Obama Fails to Stem Middle-Class Slide He Blamed on Bush

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:49 AM GMT
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-01/obama-fails-to-stem-middle-class-slide-he-blamed-on-bush.html

    As a candidate in 2008, Obama blamed the reversals largely on the policies of Bush and other Republicans. He cited census figures showing that median income for working-age households -- those headed by someone younger than 65 -- had dropped more than $2,000 after inflation during the first seven years of Bush’s time in office.

    Yet real median household income in March was down $4,300 since Obama took office in January 2009 and down $2,900 since the June 2009 start of the economic recovery, according to an analysis of census data by Sentier Research, an economic- consulting firm in Annapolis, Maryland.

    A president who attacked Bush’s policies for favoring the rich has overseen a recovery in which the wealthiest 1 percent captured 93 percent of per-capita real income gains in 2010, according to an analysis of tax data by Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

    On average, families in the top 1 percent saw their inflation-adjusted incomes rise by $105,637 that year from 2009, according to Saez.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:54 AM GMT
    When you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?

    And since real wages haven't changed - adjusted for inflation - since the 1970s, which you have repeatedly said is perfectly fine, I'm not sure what your point is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 3:57 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidWhen you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?


    There hasn't been a "Republican Congress" during the Obama Administration.


    Semantics... icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:09 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidWhen you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?


    There hasn't been a "Republican Congress" during the Obama Administration.


    Semantics... icon_rolleyes.gif


    Because Republicans haven't controlled both houses? How is this semantics? Bush didn't have the luxury of only Republican congresses either while Obama did have Democrat controlled congress in the first half of his term.

    Point remains.

    Besides, didn't Obama come to power in part because he claimed he was a uniter?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:22 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidWhen you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?


    There hasn't been a "Republican Congress" during the Obama Administration.


    Semantics... icon_rolleyes.gif


    Because Republicans haven't controlled both houses? How is this semantics? Bush didn't have the luxury of only Republican congresses either while Obama did have Democrat controlled congress in the first half of his term.

    Point remains.

    Besides, didn't Obama come to power in part because he claimed he was a uniter?


    You're an idiot. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress for the first 6 years of Bush's administration. So 6 years versus 2 and without the constant obstructionism that the Republicans have engaged in.

    Obama did try to unite. The Republicans weren't interested. Their goal was to make him a one term president. Country be damned. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 5:39 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidWhen you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?


    There hasn't been a "Republican Congress" during the Obama Administration.


    Semantics... icon_rolleyes.gif


    Because Republicans haven't controlled both houses? How is this semantics? Bush didn't have the luxury of only Republican congresses either while Obama did have Democrat controlled congress in the first half of his term.

    Point remains.

    Besides, didn't Obama come to power in part because he claimed he was a uniter?


    You're an idiot. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress for the first 6 years of Bush's administration. So 6 years versus 2 and without the constant obstructionism that the Republicans have engaged in.

    Obama did try to unite. The Republicans weren't interested. Their goal was to make him a one term president. Country be damned. icon_rolleyes.gif


    You're the one who doesn't understand the meaning of "semantics" and you claim I'm the idiot. Right. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • DR2K

    Posts: 346

    May 04, 2012 5:44 AM GMT
    What middle class?
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 04, 2012 10:54 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 saidWhen you have a Republican Congress willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States to score political points, why would this be surprising?


    There hasn't been a "Republican Congress" during the Obama Administration.


    Semantics... icon_rolleyes.gif


    Because Republicans haven't controlled both houses? How is this semantics? Bush didn't have the luxury of only Republican congresses either while Obama did have Democrat controlled congress in the first half of his term.

    Point remains.

    Besides, didn't Obama come to power in part because he claimed he was a uniter?


    Republican Say Jobs Bill ?

    Oh Riddler you seem to have only the RIGHT side of your brain working
    Try to recall the JOBS BILL that Obama TRIED and I say TRIED twice because it was denied by all republicans House and Senate

    and a dose of political reality is required here as well

    The Middle Class SLIDE has been going on for thirty years and has been on an even keel with the republican led economic policy that we had seen started during the Reign of Ronnie
    The deregulation give everything to the corporations policy that has led us directly to the catastrophe we are living through right now

    and one last thing ..... try and count the number of filibusters we have seen in the Senate and then try and tell me again that the Democrats "Control" that part of the legislature with a straight face
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:18 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    Obama did try to unite. The Republicans weren't interested. Their goal was to make him a one term president. Country be damned. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Incorrect.


    The top congressional leaders from both parties gathered at the White House for a working discussion over the shape and size of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan. The meeting was designed to promote bipartisanship.

    Challenged by one Republican senator over the contents of the package, the new president, according to participants, replied: “I won.”

    Still, other Democrats echoed the sentiment. As he left the White House, House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina was asked about Republican complaints that Democrats aren’t listening to what their GOP colleagues have to say. “We’re responding to the American people,” he said. “The American people didn’t listen to them too well during the election.”


    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/01/23/obama-to-gop-i-won/

    Correct.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-obama-polarizer_643067.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:26 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    Obama did try to unite. The Republicans weren't interested. Their goal was to make him a one term president. Country be damned. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Incorrect.


    The top congressional leaders from both parties gathered at the White House for a working discussion over the shape and size of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan. The meeting was designed to promote bipartisanship.

    Challenged by one Republican senator over the contents of the package, the new president, according to participants, replied: “I won.”

    Still, other Democrats echoed the sentiment. As he left the White House, House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina was asked about Republican complaints that Democrats aren’t listening to what their GOP colleagues have to say. “We’re responding to the American people,” he said. “The American people didn’t listen to them too well during the election.”


    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/01/23/obama-to-gop-i-won/

    Correct.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-obama-polarizer_643067.html


    Thanks for proving that Republicans and conservatives behave like a bunch of petulant children. Regardless of one remark, Obama and his team trying to craft several bipartisan approaches to national challenges which the Republicans refused to support or engage with. The historical record is very clear for those not suffering from ODS.

    It was Bush who touted that "elections have consequences", so, again, stop pretending there is anything novel or different in what Obama has said or done.

    The Republican Party and conservatives have spent 3 1/2 years engaging in obstructionism and political sabotage for which the American people have paid the price.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:39 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    Obama did try to unite. The Republicans weren't interested. Their goal was to make him a one term president. Country be damned. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Incorrect.


    The top congressional leaders from both parties gathered at the White House for a working discussion over the shape and size of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan. The meeting was designed to promote bipartisanship.

    Challenged by one Republican senator over the contents of the package, the new president, according to participants, replied: “I won.”

    Still, other Democrats echoed the sentiment. As he left the White House, House Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina was asked about Republican complaints that Democrats aren’t listening to what their GOP colleagues have to say. “We’re responding to the American people,” he said. “The American people didn’t listen to them too well during the election.”


    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/01/23/obama-to-gop-i-won/

    Correct.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-obama-polarizer_643067.html


    Thanks for proving that Republicans and conservatives behave like a bunch of petulant children. Regardless of one remark, Obama and his team trying to craft several bipartisan approaches to national challenges which the Republicans refused to support or engage with. The historical record is very clear for those not suffering from ODS.

    It was Bush who touted that "elections have consequences", so, again, stop pretending there is anything novel or different in what Obama has said or done.

    The Republican Party and conservatives have spent 3 1/2 years engaging in obstructionism and political sabotage for which the American people have paid the price.

    Guys can read both articles/blogs linked and form their own conclusions.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 2:46 PM GMT
    http://news.investors.com/article/610111/201205021856/obama-tries-distracting-voters-from-economic-record.htm

    As Economy Sputters, Obama Tries Distraction

    It's no wonder President Obama wants to direct everyone's attention to far-off Afghanistan these days. The economic news here at home is looking increasingly grim.

    Just 28 days after Time magazine ran an April 2 cover story boasting that "in the past few weeks, signs of economic expansion have been everywhere" it warned that "the economy might be stalling."

    The article pointed to "disappointing" news that Q1 GDP had climbed just 2.2% — below expectations — and job growth in March was 120,000, also a miss.

    Now, two more troubling signs have emerged. The government reported on Wednesday that new factory orders fell 1.5% in March, the steepest drop since March 2009, when the country was still in recession.

    Then ADP reported that private employment climbed just 119,000 in April — the smallest gain in seven months and also far below expectations. The April employment report comes out Friday, which economists think will show an unimpressive 160,000 job gain.

    Seems that, once again, all the talk about "green shoots" and "turning the corner" and reaching "escape velocity" are just more false hopes.
  • jock_1

    Posts: 1492

    May 05, 2012 1:46 AM GMT
    isnt there supposed to be some sort of budget from the senate? How come Obama doesnt know how to propose a budget?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 1:48 AM GMT
    jock_1 saidisnt there supposed to be some sort of budget from the senate? How come Obama doesnt know how to propose a budget?

    Harry Reid has ignored the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 that requires them to propose a budget blueprint. Too bad there's no mechanism to throw his ass in jail for ignoring the law. Obama did propose a budget but it was a joke. Last year his budget was defeated in the Senate 97 to 0. This year it came to the House but the Dems didn't want to vote on it, so a Republican put the outlines of it in an amendment to force a vote. It got zero votes. They have decided it's better to not show their cards until after the election and criticize the one with the balls to put something out, Ryan.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 4:01 AM GMT
    This article is totally out of touch with reality. For starters its from 'bloomburg' so what should we expect. Anyone blaiming Obama for this conitnueing slide has to be totally ignoring the party of no in Congress and the party masters of the filibuster in the Senate. Don't bother with the comeback that 'both sides do it' because one side stands out far in advance in this numbers game.

    This group of repubs particularly on this subject causes the problems over and over again, blockes the remedies, then blames the victim, lies at every turn and keeps repeating the lie along with timely interjections of other stretches of the truth until the truth is undetectable . We well remember their primary goal of "making Obama a one term president'.


    If you'll look up 'Goebles' propaganda tactics they align perfectly. "a well placed and timely lie will always be believed over the truth"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 7:47 AM GMT
    realifedad said This article is totally out of touch with reality. For starters its from 'bloomburg' so what should we expect. Anyone blaiming Obama for this conitnueing slide has to be totally ignoring the party of no in Congress and the party masters of the filibuster in the Senate. Don't bother with the comeback that 'both sides do it' because one side stands out far in advance in this numbers game.

    This group of repubs particularly on this subject causes the problems over and over again, blockes the remedies, then blames the victim, lies at every turn and keeps repeating the lie along with timely interjections of other stretches of the truth until the truth is undetectable . We well remember their primary goal of "making Obama a one term president'.


    If you'll look up 'Goebles' propaganda tactics they align perfectly. "a well placed and timely lie will always be believed over the truth"


    The party of no in congress? Are you referring to the Democrats who refuse to pass a budget? Who refuse to deal with entitlements and reforms? I mean let's not forget that Obama had a Democratic congress in the first half of his term and they are how he initially got a bad healthcare bill passed - the results are his to own.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 05, 2012 12:02 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    realifedad said This article is totally out of touch with reality. For starters its from 'bloomburg' so what should we expect. Anyone blaiming Obama for this conitnueing slide has to be totally ignoring the party of no in Congress and the party masters of the filibuster in the Senate. Don't bother with the comeback that 'both sides do it' because one side stands out far in advance in this numbers game.

    This group of repubs particularly on this subject causes the problems over and over again, blockes the remedies, then blames the victim, lies at every turn and keeps repeating the lie along with timely interjections of other stretches of the truth until the truth is undetectable . We well remember their primary goal of "making Obama a one term president'.


    If you'll look up 'Goebles' propaganda tactics they align perfectly. "a well placed and timely lie will always be believed over the truth"


    The party of no in congress? Are you referring to the Democrats who refuse to pass a budget? Who refuse to deal with entitlements and reforms? I mean let's not forget that Obama had a Democratic congress in the first half of his term and they are how he initially got a bad healthcare bill passed - the results are his to own.


    Riddler and the rest of the republican party contingent here on RJ

    The current legislative body that we have here now in Congress is incapable of passing ANY budget
    Let's take a walk down memory lane just under a year ago when certain people were Yelling LET IT FAIL in Congress ... Yes there were people ACTUALLY CALLING for a US default
    You have a budget submitted by some of those same people that slashes EVERYTHING that the poor and the middle class have counted on in Government and shovels even MORE toward the top 1%
    and THEN you have a Senate who has been brought to its kness because of a filibuster mentality gone mad when there is NO SUCH THING as a simple majority anymore where EVERYTHING that will see the light of day requires a super majority or it just doesn't pass

    That there my friends is the reason we here in America have no real economic policy
    and WILL NOT SEE one until certain crazy people are voted out of office

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:17 PM GMT
    Blame Obama.
    I don't care what the problem is. You're out of toilet paper? Blame Obama.
    Job sucks? Blame Obama.
    Middle class took out loans they could not afford after 30 years of government removing depression era regulations? Blame Obama.
    Dog pooped on the carpet? Blame Obama.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 2:52 PM GMT
    smartmoney saidBlame Obama.
    I don't care what the problem is. You're out of toilet paper? Blame Obama.
    Job sucks? Blame Obama.
    Middle class took out loans they could not afford after 30 years of government removing depression era regulations? Blame Obama.
    Dog pooped on the carpet? Blame Obama.


    The alternative view as you and others seem to take here is that he has no responsibility for anything. In this case he deserves blame for something he blamed bush for previously that he had identified as a problem that has gotten objectively worse under his tenure.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 05, 2012 6:44 PM GMT
    Bush had EIGHT YEARS to destroy the country.
    You can't expect Obama (or anyone) to fix it in just three years.

    mcyixc.jpg