Post Massachusetts

Tom in San Jose
San Jose, CA

The administration still doesn't get it. In today's NY Times we read, "The White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, and Secretary Geithner were both making calls to senators on Mr. Bernanke’s behalf..." Clearly, President Obama has no intention of addressing the problems that lie at the root of the Massachusetts Massacre.

It is business as usual.



Pluto Finnigan
Gainesville, FL

Obama just gave a speech in Ohio that was all wrong. It was the identical speech that he gave during the campaign. During the campaign in 08, Obama addressed the crowds this way:"you're mad, well I'm mad too...". He repeated this line in Lorain, Ohio just days ago. During the campaign those words meant "I am with you, I understand and I will address those issues". One year into his presidency those words meant "I am trying to get you to think that I get it but obviously I am an ineffective President because you elected me to do something and here I am just repeating what I want to do, not what I'm doing".

I always felt that democrats' fortunes would rise and fall with the health care legislation. Recently, Obama said to Congress: Pass the bill and I will sell it. Those words really bowled me over. It's just all wrong. He is saying that he is a shill. He is saying that the bill is such a cheat that he won't sign on to it today - he'll leave the fashioning of the bill to Congress - but he'll sell it when he can say "well, I wouldn't have made this bill, it isn't perfect, but it's the best congress could do.....blah, blah, blah". This really turns me off. I want Obama to say this is my health care reform plan, this is a plan I will defend to the death and I will take it into the mid terms and put it up against anything the republicans throw at me and if you like their plan then vote for them and if you want my plan then give me allies in Washington so I can pass it.

the reason Coakley lost the election in Mass is simple: Obama beseeched the Mass electorate to send him an ally in DC. He used those words. An ally for what? A health plan that funnels tax dollars into the coffers of big health care insurance companies? Two Bush wars?

In short, why not just vote for the republican?


urnumbersix
Washington, DC

The only way that Obama can "reboot" is to pull some Big rabbits-out-of-the-hat which exclusively benefit the middle-class. "Walk the walk," enough talking! (The Ohio speech was the wrong move - he should have signing Executive Orders.)

That means he's got to take on all the big interests and corporations whose sole task these days seems to be to turn the middle-class into the lower-class. On all fronts, special interests are bleeding America dry, while getting half of America to support them, against these own individuals self-interest.

Obama can do some window-dressing that may result in change, like letting Rahm, Geithner and Summers go "spend more time with their families" and getting some consumer-based aides in place. But that will not be enough!

He must show us that he can actually Deliver. And that he will actually Do what he promises. Then, like JFK, his support will soar among the American people once again. Giving him room and political capital to do more.

Mr. President, Do. Act. Deliver. And we'll come home to you.


WoodyMcBreairty
West Hollywood

Hillary was right when she said before the election "People think if Obama is President, choirs will sing, angels will come down and everything will be all goodness and light", I paraphrase somewhat, but I voted for Hillary in the primary, I think she would have made a much better President. Obama is all image, speaks beautifully, puts English words together masterfully, but he lacks leadership skills, is afraid to be assertive for fear of upsetting someone. I think that's why he voted "present" more than 100 times in the Illinois Senate, so he could remain noncommittal and not expose his true convictions because I think he had running for President in mind even then and tried to play both sides and the middle so he could get everyones support in the Presidential election. He would have made a good ambassador, but he has shown in only 1 year that he does not have the chutzpa or effrontery to deal with such a challenge as the Presidency, especially in these uncertain and troubled times. Maybe he and Joe Biden could trade places. As President Obama said "Nobody messes with Joe."


Phxflyer
Phoenix

Anyone who thinks that all of our nation's ills should have been cured in 12 months is a fool. It took 30 years of republican rule to get into this mess, it will take more than a year to get out of it, a point that every Democrat should emphasize every day. But there is also no doubt that a change of course is needed. President Obama needs to use his bully pulpit and political capital to make it so. He should remind those who oppose him that a majority of Americans elected him to institute these changes, including single payer health care reform . . . and he should start with the members of his own party. A considerable number of Democrats were swept into office last year riding candidate Obama's coattails. And make no mistake: the only reason they were elected was to make sure the proposals of candidate Barack Obama became law under President Barack Obama. While President Obama likes to emulate JFK, when it comes to his managing the members of his own party it's time for President Obama to emulate LBJ.


[In reference to Obama's decision to centralize control over his party's strategy for Fall 2010]


mtdarkhorse
Seattle

I wonder if it will work, re-forming the old team. I'll tell you one thing: many of us who donated large to and worked for Obama are not interested in any more pretty words. We're interested in him behaving as his campaign rhetoric led us to believe he would, instead of the exact opposite. As for those who voted for him but weren't fervent supporters - well, I think further pretty words will just make them more angry than they are.

Here's a suggestion: try replacing some advisors, like Rahm the corporatist Emanuel, Geithner, and Summers. Replace with some people we can trust to care about ordinary Americans. Just that would go a long way in helping people "hope" again.


Roman
Santa Monica

Great! So instead of governing the country whose nominal president he is and instead of steering it into the calmer waters by, for example, saving trillions of dollars now wasted in The Forever War or by putting bosses of The Financial Crime Cartel to the federal penitentiary, our Beloved Leader, the puppet-president for the corporate masters was ordered to babble some more.

These "masters of universe" that pull puppet's strings as always overestimate their powers and underestimate people's feelings. No one wants to hear more of his empty talks, no one would be deceived no more no matter how much media whores they can buy; people want CHANGE, something they voted for.

And the people started to show their rage. Bit by bit; after all we're fat, self-indulgent nation on a forced diet, suffering from sugar rush withdrawal syndrome, but once we clean and sober up, the revolution would start and nothing will stop it. CHANGE starts by throwing all these puppet's puppets he and his propaganda machine will try to prop up by some more of his empty talk.


Hurrb
New Jersey

de-ba'-cle (dibah'kl), n. Break-up of ice in river; (Geol.) sudden rush of water carrying along blocks of stone and other debris; confused rush, rout, stampede; collapse, downfall, e.g. of a government.

On Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)

AnnS
MI

The HAMP and other loan mod programs are simply extend-and-pretend in that

(1) The banks don't have to write down the loans losses now so they can keep pretending that the loan is worth more than it is

(2) The borrowers don't have to face up to the fact that they can not afford the house and that it will be 20-30 years before it reaches what was its peak price - and they can extend the fantasy until the modified loan resets back to the original terms in about 5 years and thenn they go into foreclosure.

ALl these bailed out debtors who owe more than the house is worth are not homeowners at all - they are simply renting from the bank and odds are they are paying more than the house would rent for on the open market.

The loan mod standards are unrealistic. They do not follow good lending practice by having a front end AND back end debt-to-income ratio. They do use the front end ratio of 31% - meaning that the loan payment can not be more than 31% of gross income. They are not, however, using a back end DTI of setting a limit on how much fixed debt the borrower can have. Fixed debt would be the house + the car payment + the credit card payment + the school loan payments. That back end DTI should not be more than 41% of gross. (And 31/41 DTI ratios are still very high. 25 years ago it was 25/31 for the two DTIs.) Without looking at how much total debt the borrower has is a recipe for failure.

So all that happens is a lot of houses which will eventually end in foreclosure are stuck in the pipeline and the process drags on and on and on and..... That means that the readjustment of housing prices drags on and on and on.....

And as for Mr. Zandi of Moodys with his nonsense that Treasury should MAKE the lenders write down the principal, I have to ask 2 things:

(1) Where on earth did he get his law degree - if any? The Federal government can NOT 'make' the lenders forgive principal without substantive and procedural due process for the taking of their property (the right to the money). And the only way that can be done is through a bankruptcy proceeding which would cram down the loan - and the Republicans have a conniption fit at the idea of allowing primary home loans to be crammed down in the same way loans for business real estate, cars, 2nd homes and everything else is crammed down in a bankruptcy to current market value of the collateral.

(2) No way, absolutely no way in hell, would the vast majority (the 90% not in foreclosure) stand for the taxpayers handing over billions upon billions to the the banks so that (a) the banks don't lose a penny and (b) the defaulting borrower's loan gets paid down for them by the rest of us. ANy suggesstion that the 90% who are paying their mortage or rent should ante up the money to pay down the mortgage of someone who can't pay their bills so that the banks don't lose a penny and the Wall St bankers can get their obscene bonuses would nigh on provoke armed revolt. That would be political suicide for a politician.

These programs are a debacle. Better to just let the inevitable foreclosures run their course quickly and get it down. If there is going to be pain, better fast than slow. Once it is over, then you can pick up the pieces. Closing one's eyes and whistling past the graveyard is not a plan.