Archive for the ‘Obama Administration’ Category

Palin vs. Obama: Barack challenges Todd for "First Dude" title.

October 29, 2010

During Sarah’s GOP acceptance speech she introduced her husband Todd as the “First Dude”.

Now, John Stewart is trying to transfer that title to Barack Obama.

Let the battle begin …

In the Daily Show, Obama had a friendly host and an even friendlier crowd.

He was making this first-ever appearance by a president on the Daily Show as part of a long-shot effort to rekindle the spirit of ’08.

* * * * *

“You don’t want to use that phrase, dude,” Stewart recommended (to President Obama).

Dude.

The indignity of a comedy show host calling the commander in chief “dude” pretty well captured the moment for Obama.

Washington Post, “On the Daily Show, Obama is the last laugh”, October 27, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/27/AR2010102709035.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

So, on Monday, the Dem candidate for governor tells Obama to “stuff it” …  and, on Wednesday, John Stewart calls him “dude”.

I love this stuff.

What do Barack Obama and Rodney Dangerfield have in common?

October 29, 2010

According to Dangerfield and the President, they get no respect.

Charles Krauthammer sums it up nicely …

Obama Underappreciation Syndrome

Opening a whole new branch of cognitive science — liberal psychology — Obama has discovered a new principle: The fearful brain is hard-wired to act befuddled, i.e., vote Republican.

But of course. Here Obama has spent two years bestowing upon the peasantry the “New Foundation” of a more regulated, socially engineered and therefore more humane society, and they repay him with recalcitrance and outright opposition.

Here he gave them Obamacare, the stimulus, financial regulation and a shot at cap-and-trade — and the electorate remains not just unmoved but ungrateful.

Faced with this truly puzzling conundrum, Dr. Obama diagnoses a heretofore undiscovered psychological derangement: anxiety-induced Obama Underappreciation Syndrome, wherein an entire population is so addled by its economic anxieties as to be neurologically incapable of appreciating the “facts and science” undergirding Obamacare and the other blessings their president has bestowed upon them from on high.

I have a better explanation.

Better because it adheres to the ultimate scientific principle, Occam’s Razor, by which the preferred explanation for any phenomenon is the one with the most economy and simplicity.

And there is nothing simpler than the Gallup findings on the ideological inclinations of the American people. Conservative: 42 percent. Moderate: 35 percent. Liberal: 20 percent.

No fanciful new syndromes or other elaborate fictions are required to understand that if you try to impose a liberal agenda on such a demonstrably center-right country — a country that is 80 percent non-liberal — you get a massive backlash.

Washington Post, Obama Underappreciation Syndrome, October 22, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/21/AR2010102104856.html

My early high school football coach Howie Weyer — who got 15 minutes of fame by refusing to hire smokers and fat people when he left football and went into business — used to drum in to us: respect is something you earn.

Hear that, Dude?

Update: But they like him as a person, and like Michelle even more … oh, really?

October 28, 2010

This one has perplexed me for a awhile.

The constant refrain is that a people don’t like Obama’s policies, but they like him as a person.

Well, in  the most recent CBS/NYT (left-leaning) poll, Obama’s job approval was 47% ,,, his personal approval was 40%.

Hmmm.

And about Michelle being way more popular than Barack …

Her personal approval scores 41% favorable … a point better than her hubby.

Now, to be fair, 73% of folks who have a point of view on her rate her favorably (41% / 56%) … but, she’s a total non-factor to 41%.

image

image

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/27/politics/main6997687.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

President says: "Vote to punish your enemies" … oh, really?

October 27, 2010

This week, at a Dem rally, Obama prodded the group to “get out the black vote”

He told Latinos to “vote to reward your friends and to punish your enemies”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-latinos-punish-your-enemies-voting-booth_511932.html

He told supporters that “Republicans can come along, but they have to ride in the back”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101025/ap_on_el_pr/us_obama

Wow.

Just imagine if those clever phrases were flipped and voiced at a Tea Party rally.

* * * * *

image
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-obamas-unsustainable-strategy-hunkamania-dempocalypse-and-more_513012.html

O’s victory lap: approval rating reaches all time low.

October 25, 2010

The President has been rallying his base in in the bluest states.

Looks like there might be a bit of backlash to his message of ‘stay the course’ , ‘spread the wealth’, ‘fear the evil empire’.

He’s back to his all-time approval low of 41% in Gallup … and just a tad below his disapproval high of 52% (which he hit Aug 15-17, 2010)

What ever happened to ‘hope’ and ‘change’ ?

image

Gut check for Obama: What if Google were Exxon ?

October 22, 2010

Obama loves to vilify Exxon-Mobil.

One theme: Exxon paid no U.S. income taxes in 2009.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Tax/ge-exxon-paid-us-income-taxes-09/story?id=10300167&page=2

Yep. Exxon uses strategies to minimize their U.S. corporate income taxes.  All completely legal — nothing that other companies don’t do — they’re just better at it and their income numbers have a lot of digits.

GE does the same — with about the same results.

Obama never bashes GE.

Why?

A cynic might say it’s because CEO Immelt has become a visible cheerleader for many of Obama’s wacky initiatives … hoping GE will get a bunch of the business from the government and green technology ventures.

Yesterday’s news frenzy re: Google using tax schemes to get their U.S. tax rate down to 2.4% presents Obama with a dilemma.

He should be publicly vilifying them … especially now that he’s out on the west coast.

After all, 2.4% is not statistically different from zero when it comes to tax rates.

And, it doesn’t smell right when companies are using tax strategies known  as the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich”.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html

But, Obama has been mum on the revelations … and you can bet he’ll stay that way.

Why ?

Google is 3rd among tech giants (behind Microsoft and Cisco) in political giving.

Guess what? 75% of their political contributions go to Democrats.
http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/07/02/high-tech-industry-gives-more-money-to-democrats.html

As Gomer Pyle would say: “Suprise, suprise, suprise>” (sic)

And, Google CEO Eric Schmidt has always been an Obama favorite.

Schmidt stumped for Obama in 2008.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/20/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-e_n_136047.html

Schmidt has been on Obama’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology since day one.
http://venturebeat.com/2009/04/27/googles-schmidt-and-microsofts-mundie-join-obama-advisory-council/

And — when Christine Romer suddenly realized that her daughter was entering high school and resigned from the Council of Economic Advisers — Schmidt was rumored to be on the short list of replacements.

Hmmm.

Google is lucky it’s not Exxon.

Bullet dodged …

Folks don’t think clearly when they’re scared …

October 19, 2010

Interesting blurb from Newsweek …

Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser:

“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared.

Obama Clings Again! Blames “Scared” Voters.
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/kausfiles/2010/10/17/obama-clings-again-blames-scared-voters.html

Point 1: True.  Every athlete knows that people perform worst when they’re in a state of panic. Every student who has taken a test knows that, too.

Point 2: Obama was clearly talking about the scared, dumb voters who haven’t seen the light and may — in their panic — pull the lever for a Repunlican in 2 weeks.

Question: Has the President looked in a mirror recently?

Maybe he doesn’t consider facts and science when he’s scared …

That would explain wacky moves like picking a fight with business, generally, and the US Chamber of Commerce. specifically.

Now, even black bloggers raise some doubts …

October 18, 2010

According to the ultra right leaning New York Times

The President held a special session at the White House for black bloggers.  He told them:

“Black blogs reach the part of our audience that’s not be watching ‘Meet the Press’ — not that there’s anything wrong with ‘Meet the Press.’ I’m just saying that, you know, it might be a different demographic,” he added, stirring a few laughs from the group.

Strikes me as a minority analogy to low income whites “grabbing for their guns and bibles”.

Seems that it had that effect on some in the audience …

Jack and Jill Politics (a black oriented blog) wrote that the feeling among some who attended Monday’s gathering was  that they were being used for political expediency.

“We essentially told the White House that we are not willing to be ‘pimped,’”

The guy certainly has a way with words, doesn’t he ?

* * * * *
New York Times, White House Meeting for Black Journalists, October 13, 2010
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/13/white-house-summit-for-black-journalists-doesnt-stay-off-the-record-for-long/

To see the video:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/10/14/obama_blacks_probably_dont_watch_meet_the_press.html

"Don’t make me look bad, now” …

October 12, 2010

Delivering a rallying  speech at historically black Bowie State University in Maryland a few days ago, the president got downright personal: “Don’t make me look bad, now.”

It’s not easy to convert exhaustion into enthusiasm. But if Obama doesn’t want to look bad, that’s what he has to do.

Washington Post, Need to Translate into Votes, Oct. 12, 2010
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/10/12/will_need_translate_to_votes_107522.html

Whatever happened to hope and change ?

Obama’s latest rally-shout isn’t exactly “win for for the Gipper”, is it ?

“Don’t make me look bad” is one of his current campaign themes … along with bashing Boehner (who ?), Rove, Gillespie (who ?), the US Chamber of Commerce (huh ?), oil companies, banks, big pharma, insurance companies, etc.

Then, after telling the crowds to “buck up” and get to work for their local Dem candidates, he headed for the links.

President Obama hit the golf course Saturday for what, by CBS News’s Mark Knoller’s calculation, was his 52nd such outing since taking office.

The Hill, Obama hits links for 52nd golf day, 10/09/10
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/123511-obama-hits-links-for-52nd-golf-day

Guess he hasn’t heard the management mantra: “Walk the talk.”

* * * * *
BTW: How does one “buck up”?

They don’t like his policies, but they still like him … oh yeah ?

October 1, 2010

The refrain that ‘Obama is still personally popular’ is repeated so often — especially in the mainstream media — that it’s treated as a universal truth.

Unfortunately (for Obama) the facts don’t support the contention.

Based on the latest WSJ-NBC poll :

  • 47% of people feel positively towards Obama … 29% very positively
  • The 47% is down from 64% on Inauguration Day
  • 41% of people feel negatively towards Obama … 27% very negatively
  • The 41% is up from 19% on Inauguration Day

My take:

  • People started out liking him, but …
  • Less than half now feel positively towards the guy
  • Numbers correlate pretty well with his job approval

Question: how would you feel if half the people who knew you felt negatively about you ?

Bummed, right ?

So why do the pundits keep saying he’s one popular dude ?

I must be missing something …

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJNBCPoll09282010.pdf

Stop dissing professors !

September 30, 2010

The Woodward expose “Obama’s Wars” reportly says that Obama manages more like a professor than a president.

Ouch.

Why insult professors ?

You know, a few of us have real life experience, have managed organizations, have made  decisions, and have gotten rewarded (or penalized) based on outcomes.  Don’t put Obama in our canoe.

By the way, exactly what is Obama’s professorial experience ?

Was he a full-time prof at Chicago teaching for an extended period of time?

Or, was he simply an evening adjunct who taught one course, one time so he could claim resume credit ?

Of course, he hasn’t disclosed the details.

I’m betting the latter …

Regardless, stop dissing profs.

About Obama’s attacks on John Boehner …

September 30, 2010

I’m not a big John Boehner fan, but from the get-go, Obama’s personal attacks on the House Minority Leader  struck me as one of the Administration’s wackiest campaign tactics.

Based on the latest WSJ-NBC poll :

  • 50% don’t know who John Boehner is …
  • Of those that do know who he is … 28% view him favorably, 34% view him unfavorably, 38% have no opinion on him.
  • Combined, over 2/3s (69%) either don’t know who Boehner is or have no opinion of him.

Why would you focus an attack on a guy that nobody knows ?

I must be missing something …

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJNBCPoll09282010.pdf

When a tree falls in the woods … update.

September 29, 2010

Today the President continues his campaign tour to rally his exhausted (Velma’ Hart’s word) and ignorant (Kerry’s word) base …  and get them to buck up (Biden’s words) and get out of their chairs (paraphrasing O’s words).

Interesting tactic.

Now, instead of insulting Bush & Boehner, top Dems are insulting voters.

Might work …

* * * * *

Have you noticed that crowds for Obama’s events are a lot thinner these days.

Here’s an example …

Six weeks before the mid-term elections, President Obama couldn’t fill the ballroom at the Roosevelt Hotel, despite cheap tickets on offer.

And then he was met by hecklers.

Event organizers had to reach down to the D list to fill a room to listen to him.

Most of the low rollers arrived early to see President Obama up close and personal.

Tickets for the general reception at the Roosevelt Hotel in New York were only $100.

Some bought tickets for $50 from their desperate Democratic committeeman.

Some bought the same day.

Source: The Daily Beast, Obama’s Fire Sale
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-23/obamas-fire-sale/?cid=bs:archive23

I guess some of the mojo is gone, huh ?

More important,  is anybody listening to these 2-a-day speeches the President is giving ?

They’re kind of a blur, aren’t they ?

About the $30 billion added stimulus … Did anybody bother to ask small businesses or their banks ?

September 28, 2010

Punch line: Yesterday, the President was touting his next great stimulus package — ostensibly to help small businesses.

But, the $30 billion small community business lending program faces a big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.

* * * * * 

The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

It seems like a simple effort to unclog a credit pipeline that has been blocked since the financial meltdown two years ago.

But interviews with community bankers, as well as small business owners, show a reluctance to participate.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans.

Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too many strings attached, too much regulatory oversight, and too much uncertainty.

“The rules can be changed any time.”

“We have taken a strategic decision not to have our primary regulator, the government, also be a partner in our bank.”

The fears stem from what happened under TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Fund, formed at the height of the financial meltdown to pump money into banks. Banks that accepted TARP money had to later cut dividends to shareholders and limit compensation to top executives. They were also penalized for early repayment.

Banks said they already has enough capital to meet the paltry demand for loans.

“Our business customers are mired in uncertainty and are reluctant to invest in their businesses”

91% of small business owners surveyed said all their credit needs were met. Only 4 percent cited a lack of financing as their top business problem.

Plans for capital spending were at a 35-year low.

“The crucial questions facing business owners are does it make sense to make an investment right now, and will it generate positive returns?”

“Many of our clients, business owners, put their projects on ice in 2008 because their job number one is to see their company through to the other side of this economic crisis.” 

Source: Associated Press:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100925/D9IEME2G0.html

Summers going, going ….

September 22, 2010

gone !

Not the season, the Obama econ adviser … the third to jump ship … along with budget director Orzag and Christine “8%” Romers.

Two points:

1) If the Stimulus is working as well as Obama and Biden say, why aren’t these folks sticking around for the applause ?

2) At Monday’s twn hall, the President was asked specifically if Summers or Geithner would be replaced … he answered “no pesonnel decisions have been made” … do you think (a) decision was made yesterday, or (b) Obama didn’t know, or (c) the President wasn’t answering truthfully ?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575506281087034608.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories

What the heck is so funny about "being completely exhausted"?

September 22, 2010

If you haven’t seen this clip from Obama’s town hall … you’ve got to see it to believe it.

Summary: an African-American lady who describes herself as a middle class Obama supporter says that she’s exhausted defending the President and his ineffective policies.

Couple of points:

1) Note the President’s smirk when she’s asking her question?  I still can’t figure out what he thought was so funny.

2) His answer laid out “some of the things wI’m doing to help you” … e.g. health coverage for preconditions … none of which materially  impacted this lady

3) On the Monday  talk shows, Obamatrons were already saying she was a GOP plant … watch the wrath of the mainstream media come down on this lady … like they did on Joe the Plumber

I think this clip will have a noticeable impact on the Novemeber elections … she puts a face to buyer’s remorse … and can’t be dismissed as a Tea Party wingnut.

* * * * *

Click link or picture to view:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5GqYtrSzAo&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5GqYtrSzAo&feature=player_embedded

Where to invest: United States, Russia, Venezuela ? … or, none of the above?

September 17, 2010

Punch line: Washington’s shakedown of BP may cause other multinationals to flee to a more hospitable haven: Canada.

Side note:  I’ve often said that the discarding of established bankruptcy / contract law to pay off the UAW before GM’s secured creditors was a defining moment for US commerce.  So, the BP action shouldn’t have surprised anyone.

* * * * *

Excerpted from The Globe: The great drain, August 26, 2010          

Assume you are a big-name international resource producer, maybe an oil company.

From the following selection, choose two countries where you would most want to operate:  Canada, United States, Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.       

That’s easy.

You’d pick the first two, because the others have had scant regard for  the rule of law.

At one point or another, each has been accused of expropriation or other  acts of aggression toward foreign investors.

Since you are accountable to your shareholders,  you strike those countries off your list.                            

Today, however, you might want to strike the United States off the list, too.

The  response of the Obama White House and Congress to the BP oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico is  sure to have foreign investors trembling.

As the damage claims roll in like a hurricane, BP  has become the world’s biggest ATM.

BP never expected to pay the ultimate price for the sub-sea blowout.

That’s because of the 1990 Oil Pollution Act  placed a $75-million liability cap on monetary damages payable to public and private
parties (except where negligence was proven).                        

In BP’s case, that cap was quickly deemed null and void.

In short, the U.S. government dictated financial responsibility in a politically  driven way well before blame for the leak had been determined in a court of law.

BP’s now massive liability may downgrade the world’s view that the United States is  an investment haven.

America’s loss could be Canada’s gain.

Full article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/the-great-drain/article1683458/

Thanks to JWC for feeding the lead

Boehner blinks … or doe he ?

September 13, 2010

 Obama says he only wants to extend 80% of the Bush cuts — only for families earning less than $250,000.

Speaking at a White House press conference, Obama accused Republicans of “holding middle-class tax relief hostage” by insisting that all of the tax cuts passed under President Bush be extended. He called out Congressman John Boehner as the main culprit.

On Sunday talk shows, GOP Leader Boehner — fresh off his Obama-induced rise to national attention — seemed to sell out the 3% of folks who pay almost half of all income taxes: 

WSJ, Boehner Opens Door in Tax Talks SEPTEMBER 12, 2010

The top House Republican said Sunday that he would support legislation that extended tax cuts for the middle class but not the wealthy if that was the only option, an apparent concession to Democrats that was met with skepticism from the White House.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703897204575487904204238046.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5

What’s up?

Here’s my take …

Now, 80% of the Bush tax breaks — which candidate Obama said were all “for the wealthy” — get renewed — probably permanently, without any sunset provisioning.  And, GOP is off the hook for “holding the middle class hostage”. My bet: Obama wanted them to stop the middle class tax breaks — so he could say that he was keeping a campaign pledge and have an addition $3 trillion to throw against his spending spree.

Then, GOP wins the House and immediately passes a bill to extend the Bush tax cuts for investors and business owners — i.e. “the wealthy”.

Either Obama OKs the extension — selling out his base — or, more likely, he vetoes the bill and owns the results if the economy continues to stagger. Neither are good options for the President.

Biggest question is how they sort out the capital gains, dividends and estate tax rates.

We’ll see …

John who? … Somebody explain this to me, please.

September 10, 2010

Yesterday in Cleveland –– actually, Parma – a suburb that Clevelanders have made fun of for decades, since the days of Ernie “Ghoulardi” Anderson and Tim Conway –- a feisty President Obama turned attack dog and called out House Minority Leader John Boehner nine times.

Forget that it was unseemly for the President to do it.

The odd attack must have left most people scratching their heads, wondering “Who the heck is John Boehner?”

Think about it.

Less than 2/3s of Americans can identify the sitting Vice President .  (Note: that’s giving credit for people who think it’s Hillary Clinton or Joe Somebody)

Less than 30% of the public knows who Chief Justice John Roberts is. (see chart below)

A CNN poll released the day of Obama’s speech slots Boehner between Biden and Roberts — 55% either have never heard of Boehner or have no opinion about him.

So why would Obama elevate and attack somebody who is unknown to the majority of Americans?

I must be missing something …

* * * * *

Note: Accoding to Pew, more than 1 in 4 Americans don’t know that ObamaCare was passed … and they get to vote … that’s scary !

image

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1668/political-news-iq-update-7-2010-twitter-tarp-roberts

Orzag says “extend the Bush tax cuts” …

September 8, 2010

Yesterday we posted that the looming decision on the Bush tax cuts put the Dems in a political pickle: let some or all or them expire and jeopardize the prospects of an economic recovery … extend them and implicitly concede that Bush’s tax plan was right.  Oh, what a dilemma.

Peter Orzag – Obama’s budget director who jumped ship last month – fueled the debate with an op-ed in the NY Times (link below).

Orzag opined:

What to do about the Bush-era tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year?

,,, the best approach is a compromise: extend the (Bush) tax cuts for two years and then end them altogether.

Ideally only the middle-class tax cuts would be continued for now. Getting a deal in Congress, though, may require keeping the high-income tax cuts, too. And that would still be worth it.

Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt.

And since financial markets don’t seem at the moment to view the budget deficit as a problem — take a look at the remarkably low 10-year Treasury bond yield — there is little reason not to extend the tax cuts temporarily.

Hmmmm …. wonder why the guy decided to leave the Obama economic team ?

* * * * *

The op-ed made me smile until Orzag pushed one of my hot-buttons:

Many conservatives (would) make the tax cuts permanent for the likes of Warren Buffett, even though he’d prefer they didn’t.

First, Billionaire Buffet doesn’t speak for everybody making more than $200,000.

Second, if Warren wants to pay more taxes, then why doesn’t he just write a fat check to the Feds and shut the (expletive deleted) up already ?

* * * * *

Full Op-ed: New York Times, One Nation, Two Deficits, PETER ORSZAG, September 6, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/opinion/07orszag.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Which Senators said: “Surge is wrong …”?

September 1, 2010

There were several … most notably Joe “Trifurcate the Country” Biden and Barack Obama.

Since BHO neglected to mention in last nite’s speech, here’s a clip. 

Gotta love Youtube … 

If a tree falls in the woods …

August 31, 2010

… does it make a sound ?

I ask because tonight Pres. Obama will be giving an oval office speech declaring that –- true to his campaign promise —  combat troops are out of Iraq.

My bet: real low TV ratings for the speech.

Why?

I can’t remember the last time I heard anybody mention Iraq in conversation. 

Even Bush-bashers are off the case.

It’s old news.

Besides hard core politicos, the only folks watching will be eager to see if the President:

  1. Uses the word “victory”
  2. Apologizes that US forces went into Iraq
  3. Admits that he opposed Gen Petraeus and the surge
  4. Concedes that it was Bush’s exit time line

I’m betting “no” on all but #2 … I put that one at 60-40.

Best reason to watch: to see live if the President sets off another stink bomb -– think “stupid Cambridge police” or “I support the Mosque”.

* * * * *

In a similar vein: Does anybody pay any attention at all to any of VP Biden’s many speeches ?

Fiddling while Rome burns …

August 27, 2010

How many pundit columns or TV clips have you seen in the past week that have opened with “Nobody begrudges the President with some hard earned R&R”?

OK, I just have to get this off my chest … I begrudge Obama his vacation.

Geez, he’s the POTUS … not Clark Griswald.

Ask any C-level exec if they’ve ever had a vacation cancelled, shortened, or interrupted by urgent company business

I’ll bet 100% say they did. I sure did.  Just ask my family.

There’s no more important job than POTUS … and — except for war or a plague — few matters more urgent than an economic meltdown.

According to the AP …

The government is about to confirm what many people have felt for some time: The economy barely has a pulse.

Today, the Commerce Department will revise its estimate for economic growth in the April-to-June period and Wall Street economists forecast it will be cut almost in half, to a 1.4 percent annual rate from 2.4 percent.

That’s a sharp slowdown from the first quarter, and economists say it’s a taste of the weakness to come.

Such slow growth won’t feel much like an economic recovery and won’t lead to much hiring.

The unemployment rate, now at 9.5 percent, could even rise by the end of the year.

Consumers can’t be sure their jobs are safe, with unemployment so high. Business executives don’t know if sales and profits will grow enough to justify adding jobs.

And potential changes to tax laws at the end of this year and other policy reforms also make it hard to plan ahead, economists say.

People have been overwhelmed by uncertainty.”

High unemployment is making it harder for people to make their mortgage payments and stay in their homes.

About 10% of homeowners have missed at least one mortgage payment this year.

AP, Snapshot of economy about to get a lot bleaker, Aug 27, 2010
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100827/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

Rather than strolling around swanky Martha’s Vineyard showing folks what a cool dude he is, I’d like our POTUS at least acting like he’s engaged on the economic problem.

Whatever happened to “”I will not rest until (fill in the blank)”

Oh, I know that he took time for a conference call with his economic advisers.

Big deal.

The outcome: stimulus was a grand success, staying the course with people and programs, not to worry – the home winterizing credits and solar panel tax incentives are still in play.

Give me a break …

The Thrill is gone … at least in Martha’s Vineyard

August 25, 2010

Gotta love it …

On Martha’s Vineyard, “Miss me yet?” t-shirts are outselling ones touting Obama.

As Martha’s Vineyard braces for the first family’s visit — their second summer stay here since President Obama took office — the excitement that marked last summer’s arrival of the fresh-faced commander in chief seems to have ebbed like the tide.

One barometer of the plunge in excitement has been the sale of Obama-themed T-shirts, which designers had been banking on after the craze of last year. Clothing labeled with the president’s name sold by the thousands, helping to salvage a tough economic year for the island.

But this year’s T-shirt sales are much less brisk, merchants say.

“Last year, Obama gave you goose bumps, but I don’t think you’re going to see that this year,’’ said Alex McCluskey, co-owner of the Locker Room, who sold more than 4,000 “I vacationed with Obama’’ T-shirts last year.

But so far this year, he said, his hot item is T-shirts of former President Bush asking, “Miss me yet? … How’s that Hope & Change Thing Working Out for You?’’

Vineyard buzzes less for Obamas’ second visit
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/08/18/vineyard_buzzes_less_for_obamas_second_visit/?page=2

 

But people still like him …

August 13, 2010

Thur morning on CNBC, John Harwood – one of NBC’s political hacks – reported on the most recent WSJ/NBC survey.

He rote-repeated the regular lib refrain: yes, the President’s approval ratings have fallen because people don’t like his policies … but people still like him as a person.

Oh, really ?

The WSJ/NBC survey asked people to “rate your feelings towards President Obama as very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative, or very
negative
.”

The WSJ/NBC data does say that 46% have “net positive” feelings towards Obama … 41% have “net negative” feelings towards him. 

So, he has a plurality but not a majority.

  • Technical Note: “Net Positive” adds together “Very Positive” and “Somewhat Positive”; “Net Negative” adds together “Very Negative” and “Somewhat Negative”;

In February 2009, Obama’s net positive was 68%; his net negative was 19%.

In other words – from February 2009 to August 2010 – Obama’s net positives dropped by 22 points and his net negatives increased by 22 points.

More significant, Obama’s top & bottom box ratings have converged.

In February 2009, 47% felt “very positive” towards him … only 19% felt “very negative”.

Now, 27% feel “very positive” towards him (a drop of 20 points) … and 27% feel “very negative” (up 8 points). 

Looks to me like folks aren’t liking him as much as they used to …

image

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/___Politics_Today_Stories_Teases/Aug%20NBC-WSJ%20Filled-in%20_for%208-11-10%20release_.pdf

Wasn’t suing Arizona supposed to help Obama with Hispanics ?

August 9, 2010

Oops … According to Gallup, President Obama’s ratings have slipped among Hispanics … 

click chart to enlarge

image

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141725/Blacks-Whites-Continue-Differ-Sharply-Obama.aspx

History repeats … here’s evidence

August 4, 2010

In the most recent Gallup — USA Today presidential tracking poll, Pres. Obama’s approval dropped to 41% — just above the political “Mendoza Line ”.

More interesting (to me), is the remarkable similarity between Obama’s approval decline and that of the President  to which he is most often compared (by conservatives) — Jimmy Carter.

  • Note: Jimmy Carter’s line is the one with the initial spike.

Anybody see a pattern ?

image

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/presidential-approval-tracker.htm

Smackdown: Obama versus business …

July 30, 2010

At a recent cocktail party, in a lightning strike occurrence, I brushed up to a real, live CEO. 

He’s a member of the Business Roundtable, so I said “glad to see you guys speaking out on Obama’s policies”.

He said “yeah, we figured he’s going to screw us any way, so we might as well speak out”.

He also said Obama sent some communications flunky to address the group – she said “you gotta understand, it’s good politics for us to beat up on you guys.”

She should have added “now, go out there and save or create some jobs for us.”

Might work …

* * * * *

Excerpted from FT: Obama needs to stop baiting business, Mort Zuckerman, July 26 2010

The growing tension between the Obama administration and business is a cause for national concern.

The president has lost the confidence of employers, whose worries over taxes and the increased costs of new regulation are holding back investment and growth. The government must appreciate that confidence is an imperative if business is to invest, take risks and put the millions of unemployed back to productive work.

One unfortunate pattern that has emerged in the past 18 months is to lay all the blame for our difficulties on the business community and the financial world. This quite ignores the role of Congress in many areas, most glaringly in forcing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration to make loans to people who could not afford them. Then there is the Securities and Exchange Commission, which raised acceptable levels of leverage for financial institutions.

The predilection to blame business was manifest in one of President Barack Obama’s recent speeches.

He was supposed to be seeking the support of the business community for a doubling of exports over the next five years. Instead he lashed out at “unscrupulous and underhanded businesses, who are unencumbered by any restriction on activities that might harm the environment, take advantage of middle-class families, or, as we’ve seen, threaten to bring down the entire financial system.”

This kind of gratuitous and overstated demonization – widely seen in the business community as a resort to economic populism on the part of Mr Obama to shore up the growing weakness in his political standing – is exactly the wrong approach.

It ignores his disappointing stimulus program, which was ill-designed to produce the jobs the president promised. It also undermines the confidence that business needs to find if it is to invest in the face of a new generation of regulations, increased bureaucracy and higher taxes.

Disillusion has spread to the Business Roundtable, the US Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small businesses.

The chief economist of the NFIB recently wrote: “Business owners do not trust the economic policies in place or proposed … the US economy faces hurricane-force headwinds and the government is at the center of the storm, making an economic recovery very difficult.”

Full article:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a18bd9a2-98e6-11df-9418-00144feab49a.html

He may not pay attention to the polls, but we do …

July 28, 2010

President Obama is bumping against a couple of threshold numbers.

According to the Pollster.com’s poll-of-polls:

  • 49.9% of Americans now disapprove of the job that Obama is doing as President
  • Less than 46% of Americans now approve of the job that he’s doing.

The numbers are comparable in the RealClearPolitics.com poll-of-polls. 

Both Pollster and RCP are displayed below ….

image

image

image

He may not pay attention to the polls, but we do …

July 28, 2010

President Obama is bumping against a couple of threshold numbers.

According to the Pollster.com’s poll-of-polls:

  • 49.9% of Americans now disapprove of the job that Obama is doing as President
  • Less than 46% of Americans now approve of the job that he’s doing.

The numbers are comparable in the RealClearPolitics.com poll-of-polls. 

Both Pollster and RCP are displayed below ….

image

image

image

Economy’s weak, so let’s spend and tax … huh ?

July 26, 2010

I continue to be dismayed by the Administration’s lack of business savvy, economic unorthodoxy (despite lack of success), and steaming contradictions …

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ: Liberal Tax Revolt, July 23, 2010

Only in the age of Obama have Democrats convinced themselves that the best “stimulus” is higher spending and higher taxes.

There’s nothing like the prospect of an electoral rout to concentrate the incumbent mind, and so all of a sudden rank-and-file Democrats in Congress are saying maybe they shouldn’t let the 2003 tax rates expire after all.

The revelation that “as a general rule, you don’t want to be  raising taxes in the midst of a downturn.” tax increases has recently been heard from Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and, most surprising, even from Kent Conrad of North Dakota. On a scale of unlikely events, this is like the Pope coming out against celibacy.

These are hardly supply-side conversions, but they’re a start.

As for  Pelosi,  Geithner and Obama, they remain prisoners of their spend-and-tax dogma.

Geithner declared that the tax increases will arrive as scheduled.

So the same Mr. Geithner who says the economy is weak enough that we must have new spending “stimulus” says it is strong enough to endure a huge tax increase.

Go figure.

* * * * *

New data from, of all places, the Democratic-run Joint Committee on Taxation show that in 2011 roughly 750,000 taxpayers with net business income will pay the highest marginal rate of 39.6% or the next highest bracket of 36% (up from 33%) – that’s a higher rate than Goldman Sachs will be paying.

About half of the roughly $1 trillion of total net business income will also be reported on those returns.

In a stroke, that will make tens of billions of dollars unavailable to invest or to hire new workers.

* * * * *

Full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703467304575383233009284878.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

The thrill is gone … or at least going.

July 23, 2010

From the just released CNN poll …

Headline: Obama’s approval drops to 47% (from 51%)

I was most intrigued by the the following question:

How do you personally feel about the fact that Barack Obama is president?

If you had to choose one of the following descriptions, would you say you feel thrilled, happy, don’t care, unhappy or depressed?

* * * * *

Among all Americans, more are depressed that Obama is President than are thrilled – 14% (up from 4%) to 13% (down from 28%)

click table to enlarge

image

* * * * *

Among whites, more half are unhappy or depressed that Obama is President  …

click table to enlarge

image

* * * * *

Among blacks, 39% are thrilled … down from 61% on Inauguration Day.

Note: Still, over 90% of Blacks approve of the job Pres. Obama is doing … but, given the decline in those thrilled, the intensity of the approval is diminishing.

click table to enlarge

image

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/07/22/rel10a9b.pdf

The thrill is gone … or at least going.

July 23, 2010

From the just released CNN poll …

Headline: Obama’s approval drops to 47% (from 51%)

I was most intrigued by the the following question:

How do you personally feel about the fact that Barack Obama is president?

If you had to choose one of the following descriptions, would you say you feel thrilled, happy, don’t care, unhappy or depressed?

* * * * *

Among all Americans, more are depressed that Obama is President than are thrilled – 14% (up from 4%) to 13% (down from 28%)

click table to enlarge

image

* * * * *

Among whites, more half are unhappy or depressed that Obama is President  …

click table to enlarge

image

* * * * *

Among blacks, 39% are thrilled … down from 61% on Inauguration Day.

Note: Still, over 90% of Blacks approve of the job Pres. Obama is doing … but, given the decline in those thrilled, the intensity of the approval is diminishing.

click table to enlarge

image

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/07/22/rel10a9b.pdf

For Obama, the chasm gets wider …

July 22, 2010

The headline from yesterday’s Quinnipiac University National Poll:
Obama Approval Drops To Lowest Point Ever
… 44% approve,  48% disapprove

And, when asked:  If the 2012 election for President were being held today, do you think you would vote for Barack Obama the Democratic candidate, or the Republican candidate? The unnamed ‘any’ GOP candidate beat Obama 39% to 36%. That can’t be good for the President.

Still, the bigger deal is the split by race, age, and income …

* * * * *

Approval among Blacks is still a sky high 91%,
but approval among whites has slipped below 40%
… a 54 point difference — that’s big.

image

* * * * *

Approval among young Americans has dipped below 50%
… approval among old folks like me has slipped below 40%

image

* * * * *

Approval among young Americans has stayed around 50%
…  a majority of those earning more than $50,000 (think “pay income taxes”) disapprove

 image


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1478

Where are Obama’s approval ratings highest ? … and lowest ?

July 21, 2010

Interesting recap by Gallup …

DC leads with a sky high 85% approval  … Wyoming’s 29% is the lowest.

image

image

image

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141428/Obama-Highest-Half-Year-Approval-Ratings-Hawaii.aspx

OK, let’s pretend the Stimulus worked … the math (continued)

July 16, 2010

Yesterday, we pointed out that taking Obama’s numbers at face value, i.e. the Stimulus “saved or created” 3.5 million jobs … almost $250k was (or will be spent) for each job saved or created.

A couple of loyal readers replied that “only half of the Stimulus money has been spent so the cost is only about $125k per job saved or created”.

First, $125k is still a lot of money per job.

More important, all of the money will eventually be spent and the total claim for jobs saved or created is 3.5 million … so we’re back to the $250k number.

Most important, let’s merge the 2 ideas: Romer says 3 million jobs saved or created are in the books … since $425 billion has been spent (1/2 of the total Stimulus) … that means that the spending per job has been just under $150k.

But, the next $425 billion will only save or create 500,000 jobs … that works out to about $850,000 per job.

It’s called “diminishing returns” … and it illustrates – using Obama’s own numbers – why throwing more stimulus money at the problem is a bad idea.

image

OK, let’s pretend the stimulus worked … but let’s do some math

July 15, 2010

Yesterday, as part of the Recovery Summer Tour, Obama’s CEA Chief Christina Romer cheerfully pitched that the Stimulus worked ever better then they (her and Biden-economist Jared Bernstein) said it would … that 3 million jobs have already been saved or created and another 600,000 will materialize before the end of 2010.

It’s easy to quibble since actual employment has fallen by 2.5 million since the Stimulus was enacted … and it’s well-traveled that the same same Ms. Romer said the unemployment rate would rise to 9% without the Stimulus, but would get capped at 8% if the gov’t threw a cool trillion dollars  at the problem.  Oops.

 image

The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, Romer & Bernstein, January 2009
http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/The_Job_Impact_of_the_American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Plan.pdf

But, HomaFiles aren’t in to cheap shots, so we’ll assume that Ms. Romer has gotten smarter and has crafted a more refined econometric model.

And, we’ll assume that she’s an honest person and isn’t just ginning up numbers for political purposes.

Let’s do some simple arithmetic.

Assuming Romer’s right, then – in the best case — each job saved or created cost almost $250,000 !

I don’t know about you, but that strikes me as a pretty big number.

And, keep in mind that the Stimulus just funds jobs temporarily …. when the Stimulus is expended, somebody else has to pick up the tab or the saved and create jobs vanish again.

 

image

From passive aggressive to active aggressive behavior … Business groups tell Obama: “Let’s rumble …”

July 15, 2010

In a couple of posts dating back to last year, we’ve pointed to the passive aggressive behavior of corporations and their CEOs.  Knowing that the vindictive Administration would be all over them if they openly opposed the Obama agenda, they kept quiet and simply kept their employment offices closed.

Well, now the passive aggressive stage is becoming active aggressive.  The Chamber of Commerce led the way (and got dis-invited from the White House).  The Business Roundtable went public a couple of weeks ago with a 60 page list of grievances.

Now, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Federation of Independent Businesses — are forming a united front  in their confrontation with the Obama administration over economic policy, calling on the White House to cut taxes, expand royalty-earning oil drilling and timber harvesting, sign stalled trade agreements  and curb its regulatory over-reach.

Business groups’  list of concerns is summarized in an open letter to the President that reads in part:

The congressional leadership and your administration have taken their eyes off the ball.

They neglected America’s number one priority — creating the more than 20 million jobs we need over the next 10 years for those who lost their jobs, have left the job market, or were cut to part-time status—as well as new entrants into our workforce.

Instead of continuing their partnership with the business community and embracing proven ideas for job creation, they vilified industries while embarking on an ill-advised course of government expansion, major tax increases, massive deficits, and job-destroying regulations.

This approach has failed to return our economy to a path of robust growth, which is a critical prerequisite to significant private sector job growth.

In some cases, wrong policy choices are actually eliminating good job opportunities for American workers.

By straying from the proven principles of American free enterprise, policymakers are needlessly prolonging the economic agony of the recession for millions of Americans and their families

Today, more than 16% of American workers are unemployed, underemployed, or have simply given up looking for a job.

Consumer confidence remains low, housing prices are still depressed, the stock market has trended downward, the global recovery is sputtering, and there are growing concerns about the prospects of a double-dip recession.

Through their legislative and regulatory proposals — some passed, some pending, and others simply talked about— the congressional majority and the administration have injected tremendous uncertainty into economic decision making and business planning. This is why

  • Banks are reluctant to lend
  • American corporations are sitting on well over a trillion dollars in cash
  • America’s small businesses and entrepreneurs, the engines of innovation and job creation, are starving for capital and are either struggling
    to survive or unable to expand.

The business community shares the view of most Americans that the current approaches are not working.

We are offering an achievable road map to greater economic growth and more jobs, and we don’t care who gets the credit.

Full letter to the President (worth reading):
https://createpdf.adobe.com/cgi-pickup.pl/FINAL%20-%20READY%20FOR%20LAYOUT%20-%20Open_Letter-%207%2012%2010.pdf?BP=IE&LOC=en_US&CUS=64b295f11e9e6c402b22f65989ef84df&CDS=4C3D49A7-0917-28BB03

From passive aggressive to active aggressive behavior … Business groups tell Obama: “Let’s rumble …”

July 15, 2010

In a couple of posts dating back to last year, we’ve pointed to the passive aggressive behavior of corporations and their CEOs.  Knowing that the vindictive Administration would be all over them if they openly opposed the Obama agenda, they kept quiet and simply kept their employment offices closed.

Well, now the passive aggressive stage is becoming active aggressive.  The Chamber of Commerce led the way (and got dis-invited from the White House).  The Business Roundtable went public a couple of weeks ago with a 60 page list of grievances.

Now, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Federation of Independent Businesses — are forming a united front  in their confrontation with the Obama administration over economic policy, calling on the White House to cut taxes, expand royalty-earning oil drilling and timber harvesting, sign stalled trade agreements  and curb its regulatory over-reach.

Business groups’  list of concerns is summarized in an open letter to the President that reads in part:

The congressional leadership and your administration have taken their eyes off the ball.

They neglected America’s number one priority — creating the more than 20 million jobs we need over the next 10 years for those who lost their jobs, have left the job market, or were cut to part-time status—as well as new entrants into our workforce.

Instead of continuing their partnership with the business community and embracing proven ideas for job creation, they vilified industries while embarking on an ill-advised course of government expansion, major tax increases, massive deficits, and job-destroying regulations.

This approach has failed to return our economy to a path of robust growth, which is a critical prerequisite to significant private sector job growth.

In some cases, wrong policy choices are actually eliminating good job opportunities for American workers.

By straying from the proven principles of American free enterprise, policymakers are needlessly prolonging the economic agony of the recession for millions of Americans and their families

Today, more than 16% of American workers are unemployed, underemployed, or have simply given up looking for a job.

Consumer confidence remains low, housing prices are still depressed, the stock market has trended downward, the global recovery is sputtering, and there are growing concerns about the prospects of a double-dip recession.

Through their legislative and regulatory proposals — some passed, some pending, and others simply talked about— the congressional majority and the administration have injected tremendous uncertainty into economic decision making and business planning. This is why

  • Banks are reluctant to lend
  • American corporations are sitting on well over a trillion dollars in cash
  • America’s small businesses and entrepreneurs, the engines of innovation and job creation, are starving for capital and are either struggling
    to survive or unable to expand.

The business community shares the view of most Americans that the current approaches are not working.

We are offering an achievable road map to greater economic growth and more jobs, and we don’t care who gets the credit.

Full letter to the President (worth reading):
https://createpdf.adobe.com/cgi-pickup.pl/FINAL%20-%20READY%20FOR%20LAYOUT%20-%20Open_Letter-%207%2012%2010.pdf?BP=IE&LOC=en_US&CUS=64b295f11e9e6c402b22f65989ef84df&CDS=4C3D49A7-0917-28BB03

Balancing local budgets on the back of teachers, firemen, and police … huh?

July 13, 2010

Every time a local school tax levy comes to a vote, the shrill is the same: we’ll have to eliminate football, band, and AP classes – those things that parents hold dear.

Borrowing the argument, budget-deficited locales are now claiming that the only way to balance their budgets is to cut policemen, firemen, and teachers.

Q1: Why not cut overpaid paper-shuffling bureaucrats instead ?  We’d never know they’re gone.

Q2: Why not cut back on the oversized pensions and healthcare that gov’t retirees get ? In the old days, I’d say “because a contract is a contract”.  But, once Team Obama disregarded contract law in the GM deal by elevating the claims of unsecured unions over secured bond holders, I say “what contacts ?”

Q3: If teachers have to be cut, why not the underperformers – the ones who aren’t contributing anyway ?  Think the NY public schools “rubber rooms” where officially tagged worthless teachers report each day to read papers, chat on their cells and draw a paycheck.

The WSJ article highlighted below raises an irritating  twist to the story.

In Milwaukee, the teachers union is resisting contract givebacks that teachers are willing to take to save jobs … instead, the union would rather threaten layoffs and count on Obama to rush in with bailout dough to “save teachers’ jobs.” 

Win-win for Milwaukee – lose-lose for fiscally responsible states. 

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ: A Case Study in Teacher Bailouts, July 7, 2010

The Obama administration is pressuring Congress to spend $23 billion to rehire the more than 100,000 teachers who have been laid off across the country.

Wisconsin is a microcosm of the union intransigence that’s fueling the school funding crisis in so many cities and states and leading to so many pink slips. It also shows why a federal bailout is a mistake. Milwaukee shows that unions will keep resisting concessions if Washington rides to the rescue.

Because of declining tax collections and falling enrollment, Milwaukee’s school board announced in June that 428 teachers were losing their jobs — including Megan Sampson, who was just awarded a teacher-of-the-year prize.

Yet the teachers union, the Milwaukee Teachers Education Association, had it within its power to avert almost all of the layoffs.

The teachers’ current health plan costs taxpayers $26,844 per family, compared to the typical $14,500 cost for a private employer family plan. The plan does not require teachers to pay any premiums toward the cost of the health plan.

In the spring, the school board offered a new health plan that would reduce costs to $17,172 per family. The plan would have saved money by requiring co-pays.

Shifting teachers to the plan offered by the school board could have saved $47.2 million.

This would have prevented, according to the report, the lay offs of “approximately 480 teachers” — more than the number that ultimately lost their jobs.

But when union officials were presented the option, they chose to allow their members to be dismissed.

Many Milwaukee teachers have been quoted in the local press complaining that union officials never offered them a choice to make health-care concessions, and many say they would have been willing to go with reduced benefits to avoid the firings.

So why were these teachers considered expendable by the people who are supposed to protect their jobs?

The Milwaukee Teachers Education Association was immovable on benefits in part because it placed a bet on its Democratic friends in Washington rushing to the rescue.

Milwaukee’s experience suggests that the $23 billion bailout fund is meant to provide a federal life raft to keep afloat the unsustainable, gold-plated compensation packages that unions negotiated when states and cities were flush with cash.

It is hardly sensible to force taxpayers in Mississippi, Colorado, New Hampshire and elsewhere to step in and save the union’s bacon.

A federal bailout only further entrenches bad policies — especially unaffordable benefit packages — that led to the school funding crisis in the first place and leave every child behind.

Full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704535004575348980568232888.html?KEYWORDS=moore+milwaukee+school

Recovery Summer Update: “I’m pro-business, sucka”

July 12, 2010

OK, those weren’t Obama’s exact words.

The President’s “Recovery Summer” Tour continues.

Now, he has replaced the silly “well, at least unemployment isn’t 12% or 14%” with “make no mistake about it, we’re headed in the right direction.”

Couple of points:

  1. Even I have figured out that the loose translation of “make no mistake about it” is “brace yourself, here comes a whopper”
  2. Almost 2/3s of Americans beg to differ … they think we’re headed in the wrong direction.image
  3. The recent economic data isn’t even equivocal … any recovery that night have been taking place is stalled … with an increasing number of pundits looking for a double-dipper … why ?

Consider the WSJ comments of PIMCO CEO El-Erian:

High unemployment has historically induced companies and countries to become more inwardly oriented.

Many firms have already moved to a “self-insurance” mode, including holding large cash balances rather than investing in equipment and hiring people.

Internally, the economy is adapting to an environment of lower credit, general deleveraging, higher regulation and future tax increases.

Externally, it is adjusting to the impact of emerging economies like China, and the fact that certain European countries are facing increasingly unsustainable debts and deficits.

To remain successful, firms have no choice but to adapt.

Many have begun to adapt by resizing their cost structure, increasing cash balances, and altering how they use new earnings.

For companies, this is a prudent response to the uncertainty associated with national and global policy changes.

But to governments, firms come across as unresponsive to stimulus policies.

WSJ:  The Real Tragedy of Persistent Unemployment,  July 9, 2010
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111704575354792743173672.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h

Now, Team Obama says “What uncertainty ? President Obama is just misunderstood by business leaders”

And, the RST (Recovery Summer Tour) rolls on  ….. promoting our pro-business president :

The big political news out of Washington yesterday is that the White House wants you to know that President Obama is not antibusiness.

White House aides say that they have launched “a coordinated campaign to push back against the perception” that its agenda is hostile to business.

“And it is more than just politics: Obama’s aides believe confidence in the general direction of White House policy has an effect on the willingness of corporations to hire, invest and push the economy toward a more solid recovery.”

You think?

We suppose it’s progress if Democrats are figuring out that business confidence is crucial to nurturing a fragile economic recovery into a durable expansion.

U.S. companies have an estimated $2 trillion in cash that they could deploy to create new jobs or buy equipment, but they aren’t about to do so until they know what their costs will be. There’s a  “capital strike.”

The problem for Mr. Obama at this stage is that business will need more than words to conclude there’s been a real political change.

WSJ: Our pro-businesss president, July 9, 2010
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111704575355413601768820.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

Let’s end amateur hour … please !

July 9, 2010

I was surprised that – in 2008 – folks were able to brush aside Obama’s complete lack of operating experience.

I was told: not to worry.  He’s really smart (I still would love to see his transcripts) and he surrounds himself with strong people (pick one: Biden, Holder, Napolitano, Salazar)

This guy hits the nail on the head …

* * * * *

Excerpted from AOL: It’s Amateur Hour in the Nation’s Capital, July 1, 2010

While decorum can be imposed by fiat, it is genuine respect that prompts teams to achieve in all fields, and which must be earned.

In recent years, we have seen many situations where those with little or no pertinent experience or knowledge impose their views upon the country and in the process undermine respect for major institutions with their ineptitude.

For example, In House hearings on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, we have noted experts in petroleum engineering — Reps. Henry Waxman and Edward Markey — making determinations as to which well-drilling method was preferable.

And, we have a treasury secretary with no private sector experience and who had trouble filing an accurate tax return.

If our country is going to get back on track, we need to redevelop confidence in and respect for our leaders and institutions. This means first and foremost electing and appointing people who command this respect by virtue of their bona fide achievements and not simply their paper credentials.

In recent years, far too many people with prestigious degrees and titles have made far too many horrible decisions that have caused great harm to Americans everywhere.

We need people who have shown through their actual performance in business, the military, government or academia (preferably in multiple areas that pertain to the problems we face) that they can and will handle pressure and act at all times with integrity and good judgment.

The time for on the job training in lofty positions is over.

We need to be led by those who genuinely command respect.

Full article:
http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-its-amateur-hour-in-the-nations-capital/19538553

Flashback: Why private sector jobs won’t be coming back any time soon

July 8, 2010

In the past week or so, major media has caught onto the point that CEOs are dismayed by Team Obama’s economic, regulatory and pro-union policies and won’t do any serious hiring while Obama  is in power. 

For the record, the Homa Files pitched this case almost a year ago in a post titled: “Why private sector jobs won’t be coming back any time soon … hint: it’s called passive aggressive resistance” … the punch line:

Given the Administration’s anti-corporate rhetoric, actions, and proposed game-changing rules, I doubt that many CEOs will be taking on added costs and risks to boost the administration.

More likely, they will let unemployment continue to creep up, and will slow roll the process of rehiring. 

Corporate chieftains will sit back and watch the President squirm and spin his “4 million jobs – saved or created”.  As Rev. Wright would say “the chickens will have come home to roost”.  Passively aggressive  resistance at its very best.

Unfortunately, that means we’ll be seeing double digit unemployment for some time – at least through the 2010 Congressional elections.

The full post is worth another read !
https://kenhoma.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/why-private-sector-jobs-wont-be-coming-back-any-time-soon/

* * * * *

Ken’s current take:

Certainly there won’t be any meaningful hiring until the Nov. elections are in the book. 

CEO heels are dug in.  I’ve heard cocktail party chatter like “Each job added is a vote for Obama … Fool me once, shame on you … fool me twice, shame on me”

CEOs may relent a bit if Obama put in check by a GOP Congress … but frankly, I don’t think it’ll be statistically significant.

We’ll be stuck with unemployment in the 9s until 2012 … or until there’s a substantial policy roll-back – e.g. repealing ObamaCare.

And, the latter just ain’t gonna happen …

Wall Street Shocker: Dem fundraising stalls among bankers …

July 7, 2010

Punch line: A revolt among big donors on Wall Street is hurting fundraising for the Democrats’ with contributions from the world’s financial capital down 65 percent from two years ago.

Only thing that surprises me is that the Dems have the nads to ask Wall Streeters for dough …

* * * * *

Excerpted from Washington Post,Democratic campaign committees losing big Wall Street donors, July 6, 2010

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee have … raised $49.5 million this election cycle from people giving $1,000 or more at a time, compared with $81.3 million at this point in the last election. T

he drop in support comes from many of the same bankers, hedge fund executives and financial services chief executives who are most upset about the financial regulatory reform bill 

Among the notables tossing shutouts at the Dems:

  • Jamie Dimon, the head of J.P. Morgan Chase, donated $65,000 to the Democratic committees in 2006 and 2008,  This election cycle, he has not contributed at all.
  • Leon Black, a co-founder of the $53 billion New York-based Apollo Global Management a private-equity firm,gave more than $200,000 to Democratic congressional committees over the previous two election cycles but have not given this year.
  • Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive and chairman of Goldman Sachs, has not donated to the Democrats, either, after giving $50,000 in the previous two cycles.

This fundraising free fall from the New York area has left Democrats with diminished resources to defend their House and Senate majorities in November’s midterm elections.

Full article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/05/AR2010070502913.html?hpid=topnews

Houston, we have a problem …

July 7, 2010

Whatever happened to going to the moon, or going to Mars, or developing new technologies that can be ported to industry ?

* * * * *

In a recent interview NASA head Charles Bolden said:

  When I became the NASA administrator, [Obama] charged me with three things

  • First, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math;
  • Second, he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and
  • Third,, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”

Full article: Washington Examiner, NASA’s new mission: Building ties to Muslim world, July 6, 2010
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/NASA_s-new-mission_-Building-ties-to-Muslim-world-97817909.html

Here’s what NOT to tell your boss, when you miss your performance objective (by a lot)

July 6, 2010

Let’s fresh our memories. 

Obama’s crack team of economists said: “Let O spend $750 billion to stimulate the economy and unemployment won’t go over 8%”.

Then, Team Obama overspent the $750 billion by about $100 billion.

If you’re keeping track, that’s an overspend of more than 13%.

(Don’t try that at your company … )

Then, unemployment shot past 8%, all the way to 10% … and has settled between 9.5 and 10%.

The first excuse: “the mess we inherited was even worse than we could have imagined.”

Hmmm.

You self-proc;aim to be the the smartest people on God’s earth and you’re the ones who set the performance metric.

Try again.

OK, try this: “critics say the unemployment rate is 9.7% .. but at least it’s not 12% or 13% or 15%…”

Huh ?

First, in Racine – where the stupid line was delivered – unemployment is 14.2%

Second, the argument is idiotic.  Carried to the logical extreme, as long as unemployment stays below 100%, the stimulus worked because unemployment could have been even higher – forget that 8% number.

Try that logic in your next operating review: “well we might have lost even more market share”.

My bet: you’ll be shown the door.

Here’s the video if you haven’t seen it … I love when the teleprompter is turned off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3TlNsPFkyE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3TlNsPFkyE

What “Mission Accomplished” was to Bush, “Recovery Summer” will be to Obama … just watch.

July 1, 2010

First unforced error: Obama touts study by his econ gurus Romer & Bernstein that – if a trillion dollars of faux-stimulus is thrown at the economy – unemployment will stay under 8%.  Oops.

Second unforced error, declaring the next couple of months “Recovery Summer” … kicked off by the President’s visit to a new hospital wing in swing-state Ohio that added 36 temporary construction jobs.

Since then:

  • CEO’s in the Business Roundtable sent a letter outlining how the administration’s policies are crippling job growth
    https://kenhoma.wordpress.com/2010/06/24/business-roundtable-ceos-come-out-of-the-closet/
  • The G-8 has jumped out of the stimulus canoe, opting for austerity – lower spending, lower deficits
  • The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index fell to 52.9 from 62.7
  • The stock market has plunged
  • ADP reported that private-sector jobs in the U.S. increased by 13,000 in June …  Economists had expected ADP to report a jobs gain of 60,000 for June.
  • Weekly new jobless claims claims increased by almost 3%

And, oh yeah – there’s an unemployment report coming tomorrow.

Stay tuned …

Yesterday the Homa Files, today the Wall Street Journal …

June 25, 2010

Yesterday, the Homa Files posted ”Business Roundtable CEOs come out of the closet … “
https://kenhoma.wordpress.com/2010/06/24/business-roundtable-ceos-come-out-of-the-closet/

Punch line:  CEOs are finally speaking out about Obama’s anti-business policies.

Today, the WSJ is on the case

WSJ, Business’s Buyer’s Remorse, June 25, 2010
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704911704575327241599453032.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_BelowLEFTSecond

Punch line:  For cooperating with the White House, member companies of the Business Roundtable gets socked with higher taxes and more regulations.

Think the WSJ editors read the Homa Files ?

Business Roundtable CEOs come out of the closet …

June 24, 2010

This is a big deal.

The Business Roundtable – the CEO “club” – has stopped playing nice-nice with the President and gone public with a 54 page listing of specifics on how the Obama administration is stifling business growth and employment prospects.

This is important for 2 reasons:

1) The policy concerns are what’s keeping CEOs from hiring.  It’s why unemployent levels will stay around 10% for the foreseeable future.

2) The letter and speech represent a new boldness on the part of the CEOs

I’ve heard directly from a Roundtable member that that the group had been silent on their concerns because, initially, they expected Obama to “move to the middle” and wanted to give him some time. Then, when they saw how vindictive and punishing the administration was towards certain industries and specific companies, they were afraid to speak out.  Now, they figure “what the hell”.

It’s too bad that the McChrystal situation hogged the air the past couple of days … that pushed these public grievances off the front pages.

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ : Business Leader Slams ‘Hostile’ Policies on Jobs, June 23, 2010

Where the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the other big business group in the capital, has been openly confrontational with the administration, the Business Roundtable — whose member companies pay 60% of U.S. corporate taxes and employ 12 million people — has until now been reluctant to criticize its policies in public. That has changed.

Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, current head of one of the nation’s most influential business groups, slammed the Obama administration for decisions he said “create an increasingly hostile environment for investment and job creation.” He urged the administration to “focus on the big goal,” meaning job growth, “and stop trying to micromanage industries.  By reaching into virtually every sector of economic life, government is injecting uncertainty into the marketplace and making it harder to raise capital and create new businesses … the government needs to be removing itself from the private sector.”

The comments mark one of the sharpest breaks between top executives and the Obama White House. Mr. Seidenberg used  his speech at Washington’s Economic Club to unleash a list of policy grievances over taxes, trade and financial regulation.

  • Increased taxes on foreign earnings
  • Stalled free-trade agreements
  • Shareholder rights to nominate directors
  • End to secret ballots in union elections
  • Expanded damages for pay discriminationEPA regulation of greenhouse gases 

White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said businesses would be helped by the administration’s policies, including its overhaul of the health-care system and promotion of clean energy. “The president has consistently pursued policies designed to create a better climate for American businesses in order to foster job creation, innovation and economic growth,” she said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704853404575322931249166908.html?KEYWORDS=business+roundtable

Business Roundtable CEOs come out of the closet …

June 24, 2010

This is a big deal.

The Business Roundtable – the CEO “club” – has stopped playing nice-nice with the President and gone public with a 54 page listing of specifics on how the Obama administration is stifling business growth and employment prospects.

This is important for 2 reasons:

1) The policy concerns are what’s keeping CEOs from hiring.  It’s why unemployent levels will stay around 10% for the foreseeable future.

2) The letter and speech represent a new boldness on the part of the CEOs

I’ve heard directly from a Roundtable member that that the group had been silent on their concerns because, initially, they expected Obama to “move to the middle” and wanted to give him some time. Then, when they saw how vindictive and punishing the administration was towards certain industries and specific companies, they were afraid to speak out.  Now, they figure “what the hell”.

It’s too bad that the McChrystal situation hogged the air the past couple of days … that pushed these public grievances off the front pages.

* * * * *

Excerpted from WSJ : Business Leader Slams ‘Hostile’ Policies on Jobs, June 23, 2010

Where the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the other big business group in the capital, has been openly confrontational with the administration, the Business Roundtable — whose member companies pay 60% of U.S. corporate taxes and employ 12 million people — has until now been reluctant to criticize its policies in public. That has changed.

Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, current head of one of the nation’s most influential business groups, slammed the Obama administration for decisions he said “create an increasingly hostile environment for investment and job creation.” He urged the administration to “focus on the big goal,” meaning job growth, “and stop trying to micromanage industries.  By reaching into virtually every sector of economic life, government is injecting uncertainty into the marketplace and making it harder to raise capital and create new businesses … the government needs to be removing itself from the private sector.”

The comments mark one of the sharpest breaks between top executives and the Obama White House. Mr. Seidenberg used  his speech at Washington’s Economic Club to unleash a list of policy grievances over taxes, trade and financial regulation.

  • Increased taxes on foreign earnings
  • Stalled free-trade agreements
  • Shareholder rights to nominate directors
  • End to secret ballots in union elections
  • Expanded damages for pay discriminationEPA regulation of greenhouse gases 

White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said businesses would be helped by the administration’s policies, including its overhaul of the health-care system and promotion of clean energy. “The president has consistently pursued policies designed to create a better climate for American businesses in order to foster job creation, innovation and economic growth,” she said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704853404575322931249166908.html?KEYWORDS=business+roundtable