E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS From NBC's Athena Jones
President Obama made the case for his stewardship of the economy at a speech in Pittsburgh today, arguing that for the past 16 months his administration has been working to lay a stronger foundation for economic growth.
He also pledged to work on getting the votes necessary to pass a comprehensive energy and climate bill out of Congress, legislation the White House believes should have more support due to the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, which BP has so far failed to stop.
At a speech at Carnegie Mellon University, the president noted that the economy had grown the last three quarters and projected Friday's May unemployment report would show "strong job growth." He said that steps to overhaul the health care system and financial regulations, invest in education, clean energy, infrastructure and innovation and reduce federal spending would help ensure growth in the future.
With the economy sure to be a big issue during the fall campaign, Republicans have sought to paint a picture of a president who focused too much time and attention on an unpopular health care revamp and a stimulus package that added to the deficit without producing enough jobs. The president has argued the measures he has taken, with the help of Democrats in Congress, from passing the stimulus to coming to the rescue of auto companies, have put the country back on the right track.
"Some of you may have noticed that we have been building this foundation without much help from our friends in the other party," he said. "From our efforts to rescue the economy to health insurance reform to financial reform, most have sat on the sidelines and shouted from the bleachers."
He went on to describe the opposition as the party of "No."
"They said no to tax cuts for small businesses; no to tax credits for college tuition; no to investments in clean energy," he said. "They said no to protecting patients from insurance companies and consumers from big banks."
Much as he did during his presidential campaign, Obama portrayed the GOP as the party of tax cuts for the wealthy and fewer rules for big corporations, saying voters had a choice between going "backward" to "the failed economic policies of the past" or moving forward with the Democratic Party. This argument is likely to play a recurring role in the coming months as Democrats seek to woo disaffected voters.
On the oil spill and the energy bill
The president said the oil spill fouling the Gulf of Mexico showed the risks of deepwater drilling and the need for alternatives to fossil fuels.
"We have to acknowledge that there are inherent risks to drilling four miles beneath the surface of the Earth," Obama said to applause. "These are risks that are bound to increase the harder oil extraction becomes. We also have to acknowledge that an America run solely on fossil fuels should not be the vision we have for our children and grandchildren."
In calling for a renewed focus on a "clean energy future" he says will create jobs, the president stressed the need to increase the energy efficiency of automobiles, businesses and homes, tap the nation's natural gas reserves, expand the fleet of nuclear power plants, roll back tax breaks to oil companies and put a price on carbon pollution -- something energy legislation that passed the House of Representatives last year seeks to do. The Senate has yet to pass its version of the bill, but Obama said he planned to change that.
"The votes may not be there right now, but I intend to find them in the coming months," he told the crowd of some 300 people. "I will continue to make the case for a clean energy future wherever and whenever I can; I will work with anyone from either party to get this done and we will get this done."
Leave a Comment:
There has in fact been economic progress. The economy has improved without any help from the party of NO. And, in light of the BP disaster, who (besides conservatives) could be opposed to clean energy? FR's comments this morning are right on--this will be the platform for the Democrats in November and in 2012.
It makes a great bumper sticker but define clean energy. Do you mean ethanol, which is subsidized by billions of taxpayer dollars but is now found to add to global warming. What about wind farms that require fossil fuel power stations as back up in case there is no wind. Or what about solar panels, which generate emissions in their manufacture and require heavy metal (cadmium telluride). How about batteries? You tried disposing of a couple of AA batteries? How are we supposed to "recycle" the millions of new batteries proposed to run our transportation system?
I'm all for "clean" energy but I'm a skeptic until I see the details.
If we can send man to the moon and robots with cameras to Mars, we can certainly figure out a way to dispose of batteries and recover air pollution. Of course, there has to be back up energy but not bothering because we need backups is no answer either. The whole point is that if we focus on and work toward clean, renewable energy now then finding solutions to the problems you raised will become part of the technological boom.
As for ethanol, it is a bridge to the future not a permanent solution. That's how we advance technology with ever-improving methods. 50 years ago, no one thought about corn fuel in cars.
A healthy dose of skepticism is good but it should not stop anyone from thinking outside the box and taking a risk.
Ok, so everything has negatives and on a pro – con list which is better?
You knock all these ideas for good some reasons … but … what are your ideas to replace the non-renewable energies we currently use and pay billions to unfriendly nations for?
You want suggestions, well here are a few. Start by using more natural and lp gas to power vehicles. The power out put is the same, the engines are the same, the only changes required are in fuel storage and delivery to the engine. Kits for these conversions already exist and the technology is proven, Detriot has tested new vehicle engines with natural gas for years. It burns much cleaner and causes less engine deposits reducing engine wear. This can be done relatively quickly and is cheap besides, infrastructure is the problem for dispensing product. Continue work toward a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle that is safe. Electric cars are not an economically sound idea unless your trips are relatively short and are few and far between. Otherwise the vehicles need some sort of gas or diesel backup for range. Also you have problems with disposal and recycling of the lithium hydroxide batteries these cars use, not to mention production and crash safety issues. Next finish the nuclear waste facility in Utah and remove the holds on new nuclear plants that are tied up by enviromental group lawsuits. Spend capitol here searching for ways of recycling spent fuel so storage doesn't become a nightmare. Continue to fund Nasa at higher levels with missions that produce more usable everyday technology. Remember that between the military and Nasa, we've made huge advances in Microwaves, Freeze Dried foods, waste recycling, water purification and the list goes on and on. Finally promote the use of geo-thermal, solar, wind, and super insulated housing to help decrease the use of oil and natural gas in the housing sector. Again hydrogen fuel cell technology could be valuable by making a home self sustaining if costs of technology could be lowered.
Obama has the right ideas for the country but he has an unwilling Congress that is overrun with corporate lobbyists that are accustom to writing the legislation in this country, make no mistake our Senate is not the peoples Senate, it is the lobbyists Senate plain and simple, and until that changes nothing good for our country or it's citizens will be realized. Currently the only thing that can be done is to replace the career politicians that are corrupt, and most of the dirty ones are Republicans although there are Democrats that are just as corrupt seems, they are fewer in numbers though, but the point is the Republican Party decided some time ago that it wanted to be the corporate party and turned it's back on the American people, they deserve nothing from the people so why give them your vote.
Yes, we can and yes, we must. Our president's vision for the future is critical to America's future. Look for the theme mentioned by FR to be a big part of this fall's elections. Pres Obama's vision of changing the Washington mindset also means about how to get to the future by having long-term ideas and not tweeking what we have. It was the ideas he expressed in "Audacity of Hope" and during the long campaign that I want to see happen. But Pres Obama cannot do it alone, We must continue to poke, prode, and otherwise keep after Congress to do the work even when it is hard, even when it seems impossible.
The Pres isn't talking about socialism or any other ism except capitalism with some protections for We the People. We cannot continue to stagnate in old ideas. I have yet to hear one republican tell us their vision for the future, it is all regurgitated Ronald Reagan voodoo economics, small government, no tax words. Well, here we are nearly 30 years later and how advanced are we? We're stuck in the ditch while other countries like China and India are growing. We should have OWNED the wind turbine business, the solar panel business, natural gas and other ideas Obama mentioned but being stuck in old thinking, we've stagnated by ignoring the future and we risk having other countries OWN the manufacturing.
Rarely do I read Cal Thomas's editorials completely but sometimes I do; once in awhile he surprises me with an honest assessment of a topic. But the other night, his column was laughable. He was complaining about the new GOP web site asking people for their ideas; his view was that the GOP leaders are paid to think up those ideas and they shouldn't be asking voters. Fine, beside the point. He then said that since they wanted them his were: to decrease government's size by getting rid of the Dept of Education, the IRS, and a couple others; then he said to cut taxes for business to encourage growth, deregulate to allow the free market to work properly. At that point I gave up--was Cal Thomas absent during the 2008 financial meltdown or just too stuck on GOPism to realize that all that deregulation nearly killed the country. Sorry, Cal, those are the same ideas we've been hearing for far too many years; try again.
For 30 years the GOP has been selling people used cars as new ones; and the Emperor has no clothes.
That's it Mr. President...keep the spotlight on the fact that the republicans spent all their time failing to make you fail with constant "NO" votes to EVERYTHING while you and the Democrats saved us from their 8 years of disasters as they kicked and screamed BLOODY MURDER the whole time, not even bothering to help cleanup the mess THEY made...November will be a BLOODBATH alright !!!
The party of "NO" socialism, NO big government, No health care overhaul, NO to anyone that will not lisen to the majority. The republican party is correct not to back this president. The president is a pure socialist and all he stands for cannot be trusted. I believe all Democrats should be voted out of office. Democrats backed President Obama against public wishes, the senate took orders from him. A president has no right to dictate or threaten the House or Senate members. The Senate and House have equal power to the President, in theory, I guess he blew that too. Obama has created acts that are impeachable offenses and should be applied.
Say hurtelder:
What is the difference between a socialist and a "pure" socialist? I noted you called Obama a "pure" socialist and was curious as to how being a pure socialist was different from being just a plain socialist.
"The president is a pure socialist and all that he stands for cannot be trusted..."
That's a pretty broad and bold statement. Usually such an unqualified statement would be ignored as too dogmatic for response. However, I am curious. Can you elaborate on this? What makes him a pure socialist? How would a pure 'non-socialist' be different? What does he stand for that can't be trusted?
Interesting that you would advocate a one party system yet you blast a one party system. One other item that needs to be addressed is the impeachable offenses, list by article which offenses you are referring to.
Pure socialist? Exactly what is that? I read and hear the right calling Obama a socialist--did you know they called Hoover, FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Clilnton and Bush all socialists. Which makes me think that those yelling socialist the loudest have the least idea of what it really means.
I read an interesting comment about how the GOP with the help of FOX and others right leaning media stations have convinced republicans that their view is what everyone thinks and that their view is the majority view. The problem for them is that in thinking they are the majority, they think they are entitled to the power. It must be tough when the elections glaringly point that they were not the majority which explains why they then accuse democrats ala ACORN of stealing the elections.
Really?
Seriously?
You wrote that with a straight face?
If what you wrote is true, then your right-wing colleagues in the VERY RED Gulf Coast states are NOT listening to you. Right about now, they are BEGGING the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT for MONEY to help them in their time of need. So... us helping the VERY RED Gulf coast right now would be...
Wait for it...
SOCIALISM!!!
Wouldn't that be correct, as you have defined it? If you are so PROUD of the 'Party of NO', then those VERY RED Gulf Coast states would NOT need our assistance, correct? Since we are GIVING those VERY RED Gulf States money that they don't have, then they are the BENEFICIARIES of SOCIALISM - as you have defined it, correct?
Be careful what you wish for.
Here we go again somebody chasing those "ISMS". I would think that after all this time and all this turmoil that somebody could come up with a position that didn't involve fear of "isms". And here I thought Rednecks were the only slow learners around here
Do you think President Obama will ever stop campaigning and start actually being the President? The President of All the people. Not just half.
He can't go a day without slamming someone. I wonder if he goes to bed at night feeling bad - even a little - about being so miserable to half the country.
Hey IdiotElder where were you the past 8 years when Tyrants Bush and Cheney were dictators bent on telling everyone what to do? You rightwing fools have no idea what socialism is and all you ever whine about is how Obama is a Socialist instead of talking about the issues. You conservative buffoons wrecked our country and economy and now all you do is Whine Baby Whine. Try being constructive for once!
IdiotElder - a Perfect Example of Neanderthalus Republicanus!
Over the weekend I watched 'The Smartest Guys in the Room', a documentary on the Enron collapse and the remarkable fallout from that. What was most disturbing to me was the similarities between that and what we now understand led up to and contributed to the financial sector crash of 2008. The focus on personal profits and the shady accounting practices designed to hide the looming problems, the greed and avarice of top management and front line traders, the sense of entitlement, the lack of regulatory oversight, the refusal by the principals to acknowledge responsibility and blame.
Eight years after Enron ruined the lives of many, caused a serious upset in the economy and spawned an outcry for greater oversight history repeated itself. Twelve years before Enron it was the Savings and Loan scandal essentially doing the same thing. And yet, each time we hear loud and powerful voices declaring that such occurrences are an aberration, that these folks driven by greed and unmindful of the disastrous effects on others were a small group of deviants and that the free market itself will take care of the problem. Unfortunately, by the time the free market takes care of itself there are too many innocent victims. There is an ongoing and serious need for responsible regulation and adequate enforcement of those businesses that have such control over our economy. The 20 months and counting that it is taking our economy to climb out of this last man made upheaval is proof enough of that requirement.
Wish I had seen the special. It's beyond me that the same people think it won't happen again. It's the GOP and most recently Rand Paul's purist ideology at work whether it is civil rights or corporate regulation--people (corporations) will always do the right thing and if they don't, they won't be in business. One tiny problem with that thinking: too often those who don't do the right thing, drag the entire country down with them.
Ron - the clowns at Enron were never the smartest guys in the room, that documentary got it all wrong. They were the greediest most underhanded guys in the room and Criminal Hugger George Bush made sure few did any real hard time which they all deserved. I actually thought it was great to watch Enron go down. Here in California we still feel the pain of Enron's perfidy because we have to pay far higher electricity prices than ever before. Enron created false electricity shortages and jacked up the prices.
Your analysis that we've seen their perfidy before is well reasoned. Big Business has only one business model, how to rip off consumers for all they can while bribing the repugnant ones to keep their taxes way too low. It's time to end the rich and greedy's "Culture of Entitlement", the one true evil entitlement program. It's time to vote out the repugnant ones and bring in more Liberal Democrats who know what the score is and how to heal America from the evils of conservatism.
Now the repugnant ones here in California are trying to stop local governments from being able to produce electricity, just another greedy power grab by PG&E. Idiot Arnold did nothing whatsoever to increase California's electricity generation during his reign of economic terror against our state.
There was an excellant article wriiten for Vanity Fair in 2007 by Noble Laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, named "The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush" that ties into your comments Eric. Bottom line prediction in the article is Bush's legacy is more insidious & likely to be longer lasting, a generation long struggle to recoup.
This article was written before we knew who our next President would be. I know everyone is tired of hearing "it's Bush's fault." but it is true. I find it totally scary that so many people think DUBYA was a good President. His legacy will be that he crippled the United States, brought us to our knees.
I'm grateful that we have a smart, thinking President.
Hmmm wonder where are all the 'real people' are to comment on this post instead the WH moles and Chucky''s friends? Once again the Bam points his hubris laden finger at everyone else but himself. This little man child has no ideas other than figuring out who to blame for his own incompetence. The fact of the matter is the republicans were never seriously invited to the table and ther ideas were ignored.
Face the facts- This administration has poured 1 trillion dollars down a hole, and has nothing to show for it - unemployment is still at 10% with no end in sight. despite what Bam and Biden say, this enconomy is still in the toilet, and all this administraton can do is lie on TV to try and convince the country everything is OK.
They have an old saying - Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining. Quit blaming everyone else for your failures, and do something Bam!
Tell that to the teachers and construction workers whose jobs were saved. Guess it's easy to repeat fiction than recognize fact. Funny, even republican governors, senators, representatives have been very quick to take the money and claim how many jobs it saved in their respective states -- all while making comments like yours. Iowa's own Charles Grassley has boasted about the stimulus impact on Iowans and also the good of the health care reform bill; trouble is he didn't bother to state he voted against both.
Anyone who believes the econmy is improving because of the Pes. is foolish at best. The stimulus created some jobs yes, but govt. jobs, what happens when the stimulus money runs out and these people are unemployed again?
The truth of the economy and it's current position can be read from the volitility of the stock market. Everyone is afraid the bottom is going to fall out this recovery, that is why we keep seeing signifigant, single day drops, in the market, and then speedy recoveries. (Everyone has their hands on the egection button)
The economy is only improving because it couldn't get much worse, and the fact that unemployment is as high as it is shows that this recovery is like running in sand. (You might get traction eventually, but you could also land flat on your face)
Things will improve, slowly, but dont allow yourselves to be cowed by any politician claimed to be the cause. Govt. can't create jobs, they can only tax income.
Funny how the jobs reports for the last few cycles have consistently shown that there's growth in the jobs markets--and that there are more private sector than public sector jobs being created--yet the right wing echo chamber continues to fire off with the "no jobs...well except for government jobs" line.
Face it...the first step toward recovery was stopping the hemorrhaging of jobs. The economy stabilized. The second step is adding jobs. That is happening.
It took the R's eight years of voodoo economics to get us into this mess, and it's going to take more than eighteen months to get us all the way out. Anyone who complains that all the problems aren't fixed yet must also believe that the Presidency comes with a magic wand that Mr. Obama has chosen not to wave.
If a state or local govt uses it's money to hire a private sector comapany to carry out a project with funds provided by the stimulus, lets say roadwork, then that is a private sector job funded by the stimulus.
Great new private sector jobs right?
The problem is, who is going to keep paying these salaries once the stimulus dries up? If there are no new private projects, then there will be more private layoff to come. And we will be back to square one.
The stimulus is NOT SUPPOSED to be permanent. Stimulus is defined as follows: something that encourages an activity or a process to begin, increase, or develop.
Let's look at the definition again: something that encourages an activity or a process to begin, increase, or develop.
The stimulus is NOT SUPPOSED to be permanent. The funny part about this is that a good portion of that monies goes to PRIVATE enterprise!! If the PRIVATE enterprise cannot make money without stimulus funds, then that enterprise will not be around for long. The stimulus is designed to give a jump start - NOT sustain a business!!
WOW... people are SO gullible sometimes...
Unfortunately you missed the meaning of my point. I know that the stimulus isn;t supposed to be permanent. What I'm saying is that the private sector is not strong enough to support itself, so without the stimulus it is going to fail and we will be right where we were before the stimulus. Which would indicate the stimulus failed, or was at best a temporary fix that didn't take.
I'm not saying that this is anyones fault, I'm not bashing Obama or anyone else. Honestly I dont think anyone can fix this except for time, eventually things will balance out, private industry will begin to recover with demand increasing because inflation has died off and prices will go back to what they should be, rather than what they are now. But no one can force it to happen and it wont happen until private industry can support it, that's all I was saying.
We were having such a positive discussion earlier, and now you say I'm gullible. There is no need for that, I would think you knew better.
Ron - Atlanta
Welcome to the ENRON-NATION. If you refuse to play along we reserve the right to sabotage your economic future.
The new car industry is the perfect example of Obama's economic philosophy and why he should be considered a socialist. In the case of Gen Motors his administration with his blessing screwed the shareholders and bondholders out of their investments and handed over 40 % of the ownership to the United Auto Workers (the primary cause of the bankruptcy of GM in the first place!!) and gave them a 60% investment of our money (that's you and I pal) to keep them afloat. GM was legitimately defunct but Obama needed to save his UAW buddies so he took our money and "Chicagoed" us bigtime. His disdain for the investors shows his marxist attitude towards contracts and business in general. GM is a long way from out of the woods and do not be fooled by the hyped reports of their recovery. The fact that that Obama let them dump their debt in exchange for the equity of the UAW and the USA is contributing in large measure to their very tenuous success. Chrysler on the other hand is a dead man walkin (has been for years) and sooner than later Fiat will dump them back on the US taxpayer. There is more to come on this story and don't be surprised when the UAW pigs start looking for more payback from Government Motors.
I am increasingly convinced that we who post comments deceive ourselves into thinking that the mere act of posting a comment is tantamount to doing something. Free speech is wonderful and I appreciate it, but free action to improve society is far better. The problem now is that corporate and governmental interests make it difficult to overturn the effects of their poor decisions.
All the willing volunteers in this country are not enough to staunch the flow of oil in the Gulf--or sufficient to prevent this disaster from occuring once more.
We only think we are free and committed to liberty. The individual citizen is now powerless to affect the stream of economic forces that will probably kill this planet before enough real change can prevent it.
The Right will never admit that things are getting better. Things are slowly rebounding. If the President had not taken the steps he did, we would be in a Depression. The Stimulus, HCR, Bailing out the Autos,all had to be done. If it wasn't working, the numbers would show it. Don't bet on huge losses for the Dems in November.
Bravo, David.
I'm glad to see President Obama touting his economic recovery successes, something the dopes of nope can't do because they wrecked our Bushwhacked economy and they refused to do anything but Whine Baby Whine in fixing their major economic malfunction. Time to give Obama and the Democrats the credit they deserve for reversing course on our tanking economy and for brining back job growth after inheriting a massive series fo job losses.
Definitely time to pass meaningful climate and energy reform, doing it now with the Gulf awash in BP Oil is the perfect time to do it. Ofcourse the dopes of nope don't want to do it now because they won't be able to get the backing of the majority of Americans they think they can fool otherwise. Time to stop delaying and start doing dopes of nope. One thing for certain, it's time to end the tax cut welfare for the greedy oil companies, time to see them start payting US taxes. Really disgusting to see Exxon paying billions in taxes to foreign countries yet not one penny to the USA, no wonder our federal budget is upside down.
Did you hear Warren Buffet this morning? The private sector has improved a good deal. His company is hiring every month. These are not government jobs. Manufacturing has improved. These are not government jobs. Our PRESIDENT is the one who got us back on the right track. If it weren't for him, we would have fallen into the ditch Bush dug for us. Can you imagine McShame at the helm or worse, old what's her name??? Some say we have strapped our kids with a massive amount of debt. I say it took that debt to save our nation today because if our PRESIDENT hadn't saved today...tomorrow wouldn't have mattered, there wouldn't have been a tomorrow. And, because our PRESIDENT doesn't listen to loosers like the repugs, he has succeeded in saving our nation for our kids.
Pretty good, for a socialist!! LMAO!!
Thats comical you guys dont really believe all the garbage wrote on here do you!!! Your desperate and it shows but in the end you can polish a turd but it is stilla STINKING TURD... Mark my word no matter what occurs in the next 6 months to 2 years NOTHING will save your beloved Social Proggressives..I cant beleive they waiting so long to push this agenda and it only took 16 months or less to destroy it..Ever heard about sneaky baby steps morons!!! When will the true democrats save their party and get rid of all the Chicago West Coast Flamer Minority boys and get down to the will of the people..WE dont want you or your Marxist Socialist agenda..Put the welfare under their workboots and we will save all kinds of money!!
My goodness Scole, you are bitter! The welfare that is costing this country money is going to rich corporations. Welfare as you seem to define, no longer exists, it was reformed under Clinton. Two things, learn to spell, and learn what the muti-syllable words you try to use actually mean. Your assignment today is to find out what Marxist Socialism means. And no, Faux News is not a source.