By Caitlin Taylor

Mar 26, 2009 8:08am

The Note, 3/26/09: Crowd Wisdom — Obama’s outside-inside game will need a new talking point

By RICK KLEIN One way to measure success: Everyone’s talking about President Obama’s budget. Another way to measure success: Everyone’s talking about how Democrats are ignoring big portions of President Obama’s budget. One way to frame an argument: Republicans don’t have a budget of their own. A way to unframe an argument: They will have a budget of their own by lunchtime Thursday. One way to count progress: 100,000 people have signed up to fight for President Obama’s budget. A slightly different way to count progress: That’s after an e-mail was sent to 14 million people, and tens of thousands of volunteers knocked on a million doors over the weekend. There’s an outside-inside balance going on now for the president’s budget — that droll document that only once every few years becomes the vehicle for not just legislation but an agenda. As the president found out at lunch with Senate Democrats — and would hear from the many House Democrats he hasn’t sat down with yet — the inside game is only going to get Team Obama so far. Here comes the next play for the outside crowd — inviting the public in for questioning on Thursday. (You know it’s serious when the presidential Twitter feed kicks back into action.) “Thursday’s ‘virtual town hall,’ where President Obama will discuss the economy with regular Americans at the White House and field questions submitted online and through YouTube, is just one part of a multilayered, tech-savvy effort to create support for his ambitious agenda at the grass-roots level,” Jon Ward writes in the Washington Times. White House aides “are deeming this forum an ‘experiment’ where Americans can send questions and vote for the submissions they like,” per ABC’s Karen Travers. “The president will be standing at a podium in front of an audience made up of ‘real Americans,’ the White House said. An administration official will moderate the event and pose the most popular questions submitted on the Web site to the president.” “So far, questions about Obama’s NCAA bracket picks are sorting toward the bottom of the list, along with those about what kind of dog the first family will choose. Instead, visitors are giving high ratings to questions about the economy — the stated purpose of the virtual town hall — and the president’s plans to fix it,” Christi Parsons writes in the Los Angeles Times. Macon Phillips, director of new media for the White House, said the president was soliciting the “wisdom of the crowd.” (Let that phrase marinate for a while.) As of 8 am ET, more than 81,000 questions had been voted on more than 3 million times, per ABC’s Ann Compton. Voting cuts off at 9:30. The next moving piece involves TV, too. The DNC’s Organizing for America on Thursday is launching a national and DC cable ad campaign to build on the weekend door-knocking. (America — get excited about budget reconciliation!) “Thousands are going door to door as part of Organizing for America — gathering support for President Obama’s plan to invest in America’s future. You can help too,” the ad says, over footage of some of that very canvassing. “Call Congress and tell them to support President Obama’s budget plan to get our economy moving again.” One Democratic rallying cry may have to go. “Show me your budget,” the president challenged Republicans at Wednesday night’s DNC fundraiser, per The Hill’s Betsy Rothstein. That’s sorta kinda happening on Thursday. Three’s an 11:45 am ET press conference at the Capitol “to unveil House Republicans’ better budget solution.” (Somebody get Dag Vega — we’re going to need to rewrite the talking points.) “We’ve offered a lot of comprehensive proposals on this stimulus, on the omnibus, but we’re gonna also have a complete budget that, unlike [the president's], does not use funny money, does not have tax increases,” Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, said on ABC NewsNOW’s “Politics Live” Wednesday. Party of “no,” no longer? “The entire House GOP elected leadership will join Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the ranking member of the Budget Committee, for Thursday’s event,” per Politico’s Mike Allen and Victoria McGrane. “It’s the old ‘I want to see it in writing,’” said a top House Republican official. “They’re going to see it in writing.” The GOP budget, naturally, has no chance of passing. But this is a marker in the broader political argument. President Obama has repeatedly challenged Republicans to come up with their own ideas — and so, here we go. (But the Senate GOP is still planning the “rifle-shot” amendment approach.)

Maybe Republicans don’t need a brand-new message — if the president helps them find an old one: “Suddenly, though, it doesn’t seem like a time of new politics and new concerns,” Karl Rove writes in his Wall Street Journal column. “Many Americans are anxious — and in some cases angry — about a set of old issues: deficits, taxes and the national debt. Mr. Obama’s radical budget, his administration’s slapdash operating manner, and events such as the AIG bonuses have revived animosity over government’s size and cost.” Rove continues: “Mr. Obama has put front and center a set of issues — spending and taxation — that brought Republicans to power in the past and may bring them back again. It looks as if we may be heading back to the future.” The Democrats were easy to hold together — when they were in the minority: “As a party expands its ideological and geographic reach, as the Democrats have in the last two elections, it becomes harder to hold together, forcing its leaders to spend time papering over internal differences even as they confront a smaller but more unified opposition,” Jeff Zeleny writes in The New York Times. “Faced with just such a challenge, the White House unleashed a broad offensive on Wednesday, a mix of muscle and negotiation, in an effort to contain the varying viewpoints within the Democratic Party, split the difference and move forward.” “Well, I think we are on the same page,” said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. “We may not agree as to what the page says.” What the page says: “Notably, Democratic leaders in both chambers are pushing packages that call for narrower deficits and less spending than proposed by the White House. And those levels could go lower, especially in the Senate, where moderate Democrats from conservative states will be an important factor in the debate on the floor next week,” Greg Hitt and Naftali Bendavid write in The Wall Street Journal. “Congress scaled back Obama’s budget by resorting to the same kinds of accounting gimmicks that the President had prided himself on avoiding, a fact that Republicans were quick to point out,” Time’s Jay Newton-Small writes. “Democrats downplayed the adjustments and said that they felt only harmony with the president,” McClatchy’s David Lightman reports. (And reporters played up the adjustments and will continue to look for discord.) “Congressional Democrats’ changes could be seen two ways: As the work of lawmakers gently asserting their independence from the president, or as members of Congress smoothing the legislative path for Obama by making the budget more palatable to moderates and thus easier to pass,” Lightman writes. Think he’ll miss this? “President Obama’s budget chief hinted Wednesday that the president’s signature campaign issue — a middle-class tax cut — will not likely survive a budget battle with Democrats on Capitol Hill,” per ABC’s Jake Tapper, Karen Travers, and Sunlen Miller. “Obama’s middle-class tax cut is locked in place for the next two years as part of the stimulus package he signed into law last month, but [Peter] Orszag told reporters today that the White House will have to use those two years to figure out how to keep that tax cut in place for middle-class families beyond 2010.” Easygoing: “In negotiations, he assumes a bend-but-don’t-break posture. He will compromise on certain details when necessary but not on the heart of his main proposals,” the AP’s Charles Babington writes. “Rather than confront, chide or cajole those senators, the president minimized his differences with [Senate Democrats], several participants said. Turning necessity into a virtue, he breezily agreed they can find different ways to achieve his overarching goals.” Too easygoing? “Centrist Democrats who have complained that Obama’s spending plan would drive the annual budget deficit to unacceptable levels held their tongues during the 45-minute lunchtime meeting. They asked no questions about deficits or about the administration’s controversial push to force its signature investments in health care and education through the Senate without Republican votes,” Lori Montgomery writes in The Washington Post. Who would you rather be? Writes Gail Collins, in her New York Times column: “There appears to be only two constants in our ever-changing world. One is that Barack Obama is going to be on television every day forever. No venue is too strange. Soon, he’ll be on ‘Dancing With the Stars’ (‘And now, doing the Health Care, Energy and Education tango …’) or delivering the weather report. (‘Here we see a wave of systemic change, moving across the nation …’) The other immutable truth is that we always need to have somebody we can be really, really angry at.” Over on the left: “Liberal House Democrats are stewing that they have yet to get face time with President Barack Obama, despite his whirlwind charm offensive that has ushered every other major faction of the Caucus into the White House for private meetings,” Roll Call’s Tory Newmyer writes. “Members are either taking it as a slight, or that we’re irrelevant in the planning process,” said Rep. Raúl Grijalva, D-Ariz., co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Callf., the other co-chairman: “Maybe they think that they can take us for granted, but they can’t.” Another voice that matters: “For people who felt that Obama was going to bring change, a real difference, it somehow feels quite a lot as if we’ve got the same old gang still making the policy decisions, despite how discredited they are in the eyes of the public,” Paul Krugman tells ABC’s Scott Mayerowitz. Amid all that liberal crossfire, with ads popping up back home . . . “The liberal groups need to understand that we are not elected to represent the president,” Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., tells Politico’s Patrick O’Connor and Manu Raju. “How can they be threatened by a group that has taken no policy positions?” said Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is back on the Hill Thursday — and on his own terms, mostly, this time. From Treasury: “In his opening statement, Secretary Geithner will lay out a broad framework to establish the rules of the road needed to restore faith in the financial system. The comprehensive framework will encompass four broad areas — systemic risk, consumer and investor protection, eliminating gaps in our regulatory structure and international coordination. Because financial stability is critical to economic recovery and growth and measures to reduce risks to global financial stability are expected to be the primary focus of discussions on regulatory reform at the G20 Leaders’ Meeting in London next week, Secretary Geithner will focus Thursday on details of the Administration’s plan to address systemic risk, with additional details on the other three areas to follow in the coming weeks.” Geithner grabs the lead of The Washington Post: “The Obama administration’s plan, described by several sources, would extend federal regulation for the first time to all trading in financial derivatives and to companies including large hedge funds and major insurers such as American International Group. The administration also will seek to impose uniform standards on all large financial firms, including banks, an unprecedented step that would place significant limits on the scope and risk of their activities,” Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho write. (Geithner’s troubles being what they are — is there a press operation anywhere in Washington that’s running with the efficiency and efficacy of Treasury?) Some Hill intrigue — think anyone would take this job off his hands? (Here’s guessing there’s a few ambitious pols who wouldn’t mind a chairmanship.) “As the AIG bonus mess swirled, the House Financial Services Committee hauled the firm’s CEO, Edward Liddy, in for questioning. The House Judiciary Committee rushed a bill to a vote allowing the Justice Department to claw back the payments,” The Hill’s Mike Soraghan writes. “But one committee was conspicuously absent — House Oversight and Government Reform. It’s the same committee, under the leadership of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), that dug up a $440,000 AIG retreat to a posh resort, and raked the firm’s executives over the coals. Now, under Chairman Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), the message is: We’ll get to it.” Alex Conant moves from blasting out e-mails to reporters form his perch at the RNC, to blasting out blog postings from, well, wherever. He sees a mistake in the way questions were doled out to a struggling press corps Tuesday: “President Obama’s decision to pass over national print media was a serious mistake. As much as conservatives attack the news coverage of the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, those reporters work for news organizations that are bleeding money, yet pouring resources into their White House coverage. Obama’s intentional omissions at Tuesday’s press-conference was not just insulting to the reporters whom show up at every Robert Gibbs’ briefing, but also to the editors whom fight tooth-and-nail to justify their correspondents’ travel on every Presidential trip.” FactCheck.org takes on the presidential presser: “He said his budget projections are based on economic assumptions that ‘are perfectly consistent with what Blue Chip forecasters out there are saying.’ Not true. The average projection by leading private economists is now for substantially less economic growth than the administration’s forecast assumes.” More: “He said he is reducing ‘nondefense discretionary spending’ to less than it was under the past four presidents. Not true. His own forecast for the final budget of his four-year term puts this figure higher than in many years under Reagan, Clinton or either Bush.” Just what the GOP needs? Michael Steele for president? “If that’s part of the plan, it’ll be the plan,” the RNC chairman told CNN Wednesday. “[If I run] it’ll be because that’s where God wants me to be at that time.” The Kicker: “Even if it may look like a mistake, a gaffe, there is a rational, there is a logic behind it. . . . It’s all strategic.” — RNC Chairman Michael Steele, infallibly, on CNN, explaining that he really picked a fight with Rush Limbaugh to see who his friends are. Follow The Note on Twitter: http://twitter.com/thenote For up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s blog . . . all day every day:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/

User Comments

But the GOP still won’t have a VIABLE budget after lunch today…
http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | March 26, 2009, 8:18 am 8:18 am

I just read that many states are going to pass a law requiring welfare recipients to pass drug tests in order to receive benefits. Great idea and long overdue.
Next, we should test those “dopers” in congress before they do (OR DON’T DO) anything else to put America on the fast track to imploding.

Posted by: Mandelayk | March 26, 2009, 8:31 am 8:31 am

Mandelayk:
I saw that too. Makes sense if you have to take a drug test at your place of employment why shouldn’t welfare recipients be tested.
You know this means that half of the Obama voters will have to go out and get a JOB! OMG!

Posted by: jackdaniels | March 26, 2009, 8:51 am 8:51 am

I hope the Republicans do come up with a feasible budget – maybe throw a VAT into the mix to pay for continuation of the low capital gains rate. 15% is the lowest capital gains tax rate in over 4 decades, and while it makes for GREAT hedge fund manager bonuses, it just is not sustainable. And it- along with most of the Republican dogma- seems to have been just proven by reality not to be the jobs-engine benefit it was sold as.

Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 9:01 am 9:01 am

jackdaniels:”You know this means that half of the Obama voters will have to go out and get a JOB! OMG!”
69 million people voted for Obama, unemployment just approach a record 6 million people level. Even putting aside the fact that unemployment is worst in the Red states (which tend to have a less educated worker base and lower tech industries), your jesting comment is also an example of why many on the left view Republicans as The Party of Stupid.

Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 9:04 am 9:04 am

You haven’t heard it all. They are going to make the recipents pay for the test.
Why does everyone want to punish those in this country that are already having a hard time? Next they will line them up and start executions, like Germany. Please remember all this when you find yourself in the unemployment line and have lost your home to foreclosure.

Posted by: vnvet69 | March 26, 2009, 9:05 am 9:05 am

This is pure politics’s, nothing more. The sixteen or so “members” of the democratic party that are participating in this segregation within the body need to be put on notice, that we all now know who you are and if you do not stop this crap then we will change your ability to do so for you.
Frankly, these sixteen are worse than the party of no! They all act like little children when we all desperately need/require/demand full participation from grown ups.
Play your games some other time and place, this is not either.
And all of that from a conservative leaning independent!

Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 26, 2009, 9:12 am 9:12 am

Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 26, 2009, 9:13 am 9:13 am

So 15% isn’t enough for Cap gains taxes according to you? do you even realize most of that money is taxed twice? Your taxed on the dollars you invest and then taxed again on your earnings….!!! what is wrong with people today? The gov’t has no right to decide to tax anything and everything at a whim. This is NOT how it should work. And so far, Obama is looking to tax everything. So are all the Dem’s. Are we NOT taxed enought in your opinion? GEEEZZ!!!!!! The gov of our state is looking to tax anything that moves, exists, is used or makes a noise to pay for his out of control spending. Yes he is an idiot and also a democrat. Does anyone see a pattern here?

Posted by: chad | March 26, 2009, 9:14 am 9:14 am

jhw,
Get a life. Nothing is wrong with the statement from jackdaniels.
Are any welfare recipients doing illegal drugs? _____yes _____no
Pick one.
The rest of your insultish rant, it is just disgusting and wrong.

Posted by: Kate | March 26, 2009, 9:22 am 9:22 am

chad:”So 15% isn’t enough for Cap gains taxes according to you? do you even realize most of that money is taxed twice?…The gov’t has no right to decide to tax anything and everything at a whim. This is NOT how it should work. And so far, Obama is looking to tax everything. So are all the Dem’s. Are we NOT taxed enought in your opinion?”
Correct. Capital gains is at the lowest rate in a generation, it has been proven to be ineffective as a job creator, and it contributes to the underfunding of government (Republicans put the capital gains tax cut on the national credit card). As for being taxed twice, that is just a stupid talking point. Of course it’s taxed twice. My salary is taxed when I earn it, taxed when I spend it, taxed if the retailer reports it as net income, etc. But if I earn $10k building widgets I get taxed at 28%-33%, while if I earn $100000k shuffling money for a hedge fund, I get taxed at 15%. That makes sense?
The government does have the right to tax – this is pretty basic history of civilization stuff here. Obama is NOT looking to tax everything, indeed a key item is that Congressional Democrats are pushing back against his middle class tax cut.
And no, I don’t think we are taxed enough. We live in the strongest nation in the world with the highest standard of living and have been putting it on the credit card since the 80′s. Sorry if you’re so vehemently opposed to reality on principal, but most of us (certainly the historic majority who elected Obama) live here. I believe the top tax bracket should be reinstated.

Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am

Posted by: jackdaniels | Mar 26, 2009 8:51:53 AM
jackdaniels “Be careful What You Wish For…..”; “You know this means that half of the Obama voters will have to go out and get a JOB! OMG!”
___________________
You are aware that a “Composite Profile” of the Voters who supported President Barack Obama would be; “Your Spouse (a woman), Being A Bit Younger, Probably Better Educated and Heavily Engaged In Politics!”

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am

jhw539 – I agree with you – have to have taxes. What taxes are fair, what percentage is fair, who should be taxed more or less, or is there a fair balance? As my dad used to tell me as a kid, “life is not fair”. The only fair tax is no tax, and if life were fair, I shouldn’t have to pay any taxes.
I wish the Republicans would get off of the “Government is bad” bandwagon. To me, it’s like a corporate CEO calling a company meeting to tell all the employees that they suck, and we expect you to give 110% at it. Doesn’t make sense.
And, I hope the Republicans have a better plan than just repeating “Tax too much, spend too much, borrow too much”. They remind me of the seagulls in Finding Nemo – ‘mine,mine,mine,mine,mine…”. Enough with the slogans already, please give us some honest, workable, intelligent solutions.
One more thing – that “You are punishing success” argument against progressive taxation. Is success measured ONLY by the amount of money you are able to make? If you answered yes to that question, please read “Mountains Beyond Mountains”, by Tracy Kidder.

Posted by: Steve From NH | March 26, 2009, 9:51 am 9:51 am

Moss is associated with the President’s Office of Faith Based Initiatives, which has a budget this year of $3.7 BILLION dollars, a 26-year old executive director from Chicago (a pentecostal minister) and 25 advisors.
I’m trying to find details, but they’re hard to come by — good lord journalism SUCKS today — my guess however is that with a budget of $3.7 BILLION DOLLARS this office is gong to have MORE than enough money to spread around to homophobic, misogynistic “men of god” who have jesus on their lips and greed in their hearts.
What does obama get for paying these “men of god” off?
VOTES.
sickening. all truly religious people should be appalled and all secular, non-religious people should be terrified.

Posted by: rip off | March 26, 2009, 9:54 am 9:54 am

Lets hope the republicans are going to post their alternative budget online..I would like to read it for myself..the “No we can’t” party needs a little of the” yes we can”. As far as the democratic congress, they need to get over their weak knees, They are going to sink or swim with this president…so they better think it thru. I am calling my state reps today and e-mailing pelosi…The middle class tax cut will stay in for 2 years, and by god we haven’t had any relief in quite a while..and stripping that out of the budget is an insult..For you Republicans..Did you think you were never going to have to pay for Bushs war??? He never did pay for it..the china did, and now we have to pay it back with interest..so lets not forget, bush made us pay for Iraqi freedom, and obama is asking us to pay for our economic recovery..there is a huge difference to me

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 9:55 am 9:55 am

You are aware that a “Composite Profile” of the Voters who supported President Barack Obama would be; “Your Spouse (a woman), Being A Bit Younger, Probably Better Educated and Heavily Engaged In Politics!”
Let me translate this composit of Obama voters for you.
1. A woman= didnt they get Clinton elected and than turned on him when he cheated with Monica?
2.A bit younger= niave and foolish
3. Better educated= knows enough to be dangerous and think they know it all.
4,Heavily engaged in politics= first time most ever voted but hey they thought it was cool.

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am

“You are aware that a ‘Composite Profile’ of the Voters who supported President Barack Obama would be; ‘Your Spouse (a woman), Being A Bit Younger, Probably Better Educated and Heavily Engaged In Politics!’”
————-
But are you aware that only rednecks are patriotic?

Posted by: D. | March 26, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am

$3.7 BILLION DOLLARS !!!!

Posted by: YOUR MONEY SUCKERS | March 26, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am

Posted by: jhw539 | Mar 26, 2009 9:23:53 AM
“jhw539″, Extremely astute argument! You said; “… Sorry if you’re so vehemently opposed to reality on principal, but most of us (certainly the historic majority who elected Obama) live here. …
____________________
Isn’t it Interesting how THEY tend to frame their arguments using “bogus empirical data” and “creative history?”

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am

What does obama get for paying these “men of god” off?
VOTES.

Posted by: CAN YOU SPARE A BILLON | March 26, 2009, 9:59 am 9:59 am

Posted by: sicking and unconstitutional | March 26, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am

Mainstream media needs to get their collective nose back in joint..So he asked for questions from those who NEVER get to ask…we are tired of the same old Anna nicole scandle reporting anyway..I don’t see the media as all of a sudden being ‘tuff” i see them as being hysterical, and not ahead of a story, but always chasing it…

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:03 am 10:03 am

Moss is associated with the President’s Office of Faith Based Initiatives, which has a budget this year of $3.7 BILLION dollars, a 26-year old executive director from Chicago (a pentecostal minister) and 25 advisers.
I’m trying to find details, but they’re hard to come by — good lord journalism SUCKS today — my guess however is that with a budget of $3.7 BILLION DOLLARS this office is gong to have MORE than enough money to spread around to homophobic, misogynistic “men of god” who have jesus on their lips and greed in their hearts.
What does obama get for paying these “men of god” off?
VOTES.
sickening. all truly religious people should be appalled and all secular, non-religious people should be terrified.

Posted by: OBAMA?BUSH | March 26, 2009, 10:04 am 10:04 am

rip off:”I’m trying to find details, but they’re hard to come by — good lord journalism SUCKS today”
While you’re at it, could you dig up the details about Clinton personally shooting Vince Foster or Bush instituting martial law before the 2008 election? I’m sure they’re out there, but you know – journalism today…

Posted by: jhw539 | March 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

Darryl he Contractor: You are so right. The democrats sure can find a way to shoot themselves in the foot. Most people in the know, realize who they are and what they are doing and they will pay for it in the end.

Posted by: talmag | March 26, 2009, 10:06 am 10:06 am

I personally think any party in power should be setting up a budget for religious funding..and i recognise the good that churchs do in their communitys, they often take care of the poor and needy, that slide through the cracks..I just happen to believe in the seperation of church and state, and believe we should donate personally to those organizations we choose…The Bush administration started this..and I don’t like it

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am

Americans are also worried about Mr. Obama’s plans for $1.9 trillion more in taxes. These tax hikes won’t just affect the “rich,” as he claims. His cap-and-trade carbon tax will hit everyone who consumes energy — that is, every American. Taxes on the top 5% of filers will result in lost jobs and wages for small businesses and less charitable giving. The administration claims higher taxes are required for deficit reduction. But its spending increases are half again as large as its tax hikes.
Nothing has deterred the administration from pursuing its staggeringly expensive agenda. Mr. Obama brushed off any concerns Tuesday night. He is quite openly using the economic crisis to launch a massive, permanent expansion of government financed by ever-more borrowing and ever-higher taxes. This may mean that his goal is to cause taxes to rise to European levels, transforming America into a European-style social democracy.

Posted by: WHO voted for this? | March 26, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am

First, his Propaganda Stunt today…he has CHERRY PICKED a small handful of questions he wants to ask, and will now claim he is going the average man access to the process…who are we kidding here?
75 Million Boomers need to wake up, but that is not likely when reporters like you keep feeding us pablum…there is a theme that runs through OBama’s speeches, agenda and budget….GREAT sacrifice today for a better tomorrow. His Energy Plan, his healthcare reforem, his social security reform, his dealing with ENTITLEMENTS (which should be called earnediments) all have US (BOOMERS) sacrificing for the thems of tomorrow (children and their children).
Wake up…we cannot saddle them with our debt. We need to give them Healthcare. It goes on and on, but comes down to the same thing…Obama has no issues in making the Boomers TAKE THE HIT, has no problems visiting a genocide upon us in the name of tomorrow, trying to use a play on our sense of duty and patriotism to fool us into submission long enough to push his agenda through…very Holocaust Germany move.

Posted by: Sherwood M | March 26, 2009, 10:15 am 10:15 am

The dynamic he has set in motion could spur the emergence of strong competitors to Mr. Obama in 2012 who take a strong, principled stand against record-setting deficits, debt and taxes. It may also strengthen Republican chances in next year’s midterm elections.
Democrats should, for example, be troubled by a new National Public Radio poll showing Republicans tied or ahead in generic matchups for Congress. And while the midterms are 20 months off, Republican gubernatorial hopefuls in Virginia (Attorney General Bob McDonnell) and New Jersey (former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie) are ahead in two states Barack Obama carried last year that vote this fall.
Tuesday night’s news conference showed a fluid, self-assured president — but one who seems to think that repeating a false argument will make it true. The man who promised to end “finger-pointing” has developed the habit of blaming everyone who came before him. Invoking the language of fiscal responsibility, he is engineering prosperity-killing deficits and bankrupting spending. Mr. Obama has put front and center a set of issues — spending and taxation — that brought Republicans to power in the past and may bring them back again. It looks as if we may be heading back to the future.

Posted by: Dangerous | March 26, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am

You are aware that a “Composite Profile” of the Voters who supported President Barack Obama would be; “Your Spouse (a woman), Being A Bit Younger, Probably Better Educated and Heavily Engaged In Politics!” ?????????? you mean those people by the thousands that dont even know whose vice president or the people who thought sarah said she can see russia from her house or those people who dont know who has control of congress or the people who dont know who polosi controls the house YOU MEAN THOSE INFORMED PEOPLE?????????????

Posted by: david reyes | March 26, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am

who voted for this…look you have to pull your head out of the sand, its starting to get too hott to bury it there anymore, if we don’t start today,taking steps to curb globle warming, you aren’t going to have to worry about taxes, because there won’t be anyone or thing to tax, as far as I am concerned it should be at the top of the list of prioritys, because all the health care and education in the world is not going to help us when the full effect hits us..and it is no longer 20 years off..Its here

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am

Posted by: billy bob | Mar 26, 2009 9:56:18 AM
“billy bob” your profile is also QUITE INTERESTING. “Your translation; of composit (spelling?) of Obama voters for you.”
1. A woman= didnt (punctuation?) they get Clinton elected and than (spelling?) turned on him when he cheated with Monica?
2.A bit younger= niave (spelling?) and foolish
3. Better educated= knows enough to be dangerous and think they know it all.
4,Heavily engaged in politics= first time most ever voted but hey they thought it was cool. (???)
_____________________
My ONLY SURPRISE is your willingness to Openly Express “Your Backwoods Arrogant Attitude”; that of a “Stoggy, Sexist who endorses the Generation Gap!”

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

Federal spending will under Mr. Obama top $4 trillion this year. This translates into 28.5% of GDP — a level exceeded only at the height of World War II. According to the president’s plans, spending will thereafter slow for three years, but then grow faster than the economy for the next seven years and beyond. Spending rises by $3.1 trillion from 2009-19, including $911 billion for legislation signed during his first two months in office, including the stimulus bill and the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (and not including interest on the mushrooming debt). Mr. Obama is violating every tenet of his promise “to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, YA RIGHT!

Posted by: Stupid, stupid voters! | March 26, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

The republican budget sounds the same as before….do little or nothing. Most experts feel he is not spending enough. Why didn’t the republicans address these problems when they were in power. They were there before President Obama took office so where were their great ideas then? I am an independent who feels they have no right to complain now.

Posted by: talmag | March 26, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

I am guessing t you republicans refuse to acknowledge that your partys philosopy is always to run deficits..”deficits don’t matter” became famous with reagan, moved on to bus 1 and then bush11…In between- Clinton cleaned it up. Screaming about deficits when you are the party who lives by them is really a oxymoron..LOL

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am

Posted by: UNCONSTITUTIONAL | March 26, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am

I am guessing t you republicans refuse to acknowledge that your party’s philosophy is always to run deficits..”deficits don’t matter” became famous with Reagan, moved on to bus 1 and then bush11…In between- Clinton cleaned it up. Screaming about deficits when you are the party who lives by them is really a oxymoron..LOL
Posted by: cowgirl | Mar 26, 2009 10:28:30 AM
—————————————
I am guessing you voted for Obama the REPUBLICAN!
(fixed your spelling errors, your welcome)

Posted by: Who voted for this? | March 26, 2009, 10:34 am 10:34 am

bobj72 Thank you for spell checking for me, I am impressed. I would say you probably fit the #2 and#3 Obamanot.

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Obama is worse than Jimmy Carter! Remember the Carter mess…energy crisis, weakening military, mass inflation, and unemployment. It is time to PROTEST the economic ignorance that is Obama’s plan. TAX DAY TEA PARTIES is one way. There is other ways to protest. Get ACTIVE and get CRAZY……enough is enough….if reason and historical proof won’t persuade, then angry mobs should be used. This country is becoming an International joke under Geithner, Obama, Dodd, Frank, and Pelosi. The European Union has rejected the Obama Economic Plan as a “path to hell!”. China and Russia are saying the dollar is an unstable currency. PROTEST OBAMA AND GET ACTIVE !!!!!! The time for nice is over.

Posted by: jon | March 26, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

You are very correct cowgirl.
The separation between church and state has to be maintained AND we can collectively find a way to support these institutions without direct taxpayer dollars. as you point out, these churches, from most all denominations do very good work that needs our support, the trick is how to provide that assistance, to the places that actually apply the funds appropriately. maybe at a local/regional level of community organizers that are tasked exclusively to these ends.
We must do these things now more than ever, there are more people hurting now, and will be for some time, until we get this “ocean liner’s” course corrected.

Posted by: Darryl the Contractor | March 26, 2009, 10:41 am 10:41 am

whovoted for this…thanks- but you included your own..LOL none of us is writing a thesis for our doctorate, good thing…I am just in a hurry

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:42 am 10:42 am

Posted by: david reyes | Mar 26, 2009 10:19:19 AM
“david”, you said; … “or the people who dont know who polosi controls the house YOU MEAN THOSE INFORMED PEOPLE?????????????” …
______________________
Your Ignorance is Overwhelming!!! You may want to TRY speaking English. (This response is IN-NO-WAY intended to ‘lend credibility’ to your “inarticulate linguistics!”)

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am

This is off topic but, instead of writing this boring blog, why don’t you answer the charges from Media Matters regarding the main stream media’s refusal to point out that the Bush administration bailed out AIG without trying to renegotiate the bonses. That Obama’s administration did not consent to this. If your buddy Jake Tapper hadn’t tried to imply that the administration didn’t take responsibility for those bonuses, even though they weren’t, perhaps he would not have been blasted by people on twitter and his own blog. Twit!

Posted by: roxsteady | March 26, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am

Jon….I hope you keel over packing your teabag on your march, doing your teaberry shuffle…find a worthy cause, you do realise there was a time when american citizens paid a 90% income tax don’t you and we all survived for 200 years, so lets put this in perspective..and say you republicans drug us into this by creating the massive deficit and we have to spend to get out of it creating a biger deficit…but I would prefer to work and pay taxes than sit in a tent city for the next 10 years in the middle of a great depression with NO job…I guess i am just kind of a” big picture” kind of person, and previous history shows us we will get out of this with a democratic president, and these policies

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:50 am 10:50 am

whovoted for this…thanks- but you included your own..LOL none of us is writing a thesis for our doctorate, good thing…I am just in a hurry
Posted by: cowgirl | Mar 26, 2009 10:42:50 AM
———————————–
I voted for Hillary she is my PRESIDENT and she is doing a wonderful job!! Thank god she is not the laughing stock that Ochuckles is to the whole world.

Posted by: WHO voted for that! | March 26, 2009, 10:54 am 10:54 am

Roxsteady, I know exactly what you are saying, i spent a day posting the original contract with the federal reserve and AG-across all the blogs..I found information is not in the tool bag of those who CHOOSE to be ignorant..it is however on the federal reserves web page

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 10:56 am 10:56 am

billy bob | Mar 26, 2009 10:35:41 AM
You said; … “you probably fit the #2 and#3 Obamanot.” …
___________________
#3. (Educated) You are much too kind! As for #2. (Younger) I am certain, I am sufficiently old enough to have sired You!

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 10:57 am 10:57 am

Posted by: Unbelievable | March 26, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am

Are any Wall Streeters doing illegal drugs (Everything goes better with Coke!)? _____yes _____no
Pick one.

Posted by: R Mutt | March 26, 2009, 10:59 am 10:59 am

Whovoted forthis…As a hard core member of the traveling pansuit in my state I spent a year of hard campaigning for Hillary, organised my own group-cowgirls 4 clinton- bought my own bumperstickers,, Paid for my own banners for my ranch..I can tell you for a fact Hillary wanted us to first of all to support the policies that were good for our country, over our support for her, when she urged us to support him as a candidate-she meant every word of it….for the good of our country…remember that

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am

WHO voted for that! | 10:54:54 AM
You said; “I voted for Hillary she is my PRESIDENT and she is doing a wonderful job!! Thank god she is not the laughing stock that Ochuckles is to the whole world.”
_____________________
Here you have “The most Stupid statement”, I’ve ever read from a seemingly intelligent adult!

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 11:04 am 11:04 am

Ok, I was wrong, you are the old dog that should have know better. I tried to give you a way out for your poor decision in the past election but you still do not even realize what is comming. So sad.

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am

cowgirl | 11:03:43 AM
“cowgirl”, I was also an initial devoted supporter of Hillary. And didn’t move over to support Obama until after South Carolina.

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 11:09 am 11:09 am

billy bob | 11:06:24 AM
“billy bob”, I’m sorry but I just can’t get in the “Pig Sty Slop” with ya’!

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 11:12 am 11:12 am

billybob…we are preparing for what is coming…the recovery…you might want to think about getting on board for that….

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:14 am 11:14 am

Bob—its hard for me to believe that anyone who believed in Hillary could support republican policies, to the detrement of this country…Hillary would have faced the same problems and opposistion had she been president..

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:18 am 11:18 am

“..his Propaganda Stunt today…he has CHERRY PICKED …the average man …who are we kidding here..75 Million Boomers…feeding us pablum…there is a theme.. runs through speeches …dealing with ENTITLEMENTS…sacrificing for the thems of tomorrow…Wake up…we cannot saddle them…Healthcare… goes on and on…but comes down to the same thing.. TAKE THE HIT… his agenda through…very Holocaust Germany move.”
________________
astounding.
the linking of personal passions without attention to facts, history or the interconnection of the two.

Posted by: gus amaral | March 26, 2009, 11:18 am 11:18 am

The same “Old Game” Democrates and Republicans. They argue back and forth and get the people confused and then they “ALL” do as they please. I see all of these letters about passing and not passing the budget.Well I for one have not seen anything that gives me any idea what is in the Presidents Budget. I do not even know how many of the 535 People running this Country have seen what is in it.My understanding is that the Budget is 8,500 pages long and I really do not know how long it would take to read such a novel,but, I am rather sure it would not be done in the TWO WEEKS that we have been hearing about it. Once any Budget is passed WE live with anything that is attached with the budget. They can raise the Health Care of the working people and they can reduce our Social Security and raise and lower interest on home loans. When is the last time you saw either Republicans or Democrates say “Hey let’s reduce our Health Care and get in the same programs as the rest of “THE AMERICANS”, or hey you know a lot of people have lost their pensions why don’t we cut some of ours so we can “GIVE A LITTLE” as the rest of the Country is doing. People are losing their homes and have no where to go “Why don’t we sell some of our homes and help these poor people”. You would think that the condition our Country is in instead of bringing more people here and trying to feed and cloth and give Medical Care to them our Leaders would realize that they need to take care of the people that have built these progams instead of cutting their benefits. Just keep arguing over Democartes and Republicans and let them “ALL” dig us further in the hole. I s time to quit playing their games and get some people in office who can do what they are suppose to be doing.

Posted by: Don Park | March 26, 2009, 11:19 am 11:19 am

bobj72 Bob, I understand, you are embarassed.

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 11:25 am 11:25 am

billybob…we are preparing for what is coming…the recovery…you might want to think about getting on board for that….
Posted by: cowgirl | Mar 26, 2009 11:14:52 AM
I think you mean the downfall of a once great civilization

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 11:27 am 11:27 am

Don..if i agreed with you..the fact is it would take generations to establish another party with enough voters to have a say, which is why the have a right and left wing of each party, the green party morphed into the left wing of the demo. party and the religious conserveitives morphed into the right wing..both parties trying to absorb those that had no power to pass any of their beliefs

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:27 am 11:27 am

Billy-Bob..you must be pretty young, or you would realise we as a country have survived MUCH worse than this…LOL..it only seems like the worst if you don’t use history to refrence where you are..

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:30 am 11:30 am

Billy Bob, as of this morning; manufacturing is up, housing sales are up,loans are up–except to small business, i haven’t seen the stock market yet but i imagine its up, too eary for unemployment numbers..it probably is still dropping, i see IBM is laying off 5,000 and shipping the jobs to India, the dirty rats…no IBM products for me…anyway things are begining to pick up..I am sorry to be the one to throw water on your anger..but I am thinking thats a fire no good news could put out…

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:39 am 11:39 am

cowgirl, sorry but I wish I was young. In my life time and the history of our country we have NEVER had this magnitude of Govt. spending take place so i not sure what you are comparing it too. Yes this country has been through a lot and we will survive this but the question is what will this country look like in a few years. If you want to look at history look at what the USSR went thru during their break up. That may very well be our model.

Posted by: billy bob | March 26, 2009, 11:39 am 11:39 am

billy bob…Yes thats true…but our lack of dealing with our problems as we were going along…just came due..kind of like that old ballon in the morgage…got to pay the piper someday…Bush tried to bandaid it with a 600 check to everyone..but didn’t solve the underlying problems causing the downturn in the economy..we are having to rebuild the whold ship..now..so we can get back to being a prosperous country, but i guess we are going to have to drag some kicking and screaming

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:44 am 11:44 am

thiunk about it Billy Bob, maybe americans are going to come out of this with a changed attitute…maybe living to the limit of 5 credit cards-wasn’t the answer, people are spending more time with there familys, playing games, cooking dinner instead of takeout, putting in gardens and learning how to be more self sufficient..found out they didn’t need that Hummer or big SUV gas sucker…there is a huge upside to what we are going through…however we must protect those who have no safety net, the american working class, who have been living on that threshold of poverty, both parents working, and heads barely above water..

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 11:52 am 11:52 am

Nobody knows for how long or at what expense, but so far, the people remain silent and Washington continues to profitably interpret that silence as broad-based consent.
At this late date, I have no idea what will wake up the average American or how they might react once finally awake and ready to engage in self-governance. However, I am sure about two things…
When they finally do awake, they are going to be really angry…
And, the anti-American left won’t let up until then…
The clock isn’t just ticking. Time has already run out as of the 2008 election. Washington DC is currently dismantling America, individual right by individual right, in an unprecedented massive multi-faceted assault on all things American.
If you are not familiar with the Democratic Socialists of America or their legislative branch, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, I strongly suggest that you take time to learn them well. They are in charge of your nation. This is who the average American is up against and they are a very well funded and organized enemy of the state.
You will not be able to take your country back without putting these two organizations out of business. The longer you wait, the tougher the battle, the higher the price.
Clearly, the organizational skills of the average American are equal only to that of the stumbling bumbling Republican Party. Fragmented, distracted and disorganized, the people are no match for the leftist juggernaut running roughshod in DC.
The people are lost, so they are losing… The most complex problems require the simplest of solutions. But the average American is so baffled by a daily diet of elitist B.S., that they cannot even see daylight… – When all else fails, return to the basics!
Here’s to the average American waking up in time! – Good luck!
I fear he will do us in – COME ON 2012!

Posted by: onceisenough | March 26, 2009, 11:59 am 11:59 am

Billy Bob, I imagine the trillions we are spending today..Is probably equal to the billions FDR spent, when gas was 20 cents a gallon, bread was 10 cents a loaf..I would imagine 1.00 which is what my dad made a day working for the conservation corps, was enough to feed his wife and child…you and I couldn’t make it on a dollar a day could we…that was 20 dollars a month..You see where i am going with this, yes its a lot of money, but we couldn’t build the hoover dam for what it cost to build back then

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 12:00 pm 12:00 pm

Onceisenough..Its people like you, that are the WEAKNESS of this country, you don’t care about america or the people in it…you are just a SELF-SERVING sob

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm

I just wonder if they are going to include a 90% tax in their budget on Rahm Emanuel’s $300,000+ bonus from Freddie Mac (since, uhm, you know, Freddie Mac was bailed out like AIG and everyone raised such a stink over that….).

Posted by: Get Real | March 26, 2009, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm

cowgirl | Mar 26, 2009 11:18:18 AM
“cowgirl” you said; “Bob—its hard for me to believe that anyone who believed in Hillary could support republican policies, to the detrement of this country…Hillary would have faced the same problems and opposistion had she been president..”
____________________
“cowgirl” you have me confused with someone else. I DO NOT support republican policies. Oooooh NO!!!

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm

Get Real..we have bailed out some 30 to 40 banks already and more to come..so why don’t you get busy checking on all of them…

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm

BOB..LOL no i was refering to the poster who was a hilary supporter and was calling the pres….Ochuckles..sorry it came out sounding like i meant you…I know better

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm

onceisenough | Mar 26, 2009 11:59:51 AM
“WOW!” Some of what you said; … “You will not be able to take your country back…”
_________________
Your ramblings sound like the prelude to a “Faulty strategic manifesto.” Real Patriotic of you!!!

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm

So, cowgirl, it’s really the party affiliation isn’t it? If it had been, say, Cheney, would you feel the same way?
And, I wasn’t referring to the bailout — I was referring to the bonus to one guy who was on the board for 14 months and is accused of being “asleep at the wheel”, resulting in the accounting scandal (today’s Chicago Tribune).

Posted by: Get Real | March 26, 2009, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm

Cow Girl Your Missing the whole point of living in the United States of America.
We can live the way we wish to live, as the Constitution Decrees. It is not up to some Government Offical to dictate to me what to Drive and where to Live.
As far as the Concept of Inflationary values compared to FDR’s time ..you are right that a Dollar went alot farther then…..But what we are spending Now has never been spent in the History of the World…Never.
And because we are not on the Gold Standard wait another 50 years and people will be saying..Gee remember when gas was Cheap like $5.00 dollar a gallon Cheap…
We are Destroying the Dollar since no one will buy our Debt anymore….We are now Printing Money..
Oh..In case people haven’t Heard…You know that Middle Class Tax Cut….It’s Gone.. Here is the Link.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Economy/story?id=7166810&page=1
Wasington is Killing the Country….and I mean Both Parties…not just one…

Posted by: Patch W Adams | March 26, 2009, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm

I watched the Republicans on Tv What a Joke! They have no Budget. Just More Bashing of the President same Old BS From the GOP FEAR, FEAR, And More Fear!

Posted by: Angie In PA | March 26, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm

Oh, I know what you mean, Angie. I just heard this little nugget of fear:
“I don’t think that we’ve lost all the jobs we’re going to lose in this recession,”
Of course, it was Obama that said it. But, he’s trying to be more positive — especially after his own party told him to quit scaring everyone. Remember his days on end of saying this was a “catastrophe” “it will get a lot worse” “it will take years”
Yeah, you’re right, Angie — talk about fear!!

Posted by: Get Real | March 26, 2009, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm

Ha, Get Real — pay no attention to Angie. She shrieks all of the time on these posts. Never has anything substantive or new to say, just shrieks.

Posted by: jimj | March 26, 2009, 1:22 pm 1:22 pm

Patch…that middle class tax cut was put in the stimulus bill..its here for 2 years until the bill expires…that Obama is a clever man..LOL

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm

Patch…you see this as an end..I see it as a begining…I have no doubt we will get through this..and it is not the worst thing to happen to the US, and we have over come it all. global warming will get us before taxes…

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm

cowgirl; Howdy do? FDR’s dollar did go farther than today’s dollar, so the trillions aren’t so much out of line as far as following the steps FDR took. Some say it wasn’t enough back then and that’s why it didn’t work. The idea that spending more would have brought better results is only a theory while the fact remains the amount he spent didn’t end the depression. WPA did help many desperate people survive while they waited for the war that ended the depression. The Federal Budget Office, our foreign trade partners and many many citizen “men on the street” think deficit spending at the rate this administration is spending is ill advised and/or completely unacceptable in the case of our trade partners. A sudden rapid decline in the value of the dollar on the world market could drive us into depression rather than recovery from recession. If we keep printing money it’s just a matter of time before that happens. Whether we need the things the budget includes is not the question. Of course we need education and healthcare reform, scientific research, infrastructure maintenance and improvement. The question is whether we can afford to buy what we need right now. What good has been accomplished if ten years from now the world says whatever happened to the United States of America? Wasn’t that a great nation? Too many influential people are calling for budget austerity to disregard their pleas. We’ve already overspent in the form of bailouts and stimulus packages. To commit to present and future budget deficit spending would be to thumb our noses at the rest of the world. They don’t have to sell us their goods or buy ours. That’s just the way things are now that we’re part of a global economy. The whole world is relying on us to do the right things. It’s to their benefit if we do, but they don’t have to play our game any longer. They have their own balls.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 26, 2009, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm

Angie;How about that. The repubs are using fear to interfere with the spending madness while the dems are using fear to promote the spending madness. Go figure.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 26, 2009, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm

Funny, mmonroeliveson. Good observation. I just wonder why the libs aren’t jumping to the defense of Rahm Emanuel and his big Freddie Mac bonus; or why they aren’t jumping to condemn it. The are strangely silent when the scandals are in their party.

Posted by: Get Real | March 26, 2009, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm

Monroe..I can appreciate what you are saying…and i am sure people had simular discussions during the g. Depression, one of the differences was in the amount of time when Hoover didn’t deal with the problems, and the fact that all the banks failed as well as the stock market..It was a complete rebuild from the ground up..It wiped out everyone, combine that with a drought which wiped out the aggrarian communities(and bad farming practices) and they had a deeper hole to pull themselves out of…but many factors were the same…I have looked at swedens model and japans model in their recession-the swiss being the one Klugman prefers…and can’t see anyway you can compare the swiss model…they are a tiny country and a complete socialist country -which we are not-to the US and say we should use their model..personally i think Klugman is dead wrong, and just miffed because geitner and summers were picked over him…the point being..I am not really keen to put too much faith in these “so called” experts..nobel prize winning or not…to me economists are crystal bal gazers…usually better at hindsight than forsight..Frankly none of us can gaurentee which way this is going to go..we can just hope

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm

Monroe…The whole world thought the global economy had given them independance from the US economy…come to find out…not so..much to their chagrin…

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm

One more answer for >Jackdaniels<
You probably have a good point about drug testing welfare recipients, if they prove positive-then what, deny them assistance?? Should we then extend drug testing to conservative radio talk show hosts, who clutter up the public air waves????

Posted by: Richard in Texas | March 26, 2009, 2:00 pm 2:00 pm

RICHARD IN TEXAS
Totally agree Maybe they should Drug test AM Radio Talk show Host Especially the Ones that Spew Hatred all day

Posted by: Angie In PA | March 26, 2009, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm

Get Real, give me a reliable source for your information, and I will comment on it…too much hot air on these blogs not backed up by facts

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm

Kate – yes i agree with Jack Daniels it makes logical sense that people on welfare take a drug test, i sure have to take one every year. We the tax payers are paying for them to stay home, have 7 to 8 kids by the time they are 26 years of age…and guess what neither know who their “Baby Daddy” is… [octomom] WOW!, i had to pay my way through school, planned to have 2 kids that’s all i could afford, but then we have those the irresponsible ones…which are a good majority on every type of drug you can imagine, and to make matters worse these welfare checks – tax payers money is not going to the kids, it’s going to sustain a habit, so yes i agree they should drug test the ones on welfare, Hey if they are clean, no problem – what’s the sudden defensive mecanism. For talk show hosts – i don’t pay their salary, and let me remind you they work for a living, so what they do with their hard earned money it’s up to them. Last note: I have no issues with people on welfare those that have lost their jobs, the elderly, these people worked contributed and the government needs to pay back. I am against those that never worked a day in their life, and expect everything handed to them. Hey, do your research…Welfare recipients in New York receive close to $24,000 a year in benefits, FREE MONEY…DO THE MATH!

Posted by: Peoples Voice | March 26, 2009, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm

Get Real | Mar 26, 2009 1:46:36 PM
You assert; “The are strangely silent when the scandals are in their party.”
____________________
“Get Real”, when YOU’RE simply breathing ‘Flatulent-Air’, why would an intelligent person, lend credibility to your unsubstantiated rantings? ridiculousness? respond with noise?
Posted by:

Posted by: bobj72 | March 26, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm

Get Real; Politicians will say and do whatever is politically expedient at the time 99% of the time. One thing you can count on is when it’s time to point fingers, to criticize, to create diversions, they will seldom make scapegoats of their own party members. But in today’s political world it’s more than party considerations, our government is made up of a brotherhood of lawyers. They may reguile each other in the view of the public but you can bet your bippie they’re down at the country club backslapping and laughing about it later. It’s all for show because none of them have thin skin. Nobody gets punished. It’s all for show. They’re all out for themselves and what they can get out of us. Why do you think they spend millions of dollars of their own money campaigning for offices that pay thousands? This whole Wall Street vs Washington scenario we’re experiencing is a joke, too. The current Washingtonian deciders are primarily former Wall Streeters that got us into this mess and are getting richer by the day from the mess they made while we look to them for answers and solutions to the recession that’s feeds them. Tar and feathers is the only solution.

Posted by: mmonroeliveson | March 26, 2009, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm

Cowgirl
There was not a Tax cut in the Stimulis, that reduction of withholdings from you check is not a tax cut. You will still owe that at the end of the year…they are just reducing the amount they take out by $15 or so dollars. And it was not me that said they aren’t doing the tax cut now…it was Obama’s Spokesman..read the article.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Economy/story?id=7166810&page=1
We can agree to disagree as far as the Global Warming..
But what exactly do you think I see an end to…and What Beginning are you celebrating? I think I know what you mean, I just don’t want to put words in your Mouth….I hate to assume.

Posted by: Patch W Adams | March 26, 2009, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm

Oh cowgirl before you say that was a tax cut in the Stimulis, chekc with your tax advisor..I did..
The Tax rate is not going lower..only the Withholdings out of each individual check. Hence their is no tax cut in the Stimulis, it is just a shell game.
You will still owe the amount that they didn’t take out at the end of the year…and since most people get money back..they will take it out of that..and you won’t notice that you still ended up paying it…that’s how they get you.
The Article Clearly says that the Promised Middle Class Tax cut will Probably not happen…Their words not mine…
hate to bust your Bubble..

Posted by: Patch W Adams | March 26, 2009, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm

Patch, last I checked, payroll taxes were taxes????

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm

Patch, I believe we are going to change our way of living…credit crazy…too big, 2 people living in 35,000 sq. ft house..having 3 cars…over consuming on credit…re assesing what is important..your health your family..your community…less of a ME society..anyway thats what I hope for..but thats been my wish list forever..nothing new for me..just a better society

Posted by: cowgirl | March 26, 2009, 8:39 pm 8:39 pm

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Ann
http://racingonlinegames.net

Posted by: Ann | March 30, 2009, 11:38 pm 11:38 pm

Top

The Note, 3/26/09: Crowd Wisdom — Obama’s outside-inside game will need a new talking point

Related Videos

Leave a Reply