Today’s Q for O’s WH – 3/3/09
EmailTAPPER: One question for today and one follow-up question from previous — a previous week. Regarding the stock market, the president said he didn’t want to get into the day-to-day stuff; it was like reading a daily tracking poll. But if your tracking polls over a matter of a month or two were going down significantly, that wouldn’t be a day-to-day analysis. That would be a trend, and you’d be concerned about it if you were running for office, just using the president’s analogy. Do you think…
GIBBS: Late last summer?
TAPPER: Is the president…
GIBBS: I meant ’07.
TAPPER: Is the president at all concerned that — that what he’s selling Wall Street just isn’t buying, that…
GIBBS: To use the market analogy?
TAPPER: Yes, that — that — that he’s proposing…
GIBBS: No.
TAPPER: … all these ideas and economic plans. And it’s not that Wall Street doesn’t understand them; they don’t think they’re going to work.
GIBBS: No, I think the president quite clearly said today that he has confidence in the plans that are being developed. Obviously, we’re in the beginning phases of implementing the recovery and reinvestment plan, announcement at the Transportation Department today for $28 billion to save or create 150,000 jobs, a home foreclosure plan, financial stability. Look, I don’t doubt, Jake, that there are some on Wall Street, as I’ve said before, who would like to wake up, have someone come in, take everything bad, move it over here, and let everybody start all over again. And as much as some people may like that, it’s not either completely feasible or beneficial to do that.
Obviously, Wall Street has made mistakes and we are in a deep hole that is going to take us some time to get out of. And I think the American people understand that. They understand that we didn’t get here just off of last quarter, the last two quarters, that we’ve been heading in this direction in a trend line for quite some time. But the president is confident in the steps that the economic team is taking and that he is taking to get that economy moving again. And I think he understands and I think the American people understand that, if we continue to make these decisions, that, as I said, we’ll create those jobs and that brighter days are certainly ahead.
Again, the president’s job is — is he — you know, he’s obviously concerned about any number of — of economic indicators. But, again, rather than looking at something even through a one- or two-month lens, again, we didn’t get into this problem based on one or two bad months. We got into this problem based on the trend of many years, whether it’s ignoring the investments that we needed to make that are now taking up a lot of the budgets of families or businesses or even the government, or if we’ve made regulatory decisions that allowed some people to act in an irresponsible way that many of us are paying for now, that those trends are something that we have to change.
TAPPER: OK, and just a follow-up question that Josh Gerstein from Politico asked a week or two ago before Chas Freeman had been named to the National Intelligence Council. There were a lot of people, including some Democrats in Congress, who were concerned about Mr. Freeman, both in terms of his ties to the government of Saudi Arabia and also because of his association and statement of views that — that some consider to be anti-Israel, as well as the Middle East Policy journal’s publishing of a very controversial essay called "The Israel Lobby." Is the Obama White House aware of all these concerns? And what’s the response to it?
GIBBS: Well, I’ve — I’ve — I’ve not read those. I think anybody can look at what the president has said and what the president’s views are, enumerating from the very beginning of this administration the desire to be engaged actively in the Middle East region to ensure a durable and lasting peace. It is something that he’s said he would work on each and every day. The secretary of state, obviously, in the region today to do that. I haven’t looked directly at that stuff, but I think people can be reasonably assured of where the president is on this and how he’ll be actively engaged in seeking Middle East peace.
– jpt
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Nice try Jake. I don’t think they want to answer your questions, at least I can’t see one in there anywhere. The answers they don’t give are more telling than the ones they do give.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
Well, I would say Gibbs told the truth. He and the President DO ahve confidence that their economic plan will work. Sadly, they are about the only ones. Clearly the people who try to predict and trend the economy on Wall Street have none of their enthusiasm.
Posted by: Federalistblogs | March 3, 2009, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
This is becoming laughable. The gang that couldn’t,think, or talk straight. Mr Gibbs, the leadership team you represent is beginning to pay the price for not meeting expectations, and what high expectations you set. Hope and Change….just words?
Posted by: ralph | March 3, 2009, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm
Jack, could you ask a question in the next conference?
What gain does the administration hope to achieve with Russia and scrapping the ballistic missile program when Russia already has a vested interest in no nukes being in Iran with the Iranian professed support to Chechnyan rebels?
Could you ask that? I think it’s an important quest to our national interests.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 4:12 pm 4:12 pm
Isn’t it always so CONVENIENT for liberals? When a Republican is in office, everything, a bird getting hit by a car, an afternoon thunderstorm, every little possible “bad” thing is portrayed as the Republican’s fault by the liberals.
Now, when the nation is being destroyed by the likes of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Rahm Emmanuel, the media, and Obama? Oh, they can’t run away fast enough, and try to point fingers in the rear-view mirror to distract in any way from the abject failure that liberalism and liberals CAUSE.
OBAMA = FAILURE
Posted by: JD | March 3, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
hacktacular
Posted by: graeme | March 3, 2009, 4:15 pm 4:15 pm
It’d about time the the panic and paranoia of Wall Street – which got us into this mess- stops being the benchmark for economic progress in the country.
Posted by: matt | March 3, 2009, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm
We have all just opened wide, and now, we are getting this shoved down our throats. It’s painful.
Posted by: Kitty | March 3, 2009, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
We have no doubt, absolutely no doubt, that PB0 is confident in his stimulus. And, there is no question of the intentions were good. So are communist practitioners.
The only problem is that the rest of the economic world, the Market, has no confidence.
You choose which confidence really matters.
Posted by: kat | March 3, 2009, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
Gibbs: “…save or create 150,000 jobs,….”
How many did he create, how many did he save and show proof of each.
This “save or create” idiocy has to be the government double-speak talk phrase of the decade.
Posted by: Will Stanton | March 3, 2009, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
We’re watching the most expensive learning curve in history.
Posted by: Peach | March 3, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
ask psychobabble…..get psychobabble
in laymans terms,
we cannot expect solutions before something is implemented
Posted by: watching | March 3, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
I’m taking a shot of Tequila everytime Gibbs says “obviously”. It makes the avoidance and derision “Tap dance” go down a little easier.
Posted by: Doh! | March 3, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
So what did Gibbs do before he joined obama’s team
Posted by: DJ | March 3, 2009, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
Let’s take a different view:
Say instead of the stock market being down 30% since he was elected, that the stock market was UP 30% since Obama was elected.
Would Gibbs, Obama and all the rest be out there pounding the drums of look how high the stock market has risen since the One arrived? Of course they would.
If the stock market went up yesterday 4% instead of down Gibbs and Obama, et al would be saying how Americans are getting richer.
But it is not happening, they are failing and flailing and we are the ones paying for their bungling.
Posted by: Diane Foster | March 3, 2009, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
“Obviously”
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Posted by: Doh! | March 3, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
Jake your asking good questions, this administration seems to be leaning anti-Isreal. I fear for their safety
Chas Freeman is a danger to our jewish community
Posted by: bawl knee phwank | March 3, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
This guy gives me confidence, that and the Presidents buy recommendation so with that whopping 13 dollar tax credit I am jumping in! Yippee!!!!!
Posted by: david | March 3, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
Wasn’t it Wall Street who got us into this mess?
Posted by: dm | March 3, 2009, 4:36 pm 4:36 pm
Gibbs: “…save or create 150,000 jobs,….”
=======
$28 billion for 150,000, which may be saved or created in Transportation alone!
Two questions and a follow up:
(1) how long will this jobs last, two months, half a year, one year, or two years?
(2) Wouldn’t it be more effective if PB0 is spending $28 B to create (or save) 150000 jobs that he simply give that money to 150,000 people? Then, each person would get just a bit shy of $200,000/person. Since it’s government money, PB0 should not tax his government itself, it wold be equivalent to after-tax income. Then, it really would be close to a salary of $150,000 per year, per person, for two years, for 150,000 transportation workers.
(3) Just a follow up observation: If both husband and wife works for transportation, they would get a annual salary of $300,000 per couple. We above PB0′s rich limit. See, how Smart our Clueless Leader really is. His stimulus brought 150,000 couples into the 5% rich class of public enemies.
Posted by: two cats | March 3, 2009, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
“We got into this problem based on the trend of many years…” It is my understanding that the stock market didn’t begin falling from its all-time high until after the mid-term elections in 2006 when another party took control of Congress. And, while it fell precipitously last fall, it had leveled out until the new administration took office. Since then, it has fallen steadily and significantly. The stock market stands at less than half its value from the 2006 high. I would say that is a “tracking poll” worth paying attention to.
Posted by: bkm | March 3, 2009, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm
I think it was Congress’ meddling in the natural ebb and flow of business that caused this mess. Both in picking and choosing which businesses should fail or receive our tax money and in bending to pressure to allow “everyone” to buy a house regardless of credit history and salary. Congress should not do magic they don’t understand. Unintended consequences will continue the downward slide…
Posted by: Whoo Hoo! | March 3, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
“Wasn’t it Wall Street who got us into this mess?”
Well, not exactly. A little reseach into the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act), Fannie Mae, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. will get you started. Wall Street is not blameless, but they are not the root cause (even though Team Obama and the Democrats would have you believe otherwise).
Posted by: tjp612 | March 3, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
Will Stanton wrote: This “save or create” idiocy has to be the government double-speak talk phrase of the decade.
I vote for “wmd/mushroom cloud” phrase of the previous administration as the government idiotic talk of the decade!!
Posted by: hang | March 3, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
Mr. Gibbs apparently does not realize that “Wall Street” is comprised of more than just the “Wall Street CEOs/Fat Cats” whom he and Team Obama demonize on an almost daily basis. I believe the context of the “Wall Street” to which Jake was referring is the market as a whole which includes individual investors, pension fund managers, etc. We see Comrade Obama’s vision for “re-making America” and our votes have registered in the massive market decline since his election (the smart money started getting out last summer after he received the Dem. nomination).
With regards to Israel, it appears Team Obama and Hillary are looking to institute policy to distance themselves from Israel. I may be wrong, but it doesn’t look good.
Posted by: tjp612 | March 3, 2009, 4:59 pm 4:59 pm
I wonder if the WH press corps long for the days of Dana Perino and Tony Snow…
Posted by: tjp612 | March 3, 2009, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
I think it’s quickly becoming apparent that Barack Obama is in over his head. I’m betting, however, that the Obamabots will stick with him even if the market tanks to 3,000.
Just watch – the worse Obama performs, the more strident the liberals will be in his defense. To the bitter end, they’ll be screaming that Barack’s the Messiah, he’s misunderstood, he gets no bi-partisanship, the market doesn’t matter, George Bush is to blame for everything, we’re a bunch of racists, blah blah blah.
It’s tough to admit you were wrong, isn’t it?
Posted by: Shelby | March 3, 2009, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm
Look, I think Bush was a complete and total failure too. But that doesn’t make me blind to the fact that Obama also looks like a complete and total failure. Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter where your ideology falls on the political spectrum; the unavoidable fact is that the American people lose.
Posted by: marylou | March 3, 2009, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
Wow, the denial is astounding. I really don’t know what to believe – is Obama in over his head or is he the evil socialist bent on destroying capitalism????
Which is it?
Posted by: Robin | March 3, 2009, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm
“Wow, the denial is astounding. I really don’t know what to believe – is Obama in over his head or is he the evil socialist bent on destroying capitalism????
Which is it?”
Tough call…the data is piling up for both arguments, will need to get back to you.
Posted by: tjp612 | March 3, 2009, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
Wasn’t it Wall Street who got us into this mess?
******************************************************
Yes, along with government complicity in deregulation. A similar combination of greed without oversight and limitations caused the 1929 crash.
Posted by: ajax | March 3, 2009, 5:18 pm 5:18 pm
I’m glad that Gibbs acknowledges that the White House doesn’t care about the market dropping. His initial answer was:
“No.”
But hey, what’s the stock market, anyway? Just the vehicle for providing investment capital for businesses, and the primary source of investment revenue for many investors, small and large. Who cares if it suffers? It’s not like our 401ks are made up of stock, right?
Posted by: Lightduty | March 3, 2009, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
$28 billion for 150,000 jobs?… That’s $187k per job…. Not a great bargain. This spending spree is akin to sending every child in America a platinum credit card with a $50K limit… And then, telling them the money’s already been spent and they’re over their limit. By the time they retire, they’ll owe $1million.
Posted by: WR Burton | March 3, 2009, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm
The only problem is that the rest of the economic world, the Market, has no confidence.
******************************************************
Unfortunately, the toxic assets of credit default swaps and other Frankensteins of deregulation are interconnected to the world market. In contrast, stimulus programs can be explained to children- government spending creates jobs and creates consumer spending, which in turn creates jobs and more spending. It’s a jump start for capitalism, leaving behind roads, bridges, and better public transportation to benefit generations to come. So of course, Wall Street understands the benefits.
I like how Gibbs was interjecting the recession of 2007, which hasn’t ended yet, as Tapper tried to connect a daily stock lowering to the stimulus plan. If major economic downturns had singular causes, then they would be a lot more easy to solve. Especially if they were just confidence issues. But as Gibbs was pointing out, this has been in the making for a while. Nor can you deny the effects of a global meltdown on the US stock market. Perhaps the wiser among us are those who are concerned that this may be a more serious threat than terrorism.
Posted by: kat the real one | March 3, 2009, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
jobs jobs jobs!!!
Forget about Wallstreet.
They have NO clue how much toxic assets they have.
Until they have a clean sheet, we will have to let them hit the bottom.
How else it is with real Americans?
You can’t pay your bills? The same bankers begging the government for our tax money will kick you out of your house.
Posted by: Jim | March 3, 2009, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
“This “save or create” idiocy has to be the government double-speak talk phrase of the decade.”……….
Obama also saved $4 Trillion by not spending an additional $4 Trillion. We should be grateful, no?
Posted by: Sigmonde | March 3, 2009, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm
“This “save or create” idiocy has to be the government double-speak talk phrase of the decade.”……….
Obama also saved $4 Trillion by not spending an additional $4 Trillion. We should be grateful, no?
*******************************************************
It’s not idiocy, but realism about the rapid loss of jobs in this country. Where does 4TR come in as cost of the stimulus, whose principles are easy enough for a child to understand?
Posted by: kat the real one | March 3, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
‘But Geithner defended the overall proposal, saying far more people would benefit from lower taxes under the plan. He said the budget reflects what Obama viewed as “a deep moral imperative to make our society more just. But it’s very good economic policy too. It will mean there is again a fairer, more equitably shared tax burden on the vast majority of Americans.”‘
Those are some of the scariest words I’ve ever heard. Fairer? The top 10% pays 70% of the taxes now.
Obammunism is Communism.
What happens when those who pay nothing are more than 50% of the voters? Then we become the new slaves.
Posted by: drjohn | March 3, 2009, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
Jake Tapper, you sir, are a good reporter. You’re asking questions that we’re all wondering about.
We the people can judge the answers for ourselves, but it takes men like you to ask them in the first place.
You and your work are appreciated.
Posted by: Terry | March 3, 2009, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
Im waiting for Obama’s wealth distribution, but the only distribution I see is, that big insurance companies like AIG , and big banks getting billion and billions of our tax payers dollars. This is the change we voted for? And these banks bying jets, and buying fifteen hundred dollar waste baskets and six thousand dollar shower curtains. And this is what happening . I think Obama lied to us every day.Tax the poor, and just give it the the rich.
Posted by: Joe | March 3, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm
“Im waiting for Obama’s wealth distribution, but the only distribution I see is, that big insurance companies like AIG , and big banks getting billion and billions of our tax payers dollars.”
> $13/week isn’t cutting it?
“This is the change we voted for?”
> Almost 50 million of us did not vote for The Community Organizer
“And these banks bying jets, and buying fifteen hundred dollar waste baskets and six thousand dollar shower curtains. And this is what happening . I think Obama lied to us every day.”
> Yes, he does lie every day. And often every day.
Tax the poor, and just give it the the rich.
> Well, I don’t know who the poor are, but 40%+ of Americans pay no taxes and I would modify “give it to the rich” to “give to political backers who provided votes in 2008 and who will be expected to back him in 2012 (labor, unions, the green lobby, ACORN, etc.)
Posted by: tjp612 | March 3, 2009, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
Jake Tapper,
Good questions! Thanks!
Independent viewer/reader
Posted by: dz | March 3, 2009, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
Gibbs must be a really good person. If I were him, I would behave in a manner similar to that of former President Reagan and never allow a question from you. Enough of your mr. courage come lately act.
Posted by: dave | March 4, 2009, 12:08 am 12:08 am