About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Fox's MacCallum: "This time last year, the Dow reached an all-time low"

March 09, 2010 10:17 am ET

From the March 9 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by raddave43 (March 09, 2010 10:21 am ET)
      3  
      Did it reach an all time low or did it reach the lowest it had been in twelve years?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:22 am ET)
           
        Not an all-time low, but the lowest it had been since 2003.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by raddave43 (March 09, 2010 10:31 am ET)
             
          Well she said both, that's why I was asking.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:38 am ET)
               
            Oh, I know, I was just posting the chart. McCallum is lying. The folks at Fox don't want their faithful to understand that our economy is rebounding. I realize that the job market is still in bad shape, but financially, our country is doing better than it has in a while. It doesn't conform with their message. They tried to push the meme that Scott Brown's election would spur a big increase in the Dow so they could attribute the steady climb to him. Stocks dropped dramatically the next day to the lowest they had been in 3 months. LOL!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by retiredinsf (March 09, 2010 11:18 am ET)
                4
              As stated by bintx, a conservative.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 12:11 pm ET)
                   
                Exactly, retired. Fox doesn't represent conservatism . . . if you believe it does, you are not a conservative. Do a google search for "right wing authoritarianism." That's what Fox and the hate talkers promote, not conservatism.

                The country IS doing better than it has in a while. You don't want to believe it and Fox isn't going to promote it because it goes against your pre-conceived NON-CONSERVATIVE notion of the way things should be since Obama and those gosh-awful "dems" are in power.

                Really, look up "right wing authoritarianism" . . . I'll be surprised if you don't find your picture on the page.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by MilitantMNMan (March 09, 2010 5:06 pm ET)
                  1  
                  Right Wing Authoritarianism is pretty much Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco. There were some conservatives who have stood up to the fascists. Lt. Smedley Butler in America, Ludwig Von Beck, and Claus Von Stauffenberg to name a few. They were conservatives no doubt. Right Wing authoritarians are nothing more than reactionaries. The one guy on the radio who strikes me as the most fascistic is Mark Levin. I don't know how you feel about him personally, but sometimes he gets to so shrill and authoritarian I would think he'd bow to Mussolini.
                  Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:21 am ET)
      7  
      Yeah, on March 6, 2009, following an extended downward slide under the former administration, it hit around 6,600 and then started climbing . . . right at this very minute, it is sitting at 10,564.08. My 401K has recovered every single dime I lost on paper beginning in March 2008, plus some.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wmjodea3 (March 09, 2010 11:39 am ET)
           
        The DOW maybe up 59%; but it is still 25% off from the high of 14,164.
        The DOW needs to raise 100% from the March 2009 low just to get back to where it was at it high of 14,164.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 12:14 pm ET)
          2  
          And?

          If one has a conservative portfolio like mine, you didn't lose as much. On the other hand, my co-worker who had a very aggressive portfolio lost just about everything she had invested . . . she will never get it back because the company's she had invested in have ceased to exist. The Dow is simply an average. Hence, the name DOW JONES INDUSTRIAL AVERAGE.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Major Tom (March 09, 2010 10:22 am ET)
         
      Yeah I think in the 70s it was near 40,000, right?... Or is that not how it works...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (March 09, 2010 10:22 am ET)
         
      "All time" or since 1997, whichever is longer.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by GBU-15 (March 09, 2010 10:22 am ET)
      3  
      Of course the rise can be attributed to George Bush and the special election of Scott Brown.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dogbreath (March 09, 2010 10:28 am ET)
        4  
        Of course. Brown is the second-coming, haven't you heard?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:30 am ET)
          4  
          Yeah, immediately following Brown's election, the stock market dropped to its lowest levels since October 2009. So much for the Brown bump . . . didn't see Fox reporting that their predictions were false, did you?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by dogbreath (March 09, 2010 10:39 am ET)
            5  
            Now bintx, that would require that they actually reported the news, and we know that, coming from FOX, would actually be akin to the REAL second-coming. In all seriousness, Brown's election is going to be nothing but a minor blurb in the history books, if it is mentioned at all.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:54 am ET)
              4  
              Exactly. If Brown votes solidly with the Republicans, he will be a 1/3 term Senator. He's representing a really liberal state. His winning had less to do with dissatisfaction with the Democrats and more to do with dissatisfaction with the candidate he was running against.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by aj.physics (March 09, 2010 3:14 pm ET)
                   
                . If Brown votes solidly with the Republicans, he will be a 1/3 term Senator. He's representing a really liberal state


                Just how the Republicans like them, following in the footsteps of Palin.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by pamiety (March 09, 2010 10:41 am ET)
           
        lol
        Report Abuse
    • Author by scanlontodd9871 (March 09, 2010 10:25 am ET)
      6  
      Now with dow over 10,000 does this mean that the economy is on the rebound? So if I am hearing this right did Fox just say that the economic policies put in place since last January are working. Just a thought.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:32 am ET)
        3  
        With the exception of the decline following the election of Scott Brown, which was supposed to create a huge jump, the market has risen steadily since March 6, 2009. It's sitting at 10,556.22 right now, almost 4000 points higher than it was a year ago.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 10:35 am ET)
          2  
          S&P 500 is also up 200 points since December 2008, NASDAQ is the highest it's been since September 19, 2008.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by wmjodea3 (March 09, 2010 11:46 am ET)
            1  
            Why stop at September 19, 2008? Let's go back to say January 2000, how the today's NASDAQ number looked compare to January 2000 NASDAQ number? NASDAQ still off 50% or so and the S&P 500 still off compared to January 2000.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 12:00 pm ET)
              2  
              Exactly, but both have risen significantly in the past year, which was my point.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by wmjodea3 (March 09, 2010 2:30 pm ET)
                   
                Yes your point is good; but even if your 401k is back up to where it was before the downturn you still lost money because you missed out on the earning your 401k could of made at a higher value and if you average your earning over a few year period you will most likely see little gain on a per-year bases.

                Still all and all it is better then not coming back at all and investing conservatively has it rewards.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by magnolialover (March 09, 2010 5:17 pm ET)
                     
                  Not exactly true. If you used your 401k to continue buying stocks during that time, you were able to buy MORE of what you had been buying, and hence, now that the market has rebounded a bit, your 401k should be rocking. This is what I did, since any losses I had were on paper, you only lose when you cash out.
                  Report Abuse
      • Author by Ouroborus (March 09, 2010 10:54 am ET)
        9  
        You don't understand. The market has recovered because Republicans have stopped Obama's socialist agenda from wrecking our country, while simultaneously the economy is in shambles because Obama's socialist agenda is wrecking our country.

        It's easy to believe both of these if you apply no due diligence in examining FOX/GOP claims. With one breath a FOX News anchor can tell you the DJIA is up because of Recent Unrelated Republican Activity, and with the next tell you the economy is down because our president is some sort of super socialist. The average FOX viewer already practically swims in a sea of cognitive dissonance, so it doesn't even begin to register as demonstrably false.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Quicksilver M.S (March 09, 2010 10:36 am ET)
      1  
      A year ago Fox Mews was playing the fall of the Market to the HILT! Fox Mews played the FEAR CARD Daily! Fear that I /we no longer had money to retire on! That President Obama was at fault!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MeanMrSpicyMustard (March 09, 2010 11:12 am ET)
      1  
      Wait, so the Dow hit 30 last year?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by doggeddem (March 09, 2010 11:26 am ET)
      3  
      What's the point of having copy editors with these idiots? They are not interested in the truth, so who cares if she says something completely outrageous. When George's daddy was president, he handed Clinton a DOW that was averaging around 3000. By the time Clinton left office, the DOW was over 10500, having reached as high as 11,500. Unemployment had reached 4%, which was an incredibly low level of unemployment. Then shrub came in and tanked everything. The last twenty years should serve notice to the American public that if you want a better economy, don't let the repubschmucks have anything to do with the government. They are all about plundering the country's resources for the greedy few, and throwing the rest of us onto the garbage heap.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by retiredinsf (March 09, 2010 11:31 am ET)
      2 8
      Fox's MacCallum: "This time last year, the Dow reached an all-time low"

      Anyone with a brain would know what she meant. See what I mean about MMFA picking at little trivial mis-speaks? While they gloss over the big issues? If you'd take the time to think about it you'd agree it's pretty pathetic.

      And, just in case you missed it, when Bush was in charge the DOW was over 14,000! Plus, for you math challanged, when the DOW dropped 4,000 from 10.5K to 6.5K it lost about 40%. To get it back it has to increase by about 60%. So be careful about bragging on how well your 401K's are doing. I don't want to catch you lying.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by progressivevoicedaily (March 09, 2010 11:46 am ET)
        4  
        Media Matters tackles some very substantative issues...don't quite know where you've been. Maybe that retirement thing has gotten to ya a bit. As for your breakdown of the numbers, Bush certainly didn't get us to 14,000 plus, an overflated housing market among other things contributed to that. The decline happened well before bush left office and showed no signs of slowing down. It's precisely because of the economic policies layed forth by our new president that has facilitated the rebound. Stories of 401k's rebounding are very common. You just don't like acknoledging the truth. Keep soaking up that tasty propaganda over at Fixed noise, it obviously works for you.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by retiredinsf (March 09, 2010 2:12 pm ET)
          1 2
          Week of 10/08/2007 DOW 14,093.0801. Bush was in charge then - just as I said.

          http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EDJI#chart2:symbol=^dji;range=5y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

          Not that facts matter to you folks.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by magnolialover (March 09, 2010 5:22 pm ET)
            1  
            Yes, in 2007, the market hit 14000+ when Bush was in charge.

            The last day he was in office when the market was open, 16-Jan-09, the market was at 8281.22, which is a difference of 5811.66. 41.2% percent drop.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by wmjodea3 (March 09, 2010 11:50 am ET)
           
        Are you saying Bush was responsible for the Stock Market bubble?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by So Fain (March 09, 2010 11:58 am ET)
        3 1
        Anyone with a brain would know what she meant.

        That's the problem... Fox viewers don't have brains and can't figure this kind of thing out for themselves. So they end up parroting the "trivial mis-speaks" to friends, family and even in the comment sections of websites like this one.

        What it boils down to is that you cannot count on the average Fox News Republican to know fact from fiction... Much less a "mis-speak." The honus lies on the network to provide accurate information and corrections of "trivial mis-speaks" that mislead the public.

        Also, it's funny that these "trivial mis-speaks" never go in the favor of Dems or Obama. They only seem to happen when they favor the official Fox News political position.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (March 09, 2010 12:05 pm ET)
        2  
        Depends on where your money is invested, retired. If you had a conservative portfolio like mine, you didn't lose as much. A co-worker who had a much more aggressive portfolio lost almost everything she had invested.

        Oh, and that 14,000? It represented the housing bubble, a false indicator of value.

        Nice try, but you, as usual, fail. Oh, and you make an assumption that Fox viewers have half a brain. Based upon the number of people who believe that Beck knows what the hell he is talking about, I'd say that most Fox viewers didn't know that her comments were incorrect.



        Report Abuse
        • Author by retiredinsf (March 09, 2010 9:29 pm ET)
          1 1
          I have NEVER endorsed Beck. I don't care for him and his over-the-top spin any more than you do. He hurts true conservatives. I wish FOX would can him.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (March 10, 2010 2:37 am ET)
           
        "Fox's MacCallum: "This time last year, the Dow reached an all-time low"

        Anyone with a brain would know what she meant." -- needstoretiretobed



        Uh-huh --just like "anyone with a brain" would've known what Dana "too much cappuccino" Perino meant when she said, "we had no terrorist attacks while Bush was in office".

        Anyone with a WINGNUT brain, that is . . .


        "See what I mean about MMFA picking at little trivial mis-speaks? While they gloss over the big issues?"


        I'll bet you didn't like the "picking at little trivial mis-speaks" like Obama's "57 states" comment, either -- right?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by txthinker (March 09, 2010 11:49 am ET)
      1  
      Fox's MacCallum: "This time last year, the Dow reached an all-time low"

      Not even close. According to Wikipedia, the Dow's all-time low was 28.48, set back in 1896. Here's a graph showing the closing Dow from its inception in 1896 to today:

      [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closing_milestones_of_the_Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average]

      Here's the Wikipedia article for those who want more info.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by txthinker (March 09, 2010 11:51 am ET)
           
        The graph didn't copy over - you ca see it by following the link I posted above to the Wikipedia article.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by retiredinsf (March 09, 2010 2:16 pm ET)
        1 5
        Wow! Thanks for enlighting us Mr. Thinker! I really thought the DOW started out at around 6,500 in the 19th Century!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (March 09, 2010 12:28 pm ET)
      1  
      I don't see this as a big deal. She said all time low but then she said lowest in 12 years. She wasn't blaming anyone for the "all time low" nor was she crediting anyone for the 59% rise.
      Report Abuse