White House spokesman on Stewart vs. Cramer: “I enjoyed it thoroughly”

Not sure if your numbers are accurate but it is amazing cons take a radio entertainer seriously.

getalife on March 13, 2009 at 6:23 PM

This is hilarious coming from liberals that get their foreign policy advice from code pink and George clooney. Then get their political news from Chris Matthews “I get a tinge everytime I hear Obama speak”, and Keith olberman “I am to small to satisfy a woman so I take my rage out on President Bush”.

Keep cheering on Stewart while Obama continues to make a fool of himself and the people who supported him up on the hill.

Has Hillary been told yet that America is not the longest running democracy?

Baxter Greene on March 13, 2009 at 6:37 PM

The market is down NOW because Obama is president NOW and the government has taken control of the economy and market NOW–or is that too hard to you to get?
The market hates his policies–it looks to the future not the past.
Jenfidel on March 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM

Exactly right,but liberals are more concerned with their ideology than being able to make smart,strong decisions.
That is why they blamed everything on Bush when he was President,and now that Obama is President,they are still blaming everything on Bush.
Between this and going after private citizens like Rush they have to provide distractions from their incompetent and amateurish start to the Obama administration.

When Obama is contradicting himself like this on such an
important issue,only the sheep can still take him seriously:

“We are in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression”
Barak Obama
Feb. 2009

“They’re (the economy)not as bad as we think they are now.”
Barak Obama
Mar. 2009

Liberals like the idiots here are still going around talking about how smart they are and how great Obama is when
the people who actually know what they are talking about are
calling Mr. 57 states policies out for the failures they are:

Liz Peek: Stock Market Gives Obama’s First Month An ‘F’
Editor’s Note: Liz Peek is a financial columnist and the author of wOw’s Wall Street Weekly and SHEconomics.
http://www.wowowow.com/print/214454

but so far the reaction to the new administration’s programs has been decidedly negative. Investors, among others, have panned the plans;

But in liberal land,
It’s all Bush’s fault.
The democrats have all been on Mars the last 7 years and had
nothing to do with fighting for regulating their friends at Fannie/Freddie that started this sub-prime collapse in the first place.

The Obama Economy
As the Dow keeps dropping, the President is running out of people to blame.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama’s policies have become part of the economy’s problem.

Almost every major economist and publication sees Obama’s policies for the disaster they are:

Obama Bear Market’ Punishes Investors as Dow Slumps (Update1)
By Eric Martin

March 6 (Bloomberg) —

President Barack Obama now has the distinction of presiding over his own bear market.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 20 percent since Inauguration Day, the fastest drop under a new president in at least 90 years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The gauge has lost 53 percent from its October 2007 record of 14,164.53, slipping 4.1 percent to 6,594.44 yesterday.

But I guess it’s just those crazy neo-con’s that think this right.

Tell that to Warren Buffett and Mickey Kaus:

Buffett blasts Obama’s handling of economy, crisis mentality

BUFFETT: I think–I think a lot of things should be–job one is to win the war, job–the economic war, job two is to win the economic war, and job three. And you can’t expect people to unite behind you if you’re trying to jam a whole bunch of things down their throat. So I would–I would absolutely say for the–for the interim, till we get this one solved, I would not be pushing a lot of things that are–you know are contentious, and I also–I also would do no finger-pointing whatsoever. I would–you know, I would not say, you know, `George’–`the previous administration got us into this.’ Forget it. I mean, you know, the Navy made a mistake at Pearl Harbor and had too many ships there. But the idea that we’d spend our time after that, you know, pointing fingers at the Navy, we needed the Navy. So I would–I would–I would–no finger-pointing, no vengeance, none of that stuff. Just look forward.

.

Kaus

P.S.: The whole Begala-Carville coordinated campaign against Limbaugh seems misguided when Obama is supposed to be leading the nation out of crisis (see Warren Buffett’s comments, below). Quite apart from whether it’s a good idea to take one of your smarter opponents and build him up, the campaign seems petty, partisan and poll-driven–not designed to produce any kind of national pulling-together. If Begala weren’t around I’d suspect Chris Lehane of thinking it up.

Mickey Kaus
Slate Political Blog
March 10, 2009

Nothing to see here.
This is just a distraction.

“Hope and Change” is in full bloom for the idiots on their knees in the People’s Temple of Obama.

Baxter Greene on March 13, 2009 at 7:30 PM

Finally, to which specific lack of regulation are you referring? Do you think Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should’ve been more tightly regulated? Which party was most instrumental in blocking those regulations?

ddrintn on March 13, 2009 at 7:33 PM

This “no regulation” hype by liberals is not backed up by the facts:

Is Deregulation to Blame?
The new Washington consensus says “yes.” The facts on the ground say something different.
http://reason.com/news/show/130348.html

In reality, regulation as a whole has thrived under President George W. Bush. Between 2001 and fiscal year 2009, the federal regulatory budget increased 65 percent in real terms, to about $17.2 billion.

But what about Wall Street in particular? What specific acts of deregulation are being blamed for the financial crisis, and what role if any did they play? Let’s look at the accusations one by one:

1) The partial repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 allowed commercial banks to get involved in risky investments, such as mortgage-backed securities.
The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 prohibited investment banks from acting as commercial banks, and vice versa. Signed by Bill Clinton (who continues to defend the legislation), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 repealed those aspects of the law. Many on the left blame at least part of our current woes on that move. With the repeal, Barack Obama said in a March economic address, “we have deregulated the financial services sector, and we face another crisis.”
In fact, multiple exemptions to Glass-Steagall had been granted for years before Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed into law. Most European financial markets, not normally known as more “deregulated” than the U.S., never separated commercial and investment banks in the first place.

The Bush team has spent more taxpayer money on issuing and enforcing regulations than any previous administration in U.S. history. Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2009, outlays on regulatory activities, adjusted for inflation, increased from $26.4 billion to an estimated $42.7 billion, or 62 percent. By contrast, President Clinton increased real spending on regulatory activities by 31 percent, from $20.1 billion in 1993 to $26.4 billion in 2001.

Nobody took more money and fought against regulating Fannie/Freddie as hard as the democrats:

Guest essay: Fannie and Freddie mess? Blame the Democrats
By JOHN H. PILLA
http://www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_11631591

Capitalism worked well until the government began to limit free markets by forcing the Government Sponsored Enterprises called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make loans to those not worthy of receiving home mortgages (subprime mortgages).
The markets did fine until these actions were undertaken by Democratic administrations.
Here is a list of key events:

Here they are in their own words:

Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&NR=1
VIDEO:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

But of course it is all Bush’s fault.

Baxter Greene on March 13, 2009 at 7:47 PM

Terrye on March 13, 2009 at 7:52 PM

That is why they are afraid of her.
That is why they can’t shut up about her.

They had to attack her daughter,attack a handicapped child,attack the fact that she bought a tanning bed because she actually has executive experience,successfully running a state that gained jobs,cut excessive spending,and is in the process of completing the largest energy project in the history of this country.

Obama’s amateur circus of an administration and the clowns that he can’t find to fill the jobs combined with promises being broken on a daily basis show just how much of a con job the media helped pull over on the American people with the electing of their “Paparazzi President”.

Baxter Greene on March 13, 2009 at 8:03 PM

In all of that time what have we accomplished that we can now tout as a lasting achievement besides keeping the country “safe”?

ckoeber on March 13, 2009 at 8:04 PM

“Safe” is something Clinton failed miserably at.
But since Obama can go around blaming Bush for the economic problems that he and his democratic friends were also instrumental in creating, it certainly can be said that Bush
inherited the terrorism problem that created 9/11 just months into his Presidency.

You can’t have it both ways.

Here are just a few:

Freeing over 50 million people from some of the worst terrorist regimes known to man,

Spending more money helping Africa than any other President,

Spending more money and accomplishing more to defeat Aids in Africa than any other President,

Spending more money and accomplishing more to defeat Malaria than any other President,

Defeating Al-qaeda in the central front in the war on terror,

Bush’s policies dropped the deficit 4 of 8 years Bush was president, held an average unemployment at 5.2%, saw the strongest productivity growth in 4 decades and witnessed robust GDP growth.
Bush was able to do this despite 9-11, a recession he inheritied, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Hurricane Katrina.
He did this by cutting taxes and giving people back their own money to invest:

Unemployment Soars to Highest Level Since Clinton Years… It Must Be a Depression

The nation’s unemployment rate bolted to 7.2 percent in December, the highest level since Bill Clinton was in office.

Bush’s average unemployment rate:5.2
Worse than that…
This now means that the average unemployment rate during the Bush years reached the same threatening level as it was during the Clinton years…
Although it wasn’t such a big deal during the Clinton years:

saw the strongest productivity growth in 4 decades

http://bp0.blogger.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/R9QeRH-mxbI/AAAAAAAAL7o/SZbTIKonkSU/s1600-h/productivity+rate.JPG

Myths & Facts About the Real Bush Record

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/12/myths_and_facts_about_the_real.html
at December 22, 2008 – 10:44:00 PM PST

As the year draws to an end and President Bush enters his final month in office, there is much commentary about the Administration’s record over the past eight years. Unsurprisingly, many of these stories assail and distort the President’s record and recycle myths and unfounded allegations that have been leveled for the better part of his two terms. Historical accuracy requires a response to the litany of attacks leveled against President Bush, and while there’s not enough space to respond to all of them, here are five of the most egregious:

Let’s see you defend:

Obama’s use of State Secrets,

Obama’s use of Rendition,

Obama backing out of Campaign finance reform,

Obama lying about not having lobbyist in his administration,

Obama using indefinite retention in keeping terrorist,

Obama’s administration not being transparent like he promised,

Obama being wrong about the surge,

Obama air raiding villages and killing civilians,

Obama being a chickenhawk,

Obama agreeing with Bush,adhering to the status agreement,and keeping troops in Iraq based on conditions on the ground,

Obama signing off on wasteful earmarks,

Obama acting like he wants bi-partisanship when his number one man says this:

And here’s Rahm Emanuel:
“I’ll tell you this,” Emanuel shouted out to his staff. “The Republicans may have the 72-hour program. But they have not seen the 22-month program!
“Since my kids are gone, I can say it: They can go —- themselves!”

combined with shutting Republicans out of discussions and reading a final draft on legislation before it is voted on.

Baxter Greene on March 13, 2009 at 8:41 PM