Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

What, no Presidential Address commentary?


i_am_the_swammi
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I didn't catch a lot of it, but I think he went into the alternative energy topic and I think hinted at a potential digital ID.....I've heard about this in 2003...

 

it pretty much has your ID, medical history, finances etc....and say you order pizza and get something that your Dr. says you can't have....they will be told to deny you this food....

 

what blasphemy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big O didn't answer a single question directly. Sadly, I was expecting more. Fool me twice.

 

Dude, I think you were listening to the wrong press conference. I thought he answered the questions he was asked. Here's the whole transcript:

 

:wacko:

 

example, first question out of the blocks:

And with that, I'll take some of your questions. And let me go to Jennifer Loven, AP.

 

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier today in Indiana, you said something striking. You said that this nation could end up in a crisis without action that we would be unable to reverse. Can you talk about what you know or what you're hearing that would lead you to say that our recession might be permanent, when others in our history have not? And do you think that you risk losing some credibility or even talking down the economy by using dire language like that?

 

OBAMA: No, no, no, no -- I think that what I've said is what other economists have said across the political spectrum, which is that if you delay acting on an economy of this severity, then you potentially create a negative spiral that becomes much more difficult for us to get out of. We saw this happen in Japan in the 1990s, where they did not act boldly and swiftly enough, and as a consequence they suffered what was called the "lost decade" where essentially for the entire '90s they did not see any significant economic growth.

 

So what I'm trying to underscore is what the people in Elkhart already understand: that this is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill recession. We are going through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We've lost now 3.6 million jobs, but what's perhaps even more disturbing is that almost half of that job loss has taken place over the last three months, which means that the problems are accelerating instead of getting better.

 

Now, what I said in Elkhart today is what I repeat this evening, which is, I'm absolutely confident that we can solve this problem, but it's going to require us to take some significant, important steps.

 

Step number one: We have to pass an economic recovery and reinvestment plan. And we've made progress. There was a vote this evening that moved the process forward in the Senate. We already have a House bill that's passed. I'm hoping over the next several days that the House and the Senate can reconcile their differences and get that bill on my desk.

 

There have been criticisms from a bunch of different directions about this bill, so let me just address a few of them. Some of the criticisms really are with the basic idea that government should intervene at all in this moment of crisis. Now, you have some people, very sincere, who philosophically just think the government has no business interfering in the marketplace. And in fact there are several who've suggested that FDR was wrong to intervene back in the New Deal. They're fighting battles that I thought were resolved a pretty long time ago.

 

Most economists, almost unanimously, recognize that even if philosophically you're wary of government intervening in the economy, when you have the kind of problem we have right now -- what started on Wall Street goes to Main Street, suddenly businesses can't get credit, they start carrying back their investment, they start laying off workers, workers start pulling back in terms of spending -- when you have that situation, that government is an important element of introducing some additional demand into the economy. We stand to lose about $1 trillion worth of demand this year and another trillion next year. And what that means is you've got this gaping hole in the economy.

 

That's why the figure that we initially came up with of approximately $800 billion was put forward. That wasn't just some random number that I plucked out of a hat. That was Republican and Democratic, conservative and liberal economists that I spoke to who indicated that given the magnitude of the crisis and the fact that it's happening worldwide, it's important for us to have a bill of sufficient size and scope that we can save or create 4 million jobs. That still means that you're going to have some net job loss, but at least we can start slowing the trend and moving it in the right direction.

 

Now, the recovery and reinvestment package is not the only thing we have to do -- it's one leg of the stool. We are still going to have to make sure that we are attracting private capital, get the credit markets flowing again, because that's the lifeblood of the economy.

 

And so tomorrow my Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, will be announcing some very clear and specific plans for how we are going to start loosening up credit once again. And that means having some transparency and oversight in the system. It means that we correct some of the mistakes with TARP that were made earlier, the lack of consistency, the lack of clarity in terms of how the program was going to move forward. It means that we condition taxpayer dollars that are being provided to banks on them showing some restraint when it comes to executive compensation, not using the money to charter corporate jets when they're not necessary. It means that we focus on housing and how are we going to help homeowners that are suffering foreclosure or homeowners who are still making their mortgage payments, but are seeing their property values decline.

 

So there are going to be a whole range of approaches that we have to take for dealing with the economy. My bottom line is to make sure that we are saving or creating 4 million jobs, we are making sure that the financial system is working again, that homeowners are getting some relief. And I'm happy to get good ideas from across the political spectrum, from Democrats and Republicans. What I won't do is return to the failed theories of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place, because those theories have been tested and they have failed. And that's part of what the election in November was all about.

 

Now I don't know what you were expecting. Perhaps short idiotic sound-bites or him to call the reporter "stretch"?

Edited by cre8tiff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. We should move it to Virginia.

 

Please don't. We're at our quota of crapholes...including the craphole redneck town I live in.

 

I mean I would hate the President of the United States using my town as an example on the crappiness of places to live.

 

xxx,xxx.xx - The value of your house before yesterday.

xx,xxx.xx-The value of your house after Obama trashed yer city on national TV on every channel on the dial.

Edited by TimC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I think you were listening to the wrong press conference. I thought he answered the questions he was asked. Here's the whole transcript:

 

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Earlier today in Indiana, you said something striking. You said that this nation could end up in a crisis without action that we would be unable to reverse. Can you talk about what you know or what you're hearing that would lead you to say that our recession might be permanent, when others in our history have not? And do you think that you risk losing some credibility or even talking down the economy by using dire language like that?

 

example, first question out of the blocks:

 

 

Now I don't know what you were expecting. Perhaps short idiotic sound-bites or him to call the reporter "stretch"?

 

First off, neither of those are questions. The questions should have been: Would you please define your administrations plans to end this recession and define clear milestones that the American people can gage your success with?

 

The rest of the questions were mostly fluff crap and the ones that had any meat were danced to accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I think you were listening to the wrong press conference. I thought he answered the questions he was asked. Here's the whole transcript:

 

 

 

 

Now I don't know what you were expecting. Perhaps short idiotic sound-bites or him to call the reporter "stretch"?

Forgive them. They're used to the Presidential addresses going: " umm, uhhhh, uuhhhhh, ummm....yeah Mission Accomplished."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, neither of those are questions. The questions should have been: Would you please define your administrations plans to end this recession and define clear milestones that the American people can gage your success with?

 

The rest of the questions were mostly fluff crap and the ones that had any meat were danced to accordingly.

 

Oh I get it, you're pissed because he is not giving direct answers to questions he has not been asked. :D

 

Yeah, that's realistic, mister open-minded. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but because we also inherited the most profound economic emergency since the Great Depression, doing a little or nothing at all will result in even greater deficits, even greater job loss, even greater loss of income, and even greater loss of confidence. Those are deficits that could turn a crisis into a catastrophe.

 

Granted I was a youngster then, but things wernt alot worst than this in the 1970's? I think unemployment was double what is was now, and interest rates were pushing around 20%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Granted I was a youngster then, but things wernt alot worst than this in the 1970's? I think unemployment was double what is was now, and interest rates were pushing around 20%.

 

Shh! People might realize that we don't need this bill, and then Obama and company want get the expansion in government they are looking for. The biggest problem we have right now is consumer confidence, and telling people how awful it is every time you turn around can't be helping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shh! People might realize that we don't need this bill, and then Obama and company want get the expansion in government they are looking for. The biggest problem we have right now is consumer confidence, and telling people how awful it is every time you turn around can't be helping.

 

You're right. Those 600,000 jobs lost in December was just a mirage or something. F'n nation of whiners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information