Breifing from Red State
from RedState by Erick Erickson
Wall Street investors send White House a message
The best thing President Barack Obama can do for the economy is keep quiet. A day after delivering an address that won widespread praise from the chattering class, Obama’s big-government policies were rejected by traders on Wall Street.
Wall Street’s negative reaction to Obama is nothing new. Ever since Election Day, Obama’s words have failed to inspire investors. “When the President speaks, the market listens … and crumbles,” said Family Research Council chief Tony Perkins, who outlined the following pattern of the Dow’s drop after notable Obama addresses:
Nov. 5, 2008 (Wednesday after Election Day): -486 (5.0%)
Jan. 9, 2009 (one day after Obama speaks at George Mason University on “need” for $800 billion stimulus package): -143 (1.6%)
Jan. 20, 2009 (Inauguration Day): -332 (4.0%)
Feb. 10, 2009 (one day after Obama declares that without a stimulus, “an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with a catastrophe”): -382 (4.6%)
Feb. 17, 2009 (market opens for the first time after Congress passes $787 billion stimulus on Feb. 13; Obama signs bill into law, declaring, “The stimulus lets Americans claim destiny.”): -298 (3.8%)
Feb. 19, 2009 (one day after Obama announces potential mortgage relief plan): -90 (1.2%)
Feb. 25, 2009 (one day after Obama’s first speech to the full Congress): -80 (1.1%)
SOURCE
2. Really??
Last night President Obama said, “I asked this Congress to send me a recovery plan…Not because I believe in bigger government - I don’t.” Really?
If that’s true, why was every single policy the President suggested last night…big government?
Mr. President, if you don’t like big government, perhaps you should consider not making it the centerpiece of your administration. That makes about as much sense as holding a fiscal responsibility summit days after passing one of the biggest spending bills in history.
Wait. That already happened.
Okay, how about this: saying you don’t like big government while promoting it, would kind of be like railing against earmarks while getting ready to sign a bill with, oh say, 9,000 of them.
Wait – that’s also really happening, house Democrats passed it today.
SOURCE
3. Obama budget creates $634 billion health care fund
According to the Post, Obama’s health care overhaul will cost as much as $1 trillion over the next decade.
Obama would pay for the expansion by trimming tax breaks for the wealthy and tightening payments to insurers, hospitals and physicians, according to a senior administration official.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama’s spending cuts are also aimed at “curbing health-care spending overall”:
“The cuts would affect a range of interests, including managed care companies, prescription drug manufacturers and hospitals.”
The proposed tax change would limit the deductions available to people in the highest income tax brackets.
A trillion here a trillion there pretty soon. . . .
SOURCE
4. Leahy Sets Hearing on ‘Truth Commission’
So Much for Bipartisanship
Barack Obama continues to talk about bipartisanship, while pretending to be unaware that Congressional leaders are pulling stunts like this:
“Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Wednesday announced his committee would hold hearings on the creation of a new truth commission to investigate myriad allegations of corruption and wrongdoing in the Bush administration.”
Leahy ought to at least be honest about his effort here: this isn’t an attempt to ‘get at the truth.’ It’s a witch hunt aimed at those who fought the war on terror since September 11. The men and women of the Armed Forces and the intelligence services have done their level best to keep all Americans safe, and have acted within their understanding of the law in doing so. To call that service into question insults them and introduces uncertainty into the handling of terror detainees down the road.
The Obama administration ought to consider the precedent that would be set by such a move. Contrary to campaign promises, Obama has reserved the right to used ‘enhanced interrogation’ (which Democrats call ‘torture’) in some cases. He has also elected to shield records of the War on Terror from disclosure and scrutiny, and to maintain a detention center at Bagram air base. Each of these decisions will invite a ‘Truth Commission’ down the road - perhaps as soon as 2011, if Republicans regain control of the House or Senate.
SOURCE
Wall Street investors send White House a message
The best thing President Barack Obama can do for the economy is keep quiet. A day after delivering an address that won widespread praise from the chattering class, Obama’s big-government policies were rejected by traders on Wall Street.
Wall Street’s negative reaction to Obama is nothing new. Ever since Election Day, Obama’s words have failed to inspire investors. “When the President speaks, the market listens … and crumbles,” said Family Research Council chief Tony Perkins, who outlined the following pattern of the Dow’s drop after notable Obama addresses:
Nov. 5, 2008 (Wednesday after Election Day): -486 (5.0%)
Jan. 9, 2009 (one day after Obama speaks at George Mason University on “need” for $800 billion stimulus package): -143 (1.6%)
Jan. 20, 2009 (Inauguration Day): -332 (4.0%)
Feb. 10, 2009 (one day after Obama declares that without a stimulus, “an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with a catastrophe”): -382 (4.6%)
Feb. 17, 2009 (market opens for the first time after Congress passes $787 billion stimulus on Feb. 13; Obama signs bill into law, declaring, “The stimulus lets Americans claim destiny.”): -298 (3.8%)
Feb. 19, 2009 (one day after Obama announces potential mortgage relief plan): -90 (1.2%)
Feb. 25, 2009 (one day after Obama’s first speech to the full Congress): -80 (1.1%)
SOURCE
2. Really??
Last night President Obama said, “I asked this Congress to send me a recovery plan…Not because I believe in bigger government - I don’t.” Really?
If that’s true, why was every single policy the President suggested last night…big government?
Mr. President, if you don’t like big government, perhaps you should consider not making it the centerpiece of your administration. That makes about as much sense as holding a fiscal responsibility summit days after passing one of the biggest spending bills in history.
Wait. That already happened.
Okay, how about this: saying you don’t like big government while promoting it, would kind of be like railing against earmarks while getting ready to sign a bill with, oh say, 9,000 of them.
Wait – that’s also really happening, house Democrats passed it today.
SOURCE
3. Obama budget creates $634 billion health care fund
According to the Post, Obama’s health care overhaul will cost as much as $1 trillion over the next decade.
Obama would pay for the expansion by trimming tax breaks for the wealthy and tightening payments to insurers, hospitals and physicians, according to a senior administration official.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama’s spending cuts are also aimed at “curbing health-care spending overall”:
“The cuts would affect a range of interests, including managed care companies, prescription drug manufacturers and hospitals.”
The proposed tax change would limit the deductions available to people in the highest income tax brackets.
A trillion here a trillion there pretty soon. . . .
SOURCE
4. Leahy Sets Hearing on ‘Truth Commission’
So Much for Bipartisanship
Barack Obama continues to talk about bipartisanship, while pretending to be unaware that Congressional leaders are pulling stunts like this:
“Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Wednesday announced his committee would hold hearings on the creation of a new truth commission to investigate myriad allegations of corruption and wrongdoing in the Bush administration.”
Leahy ought to at least be honest about his effort here: this isn’t an attempt to ‘get at the truth.’ It’s a witch hunt aimed at those who fought the war on terror since September 11. The men and women of the Armed Forces and the intelligence services have done their level best to keep all Americans safe, and have acted within their understanding of the law in doing so. To call that service into question insults them and introduces uncertainty into the handling of terror detainees down the road.
The Obama administration ought to consider the precedent that would be set by such a move. Contrary to campaign promises, Obama has reserved the right to used ‘enhanced interrogation’ (which Democrats call ‘torture’) in some cases. He has also elected to shield records of the War on Terror from disclosure and scrutiny, and to maintain a detention center at Bagram air base. Each of these decisions will invite a ‘Truth Commission’ down the road - perhaps as soon as 2011, if Republicans regain control of the House or Senate.
SOURCE
Comments