Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Obama Administration 6,825.42 Nice job Mr. President

Talking down the economy

By James D. Agresti
October 14, 2008
http://justfacts.com/news.economytalkfn.asp

Never heard of this web site before, but this is a well researched piece. It documents the politics that are being played today.

It's interesting that Mr. Agresti cites the very same editorial that I brought up yesterday, but he quoted a different portion of it.

The portion I quoted yesterday pointed out that when Mr. Bush began bad-mouthing the economy, many economic indicators were quite positive. I asked you whether that was analogous to the conditions in 2008, when candidate Obama began warning voters that the economy was tanking.

Is it?

Another article he cites is from the Associated Press, March 28, 2001, in which the writer, Tom Raum, quotes David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor’s Corp., as saying that consumers were no longer as worried that "the economy will be in worse shape a year from now".

Why do you think consumer confidence was rebounding despite Mr. Bush's negativity about the economy? Why is it not rebounding now, despite Mr. Obama's negativity about the economy?

My recollection (and I'm always reluctant to rely on my recollection of anything that occurred 8 hours ago, much less 8 years ago!) is that when President Bush was talking down the economy in 2001 he was laying the foundation for arguing that tax cuts were needed to "revive" a "faltering" economy. I also recall that the Democrats at the time, who opposed the cuts, were arguing that the huge budget surpluses should be used to "pay down the national debt", whatever that means.

Let me set something straight for a minute.

My initial argument was that the President should be more positive in his economic pronouncments. The root causes of this mess are so politically sensitive that agreement will never be reached on this board.

My original argument was we needed leadership and encouragment from the President, and I still maintain that is the case. When the President does something good, I will commend him on it.

gee, ma. i went back to the beginning of this thread, having kept up with it since then, and read your first posts. seems that through trying to defend your position you have forgotten that your "initial" argument was that the president is responsible, as is the dem controlled congress. go back to the first page of this thread and tell me it ain't so.

I agree that the President needs to be positive in his message (although I will disagree that he has not been), but he also needs to maintain credibility. If, as his predecessor did, he lies about both the good and the bad, his pronouncements, good and bad, will become less and less effective. He needs to time his comments well and be forthright and accurate.

Ma, I find this situation politically sensitive, controversial, and provocative as well. But we can also wheel back in time by utilizing the power of the Internet and access of information that give us the ability to diagram a factual framework agreeable by preponderance of evidence.

There are indeed a chain of events recorded that provide us a chronology of legislative, financial, and market behaviors, which has produced a corollary of facts that don't require the necessity for drawing politicized views or opinions.

Our financial and market woes aren't a Democrat or Republican problems...it is a government / special interest problem, which both have stepped way outside the boundaries of ethics.

Our government, regardless of political persuasion, have taken libertities that defy the moral standards necessary to protect the general welfare of our nation.

Our lending institutions and market place set out to buy their way into a seat of power beyond any single level of government. They got what they wanted, and now, there is no visible sign of scruples, integrity, or honesty left in any one of them.

Between government, who paved the way for our lending instutitions and market place to engage in deplorable business behaviors, and the corporations who we entrust our lives to...have put together legalized schemes that have allowed them to drain savings, pensions, and investments that many have worked for all of their lives.

Irregardless of what politics one might subscribe to...the facts are the facts. Our nation, and many others in other nations have been screwed to the wall.

But...here's my beef. We were all warned in historical documents written over two hundred years ago from individuals like Madison...etc about the temptations and influence of special interest would impose on government. However, despite the warnings, over time the citizens have allowed our government to go rogue.

So, what do we do about it? Sitting and waiting for somebody to come along who will gain the approval of every person, regardless of their political practices, and save us from ourselves,...just ain't gonna happen.

In my opinion, we the citizens are way, way more dangerous than any polticial figure in Washington. And that includes Obama.

Sign me up. I have always been in favor of eliminating PACs and 527's. PACs are just another name for legalized bribary and 527's exist just to sell influence.

Term limits are the ultimate fix.

Geez, the President only makes $400K a year. This is a really tough balancing tight-rope to suggest that he needs to walk.

...it's not like he's making millions in bonuses.

I would suggest that he has struck a good balance in telling the American people the truth and, at the same time, giving the American people reason for optimism:

From his recent speech to the Congress: