Start A Petition

Mr. President, the Elephant in the Room Is Not a Republican

Society & Culture  (tags: culture, americans, economy, government, ethics, society, politics, interesting, news, rights )

- 2114 days ago -
The recession has been hard on everyone. Tens of millions of people lost their jobs. Many of those who didn't lose their jobs suffered salary cuts. Retirement savings and home values have plummeted

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


. (0)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 3:24 pm
Finally, an article of common sense.Obama has done nothing to help the underclass in this country.His promises have all been lies from the beginning. The poor know it, and so does the country.

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 3:59 pm
Allan, I'm not sure it's lies or the fear of being perceived as in favor of one group over another.

Carol H (229)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 7:21 pm
noted, thank you Carrie

P A (117)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 6:20 am
Thanks Carrie. Sad article - but true.

Susanne R (235)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 9:31 pm
Facts are facts. They can't be denied. However, it also can't be denied that the Republican members of Congress have done everything they can to stop anything Obama attempts to legislate --including his attempts to create jobs.

I agree with Carrie that President Obama is walking a fine line so that he isn't "perceived as in favor of one group over another."

Kathleen B (37)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 9:06 am
The elephant in the room is corporate domination. What is good for corporations has devastated the USA middle class. When corporations unite with government that is called fascism.

Justin M (2)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 9:25 am

Kathlene Lentz (30)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 12:21 pm
We can't have a jobs bill PERIOD without the cooperation of Congress, and this President has not gotten any cooperation at all from the Republicans. The elephant in the room IS a Republican, because they are the ones doing everything in their power to STOP the economic recovery, be it for black or for whites. They want the President to fail on every front and they are doing whatever it takes to make that happen. That includes ruining the American economy and killing jobs at every turn.

James E (16)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 1:24 pm
Sorry, but the elephant in the room is the still the GOP, but with a Tea Party tail, and the tail seems to be what "wags the dog" these days. What reaction do you think the GOP/TP would have to a government "jobs program"? The word "socialism" would surely be a big part of that reaction.

Of course corporate greed and profits feed that GOP/TP elephant as well.

Paula M (39)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 1:42 pm
Susanne R., the President had majorities in both chambers of Congress until 2010, and passed his poorly-constructed stimulus package and his ruinous health care law without any compromise or accommodation to Republican lawmakers. He has also passed many of his most cherished policies by administrative decree, many of which represent dangerous overreaches of executive power.

The President and the Democrats own the bad decisions that have lengthened our economic troubles and should be held accountable for their actions.

Robert O (12)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 3:24 pm
Thanks Carrie.

Paula M. Republican obstructionism is also to blame for this country's woes since the GOP are not the group of perfect little angels they'd like us to believe they are. Their pro-corporate, pro-1%, holier than thou elitism is proof of that.

marie C (163)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 4:52 pm

Billie C (2)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 7:39 pm
it's amazing how dems are so willing to give obama a big pass for nothing getting dine when he had both houses and his office. they also forget they had both houses the last 2 years of bush and obama was one of them also.

helen s (0)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 7:58 pm
The only elephant in the room is your Liar-in-Chief who has been in over his head
since Day One!

kathy P (483)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 10:15 pm
Noted. Thank you Carrie for the post. I agree with Kathy L. 100%.

Susanne R (235)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 11:13 pm
Paula: Regarding President Obama's stimulus package, Gary Burtless, Senior Fellow of Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution, wrote:

"The tea leaves are clear: The Great Recession will not be a second Great Depression. And, as I argue below, President Obama’s stimulus package, though imperfect, deserves a great deal of credit for bringing us back to the positive trajectory we’re on today. Any reasonable grader of the stimulus’s effects on driving recovery and combating joblessness would give the stimulus at least a B+. In the pages that follow, I first outline the size and contours of the government’s response to the recession, paying specific attention to how this response does and does not differ from government policy in recessions past. I distinguish between standard and nonstandard responses, that is, policies typical of those in other post-war recessions and those that are unusual. Then I consider the success of the policies and the public’s surprisingly hostile reaction to them. Voters’ sour views on the stimulus make it unlikely Congress will extend or expand the program, even if the economy takes a turn for the worse."

You also made reference to his "ruinous health care law without any compromise or accommodation to Republican lawmakers." Any compromise or accommodation to Republican lawmakers would be little more than compromise to their corporate masters because the Affordable Care Act "gives new powers to the Secretary and Inspector General to investigate and audit the health insurance Exchanges. This, plus the new rules to ensure accountability in the insurance industry, will protect consumers and increase the affordability of health care."

You also stated : "He has also passed many of his most cherished policies by administrative decree, many of which represent dangerous overreaches of executive power. "What choice did he have? With the obstructionism he dealt with on a daily basis, what else could he do.

Consider this excerpt from an article written by Andrew Rosenthal of the New York Times:

"For nearly three years, President Obama devoted a great deal of effort to finding compromises with Congressional Republicans. That was futile, in my view, since those Republicans had made it clear from the day he was inaugurated in 2009 that their plan was to oppose everything he wanted, and then paint him as a failed president. (Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, said his party’s “number one goal” was to keep the president from winning a second term.)

Mr. Obama got fed up, finally, last fall, according to Mr. Savage’s article, and the result was the “We Can’t Wait” project, which has led to dozens of executive actions on a range of issues, including jobs for veterans and fuel economy standards.

Unlike the Bush/Cheney team, Mr. Obama did not take office with the explicit goal of creating new powers for the presidency. That was not part of his agenda. Moreover, his executive actions often are more modest in their effect than the White House’s public relations team might admit.

Government by executive order is not sustainable in the long-term. Nor is it desirable, whether you agree or disagree with those orders. But in this particular case, there may be no alternative."

What hasn't been discussed is the fact that there was a global financial crisis in 2007and that the U.S. had been in a recession since December of 2007, before President Obama took office.

Consider this information from About.Com U.S. Economy (affiliated with the NY Times):

"The recession caused by the financial crisis of 2008 wiped out a staggering 8.3 million jobs. The unemployment rate rose from 4.7% to 10.1% at its peak in 2009. This huge loss meant that many of the unemployed stayed that way for six months or more, making it more difficult for them to get back to work. That's because their skills and experience become outdated. Does this mean that the recession will leave, as its legacy, a higher natural rate of unemployment?

Research done by the Cleveland Federal Reserve says yes, this could be the case. That's because job turnover is slowing. Throughout this recession, those with jobs have been less likely to leave them -- for any reason. In fact, by 2011 those leaving jobs (the separation rate) was as low as it was during the boom before the recession. However, the rate of those finding new jobs has not bounced back like it has during other recessions.

Finally, you stated: “The President and the Democrats own the bad decisions that have lengthened our economic troubles and should be held accountable for their actions.”

I don’t agree necessarily agree with your assessment, but I can tell you this: I shudder to think of what would happen to former President Bush and former Vice President Cheney if THEY were held responsible for their actions!

Carrie B (306)
Friday August 10, 2012, 12:08 am
Kudos to you Susanne R.

Carrie B (306)
Friday August 10, 2012, 12:27 am
Kudos to you Susanne R. You are fair and as always, quite accurate!

Past Member (0)
Friday August 10, 2012, 3:00 am
Thanks, noted.

M A Paddock (19)
Friday August 10, 2012, 9:53 am
The stimulus package was just a way to stuff the coffers of the corporations who donate big time like lobbyist. If we had not bailed out the bad corporations we could have seen them go bankrupt as they should have and the remaining good corporations would have survived and been able to expand and employed many good workers who lost their jobs because of the crooks. It would have done an immense service to weed out those businesses that truly needed to be shut down. Many are still wasting money and abusing powers. Their CEO's are still receiving ridiculously high salaries and bonuses and still cheating.

To say that the stimulus was a good thing is a lie. General Motors now has more factories in China and the technology that has been shared has put America at a disadvantage. China no longer has to buy from us and the jobs that could have been created here now belong to the Chinese. The same is true for other industries.

You who believe this garbage economics fed to you by the government need a good economics lesson from businessmen like Forbes and Trump, etc. They truly know how business works - they made it and they know to continue on the path we are on will be the demise of America.

Susanne R (235)
Friday August 10, 2012, 2:14 pm
Margaret: Re: "China no longer has to buy from us and the jobs that could have been created here now belong to the Chinese."

China IS buying from us because GM is still a U.S. company --no matter where it produces its products. It has plants in more than a dozen foreign countries. The majority of GM stock is owned by the U.S. According to Allan Luft of GM Authority: "Not to be lost among all the hoopla surrounding the GM Initial Public Offering is the fact that Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) has been able to purchase nearly a one percent stake in General Motors. SAIC, better known as GM’s partner in its main China joint venture, paid $33 a share for 0.97 percent of GM, totaling a cost of nearly $500 million."

According to the NY Times: "GM's global sales figure for 2010 was a dramatic 12 percent increase from 2009, a year in which it closed factories and was forced to take aid from the U.S. government to survive. Its sales in the U.S., including heavy-duty vehicles, rose 6.3 percent.

But it did even better in China, selling 2.35 million vehicles there, up 29 percent as an expanding middle class gained wealth, making it the world's largest car market. The showing in China was about 136,000 more than what GM sold in the U.S. Toyota, meanwhile, sold just 846,000 vehicles in China."

REALITY: After the bailout, GM sold more cars to the Chinese than it did to the Americans.

The information you presented was brought to you by the Heritage Foundation. Here's some information about the Heritage Foundation, courtesy of The New York Times:

"Americans for Prosperity, the Tea Party organization backed by the Koch brothers, is set to begin a $25 million advertising assault aimed at President Obama, its largest effort to date.

The ad campaign is the latest example of how independent political groups funded by a small number of wealthy donors are shaping the presidential campaign in key swing states. Conservative groups and “super PACs” have been particularly aggressive, pummeling Mr. Obama on the airwaves as Mitt Romney’s campaign waits until after the Republican National Convention — when it will be legally permitted to spend the hundreds of millions of dollars it has raised in recent months — to ramp up its advertising efforts."

If that's not bad enough, "Americans for Prosperity" is working in tandem with "American Crossroads," which is associated with none other than KARL ROVE! The article cited above goes on to state: "The first ad, titled “President Obama: A One-Term Proposition,” hits the president over the rising national debt — an issue that conservative political groups like Americans for Prosperity and American Crossroads, which is run with the help of Karl Rove, believe is particularly powerful with swing voters in this election."

You cited Donald Trump as an example of someone from whom our country could use a good lesson in economics. According to an article that appeared in ABC news, "Donald Trump -- or companies that bear his name - have declared bankruptcy four times. "

The article goes on to state that "Doug Heller, the executive director of Consumer Watchdog, said Trump is the ‘most egregious, almost comical example’ of the disparity between what the average American faces when going through bankruptcy and the ‘ease with which the very rich can move in and out of bankruptcy.”

"Under the American bankruptcy laws, if you end up in bankruptcy because you're struggling with divorce or medical payments or a sudden change of income, it's a disaster. If you fail miserably with huge dollars involved then you just need some accountants to rework your books," Heller said."

As far as Steve Forbes is concerned, he has his moments. What I like most about him is his recent quote, "I was a little surprised that he [Mitt Romney] was flat-footed during the primaries that he didn't have this all squared away," [Steve] Forbes says in an interview with The Daily Ticker.

Forbes notes that the best move for Romney now is to "reverse the tables" on President Obama and call for a "data dump": both would release 20-years worth of tax returns, school records and health care records. "Everything" should be included Forbes adds."

Lynn D (0)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 1:15 am
At LAST some honesty and common sense is popping up, I hope more people realie what is truly going on! Mr. President scares me with his lies!
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Society & Culture

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.