Subscribe by RSS
Not surprising to find out that 49 so-called “blue dog” Democrats in the House are preparing to start blocking some of President Obama’s socialist agenda. Also not surprising is that they’re all from districts Obama did not win in 2008 meaning they’ll have voters to answer to whether Obama likes it or not.
CQ Politics reports on the growing House Democrat tea party:
Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona have joined a quiet revolt in the House that could slow some of President Obama’s fast-moving priorities.
The two are among 49 Democrats from congressional districts that backed Republican Sen. John McCain ’s 2008 presidential race and whose support for the Democratic majority’s progressive agenda is increasingly not assured.
A dozen of them were among 20 House Democrats who voted against the $410 billion discretionary fiscal 2009 spending package (HR 1105) on Feb. 25. Another group later forced House leaders to sideline a contentious bill (HR 1106) to allow bankruptcy judges to modify home loans.
Although only a handful of moderate and conservative Democrats abandoned their leaders during party-line votes on the economic stimulus law (PL 111-5), the group of vulnerable Democrats branded the omnibus spending bill as a budget buster and questioned whether the mortgage bill would raise interest rates on average home-owners and cause some struggling homeowners to rush to bankruptcy.
The defections could cause heartburn for Democratic leaders charged with ushering through Obama’s three biggest priorities: a health care overhaul, a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions and his fiscal 2010 budget blueprint. The president might also have trouble winning their votes for an anticipated second financial bailout package.
“My job is not to be a rubber stamp for the president or Democratic leadership, but to be a voice for the people that elected me,” Giffords said. “I voted for the stimulus, but found I could not vote for the omnibus.” She faces a tough 2010 campaign in a state that will be dominated by McCain’s expected re-election to his Senate seat.
For his part, Matheson echoed Giffords’ concerns about an increase of $31 billion, or 8 percent, in discretionary spending in the nine bills contained in the omnibus measure. Like Giffords, he also has raised concerns about the mortgage bankruptcy bill, which many banks oppose.
“A lot needs to be done to help people keep their homes. But I’m just not sure about this bill,” Giffords said.
Let the record now reflect that along with Rush Limbaugh, 49 House Democrats would also like at least some of President Obama’s socialist policies to fail.
The Democrat leadership is aware and working hard to quell the rebellion:
Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer , D-Md., acknowledged the defections, saying: “We have a very diverse party, with diverse opinions. We’re working on it.”
Many of the 49 Democrats in the group have particular concerns about Obama’s call for allowing the Bush-era tax cuts for wealthy families to expire.
“I don’t agree with the administration about letting all those tax cuts expire for upper-income families,” said Harry E. Mitchell , D-Ariz. He argues for retaining the current 15 percent rate on capital gains and for permanent reductions in the estate tax.
This is a breath of fresh air to me personally since it shows that even Democrats in Obama’s own party recognize the danger his policies are bringing to America. Three cheers to them, call your representative and urge them to join in fighting Obama’s socialism.
There is not a reasonable economist on earth who thinks that raising the capital gains tax from 15% to 20% during a recession is a competent thing to do. However, Obama is proposing we do so. Why? One can only conclude that Obama wants people’s retirement accounts to continue going down since he’s doing the exact opposite of what stimulating the economy should look like.
Obama wants the American capitalist system to fail and it’s becoming more obvious everyday with his anti-wealth and anti-growth policies. Therefore, Obama wants me to fail as a private citizen making my own living.
Perhaps this is all the proof we need:
DOW Jones Industrial Average (11/4/08 – 3/3/09)
Since Obama was elected, every single one of his policies and proposals have continued making the DOW tank. Investors don’t trust him, especially when he’s going to raise capital gains from 15% to 20%, why should they invest? Obama is hurting our retirement accounts with every new socialist policy, it couldn’t be more obvious.
Everyone tells me Obama is so incredibly smart. Well how dumb do you have to be to see that your socialist agenda is killing the markets?
Please President Obama, encourage people to invest in the stock market, stop tearing it down, you’re hurting my retirement account.
Visit the You Decide Politics Store »
Loading ...
Nate – “why should they invest?”
Because the prices are so low… I am actively BUYING, BUYING, BUYING.
I did the same thing when Enron happened.
The prices have been low for months and keep going lower. Nobody is putting money in because they fear Obama’s terrible policies, it’s the truth.
Yes, everything is on sale your gains will soon be taxed at 20% instead of 15% thanks to Obama. The incentive exists in the cheap market yet investors are still holding their cards close because Obama’s policies are terrible for our capitalist system. Not to mention the fact that you don’t know if the company you invest in will become a government-run enterprise tomorrow or the next day.
It is a great time to buy, yet why aren’t more people doing so under Obama’s “groundbreaking” plans?
As was described to me by a close friend:
“On economics, the Obama administration is on the highway doing 100 milers per hour with it’s eyes closed.”
They’re not even thinking about what they’re doing, it’s hubris by the very definition.
20% is less than 35% income tax. Welcome to the world of “why you should invest”. This is the reason why much of the wealthy are invested in the market because you don’t may as much in taxes on capital gains.
That is what we call an incentive to invest.
Nate, I think it is crazy to think that our market was going to do much better. In August 2008, Warren Buffet and many other investors had already said that they were expecting 2009 to be rough no matter who is president. The market was planning on getting worse before it got better.
It is also known that with most strong falls in the stock market, it is always followed by a strong return. The stock market if fickle no matter what.
When Enron went under, Dynegy and Williams were both under 5 bucks and neither of them were reporting bad financial statements. However, people sold anyway and the energy stocks fell. Had nothing to do with companies standing but what the buyers/sellers perceived.
The Market will recover and it was also expected to be bad in 2009 back in mid to late 2008. No surprises here. If people are selling because of Obama, then great… I will buy as much as i can of the shares they are selling.
“If people are selling because of Obama, then great…”
Even if Obama’s policies and statements are hurting people’s retirement accounts? You complained to me before about people’s retirements being wiped out yet now you don’t care that Obama’s perpetuating the problem.
You are confused… The Stock market is an investment market. When you invest money, you can either make or loss money. DO NOT INVEST in stocks if you are afraid to loss or can not afford to loss the money you are investing.
Do I feel bad that people are losing money in their retirement accounts? Sure. But Even Dave Ramsey talks about changing your retirement stock profile dramatically up to 5 years before retirement to make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen when you are about to retire. And retirement funds should be in Mutual funds not Individual stocks.
If you are not about to retire than you shouldn’t be selling. The Market will recover and if you do sell, than you should be selling with the knowledge that you will be buying at a lower point and holding onto it for when the market recovers.
Also,Nate, if you cared about people’s retirement than you need to be thanking Bush for the Bank bailout. If Freddi, Fannie, AIG, WaMu all went under at the same time than they would have even less in there retirement accounts.
I’m not confused about the market and investments and I certainly don’t need a lecture from an Obama voter, thanks.
I am talking about what YOU said about people losing money in their 401(k) plans and other retirement vehicles. You complained that we need Obama’s stimulus to help these people losing money, you’re words, not mine! You see that?
Then this:
“Do I feel bad that people are losing money in their retirement accounts? Sure. But Even Dave Ramsey talks about changing your retirement stock profile dramatically up to 5 years before retirement to make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen when you are about to retire. And retirement funds should be in Mutual funds not Individual stocks.
If you are not about to retire than you shouldn’t be selling. The Market will recover and if you do sell, than you should be selling with the knowledge that you will be buying at a lower point and holding onto it for when the market recovers.”
I completely concur, that is Basic Investing 101.
However, you were the one who complained about people losing retirement accounts, not me. My point is that you complained about it but you’re giving Obama a pass on his failing policies.
Which is it, JD? Are you complaining about people losing retirement accounts yet you’re not admitting that President Obama is currently the one to blame when he trashes the market and increases capital gains.
You need to either:
A) Admit that Obama’s policies are bad for the market
or
B) Stop complaining about people’s retirement accounts going down and then refusing to acknowledge Obama’s role in trashing the market when he talks.
Can you not see this or don’t you want to admit it, which one?
I choose Option “C” – not to buy the RNC tag lines
lol. When did i complain about people losing retirement accounts?
And Obama is not the one crashing the stock market. It is called Market Perception. All it takes is the market to perceive loss; it does not have to actually lose.
The more people want to blame Obama and sell than great, it just means the market price is under priced and again… it will recover. I will accept your apology 2 years from now.
Of course it will recover, in spite of Obama, not because of him.
It will recover because private investors, like you and I, put money back in. Obama will have nothing to do with it except make the recession last longer. His plans only hinder development and investment in the private sector.
You are right, It will recover regardless of Obama and it is falling regardless of Obama.
The Budget that you are touting isn’t even the official budget. it is a recommended budget. It hasn’t even gone through the first phase of changes. I think we should talk about this a month from now.
Again, for some one as worked up about the market, you should be thanking Bush and the Democratic Congress for Bailing out the banks. Can you imagine where the prices would be if they all went under?
What am I talking about…I bet you would blame Obama still.
With all due respect to both of you – Nate and JD – I’m an investor with 30 years experience. JD, comparing what’s happening in the market now to Enron is ludicrous. This can’t even be compared to the what happened after 9/11. Buy now if you want, but expect it to drop before it starts a very VERY slow rise. It has NOT bottomed out – and the recovery in the best stocks will be a decade down the road.
The stock market runs on emotion – and its emotions are all negative right now. You’d be better off taking your money to Vegas.
And yes – it’s on Obama. The market wants an answer to the banking crisis – and it’s not getting it.
“So… What do you think?
Is Buffett off base? Or is Abelson being needlessly risk averse? I think a big part of the divergence in views has to do with the timeline. While Abelson argues that Buffett can afford long-term patience, Buffett clearly states that he’s looking ahead 5/10/20 years, which is exactly what one should be doing when investing in the stock market.”
In contrast to Buffet’s view, Abelson when on to argue that:
“We needn’t go through the obligatory obeisance to Buffett’s investment prowess and peerless common sense. We think he’s great. And sure, we believe the country will survive and prosper in the future. No argument most stock prices are down sharply. But we don’t agree this is the time to dive headlong into the market.”
“For one thing, Buffett can afford to be patient as long as he chooses. Most investors don’t have that luxury. For another, the economy is in the early stage of unraveling and we don’t think the market decline has discounted the havoc this unraveling may wreak by a long shot”
http://www.fivecentnickel.....ing-crack/
Other factors
1. Higher coperate taxes. Passed on to consumers. Even those making less than $250,000. Americans more likely to buy foreign with more business going off shore or people not buying.. More unemployment
2 Possible carbon tax. Raising price on all things bought. Even those earning less than $250,000.
3. Homes refinanced and more business bailouts. Good chance many will still fail. Losing government investment and more lose. More unemployed
4. unknown factor. Socialism. Warren does not know this affect.
5. Buffett call for “bull market”
could be self serving.
6. Hyper inflation. When Americans start buying, all this money can lead to trouble
Could it be possible it will take 25 years for market to recover. As it did during the Great Depression.
Many unknown factors. Wise investors don’t invest in the unknown.
A fool and his money are soon parted.”
Thomas Tusser
jd says..
“And Obama is not the one crashing the stock market. It is called Market Perception . All it takes is the market to perceive loss; it does not have to actually lose.”
…..
Market Perception–Really jd..You been trading since 2001 ?
Really ??
Pick a stock, let’s say………GE…. Growth rate near -40%. Is that “market perception”. 40% drop sounds very bad.. Is that real.
o tax increase is real. money o is taking away from hospitals,doctors, drug program, and medicare for his health plan, that is real . “market perceives” the affect, reflects it in the stocks price. Example hospitals lossing income, thus stock price for that hospital is worth less. Increase cost from “carbon tax”. Might even go “out of business”? Or cut back services and/or employees or their wages.
Check the intenet on the beginning of the stock market. Market is not known to be partial to any political party. Their party is profit on investment.
jd, this is not “RNC tag lines “. Want me to get links ? Be real glad to do it !
jd, I am looking forward to your “dnc tag lines”. Lots of stuff I can disprove like your favorite..Bill Clinton balance budget
jd says
“It is also known that with most strong falls in the stock market, it is always followed by a strong return. The stock market if fickle no matter what.”
Can I have some numbers and links on this.
…..
jd said..”You are right, It will recover regardless of Obama and it is falling regardless of Obama.”
Didn’t obama say we might not recover if we did not spend all this money ?
Are you saying o’s plans has nothing to do with market fall ? Not health plan, tax increase, hugh influx of money and hyper-inflation possibility, etc ? History does not prove President and Congress actions does move market ?
Well, obviously, JD statement is correct, Bill, or there would be no stock market today. If ANY strong fall we’ve seen in history wasn’t answered with a strong gain we would never have seen 14,000 out of the market. But we did. I do believe the market will recover, because the market is moved by capitalists, and so is America, and it will recover in spite of obama and Buffet and any other big mouth that spurring the emotion on the exchange right now. But the recovery won’t be so quick this time as it was after 9/11. Risky day trading will see ups and downs on the day, sure, but I’ve never considered day trading as investing – it’s just Vegas with a broker.
It’s difficult right now to find solid companies to buy. Just look at GE, GM, and a host of others that have been the rock model for long sustaining companies in this country for decades. Look at the earnings losses for companies nearly 100 years old now. None of them are safe right now, and that makes them a bad investment until the economy itself turns around. Entire industries that are usually a soft place to land in the market are teetering on the ledge, and a wise investor knows you don’t buy stock – you buy companies.
Babs
Took 25 years to recover from Depression. I did not say his statement was wrong, I wanted proof
Again, show me the numbers from link.
Prehaps you will respond to each of my points. I see 3 points.
1.Can I have some numbers and links on this.
2. Didn’t obama say we might not recover if we did not spend all this money ?
3. Are you saying o’s plans has nothing to do with market fall ? Not health plan, tax increase, hugh influx of money and hyper-inflation possibility, etc ? History does not prove President and Congress actions does move market ?
Sure, anything obama or any of his administration says on any given day affects the market. So does earnings reports, jobless figures, and a whole host of other things. In fact, it doesn’t even take news from anywhere to move the market on any given day. The market is nothing if not fickle.
Sure, obama said we might not recover if we don’t spend all this money. So do a lot of democrats. But saying it loud don’t make it so.
I’m not going there on links and “proof”. I would have thought you knew the history of the market without links if you’ve been investing as long as you say you have. So I don’t know what you’re asking for there, and I’ll stay out of it.
Babs
I’m not going there on links and “proof”. I would have thought you knew the history of the market without links if you’ve been investing as long as you say you have. So I don’t know what you’re asking for there, and I’ll stay out of it.”
“Obviously”. Your getting out of your opinion. That means bring in links and proof.
Plus you wish to insult me. Doubt what I have done. I began buying mutual funds. Higher level is stocks. Higher level is day trading.
Babs
“Well, obviously, JD statement is correct, Bill, or there would be no stock market today”
jd says
“It is also known that with most strong falls in the stock market, it is always followed by a strong return. The stock market if fickle no matter what.”
My question pretaining to jd quote was…
Can I have some numbers and links on this.
…..
jd said..”You are right, It will recover regardless of Obama and it is falling regardless of Obama.”
Didn’t obama say we might not recover if we did not spend all this money ?
Are you saying o’s plans has nothing to do with market fall ? Not health plan, tax increase, hugh influx of money and hyper-inflation possibility, etc ? History does not prove President and Congress actions does move market ?
…
I also told you..
Took 25 years to recover from Depression. I did not say his statement was wrong, I wanted proof
Is 25 years a fast return ?. This goes back to original jd statement
I have not doubted who you are. I have no reason. I did on jd and proved it.
If you can disprove who I am. Do it. You have made references. I started trading when it cost $125.00.. I have recepts. Should I post one. I will, but I have a requirement.
Babs says
“I’m not going there on links and “proof”. I would have thought you knew the history of the market without links if you’ve been investing as long as you say you have. So I don’t know what you’re asking for there, and I’ll stay out of it.”
Does not know what I am asking ? Let’s check
…..
Bill Hedges Mar 5th, 2009 at 3:53 am
jd says
““It is also known that with most strong falls in the stock market, it is always followed by a strong return. The stock market if fickle no matter what.”
I said- “Can I have some numbers and links on this.”
…..
Babs , kind of clear what I wanted link on.
“”strong falls in the stock market, it is always followed by a strong return.”
Kind of makes sense why I said it took 25 years to recover from Drepression.
Of course you could of “asked me” ! But, you rather,,,insult.
” I would have thought you knew the history of the market without links if you’ve been investing as long as you say you have. ”
You think I should know all the history of the market. I’ll bust your bubble, I don’t..Sorry..That’s why I asked for link…If false or true, I would like to know.
…..
You end
” So I don’t know what you’re asking for there, and I’ll stay out of it”
Don’t ask and I won’t tell you. When things get stuff (or goes against you), run. jd does.
…..
I don’t look at your remarks as closely as I do jd. Am I making mistake ? Looks like it. Maybe take with grain of salt since unwiling to document concerning non-common knowledge statements.
And I have shown you ignore facts when repeatedly stated
“Since 1956 however the average duration of bear markets has been about fourteen months. The average decline since 1929 has been 38.2% versus 31.8% since 1956.”
Years to break-even is given in chart. This is factual information that I asked for. I tend to invest on best facts (not guesses). Since day-trading is based on making profit from a positive “spread” within short period, this is not my thing. I am not a long term invstor.
http://climateerinvest.bl.....ttoms.html