Losing Control

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: tjhall @ 02/05/2009 4:55:32 AM

    The "stale debate" is a righteous one. The author is obviously an Odumbo shill.

  • Posted By: zenzemann @ 02/05/2009 4:36:43 AM

    The writer of this piece seems to be in agreement with Prez Obama that this spending bill be passed RIGHT NOW!!! If there is ANYTHING that I have learned in life, it is that wanting to do things RIGHT NOW!! are usually pretty expensive things to do, and many times those things that we might want to do in haste (even though it was a REALLY good idea at the time!) we might want to modify a little bit later-kind of reminds me of a truly beautiful girlfriend that I once had... When we as a nation are talking about spending this astounding amount of money, I think that we as citizens and providers/caretakers for the next generation or two really need to understand what we are signing ourselves and the next generation up for. I DO believe in passion! I DO believe in supporting our President! I also believe in REALLY understanding the costs that we as a nation are signing up for. If it takes another week or two to fully understand what our newly elected president wants to do, I think that it would be worth that time to understand what we are truly signing up for. .

  • Posted By: aloysiusmiller @ 02/05/2009 4:08:57 AM

    On November 3, 2003 Hirsh wrote "or Bush, the political challenges are growing just as rapidly. Having made one of the most fateful decisions in the modern presidency ??? to try to remake the Middle East, starting with Iraq ??? he has no choice but to press ahead with his request for the $87 billion, even if it is unpopular, reports Chief Political Correspondent Howard Fineman.

    Six months ago, the Bush administration decided to cut corners on normal bidding procedures and hand over large postwar reconstruction contracts to traditional defense contractors on a limited-bid or no-bid basis. It bypassed the Iraqis and didn???t worry terribly much about accountability to Congress. The plan was for a ???blitzkrieg??? reconstruction. But by sacrificing accountability for speed, America is not achieving either very well right now report"

    I guess that was then and this is now. Being a Newsweek columnist means never having to say "I remember".

  • Posted By: SophoJoJo @ 02/05/2009 3:20:39 AM

    http://www.klatcher.com/sophotec/Explaining_the_credit_crisis

  • Posted By: SophoJoJo @ 02/05/2009 3:20:19 AM

    http://www.klatcher.com/sophotec/Explaining_the_credit_crisis

  • Posted By: ryoung122 @ 02/05/2009 3:13:05 AM

    We need a recession so that we can catch up on things like increasing savings, paying down personal debt, and saving more green space for the future. You don't cure a hangover with another alcohol binge.

  • Posted By: Kouros Pappadopoulous @ 02/05/2009 2:39:50 AM

    The trouble with Americans in general is that they are in denial - the reality is that they ought to cobble together and eschew partisanship. The "American dream" is over, nd the sooner Joe Citizen realises this the better: start saving and stop extravagence. In short, emulate your grandparents and only to some degree, your parents - there's an appropriate saying in the English language for each circumstance and this being best said by, "cut your coat according to the cloth you have"! For the right wing religious, even jesus Christ made this relevant when he said that the builder/developer had to plan and build his structure only after having assessed his resources. Meanwhile, get rid of the fat cats you have in your midst and for the average Joe American educate yourselves about the rest of the world that you either screw or attempt to want to change to a "one size fits all". Realise that progress, developmentand therefore success comes from diversity!

    Kouros Pappadopolous

  • Posted By: conlawprize @ 02/05/2009 2:17:54 AM

    what are the chances this bill actually works at its purported goal? no one has answered that yet

    i dont want to throw a $900 billion dart. besides, the american consumer is doing what they should have been doing for years: saving money instead of using their house as an ATM and banking on exploding housing prices to take care of retirement.

    assuming this bill does what its supposed to, arent we just trying to re-inflate the spending bubble and ultimately delaying the pain?

    i thought kicking the can down the road was no longer in vogue in this era of change?

  • Posted By: LogicBot @ 02/04/2009 10:19:59 PM

    The Republicans are taking their time with the economic crisis as they have over the last eight years, stalling to get what they want with no urgency.. figuring like many of the leaders before the start of the Great Depression that it will all blow over. The problem is that the present financial mess is not just due to a housing bubble brought on by deregulation, but goes back to the changes to our anti-trust laws that Reagan championed that allowed our manufacturing to be moved overseas. First came the Free-Market ideas and before they were fully field tested, they rushed in the Free-Trade policy built on this new untested concept... The Free-Trade policy was initially championed by Bush Sr. but signed into law by Bill Clinton. Now, after using the over inflated values of our Real Estate to create a false economy through mortgage derivatives, which is now in the throws of collapsing, resulting from having already exported our economic manufacturing base. We are still falsely trying to act like we still have an economy by bickering over a small and skimpy stimulus package that we think will somehow replace all of the jobs we have outsourced, and all of the supplemental credit based spending through credit cards and home credit lines, that previously helped to keep our economy afloat. Now, instead of worrying about our huge trade imbalance, and how to keep more jobs here, we are perplexed about adhering to our failed trade deals. OK, since we are now knee deep in it.. with the bulk of our manufacturing operations in 3rd world countries who also buy our stuff... Lets just require that we have balanced trade, so that effectively we can have World Trade with still the same amount as the Stimulus Package going into our economy. We also need to front load the economic recovery by stopping foreclosures in order to help stop the decline in the value of mortgage derivatives, and stop the consumers Fear Factor by restoring Unemployment Compensation to levels that will keep them as consumers and mortgage payers. As certain Republicans jockey for power and to protect their foreign business interest, it only highlights how out-of -touch they are.. as the reality of the financial meltdown is already showing to be rather unforgiving. And they really don't need to sweat-it so much, because as we create jobs and buy stuff.. most of it is imported.

    • Posted By: LogicBot @ 02/05/2009 12:38:32 AM

      You seem to have forgotten that Greenspan changed the home lending laws in the latter of the 20th Century just before announcing an Economic Slow-down and raising interest rates because he failed to realize that the High Tech industry had already Globalized and had created a real economic engine, because instead of a trade imbalance like we have with China, we were selling Computers and other Technology to Europe and the rest of the world because we were the leading developer... creating a positive cash flow in this direction.. that if it didn't look like an overheating economy we would have been a rather poor player in the huge world economy. But he did succeed in softening up the economy enough to help get Bush elected. Also, it wasn't so much the giving of mortgages to those of lower economic means, but Greenspan touted the variable rate loans and then proceeded to quickly raise interest rates to almost as high as they were before Bush W, when the economy was hot. How could he not have anticipated the high foreclosure rate and subsequent collapse of the mortgage derivatives market and the impending consequences. If we are going to continue to export all of our latest high technology jobs as quickly as we development them, then we are going to have to limit interest rates to about 3% and keep our fingers crossed. Besides Bush W. and a Republican controlled Government had 8 years to redirect things if they weren't totally satisfied... and what they did do, only made things worse...

    • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 11:18:38 PM

      Quite right. The fact is that the Democrats messing with the housing industry is what started this nightmare. Below is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time Republicans attempted with S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

      See also:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related (See Obama interview, about 2/3 of the way through)

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=related

      For an interesting article purporting to detail the House Financial Services Committee Chairs long history with Fannie Mae, See http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx

      "House Financial Services Committee Chair promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive."

      The Democrats failed policies started this disaster. Even Bill Clinton says so.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfGWxqsKFmY

      For an academic analysis from the field of Economics, See:

      http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1322297

      Oh, and by the way, Bush inherited a recession from Clinton, not a surplus that was anything but a surplus of bull on paper. The U.S. economy shrank in three non-consecutive quarters in the early 2000s (the third quarter of 2000 [Clinton Administration], the first quarter of 2001, and the third quarter of 2001). This required the first round of Bush stimulus checks, you may recall. Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded until the housing crises, the cause of which is set forth above.


    • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 11:03:48 PM

      No democrats have any foriegn business interests? Yeah right. Just like Gore and Kerry carrying on in 2000 and 3004 that Bush and Cheney were for big oil when both of them had more oil stock individually then Bush and Cheney had combined. Kerry and Gore also made fun of Bush's college grades yet they both refused to release theirs prior to the election. Guess what Bush had better grades then both of them oonce they released their grades and Gore flunked out of law school. He (Gore) may not be super dumb though he is conning a lot of dopes out of millions of dollars with his phony carbon credit business while uses 28 times the energy of the average American famioly and flies a private jet everywhere with limo transportation Got to love thoose elitetist dems they sure have a loyal albiet niave following.

    • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 10:55:07 PM

      The Global equalization strategy is embraced by the dems not the GOP. The globalists (UN) want to improve the global standard of living but they are doing it at the expense of the West. Their brilliant plan is to lower our standard of living while raising the third world standard up.As far as Reagan and anti trust you are way off. There was a law establlished under Teddy R. designed to keep American companies from moving their operations overseas why back then and it is still in effect today. Companies are allowed to move some jobs overseas to remain viable and competitive. Corporate tax breaks were designed to prevent flight way back then. Interestingly enough Obama and the dems want this law eliminated. Kiss every manufacturing jobs in this country gone if they get their way.

  • Posted By: syntheticzero @ 02/05/2009 12:28:50 AM

    This is all too silly. People, it's been two weeks, the legislative process is moving along, and everyone is panicking already. It's hilarious! Obama is doing just fine. Two weeks more and you'll see, we'll have a stimulus package and we'll be moving on to the next cable-news-inspired panic fest.

  • Posted By: nobsh @ 02/04/2009 7:39:49 PM

    If we don't do something NOW , we WILL be screwed! Please, give the president a chance! At least he's trying! Unless we are all independently wealthy, which I doubt, we just can't continue on the road we've been on. Not only are WE going to suffer, but also our great grandchildren.

    • Posted By: OrionCA @ 02/05/2009 12:04:42 AM

      Just remember as you turn down your thermostat to save a few bucks on your utlity bill Obama turned his UP, to hothouse temperatures so he could lounge in his shirtsleeves in the Oval Office. When you voted him to "do something" was that really what you meant?

    • Posted By: aerobat @ 02/04/2009 7:42:44 PM

      By "do something", you mean we should borrow a trillion dollars? If we're broke now, imagine the shape we'll be in after a few years of dem control of the government.

  • Posted By: chijam @ 02/04/2009 8:32:14 PM

    Hirsh is right on.
    I voted for Obama and, like millions of others, celebrated his victory with a deep feeling of pride in America.
    What Obama earned was a mandate from the people to LEAD, with the expectation that his leadership could raise the ethical and performance standards of ALL leaders, in turn delivering a better America and a better world. Change We Can Believe In. I still believe in Obama, but I can see opportunities slipping away everywhere and everyday. I beg him to realize his own strength and to stop accomodating and compromising. This is the time to be bold. Set the highest standards and expectations and take a clear, focused message to the people. The politicians will have to follow. Sacrifices have to be made - intelligent people understand this. We are in a real life mess, not some fairy tale with a guaranteed happy ending. The whole world needs help and a global majority of human beings probably believe that Obama can have a positive impact. GET MAD, STEP UP, AND LEAD!

    • Posted By: Nowforsomemoretruth @ 02/04/2009 9:00:54 PM

      Less than 3 cents more than 50 cents is not much of a mandate. He got les than 53% of the vote, and it was independants who put him over the top, not nut case ultra-liberals.

      • Posted By: OrionCA @ 02/05/2009 12:01:38 AM

        Sorry, chijam: You got took. Obama is good at reading speeches (that other people wrote) scrolling down a teleprompter but he's what we warned you he is: an empty suit. He waltzed down the street to Congress to tell the Republicans, "I won." and that tit was time for them to bow down and kiss his feet. I don't know what you call that in your neck of the woods but around here we call it "hubris". Didn't work: Every one of those GOP congressmen won, too, and most will be there long after he's gone.

        You voted for a dream. This is reality. The next four years are going to be very painful for you.

  • Posted By: toddspencer @ 02/04/2009 11:23:22 PM

    uh oh! mr. obama is showing signs of major incompetence.

    it was aesop who said that 'after all that is said and done, more is said than done.'

    is mr. president really doing something?

  • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 9:43:04 PM

    New York Times Sept 11th 2003 President Bush expresses serious concerns about the financial situation of Fannie and Freddie. He warns of an impending crisis and calls for stronger regulation on them to shore up a lot of shaky loans. Dems, Dodd, Kerry, Frank and an Illinois State senator Barack Obama block his attempts at regulation. They argue they are in great financial shape. In 2005 Senator John Mc Cain warns that Fannie and Freddie are in trouble and need oversight. The dems pooh pooh him like Bush. June 2008 Barney Frank says the two mortgage giants are on sound financial ground. A fact he later tries to deny while blaming Bush for the crisis. If the GOP would have had congress for both Bush terms Fannie and Freddie would not have collapsed because they would have regulated these companies and slowed or stopped their shaky lending practices. The dems in their blind idealism to increase minority home ownership plunged ahead and blocked the GOP attempts to address this problem. Now the housing collapse is somehow Bush's fault. Bush's mistake was trying to outspend the democrats I believe in an effort to try and increase his approval rating a serious blunder. He was a democrat in republican clothing

    • Posted By: Nowforsomemoretruth @ 02/04/2009 10:50:36 PM

      Quite right. The fact is that the Democrats messing with the housing industry is what started this nightmare. Below is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time Republicans attempted with S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

      See also:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related (See Obama interview, about 2/3 of the way through)

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&feature=related

      For an interesting article purporting to detail the House Financial Services Committee Chairs long history with Fannie Mae, See http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx

      "House Financial Services Committee Chair promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive."

      The Democrats failed policies started this disaster. Even Bill Clinton says so.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfGWxqsKFmY

      For an academic analysis from the field of Economics, See:

      http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1322297

      Oh, and by the way, Bush inherited a recession from Clinton, not a surplus that was anything but a surplus of bull on paper. The U.S. economy shrank in three non-consecutive quarters in the early 2000s (the third quarter of 2000 [Clinton Administration], the first quarter of 2001, and the third quarter of 2001). This required the first round of Bush stimulus checks, you may recall. Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded until the housing crises, the cause of which is set forth above.

      • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 11:14:56 PM

        Great follow up but not s single dem will look they are too blind by their party idealism and too busy blaming Bush for everything from global cooling to global warming gas prices (Notice he was blamed whe it was $4 a gallon but received no praise when it went below $2 a gallon. The truth is right before them my favorite is the yoou tube of Bill Clinton the first honest thing I think I ever heard him say.

    • Posted By: Nowforsomemoretruth @ 02/04/2009 10:58:32 PM

      http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63

      http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260

  • Posted By: bighappy @ 02/04/2009 10:57:15 PM

    The best way to defeat the bill is to promote it to absourd. Strange thing, it was done by Democrats, not Republicans. Original Obama package made some sense, now it ias 30% stimulus and 70% liberal Democrats agenda. Our new financial Secretary, lolf Wall Street beurocrat (change, hah?) has no clue in tax laws, did not have decency to withdraw. what can we expect from him?

  • Posted By: suzyku @ 02/04/2009 8:57:18 PM

    I agree that President Obama does need to take back control! If the Republicans had any ideas they might have won but they didn't and the majority of this country is sick of them and the obstructionist partisan games. We need to let them know and we need to make sure these rethugs do not get re elected. They have had Obama's hand reached out to them and like the snakes that they are they have bitten it. He needs to stop wooing them and just be the strong leader we know he is!

    • Posted By: gregcovert @ 02/04/2009 10:46:51 PM

      His ability to give a good "hope" speech got him elected. He has never led anything (except for his little stint as a community organizer). Clinton started bad also. Remeber the Hillary Health Care Plan and Don't ask, don't tell? He may come out of this alright. I hope he does for the country's sake. I was a Rudy G. fan. He was the only guy on either side that had any results and they threw him to the curb. Obama needs to realize that politics is a contact sport and that you can't win if you have the backbone of a chocolate e'claire

  • Posted By: aerobat @ 02/04/2009 7:16:59 PM

    Let me summarize this article.

    1) The sky is falling
    2) Because of 1) above, the feds must spend money.
    3) Pork, graft, and waste are OK, especially if Dems are doing the spending
    4) Republicans are evil
    4) The public was right to elect Dems but wrong to oppose the spending, for some reason

    Did I miss anything?

    • Posted By: gregcovert @ 02/04/2009 10:33:19 PM

      I'll second it. You hit the nail on the head with #1. I sure hate the whole "sky is falling, global warming, I invented the internet stuff." :)

    • Posted By: aerobat @ 02/04/2009 7:28:59 PM

      Yes I know there are 2 #4s, don't bother pointing it out!

  • Posted By: tmsassan @ 02/04/2009 9:10:25 PM

    Considering it's been all of 14 day, isn't a bit early to start suggesting that Obama has 'lost control'? Can you have control? Of Congress? In 14 days? Frankly, this isn't an issue of Obama's control, but rather an issue of a Congress out of control (and out of touch). Obama, within the pervue of the executive branch, is making astonishing progress. It's the wealthy, out of touch, self-absorbed, pompus members of Congress that are problematic. The Republicans are treading in VERY dangerous waters here as they attempt to be obstructionist. The public has very little tolerance at the moment, and there will be a lot of lost seats if the Republicans continue to show their absolute disdain of the (vast) majority of Americans. Also, 99.99% of Americans don't give a rip about Daschle's tax mistake; everyday people know it's almost impossible to wade through the current Tax system without making innocent mistakes. Why Daschle just can't fix it and move on is a mystery; he's the most qualified person to do that job, and after what seemed like millenia of Republican destruction, we need the best person in *every single position*.

    • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 10:08:29 PM

      Tax mistake you mean tax fraud. I certainly would not forget about making 250K give me a break he is a tax cheat as was Geithner, Rangel, Kerry, Gore, Kellifer and who know how many others on both sides of the aisle. TRY IT YOURSELF ONCE AND SEE IF IT WORKS.

    • Posted By: gregcovert @ 02/04/2009 10:17:15 PM

      When you are at the top (Obama) you take the blame. Just like he blames the CEO's for the banking problem(turnabout is fair play.) As far as Daschle's "mistake," let me ask you if you think that you would get a break if you made the same mistake? No. Then why should he? Obama needs to realize that politics is a contact sport and that you can't win if you have the backbone of a chocolate e'claire.

    • Posted By: John Dough @ 02/04/2009 10:04:06 PM

      I wonder if the IRS would consider it a "mistake" if you failed to report over 250K in income. As nfar as the GOP being obstructiionists look at the polls a majoority do not want these stimulus packages.

  • Posted By: ca93065 @ 02/04/2009 10:22:11 PM

    There's no way anyone can spend $800 to $900 billion quickly without waste and boondoggles. It comes with the Keynesian territory. This is an emergency; the normal rules do not apply. -- W O W

    Pass that Kool Aid -- He's wiling to sacrifice generations to come for this lunacy

  • Posted By: ca93065 @ 02/04/2009 10:20:34 PM

    "There's no way anyone can spend $800 to $900 billion quickly without waste and boondoggles. It comes with the Keynesian territory. This is an emergency; the normal rules do not apply." W O W Pass the Kool-Aid

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse