The reviews of President Barack Obama's speech continue to roll it and they appear to be overwhelmingly positive. The latest is from this Gallup poll that shows that a majority of respondents that watched the speech are more confident in Obama's abillity to handle the economic recession.
That chart shows a big difference (from 41 percent to 57 pecent) between those that watched the speech and those that didn't. Gallup also found that 45 percent of respondents tuned in to the speech.
These numbers reinforce the conventional wisdom that Obama's speech was, at least politically, a resounding success. We're trying to keep our finger on the pulse of the reactions coming in on Obama's budget. So far, the reactions appear to be predictable along party lines.
Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the 2008 GOP nominee for president, gave former rival President Barack Obama high marks for his speech Wednesday night but said Democrats continue to spend too much.
McCain told CNN's John Roberts Wednesday morning that Obama "laid out the challenges that we face yet gave Americans a sense of strength and optimism that we will get through this and we will get through it."
But McCain also criticized Obama's vow to cut the deficit in half by the end of the first term. With the way Obama plans to spend money, McCain said, that goal is not achievable. "I am still having trouble doing the math here, he said he was against earmarks and yet, on the floor tomorrow and the next day in the Senate, will be a bill with 9,427 pork barrel items," McCain, who emphasized reducing government spending during his campaign last year, said.
"Spending has gone completely nuts here...and to somehow say that we're going to be able to cut the deficit in half, which would then bring it down to only $650 billion dollars does not make any sense."
Pressed on what Obama could do about the bill, which is actually a holdover from last session, McCain said Obama could put a stop to it. "If he threatened to veto it...as he should, given these hard economic times, then I think it would have some beneficial effect," he said.
One can't help but recall this staple from McCain's campaign after hearing that: " I've fought the big spenders in both parties, who waste your money on things you neither need nor want, and the first big-spending pork-barrel earmark bill that comes across my desk, I will veto it. I will make them famous, and you will know their names."
Check out the video below:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Early Wednesday morning, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) took another stab at responding to President Barack Obama's address to a joint session of Congress, saying that there is a fundamental difference between Obama and his approaches to spending.
"Here's the fundamental disagreement: We think we do need to work to get the economy moving," Jindal said on NBC's "Today Show." "We think it's more important to get the private sector moving rather than just spending government money. It's not about creating deficits."
Jindal, who delivered the GOP response to Obama Tuesday night, said there were "several things" Obama said that he agrees with. In particular, Jindal applauded Obama's education goals. And Jindal, as many of Obama's opponents in the 2008 campaign also did, said Obama is a talented orator.
"There were several things that he talked about that I think, certainly, that we can all agree on as Republicans and Democrats, as Americans first," he said. "Let me also say that the president is an incredibly gifted speaker, maybe a once in a generation speaker."
"Look, the Republicans have laid out a plan," Jindal said. "For example, rather than spending a billion dollars on the census, $300 million to buy federal government cars, instead of wasteful government spending on the stimulus, why not do what they first said they were going to do. Let's do targetted infrastructure investments, let's do tax breaks, let's lower, permanantly, lower tax rates on the lower tax brackets of the income tax. Let's cut taxes on capital gains. let's ive a more aggressive net carry forward of losses for small businesses."
Americans either favor or oppose a significant government intervention in the nation's banks, depending on how it is phrased, a new Gallup poll suggests.
The poll, conducted Feb. 20 through Feb. 22, found that respondents don't like the idea of "temporarily nationalizing" the country's banks but do support "temporarily taking over" banks.
This probably explains why the Obama administration has avoided the word "nationalization" at all costs thus far in discussing its plans for the banks. Gallup writes: "Taken together, these results reflect the power of language when it comes to describing government policies: the words 'taking over' are significantly more palatable to the average American than 'nationalizing.'"
There was a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points in the poll.
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
This quote in the Atlanta Journal Constitution from Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), the chairman of the Republican Study Committee, sums up the House GOP strategy on the economy, Democrats and President Barack Obama.
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) sent a letter to the White House Tuesday urging the administration to not allow GOP governors to reject certain parts of the $787 economic stimulus package.
The letter to Peter Orszag, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, obtained by The Hill, said that governors should not be able to pick and choose funding from the stimulus because that would
A right wing group is taking heed of CNBC financial analyst Rick Santelli's call for a new American "Tea Party" last week and organizing various events across the the country.
President Barack Obama officially tapped his second in command, Vice President Joe Biden, to oversee the implementation of the $787 economic stimulus package on Monday.
Obama told the nation's governors Monday morning that he has asked Biden to "keep things on track."
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told the Huffington Post Friday that he would support nationalizing the country's "zombie banks."
"It should be the last arrow in the quiver," he told the Post of nationalization. "The danger here is when a government takes [a bank] over, it drives down shares of other banks that might not be in as bad shape," he said. "Let me be clear about this because I want to be very careful: I am not speaking of any specific institution, just a general comment about a general situation. And I don't have -- and please write this -- I don't have any specific institution in mind."
Schumer said he wouldn't support the government taking over banks for an extended period of time. But of banks that are in great peril, Schumer said: "The government should come in. And what the government would do would be: wipe out the shareholders, put in new management -- wipe out the old management and put in new management -- and then let the bank run sort of independently without day-to-day government intervention."
Schumer said the government should only control the bank for a short period of time and that the size of the bank doesn't matter.
Earlier today, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, told Bloomberg that he also may support nationalization and GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham has said repeatedly he would support it.
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
