This is where we were 4 years ago.
President Bush explains how truly bad it was and what the government had to do to stop the downhill slide into an economic disaster not seen since the Great Depression, and during which Mr. Bush said were "not normal circumstances:"
Instability... housing crisis...restricted credit...entire economy in danger. How did we reach this point in our economy? It developed over a long period of time...borrowing...loans for new businesses...for creating new jobs...easy credit..excesses and bad decisions...lending without examining if people could pay off their loans...boom in home construction...new houses exceeded buyers...mortgage holders defaulted...home loans are packaged together...credit default swaps...
On September 29, 2008, the NASDAQ dropped nearly 200 points, the most since the tech bubble burst, losing 9.14% (third largest in history) to fall beneath the 2,000 level.
Are we better off now than 4 years ago?
- The war in Iraq is over
- Bin Ladin is dead
- The stock market is up from below 7000 to over 13,000
- Unemployment is down from over 11% to 8%,
- The real estate market has stabilized,
- The US auto business is profitable,
- Credit markets are still tight but no longer frozen.
There is no question that we are doing better today, under President Obama, than we were when President George W. Bush gave that speech .
Remember this train wreck of an answer?
We definitely are better off without her.
33 comments:
We're better off indeed. Unfortunately, it's the kind of better off of having been pulled back from a nasty fall off a ledge. But in this case, a whole lot of Americans have no idea they were on that ledge and what that nasty fall would've resulted in. Their lack of appreciation of what happened — and what didn't — is a dubious "benefit" of most Americans learning only the pittance about economics included in high school social studies. classes. It's the functional equivalent of having most doctors learn diagnostic skills watching Marcus Welby reruns.
I hope President Obama and Vice President Biden will be able to explain what the country was on the brink of and what going over would've meant, in terms everyone can grasp.
The right steps taken go well beyond TARP and the automakers bailout. And nearly every one of those steps was fougth against, tooth and nail, by Republicans in Congress. People need to know that, too.
This is no time to be big-spirited, nonpartisan and conciliatory. It's a time for fire in the belly and thunder in the voice and slam-bang truth telling. A la Harry Truman.
Jim Wright over at Stonekettle Station has an interesting take on this question. It is worth a read.
Shaw, this comment is off topic and I invite you delete it after reading.
I understand you've had problems with trolls and spam, but the captcha thing is set so hard, I'm having to give it a half-dozen tries or more to get a comment to go through. My previous comment took eight tries. There's one in front of me right now and I can't begin to make the number in the picture out. The sound feature comes through so distorted, it's useless. Having it set this difficult is liable to create a strong disincentive for people to comment, and not just the trolls.
SWA,
Thanks for that heads-up. I don't know how to adjust that. I assume Blogger sets the captcha.
Is anyone else having trouble?
Or does anyone else know how to adjust this?
Deval Patrick is on FIRE!
Go Governor Patrick!!!!!
But guys - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790
I haven't had to much of a problem with it, although sometimes I have had to repeat it a couple of times. One thing that helps is if I can't read it clearly, I hit the circular arrow thingy, to reset it with a new one.
Will, Noam Chomsky is far, far, lefty left.
He doesn't like Obama?
What's your point? Letting us know that an extreme leftist doesn't agree with Obama's policies?
Wouldn't that be a plus in your world?
S.W. Anderson..The ledge is still there. It's called the 16 trillion national debt. Temporary blinders have been installed is all.
Nicholas Kristof:
"What did you think of Michelle Obama's speech? I thought she just aced it. Very moving and inspiring, with none of the nastiness of so many political speeches. Yet she very effectively highlighted differences between her husband and, er, the other guy. When she said that her husband had turned down big-money jobs to work with the needy, everyone promptly thought of a certain Bain executive."
This is the worst economic recovery in our nation's history, up there with FDR's decade-long disaster. Is Obama trying to beat his record?
Anyone who thinks his "accomplishments" qualify as a success is really smoking the hopium.
This post if full of neat little rhetorical trick like this one:
Unemployment is down from over 11% to 8%,
Unemployment stood at 7.8% when Obama took office.
from RCP
When President Obama took office, unemployment was at 7.8%. After three and a half years, it stands at 8.3%. Median income when the President took over was about $55,000. Now, $51,000. Gasoline prices in January 2009 were $1.84 per gallon. Now, $3.82 per gallon. That’s painful to working folks and it’s largely ignored by the President. National debt of $10.6 Trillion when President Obama took the oath of office. It is now more than $16 Trillion - an astronomical and dangerous rise. Finally, the budget deficit in President Bush’s last year was $458 Billion. In 2011, under President Obama, it had risen to nearly $1.3 Trillion - again, a dangerous amount of money to have to borrow.
"Unemployment stood at 7.8% when Obama took office."
That's THE most dishonest trick of all, quoting an unemployment rate that doesn't reflect the bleeding of jobs just as Mr. Obama took office, something he had NO RESPONSIBILITY for.
Next up: The GOP's vow to obstruct every single piece of legislation proposed by Mr. Obama to help America recover.
I think anyone who's been paying attention will take your comment as nothing more than verification of what the GOP plan has been since before Mr. Obama took office:
"Do not cooperate and help people get back to work so that the president and the country fails.'
Even to this date, almost 4 years after Bush left office, the American people place the majority of the blame at the GOP's feet.
Fact.
In SF's post today he uses Charles Murray to define proper economics.
You know, the Charles Murray who wrote the "Bell Curve" where he states blacks are genetically inferior in intelligence to whites.
Murray's economics are full of it.
Murray is a neo con like Cheney. A racist, right wing extremist.
Quite a choice for defining economics.
Murray's fellow professionals denounce him, but SF uses him as his standard of economic purity, and racial purity.
Anyone who does not believe we are better off now than in 2008, are idiots. That includes Republiscums.
Yes, I've had trouble signing in. You can eliminate that process and still have comment moderation, so nothing gets posted unless you approve.
Over at SF's blog they are calling the First Lady - the first Wookie.
I guess they did not like her speech.
Republican Racism.
FDR's decade-long disaster ...
...was the Great Depression he inherited from Republicans and deregulation.
FDR Unemployment rates (Bureau of Labor Statistics)
1933 - 24.9%
1934 – 21.7%
1935- 20.1%
1936 – 17%
1937 - 14.3%
Unemployment rate on Election Day 2008 – 6.5%
On Obama’s Inauguration Day - 7.3% or 7.8% if you choose.
What does that say? It was hitting the fan before Obama took office.
Thank you Mr. Bush.
What happened since?
Peak rate – 10%
Current rate – 8.3%
Stock Market Closing Prices – January 20, 2009
Dow Jones Industrial Average Close - 7949.09
Nasdaq Stock Market Close - 1440.86
S&P 500 Close - 805.23
Stock Market Closing Prices – August 28, 2012
Dow Jones Industrial Average Close- 13102.99
Nasdaq Stock Market Close – 3077.14
S&P 500 Close – 1409.30
Looks like we’re better off now than four years ago.
You start where the president's term starts, Shaw, that's how we measure all presidents. Your DNC propaganda is what is dishonest.
"You start where the president's term starts, Shaw, that's how we measure all presidents..."
No.
Not one historian or anyone else believes that.
Yes, Dave Dubya, we ARE better off.
RR: "Over at SF's blog they are calling the First Lady - the first Wookie.
I guess they did not like her speech."
It's not that they didn't like her speech, they're pissed off because she was an overwhelmingly smashing success. And if there's one thing they dislike, it's seeing Mrs. Obama respected.
Calling the First Lady the First Wookie rises to the level of pre-schoolers pointing their fingers at an adult and calling her a poopyhead.
LOL!
By all accounts, Mrs. Obama was fabulous!
It's no wonder the malcontents are pissed off:
"Members of the media immediately praised First Lady Michelle Obama's 2012 Democratic National Convention speech on Tuesday night. Obama, who stunned in a custom Tracy Reese dress, took the stage just after 10:30 p.m. EST.
Across the cable news networks, pundits swooned over Obama's delivery. There seemed to be some mixed reviews over the strength of the speech itself, but the media seemed to agree that Obama nailed the performance.
Fox News' Chris Wallace called her delivery "masterful." Fox News' senior political analyst Brit Hume said that it was clear that Obama is an "extremely impressive and attractive woman." He added that her delivery was better than the speech itself, and that she "effectively vouched for her husband."
Fox News contributor Karl Rove also agreed that Obama's speech was "very well delivered," particularly when she spoke about personal moments. According to Rove, however, Obama did not do as well when she discussed the "political sphere."
Over at MSNBC, Rachel Maddow responded simply to Obama's speech. "Oh my god," she said, immediately following the first lady's remarks. MSNBC's Steve Schmidt said the speech was "brilliantly written and brilliantly delivered." Chuck Todd, who was reporting live from the convention floor, said, "Michelle Obama owned this convention in a way that no speaker owned the floor of the convention in Tampa."
CNN's Anderson Cooper tweeted that he has "never heard such a well delivered speech by a first lady ever." CNN's Wolf Blitzer echoed these sentiments, calling the speech "a grand slam." John King noted that Obama's speech was going to be "hard to top." CNN's Donna Brazile summed up the feeling in the convention center, tweeting "Love is in the air."
Unemployment percentages are important, but it is equally important to look at job creation also. When Obama too over, the economy was losing over 700,000 jobs per MONTH. It took about a year to turn that huge monthly job loss into a positive job growth. Since then, we have had over two years of positive job growth each month inspite of republican efforts to slow the economy.
The Obama toadies in the press fall all over themselves praising Dear Leader's circus, and that's news?
Any one or any organization that isn't ripping either Mrs. Obama or Mr. Obama apart are considered "toadies" by the vicious rightwingers.
Yes, we are better off today than we were 8 years ago, redux:
"The month after Obama took office, the unemployment rate was 8.3 percent; it's 8.3 percent now. Sticking him with the January number when he was president for only ten days of it seems silly to me (as, by the way, does the unemployment in his first year). But the difference is that in February 2009, we were losing 800,000 jobs a month; in July 2012, we're adding around 150,000 jobs a month over the past year, despite a huge drop in government employment. The stock market has made big gains - from around 6500 in the spring of 2009 to almost 13000 today, inflation is under control, and interest rates are at deep lows. We're out of the quagmire of Iraq and al Qaeda has been decimated. 30 million more people have potential access to health insurance. Yes, median household income is very meaningful - but it's not the only metric. Of course, we're better off." Sullivan's blog
The man is president, so what he does, is news. Unlike the CEO of some investment company.
You (SF) use some racist (Murray) to judge economics, a person all in the field have rejected.
You (SF) who said you haven't seen a Sunday political show, the news, or a cable news show in ten years. That's a person who has no clue what he's talking about.
Go back to your blog where you can call the first Lady - the first Wookie.
"Wookiee, a tall, hairy alien species in the Star Wars fictional universe"
conservative: keeping it classy.
SF just proves once again that he is an uninformed fool. Just like his proclamation that GM is going bankrupt again. He just spouts a bunch of right wing hater talking points. It's as dishonest as complaining that gas prices have doubled under Obama, which glosses over the fact that the reason that happened is because Bush crashed the economy. Gas prices are roughly the same as they were in Sept. 08. They have been reduced to outright lying on every issue because "they got nothin".
scud,
You forgot to include this quote from your CNN article.
"The number Castro cites is an accurate description of the growth of private-sector jobs since January 2010, when the long, steep slide in employment finally hit bottom. "
4.5 million is the job growth once Obama stopped the republican job hemmoraging that he inherited.
Chomsky's a progressive, Shaw. What, you don't worship him? Only Obama?......And "my world" is fully loathing both parties. Just in case you were interested.
Saw the First Lady on teevee. Elegant, charming, graceful articulate, and a fabulous delivery. Reads the teleprompter better than hubby, and with passion. Great POLITICAL speech.
On substance.........................
Will,
You make the mistake all cynics make in believing only you have the incisive perception to see through all the b.s., when, in fact, you spread your own brand of it.
Loathing both parties contributes nothing but more cynicism and more loathing. It's nothing to be proud of.
You Will Never Understand the Right's Radioactive Freakout Over FLOTUS
Although no one's singing "Happy Days Are Here Again", I don't think any rational person would say we aren't better off than we were 4 years ago.
SF, since they praised Michelle Obama's speech, are you saying Rove, Hume, and Wallace are "Obama toadies"?
Post a Comment