Patterico's Pontifications

8/17/2011

Obama: U.S. isn’t in danger of second recession

Filed under: General — Karl @ 4:40 pm



[Posted by Karl]

Apparently, Pres. Obama’s bus has detoured for a town hall in the Land of Oz:

“I don’t think we’re in danger of another recession, but we are in danger of not having a recovery that’s fast enough to deal with a genuine unemployment crisis for a whole lot of folks out there,” Mr. Obama told CBS News Senior Business Correspondent Anthony Mason. “And that’s why we need to be doing more.”

The 46 economists in the Wall Street Journal  survey—not all of whom answer every question—put the odds that the US is already in another recession at 13%, while they peg the chances of going that way in the next year at 29%—up from 17% only a month agoGoldman Sachs has the odds a bit higher at 33%.  Moody’s Analytics’ Chief Economist Mark Zandi believes “the odds of a renewed recession over the next 12 months, already one in three, will increase if stock prices continue to fall.”  Martin Fridson, global credit strategist at BNP Paribas Investment Partners, says high-yield bonds signal a 50% chance of recession.  That’s also where Harvard University economics professor Martin Feldstein, a member of the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, pegs it.  Nouriel Roubini has it higher.

Of course, as Allahpundit notes, there’s really nothing else he can say, although the comment will make him sound even more out of touch.  But if there’s a “genuine unemployment crisis,” he could lay off the vacation on Martha’s Vineyard before offering up the same old crapola as “doing more” and trying to pretend he’s Harry S Truman.

–Karl

134 Responses to “Obama: U.S. isn’t in danger of second recession”

  1. Sometimes I don’t know whether this bozo really thinks he has the power to repeal the basic laws of economics, or whether he’s just pretending that he does. But I’m very, very, very, very, VERY sure we will have periodic recessions in the future. The question is whether it will be another unnecessarily deep and long recession, unnecessarily soon, precisely because of Obama’s and the federal government’s policies. To that, my Magic 8-Ball says, “Seems very likely.”

    Beldar (485693)

  2. “That’s why we need to be doing more” = “Let’s hurry up and dig this hole deeper, gang!”

    Beldar (485693)

  3. How bad does unemployment have to get?…15%?… 20%? How much debt do we need to incur?… $85T?… $500T?

    Just how bad does it need to get before the MSM takes notice and begins to report on this prime practitioner of an illogical, disastrous ideology?

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  4. bloated piggy piggy union whore-dominate state and local governments have a lot of fat left to cut

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  5. no worry. today
    able to buy bananas
    two for a dollar

    elissa (9161d4)

  6. Pre-emptive strike!

    hand up puppet’s ass
    desperate need of fiber?
    or is spurty gay?

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  7. Barry Obama
    One Man Vacation Machine
    travelocity

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  8. scout motto:

    be prepared

    elissa (9161d4)

  9. Well, there can’t be a second recession if Obama keeps stretching all the effects of the last one out …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  10. Stock Market declines…
    The Friday close has been DOWN for the past 3 Fridays over the previous week.
    It looks like we’re entering into a Bear Market where it will slowly drift down to ???
    The worst thing is that it doesn’t seem that we can rely on the numbers being released by either Labor or Treasury on what is happening with the economy, as they always seem to need “revision”.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  11. …and, as I noted earlier, Gold has more than doubled since BHO’s inauguration – not a good sign!

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  12. More jobs through food stamps!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  13. Good thing Obama will fix all this malaise when he reveals his secret plan next month.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  14. Yes, daley, wasn’t that about the most rediculous statement to come out of DC since Jay Carney’s last appearance at the WH Press Podium.
    With food stamps at historic highs, we should be swimming in jobs if that BS was anywhere near accurate.
    Next thing you know, Congressional Leaders will be telling us that the only way Congress can know what’s in a bill, is to pass it…..
    Oh, wait…

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  15. Too bad for Obama he can’t actually run against Thomas Dewey.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  16. oops *dominated* I mean

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  17. Now you have done it!
    Magical Grand Malaise Tour
    in Coroner Bus

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  18. Dewey would win!

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  19. A recession is the result of a cutback in production/consumption… which usually happen because (1) people and businesses with money become worried and decide to hold on to their cash and/or (2) of a reduction in the money that can be spent.

    Thus, my write-it-in-stone prediction is that we won’t have a recession unless something (hint, hint: Obama) does something to increase the fear factor (threaten higher taxes, pass new anti-business regulations, drive up the price of gas even further?).

    Since Obama holds the key, maybe his predicting no recession is evidence that he isn’t going to do anything stupid?

    steve (254463)

  20. his policies suck
    but the man sure knows how to
    eat ice cream cone

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  21. his policies suck
    but the man sure knows how to
    eat an ice cream cone

    colonel must apologize… definitely off his game.

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  22. steve, in the 30-months that Obama has been in office, when has he not done something stupid?

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  23. I like all your posts, Karl, and I always learn from you but this is one of my favorites. I think it’s the “Land of Oz” reference. It fits.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  24. Yes, if his (Obama’s) actions and policies were more uplifting, we could substitue Chuck Mangione’s The Land of Make Believe, but that would require a complete suspension of disbelief.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  25. our propganda whore pals at National Soros Radio seem a lot less sanguine about a recession than bumble and they’re a lot eager to blame anyone but our useless little president man, at least when denial fails

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  26. Rather obvious The One wasn’t big on taking any classes at Columbia, Occidental nor Harvard involving simple math nor advanced economics. The Community-Organizer-In-Chief can spout Marxist/Socialist drivel all day long, but he has no idea what he’s doing nor what to do. He does like it though when Wall Street BSDs fill his campaign coffers.

    Bugg (ea1809)

  27. Hey Obama, we’re not in Kansas anymore–and most of us have reached red max alert on our BS Meters where you’re concerned.

    Comanche Voter (0e06a9)

  28. How bad does it have to be before Spartac throws Omoron under the bus?

    DohBiden (d54602)

  29. Obama’s biggest problem with his line of rhetoric on the economy is that most Americans simply do not believe him. They roll their eyes. They do not believe that the Dec. 2007 recession was “over” in June 2009. It sounds ridiculous to them to hear him and Debbie Wasserman Schultz say so. The recession may have been over in 2009 by certain accepted technical metrics, but in terms of what matters to real people–no. Between the foreclosures, falling housing values, and unemployment, the American people haven’t seen anything resembling recovery. They don’t feel at all like the recession ever ended. Average Americans just feel like they are witnessing and living through one long, deep, depressing, never ending slog. The words “double dip”, “second recession” and “recovery summer” ring hollow- comical even. Just more clueless government BS.

    The Republican candidate who can figure out a way to articulate this, and relate to the American people about this disconnect, will win.

    elissa (9161d4)

  30. *propaganda* I mean jeez it’s hard to get all the letters right today

    one long, deep, depressing, never ending slog

    that’s apt except for it obscures the pervasive sense of uncertainty people have… especially now that president bumble ruined our little country’s credit rating

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  31. OK feets-
    ..one long, uncertain, deep, depressing, never ending slog..

    We can add lots and lots more words to that chain of misery. As many as you want.

    elissa (9161d4)

  32. So Fitch, left the US credit rating alone, yet downgraded Jersey’s,???

    ian cormac (81c5c2)

  33. we need to fit “inexorable decline” in there too plus something about hopelessness and also malaise

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  34. A Carter collapse?

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  35. I think you can make money by doing the opposite of anything Obama suggests.

    Mike K (8f3f19)

  36. Remember, a Carter collapse would be a best case scenario.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  37. DRJ,

    Thanks. The Oz thing was sorta inspired by the faux farm sets he’s been working this week.

    Karl (37b303)

  38. David Letterman should watch what he says about Osama…………….bleeeeeech dhimmitude.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  39. Buy gold and silver.

    Gold Oil and the Dollar

    gold and silver moving much higher

    The first link is interesting because “legendary” technical analyst Louise Yamada says she sees signs the dollar is losing its reserve currency status. She also sees the plummeting interest rates as very worrisome possibly pointing to a serious global slowdown. Gold (and probably other precious metals) is the only thing she likes now.

    The second link features UBS analyst Peter Lee.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  40. Even if we get a second recession it will simply be spun by the NYT as “Obama lifts USA out of two Bush Recessions!”

    S. Carter aka J-Z (786e37)

  41. don’tcha know we are
    ridin’ on Malaise Express
    takin’ us down tubes

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  42. ColonelHaiku – Grand malaise seizure of the country by hostage taking greasy-assed community organizing socialist redistributionist racist haters.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  43. Or something

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  44. Indeed daleyrocks
    horizontal trout dancin’
    function at junction

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  45. Why do so many otherwise smart people still think that buying gold — at its current high prices — is a good idea? What inherent value does gold have that justifies its price? (As opposed to “everyone is buying it”, I mean?)

    In other words: in what way is gold different from real estate, dot-com stocks, or tulips?

    Robin Munn (69cc95)

  46. Certainly there is very little risk of a recession before the election, a few extra trillion dollars of government spending should be enough to keep GDP growing despite the decreasing non-government GDP. Thinking of that, I wonder if the recession has ended for the private sector or increasing Government expenditure is the only reason the GDP isn’t dropping. Regardless, since recessions are measured by GDP and GDP includes government spending the expanded debt limit should be able to keep the US from having to acknowledge a recession.

    max (2f2a28)

  47. Interesting to see Roubini cited here. The WSJ did a substantial interview with him earlier this week that’s worth a listen.

    angeleno (e91900)

  48. Robin:

    That’s an odd question. Why do you ask?

    Ag80 (9a213d)

  49. Uh oh. Sporty’s mom woke him up.

    Ag80 (9a213d)

  50. Recession, hell. Feels like a demand depression to me.

    gp (3e06cb)

  51. Spartacvs uses Frum – a political pundit that no one pays any attention to any longer – to distract from his complete ass kicking over the last week or two on every substantive discussion that Spartacvs pretended to participate in.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  52. “Why do so many otherwise smart people still think that buying gold — at its current high prices — is a good idea?”

    Robin Munn – Weren’t the same people asking the same question just a few months ago?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  53. the idea is you buy the golds now wif your for reals dollars and then later down the road when you get really hungry you can sell your golds for worthless inflated obamadollars

    what you trade for soup

    it’s one of several possible strategies I guess

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  54. Why has Soros bought eleven tons of the stuff,

    ian cormac (81c5c2)

  55. Here’s part of your answer, Robin. Gold’s durable and it keeps forever. (Unlike tulips, houses and internet stocks.)

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-03/treasure-trove-discovered-in-indian-temple/2780998

    elissa (9161d4)

  56. ____________________________________________

    Sporty’s mom woke him up.

    Quite seriously, if a liberal like him is in his teen years, most people wouldn’t be surprised, would take that at face value, and might give him some slack.

    If he’s in his college years, again, someone at that point in life would still be considered by many as understandably immature, still caught in the phase of being naive, foolish — if not dumb — and superficially, mechanically compassionate.

    But when someone is starting to shoot well past those formative years, and certainly is reaching his or her 30s and beyond, then to still be trapped in a liberal mindset is a sign of intrinsically deficient logic and common sense.

    Mark (31bbb6)

  57. –Comment by Mark — 8/17/2011 @ 8:44 pm–

    I think this credits him with believing or caring about any of the views he spews. I have not seen any indication this is the case. When you intend to spit in someone’s face you don’t worry about how clear or pure the saliva is. He uses the same links and arguments as long as they work to his purpose and then he gathers new ones. There is no sign he is here to convince anyone or dispute anything. He is here to hijack threads and break up discussions, and he has been very good at it.

    I disagree with those who call him incompetent, blind, or stupid. His goal here is to manipulate the commenters and a look at the threads he has hijacked will show he has been far better at manipulating the commenters then they have been at avoiding manipulation. So many threads on different topics end up looking the same at some point because they all end up about him. Given his real goal, I think one would have to admit he has won these contests.

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  58. Sometimes I don’t know whether this bozo really thinks he has the power to repeal the basic laws of economics, or whether he’s just pretending that he does.

    That’s what I was thinking as I listened to him talk about how things here just “need a few tweaks” to get things back on track.

    Jeez, if it was that easy, why didn’t he do it two years ago? I read a comment somewhere that he’s like a con artist that’s become a mark for his own con.

    Another Chris (c983db)

  59. It pains me to say it but he has been a very effective troll.

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  60. Mr. spartacvs wins 90s dance party?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  61. here go you earned it my trolly trolly brotha

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  62. -Comment by Another Chris — 8/17/2011 @ 9:07 pm-

    It does seem that way. I wonder some times if he believes his own BS and I can’t really tell. It would be more frightening if he was that stupid rather than just that dishonest. He has his finger on the button.

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  63. He uses the same links and arguments as long as they work to his purpose and then he gathers new ones. There is no sign he is here to convince anyone or dispute anything. He is here to hijack threads and break up discussions, and he has been very good at it.

    That was pretty obvious for a while, but it was confirmed the minute I cited the numbers on government spending a few days ago, showing how it’s risen exponentially per capita since 1960.

    No one can say in both raw and inflation-adjusted terms that we are spending less on government programs than we were 50 years ago, but he immediately tried to misdirect by using Clinton’s fake surplus as a “baseline” and whinging about using “fair numbers,” even though government spending per capita was higher at the end of Clinton’s term than it was at the end of Eisenhower’s.

    Unfortunately for him, the numbers are what they are, and he never bothered engaging after I shut him down on it–mostly because he was throwing sh*t up against the wall to see what would stick. It’s funny that he’s always mocking people here to “Google it” when a simple Google search easily destroys his arguments time after time.

    Another Chris (c983db)

  64. Ag80 @49 –

    I’m arguing that gold is a great big bubble right now.

    daleyrocks @53 –

    Yes, gold has risen in price a lot recently, so if you’d bought gold six months ago you could make a killing selling it today. Just like housing (before it burst), dot-coms (before they burst), and even tulips back when they were still popular. The gold bubble (if I’m right about its being a bubble) has not yet burst. But past performance is no guarantee of future results, and just because gold has gone up in price recently does not mean it will go up in price forever. Substitute housing or dot-coms in that sentence and you’ll see what I mean.

    Elissa @56 –

    Right; gold has no maintenance cost. And it does have some inherent value: it’s useful in electronics, for example. And because it looks nice and doesn’t tarnish, there will always be demand for gold in jewelry. So as long as women want jewelry and men want to impress women (in other words, for as long as the human race exists) there will be some demand for gold. Its price has a natural floor.

    But is there anything inherent in gold’s nature that makes it an asset that will always go up? I’d assert that the answer is no, that the reason people buy gold is because of its reputation as a safe investment. And why is it a safe investment? Because it used to be used as currency everywhere (due to easy storage, non-spoilage, and relative rarity) and it still carries a mystique in people’s minds. And therefore, when you decide you’d rather have money than gold, it’s easy to unload your gold to some willing buyer. So because it’s in demand, it’s a safe investment.

    Notice that circle? Because it’s a safe investment, it’s in demand. And because it’s in demand, it’s a safe investment. That, my friends, is how bubbles are formed.

    If there’s anything I haven’t considered, I’d love to be wrong. But I’ve been watching the rising price of gold over the past few years and thinking, “A lot of people are going to lose their shirts when this one pops.” Frankly, it’s starting to worry me, because you never know when bubbles are going to pop, and we really don’t need this one popping while the current recession is going on.

    Maybe that’s the saving grace of the gold bubble: so many people want it irrationally precisely because of the recession, and they won’t start selling it until they feel “safe”, which usually means “after the recession looks like it’s over”. So the gold bubble won’t double-dip us when it pops. But I wouldn’t count on that.

    Robin Munn (69cc95)

  65. 53.“Why do so many otherwise smart people still think that buying gold — at its current high prices — is a good idea?”
    Robin Munn – Weren’t the same people asking the same question just a few months ago?

    Comment by daleyrocks

    Exactly. When gold was at $1,200, I wish I had bought it when it was $600. When it was at $1,500, I wish I bought it at $1,200, and so on..

    I also wish I had bought Ford stock when it was at $1.00.

    MD in Philly (41bc09)

  66. I think a big part of the Obama deal is that he listens to Valerie Jarrett instead of normal type advisors and pretty much does what she tells him. I don’t know if that’s because she “has” something on him (which is entirely possible) or if he’s just so darn lazy and golf/vacay/ice cream oriented that he is grateful he doesn’t have to do any thinking for himself. Either way, it’s not great for America because Valerie’s kind of a commie menace.

    elissa (9161d4)

  67. I wonder some times if he believes his own BS and I can’t really tell. It would be more frightening if he was that stupid rather than just that dishonest.

    A person who believes his own BS, in his position, is always a lot more dangerous than someone that’s just running his mouth because that makes him a True Believer. No amount of reality is going to make those types change their outlook or their approach.

    That’s why I think it’s actually better for people to condescend to this guy and treat him like the glorified dorm-room revolutionary college student that he is. Those types almost always carry around an unwarranted sense of self-regard, and get real pissy really fast when their opinions are treated as a joke.

    Given Obama’s penchant for saying astonishingly stupid things when he’s off the teleprompter, the more his opponents can throw him off his game by needling him, the less mature and more out-of-touch he ends up looking. A guy like Reagan would have destroyed him simply because Reagan was a master at digging in the rhetorical knife in a debate.

    Another Chris (c983db)

  68. Gold is not paper or a stock certificate, it will be worth something when others things are not. It is easier to carry than real estate, etc.

    Yes, the question is whether the bottom will fall out from the price of gold, or will significant inflation hit and everyone’s CD’s and money markets lose value by the hour while gold continues to rise.

    Yes, gold hit over $800 many years ago (during Carter years?) and then proceeded to lose significant value.

    MD in Philly (41bc09)

  69. MD in Philly @66 –

    And for all I know, the current trend of rising gold prices might last another decade before it turns around. I’m no precious-metals expert.

    I’m just saying that every single time in the past when people have thought “Investment XYZ is never going to go down in price,” they’ve eventually been proven wrong. Therefore, gold carries more inherent risk than most people realize (just like real estate did), and my personal risk/reward calculator is screaming “stay the hell away from gold!” at me.

    Robin Munn (69cc95)

  70. Comment by Robin Munn — 8/17/2011 @ 9:17 pm

    As someone who owns both physical gold and silver, I’d think anyone who owned more than 10-15% of their net worth in the stuff was crazy. It’s a SHTF hedge, something to have on hand if the fiat currency blows to hell and you need some sort of medium of exchange beyond barter.

    The best thing that anyone can say about gold and silver is that their value has never dropped to zero, and it’s been valued in some form or another by mature human civilizations for thousands of years. So having a bit on hand is always a good bet just in case.

    Another Chris (c983db)

  71. A commodities guy I know is of the opinion that the price of gold has not increased. The value of the dollar has decreased so it takes more dollars to purchase the same amount of gold. The price of gold merely reflects the market’s lack of confidence regarding the viability of our currency now, and in the immediate future.

    navyvet (db5856)

  72. Gold is indeed in a bubble now. However, it always maintains an intrinsic value as a valuable ore for industry and less valuble uses such as jewelry.

    It is relatively scarce and relatively hard to mine and refine.

    Money is printed freely. It’s not hard to understand why people invest in a hard commodity that is relatively difficult to produce versus a soft monetery unit that is easy to print.

    Saying all that, the dollar is only as valuable as the people and the industry that produce the wealth that backs it.

    Markets are saying that the U.S. productive sector, workers and industry, are not being able to compete in a global market, so the value of the dollar is going down.

    When a government decides that it can control market forces, the market invevitably says no, because capital forces are taken out of the game.

    This has been repeated so many times, I’m astonished that arguments to the contrary are still made.

    Nonetheless, people still believe the government can control all, unless it happens in the bedroom.

    Ag80 (9a213d)

  73. Another Chris @71 –

    Good point, and I think I agree 100%. Though maybe I should knock that down to 98%, as I’d draw the threshhold for “you’re overinvested in gold and need to diversify ASAP” a little lower, maybe around 4-5%. But yeah, a little investment in gold, even knowing that the price is going to drop well below its current levels at some point, does make sense when you consider it as a SHTF hedge. I just don’t want people seeing it as a guaranteed growth investment, because There Ain’t No Such Thing.

    And it’s 11:30 PM here in Dallas, so any further comments from me will have to wait until tomorrow morning. ‘Night, all.

    Robin Munn (69cc95)

  74. Moody’s, Goldman Sachs and the others better be careful or they will find themselves being investigated by the Justice Department for some alleged past crime.

    Just agree with our dear leader and no one will get hurt.

    iconoclast (36ad47)

  75. I think many people are looking at gold in these very uncertain times as a protection of their wealth for far down the road and for their future descendants. It’s a way to try to maintain and preserve what they have. It’s to hoard. It’s not like a regular-type investment on which they expect to make a killing, or on which they’ll pay taxes on dividends. Gold’s not something they’ll sell in order to buy an inflated dollar big screen TV in 5 years. From the Egyptians to the 16th century temple in that article, to war refugees, gold has been a trancendent and almost universal standard for safety and barter. And I mean real gold. Not gold funds or gold stocks or trading in gold futures. Wish I had some.

    elissa (3bd02c)

  76. GOLD…some points:

    Since Bretton Woods, Gold and Oil tracked at about 10:1; Gold today is around 18:1 to Oil.
    That signifies (at least to me – but what do I know) that a lot of people are moving into Gold as a serious hedge against inflation and/or collapse –
    in the past when oil rose to less than 10:1, oil proved to be a bubble.
    When the Carter price level broke, it was due to a newly stablized economy where investers could anticipate a reliable return in the Market,
    and didn’t have to shelter wealth in Gold.

    Gold does have a maintanance cost: you either have to have a secure vault, or you must pay someone to store it in same.
    And, if it is not coin, buyers have been known to demand an assay to determine how “fine” it is – another cost.

    But, when the SHTF, Gold (particularly known coins such as the Rand, Loonie, etc) will buy you a tank of gas, or perhaps more ammo for your sidearm.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (1a601a)

  77. “Yes, gold has risen in price a lot recently, so if you’d bought gold six months ago you could make a killing selling it today”

    Robin Munn – MD in Philly hit it on the head interpreting my statement above. Plenty of “smart” people already thought gold was too high at $1,200 a while back. There are no guarantees those you deride as “smart” people now are wrong. Precious metal prices are volatile. Trying to call the top or bottom is foolish. Make your own decisions and live with the consequences.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  78. Zero golfed while America burned

    Icy Texan (478775)

  79. Couple of things. (1) Obama never tells the truth and (2) we’re already in a recession.

    So, maybe, in the twisted lefty world of words, technically we can’t have one in the future since it’s the one we have today.

    cedarhill (742618)

  80. 67.I think a big part of the Obama deal is that he listens to Valerie Jarrett instead of normal type advisors and pretty much does what she tells him. I don’t know if that’s because she “has” something on him (which is entirely possible) or if he’s just so darn lazy and golf/vacay/ice cream oriented that he is grateful he doesn’t have to do any thinking for himself. Either way, it’s not great for America because Valerie’s kind of a commie menace.

    Comment by elissa — 8/17/2011 @ 9:23 pm

    Hear this a lot. As to the Bin laden raid-Obama scrubbed it on 4/29 so he could “sleep on it”, whcih infuriated everyone else spare Jarrett and himself. Word is Jarrett wanted him not to do it at all and was doing evrything she could to delay or scrub the mission. And that the next day, CLinton, Gates and Pannetta read him the riot act without Jarrett present, explained it that it had to be done that day (because of the cycle of the moon) to save an chance of a 2nd term, sent him to play golf to get him out of the office. Essentially for that few hours, Obama was a spectator because he follwowed Jarrett’s idiocy.

    Bugg (ea1809)

  81. “put the odds that the US is already in another recession at 13%, ”

    Recessions are such nebulous things (like the positions of particles) that their existence can only be given as series of probabilities or odds.

    ErisGuy (f98b1a)

  82. Uncertainty p0rn!! I love it.

    Machinist (b6f7da)

  83. Absent the Stumulus Bill, and the overtime schedule of the presses at the Fed, we would still be in the original recession.
    Everything since 1/20/09 has been smoke and mirrors, except the bill that has yet to come due.
    Welcome to The New Deal-Part Deux!

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (52c114)

  84. How does the number of vacation days the president has spent compare to his predecessors? CBS Radio’s Mark Knoller has kept track of presidential vacations for years and supplied the data.

    So far, President Obama has taken 61 vacation days after 31 months in office. At this point in their presidencies, George W. Bush had spent 180 days at his ranch where his staff often joined him for meetings. And Ronald Reagan had taken 112 vacation days at his ranch. Among recent presidents, Bill Clinton took the least time off — 28 days.

    That’s the multi-mlillion $ ranch built specifically as a political prop, Bush subsequently abandoned entirely when he left the presidency.

    Spartacvs (2d9449)

  85. Jobless claims unexpectedly climbed by 9,000 to 408,000 in the week ended Aug. 13, the highest in a month, Labor Department figures showed today in Washington.

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  86. Days at the ranch Crawford were not vacation days, they were working days just like days at the White House. How many actual days off did Bush take in his first 31 months? My recollection is barely a dozen, and nothing like 61. Obama’s 61 days are actual vacations, not working-away-from-home days.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  87. That’s the multi-mlillion $ ranch built specifically as a political prop, Bush subsequently abandoned entirely when he left the presidency.

    Oh, and what the f–k are you talking about? Do you have any notion whatsoever? Or did you just make that up at random?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  88. I don’t think I disagree all that much with Robin, I think in fact we all pretty much probably agree in general principles. The question, which is more opinion than science (unless someone knows something I don’t, which is probable in many tpoics), is whether the bubble will continue to expand long enough for it to make sense to buy it at today’s prices, or whether the SHTF soon enough that everyone will wish they had silver and gold while burning dollars to keep warm.

    MD in Philly (d6c18e)

  89. Comment by Milhouse — 8/18/2011 @ 7:29 am

    Oh, he must have “abandoned” it, or why else is not Cindy Sheehan still parked on the road to the ranch.

    The fact that he had the ranch prior to being President, or even considering a run for the office, is immaterial to a twit. Just as is the fact that in 6-years in Austin, he had the ranch but no other home in TX other than the Gov’s Mansion.
    The ranch was/is a retreat: first from Austin, then from DC, and now from Dallas.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (52c114)

  90. “I’ve been traveling through these small towns and talking to folks, sitting down at diners, and you listen to people. You do your part. You meet your obligations. Well, it’s time Washington acted as responsibly as you do every single day. It’s past time.”

    – President Barack Hussein Obama

    When will he begin to act “responsibly”?

    He blew $787 billion on the stimulus. Unemployment rose and the number of people without a job rose by 2 million-plus.

    Obamacare?

    Big Zer0 doesn’t even mention that POS. DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz protested that calling the law “Obamacare” was a slur that was against House rules to utter on the House floor.

    The Iraq War? It continues…

    Has he closed Gitmo?

    Is he proposing civilian trials for terrorists?

    Has he governed in post-partisan/post-racial mode?

    The mope will run on his record and so will every Republican.

    He is toast.

    ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff)

  91. “He is toast.”

    ColonelHaiku – Good you did not say burned toast. That would be racist.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  92. That’s the multi-mlillion $ ranch built specifically as a political prop, Bush subsequently abandoned entirely when he left the presidency.

    Comment by Spartacvs

    Not true.

    He has a home in the Dallas area, but the idea this was a political prop is simply untrue. The idea its been abandoned entirely is similarly untrue. You just don’t get updates on where Bush is 24/7 anymore. In fact, when Ft Hood was recently attacked, Bush was able to visit by driving in from Crawford.

    You sound like you truly suffer from BDS. You probably think he let 9/11 happen and lied to get us into Iraq.

    Bush actually did work at Crawford, and a lot of the moments of his presidency occurred there. You don’t hear about how Obama finished his budget deal from Hawaii, or made a deal with a foreign leader at Martha’s Vineyard. Obama is lazy, and isn’t working at all, while Bush was getting things done.

    There’s a whole lot of things our administrator has to do, and there’s a reason Bush’s term saw less problems and scandals than Obama’s had.

    One problem I have with Obama is his ideology, but the other is simply that he doesn’t seem to care about doing his job well.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  93. Gold and silver are hedges against hyperinflation and/or currency collapse. Evaluate the risk and decide if you need a SHTF hoard yourself. But for that kind of hedge, you need physical possession of the metal, preferably in a coinage that other people will accept without assaying.

    As for recession, now that Obama has gone on record, I’d put the odds at at least 50-50.

    LarryD (feb78b)

  94. LarryD, it not a matter of odds, just a matter if they report the numbers honestly, and admit that we really never came out of the last one.
    Without the expansion of govt at all levels, the GDP would have – at best – flatlined.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (52c114)

  95. SpartacBS your scum.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  96. Sez Wikipedia:

    At the close of the Bush presidency, the Bushes purchased a home in Dallas, TX. Laura Bush confirmed that they would make that their permanent residency, while spending weekends and holidays at the ranch. The Wall Street Journal quoted an unnamed White House official: “They’ll have their place in Crawford. He just loves it.”

    The Journal is paywalled, but this same quote appears in hundreds of places all over the web. And everyone knows, Wikipedia is never wrong. But trolls don’t bother to check Wikipedia for confirmation or refutation of even the simplest and least controversial of their assertions, so they assume no one else will either.

    Back in 2008, Vanity Fair urged its readers to “Count down to our predicted sale date with the George W. Bush Crawford Ranch Sale Countdown module on the right-hand column of vf.com!” The module has since disappeared, of course. Trolls do read Vanity Fair, but they can’t distinguish between fact and predictions in it. That’s okay, though, since neither can the people who write Vanity Fair.

    In May 2010, Laura Bush gave Oprah and her national TV audience a tour of the ranch. Trolls do sometimes watch Oprah, but they fall asleep except during the talk about sex. Laura Bush didn’t talk to Oprah about sex, or the troll might have been awake to see that.

    Google tells us that in November 2010, Bush’s book tour kicked off with “Sean Hannity‘s interview with the former president at his ranch in Crawford, TX.” There’s video, too, but trolls don’t bother to watch video, even video from Fox News.

    Then on April 1, 2011, the Puffington Host ran an article entitled Laura Bush On Life At The Ranch: ‘George And I Do Everything Together.’” Trolls read the Puffington Host, but unless its posts also refer to Bush by one of his alternate names — like “Shrub” or “Chimpy McBusHitler” — they immediately forget anything they’ve read about him there. The PuffHo piece was actually based on a feature in the Sunday New York Times magazine. Trolls sometimes read the NYT Sunday magazine, but they all suffered from small strokes when they read Laura Bush’s statement that Hillary Clinton is her “favorite Democrat,” and that they’re still “in touch.”

    Trolls exist to make up stupid crap. And they can feed off even comments like the one I’ve just made, so ….

    [Beldar has left the building.]

    Beldar (485693)

  97. Comment by Spartacvs — 8/18/2011 @ 7:18 am

    Speaking of marks for a con…

    Another Chris (c04459)

  98. SaprtacBS do you get sexual pleasure out of being a dingus?

    DohBiden (d54602)

  99. Nice comment, Beldar.

    What I don’t understand is the idea Bush’s Crawford Ranch was some kind of amazing trick that helped Bush politically.

    I can’t say I blame him for relying on a retreat. It probably was a great place to work when Governor and President. It’s a part of America I suspect many foreign dignitaries were unfamiliar with. Close enough to the hill country, they can understand why Texans envy no other state.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  100. It seems to be a pattern in the Alinsky style, Dustin, in addition to Sheenhan’s siege, one can add McGuinness’s stalking up in Wasilla, and the burning of the Governor’mansion in Austin,

    ian cormac (81c5c2)

  101. Spartacvs has never made a statement that didn’t turn out to be a lie. Quite the incompetent.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  102. Just as is the fact that in 6-years in Austin, he had the ranch but no other home in TX other than the Gov’s Mansion.
    The ranch was/is a retreat: first from Austin, then from DC, and now from Dallas.

    He bought the place in 1999, so this doesn’t seem right.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  103. I recall that Bush hosted many foreign leaders at the Crawford Ranch.
    In fact, the visit of the Saudi Crown-Prince led to a great Star-Trek joke (which I will not repeat here).

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (52c114)

  104. Barry and Michelle don’t seem to like Camp David very much as a place to recharge their batteries. Always has to be someplace glitzier with cool rich people and where they can show off their use of AirForce One.

    elissa (69edf1)

  105. Whereas the house the Rezko built, suspiciously doesn’t get much attention,

    ian cormac (81c5c2)

  106. Milhouse, I was using spvrkles logic in that argument.
    I have no idea when he bought the ranch, but I assumed it was when he was Gov.
    The Left hated it, just as they hated RR’s ranch above Santa Barbara, because it reminded people that political leaders were people just like their neighbors, and not Demi-Gods.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (52c114)

  107. _____________________________________________

    I’ve always thought the following was a great example of the hollow, phony-ass nature of liberalism.

    Snopes.com:

    LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.

    HOUSE # 1:

    A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

    HOUSE # 2:

    Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

    HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

    HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as “the Texas White House,” it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

    So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON’T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Indeed, for Mr. Gore, it’s truly “an inconvenient truth.”

    ^ This can be added to the record along with studies that indicate people of the left actually are less generous and compassionate than people of the right. Or, for that matter, a survey done since the late 1970s at the University of Chicago that reveals people with a generally rightist attitude (ie, a preference for smaller government) — compared with folks who lean left — are less likely to agree with the statement of “most Blacks/African-Americans have less in-born ability to learn.”

    Mark (411533)

  108. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern.

    wow. And I thought my rain barrel was impressive. That’s a hell of a lot of water.

    I completed a nice rain barrel setup to water my gardens and that’s about when the drought began, sadly.

    I had no idea Bush’s home was like that. Of course, common sense conservation and environmentalism is just good stewardship of your property. It’s not controversial and plenty of conservatives invest in the work and materials to do that sort of thing.

    What Al Gore wants is tremendous power over the lives of others, so he has to insist the world is doomed by global warming. He certainly doesn’t act like it’s very serious.

    This has been quite a nice threadjack by Spartacus.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  109. __________________________________________

    Obama’s 61 days are actual vacations, not working-away-from-home days.

    I’m really not being too sarcastic (or sarcastic at all) when I say it would be better if the guy in the White House went on more vacations, played more golf and, better yet, never returned from such outings.

    I’m one who doesn’t believe any president (Democrat or Republican) is the cure-all or end-all for economic problems. However, I do think a president can make a bad situation worse. And when he has not been away on vacations or playing golf — and instead been firing up his foolish staffers and dreaming up foolish policies — that’s exactly what Obama has done.

    So take a million more vacations and play a million more rounds of golf, Barry!

    Mark (411533)

  110. Obviously, the only reason anyone can say we are not in recession is that, by definition, a recession comprises two or more quarters of negative growth.

    Q1 originally came in, following a warmish Jan. and Feb., at 2.4%, now downgraded to 0.4%. Q2 on first review was 1.4%. Negative growth has started Q1 or Q2 and will easily run thru the remainder of star-crossed 2011.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  111. Obviously, the only reason anyone can say we are not in recession is that, by definition, a recession comprises two or more quarters of negative growth.

    What’s typically left uncovered in the media analyses on growth is the fact that we’re engaging in 12% deficit spending to get that anemic 1-2% growth rate.

    Exponential math says that a country can’t run that trick for very long–especially at such great deviances–before it blows up in its face. Governments all over the place have hit the “bloat” stage and are experiencing diminishing returns, despite the fact that we are paying more per capita, both in raw and inflation-adjusted terms, on government spending than we were 50 years ago.

    That’s why Obama’s claim that the system “just needs a few tweaks” is so dangerous–it’s a complete denial of the mathematical reality that the party is over.

    Another Chris (c04459)

  112. If we simply don’t count government activity in economic growth, I think the picture of our economic health is indisputable. And since it’s from that non-government health we intend to fund the government spending, we’re making things worse.

    It’s entirely predictable that tapping the private sector harder and harder to fund stimulus was going to have a short term fake-recovery and then leave us worse off than we started.

    What in the world will we do about this? I don’t know how we recover without a long period of austerity and perhaps tax increases that cripple the economy (hopefully not, but I am not optimistic).

    Dustin (b7410e)

  113. Dustin – Taxes are patriotic. Get with the program.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  114. I’m sure Ayers wouldn’t even bother sending me to a camp. I’m hopelessly set in my ways.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  115. Obamanomics, destroying wealth one year at a time. From today’s WSJ:

    “Those who make $1 million accounted for about 0.2% of all tax returns but paid 20.4% of income taxes in 2009. Those with adjusted gross income above $200,000 a year were just under 3% of tax filers but paid 50.1% of the $866 billion in total personal income taxes. This means the top 3% paid more than the bottom 97%. Yet the 3% are the people that President Obama claims don’t pay their fair share. Before the recession, the $200,000 income group paid 54.5% of the income tax.

    Well, if equality of income is the priority, liberals should be thrilled with the last four years. The recession and weak recovery have been income levelers. Those who make more than $200,000 captured one-quarter of the $7.6 trillion in total income in 2009. In 2007 the over-$200,000 crowd had one-third of reported U.S. taxable income. Those with incomes above $1 million earned 9.5% of total income in 2009, down from 16.1% in 2007.

    It’s an old story: The best way to produce income equality is to destroy trillions of dollars of wealth. Everyone loses, but the rich lose relatively more than the poor and the middle class. By that measure, if few others, Obamanomics has been a raging success.”

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  116. One of his questioners was Jim Rubens, a Republican from the village of Etna who works as a consultant for the Union of Concerned Scientists.” UCS, which was formed in 1969 to protest the Vietnam War, has lobbied against Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) and nuclear power.

    L.A. Times reporter Maeve Reston also emphasized Rubens was “an investor who works in the clean-energy sector,” and not merely a “high-tech investor,” as the New York Times had it.

    Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2011/08/18/ny-times-calls-rick-perry-critic-republican-activist-leaves-far-left-en#ixzz1VOnlcYld

    ian cormac (81c5c2)

  117. What in the world will we do about this? I don’t know how we recover without a long period of austerity and perhaps tax increases that cripple the economy

    It’s actually not nearly as bad as that. Massive deregulation, and renewed public confidence that it’s safe to do business, can stimulate enough economic activity to get us out of the mess and bring the national debt down to a sustainable level. And remember that we don’t have to bring it down to zero, or to balance the budget. We can easily afford to run carry a moderate debt indefinitely, and even to run moderate deficits, provided that GDP is growing healthily. Not that it’s a wise practice, but it’s not a crisis. That’s how we got away with it for so long, until people went crazy. And if we go back to it being a long-term problem but not a crisis, I’ll be happy.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  118. There you go again, Mark, trying to make things confusing by pointing out facts… (Said in jest, of course. Such short, decisive, disruptive, and irrefutable facts are exactly what Conservatives need to say, over and over again.)

    MD in Philly (ea3785)

  119. a Republican from the village of Etna who works as a consultant for the Union of Concerned Scientists

    Now there’s a red flag. Almost a contradiction in terms. I don’t believe the UCS allows Republicans.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  120. It’s actually not nearly as bad as that. Massive deregulation, and renewed public confidence that it’s safe to do business, can stimulate enough economic activity to get us out of the mess and bring the national debt down to a sustainable level.

    I do hope this is the case, but I think we’ve crossed a point where it will be quite hard to get the debt down to a saner level.

    Your solution, massive deregulation and some kind of assurance that things won’t be changing enormously, would indeed lead to a period of growth. But that is such a radical departure. Every damn thing is regulated to death by a government that is completely out of control. An administrator trying to reign it in will find himself in a full-fledged war.

    There are too many interests in the crony sector that would also fight against a true free market.

    We got into the position we are in on purpose. That’s reason #1 I lack optimism we will make the choice to fix it.

    Dustin (b7410e)

  121. They’re up to their old games, identifying people who agree with them as Republicans and expecting us to take their word for it. Well, I’m not playing that game. Every time I see someone like this identified as a Republican, I say “prove it”.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  122. Every damn thing is regulated to death by a government that is completely out of control. An administrator trying to reign it in will find himself in a full-fledged war.

    That’s exactly correct, and the next Republican president had better treat it that way.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  123. 115. “Exponential math says that a country can’t run that trick for very long–[]–before it blows up in its face.”

    Good point. Japan has done it but her private citizens own 95% of the public 200% of GDP debt.

    And all they got for it was 2 decades of deflation.

    The stock market and bond markets are today playing the hyperdeflation-hyperinflation antipodes. Private US citizens don’t own 50% of our debt.

    Will asset deflation kill us or commodity inflation, e.g., $200 oil?

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  124. The word “concerned” when used in the title of any cause or group is usually a very big red flag.

    elissa (69edf1)

  125. One of his questioners was Jim Rubens, a Republican from the village of Etna who works as a consultant for the Union of Concerned Scientists.” UCS, which was formed in 1969 to protest the Vietnam War, has lobbied against Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) and nuclear power.

    What gives this group any more credibility than the average Art Bell caller?

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)

  126. If someone wanted a ranch for a “stage prop,” one damn sure wouldn’t be out clearing mesquite brush in the Texas sun. When you’re clearing mesquite, if you’re not careful, you’ll end up with a nice set of thorns only slightly smaller than a man’s little finger embedded in one’s flesh; it’s a nasty, nasty puncture that’s hard to clean and slow to heal. And about the only more physically challenging ranch work to match clearing mesquite is digging post holes. Brutal stuff, borderline masochistic. Not a speck of Hollywood to it, either, nor even the photo ops that Reagan got while chopping wood on HIS ranch.

    Beldar (485693)

  127. As an aside, I will just mention that Obama and wife had originally planned on using their Chicago home as a retreat from Washington similar to the Crawford ranch.

    Unfortunately, the security situation of the area (great population density, limited roads, way too many unsecured overhanging buildings within rifle range) make it highly unwise and I am sure that the Secret Service strongly counsels them against it. They have spent only 3 days there so far.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  128. 125. Which is why its down to Perry/Palin/Bachmann in my book, with an occasional Amen from Paul or Cain attended to.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  129. He means that there won’t be a recession after the depression.

    htom (412a17)

  130. President Obama’s approach to campaigning is starting to remind me of Newt Gingrich’s: They both love those expensive vacations.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  131. Bread & SpurtCircuses argues that La Bomba has actually been working more than we think he has?

    Given the results of all that “work”, maybe he should be arguing for MORE vacation/golf time.

    Icy Texan (7760bd)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5954 secs.