Obama’s Bailout Bunch Brings Us More of the Same

[TheBreeze]

Obama mentioned several things in the interview that he would do differently:

(1) Bailouts will be directed to homeowners instead of banks. I’d prefer no bailouts, but if we’re going to have them, let’s help people try to stay in their homes as opposed to paying the banks full price for crappy loans.

(2) Different approach to the automakers as discussed above

(3) Major focus on alternative energy:

(CBS) Kroft: When the price of oil was at $147 a barrel, there were a lot of spirited and profitable discussions that were held on energy independence. Now you’ve got the price of oil under $60.

Mr. Obama: Right.

Kroft: Does doing something about energy is it less important now than…

Mr. Obama: It’s more important. It may be a little harder politically, but it’s more important.

Kroft: Why?

Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from shock to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up, everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the prices go back down and suddenly we act like it’s not important, and we start, you know filling up our SUVs again.

And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It’s part of the addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to break it.

(4) Re-regulation of the financial markets

Kroft: How high a priority are you placing on re-regulation of the financial markets?

Mr. Obama: I think it’s a top priority. I think that we have to restore a sense of trust, transparency, openness in our financial system. And keep in mind that the deregulation process, it wasn’t just one party. I think there’s a lot of blame to spread around.

But, hopefully, everybody’s learned their lesson. And the answer is not heavy-handed regulations that crush the entrepreneurial spirit and risk taking of American capitalism. That’s what’s made our economy great. But it is to restore a sense of balance.

(5) Closing Guantanamo/stopping torture

(6) redeploying troops out of Iraq into Afghanistan

(7) Not being an idealogue/being willing to change direction:

Kroft: There’s been talk on Capitol Hill and a number of Democratic congressmen have proposed programs that are part of sort of a new New Deal. The possibility of reviving agencies like the Home Ownership Loan Corporation.

Mr. Obama: Two points I’d make on this. Number one, although there are some parallels to the problems that we’re seeing now and what we say back in the ’30s, no period is exactly the same. For us to simply recreate what existed back in the ’30s in the 21st century, I think would be missing the boat. We’ve gotta come up with solutions that are true to our times and true to this moment. And that’s gonna be our job. I think the basic principle that government has a role to play in kick starting an economy that has ground to a halt is sound.

I think our basic principle that this is a free market system and that that has worked for us, that it creates innovation and risk taking, I think that’s a principle that we’ve gotta hold to as well. But what I don’t wanna do is get bottled up in a lot of ideology and is this conservative or liberal. My interest is finding something that works.

And whether it’s coming from FDR or it’s coming from Ronald Reagan, if the idea is right for the times then we’re gonna apply it. And things that don’t work we’re gonna get rid of.

(8) Communicating clearly and honestly with the American people

Kroft: Are you gonna make a lot of speeches? Are you gonna talk a lot to the American people on television and radio?

Mr. Obama: You know, I’m not sure that the American people are looking for a lot of speeches. I think what they’re looking for is action. But one of the things that I do think is important is to be able to explain to the American people what you’re doing, and why you’re doing it. That is something that I think every great president has been able to do. From FDR to Lincoln to John Kennedy to Eisenhower. I mean, I think that they were people who were able to say ‘Here’s the direction we’re going. Here’s why I think it’s important. Here are the possible dangers or challenges. But ultimately, you know, this is gonna lead us to a better America.’ And I want to make sure that I can recreate a bond of trust between the presidency and the public that I think has been lost.

Overall, I like what I’m hearing so far. However, it is just all talk at this point and we’ll have to see what happens when Obama is actually sworn in. I’m sure he’ll make mistakes, but hopefully he will have the intelligence to recognize those mistakes and change direction when needed.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.

You mentioned Clinton earlier and that’s interesting. Interesting, because for an unabashed policy wonk, Clinton came up with very little in terms of new policy during his tenure. He was someone inarguably prepared to be President, from his Rhodes scholarship to his work as governor of Arkansas, but he produced little in terms of substantive policy. There might be some parallels here worth considering.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.

You mentioned Clinton earlier and that’s interesting. Interesting, because for an unabashed policy wonk, Clinton came up with very little in terms of new policy during his tenure. He was someone inarguably prepared to be President, from his Rhodes scholarship to his work as governor of Arkansas, but he produced little in terms of substantive policy. There might be some parallels here worth considering.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.

You mentioned Clinton earlier and that’s interesting. Interesting, because for an unabashed policy wonk, Clinton came up with very little in terms of new policy during his tenure. He was someone inarguably prepared to be President, from his Rhodes scholarship to his work as governor of Arkansas, but he produced little in terms of substantive policy. There might be some parallels here worth considering.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.

You mentioned Clinton earlier and that’s interesting. Interesting, because for an unabashed policy wonk, Clinton came up with very little in terms of new policy during his tenure. He was someone inarguably prepared to be President, from his Rhodes scholarship to his work as governor of Arkansas, but he produced little in terms of substantive policy. There might be some parallels here worth considering.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.

You mentioned Clinton earlier and that’s interesting. Interesting, because for an unabashed policy wonk, Clinton came up with very little in terms of new policy during his tenure. He was someone inarguably prepared to be President, from his Rhodes scholarship to his work as governor of Arkansas, but he produced little in terms of substantive policy. There might be some parallels here worth considering.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?[/quote]
Well cmon, Andrea Mitchell is pretty cute. Though I do have a thing for older ladies.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?[/quote]
Well cmon, Andrea Mitchell is pretty cute. Though I do have a thing for older ladies.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?[/quote]
Well cmon, Andrea Mitchell is pretty cute. Though I do have a thing for older ladies.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?[/quote]
Well cmon, Andrea Mitchell is pretty cute. Though I do have a thing for older ladies.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?[/quote]
Well cmon, Andrea Mitchell is pretty cute. Though I do have a thing for older ladies.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.
[/quote]

I don’t know enough about his appointments to have an opinion of them. Plus, I actually am only aware of one appointment Obama has made: Rahm Emanuel? Supposedly the guy is a pit bull. I have no problem with that. Politics isn’t Camp Snoopy.

In any event, I likely would know very little about his other appointments even if I knew who they were. I’d prefer to wait and see what Obama actually does rather than speculate about what his appointments might mean.

As for Bill, I’d take him over Chimpy any day.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.
[/quote]

I don’t know enough about his appointments to have an opinion of them. Plus, I actually am only aware of one appointment Obama has made: Rahm Emanuel? Supposedly the guy is a pit bull. I have no problem with that. Politics isn’t Camp Snoopy.

In any event, I likely would know very little about his other appointments even if I knew who they were. I’d prefer to wait and see what Obama actually does rather than speculate about what his appointments might mean.

As for Bill, I’d take him over Chimpy any day.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.
[/quote]

I don’t know enough about his appointments to have an opinion of them. Plus, I actually am only aware of one appointment Obama has made: Rahm Emanuel? Supposedly the guy is a pit bull. I have no problem with that. Politics isn’t Camp Snoopy.

In any event, I likely would know very little about his other appointments even if I knew who they were. I’d prefer to wait and see what Obama actually does rather than speculate about what his appointments might mean.

As for Bill, I’d take him over Chimpy any day.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Breeze: But you didn’t answer the question. Yes, he is extremely intelligent and his responses clearly support that. However, what about his appointments? You know as well as I that actions speak louder than words, and now we’re confronted with appointments that would seem to indicate a “business as usual” posture.

What about that? As I said earlier, I’m curious to hear what you think. Which means, don’t continue posting snippets of the interview, but weigh in yourself as to what you think his appointments represent in terms of “change” versus the status quo ante.
[/quote]

I don’t know enough about his appointments to have an opinion of them. Plus, I actually am only aware of one appointment Obama has made: Rahm Emanuel? Supposedly the guy is a pit bull. I have no problem with that. Politics isn’t Camp Snoopy.

In any event, I likely would know very little about his other appointments even if I knew who they were. I’d prefer to wait and see what Obama actually does rather than speculate about what his appointments might mean.

As for Bill, I’d take him over Chimpy any day.

[Author]

Posts