Presidential Address to Congress

It will continue weak so long as the major players are the hedge funds and institutional account using naked short selling and no uptick rule to bet the market. Once the ertail investor gets serious and starts buying, we will see good upward movement as the f-ckhead speculators are forced to cover their bets or go bankrupt.

Someone PLEASE beg the SEC to reinstate the uptick rule and ban on naked short selling. If you are not familiar with the damage the removal of those two regulations can cause, look at the crash of October 2008. Pure short speculation coupled with selling to cover debt by hedge funds, etc.
 
basically even. He gave a better speach then I thought he would. The fingure pointing has to stop. No real solutions offered just the things he wants done. Typical of the last pres also. I don't see anything that he said that will inspire a buying spree. I also don't see anything that he said that was all that inspiring as far as how the banks and so on are going to be saved.

The problem with his bail out is that it drives a wedge between people. There are the people that have been responsible and don't need it, then there are those that bought more then they should have and now are looking for the bail out. Of course that is painted with a broad brush but basically that is were we are at. If I find out that my neighbor is getting bail out money then I will certainly think different of them. It will piss me off that I am now paying for their house as well as mine. I have to sit down with my accountant this week and honestly I am freeking out at what they said that I still owe in taxes. Now I am going to have to pay more in taxes? WTF!!!!
 
Regarding the speech, he is a very eloquen speaker who connects with the audience. I think his delivery was far better than the last president. He would've received an A- at least if graded by teachers.

However, after watching Jindal's rebuttal, some things occured to me (and Republican loyalists wont like this.)

1) He clearly did not read Obama's speech before writing and editing his own. Some of his comments seemed based on assumptions of ideas not clarified before Obama's speech. but when given after Obama';s speech made him sound out of touch. Think in terms of rising dificits and how it will affect the next generation. Obama mentioed cutting deficit by end of year, so he could've shaped it better to include Obama's promise and why it wont work.

2) He came across as if he was talking to a majority of Americans who reject Obama, but Obama has high numbers right now. So it sounded more like he was talking to a room of 4th graders, because if all the Republican party has is the content of Jindal's speech, that's the next was of people who will vote Republican. Republicans have to offer better ideas, not just criticize those in power. Otherwise, they will be relegated to always being a chech and balance and not in power. Think movie critic: they can armchair quarterback everything about amovie, but no producer or production company will give them the keys to a movie production.

3) Obama came across presidential. People don't care much about content, they want to feel good. Jindal came across as Alfred E Neuman giving a canned speech on how to use vinegar and baking soda to make a volcano. It felt like Varisty against PeeWee.

If Republicans cannot do better than Jindal and Palin, Obama is going to build large muscles from all the woodshed beatings he's going to deliver. Someone better get into the roster of Republican leaders and find someone who knows how to play chess. If Jindal's defining moment was rejecting 100 million of the 3.8 billion package (something he subsequently learned he cannot do - it's all or nothing) then Obama is going to out-strategize and win in 4 years. And if Jindal's claim to fame is denying unemployment money to a state that was given untold billions to restart it's economy, he's going to face a tough re-election battle.

Sorry for the rant, but the wheels are coming of the Republican party and I can no longer keep my mouth shut and watch it fail. Someone needs to get the kids out of the driver's seat and get it back o course.
 
If Jindal's defining moment was rejecting 100 million of the 3.8 billion package (something he subsequently learned he cannot do - it's all or nothing) then Obama is going to out-strategize and win in 4 years. And if Jindal's claim to fame is denying unemployment money to a state that was given untold billions to restart it's economy, he's going to face a tough re-election battle.

Uh... where are you getting that its all or none. Last I read, he rejected about 30 million for unemployment benifits and because of that will loose another 60+ million but haven't seen all or none written anywhere. And where are you getting that thats his "claim to fame" especially on a state level? Time will tell but I doubt Jindal gets a serious challenge in the next governors race.
 
The truly scary thing about this is that O has gotten where he is, and is going, riding on the work of a 20-something speech writer and pretty much nothing else. He has no experience, no actual legislative knowledge, no power base, and no "mafia" now that the Chicago crew has taken some hits. This morning the AP actually had the audacity to fact check him, something nobody ever did while he was campaigning. This is huge because if the mainstream talking heads will not carry his water anymore, he will crash and burn fast. And he is the only thing standing between us and the lowest approval Congressional leadership ever.

As for Jindal and Palin, we are talking about 2 very popular governors (at least until the media raped Palin) that have done admirable things in their states. But we are fighting an uphill battle when it comes to getting an unfiltered message to the sheeple through the media (reference Ohlbermann saying "Oh God" when Jindal appeared last night-oops) . We do need another Reagan that can honestly and openly connect with people. So far that personality has not floated up in the Republican party, sure hope he or she does.
 
but Obama has high numbers right now.

That's because the majority of the people need some sort of bail out and he keeps giving it or promising to give it to them. So far- why would them or any of us doubt that he won't give it to them. I'd vote YES for him to be Beautified and then Sainted if it meant I didn't have to pay my bills any more; simple poll asking if he is great or not- that one is an easy yes (no I don't think he is because I still have to pay my bills).

Sorry for the rant, but the wheels are coming of the Republican party and I can no longer keep my mouth shut and watch it fail. Someone needs to get the kids out of the driver's seat and get it back o course.

Please continue the rantings!! Good points of view, well spoken and would you be interested in running in 2012? Really- thanks for the insight!!
 
The truly scary thing about this is that O has gotten where he is, and is going, riding on the work of a 20-something speech writer and pretty much nothing else. He has no experience, no actual legislative knowledge, no power base, and no "mafia" now that the Chicago crew has taken some hits. This morning the AP actually had the audacity to fact check him, something nobody ever did while he was campaigning. This is huge because if the mainstream talking heads will not carry his water anymore, he will crash and burn fast. And he is the only thing standing between us and the lowest approval Congressional leadership ever.

As for Jindal and Palin, we are talking about 2 very popular governors (at least until the media raped Palin) that have done admirable things in their states. But we are fighting an uphill battle when it comes to getting an unfiltered message to the sheeple through the media (reference Ohlbermann saying "Oh God" when Jindal appeared last night-oops) . We do need another Reagan that can honestly and openly connect with people. So far that personality has not floated up in the Republican party, sure hope he or she does.

Unfortunately, Obama is connecting on that level. Damage control quickly.
 
Uh... where are you getting that its all or none. Last I read, he rejected about 30 million for unemployment benifits and because of that will loose another 60+ million but haven't seen all or none written anywhere. And where are you getting that thats his "claim to fame" especially on a state level? Time will tell but I doubt Jindal gets a serious challenge in the next governors race.

It is all or none. He asked to have items removed but was informed it was take it or leave it. I would call that all or none.

The nation only learned of Jindal when he won his governorship and now for his stance on the stimulus package. But with so many people out of work, they are not concerned with the logic behind his decision, they only hear he is turning down unemployment money. Simply-minded people see that as a clear slap in the face of the unemployed.

This is politics at it's basic, put the opposing party in a no-win situation. if they take the bait, they can be branded turn-coats and disloyal to the movement. if they reject teh bait, they can be branded as unsympathetic and out of touch. Republicans did a great job of it over the last 8 years. It would've worked had they not been bogged down with two wars and rising deficits.

Dems have picked up the manual and are *****-slapping the Republicans with it. Even Newt is staying relatively quiet becasue he knows it's easier to swim downstream than up.
 
If only people had the time to read about the subjects and the actions, rather than just pick up on clips in the paper or their favorite news show. Pundits have made careers out of taking advantage of this situation, and have succeeded thus far. Jindal and Palin have been thrust into the mix by a party that was desperate for some new faces. It's worked for a bit, and will stick for some. We already have people viewing those two as running mates next time around, and nobody really knows anything about them.

Now's a pretty good time to do some real reading and checking, since both parties are ripe for real change. There are many good articles being written about what has happened this decade, and why. There are names, dates, places, and actual facts being written about. Don't let political pundits and partisan whackos dictate your knowledge of important subjects. They are there to make millions, and they'll do it anyway they can. I don't know about you guys, but I have no personal interest in spewing BS about Obama, nor any interest in praising him. Jindal seems to be maybe ok, Palin I wouldn't hire as a secretary (well maybe for that job). Just deal with things as they come up, and the more "Hey, that's not even true" remarks people make, the less BS we are surrounded with.
 
As a small business owner, my favorite part of the stimulus package is learning that I now have to pay 65% of the cobra payments for any employess that were laid off after Sept 1 of last year.

Duh, these people were laid off because we did not have enough money to pay them. Now we have to pay for their ongoing health insurance. This may cause another employee to be laid off to cover those expenses...stimulus no...ridiculous yes.

Now allegedly there will be some form of reimbursement from FICA and Medicaid taxes after the fact. WHAT? Why have the cluster fvck? More gov't bureaucracy and BS. Why not provide the ebenfit directly to the laid off employee?
 
was informed it was take it or leave it.

Do you have a link for this? Been following it fairly closely and haven't seen "take it or leave it" anywhere. As far as I know there are a few gov. that are turning down portions of the stimulus pkg.

Also, what does his national popularity have to do with him getting relected governor? Seems like thats what you're saying
 
More on the bill

http://compforce.typepad.com/compen...udes-employer-subsidy-for-cobra-premiums.html
Approved Stimulus Bill Includes Employer Subsidy for COBRA Premiums
The stimulus bill approved Friday evening and now headed to President Obama for approval includes a provision for a nine-month 65% subsidy for COBRA premiums for people who lost/lose their jobs between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009.

More from Mike Haberman at HR Observations:

The bill is available to anyone involuntarily terminated since September 1, 2008. If someone did not elect to have COBRA at that time they will be given a 60 day opt-in period.

The ex-employee would pay their portion to the employer or insurer and the employer would make up the remainder. The employer would then apply that amount as a deduction against payroll taxes. If that is insufficient to cover the COBRA expense then the U.S. Treasury would pay the remaining amount. This payment would continue for a period of 12 months, rather than the 18 months of COBRA. They would cease if someone became covered by other insurance, including Medicaid.
 
I am getting tired of all of this spending crap. I wish I had the $$ to buy an island and go hide until all this crap is over....
 
I thought his speech was pretty good - short of the US inventing the automobile statement. BTW, I didn't vote for Obama - the Turd Sandwich, I voted for the Douchebag that picked a woman two years removed from being a housewife to run with him.

I guess I'm lucky. My firm is hiring people and have the sticks pushed all the way forward.

I have always believed in the old saying you make money during the good times but you get rich during the bad times.
 
then we should all be getting extremely wealthy. I just wish the trend would start crawling upward. . . doesn't need to be a race or sprint. Just upward.
 
Back
Top