“This shouldn't be a race. The only reason it is, is because Americans are impatient on things not made before yesterday and they don't understand why the economy is not totally hunky-dory again.”
| |
|
“Governor Romney has been running around talking about his five-point plan for the economy for quite some time. And as I pointed out last night, and you guys heard yourselves, it’s really a one-point plan. It’s really a one-point plan. It says folks at the very top can play by their own set of rules.
That’s why they can pay lower taxes than you do, or they can use offshore accounts. Or they can invest in a company, bankrupt it, fire the workers, take away their pensions, ship the jobs overseas, and still make money doing it.
It’s the one-point plan that says it’s okay for Wall Street to keep engaging in the reckless behavior that got us into the mess we’ve been fighting back from for the last four years. It’s the same philosophy that’s been squeezing middle-class families for more than a decade. It’s the same philosophy that we saw in the previous administration. And I have seen too much pain and too much struggle to let this country go down that same road again.”
| |
|
Below is perhaps the most powerful chart we've seen showing that the markets are afraid of Mitt Romney.
It shows inflation expectations – a great proxy for risk – and it looks like the market expects more inflation (supportive of risk assets like stocks) if Barack Obama is re-elected as president than if Mitt Romney were to win the election.
The idea that Romney would be bad for markets has been in ascendance in the past few weeks – and at a big investor conference this week, the concept was all the rage.
The thinking goes that Romney would want to put a someone with more hawkish – or conservative – views on monetary policy in the chairman position at the Federal Reserve.
Doing so, the market seems to fear, would be bad for risk assets because of the prospect that the "Bernanke put" would be removed, and the risk that the Fed lets markets fall without providing more stimulus would rise.
With that in mind, the chart below, via Société Générale rates strategist Fidelio Tata, shows the correlation between Obama's re-election odds on Intrade and the market's inflation expectations:
Well hey, we already know that the market prefers Democrats in the White House.
| |
|
Adding…one of the animators for this impressive animated flick was Lucas Gray of Family Guy and The Simpsons. The animation is unbelievably great!
Via Bob Cesca
| |
|
JIM LEHRER: Good evening from the Magness Arena at the University of Denver in Denver, Colorado. I’m Jim Lehrer of the PBS NewsHour, and I welcome you to the first of the 2012 presidential debates between President Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee.
This debate and the next three -- two presidential, one vice- presidential -- are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Tonight’s 90 minutes will be about domestic issues, and will follow a format designed by the commission. There will be six roughly 15-minute segments, with two-minute answers for the first question, then open discussion for the remainder of each segment.
| |
|
“If you think white working class guys in Ohio are lining up to vote for the "plutocrat married to a known equestrian," you are quite mistaken. Ask them who is better on the economy and they will tell you 'Obama.' This is evidence that the GOP is no longer a national party. Ohio is supposed to be a right-leaning state that Democrats can occasionally win. But, right now, it is a left-leaning state. And it will probably stay that way, just like Michigan and Pennsylvania.”
| |
|
Thanks to a leaked video, we know that Mitt Romney divides the country into those who pay taxes and those who don't, the makers and the moochers.
There is one perhaps surprising group you can put in the latter category: the nation's banks. Sure, banks pay taxes, but they pay a lot less thanks to a giant and underappreciated distortion in our nation's tax code. Moreover, this tax code distortion makes the financial system and the economy more fragile, prone to bankruptcies and runs. Banks profit, and the economy teeters. Great bargain, huh?
Shades of Ayn Rand….
| |
|
“He says he's got a 53-point plan or whatever, I don't know.”
The lack of enthusiasm is….contagious.
| |
|
The U.S. Dow Jones industrial average was up 217.11 points, or 1.66 percent, at 13,264.59 late afternoon in New York. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index was up 26.43 points, or 1.88 percent, at 1,429.87, its highest level in four years.
The rise in U.S. stocks was helped by reports showing American companies added staff in August at the fastest clip in five months and an improvement in service sector employment. A third report showed new claims for jobless benefits fell last week to the lowest level in a month.
U.S. private employers added a stronger-than-expected 201,000 jobs in August, according to payrolls processor ADP, while the government said new claims for jobless benefits fell last week to the lowest level in a month.
The data was the latest to hint U.S. economic growth may be recovering, and it raised chances the government's more comprehensive monthly jobs report on Friday could be stronger than economists expect.
"Today's U.S. reports all beat expectations to put a positive spin on the risks as we approach Friday's U.S. jobs data," said Michael Englund, chief economist at Action Economics in Boulder, Colorado.
So, better than expected job growth, a surge in the stock market, claims for jobless benefits fell………….Mitt Romney is likely to be crying into his cheerios tonight (or drinking on his boat).
| |
|
“Now, let’s be candid, President Obama clearly inherited a very difficult situation. There are no two ways about that. Problem is, he made things much worse.”
In fact, President Obama brought this country back from the edge with little help from Republicans who sought to obstruct almost everything with the intention of costing President Obama a second term.
Via Bob Cesca who rightfully claims “President Obama rescued the economy. Period.”.
| |
|
“For months, Speaker Boehner, Congressman Ryan, and other Republicans have called for the ‘unshackling’ of the private sector from regulations that protect Americans from risky financial deals and other reckless behavior that crashed our economy. Since then, the Vice President has often used a similar metaphor to describe the need to ‘unshackle’ the middle class. Today’s comments were a derivative of those remarks, describing the devastating impact letting Wall Street write its own rules again would have on middle class families. We find the Romney campaign’s outrage over the Vice President’s comments today hypocritical, particularly in light of their own candidate’s stump speech questioning the President’s patriotism. Now, let’s return to that ‘substantive’ debate Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan promised 72 hours ago, but quickly abandoned.”
Jason Easley, emphasis mine:
The Romney campaign has been doing their best to gin up outrage over Biden’s, “in chains” remark today. In fact they are trying to get any controversy going that doesn’t involve discussing how Mitt Romney feels about Paul Ryan’s record, Ryan’s budget, Ryan’s stance on Medicare, or Paul Ryan in general.
Nailed it.
| |
|
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, New Hampshire! (Applause.) Hello, Durham! (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody. It is great to be back in New Hampshire. (Applause.)
A couple of people I want to acknowledge. First of all, wasn't Scott outstanding? Give Scotty a big round of applause for his introduction. (Applause.) I want to thank Todd Allen, who is the principal here at Oyster River High School. (Applause.) And I want to thank our outstanding Senator from New Hampshire, Jeanne Shaheen. (Applause.) And I want to thank all of you. (Applause.)
I know it's a little warm in here. (Laughter.) That’s okay. That's okay. It is wonderful to be back. And I just have so many good memories here in New Hampshire, and I see some familiar faces and folks who were with me when people were still figuring out how to pronounce my name. (Laughter.)
Continue reading "Full Text Transcript of Obama Financial Speech in Durham New Hampshire June 25" »
| |
|
I want to, first of all, thank Angela for her introduction and sharing her story. I know her daughter is very proud of her -- I know her daughter is here today. So give her a big round of applause. (Applause.) I want to thank your president, Dr. Jerry-Sue Thornton. (Applause.) And I want to thank some members of Congress who made the trip today -- Representative Marcia Fudge, Representative Betty Sutton, and Representative Marcy Kaptur. (Applause.)
| |
|
There is something historically different about this recession and its aftermath: in the past, local government employment has been almost recession-proof. This time it’s not. Going back as long as the data have been collected (1955), with the one exception of the 1981 recession, local government employment continued to grow almost every month regardless of what the economy threw at it. But since the latest recession began, local government employment has fallen by 3 percent, and is still falling. In the equivalent period following the 1990 and 2001 recessions, local government employment grew 7.7 and 5.2 percent. Even following the 1981 recession, by this stage local government employment was up by 1.4 percent...
Without this hidden austerity program, the economy would look very different. If state and local governments had followed the pattern of the previous two recessions, they would have added 1.4 million to 1.9 million jobs and overall unemployment would be 7.0 to 7.3 percent instead of 8.2 percent.
Ezra also makes the point that Republicans are responsible for the increases after the last three recessions:
Note that a Republican was president after the 1981, 1990 and 2000 recessions. Public-sector austerity looks a lot better to conservatives when they’re out of power than when they’re in it.
| |
|
“ So, it was a house of cards, and it collapsed in the most destructive crisis that we've seen since the Great Depression. And sometimes, people forget the magnitude of it, you know? Sometimes I forget.”
Via Taegan Goddard
| |
|
In Virginia yesterday, Mitt Romney answered a question as to what he would do [about the economy] with his usual response, i.e., implying or stating something that is a lie:
“ What I would do? People ask me, ‘What would you [sic] to get the economy going?’ and I say, ‘Well look at what the president's done and do the opposite.’”
Also, just in case you’re wondering, yes, Mitt Romney is well aware that Obama’s economic policies worked. All he has to do is look at his [investment] earnings reports.
| |
|
Mitt Romney needs to stop running around shrieking about how Obama's economic policies didn't work.
| |
|
“Wind him up and Mitt Romney will tell you that the solution to the near economic catastrophe that the Bush administration led us into, is to do the exact same thing as Bush. That may make sense to a crash test dummy, but it will not go over well with those who have endured the worst downturn since the Great Depression and are now saddled with the bill for Bush's lost decade.
It is fitting that Romney's emergence comes as Newt Gingrich's think tank files for bankruptcy. For Republicans, whose party is led by a robot and the strongest argument to be made in favor of their policies is that "at least we didn't cause a depression," are already there.”
| |
|
In fact, the new figures are the best since April 2008, and even exceeded positive expectations.
The number of Americans who filed requests for jobless benefits fell by 6,000 last week to 357,000, the U.S. Labor Department said Thursday. Economists surveyed by MarketWatch had projected claims would total 360,000, seasonally adjusted, in the week ended March 31. Claims from two weeks ago were revised up to
Despite last week's annual revisions, the same metrics still apply: wh363,000 from 359,000. The average of new-benefit applications over the past four weeks, meanwhile, dropped by 4,250 to 361,750.en jobless claims fall below the 400,000 threshold, it's considered evidence of an improving jobs landscape, and when the number drops below 370,000, it suggests jobs are actually being created rather quickly.
And with that, here's the chart -- which reflects the revised, seasonably-adjusted data -- showing weekly, initial unemployment claims going back to the beginning of 2007. (Remember, unlike the monthly jobs chart, a lower number is good news.) For context, I've added an arrow to show the point at which President Obama's Recovery Act began spending money.
More good news on the economic front from The Washington Post:
Add Mark Zandi to the growing chorus of economists who believe that the U.S. is finally headed for a real turnaround. The chief economist for Moody’s Analytics just revised his outlook for 2012, and the biggest change to his forecast involves the unemployment rate. Back in January, Zandi predicted that the rate, which is currently at 8.3 percent, would stay above 8 percent through the end of the year. Now he says it “appears set to fall below 8 percent by year’s end” and believes it will fall below 7 percent by the end of 2013, as he explains in his latest note.
| |
|
| |
|
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. (Applause.) Please have a seat. Well, good afternoon, and thank you to Dean Singleton and the board of the Associated Press for inviting me here today. It is a pleasure to speak to all of you -- and to have a microphone that I can see. (Laughter.) Feel free to transmit any of this to Vladimir if you see him. (Laughter.)
Clearly, we’re already in the beginning months of another long, lively election year. There will be gaffes and minor controversies, be hot mics and Etch-a-Sketch moments. You will cover every word that we say, and we will complain vociferously about the unflattering words that you write -- unless, of course, you're writing about the other guy -- in which case, good job. (Laughter.)
Continue reading "Text Transcript: President Obama on the Ryan Budget at the AP Luncheon" »
| |
|
“I think he must watch Mad Men and think it's the evening news. He's just in a time warp.
You have a guy who wants to go back to the same policies that got us into this disaster. He wants to cut taxes for the very wealthy, cut Wall Street loose to write its own rules and he thinks that this somehow is going to produce broad prosperity for Americans. We've tested that. It's failed.”
That first line is damn near perfect.
| |
|
“We need a candidate who's going to be a fighter for freedom. Who’s going to get up and make that the central theme in this race because it is the central theme in this race. I don't care what the unemployment rate's going to be. Doesn't matter to me. My campaign doesn't hinge on unemployment rates and growth rates. It's something more foundational that's going on.”
| |
|
“On so many fronts, there could be no person in this country we could nominate who would be any worse on taking on Barack Obama on the most important issue of the day, ObamaCare, than Gov. Romney. And it's the equivalent of malpractice to nominate someone who gives away the most important issue in this race.”
No ecoli conservatism happening in this race.
| |
|
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. economy is recovering "pretty well" and trying to juice it up by allowing a little extra inflation would be disastrous, Paul Volcker, the former Federal Reserve chairman known for successfully reining in double-digit inflation, said on Wednesday.
"I think that is kind of a doomsday scenario," Volcker told an economic summit when asked if the Fed should foster higher inflation to stimulate faster growth.
Higher inflation would backfire by causing interest rates to rise. "You are not going to get any stimulus and you are going to make it much harder to restore price stability," Volcker told the Atlantic magazine conference.
Some economists have speculated that the Federal Reserve might allow inflation to exceed the central bank's 2 percent target in an attempt to lower the unemployment rate, still stubbornly high at 8.3 percent.
| |
|
On his financial disclosure statement filed last month, Romney reported owning between $250,001 and $500,000 in a mutual fund that invests in debt notes of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, among other government entities. Over the previous year, he had reported earning between $15,001 and $50,000 in interest from those investments.
And unlike most of Romney’s financial holdings, which are held in a blind trust that is overseen by a trustee and not known to Romney, this particular investment was among those that would have been known to Romney.
Over the weekend, Romney intends to start airing an ad that will say, “While Florida families lost everything in the housing crisis, Newt Gingrich cashed in. Gingrich was paid over $1.6 million by the scandal-ridden agency that helped create the crisis.” Shockingly enough, the ad fails to mention Romney’s own investments in the government backed mortgage giants, which have netted him tens of thousands of dollars.
Will update with the ad as soon as it’s released.
| |
|
“On the economy, the facts are these. When Obama took office, the United States was losing around 750,000 jobs a month. The last quarter of 2008 saw an annualized drop in growth approaching 9 percent. This was the most serious downturn since the 1930s, there was a real chance of a systemic collapse of the entire global financial system, and unemployment and debt—lagging indicators—were about to soar even further. No fair person can blame Obama for the wreckage of the next 12 months, as the financial crisis cut a swath through employment. Economies take time to shift course.
But Obama did several things at once: he continued the bank bailout begun by George W. Bush, he initiated a bailout of the auto industry, and he worked to pass a huge stimulus package of $787 billion.All these decisions deserve scrutiny. And in retrospect, they were far more successful than anyone has yet fully given Obama the credit for. The job collapse bottomed out at the beginning of 2010, as the stimulus took effect. Since then, the U.S. has added 2.4 million jobs. That’s not enough, but it’s far better than what Romney would have you believe, and more than the net jobs created under the entire Bush administration. In 2011 alone, 1.9 million private-sector jobs were created, while a net 280,000 government jobs were lost. Overall government employment has declined 2.6 percent over the past 3 years. (That compares with a drop of 2.2 percent during the early years of the Reagan administration.) To listen to current Republican rhetoric about Obama’s big-government socialist ways, you would imagine that the reverse was true. It isn’t.
The right claims the stimulus failed because it didn’t bring unemployment down to 8 percent in its first year, as predicted by Obama’s transition economic team. Instead, it peaked at 10.2 percent. But the 8 percent prediction was made before Obama took office and was wrong solely because it relied on statistics that guessed the economy was only shrinking by around 4 percent, not 9. Remove that statistical miscalculation (made by government and private-sector economists alike) and the stimulus did exactly what it was supposed to do. It put a bottom under the free fall. It is not an exaggeration to say it prevented a spiral downward that could have led to the Second Great Depression.
You’d think, listening to the Republican debates, that Obama has raised taxes. Again, this is not true. Not only did he agree not to sunset the Bush tax cuts for his entire first term, he has aggressively lowered taxes on most Americans. A third of the stimulus was tax cuts, affecting 95 percent of taxpayers; he has cut the payroll tax, and recently had to fight to keep it cut against Republican opposition. His spending record is also far better than his predecessor’s. Under Bush, new policies on taxes and spending cost the taxpayer a total of $5.07 trillion. Under Obama’s budgets both past and projected, he will have added $1.4 trillion in two terms. Under Bush and the GOP, nondefense discretionary spending grew by twice as much as under Obama. Again: imagine Bush had been a Democrat and Obama a Republican. You could easily make the case that Obama has been far more fiscally conservative than his predecessor—except, of course, that Obama has had to govern under the worst recession since the 1930s, and Bush, after the 2001 downturn, governed in a period of moderate growth. It takes work to increase the debt in times of growth, as Bush did. It takes much more work to constrain the debt in the deep recession Bush bequeathed Obama.”
- Conservative-Independent, Andrew Sullivan, excerpted from a Newsweek cover story. The quoted portion of the article focuses on President Obama’s job performance in regards to the economy.
| |
|
“More people are on food stamps today because of Obama's policies than ever in history. I would like to be the best paycheck president in American history. ... And so I'm prepared if the NAACP invites me, I'll go to their convention and talk about why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.”
Really, Newt, really?
Give me a freaking break. Calling President Obama the “food stamp president” and insinuating that black people are all on food stamps, i.e., too lazy to get jobs thus live off food stamps, for Christ’s sake, is old, racist, and not based in truth. [Gingrich’s association with truth is always tenuous, but this is to the point of utterly ridiculous.]
Yes, enrollment in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program has increased during the Obama administration, but as experts continually point out, and which Gingrich continually ignores, this is because of the near depression caused by the policies of Bush and company, a deep, deep recession which continues today, necessitating assistance to many more people than would be the case during better times.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition service tracks month-to-month figures dating back to January 2001. The numbers show that the total of food stamp recipients rose to 14.2 million during President Obama's administration.
The highest in history so far is President George W. Bush. The number of food stamp recipients grew to nearly 14.7 million while he was in office. But, that's eight years in office, compared to President Obama who has not finished his first term.
It's possible that when the figures for January 2012 are available they will show that the gain under Obama has matched or exceeded the gain under Bush. But not if the short-term trend continues. The number getting food stamps declined by 43,528 in October. And the economy has improved since then.
One out of seven Americans is currently getting food stamps, according to the Department of Agriculture.
The figures also show the rise in food stamps began before Obama took office, and accelerated as the nation plunged into the worst economic recession since the Great Depression.
The economic downturn began in December 2007. In the 12 months before Obama was sworn in, 4.4 million were added to the rolls, triple the 1.4 million added in 2007.
So, who gets food stamps?
The most recent Department of Agriculture report on the general characteristics of the SNAP (food stamp) program's beneficiaries says that in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2010:
-- 47% of beneficiaries were children under age 18.
-- 8% were age 60 or older.
-- 41% lived in a household with earnings from a job - the so-called "working poor."
-- The average household received a monthly benefit of $287.
-- 36% were white (non-Hispanic), 22% were African American (non-Hispanic) and 10% were Hispanic.
Oh, and by the way, Newt and Fox liars, the state with the highest number of Americans eligible for and receiving food stamps is Nevada. [Nevada, where if I had to venture a guess, I’d say that there might be maybe fifteen whole black people living in the entire state of Nevada.]
Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-IN), a prominent supporter of the food stamp program:
“People now see that it’s necessary to have a strong food stamp program.”
| |
|
January 04, 2012
Shaker Heights High School
Shaker Heights, Ohio
1:26 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Ohio! (Applause.) Ah, it is good to be back in Ohio. (Applause.) It is good to be back in Shaker Heights -- (applause) -- home of the Red Raiders. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Mr. President, I love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. And I'm glad to be back. (Applause.) I'm glad to be here.
I want to thank your mayor, Earl Leiken, for hosting us today; -- (applause) -- your superintendent, Mark Freeman; -- (applause) -- the principal here, Mike Griffith. (Applause.) Well, and I know -- I'm pretty sure we've got a couple of congresspeople here, but I don't see them. Where are they? Okay, we've got Marcia Fudge. (Applause.) Marcy Kaptur is here. (Applause.) Dennis Kucinich. (Applause.) Betty Sutton in the house. (Applause.) Outstanding members of Congress, doing the right thing every day. So we thank them all for being here. (Applause.)
| |
|
Via Think Progress:
More than 40 percent of international investors see the U.S. as the economy that will perform best over the next year, the highest rating in more than two years, according to a Bloomberg survey. That’s a sharp rise from September, when less than a third had such confidence, and is double the poll result for the next two top-rated markets, Brazil and China.
| |
|
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, everybody. Please, please have a seat. Thank you so much. Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody.
AUDIENCE: Good afternoon.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I want to start by thanking a few folks who’ve joined us today. We’ve got the mayor of Osawatomie, Phil Dudley is here. (Applause.) We have your superintendent Gary French in the house. (Applause.) And we have the principal of Osawatomie High, Doug Chisam. (Applause.) And I have brought your former governor, who is doing now an outstanding job as Secretary of Health and Human Services -- Kathleen Sebelius is in the house. (Applause.) We love Kathleen.
Well, it is great to be back in the state of Tex -- (laughter) -- state of Kansas. I was giving Bill Self a hard time, he was here a while back. As many of you know, I have roots here. (Applause.) I’m sure you’re all familiar with the Obamas of Osawatomie. (Laughter.) Actually, I like to say that I got my name from my father, but I got my accent -- and my values -- from my mother. (Applause.) She was born in Wichita. (Applause.) Her mother grew up in Augusta. Her father was from El Dorado. So my Kansas roots run deep.
Continue reading "Full Text Transcript & Video: President Obama Speech in Osawatomie, Kansas" »
| |
|
“We are economists who oppose ideological cleansing in the economics profession. Equally we oppose political cleansing in the vital debate over the causes and consequences of our current economic crisis. We support the efforts of the Occupy Wall Street movement across the country and across the globe to liberate the economy from the short-term greed of the rich and powerful “one percent”.
We oppose cynical and perverse attempts to misuse our police officers and public servants to expel advocates of the public good from our public spaces. We extend our support to the vision of building an economy that works for the people, for the planet, and for the future, and we declare our solidarity with the Occupiers who are exercising our democratic right to demand economic and social justice.”
Via Zaid Jilani
| |
|
“Leading Democratic party strategists have begun to openly discuss the benefits of embracing the growing and increasingly organized Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement to prevent Republican gains in Congress and the White House next year. We have seen this process of adopting extreme positions and movements to increase base voter turnout, including in the 2005-2006 immigration debate. This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street firms. If vilifying the leading companies of this sector is allowed to become an unchallenged centerpiece of a coordinated Democratic campaign, it has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bullseye.
It shouldn't be surprising that the Democratic party or even President Obama's re-election team would campaign against Wall Street in this cycle. However, the bigger concern should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies - and might start running against them too.
Well-known Wall Street companies stand at the nexus of where OWS protesters and the Tea Party overlap on angered populism. Both the radical left and the radical right are channeling broader frustration about the state of the economy and share a mutual anger over TARP and other perceived bailouts. This combination has the potential to be explosive later in the year when media reports cover the next round of bonuses and contrast it with stories of millions of Americans making do with less this holiday season.”
- A quote from the Washington lobbying firm’s (Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford - CLGC) proposal to conduct a smear campaign against OWS and politicians supporting OWS, and addressed to one of their major clients, the American Bankers Association.
* It’s worth noting that two of the partners in this lobbying firm, were aides to Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), and one of the partners, Sam Geduldig, is a fundraiser for Mitt Romney.
Adding........there is already, no doubt, a strong and concerted effort by the 1% in concert with Republican politicians, to discredit the OWS movement.
Via Chris Hayes
| |
|
“Today we found out we’ve had the 20th month in a row where we’ve increased private sector jobs -- 104,000 this month, 104,000 private sector jobs. And as all you know, that's not nearly enough. We have to increase the pace. We have to act now to do everything in our power to keep this
economy moving and to grow jobs.
President Obama is on his way back from France where he just met with the leaders of the 20 largest economies in the world, where he urged our European friends to step up and stabilize their own economies because if they fail, it will affect the whole world.
Too many Americans are still struggling. Too many college students here at the University of Pittsburgh and elsewhere are worrying about the rising cost of their tuition, and the increasing accumulation of debt. And too many of their parents are in stagnant jobs or out of work, wondering if they're going to be able to send their child back to college next semester.
Continue reading "Morning Quote: Vice President Joe Biden" »
| |
|
“I’ve been in Washington 35 years… and I’ve never seen a time when people have put their own personal political feelings over how we can get the economy moving.
The crowd that was elected the last time not only came here to do nothing, they also came to put down the president. And the way to put him down is not to give him any kind of opportunity to be successful.
Republicans made a decision right after the election [2010 midterms] —don’t give Obama any victories. The heck with putting people to work, because we can score points.”
| |
|
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, and fellow Americans:
Tonight we meet at an urgent time for our country. We continue to face an economic crisis that has left millions of our neighbors jobless, and a political crisis that’s made things worse.
This past week, reporters have been asking, “What will this speech mean for the President? What will it mean for Congress? How will it affect their polls, and the next election?”
| |
|
“The day that the president became president gasoline was $1.79 a gallon. Look at what it is today. Under President Bachmann, you will see gasoline come down below $2 a gallon again. That will happen.”
Is she right? Not in the sense of her implication that Obama is at fault.
Think Progress addressed this issue in June when Exxon claimed it had found abundant oil supplies in the Gulf. That “abundant supply” would provide only enough oil for 9 days worth of global oil consumption.
Setting aside that big ‘if’, while 700 million barrels is enough to ruin the Gulf if we get another blowout, it represents only 9 days of global oil consumption — and roughly one month’s worth of U.S. consumption.
The discovery doesn’t prove we have ‘abundant’ oil reserves, as Hastings claims. It proves the exact opposite, that ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ can’t solve our problems. Steve Greenlee, president of Exxon Mobil’s exploration business, unintentionally admitted that when he said, “This is one of the largest discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico in the last decade.”
There just isn’t enough oil in the Gulf to make a dent in our addiction. A 2009 report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Impact of Limitations on Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Federal Outer Continental Shelf” analyzed the difference between full offshore drilling and restriction to offshore drilling.
The EIA found that there is no impact on U.S. gasoline prices whatsoever in 2020. Gasoline prices would be a mere three cents a gallon lower in 2030. So much for Drill, Baby, Drill.
The fact is that that oil prices have been soaring in spite of the fact that U.S. domestic oil production has also been soaring, “to its highest level in almost a decade,” as EIA’s own data shows:
In January 2005 when Bush was inaugurated for a second time, gas cost $1.83 per gallon. That bargain didn't last long.
Gas prices shot up rapidly as the U.S. economy heated up and oil topped $100 per barrel. Gas soared to a national average of $4.11 in July 2008. That's a rise of about 125 percent.
Then the bubble burst.
Is that so difficult to understand?
| |
|
“The Republicans, inclusive of the tea party, have been orchestrating another economic decline knowing that it will damage the president’s re-election chances as well as the perceived efficacy of Democratic economic policies. Put another way, the Republicans are threatening your personal well-being in order to defeat the president, and they’ve just completed the latest successful attack in their economically bellicose strategy.”
| |
|
“If this is as dire as the White House says it is, and as it would seem the capital markets are suggesting it is, why not just give the Republicans want they want? Why not just cave and say, "you know what? You want only cuts, fine. To save America and save the economy, we'll give you cuts, we'll raise the debt ceiling, and we'll fight another day on the other issues that matter to Democrats.”
| |
|
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) brings the notion of Republican economic sabotage/terrorism in to the open, emphasis mine:“We need to start asking ourselves an uncomfortable question. Are Republicans slowing down the recovery on purpose for political gain in 2012? Let's not forget, Senator McConnell made it clear last October that his number one priority, above everything else, is to defeat President Obama.
And now it's becoming clear that insisting on a slash and burn approach may be part of this plan. It has a double benefit for Republicans. It's ideologically tidy, and it undermines economic recovery which they think only helps them in 2012.”
| |
|
B L O G R O L L
Angry Black Lady Chronicles
Balloon Juice
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog
Booman Tribune
Charles Pierce
Crooks & Liars
Deux Ex Malcontent
Extreme Liberal
Ezra Klein
Greg Sargent
Informed Comment
Nate Silver - 538
Paul Krugman
Please...Cut the Crap
PoliticusUSA
Respectful Insolence
Shoq Value
Steve Benen
TBogg
Think Progress
Veritas Nihilum Vincet
We Party Patriots
Copyright © Political Ruminations 2010-2012
Recent Comments