Arrianna Huffington gives Obama an F on the economy

[question everything]

and, I suppose, her opinion matters so much that she was invited to express this on Blitzer's

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/08/sitroom.02.html (and scroll half way)

BLITZER: Arianna, those of us who read you in Huffington Post all the time, you've been very sympathetic, very kind to the Obama White House, except when it comes to their economic policies. This is what you wrote on Tuesday. "The Obama administration's ongoing loyalty to Wall Street is a virus that holds far more danger than the swine flu, sorry, the h1n1." You give the president's economic team an F in how they're handling with this economy. Why?

HUFFINGTON: When it comes to the banks Wolf, and the bank bailout. We have now poured hundreds of billions of dollars into the banks. And remember, again and again we are told the reason is the banks going to unfreeze credit. It's not happening. The president himself said on Jay Leno the banks are actually basically keeping the money to balance their own balance sheet. So the main purpose of all this, which the Secretary of the Treasury reiterated in his various interviews to free up credit is not happening. So what are we doing? We're basically bolstering the prime actors of this meltdown, the people who brought us here and not allowing the free market to actually work and not allowing the free markets to punish those prime actors.

========

And I noticed that while CNN and MSNBC just rehash what other bloggers and talk show hosts say, the real news just scroll below the screen. Is it any wonder that most Americans have no idea of what really happens? That the source of any news come from biased talk shows and blogs and, I suppose, Sunday sermons?

Last Week TIME came with its "100 most influential people" and it was nothing but few people promoting each other. The top, in my opinion, was the selection of The View as the best talk show. If more of us were working on a floor of a plant that is making things instead of cold calling others to spend money on things that they don't need, fewer people would have time, or care, to find out what the View, and the other hosts have to say, or blog, or twit.

[jefferson_dem]

1. Arianna cracks me up.

Sometimes she's too cute (in a personality sense) for her own good.

[Old Hank]

2. She gave an F to his "economic team," not Obama

For accuracy purposes.

[KoKo]

3. Many of us are giving an "F" to his Economic team... so her voice is not alone. n/t

[mtf80123]

4. Thank you!

They are still making the rich... richer and consolidating the treasury to these treasonous bastards who should be sitting behind bars!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

36. precisely!

The ghost of future scandals should be a happy camper. The obvious conflicts of interest did not end with the NY Fed chair.

[Reterr]

6. Yes,eom

[sendero]

68. She is absolutely right..

... the "team" are just a bunch of connected to Goldman Sachs asswipes whose only real mission is to bail out the banks, not bail out America.

Besides being fundamentally unfair, letting the perpetrators of this fiasco get off scot free, it's not going to work either.

Worst of both worlds and Durbin was absolutely correct when he said that the banks OWN congress, but apparently they own the white house also.

[polichick]

67. That does make a difference - & she's not nearly alone in her assessment.

[question everything]

90. Obama will be the first to say that he stands behind his teams

for success and failures.

Isn't ironic that the Limpdick wished Obama to fail, or, as he said, his economic plans to fail, while Huffington already determined that he failed?

[jemma]

95. And who selected Obama's economic team?

Obama. Same thing.

[Phx_Dem]

5. Arianna, the economic expert. ROLF

:rofl:

[Skwmom]

25. Well when you look at the track record of the idiots that Obama has

put in charge of the economy, I'd side with Arianna.

[mkultra]

40. yes, those morons and thier 100 day failathon

They made the right moves and things are already turning. It takes a long time to turn a big boat.

[flyarm]

54. Please tell us how it is turning, you have to wait 4 days to get your money out of BOA in Fl

My neighbors are snow birds..they bring their money down from NY in early winter and spend winter and spring in their Fla home..they go back north in May..they went last week to get the rest of their money out of BOA the day before they were to fly to NY and they were told they had to "ORDER " THEIR 6,000 BUCKS..THEIR MONEY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO THEM..because the biggest local BOA here didn't have the fucking funds!
So these people had to change their flights ..they went to the bank on Monday morning and they were told they could not get their money until Friday!!!!!! So the wife goes into the BOA on Friday morning and was told they still did not have her funds.........they would not have their funds until after 3:30 pm Friday afternoon!

These people do not have a BOA where they spend the summer..so they had to wait for their own damn money from BOA..from Monday to Friday.

So please tell me how things are turning when you can't even get your own money out of your savings account..without ORDERING IT..

Oh and my most local BOA, been here for 25 years closed April 17th..now we must travel quite a way to go to the bank...they didn't even leave a ATM where I live..

Just try to get a chunk of your money out of BOA and have to change your travel plans ..because you have to wait for your own money for four working days and tell me things are turning!!

[PufPuf23]

57. Recent Bank of America cancelled my debit card weirdness

Several weeks ago I transferred $ from a BoA money market account into the checking account I use to pay my bills in order to buy a pickup by check at the BoA ATM. I also used the debit card for a number of other purchases that day as I live in a rural area two hours from the nearest BoA (and stoplight for that matter).

Several days later I got a call that a draw for a regular pharmacy bill on that debit card came up account not recognized so I paid the bill off the linked checking account and called BoA. BoA called up the computer records and said my debit card did not exist as the service rep entered the info and security code 3X. This is for a 20 year old account and a debit card with two more years prior to expiration that I use several times a week (and keep between $5000 and $10000 in the account by design). My checks were still clearing on the account. So BoA issued me a new debit card I finally got just this week and activated but haven't yet used. Fortunately I have another account at another bank to use.

[flyarm]

66. BOA called me 3 times in one day two days ago when i went shopping and to the ATM saying

It was a security hold..I could not get money out of the new Branch they sent my account to after closing my branch..I tried to get 200 bucks out and no deal, i could get nothing..and when i went to the grocery store i had to leave all my groceries because my debit card would not pay..We had well over $50,000.00 bucks in our account!

I called them and they said i had a suspicious attempt to get money out of an ATM..that was at an ATM i had never used before..it was the gosh damned bank ..they ...transfered my account to when >.they ..closed my branch!

We have a Small line of credit with BOA..no mortgage..on a beach front property..we used the line for a small home imporvment..and it is less than 10,000..the due date for payment is the 10th of each month..they began calling me ..5 times in one day ..two weeks ago for payment and today is the due date..today...not two weeks ago..and we always pay it two weeks prior..it was already in the mail..but they harassed me two weeks before it was due..and we have never ever been a day late on any bills!

so tell me how things are turning..i will tell you the only way they are turning is they are now harassing for no damn reason at all!

oh and my ATM card has never been denied before ..ever........nor have i ever not been able to get money out of the ATM..nor have I ever had them call for a payment ..ever..since we always pay early..and mostly pay in full, and we don't use credit cards except AX for travel..everything we pay in full cash..
We have MULTI MILLION $$ PLACE ON THE BEACH AND NO MORTGAGE..AND A SECOND HOME WORTH WELL OVER A MILLION WITH A VERY SMALL MORTGAGE..AND NO CREDIT CARD DEBT...

SO WHY NOW HARRASSMENT FOR NO DAMN REASON??????

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cwcwmack]

7. I give arrianna an F

on being a human being.

[lunatica]

8. More than half a million jobs are being lost every month

The economy is not improving. Maybe we aren't hearing where all that money is creating or saving jobs, or maybe it can't be fixed anymore.

[Old Hank]

9. To be honest, experts always said the recovery would take a year or so

And the spike in unemployment was expected, too, so I wouldn't say that the high unemployment is part of a failed economic policy. Not necessarily, at least.

[Occam Bandage]

13. Did you really think we could undo eight years in four months?

It's a miracle we've managed to stop the downward acceleration.

[lunatica]

20. How has the downward acceleration been stopped?

If the car companies go down then millions of people and hundreds of thousands of small businesses connected to the car industry will go down. And with the banks refusing to give loans and the credit card companies refusing to give credit who's going to buy any new car regardless of whether it's run with gas or electricity?

It's going to take longer than a year. And no I don't expect anything to be fixed quickly. I expect things to not be fixed for a long time.

[mkultra]

41. it has been stopped in terms of GDP loss

which is expected by most to now flatten out of the remainder of the year. Job loss will continue for a quarter or two after that as growth in GDP will drive job growth.


Things will start to correct early 2010. That's the best anyone could ever hope for.

[lunatica]

52. hoping is very different from actually seeing it happen

But I hope you're correct.

[mkultra]

59. you dont have to hope

All the numbers point to it. Everyone it seems, but krugman and a few conservatives, has already predicted it. Its not a shot in the dark or an uneducated guess. Its just the current circumstances.

[lunatica]

62. Yeah, right..

[mkultra]

77. i guess youll get to find out what crow tastes like

cause is going to happen no matter how much you poopoo it lunatica.

[LooseWilly]

98. The irony is that all those billions and billions...

seem to only be being pumped in to restore the economy to a tentative stability... value-reduced... same basic situation as before the latest implosion.

I think many are criticizing because, stemming of the economic hemorrhage aside, this would've been an incredible opportunity to re-impose more regulations (a step which I haven't heard anything but lip service paid to), not to mention some accountability, in the form of jail time for the half-assed game players with the mechanisms of the economy. Both would make the public feel better about their investment of tax dollars, and both would be positive measures to lessen the chances that the same thing will happen yet again in another 12-18 years.

Instead we just have government using tax payer dollars the help the fucktarads of Wall Street cover-over their mess... and then a national collective shrug, and we carry on as if nothing had ever happened... and meanwhile these finanacial institutions hassle and harangue the customers that are the tax payers that bailed them out... but who are, individually, just so many potentially victimizeable citizens...

But it's all gonna be roses and toilet water (eau de toilette) by 2010... according to economic forecasts... the same economic forecasts that claimed the economy was growing under W because the housing bubble, statistically, balanced out all the jobs being exported... and the same forecasts that, in '04, allowed W to crow about the millions of new jobs created... without requiring him to admit that, as I suspect, the net income of all those jobs gained was less than the net income of the jobs lost...

The economists, aside from Krugman and a few others, will tell us when the economy is better... so STFU...

I'll just STFU now. I'm looking forward to my crow. Yum.

[question everything]

101. There are already some new regulations about the stock market

that would not mean much to us, regular folks, but there are some new SEC rules. And there certainly are new rules about issuing new mortgages to people who should not purchase a home at ten times their income. And I think that we have seen the last of the NINJA (No Income, No Job, No Assets) loans.

I feel bad for the stories, above, and even more so on Senator Bernie Sanders's page

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=311981

but I hope that if people will start living within their means - general comment, not about DUers - then, perhaps we will come out of this mess a better society.

[LooseWilly]

103. I don't suppose you have some links for the new SEC rules.

I may not really understand them, but so far I've only heard talk about needing new regulations... but nothing about any actually being decided upon (a set of factoids that suggests to my intuition that the administration/congress are too afraid to actually impose any regulations until they are signed off on by Wall St., which then further suggests to me that they won't be regulations particularly worth a damn).

And, of course, you do realize that "if people start living within their means", especially while 500k+ jobs net jobs are lost per month, that means that the economy as it is currently set up will continue to implode... not that I disagree and think that might not be a bad thing... but with stagflation the rule, and health insurance running ahead of inflation, and inflation running pretty briskly itself... people living within their means will not consume enough for the economy to resume it's former hallucinatory potency... unless something is done to increase the means of the people in general... and I'm not seeing any concrete signs of that...

[question everything]

106. SEC's Schapiro Voices Support for Council of Regulators

You are right. Still in the process of talking but still a major improvement from the past 8 years.

From the WSJ:

WASHINGTON -- Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro indicated Friday she supports a systemic risk regulatory model similar to one proposed earlier this week by Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair which would create a council of existing regulators.

"I am inclined toward the structure envisioned by Chairman Bair," Ms. Schapiro told an audience at the Investment Company Institute's annual membership meeting in Washington. "I have long been concerned about excessive concentration of power."

Earlier this week, Ms. Bair told federal lawmakers she believes a council of regulators, including the Federal Reserve, the SEC, the Treasury Department and the FDIC could be charged with overseeing large firms that may pose potential risks to the broader marketplace.

A similar such proposal for a systemic risk regulator has also been floated in a bill by Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) as an alternative to creating a new regulatory agency or bestowing systemic risk authority to an existing regulator such as the Fed.

Ms. Schapiro fiercely defended the SEC's current role in the regulatory scheme Friday, saying it is vital to maintain its independence and its role in protecting investors.

She also indicated Friday she believes a regulatory authority charged with unwinding or reorganized troubled large nonbanks should be separate and apart from a systemic risk regulator.

The model she envisions, she said, includes an entity responsible for regulating the capital markets, "an entity responsible for regulating banking institutions, an entity responsible for monitoring and averting risks to the financial system as a whole, and an entity responsible for the resolution of troubled institutions."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124179409876801021.html

[LooseWilly]

109. Uhhh... is it just me?

... or "Ms. Schapiro fiercely defended the SEC's current role in the regulatory scheme Friday, saying it is vital to maintain its independence and its role in protecting investors." is this the same SEC that ignored repeated warnings about Madoff??

I mean, the talking points sound swell and all... but I'm not gonna hold my breath... lest I expire and a poster from GLBT whose name escapes me be forced to arrange that a Brahms' requiem be played at my wake...

[paulk]

102. +1

Obama had a real opportunity to make some fundemental changes, you know - the sort of change we, as liberals and progressives, could believe in - instead he has chosen to side with the money players and hope we can muddle through this mess, at least until the next one comes...

[Jennicut]

31. We have lost less jobs then expectd this month. Are you for real?

Like the economy was gonna turn around in less then 6 months. Ha!

[Bluenorthwest]

33. Yeah! ONLY 600,000 plus this month!

Prosperity is right around the corner!

[lunatica]

51. They revised the numbers back up too, so we lost just as many as before

Because census workers were hired in April which made it look like less jobs were lost. Remember this administration is using real numbers, unlike the last one

[bighart]

82. The job loss number this month is deceptive

in my opinion because it is reduced by the 60k plus temp census jobs created by the government. You add those 60k part-time temp jobs and look at the underemployment numbers and it's pretty ugly this month as well. Just saying.

[paulk]

105. about those census jobs

when hired back in January, for a job that didn't start until the middle of April, people were told that the the folks in charge had figured it would take ten weeks at 40 hours a week to do the job. Actually it took less than four weeks at less than 30 hours a week... so all those 75k people are going to be right back in next month's numbers, and the govt has lost an opportunity to provide jobs and inject some money into the economy. Maybe they'll make up for it by giving the banks another couple of hundred billion...



---------------


I know this because my wife was one of those 75k

[Zynx]

63. You know, that can be said during the pit of any recession, no matter the depth.

[quiller4]

74. The economy is improving. There are jobs created every

month, too. At this point the job losses in construction, manufacturing and retail still exceed the jobs created in health care and energy but that will change in another 6 mo or so. Small businesses can finally borrow again. Sales are starting to pick up. Regional surveys of major employers show more employers maintaining or increasing work force than reducing it.

The housing market is improving. The rate of increase in home sales in April is one of the factors that pushed the stock market up.

[wyldwolf]

10. Gingrich Girl - McCain Lovin' Arriana? Dumping on Democrats? NO WAY!

[Old Hank]

11. Arianna does not love McCain

She used to be a conservative before she even founded the Huffington Post. She may have loved McCain, but not during the campaign that just passed. She supported Obama against McCain and Hillary Clinton.

[wyldwolf]

14. she supported McCain over Gore... she worked with Newt to bring down Clinton

She's a craven opportunist and would jump back into the loving arms of the GOP if she saw a better opportunity.

[Old Hank]

16. But we all love Frank Rich, who slammed Gore and his movie

I have seen praise for Joe Klein too, go figure. Even Tweety!

And like I said, it is no secret that Arianna became a liberal after the period you are citing.

[wyldwolf]

18. Who are "we?"

I certainly like it when someone writes a good editorial, but Rich and Matthews weren't agents of the other side, helping usher in the Bush era.

[rpannier]

24. Then you weren'tpaying attention

Matthews had guest after guest that blasted away at Gore. He repeated every BS line about Gore he could.

Matthews did help usher in the Bush era.

And continued as one of DUH-bya's biggest cheerleaders for 6 more years

[Bluenorthwest]

34. I remember Matthews on the 'Mission Accomplished' day

He was drooling over how 'manly' W was, how the women love him, and so forth. All of this during what was obviously a huge mistake and a lie. He helped usher in the Bush era, then he helped cement W's image well into the second term.

[snowdays]

37. Chris Matthews: "I Felt This Thrill Going Up My Leg" As Obama Spoke - You forgot

this one about his comment about Obama.

[xiamiam]

71. he has delay on his show regularly...he drools over his guests..wierd..nt

[JamesA1102]

26. Rich didn't slam Gore he slandered Gore

As did Dowd by making stuff up about Gore to trash him.

[Jennicut]

32. Practically the entire so called "liberal" press dumped on Gore, they are disgusting

[Thrill]

12. Don't care for her opinion or Wolf's opinion

. And I think they are doing a decent job, considering this one of the worst crisis since the Great Depression.

[LittleBlue]

15. Too early to grade. It's like handing out grades two weeks into the semester.

I don't like some of what Obama's economic team is doing, but I'm certainly not ready to give them a grade yet.

[Occam Bandage]

17. The MSM loves liberals who bash Obama. Loves 'em. nt

[wyldwolf]

19. I can see the RNC ads now...

"Liberal Arriana Huffington gave Obama an F on his handling of the economy. His own team considers him a failure!"

[question everything]

87. And it is not as if she does not enjoy the turnaround of the stock market

No, she does not make a living from her Post.

[nevergiveup]

21. If Obama gets an F on the economy

what kind of grade would Chimpy get? I thought an F was as low as you can go.

[vaberella]

28. I don't even want to know what she'll say if the economy turns around.

Since everyone with a brain knows that the economy can't turn around in a matter of days no matter who the economic expert was.

[mkultra]

42. thats why she will say its taking to long

even though slowing this jugernaught in under a year is a monumental achievment, she will still contend that "there were better things that could have been done." Always the hack.

[ZombieHorde]

22. I am not an experpert on the economy, but a few months seems like a very short period of time for

economic change. This issue requires more time.

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. And I think most Americans agree with your position. However, the

"liberal" pundits seem very eager to chip away at the president's favorability on this issue. I just hope the left won't make the mistake of allowing some on air personality or blogger become the titular head of the party. We don't need our own version Rush Limbaugh, it will end badly.

[question everything]

88. I think that liberal bloggers like Huffington have to prove that they still matter

sure, during the dark days of Bush many would turn to them to get the meat to attack the previous administration. Now they have to prove that they are not cheerleaders for Obama and, like Coulter, they will say outrageous things just to get additional 15 min of fame.

[Tarheel_Dem]

99. I've made this exact point on numerous occasions. It's a matter of relevance.

But one has to question Arriana's motives, afterall she is a businesswoman first and foremost. I absolutely despised her during the Clinton years, and it looks as if she may be returning to her old ways.

[LooseWilly]

100. Look up thread.

Huffington isn't the only one criticizing.
Comparing her with Coulter is a little insulting... I mean, until she starts claiming that Dick Cheney feeds on black embryos... sucking the undifferentiated tissue from them like a Sith Mosquito feeding on the poor... Near as I can tell, Huffington hasn't gotten into Coulter territory.

[vaberella]

29. Only people with a brain think like you.

As you can see by the posts here...that brain is a dime a dozen on DU at times.

[mkultra]

43. anything under a year is epic success. Unless your without pony.

[ZombieHorde]

69. I am getting one of my ponies.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8399476

[tammywammy]

83. Yes

I had a professor describe turning a huge corporation around like turning Navy carrier in the ocean. It takes time and it's the same with the US economy. Put things in place and then slowly they'll start improving it's not an immediate overnight change.

[Zynx]

23. Okay. That's someone's opinion.

Thanks for the "information".

[question everything]

89. "Someone" who is admired on DU, who created a place for liberal

ideas and opinions and, as posted above, "someone" whom the Republicans would love to point out as a (former?) Obama supporter who does not trust him now. And so what if it is his team not him, personally? He will be the first to say that he stands behind his teams, for successes and failures.

Limpdick wants Obama to fail, Huffington already determined that he failed.

[Zynx]

96. I never really care what some sacred cow says.

Anyone is liable to be incorrect. I only defer when it is a case where expert opinion is truly required. When it is an exercise in polemic, I defer to no one.

[Vidar]

30. Works for me.

[NJmaverick]

35. At least Krugman was smart enough to shut up, once he saw he was wrong

this dingbat just keeps charging ahead, facts be damned.

[Old Hank]

44. What was Krugman wrong about?

If I may ask.

[NJmaverick]

47. It would be easier to ask what he has been right about

since he took up his anti-Obama crusade. Still the bigest blunder would be his predictions of economic doom, that failed to come true.

[question everything]

104. He has had a column in Newsweek criticizing him

http://www.newsweek.com/id/191393

[mkultra]

45. give him time, he will come out soon with a new tact.

it will be a mild correction for him but he will go straight back to doom and gloom. He is a sensationalist economist. Hes like a TV stock analyst.

[NJmaverick]

48. No doubt

[Zynx]

64. I think it is instructive to consider what even the most pessimistic economists are actually saying.

What they are calling for is not a continued performance of the 4th quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009. What they think will happen is a leveling off in the contraction by the second half to a slower rate and then no to little growth in 2010. They are not predicting continuous 4-5% declines in GDP. Not even Roubini, as right as he's been, is calling for a repeat of the Great Depression. By his analysis we are suffering from an emerging market-style financial crisis.

[mkultra]

78. intrestingly, i would say thats the mainstream opinio

not those of the pessimists. As far as im concerned a slowdown in decline is momentous. The Obama administration it self has made these very claims.

[depakid]

94. I guess you don't read much Krugman

(or many other economists, for that matter).

[Mass]

38. Attention seeking Ariana. May be she should get a radio show or something.

That would keep her busy.

[frogmarch]

39. Why is Arianna Huffington treated

like a Democratic icon? Remember how she attacked Bill Clinton tooth and nail at every opportunity over the Monica thing? I do, and I still boil with anger thinking about her calling for his impeachment every time she opened her yap.

I can't stand Arianna. It doesn't surprise me she's starting to jump all over Obama now. That's who she is.

edited to correct my misspelling of her last name in the subject line.

[Old Hank]

46. Again, Turley, Rich and all Clinton/Gore haters who were on Obama's side were heroes during 2008

Even Barbara Ehrenreich. Remember her? The one who said Gore and Bush were the same? She was praised for being on Obama's side last year.

[bertman]

80. Arianna has one of the best and most comprehensive progressive websites on the internets.

One of my two favorites.

However, she is not lockstep pro-Obama and she certainly questions the Democratic Party's ongoing drift to the right. As do many of us.

She may have been a big conservative at one time, but in my book, she's put that to rest, Dahhlink.

[unblock]

49. i think they've done a good job IF their goal was to avoid a depression AND keep banks from failing

because it looks from my perspective, as someone who works in the financial sector, like that is what's going to happen.

the real question is, were those the right goals?

frankly, i believe that we could have emerged from this recession faster and with less moral hazard by taking much of that bailout money and using it to fund NEW government sponsored entities chartered to lend immediately, with clean balance sheets, while letting at least some of the banks who screwed up fail.

that would have gotten lending to happen faster (ending the recession faster) and it would have reduced the moral hazard because most banks AND THEIR CREDITORS would have been properly, severely punished for screwing up.

as it is, the money is going to banks with giant holes in their balance sheets, who will sit on the money until their leverage ratios come down. i.e.., they put the money in the single WORST place to promote immediate lending. moreover, banks and other "too big to fail" institutions will become ever more emboldened to place the economy and the country in future jeopardy because they know that even democratic governments will bail them out no questions asked.


we need massively more defensive regulation AND TAXATION of "too big to fail" institutions, of better enforcement of antitrust laws to prevent companies from becoming "too big to fail" in the first place.

[paulk]

110. you've asked the right question

and we'll just have to hope that Obama's long term goals include some real change in the financial sector, rather than the bandaid (really expensive bandaid) the Treasury has so far put on the wound.

[jgraz]

50. Oh noes!! Someone criticized The Pwesident!!!!!

Quick, let's see how many tired, clichéd attacks we can fling at her before someone realizes she's right!!!

:eyes:

[OwnedByFerrets]

53. Right on!!!

[Ikonoklast]

55. She's as right now as she's ever been.

And I do mean 'Right'.

I trust her as far as I can throw her. Shameless opportunist. When she saw fame and fortune bashing Democrats, she did so at every turn.

I put her in the same boat with Lieberman and Specter. Whatever is personally expedient.

[jgraz]

Thank you for making my point for me.

[Ikonoklast]

58. The problem is, she's wrong.

She has no grasp as to what direction the economy is heading right now.

But, because things haven't magically turned around six months into the largest economic crisis the world has seen in the last seventy years, Obama is a failure.

It's actually quite interesting to see the critics grasp at anything to justify their positions.

And I already know what your point of view is.

[jgraz]

60. Then show where she's wrong. This fanboy shit is getting embarrassing

Some of us remember when this board used to discuss ideas. Now it's like a Star Trek convention without the cardboard ears.

[NJmaverick]

75. Robert Kennedy had you in mind when he said

"One-fifth of the people are against everything all the time."

[jgraz]

84. Oh really. And what do you have in mind? Anything?

Cuz if you do, baseless, ignorant attacks are probably not the best way to demonstrate it.

[NJmaverick]

85. You mean ignorant baseless attacks like this one?

"""Then show where she's wrong. This fanboy shit is getting embarrassing
Some of us remember when this board used to discuss ideas. Now it's like a Star Trek convention without the cardboard ears."""


You seriously need to start reading what you post

[jgraz]

91. You may want to familiarize yourself with the meaning of the words "baseless" and "ignorant"

Just sayin... a little vocabulary building never hurt anyone.

[NJmaverick]

93. ROFLMAO!!!

:rofl:

do you do kid parties?

[closeupready]

115. LOL - ain't that the truth? The Barack Obama Fan Club Discussion Board. Yay, Obama!

:rofl:

Don't get me wrong, mods/Skinner - I love DU, obviously, or I wouldn't spend so much time posting here.

I just get a kick out of the minority of members here who predictably rip any and all who deign to criticize Obama on his policies and what he has done or what he has failed to do.

Peace.

[jgraz]

118. Now I'm thinking I shouldn't have mentioned the cardboard ears

Don't want to give anyone ideas...

[dkf]

56. Once again, its a freaking LOAN. HELLOOOO.

The banks are supposed to pay it back in 3 years with 5% interest. The funding is needed because the banks are taking huge losses as people can't pay their mortgages. Banks that made responsible loans to people who could afford them are being affected by the collapse in value caused by irresponsible banks and mortgage brokers that lent to any Tom Dick Harry or Jane.

In addition, most of the credit that disappeared is through the collapse in securitization on Wall Street, where they depended on leverage. The banks have stepped up to lend to entities that used to depend on funding through bonds, etc. who had to go to their lines of credit when it became impossible to float a bond.

I wish Ariana would show a slightly more sophisticated grasp of the situation.

[xiamiam]

72. what is happening now is that mary peter and judy are facing foreclosures because tom dick and harry

foreclosures were not dealt with properly...the subprimes were packaged and bet against by the same banks that created them, in some cases...then they hired a pr firm to blame it on the subprimes and tom dick and harry...never thinking that even the ashleys, erikas, and justins would be facing the same fate...at the same time, money froze, house prices plummeted, consumer confidence dropped so low people stopped spending or buying houses other than foreclosures...

stop blaming this on the subprime borrowers...its bigger and more sinister than that..

[dkf]

73. Well I don't call a 3 year balloon payment loan with an interest rate of 5%

a bailout. If they think the Government could do as well loaning those funds to these people who are underwater, who will pay it all back at the end of 3 years so be it.

The only bank that won't be paying it back is Citi who converted some of their Preferred to Common Stock. We all know the main purpose of all that "hide the bad bank" rigamarole was to protect Citi.

[brentspeak]

65. And she's right to do so

The latest laugh that Obama provided with regard to the economy was his proposal to offer job "retraining" for laid-off workers. Again, the $2 trillion question: retraining for what?

[nichomachus]

70. Didn't she cause Gore to lose in 2000? We hate her, right? Oooh, look a puppy - cute.

[question everything]

107. Never head that story

which does not mean much, but I would like to think that no one person can cause someone else to lose elections... unless this person is a dead woman or a live boy in that candidate's bad.

(paraphrasing a politician from Louisiana)

[Honeycombe8]

76. I know 2 people who just refinanced, so they got lending. And home sales are up...

so those people got lending.

Citibank has announced it will work with the fed govt on helping to prevent foreclosures, etc.

Who's not getting lending? Commercial ventures? Just aimin' for the facts.

[bertman]

79. Local realtors in what was a VERY HOT market are telling me that the banks and

mortgage lenders are doing everything they can to NOT lend their clients money. But maybe that changed this weekend.

[uponit7771]

111. Not changed, the 650 FICO and 40% DTI is no longer a base line metric...

...and the banks have gone to just throwing crap up against the wall to say who gets a loan.

Also, the 10 yr T has gone up = refi rate goes down.

[JNelson6563]

81. Yeah, this from she who

not so terribly long ago stood by her Rethug hubby's side and denounced immigrants with her thick Greek accent. Indded, her opinion of President Obama's performance matters a lot to me.

:eyes:

Julie

[Old Hank]

86. Not so long ago, Arlen Specter was a Republican. But Obama doesn't hate him

Indeed, President Obama vowed to support him in the PA primaries. And Specter's switch occured a month ago, while Arianna's ideological switch occured nearly a decade ago.

Yet we see some bring up the issue of prior conservatism as a reason to dismiss someone's opinions.

[spanone]

92. i think we should turn the economy over to ms huffington, i'm sure she knows more than the Prez

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[kiranon]

97. Just moved Arrianna to the no longer relevant column.

Arrianna another instant gratifcation person. It will take time before we will know if what Obama and crew have done is successful or not. I can wait.

[JohnBT]

116. yeah, how dare she !!?

How dare she criticize the excellent Obama economic team before...what, 2015 ?? She's just a journalist who doesn't understand what the big guys do.
she's definitely irrelevvant now!

[w4rma]

108. Arrianna is 100% correct. Obama's economic team deserves an F. (nt)

[uponit7771]

113. I'd give them a D, they did the right thing for an economy that needed money...

...but that's not true any longer due to base line number of unemployed staying static against a decreasing pool of employees

[Dappleganger]

117. Yes

And O did make those choices. He is the President, is he not?

We cannot keep allowing the foxes to guard the hen houses.

[Life Long Dem]

112. Sounds like old news or just feeding some nonexistent frenzy some want to continue

[closeupready]

114. Oh, she's just a right-wing mole.

and past her prime. Her website sucks. She needs to STFU.

:sarcasm:

Major sarcasm there. She is totally correct.