Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Obama promotes modest American dream

Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:28 AM EST
politics, us, obama, barack-obama, dream, american-dream
Erica Werner, Associated Press

President Barack Obama speaks at a production facility of a Boeing plant in Everett, Wash., Friday, Feb. 17, 2012. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — This time around, President Barack Obama's message can sound decidedly down-to-earth.

Four years after winning the White House, Obama is dealing with a different economic and political reality as he seeks re-election. He's focused less on a lofty vision for overcoming divisions and remaking Washington, and more on the most basic building blocks of middle-class economic security: a job, a house, a college education for the kids, health care, money for retirement.

What Obama describes as the American Dream can seem a spare, fundamental aspiration, tailored for a campaign that looks to be fought over who is best equipped to safeguard the interests of middle-class Americans.

The question is whether it will convince, even as Mitt Romney and the other GOP presidential hopefuls mount a counter-argument that the president has made the American Dream harder, not easier, to achieve. And Obama must overcome the grinding realities many voters confront daily, even with the economy showing signs of life: no jobs, mortgages they can't pay, dwindling retirement funds and college savings.

The president is betting that if he shows voters he understands their yearning for economic stability and security, they'll reward him over Republicans he's casting as just watching out for the rich — even though he hasn't succeeded in fully reviving the economy so far.

"If you're willing to put in the work, the idea is that you should be able to raise a family and own a home; not go bankrupt because you got sick, because you've got some health insurance that helps you deal with those difficult times; that you can send your kids to college; that you can put some money away for retirement," Obama said recently in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

"That's all most people want," he said. "Folks don't have unrealistic ambitions. They do believe that if they work hard they should be able to achieve that small measure of an American Dream."

The goals can seem almost humdrum in comparison with some of the rhetoric from Obama's 2008 White House campaign. But the message sounds made for the times, with the country emerging haltingly from recession, the income gap widening and unemployment stuck above 8 percent. At the White House Tuesday Obama said, "We want to build an economy where every American has a chance to find a good job that pays well and supports a family."

"He can't run on change because he's the incumbent, and he can't paint too rosy a scenario because things aren't that rosy," said John Geer, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University. "He's got to come up with a theme that appeals to voters, especially middle-class voters, alleviates their fears and gives them reason to believe the future will be better."

The message also creates an implicit contrast with the portrait Democrats are trying to create of front-runner Romney as preoccupied with the concerns of the rich. But Romney is answering Obama's message head-on, seeking a careful balance between sounding optimistic about the nation's future and accusing Obama of destroying the American Dream.

"I've met Hispanic entrepreneurs who thought they had achieved the American Dream and are now seeing it disappear," Romney said after his recent victory in Florida's GOP primary. "We want to restore America to the founding principles that made this country great."

GOP candidates Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich also have accused Obama of tarnishing American opportunity, as Republicans make clear that no matter their nominee, Obama's claim to be the one to restore the American Dream is sure to be challenged.

The candidates' focus on the American Dream is in itself a sign of the times, said Michael Ford, founding director of the Center for the Study of the American Dream at Xavier University. The phrase was coined during the Great Depression and since then has tended to become a central theme during economic downturns, Ford said.

He said rhetoric about the American Dream has been featured during this election cycle more than in decades, which he attributed to the tough times the nation has been suffering.

"It's pretty basic stuff (Obama) talks about and I think as it turns out that's pretty much where the dream is right now," Ford said. "We can say the dream might have been lowered a little bit in terms of its aspiration but the aspiration is still there, and it's always there."

Some polling suggests that, despite voters' continued unhappiness with the economy and Obama's handling of it, the president may be convincing Americans he's on their side. A recent CBS/New York Times poll shows people view Obama as the candidate who best understands the needs and problems of "people like you," and see his policies as more apt than those of the GOP candidates to favor the middle class or the poor.

Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod said "the viability of the middle class is the central economic challenge of our time, so I think that this is very essential in terms of this election."

"He's been talking about this for years, that there are certain things that are pillars of a middle-class life, and he's been very focused on those things and addressing them as president," Axelrod said.

___

AP Deputy Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta contributed to this report.

© 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Erica Werner's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: cweSpring2012
  • Regions: United States , Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (87)
Infohack

Who picks these photos? You'd think they could find one without a weird light flare. Film is cheap in the digital age.

  • 3 votes
Reply#1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:07 AM EST
Heavy Artillery Rocker

Couldn't help but notice, it is kind of eye catching tho.

  • 3 votes
#1.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:48 AM EST
cenaowcueawouceDeleted
CPOSharkey

Realistically, most people don't aspire to be rich, they just aspire to what the American dream for the middle class has always been, decent home, be able to take care of the family, send the kids to school and have something left for a decent retirement. This is pretty much what was available/achievable starting in the late 50s, into the 60s and 70s and then there was Ronnie to come along and start things spiralling down.

I think the President is striking the right cord for this election and I think his opponents want to take this country in a direction I don't think it wants to go in. I certainly don't.

  • 13 votes
#1.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:33 AM EST
BeMyJellyfish

CPO,

Yeah, everything was great before Ronnie came along......gas shortages, 18% mortgage interest rates, double digit inflation, etc.

There were two big problems that none of us thought about at the time....First, the massive expansion of the Federal government and the tax burdens that went along with that beginning in the 1960s and continuing. The second was the fact that we were so arrogant as to believe that no other country would catch us when it came to manufacturing. As those countries came on line, and technology inproved, the need for vast numbers of American manufacturing workers diminished rapidly.

So if you are going to talk about where things started to go downhill, take a minute to get a little deeper than "then there was Ronnie." I wouldn't credit OR blame any single President for our problems. The only place we should really be looking for blame is in the mirror.

  • 7 votes
#1.4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:46 AM EST
Palmquist1

To blame a single President is wrong start with Reagan, Bush and Bush2 I live in the 60 we where better of then before Reagan and the American dream was real and could be reach.

  • 1 vote
#1.5 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:56 AM EST
SteveH USA

obama has unrealistic dreams of America that were born in a college dorm.... In the real world he is not qualified for a position that deals in reality!

  • 7 votes
#1.6 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:59 AM EST
Jesse-Az

CPO, most can live the american dream you describe from your childhood. But somehow the new american dream includes 50 inch tvs, houses on average 30% larger than the 80s, multiple cars, trips, etc.

The American Dream has grown in size and scope. People used to save for months to buy the new household item like a microwave, now they all want instant gratification. Savings rates are at all time lows. Products (non staple items) are cheaper than ever, yet people keep replacing them again and again. Long gone are the days of dad tinkering on his automobile, now it's just go buy a new one.

American attitudes have changed, that is the primary driver of economic angst.

  • 2 votes
#1.7 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:04 AM EST
CPOSharkey

Jesse - very true, for the most part we have only ourselves to blame, both for our own greed and for taking our eyes off the ball where politics is concerned. It isn't too late to fix things but it will mean making some painful choices and a majority just doesn't want to do that, it's much easier to assign blame and then sit back a pop the top on a PBR!

  • 1 vote
#1.8 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:13 AM EST
Newbigtech

That's the way he looks... Why change it..

  • 1 vote
#1.9 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:21 PM EST
Nicey-1026620

CPO,

Yeah, everything was great before Ronnie came along......gas shortages, 18% mortgage interest rates, double digit inflation, etc.

That wasn't true until about the middle of the 70s. So when looking from 1945 thru the 70s, that's kind of cherry picking a bad point that resulted from global macro economic conditions.

There were two big problems that none of us thought about at the time....First, the massive expansion of the Federal government and the tax burdens that went along with that beginning in the 1960s and continuing.

Well, to an extent. However, if the federal spending budget could be balanced in the 90s by actively trying to drop government spending relative to GDP growth, then evidently the largesse wasn't too large in the 1960s.

A big problem is the continuation of a lot of government spending while tax revenues as a % of GDP weren't all that impressive except for the 90s.

The second was the fact that we were so arrogant as to believe that no other country would catch us when it came to manufacturing. As those countries came on line, and technology inproved, the need for vast numbers of American manufacturing workers diminished rapidly.

?

It's hardly technology.

Apple loves Foxconn and China cause they can make a design change and force a factory with 400,000 workers to start immediately by giving them a biscuit for breakfast and 0.33 cents an hour.

For the most part, Corporations decided they could build all these things with far cheaper labor and still charge people with higher incomes the same price as before with less quality.

Really a raw deal, the cost of most of the goods should have dropped significantly for the reasons that the inputs were much less and the quality was a lot lower. Course, we didn't boycott them so, there ya go.

So if you are going to talk about where things started to go downhill, take a minute to get a little deeper than "then there was Ronnie." I wouldn't credit OR blame any single President for our problems. The only place we should really be looking for blame is in the mirror.

I agree to some extent.

But then again, anytime you get a movement to change things it's manipulated, controlled, and stamped out by a flood of corporate money and political influence.

The people who should look in the mirror are the leaders. You can't put most of the blame on the average citizens. It's not accurate in a variety of ways. It's leadership.

    #1.10 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:45 PM EST
    Heavy Artillery Rocker

    I see your point very clearly and have been doing my part as best I can.

    I'm rural and limit my trips based on necessity. I don't shop Wal-Mart unless I have to, otherwise I strongly support the smaller businesses in town who have amped up to provide quality over Wallyworld. I don't buy imported anything unless it is impossible to find American made. I will drive to the nearest city once a month to purchase hard to find items as needed.

    Having this mindset, I wish more people would do the same. We hold the purchasing power to make this country great again if we all pull in the same direction and demand our politicians take steps to firmly bring good quality jobs back to America.

    I still believe Obama wishes to do this but has had his hands tied by the Lame A**ed GOP congress. We have to fix that.

    While we're at it, do something nice for a neighbor or elderly person in your area so we can prove to the rest we're still the Best Dang country in the world.

    Hope 4 the Fyuture? Begins at home.

    • 1 vote
    #1.11 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:27 PM EST
    Reply
    BURGUNDY1222

    Obamas got our votes,no doubt about it. I thing he's done a good job as president with what he was handed.

    The republicans have nothing to offer but crazy stuff, They might try to give americans some kind of solutions as to what they would do to fix things instead of all this negative crap they spew,Disgusting.

    • 15 votes
    #2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:24 AM EST
    RackNStack

    Ten years ago, if you would have asked what my political affiliation was, I would have said Republican. Now, I cringe at the thought of voting Republican after watching the behavior of the GOP. The mere fact that a single Republican is holding office in D.C. is kind of sickening.

    • 6 votes
    #2.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:19 AM EST
    RackNStack

    It's like watching a loved family member drink themselves to death. As much as you know they're doing wrong, there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

    • 2 votes
    #2.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:37 AM EST
    Phazfun

    He's focused less on a lofty vision for overcoming divisions and remaking Washington, and more on the most basic building blocks of middle-class economic security: a job, a house, a college education for the kids, health care, money for retirement.

    Sounds exactly the opposite of the GOP!

    Good to hear there is some hope with RackNStacks' realization. It's scary some middle class still support the GOP. I believe it's due to terrorist media dividing the country which isn't news, but propaganda.

    • 3 votes
    #2.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:55 AM EST
    Rational Brent

    Looks like Obama learned what most of us already knew in 2008. Hope, change and "the Earth healing itslef" were all bullsh1t. Now he's begging for another term.

    Sad

    • 8 votes
    #2.4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:29 AM EST
    Phazfun

    Rational,

    Looks like Obama learned what most of us already knew in 2008.

    What's sad is the GOP hopefuls. I'd take the lesser of 2 evils any day over what we did know from 01-09 or one of these hopefuls saying anything they can begging for power.

    • 1 vote
    #2.5 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:54 AM EST
    echo82

    What is sad is that people are willing to let americans suffer, to let our ecomony fail, in order to gain political strength. Voters who accept this behavior are as bad as the politcians that peddle it. Number one priority should be stablizing the economy and focusing on job creation. Not on defeating the President and the Democratic party.

    • 1 vote
    #2.6 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:06 AM EST
    Marshall James

    echo

    since obama and the democrats are against the economy and jobs...it makes complete sense.

    Just like the republicans they institute policies that hurt Americans.

    • 2 votes
    #2.7 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:11 AM EST
    echo82

    MJ: simply twisting words to fit your viewpoint will not work. GOP stated their objectives and that is what they focus on. and meanwhile americans continue to suffer.

      #2.8 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:19 AM EST
      Marshall James

      echo

      your failure to see how they want the same thing...as evidenced by 80 years of our country going in the same direction...is the reason we are failing as a country.

      there are no differences between the two parties...and this libertarian points it out so well in this little segment,

      would love to hear your thoughts on this piece....let me know.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zyo10lusCY&list=FLIZZqwWm6tVQBvZkYjSWrjg&index=10&feature=plpp_video

      • 2 votes
      #2.9 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:24 AM EST
      echo82

      I disagree, I believe there is a difference in the overall behavior of the parties. And thanks, but I don't click on random youtube videos. Defend all you want, it is clear to see what the priorities of the GOP are, and it has little to do with the plight of the unemployed, underemployed, sick, etc.

      • 1 vote
      #2.10 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:28 AM EST
      Marshall James

      there are no differences.

      and its too bad you refuse to listen to views that you do not agree with.

      too bad indeed.

      • 3 votes
      #2.11 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:30 AM EST
      echo82

      many ways to gather info. do not assume. I wish most voters researched as much as I do. youtube serves a purpose for some, actual reading is the preferred method for others.

        #2.12 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:37 AM EST
        Marshall James

        being one dimensional isnt a sign of wanting true education.

        I also read more than others...this just happens to be a show....and if I could find the transcript I would....but cant.

        it just goes over obama...what he said and acutally did...bush jr...what he said and actually did...clinton...what he said and actually did....reagan...what he said and actually did.

        they are the same...their rheotoric is different...but their actions show they are not.

        peace.

        • 2 votes
        #2.13 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:54 AM EST
        Newbigtech

        Re Register as an Independent....

        • 1 vote
        #2.14 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:23 PM EST
        Topcat Roosevelt

        Of all the most illusory fairy tales...Libertatianism is at the top...esy to say everything else is the same, because libertatianism is totally unproven, with nothing but statisical modeling to advance its notions. No nation ever thrived in perpetuity through it...the closest that was ever tried was Laissez Faire, ask the Irish and India how well that worked out for them, then ask why England is not still on that system...

          #2.15 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:12 PM EST
          Reply
          Heavy Artillery Rocker

          Have to agree Burgundy, it's more like listening to little kids on a playground rather than a Presidential election. The GOP is full of idiots who can only spew stupid crap instead of coming up with any realistic solutions as to how to deal with the current state of the union.

          It further goes to prove that one really has to be ignorant to even consider voting as a Retardican.

          • 7 votes
          Reply#3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:46 AM EST
          Rational Brent

          What are Obama's "realistic solutions"?

          LOL

          • 5 votes
          #3.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:31 AM EST
          CPOSharkey

          Realistic solutions proposed by Obama:

          1. Infrastructure repair and renew, millions of long term jobs there.

          2. Invest in green energy, again many long term jobs. Don't let me see another of your right wingers complain about their grandchildren when the GOP policies will help ensure we leave them nothing in the way of energy.

          3. Heavier investment in new and emerging technologies.

          4. Close the @!$%#ing tax loop holes, etc. etc.

          Just what has the GOP proposed? NOTHING, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH!

          • 1 vote
          #3.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:19 AM EST
          Reply
          gabriomyers20

          I must say, what a strategy.

          • 1 vote
          Reply#4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:20 AM EST
          Joe Steel

          They call it the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.

          The truth is, living in America has become a nightmare. Everything the middle class has been told to believe in has failed them. Get an education, work hard, be faithful and you'll be laid-off just in time to see your retirement funds evaporate when a financial bubble bursts. And don't think you can rebuild. If you've reached the stage of life when you think of retirement, you're too old. No one will hire you. All you can do is try to hang-on until you can get Social Security and Medicare...and hope, hope, hope they're not gutted by politicians who have no idea of what the real world is like.

          The President can campaign on restoring the American Dream but, to tell the truth, I won't believe much of what he says. I've seen too many promises broken.

          • 9 votes
          Reply#5 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:47 AM EST
          Rank on Rank

          Joe Steel,

          Which Republicans do you think would be better than President Obama? And why?

          • 6 votes
          #5.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:01 AM EST
          Joe Steel

          Which Republicans do you think would be better than President Obama? And why?

          No Republicans are better than Obama.

          Don't get me wrong.  I have no intention of voting for a Republican.  I will vote for Obama but not because he's an ideal candidate.  He's just the best available.

          • 4 votes
          #5.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:28 AM EST
          Territan

          Joe Steel: They call it the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.

          Ah, cynicism. I remember when I was like you. Still am, in fact. But come on now—dismissing what should be a worthy goal for most people because it's not achievable now is just being defeatist. It's like saying that we shouldn't bother trying ever because conditions aren't good for success right now.

          Tell you what: Let's not call it the American Dream. I hate that term, anyway. It makes it sound like it just kind of happens on its own.

          Let's call it the American Expectation instead. The expectation is not that it will happen, but that it should happen. Don't look at it as a promise—look at it as a goal. And if it's not achievable where we are now, then let's peel back old regulation, apply new regulation, rebalance the playing field, and put ourselves in a new position where it is achievable. Better yet, let's make it sustainable.

          • 4 votes
          #5.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:50 AM EST
          Reply
          Dean Moriarty

          I'll be voting for anyone but Obama in 2012.

          • 9 votes
          Reply#6 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:02 AM EST
          Territan

          Why?

          • 3 votes
          #6.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:10 AM EST
          Marshall James

          because I believe that the patriot act should be ended like he campaigned on. I believe that american citizens should be afforded a trial before assassination as ordered by one person, I believe that citizens shouldnt be forced by government to purchase a good from a private organization, I believe that habeas corpus should not be ignored, I believe that we should not be the policeman of the world, and that bombing other countries for their "own good" has negative consequences.

          those are a few just right off the top of my head.....and in all reality...to me, is all that is needed to disqualify him as our president.

          peace.

          • 7 votes
          #6.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:17 AM EST
          Territan

          It's good that you list reasons.

          So, is there a Republican in the current batch that you trust explicitly to respect civil rights, habeas corpus, and an anti-war stance? And can you point to where they state they would stand by these promises?

          Or are you gentlemen more the Vermin Supreme type?

          • 2 votes
          #6.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:26 AM EST
          Marshall James

          Ron Paul

          he doesnt flip flop and believes in freedom and peace.

          the other republicans are worse than Obama in my book.

          peace

          • 3 votes
          #6.4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:31 AM EST
          don-72

          Some people seam to believe that the President can do anything he wants. On day he can revers Evey law he dose not believe in.

          Well it dose not work that way. Congress has to change the laws and then the President can sign them into law. Then even the Supreme Court can say that some law in unconstitutional.

          • 1 vote
          #6.5 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:44 AM EST
          Marshall James

          so congress is the one who ordered assassination of an american citizen?? good to know. The president does not control the troops?? good to know. The president didnt extend the patriot act?? good to know. The president didnt sign NDAA on Dec. 31st to little media attention and while the people busy with the holidays?? good to know. The congress...didnt ask for congress approval in declaration of war for bombing Libya and Yemen?

          GOOD TO KNOW.

          • 4 votes
          #6.6 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:51 AM EST
          Territan

          And because you made me curious:

          Marshall James: because I believe that the patriot act should be ended like he campaigned on.

          However...

          "As president, Barack Obama would revisit the PATRIOT Act to ensure that there is real and robust oversight of tools like National Security Letters, sneak-and-peek searches, and the use of the material witness provision."

          -- Politifact's "Obameter"

          • 1 vote
          #6.7 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:59 AM EST
          Marshall James

          so he didnt sign an extension of the patriot act...or he did?

          • 1 vote
          #6.8 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:14 AM EST
          Territan

          Say, did anyone else just feel the ground shaking, as if somewhere a set of goalposts were being shifted?

          • 2 votes
          #6.9 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:24 AM EST
          Marshall James

          yes it happens everytime people point out how he violates the rights of Americans.......

          his supporters now support george bush jr. atrocities.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF3MC-TkpRQ&feature=related

          • 5 votes
          #6.10 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:30 AM EST
          Territan

          Wow. A point-missar is you.

          Here are your words again:

          because I believe that the patriot act should be ended like he campaigned on.

          And I linked to Obama's actual promise as tracked by a third party. Nothing of the sort was promised. Rather than argue that point, you shift stances:

          so he didn't sign an extension of the patriot act...or he did?

          You were talking about ending the Patriot Act before. Suddenly the argument is about his extending it?

          And as for your Youtube link, who cares about your goat porn? (No, I didn't click it to verify, but given how shoddy your argument has been up to this point, why take chances?)

          • 3 votes
          #6.11 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:48 AM EST
          Marshall James

          its all in how you see it.

          he supposedly was going to end the patriot act as signed by bush..no more wiretaps....etc....see the video.

          yet....for some reason...he decided he didnt need to honor his word....guess it doesnt mean much.

          • 3 votes
          #6.12 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:06 AM EST
          CaptainObviousSays

          he decided he didnt need to honor his word....guess it doesnt mean much.

          Obamas word is not worth much..

          • 2 votes
          #6.13 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:53 AM EST
          agagnu

          Don't forget the three-legged stool cannot stand when the other two legs come short

          • 2 votes
          #6.14 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:40 AM EST
          Reply
          Rev-1240041

          This is a great message but can we believe him? We heard some great theoretic from hm in 2008 only to see him do the exact opposite when he got into the White House.

          The country needed an FDR which is what most people thought they were voting for. Instead we got a president who packed his administration with Wall Street insiders. Some of them had a direct role in causing the current depression. Instead of breaking up the too big to fail bandits they have gotten bigger as his administration has protected them. We are 4 years into a depression caused by fraud on Wall Street yet his "Justice" Department has not held anyone responsible for all the misery and suffering.

          Obama crated the cat food commission and became the first "Democrat" to advocate cutting Social Security and Medicare. Hurting senior citizens as part of his "Grand Bargain"

          Even the "Affordable Care Act" the achievement he seems most proud of is really a steaming pile of corporate welfare. If you look at what is happening here in MA (2 tier health care, return to the failed strategies of capitation and managed care, junk insurance, failure of the mandate) it will disaster on the national level.

          As someone who supported and contributed to him in 2008 I am not doing the same in 2012. Though I wouldn't vote for a republican I cant bring myself to vote for Obama. What we need in this country is a third party. Otherwise our elections will continue in their a current form. A really expensive reality show.

          • 4 votes
          Reply#7 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:39 AM EST
          BeMyJellyfish

          Rev,

          You're right about the health care act. I started reading through some of it. Its a total nightmare, and not many people realize that! The only reason that the MA plan was able to work at all is that there was a half billion dollars in Federal tax money pumped into it. Where is that outside money going to come from when its a national program? Scary stuff. I think it could truly put our entire economy in the tank.

          • 3 votes
          #7.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:49 AM EST
          RackNStack

          I was very disappointed in the Health Care act that was passed, because it essentially leaves the health insurance companies and pharamaceutical industry untouched. The rich guys get away again.

          • 4 votes
          #7.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:17 AM EST
          Marshall James

          bemyjelly

          remember though..he went on 20/20 and told the world if we didnt pass it...that it would be the destruction of our country....those exact words.

          and the people believe it.....goodness.

          listening to him say that crap made me puke...and then made me very sure...that it was not needed....for whenever government uses fear to get power and take away rights....its never for your "own good"

          • 6 votes
          #7.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:20 AM EST
          BeMyJellyfish

          Marshall,

          I agree. People want to line up for government help. What they seem to forget is that whatever the government gives you, it can take away as well, or expect you to give something up to receive their largess. Its starting to look a lot like the Roman Empire's Bread & Circuses policy....Give the people some food and amusement and we can do whatever we damn well please. That only works until the Visigoths are breaking down the walls though.

          • 4 votes
          #7.4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:49 AM EST
          Reply
          patriot_in_nh

          "If you're willing to put in the work, the idea is that you should be able to raise a family and own a home; not go bankrupt because you got sick, because you've got some health insurance that helps you deal with those difficult times; that you can send your kids to college; that you can put some money away for retirement," Mr Obama said recently in Cedar Rapids, Iowa

          I find it hard to believe that what Mr Obama actually said in the above statement is anything more than campaign year political spin.

          As recently as 2 months ago when he signed the 2 month payroll taxcut he put the American dream of owning a home further out of reach and more costly for American's. The average employee got $160, but for the next decade it will cost anyone taking out or refinancing a mortgage thousands in increased mortgage fees and premiums.

          cnettv.cnet.com/hidden-mortgage-fee-paying-payroll-tax-cut/9742-1_53-50119506.html

          • 2 votes
          Reply#8 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:43 AM EST
          buckeyenut-2225921

          "He's focused less on a lofty vision for overcoming divisions and remaking Washington"

          Wow, when did that happen? I must have missed it. I remember "we won John" and republicans can ride along but they have to sit in the back of the bus. Way to overcome division there oh great unifier.

          • 3 votes
          Reply#9 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:59 AM EST
          BeMyJellyfish

          Yeah, I thought the day he was elected was going to be the day that "the earth would begin to heal, the sea levels would drop, and America would get back to work." What happened to all of that?

          • 3 votes
          #9.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:10 AM EST
          Reply
          MN blu collar worker

          I read O's speech in Wash. I should have counted the times he said tax. Leave business alone so they will put their money into jobs and economy rather than buy oil futures and drive up the price of gas. The dream is there, too much government makes it hard for the little man to catch it.

          • 6 votes
          Reply#10 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:17 AM EST
          Marshall James

          you are very right.

          • 2 votes
          #10.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:24 AM EST
          RackNStack

          Yeah, but all of those Bush tax cuts that were passed back in the day.....where's the jobs? I thought tax cuts = job creation. Why didn't it work back in the 2000s?

            #10.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:35 AM EST
            BeMyJellyfish

            Rack,

            It did work. Look at the unemployment numbers from 2000 to 2006. There was a lot more wrong with the economy than tax cuts. The rot is deep, regardless of who is in the White House. MN Blu is correct, too much government, with their cronie capitalism is what is choking us. If the government didn't have its fingers in everyone's pie, then the lobbyists would be out of work. The only reason there are lobbyists is because the government has infused itself into business so deeply that it is in a position to play favorites.

            • 2 votes
            #10.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:45 AM EST
            RackNStack

            so all we get is six years benefit?

              #10.4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:44 PM EST
              Reply
              IndependentVoter

              Good speech

              • 2 votes
              Reply#11 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:22 AM EST
              RackNStack

              You know, if it mean hiking my taxes 5% and returning the nation to glory through the reestablishment of U.S. manufacturing, a solid middle class, and establishing a health care system that takes care of its citizens (and citizens only) I'd do it in a heartbeat.

              But, I feel that all Washington will do with it is piss it away.

              • 3 votes
              Reply#12 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:34 AM EST
              Joe Steel

              Territan: Let's not call it the American Dream. I hate that term, anyway. It makes it sound like it just kind of happens on its own.

              As long as we're exploring new perspectives, let's try The American Delusion.

              That's really a better way to think of it. Truth be told, just setting-up the playing field and creating a game plan doesn't justify the expectations. Without some rules, real rules not just expectations, none of us can count on anything. Let's guarantee a return to education. Let's guarantee an unemployment subsidy. Let's guarantee a reasonably comfortable transition from employment to retirement.

                Reply#13 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:43 AM EST
                BeMyJellyfish

                Welcome back, Mr. Stalin!

                Let's see...guarantee a return on education? "reasonably comfortable?" Am I having deja vu, or didn't a bunch of eastern Euros try this already? The result.....a polyglot system that resulted in the total extiction of individual freedoms and provded the barest neccessities of life (when they could be obtained at all) for everyone living in that "workers' paradise." But wait, there's more..secret police, assumption of guilt, conviction and sentence without trial, gulags, executions, no religious freedoms...shall I go on? Meanwhile, the entire time, the "powers that be" lived in luxury and wanted for nothing! In the end, it all collapsed in on itself, the decay starting from within the very foundation of that system.

                Yeah, that sounds great! Let's try it here in the US! Because, after all, we are the United States and it can work here, even if it didn't work there! Go AMERIKA!

                • 3 votes
                #13.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:13 AM EST
                Joe Steel

                BeMyJellyfish: Yeah, that sounds great! Let's try it here in the US! Because, after all, we are the United States and it can work here, even if it didn't work there! Go AMERIKA!

                Wow! You got all that from a few common sense suggestions? Why do they say you guys have no imagination? You certainly were able to concoct quite a fantasy on this one.

                No one is proposing the implementation of socialism (although it would be nice.) I just though we could look at what the American Dream could be.

                • 1 vote
                #13.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:59 AM EST
                BeMyJellyfish

                Joe,

                Really? Guarantee of a return on education? Reasonably transition from work to retirement? There are ways to acheive those and we already have those tools, its called digging down deep, pulling yourself by the bootstraps and WORKING YOUR ASS OFF! No one ever said life was easy...or should be!

                You claim to offer common sense suggestions...please elaborate on how to guarantee a return on education or your other suggestions, short of either taking something away from someone and giving it to someone else, or supporting someone beyond their own means?

                Besides, I'm not an idiot......translate you screen name into Russian and lo & behold....good old Josef Stalin. You're not fooling anyone. If you want to use your imagination, try offering NEW suggestions.

                  #13.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:38 PM EST
                  Reply
                  Katie hanson

                  A monkey would be a better president than Obama.

                  • 2 votes
                  Reply#14 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:15 AM EST
                  It Aint So

                  OK, I'll bite. I stand opposed to some of what this guy wants to do, but I will have to admit, if he stays on this theme, instead of trying to change the world, then he may resonate with more.

                  Trouble is, with this guy, you cant ever tell when he's sincere, or when he's pandering to the gullible left. I still dont think he's up to the task in general, but maybe since he's so damn educated, now he might finally be getting "smart".

                  Let's guarantee a return to education. Let's guarantee an unemployment subsidy. Let's guarantee a reasonably comfortable transition from employment to retirement.

                  No guarantees...all I want is the opportunity.

                  • 5 votes
                  Reply#15 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:17 AM EST
                  b0bab0ey

                  Just what I want to hear from my leader: Let's just keep our heads above water and shoot for mediocrity. For those of you too young to remember, we heard the same thing from Jimmy Carter when he was running for reelection. Obama, like Carter, has realized he is in way over his head and hopes Americans will buy into just keeping expectations low. It didn't work for Carter back in November 1980. Nowadays, I'm not so sure... I can only hope that there are enough of us left who will remember what the American Dream was supposed to be and will realize it, in fact, has nothing in common with Obama.

                  • 5 votes
                  Reply#16 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:46 AM EST
                  BeMyJellyfish

                  Malaise forever! Wasn't that Carter's motto? That, and striving for mediocrity seemed to be a theme of his as well.

                  • 2 votes
                  #16.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:26 AM EST
                  b0bab0ey

                  The only difference between Carter and Obama is Carter didn't have 24/7 "cheerleaders" in the news media actively campaigning for his reelection. That, along with race baiters, illegals voting, libs voting multiple times, voter intimidation at the polling places is going to be a lot to overcome. I think the Republicans already know this, which is why we're seeing such a half-ass effort on their part. History will someday record 2008 as the last time we held free & open elections in this country.

                  The United States of America, the greatest country ever, may she rest in peace...

                  • 3 votes
                  #16.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:44 AM EST
                  Topcat Roosevelt

                  Carter Had better employment and growth than any republican. What Did Nixon/Ford Leave him but stagflation? He didn't triple the Debt, Reagan did, He didn't trade hundreds of advanced missiles to secure the release of one hostage Reagan did. The 12 years prior to 1981 the avg annual deficit was 35 billion...after '81 it was 295 billion! He was the only President selfless enough to induce a recession by contracting the money supply that Carter Volker AND Reagan approved of. Cons try to call carter the worst, he was far better than Criminal Nixon, Feckless Ford, Republideity Reagan or the Bushes that for sure. But he was no Clinton or FDR or Eisenhower...

                    #16.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:26 PM EST
                    Reply
                    pacosperson

                    We finally have a few answers. It's not that we have a three trillion dollar government which cannot function. Or, when it does function, actively works to make things worse. NO. The problem is we have dreams that are too big. Well, I beg your pardon Mr. President. I shall proceed to lower my expectations, especially during your bumbling administration.

                    Mr. Obama is correct. The American dream is changing. People now have fantasies about heating more than one room. Or getting a job when they graduate. Or selling their house for a profit so they can move to a retirement community. Or being able to pay their property taxes and stay in their home in the first place. And even these little dreams generally will not come true.

                    I bet the White House is nice and toasty warm. Now that's a pretty grand dream, isn't it?

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#17 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:24 AM EST
                    BeMyJellyfish

                    Anyone can attempt to deny it if they wish, or to blame the rich for our problems, but the fact is that the politicians have beens trying to "help" us for far too long and we are reaping the bitter fruits that we ourselves have sown. Everyone needs to take a look in the mirror if they are looking for someone to blame. We continue to send the wrong people to Washington and then want them to "do stuff" for us. We all look at how much legislation the various candidates have sponsored, or what programs they have shovelled around DC. I would be happier with someone who didn't introduce any new laws and voted against anything that came down the pipe that wasn't in accordance with the limits of the government's function and responsibility as outlined in the Constitution. We have been going down this road for a hundred years and I don't know if we can ever recover. I'm not talking about going back to a hundred years ago, but moving forward with our lives, free from the ever increasing influence of government on our daily lives. Take a look around your house and you will find that almost everything you own is, in some way, regulated by the Federal government, not even taking in to account State & Local government involvement. Right now I'm sitting here looking at my $25,000 sprinkler system, which was mandated for new construction in my township! We are surrounded by petty tyrants!

                    • 2 votes
                    #17.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:33 AM EST
                    Reply
                    yes I CAN

                    The middle class has been downsized .

                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#18 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:25 PM EST
                    Current Soldier

                    As a Soldier I will defend your right to your opinion, as an American most of you scare the "beep" out of me, I am so tired of all the blame Bush, and he is doing the best he can with what he got bull. this president has doubled the national debt in 3 years, twice what Bush did in 8. I am not defending Bush or any other president. But seriously, are you folks blind gas prices have doubled, everything is more expensive and we have not had a balanced budget since he took office, he spent the first 2 years trying to shove a health care bill that we can't pay for down our throats. and presided over the first decrease in American credit rating in history. Boy I cant wait to see the next 4 years....

                    • 3 votes
                    Reply#19 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:19 PM EST
                    Topcat Roosevelt

                    CS

                    Sorry you are so willfully unaware of what happened 3 months before Bush left office...We lost 9% of GDP...9%! Tell me what repub ever got us out of a mess like that, they sure got us into those situations but they have never got us out. He didn't double the debt...Bushs' last budget was 1.4 trillion dollars, when it was over the debt was 11.9 trillion dollars. He has not doubled the debt, and his spending is directly related to the crisis BUSH left so you could just stow that Don't Blame Bush crap.3 million jobs in 3 years, and GDP growth resumed 6 months after BUSHS' crash thats a record no repub could claim...Hoover was the only one to try, unemployment wnet from 4.7% to 35% and -9% GDP turned into -28% in under 4 years. The Credit rating was reduced DIRECTLY because of republican obstruction , introducing instability they never seemed to attempt during Bushs' presidency.

                    If you don't like dealing with the crap YOUR president Bush left , don't elect anybody like him again...and the current GOP field they are ALL Bush, his economic plans on steroids.

                      #19.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:42 PM EST
                      Current Soldier

                      TOPCAT, WOW such strong words and so wrong< I will give you actual numbers so it wont confuse you 12/31/2008 GDP $451,154,049,951 3.1 % 12/31/2009 a year later not 3 months 383,071,060,815 2.7% SO loss of .4% that is point 4 not even a whole percent and no where near your 9% , this is exactly the kind of BS that is so tiresome, why don't you guys stop blaming Bush and come up with a plan that balances the budget, and I don't mean that crap they are spewing now, war time savings,(seariously) it is not saving money if you were borrowing the money to begin with, that is not a real cut in spending and cuting spending is the only way out of this hole we are in. And if you would have read my post you would have noticed I said I was not defending Bush or any other president, I said I was tired of the blame game, accept the fact your policies are not working and come up with a plan that is REAL and not smoke and mirrors and I will vote for you i don't care what party you are in.

                      • 1 vote
                      #19.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:47 PM EST
                      Topcat Roosevelt

                      CS

                      Sorry you are confused, I specifically said when the President resumed GDP growth, that is going from negative growth to positive...which occured in June 2009...and because bush's last 3 months was such a cluster , losing 2.24 million jobs, losing 9% of GDP, I would concede from November to June is 8 months , not 6. I was off by 2 months MEA Culpa...the point I was making is when Repubs had a similar crisis, Gdp went like this,

                      GDP ANNUAL CHAINED DOLLARS
                      1929 976.1
                      1930 892
                      1931 834.2
                      1932 752.2
                      1933 715.8 -28%
                      1934 793.7
                      1935 864.2
                      INSTEAD OF OUR PRESIDENTS RECORD
                      2008-2011 GDP chained
                      2008
                      1 14,273
                      2 14,415 (+142)
                      3 14,395 (-20)
                      4 14,081 (-314)
                      2009
                      1 13,893 (-188)
                      2 13,854 (-39)
                      3 13,920 (+66)
                      4 14,087 (+147)
                      When did hoover recover normal GDP from 1929? Oh thats...He didn't
                      Now...I don't even know where the hell you gleened a.4% drop in GDP , that would be on par with the Bush recession of 2001, the shallowest in recent history, we would not have lost 8 million jobs had we had a .4% drop , so sorry to burst your shroud of denial, but according to the NBER WE LOST 8.9% of GDP

                      www dot

                      .bea

                      .gov

                      /faq/index.cfm?faq_id=1004

                      The revisions did not change the timing of the contraction. The overall pattern of quarterly changes during the downturn was similar in both the revised and previously published estimates, though the revised estimates show larger decreases for 2008:Q4 (-8.9 percent compared with -6.8 percent) and for 2009:Q1 (-6.7 percent compared with -4.9 percent). The contributions of specific GDP components to the contraction were similar in both the revised and previously published estimates.
                      It should show link

                      For further schooling on it you should try

                      www
                      tadingeconomics

                      .com

                      /united-states/gdp-growth
                      I can't link so join the pieces together if they show up at all
                      Balancing the budget would contract the economy, get us into a double dip at best a depression at worst. Thats the same crap Hoover n his response which is why we had the depression to begin with. I don't like spending in deficits, the only reason you should is in total warfare, and economic catastrophes ,not to give to give the illusion of tax cuts as repubs have done this past 30 years...the reason we were 12 trillion in debt before Obamas 1st budget even started...

                        #19.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:43 PM EST
                        Current Soldier

                        TOP CAT,

                        WOW again, I wonder how far back you will go this time the 1930’s… really!!!! I still hear the same stuff to be polite, and once more you decided to play the blame game, and completely miss my point… at this point I don’t care who you think is at fault, I want it fixed and this out of control spending has to stop. As for your numbers or my numbers the first thing they taught us in statistics is you can make the numbers look any way you want to. I could spend the time and come up with the same kind of numbers to support my view but what is the point. You will never see what I am trying to say,,,, try this experiment and let me know how it works for you I want you take your household budget and spend just 25% more than what you have coming in and tell me how long do think you could keep your household going. Why is this so hard for people to understand, WE ARE BROKE!!!!!!! And the only way out is to cut spending. That is what it boils down to you have to cut the spending ,these are hard times and hard choices have to be made and if you are in office and (I don’t care what party ) and cannot make these hard decisions then you need to leave. We cannot continue to spend money our grandkids don’t even have.

                          #19.4 - Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:27 AM EST
                          Reply
                          BeMyJellyfish

                          Thanks for the history lesson Topcat. Why don't you tell us what year the unemployment rate in the US dropped back down to pre-depression levels?

                          You also forgot to mention that for the first time in the history of the US, the national debt has exceeded GDP and that's been done in the current administration. Plenty of blame to go around!

                            Reply#20 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:33 PM EST
                            Topcat Roosevelt

                            Typical conservative answer...like a pyromaniac complain the Fire debt isn't putting out the inferno they started fast enough...How about you address why is it the republicans always cuse these catastrophes, that take a long time to recover from? If the typical recession is 2-2.5% and the damage is occurs like a geographic progression, like a richter scale . then losing 9% of GDP is the Fukushima level disaster of recessions/panics...Addressing it the way Hoover did is addressing it the way the Japanese did...they allowed the reactors to meltdown...Obama prevented the meltdown. Instead of clamoring to contract the economy, we should make it a point to do most of or infrastructure when the economy contracts...The only time we should ever go into debt is when we are in total war or economic catastrophes. If Republicans did their due diligence just on the mortgage and wall street issue of all those junk mortgages sold 2002-2006 the economy would not have exploded, bush would have only indebted us 5 trillion instead of 6 , and Obama would have been on his way to reducing the deficit as Clinton did form the very start of his administration.

                            To answer your question..it took 10 years...can you name another president that averaged 4% employment growth a year , grew GDP and avg 10% and GNP 13% a year? No wonder they voted for him 4 times!

                            Thanks for the history lesson Topcat. Why don't you tell us what year the unemployment rate in the US dropped back down to pre-depression levels?

                            Sure But first ...When Hoover left office in march 1933, The state of business was there was no business...6,000 banks had collapsed ,people lost there holdings, and Hoover was up for a week straight before FDRs inaugural trying to hold things together . The first duststorms across the breadbasket had already started, thanks to reckless non existent land management removing the grasses and exposing the topsoil and

                            Bureau of the budget non-farm unemployment;

                            Hoover

                            1929; 4.7%

                            1930; 13%

                            1931; 23.3%

                            1932; 34%

                            1933; 35.3%

                            1934; 30.6%

                            1935; 28.4%

                            1936; 23.9%

                            1937; 20%

                            1938; 26.4%

                            1939; 23.8%

                            1940; 20.2%

                            1941; 13.3%

                            1942; 6.3%

                            1943; 2.5%

                            Then war 2 , which is the biggest keynesian government spending program got us to better than full employment.

                              #20.1 - Wed Feb 22, 2012 12:29 PM EST
                              BeMyJellyfish

                              My point is that it took two years into a wartime economy for the unemployment rate to dip below the level of when the depression began. I don't have the crystal ball to know whether other solutions would have been more effective, or worked more quickly. My biggest concern is that the FDR administration used the weight of the government, expanding its powers and establishing massive regulations as well as government spending in order to try to stimulate the economy. The question is whether that was the right answer or not. You know as well as I that FDR did make mistakes, and some of his programs were ineffective or worse.

                              My second issue is that attempting to compare the cause of and results of the great depression have little to do with what is going on today. The government is vastly more involved in the regulation of the financial sector and just about every other industry in this nation. I thought that 70 years of government regulation were supposed to prevent the economy from sliding into a sinkhole again?

                              I think it is erroneous to look at ANY President and give them blame or credit for steering the economy. The more the government fiddles with the market, the stranger things can get. It has turned the economy into an artificial market which is controlled by the lobbyists and the politicians who are in their pockets.

                                #20.2 - Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:16 PM EST
                                Topcat Roosevelt

                                Of Course their were mistakes made under FDR, but they were not worse than what Hoover did..the pain was when Hoover responded by doing nothing and thats why the economy was so thoroughly gutted, and why it took another Pure government stimulus war to get us out of it fully. He also went into a short and sharp contraction in 1938 when he listened to deficit hawks and pulled back spending. FDR , and this is even according to Milton Freidman, introduced the most stabilizing policies to save our Banking industry, and it was stable till the 80' till the deregulation started to peel back the FDR regulations that served us so well from 1933 till Reagan, then BOOM Savings and loan debacle, and BOOM the bank collapses of '08. If you look at a chart of Bank failures you will find that after 33 failures were exceedingly rare till 1986, then stability in the 90's then crash again.

                                My point is we would not have to bail the country out with such extreme measures if republicans didn't cause such catastrophes...the 08 crash was related to too little regeulation not too much, I knoe thats a right wing meme, but its not the case...no cra demanding private banks give mortgages to unworthy people, no fannie and freddie selling mortgages. All of the loans that went south were sold between 2002-2006 and when they reset in 2007-2009 thats when people saw there was junk infecting market products globally and thats what caused 08.

                                Again nobody wants to have to spend in deficits to stimulate an ailing economy, but I think what Obama did shows if you get to the problem right away, you could avert the long recovery that was required after Hoover ..I actually think we should have infrastructure projects that should kick in when the economy goes into recession rather than doing it in good economic times and I hope we have a conversation about where we get the most bang for the buck...it seems to be in crisses like the on we just had, when interest is low, and there is low risk of crowd out...

                                • 1 vote
                                #20.3 - Thu Feb 23, 2012 3:16 PM EST
                                Reply
                                Leave a Comment:
                                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                FUN STUFF:
                                • Leaderboard |
                                • E-Mail Alerts |
                                • Top of the Vine |
                                • Newsvine Live |
                                • Newsvine Archives |
                                • The Greenhouse
                                COMPANY STUFF:
                                • Code of Honor |
                                • Company Info |
                                • Contact Us |
                                • Jobs |
                                • User Agreement |
                                • Privacy Policy |
                                • About our ads
                                LEGAL STUFF:
                                • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com