A Sign Of The Times

On a tip from Edward Kilbane

A Sign Of The Times

Axelrod on CBS

It won't say in the history books it was Bush's fault.

What did I say the other day about directing the blame elsewhere? This has become SOP with this administration. Yesterday the market was down about 350 when the soothsayer decided we needed a "pep talk". After the thrilling oration, which had all the sincerity of a Mel Gibson apology, dodging any responsibility, the market closed 635 in the hole. The sixth worse close of all time. Not to be deterred by these trivialities he was able to accommodate two more fund raisers into his tight schedule. 

One f------ moron.

Of course he was on CBS when he said this so consequently his remark went mostly unchallenged.

Strangely in the S&P report there was no mention of the Tea Party. Probably because they never spent one red cent of the $14.6 trillion we owe. Essentially the downgrade occurred because the spending cuts were not deep enough. Who more then anyone is against government spending? Take a wild guess. Obama wanted a "clean" bill before him for a debt ceiling increase with no strings attached. He would have gotten it if the House didn't go Republican in 2010.

Tea Party Trashing: Dems Blame Tea Party For Credit Downgrade

If your going to dream up a lie at least make it plausible instead of diametrically opposed to the facts.

The true story 

☟

S&P Blames Inept Congress for Downgrade

BOSTON (TheStreet) -- Standard & Poor's rating analysts placed the blame for the U.S. sovereign credit rating downgrade -- to AA+ plus from its highest rating, AAA + squarely at the feet of the nation's political leaders, with the nation's slowing economic growth and spiraling debt also playing a role, in a conference call this morning.

"The primary focus remained on the current level of debt, the trajectory of debt as a share of the economy and the lack of apparent willingness of elected officials as a group to deal with the U.S. medium term fiscal outlook," formed the basis for S&P's action, the firm said in a statement Friday, a standpoint that was reiterated on the call by S&P analysts.

"The downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges," a weakening that has accelerated since S&P telegraphed its concerns about the nation's fiscal health when it assigned a negative outlook to the nation's then AAA rating on April 18.

John Chambers, head of S&P's sovereign ratings committee, in New York, and David Beers, global head of S&P's sovereign and international public finance ratings, in London hosted the conference call Monday morning.


Put in simple terms on a tip from Ed Kilbane



If you want to understand the magnitude of the recent debt and budget reduction actions agreed to by Congress and the President, this non-partisan example really puts it in perspective.

U.S. income: $2,170,000,000,000

Federal budget: $3,820,000,000,000

New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000

National debt: $14,271,000,000,000

Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000 (about 1 percent of the budget)

It helps to think about these numbers in terms that we can relate to. Therefore, let's remove eight zeros from these numbers and pretend this is the household budget for the fictitious Jones family:

Total annual income for the Jones family: $21,700

Amount of money the Jones family spent: $38,200

Amount of new debt added to the credit card: $16,500

Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710

Amount cut from the budget: $385






Sounds like a foreboding prophecy straight out of the bible.


The Obama Principle (election)

We are inclined to believe those whom we do not know because they have never deceived us. - Samuel Johnson

Axelrod on CBS

Missing you

I woke up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat. I started shaking uncontrollably and couldn't figure out what was wrong. This nightmare has got to stop. The same one over and over.  A glass of cold water helped to settle me down a little. Then it dawned on me. Sometime in January 2009, maybe around the same time the new president was sworn in, is when I think it happened. Where are they? My concern deepened to torment.

How can one sleep when a whole organization turns up missing? Nothing... nada... like they vanished in thin air. You would have thought someone would have filed a missing persons report, something. What is even more bizarre is an organization of this size turns up missing and there is no report, no story, zilch, from the MSM.

What happened to Code Pink?

Have a heart. Look at all these people in the photos.

Where are they? 
Doesn't anyone care?


If you spot them please report it to your local authorities so I can get a good night's sleep.

Their so lovable. Warms your heart doesn't it?

Why pay retail when you can get it from Obama wholesale

What happened to the rallying cry "Blood for oil" 

Stomping Bush

A member advising Condi... if we could find her she could do the same for Hillary

Ah...Cindy Sheehan the Patron Saint of Dementia is also missing. Doubly dangerous since she is unable to find her way home.  Love the scarf. Shown with her friend Hugo. Picture taken shortly after Sean Penn left.

This is Medea Benjamin. Real name Susan.  Co-Founder of Code Pink. She may not be missing.  Might have moved back to Cuba.  Then I remembered.  Fidel had her deported for railing against the government. True story.

Thank God for Obama the stalwart of truth telling.

This is all very strange to me. Obama promised to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan before he was elected president and close down that "waterboarding" Gitmo.  As it turned out all three are still in business sort of speak. In fact he even sent an additional 38,000 troops to Afghanistan. Just to add a little frosting on the cake he got us in another war with Libya. Well, its not really a war, they call it kinetic military action. I'm not the brightest guy around so I had to look up kinetic. It means:  depending on movement for its effect. Now I got it. When you pull the trigger, the bullet travels (movement) through the barrel and the (effect) is someone dies. Who knew?

I think the disappearance of Code Pink right after the inauguration of Obama is just a coincidence. If you know of their whereabouts please report it immediately.

I could use a good night's sleep.

Hope I don't get a limp wrist.

Missing you

Rock bottom...U.S. Loses AAA Credit Rating

For the first time in history the United States has lost its sterling credit rating.

Winning the future?

Although the Democrats have been in control of Congress up  until Nov 2010, and still in control of the White House and Senate today. It will again be time to redirect the blame elsewhere.

"The action by S&P reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combines spending cuts with revenue-raising measures like closing taxpayer-funded giveaways to billionaires, oil companies and corporate jet owners," Reid said.

The walls come tumbling down and he still doesn't get it.

Credit rating agency Standard & Poor's on Friday lowered the nation's AAA rating for the first time since granting it in 1917. The move came less than a week after a gridlocked Congress finally agreed to spending cuts that would reduce the debt by more than $2 trillion -- a tumultuous process that contributed to convulsions in financial markets. The promised cuts were not enough to satisfy S&P.

The drop in the rating by one notch to AA-plus was telegraphed as a possibility back in April. The three main credit agencies, which also include Moody's Investor Service and Fitch, had warned during the budget fight that if Congress did not cut spending far enough, the country faced a downgrade. Moody's said it was keeping its AAA rating on the nation's debt, but that it might still lower it.

Speaker John Boehner issued a statement saying that the downgrade is "the latest consequence of overspending by Washington."

One of the biggest questions after the downgrade was what impact it would have on already nervous investors. While the downgrade was not a surprise, some selling is expected when stock trading resumes Monday morning. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 699 points this week, the biggest weekly point drop since October 2008.

"I think we will have a knee-jerk reaction on Monday," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank.

But any losses might be short-lived. The threat of a downgrade is likely already reflected in the plunge in stocks this week, said Harvey Neiman, a portfolio manager of the Neiman Large Cap Value Fund.

"The market's already been shaken out," Neiman said. "It knew it was coming."

One fear in the market has been that a downgrade would scare buyers away from U.S. debt. If that were to happen, the interest rate paid on U.S. bonds, notes and bills would have to rise to attract buyers. And that could lead to higher borrowing rates for consumers, since the rates on mortgages and other loans are pegged to the yield on Treasury securities.

However, even without an AAA rating from S&P, U.S. debt is seen as one of the safest investments in the world. And investors clearly weren't scared away this week. While stocks were plunging, investors were buying Treasurys and driving up their prices. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note, which falls when the price rises, fell to a low of 2.39 percent on Thursday from 2.75 percent Monday.

A study by JPMorgan Chase found that there has been a slight rise in rates when countries lost an AAA rating. In 1998, S&P lowered ratings for Belgium, Italy and Spain. A week later, their 10-year rates had barely moved.

The government fought the downgrade. Administration sources familiar with the discussions said the S&P analysis was fundamentally flawed. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the matter publicly. S&P had sent the administration a draft document in the early afternoon Friday and the administration, after examining the numbers, challenged the analysis.

S&P said that in addition to the downgrade, it is issuing a negative outlook, meaning that there was a chance it will lower the rating further within the next two years. It said such a downgrade, to AA, would occur if the agency sees smaller reductions in spending than Congress and the administration have agreed to make, higher interest rates or new fiscal pressures during this period.

In its statement, S&P said that it had changed its view "of the difficulties of bridging the gulf between the political parties" over a credible deficit reduction plan.

S&P said it was now "pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics anytime soon."

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said the credit downgrade showed the need for a "balanced approach to deficit reduction that combines spending cuts with revenue-raising measures."

GOP Rep. Jack Kingston has called on Congress to reconvene to fix the debt crisis, saying the downgrade "confirms my belief that the debt ceiling increase signed into law this week does not go far enough to change the nation's fiscal trajectory."

The Federal Reserve and other U.S. regulators said in a joint statement that S&P's action should not have any impact on how banks and other financial institutions assess the riskiness of Treasurys or other securities guaranteed by the U.S. government. The statement was issued to make sure banks did not feel that the downgrade would affect the amount of capital that regulators require the banks to hold against possible losses.

Before leaving for a weekend at Camp David, President Barack Obama met with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in the Oval Office late Friday afternoon.

The downgrade is likely to have little to no impact on how the United States finances its borrowing, through the sale of Treasury bonds, bills and notes. This week's buying proves that.

"Investors have voted and are saying the U.S. is going to pay them," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Analytics. "U.S. Treasurys are still the gold standard." He noted that neither his parent organization, Moody's, nor Fitch, the other of the three major rating agencies, have downgraded U.S. debt.

Japan had its ratings cut a decade ago to AA, and it didn't have much lasting impact. The credit ratings of both Canada and Australia have also been downgraded over time, without much lasting damage.

"I don't think it's going to amount to a lot," said Peter Morici, a University of Maryland business economist.

Still, he said, "The United States deserves to have this happen," because of its clumsy handling of fiscal policy.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Rock bottom...U.S. Loses AAA Credit Rating

The Audacity of Birthdays

Friday, August 5, 2011 by T.J. O'Hara

RANCHO SANTA FE, Ca., August 4, 2011—President Obama celebrated his 50th birthday in style: flying to Chicago on Air Force One and being welcomed by Jennifer Hudson's obligatory reprise of Marilyn Monroe's "Happy Birthday, Mr. President."

Marine One takes off from the White House lawn whisking the President away from the drudgery of Debt Ceilings and on to the joy of fund raising in Chicago on his 50th Birthday

Then, he attended a fund-raising concert with several thousand supporters before dining with approximately 100 major donors. To cap off the festivities, he still found time to blame someone for something.

President Obama wrote a book called The Audacity of Hope. The title expressed what many of us saw in him: a fresh, new face in American politics; a tall, athletic-looking man with a supportive wife and two beautiful children; and a spirited voice of optimism. He offered the promise of "hope and change."

Unfortunately, his presidency has delivered "more of the same" in the form of traditional politics. If he ever considers writing a sequel, it might well be titled "The Audacity of Blame."

On July 21st, this column predicted that the debt ceiling crisis would be resolved on August 2nd because traditional politics demanded it; not because of the Hill's commitment to doing what's best for the country … but because August 4th was the President's 50th birthday and major fund-raisers had already been scheduled for August 3rd. Serious money was at risk … campaign money.

The rough estimates are in and the "take" from the shindig in Chicago was approximately $3.65 million (not counting the seven other fund-raising events and 1000 or so additional organizational parties that were hosted in his honor around the country).

Now, we can't be sure how much the President raised last year when he dined alone with Oprah Winfrey before attending birthday fund-raisers the next day (his family was vacationing in Spain), but we do know that the price of the tickets went up. Last year's top-end party, hosted by Chicago billionaire and real estate mogul Neil Bluhm, cost $30,400 to attend. This year's event tipped the scales at $35,800 for the political cognoscenti who could afford to attend. If you do the math, that's a 17.76% increase year-over-year.

One explanation might be found within the regulations of the Federal Election Commission. The FEC permits campaign donation limits to be adjusted each year by the rate of inflation.

However, that can't be the answer since we're officially told that we are experiencing a minimum level of inflation (assuming that you agree with the Administration's position that the price of food, clothing and fuel shouldn't enter into the calculation of inflation because they're "too volatile"). Perhaps the increase of 17.76 percent was just a subliminal manifestation of patriotism at its finest.

However, let's not quibble over price. After all, what's $35,800 to the average middle-class American? So, let's delve into the celebration itself.

In the spirit of the evening and before the private part of the gala began, President Obama took the opportunity to rally his minions. "I hope we can avoid another self-inflicted wound like we just saw over the last couple of weeks. Because we don't have time to play these partisan games. We've got too much work to do ... It is going to continue to be challenging every step of the way," the President said.

Notice his sleeves are rolled up like he actually did something

It's interesting that he is distancing himself from the debt ceiling debacle as if he didn't play a role … or as if it didn't constitute "work" just because it wasn't directly related to campaigning. Some might argue that the President failed to demonstrate appropriate leadership when he chose to wait until the last moment to engage Congress on the potentially cataclysmic problem of which everyone had been aware for more than a year.

Then again, any earlier engagement might have interfered with the 36 prior fund-raising events he attended in recent months. As it was, he had to cancel planned appearances at about a half-dozen fund-raising events just over the three weeks that he chose to become personally involved in resolving the issue.

It is also interesting to note that, while they remain his primary target, President Obama is no longer restricting his reprimands to the Republican Party and its splintered TEA Party associates. He has subtly begun to allude to the more radical elements of his own Party when he comments about partisan politics.  The question remains as to whether the more extreme faction of the Democratic Party will tolerate his thinly-veiled version of a public rebuke.

It is one thing for the President to position the entire conservative movement as wicked and obstinate, but it is far more tenuous for him to throw his major fund-raising constituency under the bus. Will those members of his base accept this tactic as a necessary evil that will allow him to retain support among moderates, or will they rebel against his self-serving abandonment of their position? Only time will tell.

In one of the more intellectually amusing moments of the evening, President Obama shared his thinking with respect to the issue of taxes. "What they want to know is our campaign stands for a fair, just approach to the tax code that says everybody has to chip in. And it's not right if a hedge fund manager is being taxed at a lower rate than his or her secretary. That's a values issue," the President said … with a straight-face … to a room full of hedge fund managers and others of similar wealth.

He also probably didn't mean to insinuate that "everybody has to chip in." Otherwise, the 47 percent of American households that presently do not pay taxes might be in for a rude awakening. It almost certainly was just a figure of speech.

During the private dinner that followed the concert, President Obama went on to say, "I think this episode was just a severe example of what's been going on for quite some time and it's part of what led me to run for President. It's part of the reason why, hopefully, all of you are here tonight, because you recognize we still got some more work to do."

Accordingly, why haven't we seen more of the "change" we were promised? Why is it still "business as usual" in Washington, D.C.?

Where is the transparency we were promised? Where is the accountability? Where is the bipartisan accord?

Of course, it's difficult to establish the latter when "blame" seems to be the central premise of the current Administration.

For the first two years, the failed Bush Administration was blamed for virtually everything (many times, deservingly so). However, this strategy disregarded the fact that the both the House and the Senate were Democratically-controlled during the final two years of President Bush's second term (the 110th Congress) and that both chambers continued to be ruled by an overwhelming Democratic majority during President Obama's first two years (the 111th Congress). Could there be some joint culpability involved in our nation's challenges or should we simply ignore the obvious?

Luckily, just as Bush-bashing was beginning to lose steam, the Democratic Party lost control of the House. This allowed the President to shift the blame to House Republicans and their cohorts in crime, the TEA Party. Again, just ignore the fact that the Democratically-controlled Senate has effectively become a legislative black hole into which almost everything disappears … usually without debate. There is no such thing as joint liability on the Hill.

The same proverbial coat of Teflon should be applied to the President. Of course, if he really wants to be the "adult in the room," he needs to accept responsibility and demonstrate more leadership.

Whose to blame? When you take over a company, you take over the problems of that company. Isn't that what winning an election is? A take over? (Image: Associated Press)

In that regard, let's review an excerpt from The National Platform of Common Sense that addresses leadership.

"In keeping with the current direction of our country and out of respect for the amount of debt we owe to China, I thought I would quote Lao Tse (in Tao Te Ching):

"'The superior leader gets things done with very little motion. He imparts instruction not through many words but through a few deeds. He keeps informed about everything but interferes hardly at all. He is a catalyst, and though things would not get done well if he weren't there, when they succeed he takes no credit. And because he takes no credit, credit never leaves him.'

"All kidding aside, that's a pretty profound description of leadership and one from which the "leaders" in our Executive and Legislative Branches would greatly benefit if they took heed. Compare and contrast that to their more predominant tendencies toward chest-thumping, credit-stealing, blame-shirking, and behavior-shifting. Am I the only one who's troubled by the "star" status that appears to be so desperately sought by our "leaders?"

"I'd be more comfortable calling most of the members of the Executive and Legislative Branches of our government "celebrities" rather than "leaders." I think that would help the general public see them more clearly. After all, while we may misguidedly idolize "celebrities" for the roles or games they might play, we intuitively recognize that their importance is somewhat in­flated and that their contribution to the world is one of entertainment."

Think about that. Leadership isn't about taking credit. It also isn't about assigning blame. It's about taking responsibility and taking action. There isn't a "celebrity" status associated with it.

Having worked primarily in the world of corporate turnarounds for 30 years, there was one recurring theme: when you agreed to take over, all of the problems became yours.

You needed to demonstrate leadership by assuming responsibility for the facts as they existed when you took control. It did not matter how those circumstances came into effect or who contributed to their creation. It only mattered that you provided the leadership necessary to recover from the past and to establish an environment that fostered the opportunity for a better future.

Leadership isn't about "winning;" it isn't about taking credit; and it isn't about raising money. It's about getting the job done. May the President have success in that regard during the remainder of his term, and may "the audacity of blame" fade away as quickly as "the audacity of hope" apparently did.

The Audacity of Birthdays