The Note, 3/16/09: Team vs. Rivals — Obama enlists allies in searching for match-ups he can win
Email By RICK KLEIN
Your political regional match-ups: 1. Barack Obama
16. No 8. Rush Limbaugh
9. Rahm Emanuel 5. Michael Steele
12. Michael Steele 4. Tim Geithner
13. Dow Jones Industrial Average 6. Facebook
11. Twitter 3. Public Outrage
14. AIG 7. John McCain
10. Earmarks 2. Jon Stewart
15. Jim Cramer While we’ve got brackets on the brain, might some rivals be just what President Obama needs? Team Obama knows that the online army now being deployed may be more effective if it’s against something — say, Rush Limbaugh, or “those who say,” or the Bush era, or Wall Street excesses, or just the party of “no.” (Here’s guessing the president doesn’t mind having a rival in Dick Cheney, either.) (And what does it mean to have Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke charging alongside the president in optimism for a recovery?) Speaking of strong fundamentals, the president now begins to press his plan for a budget against an array of forces, both real and partly imagined. The Republican Party has found a voice — and a label. AIG has found some serious chutzpah. The economy has found . . . well, we just don’t know where that one stands. “The Obama administration is increasingly concerned about a populist backlash against banks and Wall Street, worried that anger at financial institutions could also end up being directed at Congress and the White House and could complicate President Obama’s agenda,” Adam Nagourney writes in The New York Times. “Beyond that, a shifting political mood challenges Mr. Obama’s political skills, as he seeks to acknowledge the anger without becoming a target of it.” And so it’s back to the organizing energy and power of the campaign, powering that Obama brand of populism, just with a less-exciting-sounding goal: passing the budget. “The White House on Sunday began harnessing every part of the Democratic Party’s machinery to defend President Obama’s budget and portray Republicans as reflexively political,” Politico’s Mike Allen writes. “David Plouffe, manager of Obama’s presidential race, helped design the strategy, which includes the most extensive activation since November of the campaign’s grassroots network. The database — which includes information for at least 10 million donors, supporters and volunteers — will now be used as a unique tool for governing, with former canvassers now being enlisted to mobilize support for the president’s legislative agenda.” “Aides familiar with the plan describe it an unprecedented attempt to transfer the grass-roots energy built during Obama’s presidential campaign into an effort to sway Congress. . . . Several individuals intimately involved in the planning of this campaign made it clear that they believe this is the moment Democrats have been waiting for and Republicans dreading since Obama’s election — the deployment of the volunteer army that helped catapult a freshman Illinois Senator to the presidency in support of his legislative agenda,” The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza writes. (Why is a budget that just needs a majority vote such a perceived problem for a party that has wide majorities in the House and Senate? And if this push disappoints, how much juice does the Obama army carry into the next fight?) (And how many more stories of bonuses like AIG’s before Team Obama takes some serious blame, too? Helping put some life in the straw men: “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the Republican Party doesn’t intend to offer a comprehensive alternative budget in the Senate. Instead, McConnell said, the GOP will offer numerous amendments to the administration’s budget plan,” ABC’s George Stephanopoulos blogs after his “This Week” interview with McConnell. Said McConnell: “Whether you have a comprehensive approach or whether you offer an amendment approach is something that parliamentarians can debate. But the point is, we’re going to have alternatives.” The real targets? (Will the grass-roots army want to touch this?) “Worried Democrats are seeking ways to rewrite and reduce the size of President Barack Obama’s budget proposals,” McClatchy’s David Lightman writes. “If all 47 Blue Dogs joined the House’s 178 Republicans, they could deny Democratic leaders a House majority of 218.” How long before this becomes THE option? Reconcile this: “The easier way would let the president negotiate with only fellow Democrats. The deal they strike could pass Congress this year by a simple majority vote — in a single budget bill with historic health and energy policy changes that Republicans could not filibuster,” John Harwood writes in The New York Times. “It is not too soon to say that the Obama honeymoon period is over,” David Broder declares in his column. “His critics in Washington and around the world have found their voices, and they are subjecting his administration to the kind of skeptical questioning that is normal for chief executives once they settle into their jobs.” Helping along the broad edges: “A broad coalition of left-leaning groups is quietly closing ranks into a new coalition, ‘Unity ’09,’ aimed at helping President Barack Obama push his agenda through Congress,” Ben Smith reports for Politico. “Conceived at a New York meeting before the November election, two Democrats familiar with the planning said, Unity ’09 will draw together money and grassroots organizations to pressure lawmakers in their home states to back White House legislation and other progressive causes.” Will the Sunday night AIG disclosures help or hurt the push? (Disclosure is great — but won’t it always raise new questions?) “After calls for more transparency, AIG disclosed Sunday that roughly two-thirds of the $173.3 billion in federal aid it received has been paid out to trading partners such as banks and municipalities in the U.S. and abroad,” Liam Pleven, Serena Ng, and Sudeep Reddy write in The Wall Street Journal. “The disclosures came as AIG was lambasted for about $450 million in bonus payments planned for employees at a business unit that lost $40.5 billion last year,” they write. “The disclosures highlighted the increasingly close but uncomfortable relationship between AIG and the U.S. government, which six months ago was a restless creditor and now has little choice but to be a patient ally.” The Los Angeles Times’ E. Scott Reckard and Tom Petruno: “The company said it shelled out nearly $100 billion in the final few months of the year to satisfy some of the contracts it had outstanding under credit default swaps and other insurance and investment agreements. The beneficiaries included major foreign banks such as Germany’s Deutsche Bank and France’s Societe Generale, as well as U.S. titans Goldman Sachs Group and Merrill Lynch & Co.” “The American people are being played for fools by AIG,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said on ABC’s “Good Morning America” Monday. Now comes efforts to start building up public support: The White House Monday outlines new small business initiatives, aimed at thawing frozen credit markets for small businesses. “These include details of an effort to unlock frozen credit markets for the Small Business Administration’s major programs — the 7(a) program, which allows small business owners to get up to $2 million in loans, and the 504 program, which provides a guarantee on up to $4 million in financing for economic development projects,” ABC’s Jake Tapper reports. From the White House: “President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner will meet with small business owners and community lenders in the Roosevelt Room. There will be a pool spray at the top of this meeting. Following the meeting, the President and Secretary Geithner will deliver remarks to small business owners, community lenders, and members of Congress in the East Room.” Bloomberg’s Kim Chipman: “White House officials are trying to counter criticism in Congress that a $700 billion financial rescue plan is benefiting mostly banks rather than consumers or non-financial companies. Banks are still hoarding cash after $1.2 trillion in writedowns and losses since 2007.” Is this a hiccup? “President Barack Obama is set to release a plan Monday raising the federal guarantee on small-business loans up to 90%, but a study by Congress’s watchdog agency contends that insufficient oversight is in place for that program,” Jonathan Weisman writes in The Wall Street Journal. “Under the ‘credit elsewhere’ program, before issuing a loan lenders must provide supporting documentation from potential borrowers to show that they couldn’t get loans elsewhere. The study by the Government Accountability Office found that few of the participating banks are sufficiently documenting borrower need.” Is it his yet? (No, but maybe soon.) The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz: “At some undefined point, the battered economy will be seen as Obama’s problem. The conventional wisdom when he took office was that he had a year to show some progress. But that was before cable commentators started handing out 50-day report cards and presidents were expected to solve problems before the next round of Sunday talk shows.” The next sales job: “Under the emerging plan, Washington would finance the creation of several investment funds charged with buying up to $1 trillion of the toxic mortgage-backed securities and other bad assets now corroding the books of huge financial institutions such as Citigroup Inc.,” Maura Reynolds and Jim Puzzanghera report in the Los Angeles Times. “Money to purchase the assets would come from the government, in partnership with private investors. It’s not yet clear how large Washington’s contribution would be or the ratio of tax dollars to private capital.” Who’s hurting? “President Barack Obama will headline the first fundraiser of his presidency this month, appealing to donors large and small even as the economy struggles through the worst recession in generations,” Bloomberg’s Hans Nichols and Jonathan D. Salant report. “Obama’s appearance at the Democratic National Committee’s March 25 event at the Warner Theatre in Washington, with tickets ranging from $100 to $2,500 per person, will be an early test of his ability to keep up the record-breaking fundraising he achieved during the campaign.” What does this do for his plans? Obama will be a no-show at the Gridiron: “President Barack Obama deciding that he is too busy to attend the Gridiron’s annual banquet later this month is a slap. He’s the first president since Grover Cleveland to skip the white-tie-and-tails affair in his first year in office,” Anne Schroeder Mullins writes for Politico. Another Clinton write-down: “Former President Bill Clinton has ended his high-profile business connection to his friend Ronald Burkle’s Yucaipa Cos. by walking away from a final payment that was once estimated at up to $20 million,” John R. Emshwiller reports in The Wall Street Journal. “While the former president could have claimed additional money from Yucaipa, he decided not to, said a person familiar with the matter. He apparently made the decision early this year.” Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., has his challenger: “Former Republican Rep. Rob Simmons said Sunday that he plans to run against Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd,” the AP’s Andrew Miga reports. “In a hypothetical 2010 matchup, a recent Quinnipiac University poll showed Simmons with 43 percent of the vote and Dodd with 42 percent.” “Simmons, a Republican, has won eight of the 10 political races he has run in his career, including three terms for the U.S. House of Representatives from the 2nd District, which covers more than 50 towns from Madison to Stonington and Enfield,” Christopher Keating writes in the Hartford Courant. Noam Scheiber profiles Larry Summers in The New Republic, delving into details of his career as a college debater: “When I wondered what steps he would take if there were no checks on his decision-making, Summers was deferential. ‘I think the right approach here is the president’s approach,’ he cooed. Scheiber: “At which point I began to worry: What if we in the press have gotten it wrong? Collegiality is all well and good. But, in this moment of global crisis, when indecision could be disastrous and a wrong decision even worse, shouldn’t we want to unleash our hard-charging geniuses and get out of their way?” Meg Whitman (and a horse named Brandy) take the cover of the new Fortune. Pattie Sellers reports that Whitman’s campaign guide is Joe Klein’s book, Politics Lost. And Whitman takes a dig at Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif.: “Being CEO of the state is not a popularity contest. In the real world, business leaders cut expenses until the company is healthy again.” Writes Sellers: “Whitman is eager to fight what will probably be the most expensive governor’s race in history. When I mention that I’ve heard that her campaign might cost $150 million to $200 million, she doesn’t bristle. And when I ask whether she’s willing to spend, say, $50 million of her own money, she nods and replies enthusiastically, ‘It’s conceivable!’ ”
Sad news: “Ron Silver, the Tony Award-winning actor who amassed an impressive list of roles based on real-life figures in movies including ‘Reversal of Fortune’ and ‘Ali,’ died Sunday. He was 62,” per the Los Angeles Times. “Silver, a longtime liberal political activist who became an outspoken supporter of former President George W. Bush’s military response to 9/11, died of esophageal cancer in New York, according to Robin Bronk, executive director of the Creative Coalition, which he helped found.” Frank Luntz, on Silver’s decision to speak at the 2004 Republican National Convention: “He lost a few friends that night, but when people talk about that rare individual who practices what they preach, who lives the courage of their convictions, they are talking about Ron Silver.” The Kicker: “I was clearly not happy that we in effect left Scooter hanging in the wind, which I don’t think was appropriate. . . . I think he’s an innocent man who deserves a pardon.” — Former Vice President Dick Cheney, on Scooter Libby, who probably saw his best chance for a pardon leave town in a helicopter Jan. 20. “The engagement is off, yeah.” — Levi Johnston, to ABC’s Neal Karlinsky on “GMA.” “Me not being mature enough, or something. . . . Better for us to separate for a while.” Follow The Note on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote 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/
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will 
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
Who still thinks the bailout money was a great idea. Nobody could read 1000 plus pages of it. Now AIG is showing how you can take money off one person to FU-K everyone just like Obama promised. Its not just the rich like AIG. Its also workers at GM who demand 50 dollar an hour jobs when they are only worth maybe tops 15 dollar an hour. Obama will F-CK you with this take your money from you so someone can F-CK you and keep it.
Posted by: putsky | March 16, 2009, 9:08 am 9:08 am
- The Obama administration is increasingly concerned about a populist backlash against banks and Wall Street, worried that anger at financial institutions could also end up being directed at Congress and the White House.
Since Bush/Cheney created this mess a solution would be to create posters of them and throw your shoes at them until this mess is cleaned up it, it may take a few years but at least we can wake up every morning throw a few shoes at them and relieve stress.
Posted by: John | March 16, 2009, 9:20 am 9:20 am
It seems Obama doesn’t get it. People are maxed out moneywise, and he has the nerve to conduct an endless campaign asking for more. Let the campaign end!
Posted by: Vivi | March 16, 2009, 9:35 am 9:35 am
The fact that AIG Executives can get away with thumbing their noses at the White House with no one from AIG going to jail certainly clarifies who is REALLY running this country. How long will the tail be allowed to continue wagging the dog. I am getting really tired of hearing “too big to fail” as a justification for anything. Seems like if a Company is “too big to fail” their would be offsets in law that allowed Government to respond with consequences that would such kingdom making impractical and incapable of being sustained in the first place. As things stand AIG is demonstrating how they have easily put the US Government in the position of being a hostage to AIG whims. Who would have thought that could happen.
Posted by: Chuck | March 16, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am
“8. Rush Limbaugh
9. Rahm Emanuel”
I would pay good money to see this.
Posted by: silky | March 16, 2009, 9:53 am 9:53 am
Uhm, I wonder why the American people are maxed out? Wished I’ve been the guy who threw the shoes…..I would not have Missed. 3 years, no problem.
Posted by: sngeorgia | March 16, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am
Putsky:
I think the bailout was a good solution to a terrible problem. The problem wasn’t the concept of the bail-out, but how it was implemented… with no oversight or accountablility.
Obviously, it would have been better to nip this in the bud by requiring AIG to have sufficient reserve to back the Credit Default Swaps they were writing, and to mark to market the assets they were using to back those reserves. But given that our government defaulted on it’s responsibility to regulate our financial markets, bailing out the world’s biggest underwriter was the best solution to a horrible situation
Posted by: Missouri Dad | March 16, 2009, 10:05 am 10:05 am
Hey Putsky,
What are you rambling on about? First of all, the application for a “bailout” (at least last year) was two or three pages long. That’s part of the problem – Treasury under Paulson just asked ‘em “How much do you want?” and “Where do we send it?”.
Second, to all of you people still going nuts over “redistribution of wealth”, and “socialism” and all that – calm down a tad, would you? Stop being so hysterical.
Strategist on the right are trying to get you all worked up so you’ll get up off your butts and do something. Strategists on the left are trying to get the other side all worked up about Rush Limbaugh. CEO’s of banks and Jim Cramer are trying to get everyone all worked up so that they can make more money, along with the day traders. The sales and marketing folks are trying to remain in charge of everything.
Now, while you’re foaming at the mouth about socialism and redistribution, please try to think a little bit about this -
Very few people really want to give anything to people who don’t _want_ to work. During the last few years, if you were able to work, you could find a job doing something.
That’s changed – don’t you get it? There are many, many people now who cannot find a job – at all. Those are those “losers” that jerk on CNBC was whining on about. 1 in 10 schoolchildren in Minneapolis are homeless – H.O.M.E.L.E.S.S – get it? I am almost positive that most of their parents didn’t lose their jobs, then their homes by choice.
Please take that information and juxtapose it with the people that make 260,000 that will have to pay an extra 300 – 400 in taxes starting in 2011, when we go back to the tax policies of Ronald Reagan, and the start of the Bush II Presidency.
Do taxes get wasted, and some end up going to people that don’t deserve it? Sure thing. But put things in perspective please – especially these days when we taxpayers are paying for the mistakes of a bunch of people who took on an absurd amount of risk so they could make an even more absurd amount of money.
I’ll bet the amount of taxes that get “wasted” trying to help the parents of homeless schoolkids on Minneapolis, or the subsidizing the truckloads of food being sent to Indiana so the people that can’t find a job don’t starve, or to help the people living in the new tent cities – I’ll bet the amount of money “wasted” trying to help those people pales in comparison to the amount of money “wasted” propping up the banks that gambled and lost the “American Dream” for us.
Posted by: Steve From NH | March 16, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am
Missouri Dad, if only – “Toilet Mouth” putsky, “Dizzi Vivi” & “Help me understand the Unintended Consequences” – Chuck; had an understanding of Reality, we could move on to more productive matters!
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am
I caught an interesting “call-in” segment of C-Span this morning. I found most interesting a comment from a young Military Veteran (fought in the Middle East, and had a foreign accent.) He calmly offered the following suggestion; “The Republican Party would be ‘better off’ by being Honest and Re-Naming their Party, “The Dixie Aryan Party.” Quite a perception by the young man.
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Cheney …..WE DID NOTHING WRONG….BUT WE DID NOTHING RIGHT
Posted by: BSKI | March 16, 2009, 10:34 am 10:34 am
STEVE FROM NH….Well said..these same people that now are unemployed and looking for help, not their fault, are probably some of the same that would not help others when they need it. My Mother always reminde me that…WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND….sooner or later.
Posted by: BSKI | March 16, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am
“Putsky:
I think the bailout was a good solution to a terrible problem. The problem wasn’t the concept of the bail-out, but how it was implemented… with no oversight or accountablility.”
—————————–
And WHY did it happen that way……?? Because Bush & Paulson were WRONG. We didn’t need to something so fast that no one understood exactly what it was we had done!
That left open all these holes! Now we have a new “Change” president who has done EXACTLY the same thing on all most every possible issue.
We must do something right now, or we risk making a crisis become a catastrophe.
This is the theme to the Obama presidency! Cant wait to see the abuses that rise from all of what he has done! Opps, I forget we have Joe Biden on the prowl to catch anyone messing with this. You know what the problem with that is? Biden also voted YES on TARP!!!! HE HAD HIS CHANCE to make sure things were done right already and blew it!!
Posted by: Mike_C | March 16, 2009, 10:51 am 10:51 am
OBAMA IS HIS OWN WORST ENEMY HE DOESNT NEED AN RIVAL HE RIVALS HIMSELF THE ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS REPLAY HIS SPEECHES THE FUNDAMENTALS ARE STRONG , THE WAR IS WRONG, PAY TAXES ON YOUR ISURANCE ON AND ON AND ON HES THE ENERGIZER MONKEY
Posted by: david reyes | March 16, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am
Start by going after the wealthy corporate execs. They’ve been taking bailout money and giving it to themselves.
I’m sick and tired of the wealthy receiving every break in the book. Less than 2% of small business owners are in the top 2 tax brackets. The top tax brackets consist of the corporations that have been robbing Americans.
Add a new corporate greed tax…
Only applies to anyone working for a company that received a bailout during 2007-2010. For these employees, every penny of bonus money over $50,000 is 100% taxed. That means their salary and bonus money they can keep are still more than most American families.
From 1994-2006 (both Clinton and Bush) sold out Americans and deregulated. Everyone in Senator and Congress that supported this needs to have their pay and their pension taken away from them. They sold America to their lobbyists.
Posted by: Dan | March 16, 2009, 11:04 am 11:04 am
“Couldn’t resist!” You’ve now progressed to a “monkey” reference. This really “Magnifies” the ‘historical racial issues’ between Hispanics and African Americans. (Imagine issuing such vile and demeaning language with such “lacking and faulty ESL skill!”)
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am
Senor Reyey; that comment was directed to YOU. “Couldn’t resist!” You’ve now progressed to a “monkey” reference. This really “Magnifies” the ‘historical racial issues’ between Hispanics and African Americans. (Imagine issuing such vile and demeaning language with such “lacking and faulty ESL skill!”)
Is it any wonder, most Americans oppose Positive Immigration Reform???
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am
david reyes…example A of this country’s need for an education system overhaul.
Posted by: silky | March 16, 2009, 11:38 am 11:38 am
The administration should be worried. The fact that they are and are broadcasting that they are says several things.
First, that they understand the issues and are fully engaged with design correct solutions. Most of these issues are still very fluid and require evolving solutions to get in front of and stop.
Second, they understand the outrage that is circulating as well as growing exponentially. The way that the “Executive Managers” are continuing to “manage” their businesses, especially with respect to the continuing “bonus/retention” crap shows both sides of there(bankers) thinking. They just don’t get it. The rest of the world is truly suffering, the collective arrogance that got us here in the first place.
Third, anger, (and people have a right to be angry with the likes of AIG, B of A, Citi and there continuing tone deafness to the rest of the planet) is a very powerful emotion. It can blur the abilities to reason as well as focus on the solutions rather than the problem(s) that got us to this place and time.
Lastly, some varying degree of self guilt. In some cases, outright lack of remorse and personal accountability that comes through denial. And in others, a profound sense of drinking the “kool-aid” or just allowing themselves to get caught up in the euphoria of the recent past, when the little voice we all have was shouting, don’t buy that, you really can’t afford it. I do hope that the Obama administration will move away from the position of reminding us that they inherited these conditions. We know that and it is true.
That said, we have to work collectively on solutions, as easy as it is to point fingers, and defining the responsible parties as well as the systemic failures, does carry a very necessary function/place, we must first and foremost get the economy reset on a firm foundation.
Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 16, 2009, 11:42 am 11:42 am
Mike C: how many Republicans voted “yes” on TARP?
Posted by: Howard Beale | March 16, 2009, 11:44 am 11:44 am
I ran into an old acquaintance over the weekend. He’s a new car salesman. I asked him how new car sales were going. He said he sold at least one car every day last month. I asked how he did it. He said he refused to participate in the recession. Maybe more of us should adopt that attitude, I expect the recession would end tomorrow. WHAT IF THEY THREW A RECESSION AND NO ONE CAME?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 11:54 am 11:54 am
47 blue dogs now. Wasn’t that number only 39 a couple of weeks back? Looks like I called the shot. I said back in November his strongest opposition would be from his own party members. As for the army of volunteers, soliciting the votes of Republican senators and reps for liberal legislations will keep their hands busy. they’ll at least feel like they’re participating. The Republicans know the people making the noise won’t support them no matter how they vote so the barrage of phone calls and emails will have little to no affect.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Obama calling out his army will only deepen the divides in Washington. Not a wise move.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
mmonroeliveson 11:54:10 AM
yup, if we close our eyes, it won’t happen.
and, of course I would gauge the entire U.S. economic picture by one conversation with a car salesman.
Posted by: gus amaral | March 16, 2009, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
I’ve got the workers down at Seaboard Farms chicken processing plant saving feathers. Anybody got a line on tar. The AIG people need to be punished, not for the measly bonuses but for getting us into this mess. Seriously folks, don’t let the diversion of a few million dollars in bonuses blind us to the fact that AIG sold trillions of credit default swaps and that’s where most of the bailout money went. But thanks to the taxpayers paying out hundreds of billions, the retirement funds AIG manages for congress are secure. Fire congress for seting up the mortgage crisis, dropping the ball on financial oversight, for creating a panic, and for pointing their fingers elsewhere as usual.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm
gus amaral; It’s about the power of positive thinking. Get it? But if you’d rather argue and grump all day again today, let’s have at it.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
There could be no better investment in America than to invest in America becoming energy independent! We need to utilize everything in out power to reduce our dependence on foreign oil including using our own natural resources. Create cheap clean energy, new badly needed green jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.The high cost of fuel this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. The cost of fuel effects every facet of consumer goods from production to shipping costs. After a brief reprieve gas is inching back up.OPEC will continue to cut production until they achieve their desired 80-100. per barrel.If all gasoline cars, trucks, and SUV’s instead had plug-in electric drive trains the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota.We have so much available to us such as wind and solar. Let’s spend some of those bail out billions and get busy harnessing this energy. Create cheap clean energy, badly needed new jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. What a win-win situation that would be for our nation at large! There is a really good new book out by Jeff Wilson called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now. http://www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com
Posted by: Sherry | March 16, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
i was positive through the years with a lot of presidents even a few i didnt like.but this is different. he really doesnt like capitalism . unlike all the other presidents he is spending our country into a whole new country that believes every person no matter what the work ethic is entitled to the same.
Posted by: jane gutowski | March 16, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
monroe, you haven’t said anything positive in months. What is the sudden turnaround? You have been down right grumpy yourself. Please don’t try to spin yourself out if now. You wouldn’t be the mmonroeliveson that we know and love. :)
Posted by: scentsofroses | March 16, 2009, 1:44 pm 1:44 pm
Sherry; I’m a little confused. The stimulus package funded a nuclear power plant in Illinois. Obama says he’s against nuclear power as a source for electricity. The nuclear waste disposal facility is to be closed in Arizona and Nevada isn’t a viable site because the residents don’t want a waste disposal site there. We have equipment that will need to be used for many years that runs on gas or oil or diesel and we’re not open to the idea of becoming fossil based fuel independent to cover those needs. I think you said a mouthful when you said we should pursue fuel independence in every way possible. It was gas prices that triggered the housing crisis that revealed the credit default swap that led to a worldwide financial crisis. As long as we rely on the mid-east for fuel we’re vulnerable to another financial crisis here at home. Making us want alternative power by raising the costs of fuel, by increasing fuel taxes, by creating new usage taxes etc. It may seem like a good idea but we the consumers are being targeted to pay the price as if we’ve done something wrong, when in fact, legislation and lawsuits that prevent drilling are the culprits.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 2:00 pm 2:00 pm
scentsofroses; How ya like the new me? Most of the problems with our stagnant economy are psychological at this point. And I’m not saying people without jobs are imagined. All I’m saying is recovery is being delayed by alot of people with stinking thinking. I want to see recovery instead of the president using doom and gloom and fear to sell his agenda and justify the spending. Now’s not the time. First comes economic recovery, then if he has money burning a hole in his pocket we can talk.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm
“gus amaral; It’s about the power of positive thinking.”
So, you’ve had a change of heart?
Posted by: silky | March 16, 2009, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
mmonroeliveson 1:02:47PM
You missed the point.
Pretending an economic crisis does not exist, is both avoidance AND dumb.
Informing oneself, being aware of the challenges allows one to be both positive AND productive.
Posted by: gus amaral | March 16, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
“Most of the problems with our stagnant economy are psychological at this point.”
____________________
mmonroeliveson:
What happened to your Lee Marvinish
persona of last week?
I MISS it.
(it diminishes your
‘Up with People’ manner)
Posted by: gus amaral | March 16, 2009, 2:25 pm 2:25 pm
Gus–”Pretending an economic crisis does not exist, is both avoidance AND dumb.”– true, and so is pretending that bopundless government spending will correct the problem.. But we have been sold that bill of goods for several months now..
Posted by: arkie vet | March 16, 2009, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm
silky –”So, you’ve had a change of heart?”– why do you see a change of heart? I don’t I have always maintained a positive attitude that the ability to overcome this problem was through the hard work and effort of the people. Its our current president who keeps reminding us that only the government can save us.. that we can not do it based on our own ability ( even though we always have)…sounds like ( if you use your logic), the true pessimists would be those who now lead us…
Posted by: arkie vet | March 16, 2009, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
Once again, the corporate wealthy continue to steal from American families.
I’m so tired of paying for the corporate wealthy. This trickle down economics should be called p-on American families economics.
The tax center data shows only 2% of small business owners are in the top two tax brackets. I guess that means it’s the corporate execs in those two brackets.
Why did government remove banking regulations that were put in place after the 1929 crash?
Why did we cut regulators from 2001-2006?
Posted by: Dan | March 16, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
Silky; Yes, I’ve decided to be positive. I’m trying to convince the crooks in Washington to follow suit.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm
Jane gutowski–”i was positive through the years with a lot of presidents even a few i didnt like.but this is different. he really doesnt like capitalism . unlike all the other presidents he is spending our country into a whole new country that believes every person no matter what the work ethic is entitled to the same.”
___________________________________
thats about as well as it can be summarized..thats exactly what is going on.. Its called social democracy.. and its not what this country was founded on, in fact, this country was created to get away from it.. the question is, will it be too late when we all figure that out?
Posted by: arkie vet | March 16, 2009, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm
Dan; Why do you insist on pointing out only the time Bush was in office. Become an American rather than a Democrat and you’ll see a whole new list of people to bash. Deregulation goes back about five presidents. That’s one of the few things about our government that’s truly bi-partisan.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
DAN– Some of your post is spot on, some not.. first,
Corporate wealthy are not stealing from american families.. most execs contractually receive a lot of their annual salary from bonuses.. these bonus payments were written into the employment contracts BEFORE the bailout. when the money was handed out, it was done with NO stipulations or restrictions. Actaully what is going on here is that the government is trying to “steal” money from the execs even though they are contractually entitled to it..
this has absolutely NOTHING to do with trickle down economics..nothing..
yes corporate execs are in those brackets.. which means that they pay the HIGHEST rate of taxes currently being assessed.. where would you want them to be? in lower brackets??
We removed the regulations and in 1998 so “more people could be eligible to own homes” problem was, the people who were in charge of monitoring the process to make sure it was done wisely (Like Frank, Waters, Reid, and Rangle) were all getting lobby money from the very companies they were supposed to be watching..the foxes were watching the hen house and now we are paying for it…
Posted by: arkie vet | March 16, 2009, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
Looks like a discussion is imminent. You guys keep it going. I need to work for a couple of hours. I’ll be checking back to make sure you’re playing pretty. Try to resist talk about socialism…we’re partially socialist and have been ever since 1932, before most of us were born. A little socialism hasn’t hurt so far. And try not to break into those rounds of “we are the champions”. Be good winners. Leave the sour grapes to the losers. Bush isn’t president any more so you can stop beating that dead horse too. Instead, cherish your moments of glory for they are fleeting. Smile and think of all the wonderful things your president has promised.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
Here is some opposition for you BO..
-stop trying to turn this country into a socialist branch of the EU.
-forget everything you learned all those years in college when you were “seeking out the marxist professors”, as you stated in audacity of hope.
-hold criminals like barney frank accountable for their DISASTROUS push for “affordable housing”, courtesy of fannie mae, while at the same time having a gay affair with the head of fannie mae.
-accept responsibility that your own community organizing efforts led to countless #’s of home loans in chicago to deadbeats.
-tell your wife that America really is a good country. Where else could a lower-middle class girl obtain a harvard education via loans, and now be fortunate enough to live like a queen on the tax payer’s dime? All the while proclaiming she has never been proud of her country.
Posted by: BO stinks | March 16, 2009, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
We’ve become obsessed with blaming CEO’s and thrying to punish them. CEO pay was seldom a matter of concern before congress needed someone to point a finger at. And other than war, Bush wasn’t being bashed. The economy is a problem brought on by legislation and/or lack oversight. Congress is to blame, not the CEOs and not the presidents. Try to focus. All the CEO pay and bonuses combined aren’t a drop in the bucket compared to bailout and stimulus money. All congress knows how to do is spend. We’re counting on them to get us out of recession? Duh.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm
For all you people that B**** about everything, why want you take a run for office and see if you can do a better job. No one will ever for you because you complain about everything. The fact is the Majority of the American people spoke and we won. You should being complaining about Bush when he bankrupt our country. Our president has not been in office 60 days and we are complaining and you gave Bush two terms.
Posted by: Tonya | March 16, 2009, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
In the meantime another American will become unemployed before I can complete this message.
When the trapeze artist falls from the high wire, the clowns are summoned so as to divert attention from the tragedy; hence, “Send in the Clowns.”
Posted by: Percy | March 16, 2009, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
Tonya
BO is a socialist who had 10 more to do with the destruction of our economy than W. ever did. BO led the charge against “evil” banks in chicago, along side ACORN, to force them to lower their lending standards- which the banks eventually did. Great job BO.
BO was elected because of mindless sheep, such as yourself, who listened to everything that the mainstream media says. The mainstream media has a basic message…..
Capitlism bad
America bad
Bush evil
Republicans evil
BO is god
And people like you have been swallowing their crap for years.
Posted by: BO stinks | March 16, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Mar 16, 2009 12:59:20 PM
Monroe, you’ve nested “in the wrong tree” on this one.
You say; “The AIG people need to be punished, not for the measly bonuses but for getting us into this mess. Seriously folks, don’t let the diversion of a few million dollars in bonuses blind us…….
** This is outright drivel, straight from the “Elitist, hard-right-edge playbook.” You say; “don’t let the diversion of a few million dollars in bonuses blind us…” Only an Elitist would reference $160M + as “a few million!”
You said; “AIG sold trillions of credit default swaps and that’s where most of the bailout money went.”
** AIG actually sold Trillions of dollars worth of Credit Default Swaps. And “short of” AIG admitting “that’s where most of the bailout money went” – that would be a presumptious and ignorant conclusion to draw.
You said; “But thanks to the taxpayers paying out hundreds of billions, the retirement funds AIG manages for congress are secure.”
** Monroe, you’re pandering here, you don’t know that to be a fact. But it sounds ‘Knowledgeable and Cute’ – “glibness” is great for influencing rookies.
You said; “Fire congress for seting up the mortgage crisis, dropping the ball on financial oversight, for creating a panic, and for pointing their fingers elsewhere as usual.
** The “mortgage crisis” evolved from the “products designed” by Wall Street (mortgage banks and traders) intending to optimize the securitized (bundled) mortgages. Financial oversight? Now that’s pretty well documented. The Central Player here is Ex-(R) Sen. Phil Gramm, “The GodFather of Deregulation” (S & L Scandal, Enron and the basic financial sector “loop-holes.”) As far as Congressional Oversight goes, you can “Thank” the Senate Republicans for “Blocking” (R) Sen Chuck Hagel’s 2005 Legislation, (and “throwing Hagel under the bus.”) Hagel’s bill was intended to strengthen the oversight of Fannie & Freddie, but the Republican “Hired Guns” (Big Time “M” Street lobbyist) “saw to it” the bill never got to the floor for a vote.
Your statement; Congress “creating a panic, and for pointing their fingers elsewhere as usual.”
** Panic was created by “Global Greed” which was started right here at home in the USA! Use your own judgement, as to who “fingers should be pointed at.”
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
Bobj72; I already pointed my finger at the people I think are to the greatest extent responsible for the global economic crisis. They’re the ones who are now trying through trial and error methods to fix the problems they for so long turned a blind eye to. Track the mortgages back to trying to provide affordable housing to people who couldn’t afford housing coupled with mortgage flippers who drove the prices of real estate unrealistically upward. Credit default swaps caused what could have been merely a mortgage crisis into a global economic crisis. Congress failed to oversee the activities of our financial institutions. It’s not about which party was in control. I seriously doubt anyone intended to cause a problem such as the one we’re experiencing with the possible exception of that dude who thought up credit default swaps. Even he and AIG just wanted to make some easy money. Was it less than ethical to find a way around government regulation? You bet it was. That’s why I keep calling for tar and feathers. But backtrack to what set off the domino effect, fuel prices. It’s a problem that’s been brewing for a long time. This administration wants to risk our future on the hope of developing and implementing new technology before another fuel crisis hits. Need I remind everyone the price of fuel is determined by people who are not our allies and who want to make more profit? All tyhey need do is produce less crude. Furthermore we aren’t capable of instantly converting to alternate fuels. It’s awonderful goal to have but at this point it’s only a goal.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
Moreover, in 05 McCain was calling for regulation too. the thing that caused everyone to back off was the threat of offending minorities who held many of those improprietous mortgages. The dem leaders at Fannie and Freddie were saying they had everything under control. No worry.
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 16, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Yep! It’s gonna be a Long 4 years! Maybe next election people will vote for Experience AND Competence!!! NOT Personality Or Race… For A Change!!!!!
Posted by: from Ohio | March 16, 2009, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | Mar 16, 2009 6:05:54 PM
Monroe, inevitably you over-talk yourself. You said; “But backtrack to what set off the domino effect, fuel prices.”
* If that were true, we would have had a ‘housing crisis’ along with the “mile long lines around gas stations” in ’76, ’77!
You said; “Moreover, in 05 McCain was calling for regulation too.”
* He may have supported Sen. Hagel’s bill, but I’m not “cheerleading” for anyone here. And the Republican Party, IN FACT Hired the Lobbyist “To Work SURREPTIOUSLY Through Fannie & Freddie to Derail Sen. Hagel’s Regulatory Bill.” Which They Did, and again the bill never reached the floor for a vote! So your saying; “The dem leaders at Fannie and Freddie were saying they had everything under control. No worry.”
* That statement is riddled with incorrect assumptions and IS NOT totally accurate. Fannie & Freddie may have indicated that, but it was at the behest of the Lobbyists who were hired by the Republican Party.
You also make the claim that; “the thing that caused everyone to back off was the threat of offending minorities who held many of those improprietous mortgages.” (improprietous??? Having completed numerous formal investigations in the arena… Never heard of that one.)
* Monroe, this is unequivocably and logically INCORRECT. (And the Threat of offending minorities, is a questionable statement…..it’s also RIDICULOUS. “A Lender’s going to be reluctant to protect their financial interests?” What have you been smoking???
* Most minorities do fit the SubPrime Mortgage profile; basically “less than stellar credit scores, with an acceptable Debt-To-Income ratio, stable residency, stable employment/employment history and clearly having the ability to repay the loan. That’s a credible SubPrime loan application qualifier. Total SubPrime loans account for ONLY 12% of the total mortgages in question. Flipping Properties, Fraudulent Investment Property Defaults and 2nd homes make-up the majority of the initial “slippages”, which began to impact ‘A’ Paper (Prime loan) mortgages as the economy began to deteriorate.
Additionally, minorities in the mortgage arena are made up of African Americans (11% – 12% of the total US population) and Hispanics, assume 20% – 25% based on the State. Your typical Hispanic homebuyer, does NOT default on a purchased home, as they will “Pay their mortgage, before they buy food.” The roof over-head, is serious and most important to this segment of the population. The point here, is your “minority” assertion is TOTALLY INCORRECT! (Minorities, in general and African Americans specifically, may be associated with a variety of the negative social-ills in society, but clearly being responsible, or even being a ‘major contributor’ to the ‘mortgage meltdown’ is an unfortunate, improper and unwarranted charge.)
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
Posted by: from Ohio | Mar 16, 2009
“Vote, Personality Or Race… For A Change!!!!!”
______________________
Question sir, did you Vote AGAINST Personality Or Race…
“Oh, heck what’s the use??? They will forever be Who They Are!”
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm
Posted by: from Ohio | Mar 16, 2009 8:21:26 PM
“Ohio”, Sorry, what you actually said was; “Maybe next election people will vote for Experience AND Competence!!! NOT Personality Or Race… For A Change!!!!!”
_______________________________
My question really is; “Do you think you voted for Experience AND Competence??? And did you Vote AGAINST Personality Or Race…
“Oh, heck what’s the use??? They will forever be Who They Are!”
Posted by: bobj72 | March 16, 2009, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
You’ve got to question why the US Administration would announce we’ve given the US Automotive Manufacturers a “pass” before their Plans are due? Have we lost our minds?
Will look for your call on this matter if you’d like an alternate theory on this so-called “oversight committee.”
Regards,
Andrew Gross
Chairman & CEO
Automotive Consulting Services, LLC
(An Oregon Corporation)
http://www.autoconsult.us
503-701-6003
andy@autoconsult.us
MARCH 16, 2009, 8:10 P.M. ET
Obama to Avoid Auto Bankruptcies
Article
Comments (1)
more in Politics ยป
By NEIL KING JR. and JOHN D. STOLL
The leaders of President Barack Obama’s auto task force are focused on restructuring General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC outside of bankruptcy court, despite suggestions from some experts that a Chapter 11 filing would be the best way to revamp their troubled operations.
Steven Rattner, a private-equity executive leading the team, said Monday that “I don’t think that bankruptcy is necessarily a better place for any company.”
“It sometimes becomes a necessary place for some companies, but it’s certainly not a desired place and it is certainly not our goal to see these companies in bankruptcy, particularly considering the consumer-facing nature of their businesses,” Mr. Rattner said in an interview.
GM had said in December when its U.S. loans were granted that bankruptcy could mean an end to the company because many consumers wouldn’t buy a vehicle from a car maker in Chapter 11. But the company has since softened that stance.
Administration officials also said the team doesn’t plan to recall early the $17.4 billion in government loans given to GM and Chrysler — something allowed under the loans’ terms if the companies don’t prove by March 31 that they can be viable long term.
Related Story
Chrysler Presses Request for Loans
The administration officials said the two auto makers had already spent the cash, and that asking for the funds to be returned immediately would trigger their collapse.
By backing away from bankruptcy discussions and the threat of putting the auto makers in default by recalling the loans, Mr. Rattner’s team will ease some of the pressure that has been on GM, Chrysler and their constituents to make immediate and sweeping concessions.
The car companies, along with bondholders, unions and suppliers, have been renegotiating contracts to meet certain requirements set out by the Bush administration when the loans were approved in December. Those conditions include eliminating two-thirds of unsecured debt outstanding, and renegotiating the terms of multibillion-dollar health-care trusts established with the United Auto Workers union.
Because the U.S. Treasury has the broad power to call back the loans, GM and Chrysler have been rushing to craft bankruptcy contingency plans that could be executed as soon as April 1. Teams of advisers and attorneys have created a variety of scenarios under which the two companies could survive while under court protection.
GM and Chrysler submitted plans on Feb. 17 that were designed to explain how the companies intended to return to health in the coming years. The plans included details of how the two companies will work with unions, bondholders, suppliers and dealers to fix their structural issues.
Mr. Rattner indicated the Treasury is taking a close look at requests by GM and Chrysler for an additional $22 billion in loans. “They do need more money,” he said. At the same time, he said the Obama administration would not “put these companies on an intravenous drip-feed that lasts forever.”
By the end of the month, the government plans to lay out its view on the companies’ viability and what the industry should look like in future years, Mr. Rattner said. However, those plans won’t include a comprehensive fix for the two companies. That, he said, will largely be left to the stakeholders, such as unions, management and investors.
Earlier Monday, Mr. Rattner met with GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner and Chief Operating Officer Fritz Henderson at the Treasury Department. A GM spokesman said the meeting was essentially a fact-finding expedition on the part of the auto task force, and no concrete decisions were expected.
Write to Neil King Jr. at neil.king@wsj.com and John D. Stoll at john.stoll@wsj.com
Posted by: Andrew Gross | March 16, 2009, 11:23 pm 11:23 pm
People, this IS outrageous and needs to be resolved. However it is a distraction from the bigger issue.
And that is what AIG is doing with the billions we have handed them. Guess who has lined up at this preverbal trough……….
The top banking institutions of our country as well as some overseas, the Goldman Sacs and the rest.
This IS the bigger issue here. Yes these “managers” should take Senator Grassley’s advice literally, however the REAL money and the REAL ISSUE is/are our banking institutions that are collectively double dipping at the “bailout trough”
Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 17, 2009, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm
People, this IS outrageous and needs to be resolved. However it is a distraction from the bigger issue.
And that is what AIG is doing with the billions we have handed them. Guess who has lined up at this preverbal trough……….
The top banking institutions of our country as well as some overseas, the Goldman Sacs and the rest.
This IS the bigger issue here. Yes these “managers” should take Senator Grassley’s advice literally, however the REAL money and the REAL ISSUE is/are our banking institutions that are collectively double dipping at the “bailout trough”
Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 17, 2009, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm
Drug oxycodone.
Hydrocodone versus oxycodone. Oxycodone extraction iv. Oxycodone side effects. Sinemet oxycodone. Oxycodone. Buy oxycodone online without.
Posted by: Oxycodone. | August 30, 2009, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm