Obama Loses Sleep
by Big Dog on Jun 17, 2009 at 04:55 Political
Barack Obama says he loses sleep worrying about the massive US debt. Perhaps he should have been worried about it before he spent a fortune on a plan that has provided little in the way of results. Obama is now saying we have to be responsible but that unemployment will reach 10%. That would be 2% higher than he predicted but he insists things are turning around.
Not as far as I can see.
Perhaps Obama is losing sleep because all his poll numbers except his popularity are tanking. Perhaps he is beginning to realize that his actions were wrong and that running headfirst into a wall was not a smart thing to do. Maybe he is beginning to see that what he is doing might cost him seats in 2010 and his job in 2012.
Bill Maher expressed his dissatisfaction with Obama. If Obama is losing libs like this guy the end might be near.
Even his supporters are beginning to think he is a failure.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: debt, economy, maher, Obama, sleep, unemployment
The mainstream media wouldn’t do it. So we are trying to get your important messages to the American people. 50 This post is a suggested read at, http://aresay.blogspot.com/
Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result. By that definition, Hussein is insane. The trouble is that he is supposed to be leader of this country. This is a bad thing.
Thanks Dr. Phil.
Just thought you ought to get the straight talk here- you need to rid yourself of this destructive delusion that this man is the messiah, or you will spiral down into a life of socialism, and you do not want that.
“[Obama] insists things are turning around. Not as far as I can see.”
You aren’t seeing the turnaround you want just 4 months in? Oh golly. That’s a lifetime. If it hasn’t worked by now it will never work, right?
Unlike the Iraq war that some Republicans said would be a matter of weeks or months while it has taken years instead, the Obama administration has always been honest and said it would take time to recover from this downturn. I guess the question is what do you want to have happened by now in just 4 months that hasn’t and how does that make Obama a failure?
You can’t see signs of recovery? I guess you can miss a lot of things when your head is up an elephant’s butt.
So early with the insults? How sad- but the truth is that we should be seeing some indications of something other than stricter government controls here, like perhaps – JOBS?
Should that be too much to ask for from Hiz Lowness?
First it was only going to be “maybe 8%”- now it’ll be “10%”.
How many more times will the liar change the line in the sand?
The truth is I could do better than he has, and that’s a fact.
Hell, my dog could do better than he has.
Who’s head is up an ass’s butt?
Before anything else you should read the Romer/Berstein report that estimates the number of jobs created, what unemployment would have been with and without a stimulus, etc. This is after all the source for most of what Obama said publicly about what the stimulus would and wouldn’t do.
You are critiquing the stimulus with faulty expectations. You are expecting some kind of job growth that even the administration did not pretend would be happening at this point in time. They say in the report:
Job creation lags.
Take a look at this edited Romer/Berstein graph that shows estimated employment versus the grim reality of what we have now.
If you notice the estimated peak is between Q1-Q3 2009. We are seeing what appears to be the beginning of a peak from our May numbers. We are not even at Q4 2009 when the report estimates unemployment would begin to drop noticeably. The biggest drop in unemployment comes in 2010 and 2011.
All of these results are skewed though because unemployment was so much worse than expected. It means simply that the stimulus will not be as effective in reality as was estimated. It does not however mean that it is a failure and it will create jobs and stimulate economic growth none the less.
Here is the graph link. I messed it up the first time.
I prefer to read the governmental Economics reports that the Census bureau sends me- its not a pretty sight, even through governmental rose- colored glasses. try it sometime.
I’m simply asking you to educate yourself on what Obama has actually said the stimulus would do and when it would do it instead of just making up lies to pretend the stimulus is somehow not living up to expectations. But asking you to educate yourself? I guess that’s out of the question…
I would think that reading the actual governmental report on the economy might just cut the bulls*** Hussein spews, so that is what I do- Its much worse than he wants you to know.
Yes Adam, job creation lags. It is simple, the numbers are NOT what he said they would be when he was running around talking about the world ending.
Ah, if Obama only gets guns outlawed in USA during his term, libs will see it as a sussessful term. And by their standards (joke, ha ha!;-) libs have no standards) he is a success because there are more government jobs than ever before!
Oh, head up an elephants butt? Aren’t you so cute!
There was stunning results in the war you speak of, right from day one. Did you sleep through the victory? Maybe so! It was that fast. Talk about results! The first week was a rail-grabber.
Unlike Obama’s first four months. Yawn!
It was the time after that first four months of the war we have a problem with…George let us down.
He should have cut the military boy’s chains and let them stomp til every camel-jockey was dead dead dead.
They could do that.
But nooooooo!
Liberals couldn’t stomache a real solid no-holds bared victory!
So we got what…you wanted.
Are you happy about that?
INON: “if Obama only gets guns outlawed in USA during his term, libs will see it as a sussessful term.”>>
DAR
How frustrating it must be to the righties to find that their old hobby horses and boogiemen don’t work anymore. They try to bring them out and play with them but people just point at them and snicker.
Obama doesn’t care about your guns or the gun issue but the NRA likes to lie and try to scare people by saying he wants to “grab them.” Yawn. Nobody believes it anymore. The generation that cared about keeping the gays down is dying and quickly becoming irrelevant and a farce. Abortion is what it is, Roe v. isn’t going anywhere. Terrorism is a concern but it’s a tactic and a law enforcement issue. You don’t start a conventional war over a tactic (with the wrong country), that’s just stupid.
“Obama’s gonna outlaw guns!” “The gays are coming for your kiddies and they want to wreck your marriage too!”
These are now punchlines for jokes. Your party platform I mean. What else do you guys have?
D.
—————–
“What is a political party that is vastly white, middle-aged, male, Southern, pious, conservative, aggrieved, impotent, nostalgic, rude—and regarded negatively by more than half the respondents? Time magazine’s Republican political consultant Mike Murphy looks at the demographics and warns of a coming “ice age” for the party. That is grossly optimistic. No longer in second place, the voter self-identification polls place the Republicans well behind the leading independents and the second-place Democrats. The GOP is the equivalent of a shrinking third party on its way to becoming a museum piece beside the Whigs, the Greenbacks, and the Prohibitionists. The GOP is like a zombie cartoon reading the daily headlines of the last four years and asking, “Am I dead?””
–Conservative, life long republican, John Batchelor, LINK
What do they want to have happen? Well, with regard to the long term big picture, they have said so several times. They want him to fail. This is so their economic theories, now on the ropes (or in the gutter) might possibly be considered again.
What are they most afraid of? Terrified of?
America doing well under Obama. Because this would show them to be wrong. To dogmatic ideologists, “who know they are right and will never admit they are wrong,” this is the worst outcome. People get so attached to their ideas, they think they *are* their ideas. They they think you are attacking them if you attack these ideas. They become furious and frustrated when it looks like their ideas, (which they have invested so much time and effort in cultivating belief in) are going down in flames.
But the truth is, some ideas are bad ideas, and they should be discarded. This is hard for regular folks but the hardest thing of all for “true believers” to do. Progressives are sometimes too quick to throw away the old and go on to the new (with bad results). Conservatives often cling too hard to the past, afraid to go onto the new, with bad results.
As with so many issues (gay rights, GOP family values/moral high ground record etc.) they’ve set themselves up for disappointment again. America is going to come out of this and the GOP is going to continue to listen to it’s Zombie Leadership that got it into this mess, to ill effect.
D.
We want him to fail because if he succeeds America fails. He is driving us into the ground.
Jimmy Carter and FDR showed you can’t do this and had disasterous results.
I want America to succeed.
If America succeeds, Obama will be judged successful, and you know it. If America does not succeed, and more people suffer, the opposite will be true, and you know it.
Righties like to bash Carter, but as usual, they don’t know what they are talking about (or they do and are lying).
See this detailed analysis/chart from those lefties at Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html
Among presidents since WWII, the Demo’s have the top three slots, the republicans have the bottom three slots. Carter is squarely in the middle beating your Nixon, Eisenhower and he beats the pants off of both papa Bush and baby Bush *handily*.
D.
Oh please- Not Jiminy Carter, the most inept socialist there ever was- there is no way anyone could spin his career into anything remotely resembling something other than abject incompetence- the man cannot even build a decent house- its all for show for him. If there were not people to do the actual work, he couldn’t even hold a hammer right, much less read a level.
He’s not a carpenter. You got him there. Good one!
Now look at the historical record, in the chart.
Carpentry is not one of the categories we judge presidents by. But it is useful to note that he has long been associated with “Habitat for Humanity,” a group that has:
“built 50,000 houses in the U.S. and more than 150,000 around the world.”[2] In 2005 Habitat built its 200,000th house, bringing the number of people sheltered in Habitat houses worldwide to one million.”
What do republican presidents do when they’re finished putting us in debt? Oh, play golf.
People like to spread misinformation about Carter’s record. They do this over and over and after a while some people even start to believe these lies. The record shows otherwise.
Perception does not = reality. That’s fantasy, for children. Time to grow up.
Oh, and I see I gave you credit undeservedly. Carter is in fact a carpenter:
“While the former president is a noted carpenter (the White House staff gave him tools for his workshop when he left the presidency), Rosalynn has also gained building experience with Habitat.”
LINK.
Here is what he is doing while your guys play golf and milk the lecture circuit for more cash:
“In 2008 Habitat for Humanity celebrated the 25th annual building project with the Carters and renamed it to include Mrs. Carter. The Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Work Project focused on supporting the Gulf Coast community seeking to rebuild after hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Despite periodic downpours, volunteers got most of the work done during one week in June to finish building and fixing 60 houses and frame 48 more.[15]
During November 2009, volunteers will join Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter in the Mekong River region of Southeast Asia where houses will be built in the countries of Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and the Yunnan Province in China. The week-long project will serve an estimated 300 families. It also will begin a five-year Habitat for Humanity initiative to work with 50,000 families across the five countries.”
LINK
But that’s just what he does in his spare time. When he really puts his mind to it, he through the efforts of his Carter Center, accomplishes things like this:
* Observation of more than 69 elections in 27 countries[2]
* Helping over 8 million small-scale farmers double or triple grain production in 15 African countries[3]
* Creating avenues to peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Haiti, Liberia, North Korea, Sudan, and Uganda
* Reducing cases of Guinea worm disease worldwide from 3.5 million in 1986 to fewer than 25,000 in 2007[4]
LINK
You really plumb the depths of the “low ground” when you try to smear someone who has done as much for America, and the world, as Jimmy Carter.
D.
ps. Wouldn’t it be funny, if he was also a carpenter than you.
——————-
“To create our rankings we looked at six measures of economic performance–GDP growth, per capita income growth, employment gains, unemployment rate reduction, inflation reduction and federal deficit reduction–for each of the ten postwar presidencies. For each measure we looked at whether the situation improved or got worse, and we ranked the presidents from 1 to 10.”
Ibid
I did not see “baby” Bush on the chart.
Carter was worst in inflation. He was
Reagan and Ford were one and two. Each had strengths and weaknesses and could be ranked any number of ways depending ont he column.
Really BD? You need a chart for “baby” Bush? Do you really need a chart to see the economic mess that his office handed us? Numbers on the Katrina disaster? Data on the Iraq war? (with Osama still at large I may add) He’s a walking disaster that needs no chart.
Baby Bush wasn’t included since this was done in ’04. He would easily be last, well below his father and everyone else. Off the charts, so to speak.
Carter was worst in inflation. Nixon was second worst. The seventies, and oil prices we bad for that.
The categories considered in this chart are normal categories we judge the health of the country by.
Total of average rank (lower number better)
Demo’s: 22.9
Repub’s: 32.2
D.
Tamara, it was the dems who began the “mess” that you attribute to “baby” Bush- the war is all his, but the housing crisis and mortgage meltdown is all the dems- to say otherwise is a lie, plain and simple.
As I have also done carpentry for Habitat, I know just how they cut corners in their construction. I helped build two homes before I quit in disgust. They are one step up from cardboard, and Carter just gets kudos (undeservedly) from this crap construction.
You can kiss his feet if you want Darrel- I do not expect a lot from a goat herder.
BLK: “…they cut corners in their construction.”>>
DAR
Building homes for the very poor and they try to stretch their limited budget by “cutting corners?” I hope so.
You got anything better to hit Jimmy Carter with, or is this your best stuff?
D.
There’s those insults a-flying already. I guess “insulting me (him) is just your way of admitting your weak argument.”
It all depends on what you define as success.
Adam, the graph shows he is not where he said we would be with the stimulus and he is way above where he said we would be without it. Those were his predictions and what he sold the plan with.
So it is fair to hold him to those benchmarks.
So Adam, what you are saying is that we should read a report based on predictions and accept it but we should not read Obama’s predictions and hold him to them.
All I’m saying is that it is too early to call the stimulus a failure on job creation alone simply because unemployment now is higher than was estimated. Job creation by the stimulus is concentrated in 2010 and 2011, not Q1 2009.
Find me one person that said the stimulus would be creating the level of job growth that you apparently expect out of it just 4 months in. Find me one person who said the stimulus would be lowering unemployment right now instead of just making it level off, which it unemployment appears to be doing.
You’re critiquing the stimulus on a set of expectations that even Obama did not outline and I wish that you would at least appear to know what exactly Obama said the stimulus would be doing right now when you judget it as failing.
How is it leveling off when your chart shows it rising. The one person who said it was Obama.
Sorry, he used this to ram that through and now people are starting to balk at all the spending.
I told YOU that jobs lag before he got it passed. I also said the stimulus provided little in the way of jobs and is nothing but pet projects.
We will have huge inflation and more economic woes and that will be next year.
I should have said job losses are leveling off, not unemployment rate. I’m not sure exactly how though unemployment climbs by an even 0.5% each month while job losses have declined 4 months in a row. Maybe somebody can explain that for me…
I am sure Darrel can explain it to you since he is an expert on everything.
I don’t have much interest at all in the arcane metaphysics of job prediction. As with the stock market, monkeys throwing darts at a dart board tend to compete real well (all though some trends are obvious and everyone knew, post Bush, unemployment was going to skyrocket). The report put out by Obama’s people was filled with the necessary qualifiers and admitting a wide range of estimates. So all this attempt to say Obama said X was going to happen is an exercise in pretending those qualifiers didn’t exist or weren’t clearly stated or really really obvious to anyone who knows about “projections” and “estimates.”
There are no end of ways of counting the unemployed and the numbers are adjusted seasonally and for other variables. It’s a mess and I think the US, for political reasons, has cooked their numbers a bit. And for quite a long time.
And it’s not true I am an expert on everything. For instance, I know nothing about sports.
D.
ADM: “unemployment climbs by an even 0.5% each month while job losses have declined…”>>
DAR
It seems to me an answer would be that these are two different numbers that don’t necessarily follow each other well. “Job losses” would be the category of jobs disappearing due to contraction and businesses closing. Saying it declined also refers to a “rate.”
Many of these people may find employment so because they experienced “job loss” they don’t necessarily go into the unemployed column. Or, as is very common, they are people who hold more than one job, so they don’t go in the unemployment column. Also, people who are unemployed for too long, and give up, tend to not be counted anymore.
D.