Hannity, Hewitt revive bogus "Obama recession" claim
SUMMARY: On Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity and Hugh Hewitt rehashed the discredited claim that President-elect Barack Obama is to blame for recent declines in the stock market. In fact, analysts have cited economic data on dropping retail sales, increasing unemployment, and other significant factors to explain recent stock-market declines.
On the November 14 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, co-host Sean Hannity and syndicated radio host Hugh Hewitt rehashed the discredited claim that President-elect Barack Obama is to blame for recent declines in the stock market. As Media Matters for America noted in response to Hannity's earlier, similar claims, analysts have disputed the assertion that the market decline is attributable to Obama's election, citing other factors such as economic data on dropping retail sales and increasing unemployment.
During the broadcast, Hannity said: "I've said it myself. Dick Morris has said it. I think Rush has said it -- others. You know, this is really the Obama recession in this sense: That people that have money are looking at this, 'Look, if -- if he is true to his word, you know what? I'm getting out now.' And he's the only president that has seen this dramatic a decline in the stock market in the post-war era." Hewitt responded: "You're right. That -- it's been dramatic. The point drop in the Dow, the S&P, and the NASDAQ is called 'pricing in Barack Obama.' " Responding to co-host Alan Colmes' statement that "[a]ll business experts say it has nothing to do with Barack Obama," Hewitt asserted: "Alan, the Dow dropped four out of five days this week, three out of four days last week. ... [I]t's called 'pricing in Barack Obama.' " Hewitt later added: "[T]he markets are very smart. Markets are very, very savvy, and they are -- they reflect the actions of millions of investors, millions of whom have taken a look at President-elect Obama and his team of advisers and a Democratic Congress run by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and said, 'I'm going to park my money because there aren't enough Republicans to stop the worst excesses,' and they're afraid of Carter 2.0."
Contrary to the assertions by Hannity and Hewitt, analysts have cited economic data on dropping retail sales, increasing unemployment, and other significant factors to explain the decline of the stock market. For instance, according to a November 14 CNN.com article, the Commerce Department's retail report released on Friday, November 14 -- stating that retail sales dropped by 2.8% in October -- "helped drive down stocks Friday, which bolstered investment in the dollar." CNN.com further reported: "On Friday, the dollar got a boost as the Dow Jones industrial average was driven lower by both the retail sales report and job-cut announcements from major companies such as Sun Microsystems." From the CNN.com article:
The dollar climbed against the 15-nation euro and the British pound Friday, as fears of a major economic recession were rekindled by a dismal U.S. retail sales report and announcement of a euro-zone recession.
Investors sought the shelter of the U.S.-backed dollar, sending the euro down 1.7 cents to $1.26 from $1.277 on Thursday.
[...]
"Its a reminder of how challenging the economic circumstances are going to be," said Nick Bennenbroek, chief currency strategist with Wells Fargo.
Retail sales: According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, retail sales fell 2.8% in October, the largest percentage monthly drop on record, and worse than the 2.1% decline predicted by analysts.
The retail report confirmed statements made this week by major retailers such as electronics seller Best Buy (BBY, Fortune 500), whose chief executive called the months since September "the most difficult climate we've ever seen."
Equities: The poor retail report helped drive down stocks Friday, which bolstered investment in the dollar.
[...]
On Friday, the dollar got a boost as the Dow Jones industrial average was driven lower by both the retail sales report and job-cut announcements from major companies such as Sun Microsystems (JAVA, Fortune 500).
The Dow recovered some of its losses by mid-day, taking the edge off the dollar's rise against the euro, and actually reversing the dollar's position against the pound, but the dollar regained its strength again as the the [sic] Dow closed down nearly 4%.
Additionally, the Associated Press reported on November 17 that "Wall Street fluctuated Monday as investors digested more signs of economic weakness, including a huge round of layoffs in the financial sector." The U.S. Department of Labor's statistics on new unemployment claims showed more than 500,000 new claims in the week ending November 8 -- the week of the election -- an increase of about 32,000 claims from the previous week. The Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch website reported on November 13 that this represents the highest level of new jobless claims since September 2001:
Some economists are expecting the picture to worsen further, perhaps considerably. On Wednesday [November 12], economists at Wachovia said they don't expect the unemployment rate to peak until late in 2010 and at 9%. This would be the highest since 1983. The Wachovia economists said the U.S. economy's likely to experience a recession as long and severe as the downturns seen in 1973-75 and 1981-82.
Further, as Media Matters noted, a November 12 post on the Journal's MarketBeat blog stated that "[f]ollowing the brief pre-election euphoria that brought stocks up 17% in a six-day period, stocks have been sluggish since as investors focused, once again, on the lame economic data and the drumbeat of bailouts, potential bailouts, and worries about other bailouts."
Media Matters documented in the days immediately following the November 4 election several analysts on Fox News and Fox Business Network citing reasons independent of the election to explain the fall of the market, explicitly stating that they did not believe the market was reacting to Obama's election.
From the November 14 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
HANNITY: The Wall Street Journal says that I've -- I've said it myself. Dick Morris has said it. I think Rush has said it -- others. You know, this is really the Obama recession in this sense: That people that have money are looking at this, "Look, if -- if he is true to his word, you know what? I'm getting out now." And he's the only president that has seen this dramatic a decline in the stock market in the post-war era. I mean --
HEWITT: You're right. That -- it's been dramatic. The point drop in the Dow, the S&P, and the NASDAQ is called "pricing in Barack Obama" --
COLMES: You can't blame Barack Obama for that, Hugh.
HEWITT: -- and it's been devastating.
COLMES: That's absurd. That's preposterous. I mean, this went down long before Barack was president-elect. It went up the day he was elected. It was up in anticipation of him being elected. All business experts say it has nothing to do with Barack Obama. It was the bad job numbers that came out. What are you talking about blaming the president-elect --
HEWITT: I'm talking about --
COLMES: -- for a bad stock market? That's crazy.
HEWITT: Alan, the Dow dropped four out of five days this week, three out of four days last week.
COLMES: On bad job numbers.
HEWITT: It's called pricing in Barack -- it's called "pricing in Barack Obama" and the anticipated deleterious effects on the economy that will come from his combination of tax policies and the Democrats' penchant for spending.
COLMES: That's absolutely absurd that you want --
HEWITT: Now, the markets are very savvy.
COLMES: -- to blame Democrats, Hugh. At least have some intellectual honesty here, because when George W. Bush was about to become president of the United States, and then he -- he caused the recession when he came in. But then you want to blame Clinton for that, and he was the outgoing president, but yet you want to blame the incoming president when it's Barack Obama. Clearly, that sounds quite partisan.
HEWITT: I'm not blaming anyone, Alan. I'm pointing to -- the markets are very smart. Markets are very, very savvy, and they are -- they reflect the actions of millions of investors, millions of whom have taken a look at President-elect Obama and his team of advisers and a Democratic Congress run by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and said, "I'm going to park my money because there aren't enough Republicans to stop the worst excesses," and they're afraid of Carter 2.0.
COLMES: You want to take no personal responsibility. We have a president who just spent three-quarters of a billion dollars in a bailout. That caused all kinds of problems. You got Henry Paulson; they're talking first about buying up bad mortgages, now investing in banks, the biggest government spending ever. And you want to blame Barack Obama for government spending that he hasn't even done yet when this president has done more government spending and had bigger government and has done the kind of thing you would call socialism if a liberal Democrat did it.
HEWITT: Alan, I don't call it socialism; I call it really bad tax policy.
HANNITY: Alan, can I get you a decaf?
COLMES: Please.
You know a good joke is coming when Hannity begins, "You know, in reality ..." The only problem with the Hannity/Hewitt approach is that the rest of Amerca has heard of the auto industry, the restructuring of the bailout, Circuit City, etc. Heckuva strategy, guys. "Best of luck to ya!" (As Sarah Palin might say.)
and they're afraid of Carter 2.0."
That's right-- and Nixon-Ford never existed, with huge oil price increases, stagflation, inflation, and wage and price controls.
And here I thought that the "economic crisis" (which, unless they forgot the whole month of October, is really when the "recession" and the "stock market drops" started happening) was exactly what propelled Obama INTO office in the frist place!
If you recall, back in September, Sen's Obama and McCain were tied in the National Polls and the Electoral College was so close that whomever won Ohio would be the next prez. (And it was not only unclear who that would be, but McCain was polling ahead in Ohio at the time!)
So when this all strated it wasn't clear at all who would win. Then the stock market drops 800 points in one day (biggest 1-day drop in history) and then Sec Paulson starts talking about bailouts, and THEN "erractic" replaces "mavercik" as McCain's bradn logo... only after ALL THAT did Obama start pulling away in the polls. How can these idiots not think we were in a recession, well... more like a full fledged CATASTROPHE since well before the election, even before it was at all clear who would win?! Forget having a sense of history, or even 'current events'... This assumes people will forget what JUST HAPPENED A MONTH AGO!!!
Finally!
After eight years now there's something blamed on someone other than Bill Clinton.
Wasn't Obama on the grassy knoll in Dallas also? I am starting to rethink the causes of the civil war also. This hewitt guy is a 10+ on the creepy meter.
"Wasn't Obama on the grassy knoll in Dallas also?"
Now, that's the silliest thing I've ever heard. Obama was the Umbrella Man.
Dang faulty comment boxes.
Now, looking at the data from the Dow Jones industrial average from November 7th, 2000 (election for Bush) to Inauguration in January of 2000, the market dropped 82 points, or 2.5 percent for the same time frame (see attached rough graph). So if they're going to claim some sort of Barack recession, then they also have to claim a Bush recession post election as well...
Sorry, my graph didn't attach...
Well, before the election the Dow was lower than when Bush took over. That must be, ahh, Clinton's fault? ;)
Cons really do believe anything their masters tell them. Hmmm, just like a slave...
It'd be hilarious if it were found out that Hannity voted for Obama.
But (fortunately [voter privacy]), we'll never know
The only way that would happen is if Hannity were one of those pathetic people who can't exist if they aren't associated with the winners.
Oops, you might be onto something there...
Or just like one of the "idiots" who voted for Pat Buchanan instead of Al Gore via the "hanging chad." I'm not judging those in Florida... but Hannity could be that stupid.
Actually, he was probably so busy prepping for and ranting on his shows that he forgot to vote. Heard somewhere that RashL had never voted until 1984. Wouldn't surprise me to find Shamity never even voted.
If he didn't keep repeating the same old lies, Sean Insanity woiuld have nothing to say.
And Sean? Since either you or someone on your staff monitors MMFA, here's a special message from me to you:
Seean hannity, you are NOT a Great American - in fact, you're a sorry excuse for a human being, a lousy father, and a bad husband. Not only that - since you seem to be unable to stop lying and bearing false witness against those you disagree with, you're a bad Catholic, too.
(That felt good.....)
Ugh. Recession discussed last year. Drawings on wall say so. Gronk say Obama not important last year. Ugh.
See? It's so easy a caveman can do it!
These guys have balls, you have to give them that. Usually, history revisionists have to wait until events are safely in the past... not these liars. They can rewrite history before it's even history.
It's like a six-year-old performing a magic trick.... and we're supposed to pretend we don't know it's a trick.
So they're not like Revisionist Hiostorians, more like Revisionist Journalists? So much for "no spin" or "fair and balanced."
I'm glad they're taking the time to set us straight on this economic stuff.... I thought for sure that the $250,000,000 a day that we've been pi$$ing into the sand in Iraq for 5 years might have had an impact on our economy, especially after President Numbnuts gave all the Billionaires (like his dad) huge tax cuts.
As a side note, which politician should we trust... the one who pursues policies which lower his own taxes, or the one who pursues policies which will raise his own taxes? Just asking....
Speaking of "Wealth Redistribution".... how about all that taxpayer wealth that has been redistributed into the pockets of a few contractors in Iraq? Funny that Simple Sarah's Sycophants have no problem with that.
This is an extra-stupid example of what literally all conservatives do. They create a theory, check to see if it sounds right and seems logical, and they're done. They never take the next step to test the theory against reality.
And I'm not using absolutes lightly.
What else do you expect from these morons? Next they will be blaming OBAMA for everything that has and will go wrong in the future. No imagination with these creeps. Did anyone see hannity' show friday? He had several guests who knew BILL AYERS when he was a member of the WEATHER UNDERGROUND. Hannity tried to get them to describe how bad AYERS really was and tried to push OBAMA'S relationship with him. and the guests went right along withe him. I dont know why INNSANITY is still pursuing this line now that the election is over and his side got wiped. Obviosly the AMERICAN people didnt buy this line of attack or OBAMA would have lost. I dont see what HANNITY has to gain by continuing to pursue this "AYERS-OBAMA "connection."
It's quite underhanded, really. All day long on CNN one of the viewpoints posted to Rick Sanchez was about the liberal philosophy actually pricing workers out of a job and how should Obama address that in a center right fashion. Well, in case nobody has been watching we've been priced out of a job eight years running. I know of a few companies who spent the last several years coming up with every method possible to cut the cost per box to the bare minimum and then outsourced anyways. It's like they used good ol' american inginuity to make production as cheap as possible so they could give it away to foreign investors to build it. On another front, I personally went through one of those "please take a week off without pay and give up a few benefits, we'll reward you later" stints that the right is pushing against the auto unions in the press. Guess what? They got those requests, and eight years later they not only never made good on their claim, they took away the stock purchase plan, pushed about 90% of the cost of benefits on us and cut company matching to our 401K. Oh, and they are now outsourcing manufacturing. Did I mention that?
Ah the hypocracy! We bail out these shadow bankers who are well compensated for their reckless and greedy efforts, but somehow we must be outraged that the people who actually make something have the nerve to try to maximize their compensation.
"Priced out of the market" - that belongs next to "too big to fail". Billions of slum dwellers and rural poor are priced out of the market globally - billions!. They must make do somehow. Our elete financial geniuses seem to think that their market beast could never turn on them. I remember a CFO once telling us we "had experienced a cost reduction excorcise to right size the corporation" during a severe layoff. See its not messy or ugly when it happens to the bottom feeders.
Good points! Seems equality in right wing terms means if all the workers are dirt poor they have an equal chance at getting one of the 30 dock job openings for this week - oh, and if the dock forman has a preference for white over black or something like that, it's the forman, not the owner responsible for that.
I wonder if Fantasy Boy Hewitt knows these things about Jimmy Carter:
Carter deregulated airlines (1978), trucking (1980), and railroads (1980).
Carter began to phase out oil price controls (1979).
Carter began to phase out interest rate limits (imposed by Regulation Q) on Savings and Loans, and eliminated some restrictions on banks (1980).
Carter appointed Obama economic advisor Paul Volcker as Fed Chairman in August 1979. Volcker's new monetary policy, announced on October 6, 1979, resulted in high interest rates in 1980, but is now credited for solving the inflation problem. Look up "The Volcker Disinflation."
Carter lifted the federal ban on home brewing of beer and wine (1979).
Carter increased real defense spending each year he was president. That was after nine straight years of declining real defense spending,
Carter signed a finding on July 3, 1979, providing covert aid to the Afghan Mujahedin - six months before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. The initial allocation was tiny - only a little over half a million dollars. (Page 146 in the book "From the Shadows" by current Defense Secretary Robert Gates and confirmed by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter's National Security Advisor.)
Carter appointed Obama economic advisor Paul Volcker as Fed Chairman in August 1979.
The other day the NYT had an extraordinarily dishonest review of the new Robert Samuelson book, crediting Reagan with-- well-- just about everything, including Paul Voelcker.
These under 50s who write this stuff know nothing about recent history. The lionization of Reagan is really toxic-- and poor Carter, who gets blamed for everything from 1967 on. Oil prices and gas lines were much much worse under Nixon Ford, but nobody ever reminds us of that.
The utter dishonesty of these people.
Just to be clear, Carter named Paul Volcker to be Fed chairman on July 25, 1979. The Senate confirmed Volcker on November 2.
Robert Samuelson was a guest on 850 KOA's Mike Rosen show in Denver yesterday (11/18/08) during the 10-11am hour. You can listen to it because KOA archives the shows. Rosen and Samuelson talked about Volcker's successful fight against inflation back in the early '80s and gave all the credit to Reagan with great praise. No mention of Carter - not even that Carter appointed Volcker as Fed chairman in the first place. As I said, Volcker initiated the new Fed policy to fight inflation in October 1979, more than a year before Reagan became president.
Talk radio is a problem. On Monday Sean Hannity said that 10 million jobs were lost while Carter was president. I looked up the employment numbers at The Bureau of Labor Statistics and it turns out that 10 million jobs were created during Carter. That's not surprising. Baby boomers like me were flooding the job market during the '70s and early '80's. Did that demographic hit play a role in the economic problems at the time, i.e. stagflation? I believe it did.
About a week before the election, Rush Limbaugh said that if Obama gets elected, then we'll get 12 percent unemployment like Carter had. In fact, the highest unemployment number for Carter was 7.8 percent in 1980. Ford had 9.0 percent in 1975 and Reagan had 10.8 percent at the end of 1982.
Another talk show host on KOA, Jon Caldara, during the 12am hour on Monday 11/17/08 said that the Federal Reserve was established during the Depression Era. In fact, as we all know, the Fed was created in 1913 - before World War I. Milton Friedman blamed the Fed in large part for the Great Depression by severely contracting the money supply. Caldara, a conservative like Rosen, considers himself to be informed on economic issues.
Correction:
The Senate confirmed Paul Volcker as Fed chairman on August 2, 1979.
Sorry. If only talk radio hosts would correct their mistakes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y44dtUCMf2E Part 2
Watch this You Tube and see why Ohio citizens say their quality of life has collapsed following stolen elections.
Meantime, Obama is elected, but none of the officials are held accountable. Will those responsible for fraud try to trip up his Presidency?
Incidentally, this is ridiculously short-sighted spin. When the economy turns around you know they're going to say that Bush laid the groundwork, so why not plant that seed right now? Instead they're taking the economy completely out of Bush's hands. When the economy turns around they'll have no choice but to give it back to Bush and thoroughly contradict themselves.
I know their listeners will never call them on it, but this so clearly illustrates an utter lack of foresight. Conservative spinners simply grab whatever they need right now and never look anywhere else.
The whole conservative philosophy is based on contradictions. They blamed Clinton for the job losses, recession and stock market failure in W's first year and now they blame Obama for the same failure during W's last year. And look at these great economic minds: Limbaugh, Hannity, Morris and Hewitt! I expect Regnery will have "Pricing In Barack," in the stores tomorow.
And here's the thing. The only time the economy was "good" under Bush was whe real estate prices went through the roof. In other words it was only good for the rich, and the "good" is key to what the problem with the economy is now with failing mortgages, foreclosures, and land grabs.
Blame, baby, blame...! ;>)
Well, Hannity, Limbaugh, and Hewitt say that it's Obama's fault, so it must be so!!!!
;)
Now let me get this straight according to Hannity-- President-elect Obama is now responsible for the recent declines in the market and that the answer to all our problems was that we should have elected Sarah Palin and John McCain. Is he for real?
That's the mindset of HANNITY, HEWITT, and the rest of the RIGHT WING NUTJOBS for you.