Posted on 03/07/2009 10:55:39 PM PST by rdl6989
Some economists, lawmakers fear policies are sowing uncertainty WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama offered his domestic-policy proposals as a "break from a troubled past." But the economic outlook now is more troubled than it was even in January, despite Obama's bold rhetoric and commitment of more trillions of dollars.
And while his personal popularity remains high, some economists and lawmakers are beginning to question whether Obama's agenda of increased government activism is helping, or hurting, by sowing uncertainty among businesses, investors and consumers that could prolong the recession.
Although the administration likes to say it "inherited" the recession and trillion-dollar deficits, the economic wreckage has worsened on Obama's still-young watch.
Every day, the economy is becoming more and more an Obama economy.
More than 4 million jobs have been lost since the recession began in December 2007 — roughly half in the past three months.
Stocks have tumbled to levels not seen since 1997. They are down more than 50 percent from their 2007 highs and 20 percent since Obama's inauguration.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Yes, MessNBC really did say that.
Obama deserves all the credit. Instead of fixing the problem, he has come up with all these harebrained pork schemes....
Why would anyone expect anything more from a man whose most challenging economic task prior to being elected president was balancing his checkbook? The American public knew that and elected him anyway. It is as if the passengers of US Airways Flight 1549, upon realizing that both engines had been taken out by geese and a major disaster was just minutes away, voted to send a junior high school history teacher from seat 27C to fly the plane because he looked good in a suit and had a nice baritone voice.
Bible prophesy states that it will take a days wages to buy a loaf of bread. Not too far off, I’d say.
Good point.
For years I've heard people in and out of media say a president sets the tone, or has a "vision", which is a subtle way of saying anyone could be president as long as he or she knows who to pick for his or her cabinet.
I think we're seeing the results of that kind of thinking. While I liked Palin more than I liked McCain, I think an unintended consequence of that choice was that McCain destroyed his greatest asset--the experience vs. inexperience argument--by choosing her. It was a validation of the "experience isn't that important" idea.
It isn't a case of being for or against Palin but one of a candidate trashing his built-up reason for being elected. Without the experience argument, there was no reason to vote for McCain. Too bad by that point Palin couldn't have taken the top spot and McCain the VP position.
But since the experience issue was not something anyone was arguing anymore, a major reason to vote not for McCain but AGAINST Obama was lost.
And people just went with the MSM love for this "historic" figure. It's all emotion, and making people feel good about THEMSELVES for voting for him.
Soon maybe they're realize voting for president should be for voting for the person who has the ability to run and economy and a military.
“I think an unintended consequence of that choice was that McCain destroyed his greatest asset—the experience vs. inexperience argument—by choosing her.”
It was her or Lieberman.
Lieberman would have guaranteed an utter rout.
“Obama’s economic style is unnerving.”
“unnerving”??????
How about freekin’ terrifying!
How about being in a car with the Kenyan as he drives 150MPH towards a cliff while proclaiming: “No worries, it’s all under control.”.
Disgree, but let's not go through that whole thing again. What's done is done.
Lieberman would have guaranteed an utter rout.
As opposed to the first dem since Carter to win a clear majority win?
I think Lieberman would have been a godawful choice.
I agree with you. The fawning media and fools who gave Obama control of our economy in a time of crisis obviously didn’t do so because they thought he could competently handle the economy. They really didn’t give the economy much thought at all. They voted for him to feel good about themselves, to get quick high off the smoke of their own smug self-righteousness. Now that the high is wearing off and nation’s attention is turned to the economy, it is becoming apparent that he cannot effectively frame a “vision” on the economy because he barely knows what the economy is, let alone how it functions (apart from the Marxist pap he was fed at home and at school). That gross ignorance screams so loud that no one can hear what he is saying.
yes, I like that they put the word inherited in quotes... now I have a few more suggestions for them...
“global warming”
“fairness doctrine”
“comprehensive imigration reform”
Yes, I agree completely. But, I've thought about it a lot and can't think of anyone he could have picked that really would've made the difference. Romney's financial experience is probably without equal. But, he would have alienated the Baptists, most social conservatives and his wealth would've been an issue.
In a way, Palin made it a closer race than it would have been, but also assured a loss - a real paradox. Palin was a triple. McCain needed a home run.
a few others...
Shared Responsibility
A New America
Muslim Outreach
Does ANYBODY expect Obama to get reelected in 2012? With no prospects for serious economic growth on the horizon? (unless the GOP wins big in 2010 and can put a check on Obama’s taxing and spending)
From the article:
“I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement — the prescription drug plan without a source of funding.”
While it may be USEFUL to point out that the previous administration MADE THE SAME MISTAKES THAT YOU ARE MAKING NOW, it doesn’t excuse the fact that YOU CONTINUE TO MAKE THEM!
Hope, Change?........anyone?
Buy only food and fuel—nothing else. Hop on the American bandwagon to victory, and fear no one!
His cabinet meetings must go allot like this”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfVnWH_PCME&feature=related
I pray there are no earthquakes or hurricanes in the U.S. in the next four years. Obama sure wouldn’t know how to react to it.
I’m beginning to think that the only way for Obama to be relected would be for him to cancel the stimulus fiasco, completely take his hands off the economy, and let the bad banks and incompetent businesses fail. The economy might actually begin to recover within four years if government would stay the hell away.
But he won’t do that, and he will give Pelosi and Reid a free hand to accelerate the collapse and ruin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.