start to plummet ?
You should be noticing something about them right now. His negative has doubled in that gallup poll. While his approval number has dropped only slightly. So, basically its the “undecideds” in that poll that are making up their minds….against him!
“I am confident–very confident. BHO is everything we thought he was: smart, savvy man with a plan.
Congratulations, America, for electing this visionary leader.”
Hoorah, what a plan!!!
Part A. – Run around the country to every micophone avialable and tell us unless we immediately pass an enormous bill that noone will read, the “crisis” wiill become….”a catastophe”….
Part B. Continue on more plans to spend, spend, spend, and keep watching the Dow jones until it sinks below 7000!
Part C. Put Joe Biden in charge of both the Middle Class Task Force & the Implementation of the “stimulator” package.
Part D. Pray daily that Geithner will come up with “something” we can sell to the world!
Yep…great Plan!
Obama has not demonstrated much of an understanding how to speak & when to speak so far. He has managed to seriously oversell “crisis” & “catastrophe”.
He is going to have do a hell of a soft shoe act tonight to really get confidence moving upward. Today’s revelations about AIG are not going to help in that effort. It is going to be very difficult to convince the American people that his “super-genius” Tim Geithner really is the man for this job. After Geithner’s fiasco following Obama’s first press conference, and now the knowledge that that AIG bailout has been a total disaster so far, I have no idea how Obama can spin things so the people actually buy into any plan concieved by Geithner.
To top all that off, He had better watch out, Bill Ayers believes sending those 17,000 troops to Afghanistan is a big mistake. Obama better hope his “aquaintance” does not decide to become an active protester again!
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am
“I am a died-in-the-wool capitalist, moderate independant voter who has never voted a straight ticket in my life. But I believe that desperate times require bold action and not just doing nothing.”
I am also a capitalist, moderate, independent but I am not ready to sell my soul for short term gain. I agree, the market will come back on its own in its own time (kind of like a bad cold, you can take OTC meds or visit a doctor and the cold will still take you 8 to 14 days to recover) but, I don’t know if democracy can come back once it moves beyond flirting with socialism and decides to commit.
Posted by: NotSoFast | February 24, 2009, 10:55 am 10:55 am
No, I wasn’t. He didn’t ask me to pay your mortgage. If he had, I would have been. If the stock market would have dropped like a lead balloon as a reaction to his policies, then I would have been, but it didn’t.
Posted by: jennifert7
================================================
He did honey. In 2001, he asked you and more importantly your children and grandchildren to pay his friends mortgages, for all their houses.
You and your (grand)children are asked to foot the bill of the national debt he ballooned out of control.
And the market tanked. Spectacularly. He was the first president to leave office with the Dow below where he took office.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 24, 2009, 10:56 am 10:56 am
Jennifert7, while I certainly understand what you are saying, unfortunately the vast majority of America is still enamored with President Obama’s charisma and blinded by his eloquence.
President Obama TOLD the American people that he is for wealth redistribution. He TOLD the American people how he disliked Corporate America? He TOLD the American people that he wants to level the playing field. The words are out there for everyone to see, but too many don’t care WHAT he is saying, they just love HOW he is saying it.
I just hope–and pray–that the American people will wake up soon, BEFORE he and the Democrats are able to fully ram their total socialization of America down our throats.
Posted by: James Danley | February 24, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am
Concerned: I don’t like rendition and warrantless wire tapping no matter WHO is in the White House. I never claimed to like everything that Obama is doing. Republicans are the masters at that: No GOPer can do no wrong, ever.
Posted by: William J. LePetomane | February 24, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am
He did honey. In 2001, he asked you and more importantly your children and grandchildren to pay his friends mortgages, for all their houses.
“You and your (grand)children are asked to foot the bill of the national debt he ballooned out of control.
And the market tanked. Spectacularly. He was the first president to leave office with the Dow below where he took office.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yeah, it took Bush 8 years to “balloon” the national debt out of control and it only took wonder-boy Obama 4 weeks to out do him the likes we’ve never seen before. Children and grandchildren having to pay for it? If only it could stop there!
Since you brought it up, how’s the market done since Nov. 4th, 2008? How about since Jan. 20, 2009? Pretty darn spectacularly, eh?
Nice condescending tone, btw ;)
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 11:17 am 11:17 am
“President Obama TOLD the American people that he is for wealth redistribution. He TOLD the American people how he disliked Corporate America? He TOLD the American people that he wants to level the playing field. The words are out there for everyone to see, but too many don’t care WHAT he is saying, they just love HOW he is saying it.
I just hope–and pray–that the American people will wake up soon, BEFORE he and the Democrats are able to fully ram their total socialization of America down our throats. ”
Posted by: James Danley | Feb 24, 2009 11:02:56 AM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s a matter of time. As I stated, many of these voters were young people whose parents have footed the bill for them all their lives. These kids didn’t have 401k’s to lose. Well guess what? Mom and dad have had tightened up on, or yanked altogether these kids spending money. Some of these kids are going to be in the job market come May and it ain’t gonna be pretty. I don’t know if you were alive during the Carter years, but the ones who voted for Carter’s first term switched and overwhelming voted for Reagan in 1980. Unfortunately, we all have to suffer for this horrible mistake for a while longer.
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 11:24 am 11:24 am
“Gloom and Doom” are the new “Hope and Change”
Oh, and he will blame it all on George Bush…
Posted by: Sally J. | February 24, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
“Rendition, warrantless wire-tapping”
Two Bush policies that 0bama has validated and continued.
Posted by: Concerned in OH
============================================
Wrong, he has not validated the Bush interpretation of those policies.
Rendition was never the problem. I approve of the idea of bringing people who are being accused of terrorism or crimes against humanity being brought to justice, in broad daylight, on an internationally scale. It is *extraordinary* rendition that has always been the problem. And he has disavowed that.
With regards to warrantless eavesdropping. I have opposed that and oppose Obama and every Republican who voted in favor of it.
Your side has defended Bush on both policies to the extreme. It’s rather hypocritical of you to now suddenly voice your concerns about it. It’s as hypocritical as suddenly having rediscovered “fiscal responsibility”, after every Republican President and Congressman in power from the last three decades has never acted fiscal responsible.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 24, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am
jennifert7,
you guys tried to blame Carter for the mortgage crisis 25 years after he left office; you blamed Clinton for the 2001-2003 recession, after he had left office, yet you blame Obama for events when he even wasn’t in office?
Nice double standards you’ve got. But we knew that already. That’s why we voted your party out of power. Keep up the good work.
This Depression is yours and yours alone. The Americans trust Obama and the Democrats more in handling the economy.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 24, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am
“you guys tried to blame Carter for the mortgage crisis 25 years after he left office; you blamed Clinton for the 2001-2003 recession, after he had left office, yet you blame Obama for events when he even wasn’t in office?”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And how did that next election work out for Carter? Did he win or lose? Uh huh.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“”This Depression is yours and yours alone. The Americans trust Obama and the Democrats more in handling the economy.”
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Feb 24, 2009 11:41:23 AM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Nope, sorry Willem. We weren’t in a Depression with a republican president or even a republican congress.
You’re not a student of history so much, are you?
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 11:53 am 11:53 am
William van Oranje, the stock market tanked following the attacks of 9/11. But as the 2001 & 2003 Bush tax cuts began taking effect, the stock market recovered and set new records. On Jul 19, 2007 the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed above 14,000 for the first time. After retreating to below 13,000 within a couple of weeks (profit taking), it once again soared and closed at 14,164.53 on Oct 9, 2007.
Had either the 109th Congress (led by the Republicans) or the 110th Congress (led by the Democrats) heeded the warnings by the Bush Administration in 2006 & 2007 on the mismanagement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we might have discovered the other corporate abuses before they collapsed. But by the time that the 110th Congress decided to act it was already too late. The stock market steadily fell and closed at 10,365.45 on Sep 29, 2008. After gaining nearly 500 points on Sep 30, 2008, the market began it’s current downward spiral–losing nearly 2,400 points in the next 7 days. With the exception of a few good days, the stock market has continued this downward spiral ever since.
To blame this tanking of the stock market and the economy solely on President Bush is wrong. To blame this tanking solely on the Republicans is also wrong. There is a lot of blame to go around. But instead of dwelling on blame, we need to move forward and fix the problems.
I, personally, believe that the first order of business should have been the restoration of the financial system. No amount of government spending will work unless and until individuals, small businesses and Corporate America seeking loans can readily get the loans.
Posted by: James Danley | February 24, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am
As I stated, many of these voters were young people whose parents have footed the bill for them all their lives.
Posted by: jennifert7
============================================
Nice of you to label everybody younger then 65 as “young people”. McCain only won the older male vote.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 24, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am
Obama still thinks he’s a rabble rousing community organizer. He campaigned on “Hope” but all he has delivered, so far, is “Fear”. He’s using his time tested Alinsky agitation methods to get his agenda rammed through Congress.
Posted by: OxyCon | February 24, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am
I want to hear that he resigned! That should make the stock market go up.
Posted by: jim | February 24, 2009, 11:58 am 11:58 am
Willem van Oranje wrote: “…after every Republican President and Congressman in power from the last three decades has never acted fiscal responsible.”
Are you forgetting that it was the Republicans who had control of both Houses of Congress during President Clinton’s last 6 years?
Posted by: James Danley | February 24, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
In general, I’d like him to stop being so gloomy and scoldy. FDR never sat down and said WWII was becoming a catastrophe (even though sometimes it was!).
In particular, I’ve noticed the new position that this crisis was caused by high medical costs, and the argument that reducing medical costs is key.
I’d like to hear how bringing more people under government medical care is going to reduce medical costs.
Gibbs really danced around this yesterday, but it is counter-intuitive to me. If he could give a true summation of what he will do specifically to reduce medical costs, I’d like to hear it.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
“Nice of you to label everybody younger then 65 as “young people”. McCain only won the older male vote.”
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Feb 24, 2009 11:55:46 AM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sigh….Willam (with no “i”), go back and read what I said. That shouldn’t be too hard for you to find since you quoted me. I did not say “everybody”. I said “many”.
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
Here’s a 4th challenge for Obama:
4). Try to convince Americans that he knows what he’s talking about, even though he’s never truly accomplished anything on his own, or ever acted in a leadership capacity in any of the government positions he has previously held, due to the fact fact that he’s nothing more than a poser who has been constantly campaigning for office for the last 12 years.
Campaigning is the one thing Obama is good at, along with posing for pictures and reading flowery prose.
Posted by: OxyCon | February 24, 2009, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm
“even though he’s never truly accomplished anything”
Yeah … getting elected President of the United States is hardly an accomplishment – everybody and their brother does that!
ADVICE TO REPUBS: IF YOU FIND YOURSELF IN A HOLE, STOP DIGGING.
NOTE TO REPUBS: YOU’RE IN A HOLE.
Posted by: R Mutt | February 24, 2009, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
jennifert7,
you guys tried to blame Carter for the mortgage crisis 25 years after he left office; you blamed Clinton for the 2001-2003 recession, after he had left office, yet you blame Obama for events when he even wasn’t in office?
Nice double standards you’ve got. But we knew that already. That’s why we voted your party out of power. Keep up the good work.
This Depression is yours and yours alone. The Americans trust Obama and the Democrats more in handling the economy.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje
———————————-
WVO,
Perhaps you need to actually look the real FACTS, rather than just regurgitate Keith Olberman.
There is Blame on both sides of the aisle and it does in FACT go back to Carter! He gave us the Community Re-investment Act. During Clinton’s administration, Larry Summers (heard that name lately?) & Clinton strongly backed a Republican, (YES – REPUBLICAN) bill, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.
These things set the stage for the events of the past few years.
Obama has shown exactly how someone with ZERO experience at governing over-reacts during these kinds of situations.
Now he has to run in damage control mode! Now after a solid month of telling us doomsday was around the corner if we didn’t do “something”. Even a something that our nations elected leaders in congress would not have time to fully read!
Now, he has to make the American people believe that the tornado has past, and its ok to come out and play again!
As evidenced by the markets, very few people really beleive that the adminstration has the answers. Yes, despite these nice polling numbers, the people are not convinced…neither are the markets!
Peopple are not going out and spending on big ticket items, unless they absolutely have to. People are saving as much money as possible because they have no confidence that the job they hold today will be there in 3 or 6 months.
Take a few minutes and watch some the shows and the debates on the news channels. There is no vast consenus that the great “stimulator” package is going to have any major impact on creating jobs at all.
But we do have an interactive map on the “Recovery” web site that tells us just how many jobs in each state will be “created/saved” I am still waiting for “further clarification” on the defintion of a “saved job” and how they will be reported!
Take a long look at those job numbers on that lovely map, then look at the number of unemployed in that state as well. Since we do NOT know how many of the “created/saved” jobs will be created, it is impossible to tell what kind of an impact there will be.
Hell, what am I worrying about, after all we have Joe (what’s my next stupid line) Biden who is now in charge of the implementation of the great “stimulator”! I’m SURE Joe knows all about created Vs saved jobs!
Posted by: Mike_C | February 24, 2009, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
To All Republicans on Board And Obama Haters,
Do you think President Obamas Job is easy? the man Inheriated 2 Wars,.An Economic Melt Down,There is no easy way out,Its going to take time and I highly think 30 days is enough time. Now in regards to the Republicans they have a 37 Percent Approval Rating,The American people do not trust them to Handle this because they Caused this mess Right along with Bush.
Posted by: Angie | February 24, 2009, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm
MayBee wrote: “I’ve noticed the new position that this crisis was caused by high medical costs, and the argument that reducing medical costs is key.”
Great observation!!! And this is just the beginning! Our current economic crisis will have many “causes” over the next few months. As President Obama and the Democrats attempt to pass their socialist agenda one step at a time, the passage of each step will be touted as an urgency due to the crisis. Why else would President Obama keep saying that he expects the economic crisis to get much worse–and possibly last years–before it gets better?
NOTE: Yet we have Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke saying, today, that the recession could end this year!
Posted by: James Danley | February 24, 2009, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm
James Danley, I fully agree that the problems are far more complex than simply blaming one side or the other. But I would advice you to first berate your own side (I assume) when they’re using such blatant silly statements like the market tanked when Obama got elected. Or cries of “socialism” or “marxism” every time badly needed regulation and oversight is proposed.
With regard to the problems with F&F. The problems Bush and others (some Reps and some Dems) saw with Fannie and Freddie was in management (esp. accounting) and in oversight, not in their business model. Better oversight *might* have exposed that, but since it were decisions in 2004 by President Bush’s HUD, to ratchet up the main affordable-housing goal over the next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent, I remain extremely sceptical. John C. Weicher, then an assistant HUD secretary, said the institutions lagged behind the private market and “must do more.” Everybody viewed the subprime market as a goose with golden eggs. Nobody is going to kill the goose while she’s laying those eggs.
Problem was that F&F and their regulators were jealous of the huge profits in the private subprime mortgage market, saw their own share in that market diminish greatly, and HUD, Bush, Reps AND Dems ALL wanted them to take part of that booming business (which proved to be a bubble).
In 2000, HUD had regulated that F&F should stay clear of “predatory lending practices”. In 2004 they did away with that regulation and allowed F&F to enter the “mortgaged backed securities” market. That was what led to their downfall.
Posted by: Willem van Oranje | February 24, 2009, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
“Now in regards to the Republicans they have a 37 Percent Approval Rating,The American people do not trust them to Handle this because they Caused this mess Right along with Bush.”
Posted by: Angie | Feb 24, 2009 12:53:17 PM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Republicans’ approval ratings are going up while Obama’s are going down. That is the trend you need to be worried about. And yes, all that after only 30 days.
Posted by: jennifert7 | February 24, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
Jennifer
Please share your Facts where Republicans ratings are going up lolol hahah
Posted by: Angie | February 24, 2009, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm
Popularity does not equal good policy.
The Iraq war was popular, promoted by a popular president. It enjoyed bipartisan support.
On the other hand, the surge was not popular. It was decided on by an unpopular president. It was rejected by the party who had just won the elections.
Yet the surge turned out to be a better plan than the original plan for war. The surge is quite obviously better than the alternatives offered at the time.
Public support at the outset of a policy is neither a guarantee of success, nor a guarantee of continued support.
As an argument for or against something, it is almost meaningless.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
I also want to hear him state some understanding that everyday people are concerned about our investment losses.
The rhetoric from Biden yesterday about “paycheck before portfolio” was not helpful. The Gibbs joke about the “Gibbs surge” when the market went to 7300(or whatever) didn’t show understanding. Their defensive position that their plans can’t be measured by market reaction shows callousness.
I want to hear that they understand normal people are losing 401(k) and 529 value just as much as we’re losing mortgage value. It’s scary.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
“I’ve noticed the new position that this crisis was caused by high medical costs, and the argument that reducing medical costs is key”
This not new at all and was a key discussion in the Democratic primaries and by Obama during the GE campaign.
Medical bills have been one of the leading causes of bankruptcy for years now.
Maybe Republicans didn’t hear anything about it because their party could care less.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm
Ryan C-
How is he going to reduce medical costs?
A cost so gigantic, it is a major portion of our debt and one of the causes of the crisis.
Computerizing medical records isn’t going to do it. What will?
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm
“Republicans’ approval ratings are going up while Obama’s are going down. That is the trend you need to be worried about. And yes, all that after only 30 days.”
Ahhh the right wing…when in doubt just make it up.
Obama’s approval ratings are in the 60′s.
Gallup just polled Congress approval ratings which are up to 31% from about 19% a month ago.
That rise in support is due to Democrats and Independents viewing Congress more favorably.
Rasmussen found Pelosi to be the most “popular” member of Congress though the approval rating is nothing to write home about.
So which Republican approval rating is going up?
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
“How is he going to reduce medical costs?
A cost so gigantic, it is a major portion of our debt and one of the causes of the crisis.
Computerizing medical records isn’t going to do it. What will?”
Computerized med records are important but I agree that the cost savings from them will not be significant.
See his campaign website for what was his healthcare plan.
I assume that is the one they will seek to put in place.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
“Clinton strongly backed a Republican, (YES – REPUBLICAN) bill, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.”
Really?
House and Senate Republicans yesterday unveiled a newly revised version of a bill to revamp banking law, but the White House said the proposed legislation inadequately protected consumers, didn’t resolve other issues and would still result in a presidential veto.
“The administration is disappointed,” Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said of the bill and of the Republicans’ decision to work on it behind closed doors without the help of Democrats.
The lesson as always?
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
Ryan C- I am familiar enough with his plan. I am unfamiliar with any logic that ensuring everybody has access to inexpensive insurance will actually reduced medical costs.
That’s what I’m wondering about.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
I’ll add- I am willing to be proven wrong, that the government making sure people have insurance will reduce our enormous medical costs. That’s why I said I’d like the President to explain it more thoroughly tonight.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
Why are people who saved their money for their future because they knew Social Security was broke any less worthy of a bailout than the irresponsible homeowners who bought more home than they could pay?
Posted by: Peach | February 24, 2009, 3:14 pm 3:14 pm
1) remember to not keep saying “ahh, ummm”
2) make less gloom and doom talk and smile more.
3) when all else fail, say, “i won!”
i am most looking forward to Bobby Jindal’s response.
Posted by: jaj | February 24, 2009, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
“I am unfamiliar with any logic that ensuring everybody has access to inexpensive insurance will actually reduced medical costs.
That’s what I’m wondering about.”
Well there are two main parts to that(at least in my mind).
One is stopping people from using the emergency room for all their medical needs.
That results in not just a larger cost (emergency care vs standard care) but burdens the emergency care system itself which is not designed for regular care.
Two, is people with insurance are far more likely to have regular checkups and to follow thru with any medical regime than those without. This works as preventative medicine which reduces the cost of people getting disease down the road.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm
Ryan C:One is stopping people from using the emergency room for all their medical needs.
===========
A study in California showed that- in California at least- it is the people on state-subsidized MediCal insurance who over-used the emergency rooms. Not the uninsured.
…..
Ryan C:Two, is people with insurance are far more likely to have regular checkups and to follow thru with any medical regime than those without. This works as preventative medicine which reduces the cost of people getting disease down the road.
======
I would like to see more data on that. A yearly checkup costs about $75. A month of insurance costs much more than that. I’d be very interested to see if it can really make enough of a difference to *save* money, which is the claim.
Posted by: MayBee | February 24, 2009, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
“A study in California showed that- in California at least- it is the people on state-subsidized MediCal insurance who over-used the emergency rooms. Not the uninsured.”
You have a name for that study so I can check it out?
(ABC deletes all links)
I found this
This study examines emergency room use among Medicaid disabled beneficiaries focusing on three specific areas (1) prevalence and characteristics of frequent ER users; (2) overall cost profiles; and (3) diagnoses related to ER visits. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective secondary data analyses were conducted from a linked cost and utilization summary data set based on all Medi-Cal claims records. For those disabled individuals who were also eligible for Medicare benefits, their Medicare cost and utilization data were also included in the analyses. POPULATION STUDIED: Analytical sample consists of 426,238 Medi-Cal disabled beneficiaries for 19 California counties in the year 2000. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Frequent ER users were more likely to be younger, female, white or blacks, and less likely to be enrolled in a Medi-Cal managed care plan.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm
Oh also Maybee, looking around on the issue.
There are acknowlegded problems with getting Medicaid recipients to start using regular doctors
Google this
Reducing Inappropriate Emergency Room Use among Medicaid Recipients By Linking Them to a Regular Source of Care*
Posted by: Ryan C | February 24, 2009, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
as a case manager, that works in a major city, for regularly schedules doctors appointments for my clients that have mental illness and are deaf, so that is a double barrier for my clients.
what i have noticed, 1)medicaid offers very little providers. sometimes it takes a week to find a doctor that will accept my client. 1) i have to advocate for sign language interpreter-i hve to tell the office that the DOCTOR needs the interpreter more than the deaf patient so often time the office will decline accepting my clients. 2)most specialist,in Clinics only, are not available for 6 months or more. Medicaid offers very little services and most are never available right away and that oftens leads to more ER visits.
if you have Medicare and medicaid, you hve more options.
don’t forget to add that most frequet ER visits are probably due to the fact that the patients have mental illness, if you don’t have a good support network, these people will often end up in ERs.
in some cases where you have mental illness individuals who have to take mulitple medications, the risks for health problems increase and when clinics are not available to see the patient right away, that leads to more ER visits.
Posted by: jaj | February 24, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm