RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Obama sinks along with the American people

Obama’s ratings sink on economic doubts.” Yup. We thought we’d heard enough bad numbers and knew how Obama has failed to become a president. But today the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances announced:
     (1) The median net worth of families has plunged 39% in three years
     (2) Median income has fallen 8% in three years
     (3) The value of home equity has fallen 32% in three years

Barack only cares about how these numbers will frighten voters and lose him his gig as The One. He cares nothing about the families affected. Besides, Barry and Michelle will always have Chicago. Or will they? I find it so damn odd that never once have I seen a news report about either setting foot inside their “historic” Chicago mansion[1] since they stormed the White House in 2009 … before he won in 2008, we banged out post after post about the squalid story of how that house came into the Obamas’ hands, aided by Tony Rezko and Michelle’s conniving ways.

It is devastating to see a HARD number showing that MOST Americans — can we say ALL Americans who own a home? — have seen their primary worth tied up in their home equity sink like a stone. Over 20 years worth, some say. Charles Krauthammer says it’s a permanent loss. Krauthammer also said, and this surprised me a bit, that the housing F**K UP began in the early ’90s and throughout all U.S. administrations, including the eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency along with Clinton’s. But now (and Krauthammer nearly seemed sad for the man as he said this) the blame will ALL go to Obama because it’s during his administration that ALL the chickens are, so to speak, coming home to roost. If they still have one to go to. Which takes me back to Reuters’ big story today:

From “Obama’s ratings sink on economic doubts“:

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama’s approval ratings have dipped to their lowest level since January on deep economic worries, wiping out most of his lead in the White House race over Republican rival Mitt Romney, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday. …

There’s more. Reuters commissioned a poll:

The percentage of Americans who approve of Obama’s job performance dropped from 50 a month ago to 47, matching his mark in early January. The number who think the country is on the wrong track rose 6 percentage points in a month to 63 percent.

The doubts about Obama’s leadership helped Romney pull to within 1 point of the Democratic president in the White House race – 45 percent to 44 percent – among registered voters with less than five months to go before the November 6 election. Obama led by 7 points a month ago.

The poll was mostly taken after Obama suffered several recent campaign setbacks, including a weak jobs report in May and an optimistic comment on the good health of the private sector that critics say showed he was out of touch. …

Wasn’t it Jeremiah Wright who liked to talk about those chickens comin’ home to roost?

There’s another old-fashioned saying: “Don’t bite off more than you can chew.”

Mr. Obama, you are out of your depths as president. We gotta let you go. To Chicago. It’s where you belong. Your time is up. Make way for a wiser, more mature, vastly more experienced president.

[1]In 2008, several of us wrote many, many stories about the Obamas’ purchase of their Chicago mansion. Oh, it is an intricate story — stinking of unholy alliances, special favors, money secretly changing hands, a ruthless and cruel slumlord, and on and on. There even was an FBI probe. I can’t decide which story you’d most get a kick out of. You might begin with “How to Buy a Mansion You Can’t Afford.” For more info, check out this list of posts at No Quarter.

  • lola828

    Brownyn do you always have to be so transparently dishonest in you commentary? Do you ever put things in context or even try to understand what you write about?

    You quote a bunch of facts, but put them in zero context.

    Yes, of course median income and home equity has fallen since 2009. We have been in a huge recession since 2007, which carried into 2009.

    However, many of those economic stats you quote have bounced back significantly since the bottom of the recession since 2009.

    By the way Obama’s approval rating has consistently been above that of both Reagan and Clinton during his first term. It has remained consistently in the high 40s for 3 1/2 years now. That is pretty impressive, given the tough economy.

    Romney’s approval has been less than impressive. He is the weakest approval rated major candidate for President in a very long time.

    • BuzzLatte2

      LOLa: Thanks for the laugh!  Wish your comment actually put money in peoples’ bank accounts and regained lost home value…but hey, it IS yet another fine example of empty and hollow demdrone idiocy.

      The classic:  ”You quote a bunch of facts…”  as opposed to “many of those economic stats have bounced back”…WITHOUT the facts to back that up, of course.

      • lola828

        You can thank you buddy George Bush for any loss in  housing values. The housing crash started years before Obama became President.

        It was also a real estate bubble, so a lot of that so-called home equity was a fascade to start with and will not come back for years, if ever.

        You want facts on my comment on what Brownyn reported above. Fine. Here you go:

        “The Fed’s survey of consumer finances contains information only through 2010. A separate survey the Fed released last week showed that total family net worth climbed 4.7 percent in the January-March quarter to $62.9 trillion, about 28 percent above its recession low. ”

        http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iquHwsTmrs3IENwI-aFBsDWwlqVA?docId=d6e69ae34cb04e7db1e0dea069643a80

         Brownyn quotes Fed numbers that span 2007 to 2010. A big part of that was a time when the recession was ramping up and Obama was not even President. Hard to blame Obama for those numbers. And since 2010 there have been improvements in the numbers.

  • jrterrier

    For those of you who doubted that Romney would be suffficiently hard on the President:

    “My own view is that he will speak eloquently, but that words are cheap, and that the record of an individual is the basis upon which you determine whether they should continue to hold on to their job,” Romney told about 100 executives at the Business Roundtable quarterly meeting in Washington. “We have 23 million Americans that are out of work, or stopped looking for work or underemployed. That is a compelling and sad statistic. These are real people.”

    Ouch.  This also harkens back to President Obama’s words have meaning and his presumed strength as an orator.  

    • EllenD818

       ”and that the record of an individual is the basis upon which you
      determine whether they should continue to hold on to their job,”
      Is that what he says to Jamie Dimon as well?
      The days when competency mattered went out with Clinton.

      • jrterrier

        Jamie Dimon is one of the best.  He didn’t come to congress asking for money.  he took responsibility. 
        to put it in perspective, all that JP Morgan lost is less than all the losses from the President’s venture crony capitalism that he tried out with his green agenda:

        But
        according to a new investigation by CBS News, the Solyndra scandal is
        just the tip of the iceberg, as at least 11 other green energy companies have
        either already failed, or are on the verge of failing, taking with them more
        than $6.5 billion in taxpayer money.Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034717_Solyndra_green_energy_failures.html#ixzz1xjgDQ3qw

        • EllenD818

           Yeah. One of the best WHAT?
          You’re praising bankers now when they DON’T ask for public money? What kind of upside-down world are we living in?
          You just needed to watch the sickening  group of Senators sucking up to him to understand what is wrong with government today.
          It makes you want to upchuck.

      • jrterrier

        Dimon makes JPMorgan shareholders $2 billion richer while testifying.

  • foxyladi14

    good post.

  • HARP2

    Obama`s poll numbers.

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hwxNVnPKaPE

  • KenoshaMarge

    This column by Karen Tumulty shows why Obama is, and will be in deep trouble. Too arrogant to take advise is too arrogant to survive.

    Obama campaign’s rough patch concerns some Democrats
    more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-campaigns-erratic-behavior-concerns-some-democrats/2012/06/12/gJQAedXZYV_story.html

    Meanwhile Romney’s “agility” can help him turn on a dime. If the Obama smartasses are still campaigning against GeeDubya they are in deep trouble. One can only hope they don’t wake up and smell the coffee.

    • nickoury

      Was that article fact or fiction?  Maybe she was trying her hand at some humor, it was difficult to discern
      Oh, I’m sorry, it’s from the wacompost, now I get it.

      As exampes from Tumulty’s article illustrate:

      “For one thing, the candidate now has a day job and therefore cannot devote five or six days a week to the campaign trail as he did then.”

      (????????!!!!! What day job? King Rat has been on the trail since Day One. Well that, golf, celebrity dinners, vacations, etc.)

      (And, though not her quote, but within her train of thought, she noted:)

      “Romney, Plouffe said, is ‘out there every day misrepresenting what the president has done on the economy, on spending, on foreign policy.’ ”

      (again ???????????!!!!!!!, what “misrepresenting?”)

      Tumulty, and all other supposed journalist/commentaters/reporters, we are definitely not that stupid.

      One last thing, I really like the commenter with the username of “don’t eat my dog”, great avatar as well.
      Hence the King Rat reference.

      • KenoshaMarge

        Even when exposing Team Obama’s arrogance MSM cannot help their bias. But bits of truth are slipping in here and there that were not visible before.

        The thing that intrigued me was that Team Obama is refusing to take advice. I like that. Arrogance has brought down a lot of people who thought they knew everything.

        Team Obama seems to still believe that all they have to do is put out the great Speechifier and let his golden tongue do its thing.

        This ain’t 2008 and people expect more. I hope they continue to think they know it all. Cause they don’t and fighting the same fight against Romney they fought against McCain will get their ass kicked. A consummation devoutly to be be desired. 

    • foxyladi14

       Sleeping dogs.   lol

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_W6RLFUOLWP23SJ5RQHENEPHKME David L

    The “deer in the headlights “, look is getting old.  Look into Obongo’s eyes, you can see the back of his head.  This idiot is in so far over his head that his pea brain can’t even begin to understand whats happening ! The saddest point of all, is that there are still morons that want to reelect this idiot to 4 more years, God help us !!

  • elizabethrc

    In my lifetime I have seen Presidents who were imperfect (that would be all of them).  Never have I seen one who holds a basic hatred of this country, until Obama.  I truly believe that he has a gutteral dislike of everything about our country except as it provides him the opportunities to hobnob with the rich and famous.  It’s more about celebrity to him than about governing and trying to make things better for the people.    He reminds me of the student who parties like crazy and then pays someone to write his term papers for him.  Obama just doesn’t understand that the people deserve better than this.

    • foxyladi14

       tru dat.

    • shelldoll2

      Amen.

  • KenoshaMarge

    As cracks appear in the media’s love affair with the “Rock Star” they worked to hard to elect there may, I stress may, appear some honest reporting here and there.

    Not because these hustlers masquerading as reporters have suddenly come to the realization that it’s their job to report, not cheer-lead, but because they are loosing all credibility.

    And then there’s the fact that most media types are sharks and once they smell blood in the water…

    Ask former media fave John McCain how that works.

  • stodghie

    it wasn’t the clinton and bush administrations for the most part though i fault both administrations for allowing wall street to run amuck. it was the bills passed by the dem congress that started a lot of this problem. they wouldn’t handle fnma or others like hud and freddie allowing clowds to be the head. wall street and begans began bundling loans into derivatives

    which spelled confusion and doom for housing. obama’s polices are the most horrendous i have ever seen and we were for the most part passive while he and congress passed one law or executive order after another that meant nothing good for the country.

    • getfitnow

      There were hearings in congress–regulators testifying about loan policies and Maxine Waters and others saying that changes would be “racist.”

    • elizabethrc

      At this point it almost doesn’t matter who created the behemoths FNMA and FreddyMac, nor any of the  programs to make housing available to people who aren’t qualified to own a home.  It’s still happening.  While there was a lull after the subprime fiasco, it seems to be back in force again. 
      As a realtor, I sold a condo to a lovely lady and her Mom who used one of these programs to get the property.  She had already done her due diligence when she came to me and with the help of her mortgage person, she was able to obtain a no money down mortgage.  I fully expect to get the property back for resale within a couple of years because I can see the struggle it is for them.  I feel complicit in this to a certain extent.
      Who benefits?  Certainly not the owners and not the taxpayers. 
      Everybody wants something for nothing and as long as government caters to this thinking, we’ll never get out of this morass.

  • nickoury

     On the other side of the coin is this from the Financial Times:

    “Agile Romney gains momentum”

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b48c63aa-b4a5-11e1-aa06-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1xdcRoSxZ

    Which contains the following comment that I find to be the best, most concise analysis of the current environment to date:

    Ela | June 13 12:56am | Permalink

    | Options

    I find it rather amazing –
    and amusing — how (whether through deliberate intent or mere ignorance)
    articles continue to be written about Mitt Romney being ‘out of touch’ and/or
    ‘among the 1%’ (a supposedly trendy description based on supposed popularity of
    the now-disintegrated and politically ineffective OWS movement…which didn’t
    affect a single political change anywhere on earth), and how Romney must do
    such-and-such if he’s to win the elecion against Obama.

    The REAL situation, as we speak, on the ground in the USA is as follows: the U.S. election
    is ROMNEY’S…TO…LOSE. True, anyone is capable of snatching defeat from the
    jaws of victory, but with all trends and recent news trending away from Barack
    Obama at a rapidly accelerating pace, unless something rather drastic happens
    between now and November Mitt Romney will be the next President of the United
    States — and by a rather sizeable margin.

    There is not a single ‘swing state’ (as they’re known, in the USA) — those
    states that could go either way — where Obama is not losing ground. He’s
    beginning to consistently trail Mitt Romney in most national polls (and does
    even worse when LIKELY voters are polled), he’s badly trailing Romney with
    whites (the majority), men, and independents, and is now virtually tied with
    Obama with WOMEN voters, as well (a group that Romney was trailing badly with,
    not two months ago). Obama is losing Jewish support at an insane rate, and even
    black support is starting to ebb (though no doubt he’ll still carry a majority
    of that segment. Problem is they’re only 12% of the U.S. populace). Obama’s party has
    lost the bellwether state of Wisconsin (which
    he won in ’08 by 14 points) for three elections in a row there (thanks to the
    implosion of labor unions — it’s about time!), ditto in Virginia, and the economic attitude of
    Americans has never been this gloomy in my lifetime (and I’m over 40). No
    incumbent President in recent history has EVER won re-election with
    unemployment this high, or things this bad and uncertain.

    So when any article, anywhere (or any news broadcast, for that matter) attempts
    to soften in any way, shape or form just how bad things have gotten for Barack
    Obama here in the USA, it’s either blithering ignorance, or patent,
    politically-motivated dishonesty. Because believe you me, folks — the man is
    in more serious trouble than any incumbent President I have EVER seen, on far
    more fronts than I’ve ever seen. And it is the height of self-blinded,
    self-deluded denial to just brush past that. All doing so means is that the
    political tsunami will catch them by surprise all the more, when it hits this
    November…unless as we’re seeing (slowly but surely) the signs are getting so
    monstrous that even such self-deluded folks are beginning to show open
    nervousness. I don’t think most of Europe has
    the foggiest, tiniest clue how bad it is for Obama here (yet), but they will.
    Oh, they will.

    But heeeeey….certain people in the USA had something to prove, in the
    last election in 2008. And they proved it, all right. They proved that a person
    being of mixed stock and having a Star Wars name is not enough to qualify them
    to be President.

    • BronwynsHarbor

      I just happened to read that story. But I didn’t spot the comments.

      I am going to post that comment, Nickoury.  Thank you so much for sharing it.  However, I’m not quite as confident as Ela who wrote it … the MSM can still play with people’s heads.  There’s been a LOT of “dog whistling” going on about the Romneys — about their religion (which matters not at all), their wealth (Ann’s expensive horses, the car elevator thingie, etc.).

      The last paragraph.  One can hope that the guilty whites who could hardly wait to elect a man as president solely because he is black … well, they’ve gotten to do that.  They don’t need to do that again … unless (!) they are going to feel guiltier voting against a black man.  Oy.  

      • FLDemFem

         They can assuage their guilt by just voting against his white half. Heh.

    • KenoshaMarge

      They proved that they aren’t smart enough to vote for someone for president. Barely smart enough to vote for an “American Idol.”

      We’ve allowed the corrupt and venal media in their endless quest to sell air time and newspapers to convince us that the office of president is a place for someone we “like” and think is “cool” instead of someone who is worthy.

      Now that “cool” has proven he hasn’t a clue they are in a quandary. How can they backtrack on Baracktrack? Simply stay home? Vote for a “gasp” GOP Businessman? STFU?

      What’s a stupid voter to do?

      • getfitnow

         Be careful. Last I read–”cool”, when referring to this POTUS, is code for racist.

        • KenoshaMarge

          I read that too. Since there is nothing you can say about the POS POTUS that isn’t considered racist, unless you are a slobbering love-stricken fan, I stopped worrying about it.

          The ones crying “racist” the loudest are the “racists.” People who don’t give a rat’s ass about the color of a person’s skin aren’t so damned obsessed with it. The left is skin-color obsessed and thus far more racist than those they aim that word at.

          They are also aiming it at a population back in the sixties. Most American no longer think about skin color much. They may “like” or “dislike” someone for various reasons but just the color of their skin usually isn’t it. Unless it’s liberals, they, even the white ones, really seem to hate white folks. But that’s okay.

          Isn’t it a trip living with such double-standards?

          • BuzzLatte2

            That’s the retort the libbies give on “cool”.  Cool caters to the notion that Obama is stuck in the past.  Commies and socialists and the casual, destructive indifference of “MadMen” 1960′s – when Kennedy’s administration was also held to one term.

            Agree that the most racist of all are the ones who keep pointing it out.

          • nickoury

            Replying to BuzzLatte2-

            Your point is well taken.
             However, I’m very sure JFK administration was not “held” to one term, you might want to rephrase that.

          • BuzzLatte2

            Reply to Nick Koury:  The why or the how doesn’t matter on this point.  It was one term and Obama fans don’t want the specter of history stuck to him.  Would the one term of Carter in the polyester and sweaty smell  of the ’70′s work better?  Think not, for the meme was “Far out” then.  Unless it attaches to the Obama’s being “far out” of the WH in 2013.  

  • http://www.alexlogic.com AlessandroMachi

    According to Chase Bank, there has been a loss of 7 trillion dollars in home equity in the U.S. since 2006.  Add in between 2 to 3 trillion from credit card debt, student loan debt, plus court ordered written off credit card debt that is hemorrhaging people at 9.9% every month or higher)

    What did americans get for their 10 trillion dollars in lost wealth? Not even a chance to lower their now dangerously higher ratio of consumer debt to overall wealth via an incentivized consumer debt paydown program where interest rates are drastically lowered for those who can pay down theirconsumer  debts over time.

    Obama is a Banker through and through and bailed out the banks, but not the people. Obama also thinks putting more debt on small business is the way to stimulate the economy. And whose going to buy what the small business owner has to sell when they have 10 trillion in lost wealth?

    • Hokma

      Very well put. But I think you give Obama way too much credit for calling him a banker – he’s not that knowledgeable about even the most fundamental economic principals.

      • EllenD818

         I don’t know, Hokma. Dimon said his Bankers lacked basic common sense, never mind fundamental economic principles so Obama would be in good company.