Obama takes to the road
It was a short honeymoon after all. Short and not all that sweet, although the courtship seemed to promise a love for the ages.
It’s a subtle thing, since President Obama’s approval figures remain quite high. But support for his stimulus package is falling, and the uniformly positive press he’s used to receiving has taken a sour turn.
It’s the latter that must especially worry and frustrate him. Because he must know that the press was his matchmaker with the American public during the campaign, and if the press deserts him, the people may follow.
Ah, the campaign! It must seem like a thousand years ago to Obama, although it’s only been a few months. It wouldn’t be surprising if he were longing to return to the days when all he had to do was speak, and the love flowed.
And so Obama has decided to take his show on the road, since it’s not been playing as well as he’d hoped in DC. As the Telegraph’s Toby Harnden notes:
…[Obama] is returning to one thing in his political career that he has perfected—campaigning. In Elkhart, Indiana, today and Fort Myers, Florida, tomorrow, Mr Obama will try to seize back control of the political agenda with question-and-answer sessions with voters in two of the swing states that gave him victory.
Harnden also points out that Obama is now being perceived as passive, uncertain, and inexperienced;
But making decisions and operating the levers of power is something completely new to him. And it shows.
How could it be otherwise? These character traits were in evidence earlier, for anyone with eyes to see. In fact, it’s the sort of thing Hillary Clinton famously played on during her own campaign. But those in love with Obama weren’t interested in facing the possibility that, despite his glamour and glibness, she might indeed be correct.
Somehow, I can’t escape the feeling that Obama wants out.
I wish he’d learn economics 101.
Then he could learn how to be an executive…
I’ve been wondering why he doesn’t address the nation and explain the situation. It’s as if it hasn’t occurred to him. If this is indeed the dire situation he says it is, shouldn’t he act like a president ? It seems so odd to be going on the road in these circumstances.
Unfortunately, schaudenfreude is not entirely appropriate, because his screw-ups affect us all: Republican, Democrat, or Independent. As Neo, Hillary and others have pointed out, his resume is not replete with executive experience.
It is rather, what can we as citizens do to encourage him to make better decisions?
We have him for four more years. God help us. As I am an agnostic, the previous sentence illustrates my opinion on the matter.
Passive, uncertain, inexperienced – indeed. Throw in brittle, self-important (Office of the President-Elect? Styrofoam Pathernon? Good God!), thin-skinned, and season with a dollop of narcissism. What could go wrong?
Bull’s eye. Grownups long ago appreciated the distinct possibility that he would do his Britney Spears impression.
I’d thought it would be triggered by foreign policy blunder, but that’s a detail. The point is he he’d never faced down a serious challenge, and came across as someone whose personality might crumple under adversity.
I too have wondered if Obama regrets now being the President. It’s a tough job for anyone, but especially tough when it’s your first job.
I’m in two minds regarding my hopes for him. If he’s truly a loyal American trying to do his best for the country, and simply over his head, I hope he gets it together and grows up and into the job.
If he’s not so loyal, but fundamentally just an opportunist, puppet, and/or front man for the hard left, I hope he crashes and burns badly enough to vaccinate the country against left-wing nonsense for generations to come.
Personally, if he implodes catastrophically (seems to be one of his favorite types of words lately) and becomes an ineffectual president I won’t lose too much sleep over it except in the foreign policy arena.
Reason being that if he is ineffectual, maybe he won’t be able to implement that crap sandwich he’s trying to shovel through Congress and maybe – just maybe – we’ll retain a decent chance to pull out of this recession as he keeps the government locked up doing basically nothing.
The hazard here of course is for our armed forces.
Historically such ineffectual leaders tend to try to distract the natives by focusing on international issues – and this is where he can get our service personnel killed if he’s really…really….incompetent.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/pt_survey_toplines/february_2009/toplines_stimulus_package_february_6_7_2009
Look at the third question. 62%
Obama’s naivete and inexperience are clearly on display in his public speeches, where he is obviously rattled. (A major league pitcher with that facial expression/body language would cause fevered activity in the bullpen!)
The problem is that by coming unglued publicly he emboldens our enemies. And yes, Virginia, we do have enemies. Grave ones. Implacable ones. And even He won’t be able to charm them out of their lust to do us harm.
From what I recall of the Telegraph coverage of the Presidential election, there was no suggestion from Harnden or anyone else that there might be a problem with a completely inexperienced politician in the Oval Office. It was roses, roses, roses all the way. In fact, on the day of the actual election I announced my firm decision NEVER to buy either the Daily or the Sunday Telegraph again. I imagine the ever fewer people who still read that newspaper are a little surprised at the problems that Obama is facing. How could this have happened? Were they not told by the Telegraph team in America that the man walked on water? I do so hate the British media. It is the worst. Grrr.
The press still seems rather postive. All the spin from the wapo news pages is that republicans are being partisan for not jumping on the stim pack.
The public just is not buying it…
as to being a failure, by my standard, the less any president does, the better they are….
The Peter Principle exhibit A: Obama. Seems anybody can dish out other people’s (foundation) money.
I’m betting he chain smokes cigarettes while on the toilet wondering WTF hes got himself into. Hey i’ve done it…but my situation was never quite at this dire level.
I wish he’d learn economics 101.
As Phil Gramm used to say, it was easier to teach economics to Aggies than it was to 534 members of Congress.
One problem that all Presidents have is that they mostly do not communicate with the public; They communicate through the media.
Carter, Reagan and Clinton, for example, had serious problems with the first round of appointments and cabinet members.
The financial crisis is not easy for anybody. Let’s say an economic expert like Summers or Mankiw was President; They would follow their own beliefs, not choose among generals. Being an expert usually makes you less flexible. Being a generalist makes you unsure.
If Obama really wants to escape, I’d be personally frightened; One of his “Friends” will bring him some hash or coke to help him “Relax” and it will be all down hill from there. I’m painting a nightmare scenario and I really see no sign of it. But we aren’t in the 50’s, and the sophisticated people are just too vulnerable.
Fred2, Thank God we are not in the 50s with this CinC. Early on, we were in a very hot war on the Chinese border.
Once we cleared that, we faced a Soviet Union that was expanding all around its borders and beyond; and had a huge army and nuclear weapons. Family bomb shelters were shown and demonstrated at every State Fair. (Glad to say, I don’t know anyone who actually bought one.)
As we departed the 50s, we had the Cuban Missile Crisis. Most people honestly did not know if the nuclear tipped missiles would start flying at any moment.
The country faced serious risks; the difference between then and now is that we knew that our President took it seriously then.
One of his “Friends” will bring him some hash or coke to help him “Relax”
The scary thought is that, by his own admission, those aren’t uncharted waters for our President.
One other problem Obama has is that he does not have a mandate to do anything in particular. He ran on “change” – without ever explaining what he wanted to do. Judging by the Obama voters I have spoken with, his supporters had widely different views about what change actually means. Running on a word was enough to get Obama elected, but it doesn’t give him the political capital to pass any legislation. Running on what you are not does not give you the same ability to enact specific proposals as running to enact those proposals.
During the campaign, Obama did a masterful job of reflecting people’s views right back at them. I spoke to hard Leftists who were convinced Obama was a Leftist and Republicans and moderates who insistend he was a pragmatist. Was I the only one who knew he couldn’t be both? To this day, I confess that I still don’t know what he is, and I am not convinced that he does either. One commentator I read recently (I don’t remember who) summed the matter up nicely by saying he wasn’t afraid Obama is a closet something; rather, he was afraid Obama is a closet nothing.
Personally, I am concerned that Obama will essentially be a do nothing President who will simply go along with what the Pelosi-Reid axis sends over for signature. Lord help us!
Oldflyer, thanks for giving me my second scary thought in as many minutes by reminding me of the Cuban Missle Crisis – a crisis that was induced by the perceived weakness and inexperience of our new President.
I was a young kid during the Cuban Missle Crisis, but remember well going onto MCB Camp Pendleton with my mother. As the home of a Marine division, it was usually bustling with Marines, but it was an eerily deserted ghost town then, because the Marines (including my father) were saddled up and awaiting orders – to go to war.
I’ll never forget that.
I was actually surprised (though I shouldn’t have been knowing his lineage) that Chris Wallace from Fox News Sunday said he was impressed with how much Obama seemed at home in the job. This is in direct opposition to my personal observations of him. He has seemed a bit like a “deer in the headlights” and when he has spoken he has been both threatening and petulant. I continue to hear democrats (including Obama) make statements about how they own the ball (won) and therefore they are going to make the rules. The latest example of this was apparently after Petraeus’ meeting with Obama. When it was observed that Petraeus didn’t look happy after the meeting a presidential aide apparently remarked “He (Petaeus) needs to realize he isn’t working for Bush anymore.” To me this translated to, “There’s not some boob in there now who is just going to be led around by the nose by these uppity military types.”
Unfortunately it means to me that he (Obama) is going to be more interested in paying off his political supporters that in listening thoughtfully and weighing the advice he gets.
He ought to hit the road, Jack.
i said he came out of the original meeting of being informed of the situation looking ill. that he has just found out that all the things he has been working against his life as propaganda are now true. not only true, but they are more real and true than he ever knew.
now what? he will follow the ways of his keepers. he didnt earn the position he has, so he will not vote his own mind here. for a hint of what he will side with and let go by.. look to biden “reseting” our relation with russia… his daughter sasha after pushkin, malia after pushkins most favorite biographers last name. his wife calls our president pumski. stalin was an international socialist, obama says he is a transnational socialist…
and on the idea of good governance after power.
If one has studied the revolutionary socialists, one will find one common thread throughout the whole history of all of them.
The will to power achieved “by other means” than merit, does not come with an ability to good governance.
They have no concept of good governance, as everything they do is about first winning, and beating everyone else to the top of the hill, then taking the measures to prevent removal.
Socialism, allows the parasite to acquire funds from the body its attacking, and then using those funds to expand and keep going till such power is usurped by perverting and polluting the systems of merit and culture, and injecting slow confusion.
others here have lamented that X doesnt know economics 101, or any of that… but the point is that he doesnt have to!!! he has no desire to run capitalism well, so he need not understand it at all.
he wants to run it a different way, a way that makes sure that unequal treatment is ok… (sold under the concept that it will make for more equal and fair outcomes).
if you want to know whats coming, look to the soviet union and how it turned out for the people. it will eventuyally be worse, since there will be no united states and west to protest what eggs will be broken to make utopia.
we already have eugenics (while we fear a million or two vaporized by an atomic weapon, the world silently murders 50 million plus a year)…
we are ramping up the euthanasia to go from assisted suicide to beuracratic rationing for the elderly AND favoritism for the young…
how far are we from these doctrines of all the major socialist states? He doesnt need to know economics, beacuse he doesnt want to run an economy, he wants to run utopia, and in utopia, the farm animals, i mean means of production, i mean slaves, i mean people dont need money.
how long before we decide that the infirm are not worth having? after all theya re more expensive..
the military situation is one of many situations coming to fruit. there will now be so many, we wont know which way to turn to react, or protest. if we yell about A then B, C, D will get passed as we are focusing there…
we didnt do what our founding fathers said. we did not preserve this (conserve this) a nation.
infirm? then the crazy, and presumed crazy (the religious), and then what?
Mizpants hit on a very good point when she asks, “why he doesn’t address the nation and explain the situation?”
Agreed, however I suspect the reason that he isn’t addressing the nation is because he doesn’t have anything to tell them that they don’t already know, or sense. Better to go on the road and do stage managed events in front of screened crowds. That way you can edit out any ‘Joe the Plumber’ moments.
Perhaps as noted by others above, many are seeing that their dear leader really is the empty suit his opponents claimed him to be. An empty suit who’s greatest achievement to date, besides running for office and writing autobiographies, is having voted present 137 times while in the Illinois legislature.
It’s one thing to be the on a political campaign. It’s quite another to actually have to lead. Especially for one who has never been a leader by nature anyway, but a professional protege of the hard left. Not even one month since the inauguration and they’re ‘exhausted.’ Just wait till they see how they feel in two years.
The MSM, who did Obama’s heavy lifting during the campaign and carried Obama through the election to make him America’s second black president, are looking particularly bad right now. I will enjoy watching to see if they decide to throw Obama under the bus to save their own asses or if the double down on him.
I only hope that dear leader and his cohorts don’t do too much lasting damage to our country. Not that I’m much happier with the republicans either.
Our Dear Leader is scrambling to get the approval of Republican members in Congress, but it doesn’t seem to be working. I see perhaps three members who are actually backing his stimulus plan (not surprising considering its content), which is hardly enough to qualify for the “Bipartisan” stamp that Obama is attempting to plant on it.
Opposition to the stimulus package is growing. Just last week, Senator McCain activated his mailing list from the campaign and requested his followers to sign an online petition against the package. Left and right, old campaign groups are being reactivated and used to support one side or another in the debate. Think tanks are churning out thoughts like cloud factories (I was pleasantly surprised this morning when I read the Cato Institute’s advertisement in the Star Tribune condemning Obama’s plan). Our Dear Leader is bashing his political enemies as “irresponsible.” This is definitely the worst time to be a voter – when you start seeing the consequences of your actions on Election Day.
– G
I do not think he was talking to them, he was talking at them. And what about talking to Dems as well and instructing them to put partisan politics aside – it takes 2 parties to have partisan politics, you know.
Even though Geithner’s nomination was delayed, this financial wiz-kid has been at the job for 6-8 months now. And he has not yet come up with anything. I guess we will know tomorrow. (Well, it is not as easy as forgetting your self-employment taxes.)
As for Obama, although I wish him success – or else, we are the ones getting screwed, I am hoping that it would be a Carter-like 4 years. But something we can recover from. Not like the depression and the long recovery people have been portraying.
Is it just me or is President Obama spending more time in front of that darn camera than doing his job? He’s campaigning right now.
Campaigning for goodness sake!
After 2 years of uninterrupted campaigning of promising to fix Washington, now that he IS in Washington, he decides to keep on campaigning for a job he already has. He keeps selling himself to a country that already bought.
It is one thing to come directly to the American people and reason with them, to explain to them what he’s doing, why he’s doing it, and the details of what he’s doing. It is another thing to try to wow people with his personality and take digs at his political opponents.
It doesn’t seem like President Obama wants to do the job. Which begs the question: Why did he campaign for two years for it in the first place?
And we elected him.
We knew going in that President Obama is a profoundly lazy man. He has ducked every job he’s taken. From being the very first non-publishing President of the Harvard Review to being a vacant seat in the US Senate.
For all his supposed intelligence, of which I’m not yet convinced, he did not win this previous election. Madison Avenue and the world’s press won it for him.
So again I ask, why did he apply for the job of President when he is clearly unwilling to work?
Why would he want out? He has everything he wants. I think it’s an act. He has a majority, and I doubt he is losing sleep after serving $100 a pound beef at White House parties and jetting away to Camp David with the family. Americans are suffering, and he puts on a good show that he cares. Yeah right. He’s right where he wants to be.
Its true, he has a good side or purpouse
Clay,
I think it would be proper to say “helicoptering away to camp David.” Though I wonder how much that little jaunt in Air Force 1 down to Kingsmill Resort cost the taxpayer. He could have limoed for a lot less. Besides isn’t there a government owned building somewhere around DC that would have accommodated the Dem Caucus?
Why would he want out?
Are you kidding? The prospect of going down in history as a colossal f-up far outweighs $100/lb steak.
Hell, you or I could buy $100/lb steak. Peace of mind is a bit more pricey…
He worked on cementing that reputation as a colossal f-up with that news conference stump speech nonsense tonight.
Not ready for Prime Time.
Gray, I agree. It was painful to watch. I’m now leaning toward the “Obama is a loyal American, doing his best for the country” side, and so I’m hoping he gets it together, but tonight’s performance was dispiriting. Scary stuff. It’s kinda like seeing the pilot of your plane reading a “Flying for Dummies” book before you (try to) take off.
Checking back in here for an amusing read. It’s a bit like visiting an alternate universe. The perceptual filters you guys have on are so strangely skewed.
Obama is doing extremely well. He’s negotiated a solid, if not perfect, massive stimulus package, which is of course precisely what we need right now. It’s a combination of ideas from the right and the left. It includes investment, and tax cuts, both of which the vast majority of economists broadly support. Yes, the House bill did contain some needless items, but for the most part the bill is very well constructed, and the needless spending in that bill was stripped out in the Senate. The Senate, unfortunately, stripped out a bit too much — including reducing aid to the states and education spending both of which are extremely important — however, even the Senate version of the bill largely gets it right.
It’s really hilarious how people get so worked up over these little rhetorical games. Most of the Republican umbrage over the bill is simply to score political points; whining about deficits when that’s precisely what you don’t care about in a depression, and whining about them when they presided over a doubling of the Federal debt even during flush times! Republicans are far more fiscally irresponsible than Democrats — they’re irresponsible when times are good, and irresponsible when times are bad.
I’ve been truly amazed at how brilliantly Obama’s been handling the job so far — not only that, but he can explain his views clearly. He takes responsibility for mistakes. He learns. It’s a joy to watch.
We’ve had worse recessions and within my lifetime so far I’ve already experienced two of them (1973-75 and 1980-82), therefore some historical perspective and psychological toughness is required. I work in the investment business doing research. The past year has been brutal for those of us in the industry. Complicating the task of looking for value and valuing businesses is that we cannot have a tight standard deviation around some kind of discount rate to apply to company cash flows. And that reflects an environment in which there is no steady, calm leadership anywhere. The Fed is trying to do this, but Bernanke’s efforts to not panic is completely obviated by the panic and fearmongering that is emanating from Congress, Senate, and the White House.
What Obama does not seem to understand is that the government does not run a modern, capitalist economy. I highly doubt he’s had any good courses in economics and finance when he was a young man, so he really has not a clue as to how it all works. His view seems to be in the static, socialist vein. Zero sum thinking, but this is also the mindset of the most powerful person in the government, the Speaker of the House. She who used to be an important member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
The “economic stimulus” bill (a.k.a., the “Porkulus Bill”) is really her baby. Obama, via Emanuel, signs off on it. There are probably other very powerful, influential people here and abroad who are pushing this thing. Pelosi is the perfect symbol of our new American “homo urbanus” of a socialist inclination, which now drives the nation. The urban strongholds are the locus of the collectivist virus that now parasitically feasting on the host.
This was the crisis that Emanuel and Pelosi simply did not want to waste. They had to strike while the iron was hot, in order to effect PROFOUND changes to our society and economy. At the end of it all we will be more like France than what we used to be.
The environment we are in is so fraught with risk that it would take an academic paper for me to lay it all out for you. It means that currency risk is enhanced, economic risk is enhanced, systemic risk, financial risk, industry risk, etc. It amounts to a bigger discount rate that I have to apply to free cash flows for companies, with a resulting lower value for the company shares. The multiples get lower.
The budgets going forward for years are going to be horrendous. Also, it will mean dramatically smaller defense budgets – at a time when the danger in Indian country is more profound. Our enemies are circling and hoping to move in for the kill. Russia, China, Iran, the new Socialist Sphere of Cuba and Latin America, and the truculent, upstart Ummah.
The economists I talk to think this bill is going to be very bad news. Add to it all these things:
1. Tax hikes coming
2. The carbon tax/cap and trade system
3. Out of control entitlements
Employers are not hiring right now because they correctly perceive that they are about to get hosed and jerked around during the next four years.
The people in charge now have that “deer in the headlights” look. The thousand yard stare that says, “What the f**k did I get myself into?”
I’m actually most angry with the people who voted for this abomination.
Mitsu in an alternate universe wrote, “He’s negotiated a solid, if not perfect, massive stimulus package, which is of course precisely what we need right now.”
What we need right now is for the government to stop increasing spending so massively and picking and choosing winner and loser businesses.
An ACROSS the board corporate tax rate reduction would help ALL companies.
Right now the economy continues to tank because companies and people are waiting to see WHO the government chooses to win.
The definition of socialism is = the government choosing who gets what resources.
The definitino of capitalism is – the PEOPLE choosing who gets what resources.
This government has gotten so large and so much so that it is stifling the private sector of this economy.
YOUR view. Obama’s View is HURTING America. You and Obama should apologizing for not learning economics 101.
Mitsu without a grasp on reality wrote, “The Senate, unfortunately, stripped out a bit too much”
The Senate bill has a total dollar amount that is larger than the House Bill. Therefore Mitsu, as usual you are clueless and very unpersuasive.
Let’s see you take responsibility for your mistakes………………
“It’s a joy to watch.” – Mitsu
Exactly what America’s enemies are thinking, the Manchurian Candidate is off to a strong start…
Off to a strong start with the best way to neutralize nuisance enemies (ie. Iran and Syria)? Concoct some “diplomatic” ruse to ally with them instead, ie. common cause in the “drug war”, ostensibly with Afghanistan as the focus; Redefine “war on terror” to “war on extremism”, so you can target the Israeli settlement crowd as equivalent “extremists”, while glossing over the massively endemic state sponsored genocidal Islamic hate culture that will target Christians, Buddhists, and Hindus similarly if they prevail against Israel and the Jews; Pretend that America’s “mistakes” with the Islamic world has been an equal and instrumental cause of the violence emanating from the Islamic world during the last three decades, after doing everything possible to undermine the Iraq war; Start a significant reduction in military capability while taking a major step toward bigger government and socialism. In the meantime Pakistan and Russia neutralize American capability in Afghanistan while solidifying the potential for nuclear proliferation by hostile Islamic and radical left states, with AQ Khan “free at last”… Then consider the ramifications of the census expedited under “Rhambo”… and all in the first couple of weeks, truly breathtaking, imagine what the DINOS will be capable of during four years of their Manchurian Candidate’s “regime”. Mitsu, you’re as intellectually perverted as any garden variety Stalinist…
The Senate bill cut spending in areas that were much needed, and replaced them with tax cuts. I agreed with them cutting a lot of piddly things (i.e., the infamous refurb of the National Mall, etc.) but not with cutting education and aid to the states.
If there’s anything the last 8 years ought to teach us, it is that tax cuts and deregulation alone do not produce long-term, stable prosperity. The market is a great way to produce short-term price efficiency, but it does a terrible job factoring in larger-scale effects. Bubbles happen in market economies by their very nature; excessive capital accumulation happens, excessive income disparity happens — and all of these things result in the eventual destabilization of the economy. Government can and should step in to stabilize things when markets by themselves go haywire, as they obviously have right now.
Obviously government can’t do everything; it just provides a push here, oversight there, and some long-term incentives. In the end, it takes a balance between prudent government action and oversight, and market forces, to produce the optimal result. That’s my position and it’s Obama’s position. Which, obviously, is why I am so pleased with how’s he’s doing so far, and why the American public is, as well.
Of course, it’s hard to do much worse than the last 8 years… so clearly by contrast nearly anyone would look good. But, Obama’s doing far better than I was hoping, overall.
Of course, it’s hard to do much worse than the last 8 years…
Talk about perceptual filters. What a dishonest and stupid thing to say.
As Bill Cosby used to joke, “Never dare worse.”
Other than the economy–which is in trouble all over the globe–George Bush left America in pretty good shape, considering that he took office in the midst of the dotcom bust and right before 9-11.
I’m at a loss to understand the mindset that views all our problems stem from a gigantic middleman (govt) not being gigantic enough.
Do these same people think car salesmen and realtors not getting a big enough cut is at the root of their housing and transportation problems?
“If there’s anything the last 8 years ought to teach us, it is that tax cuts and deregulation alone do not produce long-term, stable prosperity.”
I thought this bill was being rushed through because it was about short term stimulus?
I guess we see what the real aim is, don’t we.
No wonder you’re happy.
I watched portions of the press conference last night, and have a few observations about this “perfect” performance:
First, am I the only one who noticed His reference to the 1990’s being a “lost decade”? One that took a long time to recover from?
Let’s see, who was president during most of the 1990’s?
Oh yeah, that would have been Bill Clinton.
Despite what I think of the man, I do have to admit that aside from some dotcom bubble issues the 90’s were generally prosperous.
Wonder how ol Billyboy and Hillary took that jab?
Now let’s see, if the 90’s were a lost decade that we had to climb out of, exactly when did we climb out and who was in charge?
Oh yeah, that would be 2001 to the present, and the president during THAT time frame was Bush the Younger.
Don’t forget to toss in the fact that Congress was also controlled by the Republicans during this time frame.
Ouch….talk about losing sight of the message here….
Then there was the incident where a reporter asked The One about whether He was going to lift the ban on photographing flag draped coffins coming back from Iraq.
This was a direct question on the part of the reporter, easy enough to answer with a yes, no, or “I’ll think about it”, and instead of a direct answer The One gave us about 10 minutes of meandering drivel and absolutely no straight answer – and the reporter didn’t call Him on it!
He didn’t answer the question!
Then there is the ancient female reporter who asked about who had nukes in the middle east.
There were two parts to her question, but that was the part I remember as He again driveled on and on and on without answering her.
It was funny though when He called on the next reporter you could hear the elderly woman who had asked the question remarking, within the reach of the microphone, that He didn’t answer her question!
Then there was all the bull$hit about Him making bipartison overtures to the republicans – without ever mentioning or being asked about His “I won” statement, or how Pelosi shut out the republicans in the House while the democrats wrote the legislation.
He had a perfect opportunity to encourage a spirit of “coming together” when He was posed the question about former Bush administration officials being charged with “war crimes” under Patrick Leahy’s proposal.
That was a time He could have made a succinct (is He even capable of being succinct???) statement that would shut off such a course of action and He refused the opportunity.
At that point I looked over at the wife and commented that if the democrats DO attempt war crimes trials of former Bushies, all Hell is gonna break loose.
I have to say, based on what I saw, that it’s going to be a long 4 years and we have a complete neophyte in office who apparently is still in campaign mode.
Unless something changes, this country is going to end up divided like it hasn’t been in living memory.
I watched the press conference last night. I am trying not to jump to conclusions, but I wasn’t impressed with anything but the quality of President Obama’s tailoring.
Was it only me, or were other people unimpressed with his rambling, filibuster-style answers on the economy?
And some of the things President Obama said extemporaneously made me extremely nervous. For example, he described the beginning of the the credit crisis in the following way:
“because of the enormous leverage where they had $1 worth of assets and they were betting $30 on that $1, what we had was a crisis in the financial system.”
I thought that this was a reference to Lehman, but that he is confusing assets and equity in his discussion of financial institution balance sheets. This would make sense if he doesn’t know the first thing about finance.
President Obama’s response to Chuck Todd’s question was comical.
It doesn’t give me a secure feeling. I wouldn’t be surprised if the markets are not impressed, either.
Transcript at this address:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090210/pl_politico/18654
Liberal / democrat women can say what they want. Most of them, just like with Clinton, voted for Obama because he’s a “hottie”.
I watched about 3 minutes of the speech. So many uhs and umms that I had to change the channel. And I honestly tried to sit and listen.
When the Huffington Post gets front row seating, and gets called on to ask a question, and that question asked is if Obama is going after the Bush administration, one has to wonder what is truly on some people’s minds. With all that is going on in our nation at this time, that’s what Huff Po wants to know?
Is the Obama administration (with Soros’ 15 million) trying to legitimize the Huffington Post?
Can I get a “duh!”?
Look, months before most people really had him on their radar screen I did the research into who exactly Barack Obama is. He’s a Red Diaper Baby. Therefore, that’s his comfort zone. I am sure he has made his own ideological modifications to his inherited template along the road of life, but his associations and allies pretty much convinced me that the apple does not fall far from the tree. Therefore, I was most negatively predisposed towards him. And I don’t like his oratorical style. I especially don’t like the way he dissimulates. All taken together, it is annoying and painful to listen to the motherf****er. And since I do need to keep my blood pressure under control, subjecting myself to annoying chaff is advisable. And that is why I did not listen to the press conference last night and I will never listen to any of his speeches or press conferences.
The “stimulus” bill was never his legislation to begin with. Nancy Pelosi is a coward for not openly taking the point on this and defending it before the cameras and the public. Instead, she sends her lackey from the Oval Office to do it. Baaahhh…. I don’t have time for this! I can read about it afterwards, from articles and analysis that I consider to be reliable.
As an investor, an analyst, a parent, a citizen, and a thinker, I am simply disgusted with the entire flim flam.
br549,
Heh heh…if you’re referring to the female reporter that I THINK you’re referring to, I made a funny observation to the wife as The One was droning on endlessly in response to the question.
Her mouth dropped open and then she busted out laughing as we rewound the dvr back to the pertinent scene and she saw what I was talking about.
Now bear with me, cause it’s a little long but is worth the read.
Back in college (wayyyy too many years ago) I had a sociology professor who provided a bit of information that was always funny to watch with new students in his class.
His observation was that crossing one’s legs was an unconscious method of…ahem…*self-gratification* on the part of females.
He further observed that you could tell just how much *self-gratification* was in the works when you noticed if they were swinging their leg back and forth, as well as how fast their leg was swinging.
This was usually followed by numerous female feet hitting the floor simultaneously in the classroom…lol.
If you get a chance to watch the campaign…er, oops….the news adoration…I mean, ah…the news conference, take a moment to notice the female reporter who asked the question.
She is sitting there studiously watching her Messiah – with her legs crossed and swinging like a sewing machine….roflmfao.
Don’t know if the old professor’s diagnosis was correct or not, but it’s always been fun to notice such things – especially in this context.
Unbelievable.
Iran boxed His formidable ears by lecturing Him on what He needed to do before they would deign to talk to Him — a real prestige builder. Half of his appointees haven’t paid their taxes (no wonder Dems don’t care about higher taxes — they don’t pay them anyway!), and the other half are lobbyists (weren’t they going to be banished?). The extraordinary rendition program is alive and well (I’m pleased, but didn’t He run on stopping it?), Gitmo is going strong (but for immediate meetings of a committee to discuss possible appointees to a commission to consider possible recommendations to close Gitmo, when the time is right. Again, I’m pleased, but what about His campaign promises?).
He’s in a power dive right now, and we’re all grabbing the radio and shouting “Pull up! Pull up!”
Negotiated? Negotiated with whom? He delegated the writing of the bill to Pelosi, presumably because he’s too green to do so. In a less charitable view, he’s struggling with Pelosi and Reid for control over who calls the shots.
Have you actually read the bill? I have. It’s outrageous. A lot of the spending does not kick in until 2011. What the hell good does that do to stimulate the economy now? The bill has to be rushed through because we’re going to need it in two years?
I wish I were on your planet — it sounds much nicer than this one.
Having said that, his plan to increase tax compliance among Democrats has been truly inspired.
You must enjoy bullfights.
This has been like watching Mike Tyson spar with Pee Wee Herman, with Obama in the latter role. He looks weak, terrified, rattled, and panicky to me. I didn’t support Obama, but I hope he pulls up his socks, fast, for His own sake — and ours.
Mitsu without a clue. Unbelievable. But you see the talking points emerging… took a week or so for them to find their footing, but they’re on message now.
Is it just me, or do others find this ghoulish obsession/rampant desire for agitprop by journalists to be …well…obscene?
I was hoping Obama would offer them a compromise: they can take as many photographs as they want of coffins of journalists killed overseas. I’ve got no problem with that.
Mitsu is an arrogant smart guy who characteristically overreaches and bluffs, while patronizing those with whom he disagrees.
Kinda sounds familiar.
Huxley, I take a more charitable view. He strikes me as young and idealistic.
I have to say, however, that I was astonished that Mitsu thought Obama was doing well. Defended Obama on grounds it was early days, or a tough crisis for anyone to handle, sure; both sensible observations, and defensible.
But to say Obama’s doing well? Whoa.
The foreign press doesn’t think he’s doing well. I don’t generally much care what the foreign press (or foreign anything else) thinks about Obama (or anything else), but considering that they were totally in the bag for Obama a month ago, the change of their tone is remarkable.
The equity markets today didn’t think he did so hot last night, and Geithner gave them no joy, either.
Ignoring Mitsu is best. He (she?) is at best ignorant, at worst a goad.
If it says Mitsu, I’ll scroll on without reading.
P.S.: Obama=Chavez
Mitsu is in his forties. He really is a smart guy and sometimes he has interesting things to say, but when he wants to set you straight, he’s pretty overbearing.
However, I don’t understand why he was pushing his points so hard. Certainly a case can be made that Obama is not doing as poorly as many of his opponents here and elsewhere claim.
But it is indisputable that Obama has hit a lot of chop–cabinet opponents and this stimulus bill–immediately on assuming office.
Hyperbole adds little to discussion.
Limbaugh said today that the “press conference” was nothing of the kind: Hussein read his opening remarks off a TelePrompter, which Limbaugh says is the first time ever that a POTUS has resorted to that crutch in a “press conference,” Then he nattered on for about a half hour before he even allowed anyone to ask him — a Question.
IOW, it wasn’t a Press Conference at all, just another campaign speech. This guy is seriously out of his depth. He keeps doing the only thing he’s mastered: campaigning.
3.27 am
“The market is a great way to produce short-term price efficiency, but it does a terrible job factoring in larger-scale effects. Bubbles happen in market economies by their very nature; excessive capital accumulation happens, excessive income disparity happens – and all of these things result in the eventual destabilization of the economy.”
This is a breathtaking statement. Whose theory is it?
Oblio,
That statement in your above comment that you are criticizing is unworthy of our attention, insofar as it would claim to be a point of departure for a serious discussion. The one who uttered it has obviously not studied economics and finance.
In my industry people are all over the map with respect to their take on the Efficient Markets Hypothesis. I am not a proponent of the strong version of the EMH. In the long run, however, prices do tend to average close in to intrinsic value. It’s the short run where inefficiencies and mispricing can and does occur. That’s why I’m not a big believer in market timing strategies. Market timers believe in the strong version of the EMH. Predicting long term trends, in my view, is very perilous, which is why you want to purchase sound financial assets at distressed prices. That’s building in a margin of safety.
I just wonder where people get ideas like that and how they have the audacity to throw them out in public, if they don’t know what they are talking about. Or do they think it doesn’t matter?
Fred, I’m with you on EMH (I think). People misprice assets all the time, in the short-term. You can see very great divergences between market-value and intrinsic value, which is determined by long-term cash flows, interest rates, and risk premiums.
I have been loathe to try to time the market, as you suggest, but I need to revisit my assumptions. I wasn’t well-served by deciding not to sell in the Fall of 2007.
As to Mitsu’s claim about how pleased the American public is with Obama, check Rasmussen’s Obama Approval Index where the strongly disapprove numbers are subtracted from the strongly approve. By this measurement, Obama’s approval index has dropped from 28 to 15.
The erosion of support for Obama is quite clear and remarkable given that is only a few weeks since his inauguration and all the spectacular adoration Obama has received after his election.
Forties? Yikes.
“A fool at forty is a fool indeed.”
I was 32 years old when I cut my ties with Marxist thinking (that was in ’87). During the Nineties I was one of those moderate Democrats that was moving towards a conservative position.
Our President is, what, 47 years old? And he’s still a Marxist? If he’s brilliant (and I’m not) and he’s still a Marxist, perhaps we are talking about a character deficiency? LOL!
Google “mitsu harvard physics -mitsubishi”; that’s our guy.
If you have ever worked with an arrogant programmer, it makes perfect sense.
Ok huxley, I bit and googled it.
All I can say is having a lot of education does not make one intelligent, and I’ve met my fair share of educated idiots in my lifetime.
I think I’ll leave it at that….
Has anyone noticed a pattern in the last 100+ years of our nation’s history? Harvard people – and other Ivy League grads – consistently, in the world of politics and finance – have brought more grief and trouble? FDR was a Harvard grad (and was described BY HIS PEERS as a very mediocre mind).
Harvard, as a going concern, is wrecking the country and its people are in the lead of the intellectual movement to destroy Western Civilization.
Supposedly bright folks who let the barbarians inside the gates. And they give them the torches to burn it all down.
I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.
–William F. Buckley, Jr.
Or its graduates.
Which includes George W. Bush.
I didn’t vote for him in 2000 because I was a Democrat and because his resume — in that halcyon time — seemed distressingly thin.
I couldn’t imagine we would ever see such a bizarrely unqualified and fringey character as BHO running for President, much less winning the office.
I just think we got lucky with GWB.
hey cheers for that… very informative – i’ve added your blog to my netvibes account – thanks 🙂