President vs. Congress

This chart is a combination of the 5 most current polls regardin America's feelings toward the President and Congress.

(I am working with Google Docs so please excuse the fact that my labeling didn't work)


Results by Row

President Approval rating 64%
President Bringing Change 71%
President Being Bi-partisan 70%

Congressional Dems Approval 48%

Congressional Repubs Appr. 35%
Congressiona Repubs being Bi-partisan 33%.

Let's restate that in video.

Here we go again

The only joy of being the minority party, especially one that has very little power, is that you don't have to accomplish or do anything. This is true no matter who is in power. However, it appears our current day nay-sayers are going overboard to rewrite history. I mentioned earlier their attempt to rewrite history. This concept is getting played out vis-a-vie Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is almost impossible to hear a conservative or a republican commentator or politician speaking about the housing crisis without the the F words coming out of their mouths.

House Minority Leader John Boehner leads the way with such statements as

"Why should we reward Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with $200 billion in taxpayer dollars without first reforming these housing entities that were at the heart of the economic meltdown?" House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement.

There are two main reasons the conservatives of the world such as Larry Kudlow like to spew this talking point. The first is the continued attempt to de-legitimzie the successes of the New Deal. Fannie was established as a New Deal program to stabilize the housing market. Secondly This fits into their dis-proven narrative that the whole economic mess is a result of mean old democratic politicians forcing companies to give loans to poor, lazy, no good people. "See what happens when you let people interfere with the invisible hand of the market". My understanding of the invisible hand of the market works to prevent business from doing bad things because they won't have any customers after a while, Hmmmm. Also when customers do find out all the trouble that has been inflicted on the general market, customers will punish them by not utitlizing their services causing the business financial hardship, double Hmmmm.


http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/09/08/fannie_and_freddie_bail_out/


"A point that gets easy to miss in the current hullabaloo over the bailout is that Fannie and Freddie were not primarily responsible for either the housing boom or its bust. That responsibility is more fully borne by the non-government sponsored enterprises who play in the real estate market -- the private mortgage lenders, commercial banks, investment banks and myriad institutional and hedge fund investors who engaged in an orgy of exotic mortgage loan and mortgage security innovation and speculation. Toward the very end of the boom, Fannie and Freddie did begin to get more involved in subprime loans and related derivative markets, but that was because they were losing market share to the fully private sector."


Something else that falls into this logic is that it was a terrible thing that over the past 15 years or so the home ownership rates have increased from a historical average of 64% to around 70-72%. This additional 6 - 8 % of home ownership was a bad thing. I am guessing the thinking is that these additional percentages were the lazy, no good people getting into the market and screwing it all up for the rest of us.

Now I do agree that a big part of the housing problem was people getting into mortgages that they could not handle. Although I question, that all of this was the last 6 - 8 %. It seems to me that a lot of people who got caught up in these bad mortgages, were people who were looking to upgrade. I am guessing a lot of middle income people saw the shining new house and the hill and decided they could make it work. They would just get a ARM and refi when it was time. Then when it was time they eventually found themselves in trouble.

So to suggest that this trouble was brought on by the bottom rungs of the housing customers is suspect. I do believe in general it is better for more people to own their homes. It is just as important that all people can afford the homes they own.



Another important note on this fallacy that is being shouted from every roof top. Fannie and Freddie are owned by.....You and Me (otherwise known as the taxpayers).

Pants on fire

I expect to come back and complete this thought more thoroughly. That being said, in a continuing theme about intellectual dishonesty - The New Deal worked.

I can respect one disagreeing with the New Deal on a philosophical term. But do not tell me that the New Deal did not work. The programs of the New Deal cut unemployment by 40%. If we were able to cut unemployment by 40% today we would be down to 4.5. The New Deal left 37 dams in the TVA providing more than jobs. It provided a chance for citizens to be productive and proud. The TVA brought millions of people into the modern era of electricity. The New Deal left behind roads, and sewers many of which are still in use today. Take a look at a few of the things the New Deal provided http://www.newsweek.com/id/179874.

From Pat Buchanen of all people, Industrial output was back upto 1929 levels by 1936. While unemployment still around 15% this was down from a peak of 25%. A great portion of that 85% that was employed were actually making something to be left behind for future generations.

Do not tell me the New Deal did not work.

Foreshadowing

This clip is from Nov. 2007. Obama is enjoying himself, but sheds a little light. Again it is interesting that all along people have not been listening to what he has said along the way to the Presidency. That or they have just assumed he did not mean what he said.

Enjoy.

Amen

http://www.dailykostv.com/v/000498.html

Spending Vs. Cuts.

I have said time and time again that this crisis is new unchartered and difficult territory. There is a lot of legitimate debate going on. The general consensus is not if, but what to do. the "what" is generally spending vs. tax cuts. I'll admit my gut reaction is for spending.

The gut level reaction is based on the thought that our infrastructure is in need of updating. So if we spend on these projects and we still do not come of the recession at least we have addressed our infrastructure needs. This is the same logic I used when addressing the spending on school construction and updating. Now it is imperative that this be done in a manner that has unprecedented scrutiny. Is there going be something that some can characterize as waste. Yes. There has to be a great effort to minimize this.

My gut level on tax cuts is that If I were to get a little extra money back I am going to do one of two things. The first is to put it in the bank. If it is a little bit of money, maybe buy an extra latte every week. So either the money is not going to be thoroughly recycled through the economy or I will help Starbucks a little bit. If this fails to stimulate the economy, what do we have to show for it as a country. Our bridges are still beat up, our schools are still in need of help.

I came across this article in Freakonomics that provides for another possible argument for spending vs. cuts.


http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/tax-cuts-vs-government-spending/

Maybe we don't know what we are talking about.

I couldn't sleep, so I got up at like 3:00 on Monday am. At 5:00 when Morning Joe came on I started to get a little depressed. Not serious, just disturbed. Every pundit that sat down on that set was stating how horrible Obama had been last week. He was a failure on his approach to Bi-partisanship, the stimulus package was up in smoke. Especially Joe. I wish he would decide who he really is. At one moment he attempts to be an honest although right leaning / analyst observer. The next moment he is full fledged High School Cheerleader for the Conservative movement.
That was the mode he was in early on Monday am.

I don't know if it was my lack of sleep or what, but I started to buy into the spin. Then the sun came out and shined light on the reality.

Gallup releases poll on the handling of the Stimulus package

Handling of Stimulus Package

Obama 67% approval
Reps. 31% approval


This is followed up by an amazing townhall conducted in Elkhart IN. This townhall accomplished so much. Personalized the story. It put faces to the troubles we are experiencing. You know what it wasn't "welfare queens" it wasn't illegal immigrants. It wasn't those "damn kids." It was our neighbor. President Obama looked real and dynamic and like he was understanding and reacting to these people.

President Theodore Roosevelt is a President I need to read more about. I have read one biography about his life during his Presidency. A sense of Roosevelt, T. came to me as I was watching Obama interact with the crowd on Monday. President Obama said to hell with all this nonsense of Washington DC and he went out to the people. The townhall was not staged, anyone was allowed in and the questions were random and real. He encouraged them to ask pointed questions. He was real, he was at one time one of them and also their leader. He was going to go back to Washington and continue to fight an honest fight for what he thought was needed.

You know what a CNN poll was released

66% percent approve of the way President Obama is handling the Stimulus Package.

I have said many times that this is a big deal and there can be honest differences on how to approach it. That being said many on the Republican side seem to be sending the message that they are sticking to politics over people. That seems to be resonating with the American people. I still think one of the biggest mistakes was to have absolutely zero votes for this in the House. That is a number that is not easily forgotten and sends a message, I don't think it was the message they expected.

A couple of notes. This whole situation reminds me very much of the campaign against McCain. The republicans are playing for the sound bite the one day story. President Obama seems to be always looking down field. Remember all of McCain's stunts in the campaign, cancelling his campaign, picking Palin. It seems that many of the republicans have not learned they lesson.

Second, from what I heard last night after the townhall, Republicans are starting to realize at this time that they can't win by beating on President Obama. If his numbers are this high before Monday, I think we'll seem them creep even higher. They have now repeating that it was the mean old Nancy Pelosi that made them do this. I am old enough to remember the Newt Gingrich lead shutting down of the government. You know what when people are pissed off and they are focused on what is going on in
Washington, they do not like games. They expect their representatives and Senators to act like adults. Over the last week there has been one adult in the room and a bunch of tantrums all around him.


And oh by the way let's check in with Morning Joe and see what he has to say today.

No Description Needed

Round 2

The last post I put up finished with the idea that President Obama needed to pivot and talk to the people of America regarding his battles to pass a stimulus package. He scheduled interviews on all major networks and Fox News. Either through bad timing (or good) the Daschle withdrawal occurred just prior to these interviews. The bad side of the coin is that the original purpose of the interview was to speak to the people about the need to pass a stimulus package. The possible good side of the coin, which may not have been totally coincidental is he was able to turn the page on the negative news cycle.

With the CPO's tax issue coming to light that day, Daschle's withdrawal all happening before the interviews President Obama was able to face the questions straight forward and take responsibility and then pivot to speaking about the stimulus package. Knowing the way news cycles work those interviews cleared the air on the issue and opened up a new round of talking. Your going to see the media starting to focus on President Obama fighting back on his package. 1) This is true 2) it makes for a good story. The news media like to balance, whether it is accurate or not. The past week or so the Media has been covering the Republicans beating up on the package. You now will see the media tell us the story of how the President it fighting back.

Now just because the media is talking about it does not mean it is NOT true. President Obama is out today with a editorial in the Washington Post which is linked below. Organizing for America is hosting hundreds if not thousands of House Parties this weekend to discuss and build support for the package. You will also see a number of Democratic Senators out discussing the need for the package, albeit tweaked from the original House version .


President Barack Obama speaks to the people

"So we have a choice to make. We can once again let Washington's bad habits stand in the way of progress. Or we can pull together and say that in America, our destiny isn't written for us but by us. We can place good ideas ahead of old ideological battles, and a sense of purpose above the same narrow partisanship. We can act boldly to turn crisis into opportunity and, together, write the next great chapter in our history and meet the test of our time. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/04/AR2009020403174.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

The first hurdle of many to come.

A third Obama appointee is in trouble for tax issues. This is troublesome. President Obama is fighting hard and a good fight on what he believes is right and necessary regarding the stimulus package. I do not believe anything sinister is going on. However, there is the issue of perception. President Obama campaigned hard on a doing things a new way.

This damage is not permanent. It will go away. It was not necessary. That being said there are people that will play up the sexist angle on this. President Obama was able to get Geithner and Daschle through for a couple of very important reason. Senators on both sides of the aisle were afraid that if Geithner didn't get to Treasury our steep decline would dramatically worsen. Daschle is simply too important for the Obama's administration's plans regarding health care. I have mentioned previously that the reason Daschle was chosen was ability to work the Senate. He will rely upon his experience as Majority Leader of the Senate.

Deputy Director of Office of Manage and Budget is expendable. There are a number of competent people that will perform this job admirably. President Obama has to spend any political capitol on 1) Geithner 2) Daschle 3) stimulus package. Plus he will need to save some capital for future battles.

I will be glad once we get past the confirmation stage of this administration. So far, it appears that most of these problems have been fairly honest mistakes. The important issue is how the administration handles these issues and communicates with the people.

Word of the Day.

Stimulative.

"Marketing"

Paul Krugman has a very relevant critique of the Obama Administration's handling of the stimulus plan "marketing". While I give the Administration high marks, I would have to agree on this point. It seems to be something that can be easily addressed.


http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/02/stimulusbailout-confusion/

R-E-S-P-E-C-T

There are many times I come across a post on another site that summarizes my thoughts clearly and concisely before I have a chance to put them together.

This is the case in a mini dust up that is being played out currently. A few on the right are complaining about that the Obama Administration is not paying sufficient respect to the oval office.


Follow this link for a review of this issue