Obama using fear tactics to move his agenda forward

[Skitzer]

Link

"Mr. Obama's analogies to the Great Depression are not only historically inaccurate, they're also dangerous. Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup. Beyond that, fearmongering can trigger a political stampede to embrace a "recovery" package that delivers a lot less than it promises. A more cool-headed assessment of the economy's woes might produce better policies."

I don't believe this stimulus will do a whole lot for the economy. We bounced back in the mid 80's from similar circumstances ....... we would have done it again without spending billions.
I hope all this fear mongering doesn't come back to bite him in the ass.

 

[heyheybooboo]

... Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup ...

Of course. We are in a mental recession.

Let's raise expectations and spend money. It's the American Way ...

 

[StageLeft]

Didn't the gov inject money during the 80's, though? Granted, not on a scale that's being talked about now. This does feel like being maxed on credit cards and instead of taking out a student loan to get an education and make the money to pay them off it's instead just applying for more cards.

Anyway, I cannot slight Obama for being honest and laying it out as he sees it. Bush & co. were optimistic on a level similar to Baghdad Bob in 2003, and still things have gotten dire, so optimism alone doesn't work (just don't tell that to Gordon Brown

 

[GTKeeper]

We still have a chance of having a depression II. I don't see how these are 'fear tactics'.

The GOP controlled congress in 2005/2006 said that Nouriel Roubini who is one of the few economists who got this whole fucking mess right was accused of 'fear tactics' and 'fear mongering' and he was laughed out of congress.

So yes, lets keep assuming this are better than they are and see where that gets us.

 

[Jiggz]

My question is, "Why the rush to vote last Friday when the darn thing is not even going to be signed until next Tuesday! Rush, rush so they can all hide those sausage making in the spendulous bill.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Skitzer
Link

"Mr. Obama's analogies to the Great Depression are not only historically inaccurate, they're also dangerous. Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup. Beyond that, fearmongering can trigger a political stampede to embrace a "recovery" package that delivers a lot less than it promises. A more cool-headed assessment of the economy's woes might produce better policies."

I don't believe this stimulus will do a whole lot for the economy. We bounced back in the mid 80's from similar circumstances ....... we would have done it again without spending billions.
I hope all this fear mongering doesn't come back to bite him in the ass.

If the telling the truth is "using fear tactics" things are in a sad state of affairs!!

 

[TallBill]

Why is Obama touring to promote his plan?

From cspan.com home page:

Pres. Obama is expected to sign the bill in Denver, Colorado, on Tuesday during a tour to promote his plan.

 

[JSt0rm]

dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

It's the WSJ editorial page. Much like you can predict what the NYT editorial page will say, the WSJ is predictable and highly partisan.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

... Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup ...

Of course. We are in a mental recession.

Let's raise expectations and spend money. It's the American Way ...

I'm using magnets, crystals and folk medicine to thaw out the credit market.


I've already got my cat convinced that happy days are here again.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Didn't the gov inject money during the 80's, though? Granted, not on a scale that's being talked about now. This does feel like being maxed on credit cards and instead of taking out a student loan to get an education and make the money to pay them off it's instead just applying for more cards.

Anyway, I cannot slight Obama for being honest and laying it out as he sees it. Bush & co. were optimistic on a level similar to Baghdad Bob in 2003, and still things have gotten dire, so optimism alone doesn't work (just don't tell that to Gordon Brown

Difference was tighter money to encourage saving and elimination of debt.
Now we have easy money, and expansionary fiscal policy.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

It's the WSJ editorial page. Much like you can predict what the NYT editorial page will say, the WSJ is predictable and highly partisan.

Except it really would have hit the fan if we didn't pass that.

Pehraps you haven't heard but when LB failed 5T were pulled that morning alone, until the Fed increased FDIC coverage to 250k/account temporarily.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

And on the flipside, the lefty looneys around here screamed about Bush's FUD, but now they applaud it coming from Obama.

Both sides are nuts. I hope they kill each other and leave the rest of to live our lives.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

And on the flipside, the lefty looneys around here screamed about Bush's FUD, but now they applaud it coming from Obama.

Both sides are nuts. I hope they kill each other and leave the rest of to live our lives.

Kind of fun to watch isn't it?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Its not fear tactics. He letting ya know its going to get alot worse. But thanks to the new stimulas package we can build up the government to resist the rath of the people.

 

[IGBT]

--he's got plenty of willing accomplices in the "alarmist" network media with their doomsday action lines. They've been talking down the economy for 8 years and it hasen't stopped.

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

The TARP was targeted to fix the financial or banking system not to MAKE SAUSAGE JUST LIKE THE SPENDULOUS BILL! Remember it was BHO who said he will eliminate earmarks and pork projects. Do you even have any idea what's in the spendulous bill? More than 50% is pork which is used to make the sausage!

Personally, I can care less about spending this amount of money if it's excess and needed to be burn, but the truth is we are just borrowing it! Talking about the largest shovel to bury ourselves into debt!

 

[alphatarget1]

The Hopemonger is using fear to forward is agenda. Change I didn't believe in. If you are a partisan hack who believes that when your buddies has sole control of the government it'll do the country good there is no point of talking politics with you. If you voted for Obama because you really believed that he would change things for the better by a government dominated by a single party (see the first 6 years of Bush's term) you're pretty stupid.

It's one thing to say that it would be good for the country if we were to pass the spending bill, it's another when you tell your fellow citizens that unless you (in this case your representatives in congress) do as I say we're all screwed.

Our government won't do us any good until we rid ourselves of career politicians, introduce new parties and weaken the big boys (GOP and Dems). Chances of that happening? Close to zero.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
The Hopemonger is using fear to forward is agenda. Change I didn't believe in. If you are a partisan hack who believes that when your buddies has sole control of the government it'll do the country good there is no point of talking politics with you. If you voted for Obama because you really believed that he would change things for the better by a government dominated by a single party (see the first 6 years of Bush's term) you're pretty stupid.

It's one thing to say that it would be good for the country if we were to pass the spending bill, it's another when you tell your fellow citizens that unless you (in this case your representatives in congress) do as I say we're all screwed.

Our government won't do us any good until we rid ourselves of career politicians, introduce new parties and weaken the big boys (GOP and Dems). Chances of that happening? Close to zero.

Your so ignorant why bother posting??
There will NEVER be a day when there is no more career politicians......your living in fantasy land!
Do the people who adminster your mends know you are up this late at night unsupervised??

 

[Budmantom]

Using the scare tactic is win-win for Obama and the democratic party.

If his plan of "spending us to prosperity" doesn't work: he could only do so much it was such a terrible crisis (the worst in the history of the world) that nothing would have worked.

If the economy turns around in a year or so : it was such a terrible crisis (the worst in the history of the world) and only Obama was smart enough to get us out of it.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: TallBill
Why is Obama touring to promote his plan?

From cspan.com home page:

Pres. Obama is expected to sign the bill in Denver, Colorado, on Tuesday during a tour to promote his plan.

He wants to take a vacation. One month on the job and he's tired already.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The economy will become Obama's Al Quaida.

 

[nageov3t]

after all that urgency, the NY Times is saying that there's really no one even filling the positions yet to spend the money.

President Obama blasted through all sorts of speed records pushing a $787 billion economic plan through Congress, arguing it was too urgent to wait. But even after signing it into law Tuesday, he faces another problem: virtually no one is in place at his cabinet departments to actually spend a lot of the money.

The once efficient Obama transition has ground to a near standstill after tax problems bedeviled several of his nominees, leaving the top echelon of his government largely unassembled. Three cabinet jobs remain unfilled, only 2 of the 15 cabinet departments have deputy secretaries confirmed, and the vast majority of lower-level political jobs remain vacant.

The slowdown seems to stem both from the administration?s sharpening its vetting process after losing several nominees and from Senate committees? taking more time to consider names that have been sent to Capitol Hill. As a result, the very departments charged with executing one of the largest spending projects in American history are operating largely with career stand-ins without the authority of political appointees.

?The senior executive guys who are filling these chairs are not going to switch these policies,? said Terry Sullivan, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina and the executive director of the White House Transition Project, a scholarly effort that studies presidential staff. ?They?re going to carry out the policies of the last guy standing, and the last guy standing was Bush.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/18cabinet.html

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
dude. Didn't Bush come on TV and talk about how bad the shit was going to hit the fan if we didn't pass his 750billion? But when Obama does it its dangerous?

No there isn't any difference....Wasted spending that is going to just screw the country up more is wasted spending.

We shouldn't be bailing out consumers or biz's. Let them learn instead of spoon feeding them.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: loki8481
after all that urgency, the NY Times is saying that there's really no one even filling the positions yet to spend the money.

President Obama blasted through all sorts of speed records pushing a $787 billion economic plan through Congress, arguing it was too urgent to wait. But even after signing it into law Tuesday, he faces another problem: virtually no one is in place at his cabinet departments to actually spend a lot of the money.

The once efficient Obama transition has ground to a near standstill after tax problems bedeviled several of his nominees, leaving the top echelon of his government largely unassembled. Three cabinet jobs remain unfilled, only 2 of the 15 cabinet departments have deputy secretaries confirmed, and the vast majority of lower-level political jobs remain vacant.

The slowdown seems to stem both from the administration?s sharpening its vetting process after losing several nominees and from Senate committees? taking more time to consider names that have been sent to Capitol Hill. As a result, the very departments charged with executing one of the largest spending projects in American history are operating largely with career stand-ins without the authority of political appointees.

?The senior executive guys who are filling these chairs are not going to switch these policies,? said Terry Sullivan, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina and the executive director of the White House Transition Project, a scholarly effort that studies presidential staff. ?They?re going to carry out the policies of the last guy standing, and the last guy standing was Bush.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/18cabinet.html

Not really a surprise.

I can't wait for the next emergency stimulus.