"Dow Teeters on the Brink of Record High"

Author as heard on network news broadcast | 5/10/2006 | JewishRighter

[JewishRighter]

"Dow Teeters on the Brink of Record High"

I kid you not. On the 2:00 ABC radio network newsbreak, the announcer said the exact words quoted above. How can you say that something doing extraordinarily well is teetering on the brink? Doesn't that suggest impending doom or disaster? This is just an example of a literally endless suppy of proof that the MSM is rotten to the core with bias.

[mikethevike]

It's a slow day at the office for me :-)

[JewishRighter]

I can't quite agree with you. I remember distinctly that media coverage of markets and the economy during the Clinton years was celebratory, optomistic and even giddy. Talk of a market bubble was generally scarce and quickly dismissed.

[massgopguy]

You don't hear any analysts talking about a 20% "correction" on the horizon like you did in 1999.

[newgeezer]

The index has increased 4.9% in the last 6 1/2 years for a new high. I'm glad my money has been in CDs.

Anyone who was listening to Bob Brinker ("Money Talk" on syndicated radio) would have been out of the stock market before 9/11/2001, and fully-invested in stocks since sometime in 2002 (or 2003, I don't recall).

Unfortunately, I missed out, too, because I'm still waiting for my S&P index fund to recover completely.

[JewishRighter]

I see this thread was re-classified to General/Chat. Sorry if I had that wrong. I thought since it was something just heard on the news, it belonged in news. Thanks.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Yeah, I remember the constant cheer-leading on CNBC. However, even while talking the market up, they would put on enough shorts to provide "balance" -- even though the shorts were usually nothing more than fresh meat for the rabid bulls to gore. It was supposed to be "the end of the business cycle" thanks to the Internet. (There's some truth to that, because of vastly improved supply-chain and inventory management -- but, in retrospect, it was mostly hype.)

Clinton gets credit for a strong economy -- even though he should be blasted for presiding over a bubble. Bush will never get the credit he deserves for preventing a serious depression after the bubble was burst, to say nothing of containing the damage to the economy after 9/11. The U.S. (and the rest of the world) is fortunate that the U.S. economy didn't go the way of the Japanese economy after the collapse of their real estate bubble a decade earlier. I "blame" Bush.

[Kenny Bunkport]

"For now they are considering a backdoor approach."

That's Jay Leno-like material.

[Kenny Bunkport]

Reagan gets credit for nearly a quarter century of sustained grown (with very minor down-ticks over that time). Clinton gets "credit" for doing nothing to seriously mess with the economy, and the credit for that goes to the Republicans for taking control of Congress in 1995. Clinton is the biggest do-nothing president we've ever had, and for that we should all be grateful.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

You're right about who gets the credit from those who think -- unfortunately, that's not the spin the MSM puts on things.

[JewishRighter]

I know you knew what teeter means. I'm just playin' dumb, which comes natural.

[Doctor Stochastic]

The Dow's no fun. It fell right over.