Michelle Malkin » No duh! White House “worried about bailout backlash”

No duh! White House “worried about bailout backlash”

By Michelle Malkin • March 16, 2009 10:05 AM

With a few notable exceptions, the national media has ignored the tax revolt movement against the porkulus package, omni-pork spending bill, and bottomless bailouts that began in Seattle on President’s Day; continued in Denver on the day of the Generational Theft Act signing; spread to Mesa AZ during President Obama’s massive mortgage entitlement push; spurred protest in Overland Park KS; and evolved into the Tea Party movement across the country.

But local politicians and local newspapers/TV are definitely on notice. Thousands of folks converging in places like St. Louis (1,500), Greenville (2,000), Fullerton (est. 15,000), and Cincinnati (5,000) are getting harder to ignore.

And now, it seems, word is getting around in Washington. The White House, the NYTimes (which has mocked the tax revolters) tells us, is worried about a populist backlash against bailout-mania. Naw. Really? You don’t say:

“Bracing for a Bailout Backlash”

The Obama administration is increasingly concerned about a populist backlash against banks and Wall Street, worried that anger at financial institutions could also end up being directed at Congress and the White House and could complicate President Obama’s agenda.

The administration’s sharp rebuke of the American International Group on Sunday for handing out $165 million in executive bonuses — Lawrence H. Summers, director of the president’s National Economic Council, described it as “outrageous” on “This Week” on ABC — marks the latest effort by the White House to distance itself from abuses that could feed potentially disruptive public anger.

“We’ve got enormous problems that need to be addressed,” David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, said in an interview. “And it’s hard to address because there’s a lot of anger about the irresponsibility that led us to this point.”

“This has been welling up for a long time,” he said.

Starting to get a clue:

For all his political skills and his capturing of the nation’s desire for change in the 2008 election, Mr. Obama, a product of Harvard Law School who calls upscale Hyde Park in Chicago home, has shown little inclination to strike a more populist tone. The danger, aides said, is that if he were to become identified as an advocate for the banks and Wall Street, people could take out their anger on him.

“The change now is you have a free-floating economic anxiety that has expressed itself in a kind of lashing out at those being bailed out and people who are bailing out,” Michael Kazin, a professor at Georgetown University who has written extensively on populism. “There’s not really a sense of what the solution is.”

“I do think there’s a potential for a ‘damn everybody in power’ kind of sentiment,” Mr. Kazin said.

“Potential?”

It’s here, baby. Open your eyes. More Cincy Tea Party photos via RWNJ:

Via WCPO, making the message crystal-clear:

Tea party supporters say their reasons for demonstrating on Fountain Square are simple.

“To actually show the state and federal government that we’re displeased with the way that they’re handling our money. That’s our money,” said George Piper.

And: “This is not a Democrat thing. Or a Republican thing. It’s a government thing.”

Wait until April 15…

Posted in: Tea Party, fiscal stimulus

Printer Friendly

comments (213)

trackbacks (44)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#201

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:46 pm, Omu said:

Sure a “plurality” of the sheeple support Obummer. When you got a hand out, what do you expect?

When the GOP wins (or, as was the case in 2000, steals) a majority of votes, then we are a proud and prosperous democracy. But when the people choose a Democrat, by a much more significant margin, they are “sheeple”. Convenient, isn’t it? I think maybe you need to get some sense, and grow the heck up while you’re at it.

You either believe in democracy, or you don’t. You can’t just believe in it when the GOP is scaring the electorate into voting for them by a minuscule margin (2004) or stealing elections (2000, as I already pointed out).
#202

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:46 pm, thetoysurgeon said:

I can see this thread was hijacked!

The MSM will get interested when we protest their stations. Lets call a spade a spade or a red a red. Its time.
#203

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm, Omu said:

You can stop bringing matters of religion into this now. You are free to believe in all the fairytales you like, but it really has absolutely nothing to do with politics. If the only way you can defend a principal is by resorting to some ancient text written by nobodies from which you’ve cherry picked what you want to hear, then it’s not a good principle.
#204

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:52 pm, jangar said:

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm, Omu said:

You just made my point…

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:43 pm, jangar said:

Well, I’m giving it all I can. It’s a sad situation for those who reject truth, you know. Too bad it all has been overly politicized and not brought down to earth. Just depends on one’s world view.

You need help, man. And I mean quick!
#205

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:54 pm, emjem24 said:

Omu said:
Do dim-witted social conservatives (dim-witted and all as they are) actually understand the concept of a judge? You see, when someone is extraordinarily well trained in matters of the law, they sometimes become judges . These ‘judges’ are therefore much more qualified to read the constitution than some redneck, backward, homophobic, Islamophobic hick. Does this make sense yet?

So the way you win the argument or make liberal ideas so “appealing” is to be condescending to the hostess of this blog and those who contribute, right?

There are judges trained to practice law but when they’re appointed judges they often fail to either enforce it or interpret it in a constitutionally correct manner. The Constitution belongs to all of us not just the judges or the condescending libs like you who think you can disregard it in favor of all of your “pet causes.”

It doesn’t make sense to go off on this blog if you’re so confident in your arguments. The only way you know how to deal with opposing ideas is to shout them down and call them names for disagreeing with gay marriage and not catering to terrorists. Any lick of common sense you have as an American citizen is lost when you can’t come to terms with the fact that your ideas aren’t socially appealing (or just appealing period) to others.

Gays don’t need to be married to have rights. We don’t need nationwide Sharia law to make Muslims feel better about themselves. If you want to go down the road that the UK already has, then you no longer believe in the notion of what America is or what it stands for. Only that it must be changed to suit your belief system and not adhere to the Constitution or the founding principles of the US.
#206

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:54 pm, jangar said:

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm, Omu said:
You can stop bringing matters of religion into this now. You are free to believe in all the fairytales you like

Like I said, it’s a free country, but sad you want to gamble your whole life upon a lie.
#207

On March 16th, 2009 at 10:56 pm, jangar said:

emjem24 said

Thank you.
#208

On March 16th, 2009 at 11:01 pm, Omu said:

Gays don’t need to be married to have rights. We don’t need nationwide Sharia law to make Muslims feel better about themselves. If you want to go down the road that the UK already has, then you no longer believe in the notion of what America is or what it stands for. Only that it must be changed to suit your belief system and not adhere to the Constitution or the founding principles of the US.

The fact you compare gay marriage rights and the imposing of Sharia Law on the United States either shows that you are a) massively desperate to paint gay marriage in the most negative light possible or b) atrociously ill-informed. I would imagine it’s both.

So the way you win the argument or make liberal ideas so “appealing” is to be condescending to the hostess of this blog and those who contribute, right?

Hah, because I am the sole source of condescension on this blog? Have you not noticed that two members of this site have, on countless occasions in the past single hour, told me that I am bound for hell because I am not an enlightened Christian?
#209

On March 16th, 2009 at 11:18 pm, emjem24 said:

Omu said:

When the GOP wins (or, as was the case in 2000, steals) a majority of votes, then we are a proud and prosperous democracy. But when the people choose a Democrat, by a much more significant margin, they are “sheeple”. Convenient, isn’t it? I think maybe you need to get some sense, and grow the heck up while you’re at it.

I was wondering when you would rehash the 2000 election. It still pretty much bugs you that, darn it, Mr. Lockbox didn’t win. I think that there are sheeple on both sides of the aisle. Then again, you’re Mr. Independent, right? One who posesses common sense doesn’t cling to the past (say the 2000 election or the Iraq War). Telling me to grow up would be relevant if you could stop acting the opposite on this blog.

You either believe in democracy, or you don’t. You can’t just believe in it when the GOP is scaring the electorate into voting for them by a minuscule margin (2004) or stealing elections (2000, as I already pointed out).

We live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy. I know 8th grade students who know the difference. It’s amazing how many adults really don’t understand their own country or the type of government that we participate in.

I believe in a Constitutional Republic not a democracy. Democracy is simply mob rule, something that you and others not faithful to the Constitution or the founding of this country really don’t seem to comprehend. Well, then your 2004 miniscule margin also applies to all the dead, illegal, and stolen votes in the 2008 election. It goes both ways. Have you suddenly found your faith in whatever madeup government and political demi-god you want because they share the same ideological blanket as you?

The 2000 election was decided by the Supreme Court. That was the appropriate measure to take. If you’re suddenly a believer in the rule of law then that was the only outcome the 2000 election was going to get. Too bad both the electoral system and the voters themselves still don’t take voting and its preparation seriously.

Face it… you didn’t believe in “democracy” or mob rule until your beloved Obummer received his “deification.” You neither respected Pres. Bush or wanted him to succeed based on many of your disingenuous comments and made-up figures and stats. It takes someone with a lot of common sense to take on those of both political parties and criticize them. As an American citizen, do you ever question your government unless it’s not of the same ideological persusion as you? Or is it democracy when people can’t stand up and take care of themselves instead of the federal government?

You’re full of it, Omu… but don’t let that stop you from clinging to all your old grudges and stereotypes.
#210

On March 16th, 2009 at 11:39 pm, emjem24 said:

Omu said:
The fact you compare gay marriage rights and the imposing of Sharia Law on the United States either shows that you are a) massively desperate to paint gay marriage in the most negative light possible or b) atrociously ill-informed. I would imagine it’s both.

I don’t think you would know what a comparison is if it actually hit you in the behind. You see only what you want to see and in the process draw from my comments something (a comparison) that was never there. I don’t mind civil unions but that’s as far as I go. Stop speaking for all the gays who DON’T want to get married already. You and the radical segment of the gay community can push your lifestyle and rub people’s faces in it but it only alienates people more. Sharia law is real and already being practiced in Great Britain. You wanna put your head in the sand about it… fine. However, don’t put up some false comparison that I didn’t make to make excuses.

I’m not as ill-informed as you that’s for sure and the negative light that you focus on traditional Americans is really telling of the fact that when you can’t win the argument, you force the conversion or brainwashing.

Hah, because I am the sole source of condescension on this blog? Have you not noticed that two members of this site have, on countless occasions in the past single hour, told me that I am bound for hell because I am not an enlightened Christian?

Right4life and Jangar have nothing to do with the fact that you can’t make a decent argument. You come on this blog and present unproven arguments and cite made-up questionable statistics and yet you think that you can’t be challenged. They’re being as condescending to as you are every time you call people homophobes who don’t believe in gay marriage. What does that say about you?

I think you’re bound for hell for different reasons than Jangar and right4life. I’m not overly religious myself but I do believe in God and do have a bit of spirituality to keep me centered. There are actually a couple of atheists who post on this blog who aren’t off the charts unreasonable (such as zeroangel) as you are.

It doesn’t take religion to know when somebody is either not in control of their life, not possessing of common sense, or hate Conservatives and make it a well-advertised statement on this blog.

Mookie made a good point the other day that applies to you as well. It’s all or nothing with you libs. If you can’t succeed in getting support for your pet causes you demonize the opposition and alienate them more. The same goes for the GOP who can’t find a fiscal conservative bone if they were doing exploratory surgery.

For you, it’s more about the precious pink pony of gay rights than what’s really fair or right for the entire country.
#211

On March 17th, 2009 at 12:13 am, txlawgeek said:

For all his political skills and his capturing of the nation’s desire for change in the 2008 election, Mr. Obama, a product of Harvard Law School who calls upscale Hyde Park in Chicago home, has shown little inclination to strike a more populist tone.

Speaking as a three-year resident of “upscale” Hyde Park, Chicago, I think this is excellent proof some members of the media are just making stuff up. Upscale, compared to what? Eight Mile?
#212

On March 17th, 2009 at 12:23 am, alaskangrizzly said:

That group is nothing more than inbreds with signs.

I wish I could get front row seats to your last interview.
#217

On March 17th, 2009 at 8:48 am, Trollman said:

Omu said:

Are Obama’s numbers going up or down?
Solid majorities still support him; that’s what’s important.

What is important isn’t where we are so much as where we’re going. And Obama’s numbers are going down. Translation: The American people gave Obama a chance, they don’t like what he is doing, and his numbers are falling.

Omu said:

When the GOP wins (or, as was the case in 2000, steals) a majority of votes,

Hey, liar, Bush won every single recount. Every. Single. One. I guess you only like democracy when your guy wins, eh?

Omu said:

You either believe in democracy, or you don’t.

Which is why you respect Prop 8, the will of the people, right?
#218

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:19 am, Misscheryl said:

May I suggest OMU’s post go unanswered. This person obviously has a bone to pick with God and his vitriol hatred is only flamed here which is why he posts here. He likes to feel rebellious, put upon so he can excuse his feelings of being cheated and wallow in them. Those who respond to him only serve this pathetic purpose and give him reason to feel superior to you and to God. Pray for him though. The Democrat party is almost completely comprised of disgruntled, rebellious, malcontents such as OMU and the answers he seeks will not be found, cannot be found on a blog. Some people don’t feel alive unless they are spewing hatred and feeling put upon. Don’t buy into it. If he didn’t really believe in God, he would be indifferent not just try to “appear” indifferent, instead he hates God, therefore he knows God exists – he just doesn’t like Him very much.
#219

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:22 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

Now as this new day dawns I ask myself:

What can I do today to worry Obama and Company, trolls and wimps? Generally, usually, I have a cup of coffee or three in the morning but lately I have been having tea. Something Revolutionary about it I suppose. But then I am nothing but an “inbred with a sign and a gun (several of both thank you)

Have Tea Bag
Will Travel

—
Keep the change-I’ll keep my guns
#220

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:24 am, jangar said:

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:19 am, Misscheryl said:

Spot on. His type shakes their puny fists at a Holy God and says “Not Your will be done, but MINE.”
#221

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:30 am, sonofdy said:

OMU seems only to care about gay marriage. Which is his right to do. But my god, don’t you think the destruction of the entire american economic system is SLIGHTLY more important???
#222

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:32 am, right4life said:

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:19 am, Misscheryl said:

you’re right…sometimes I like to play ‘whack-a-wacko’..its a weakness!
#223

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:32 am, Misscheryl said:

jangar – they shake their fists and say “You did this to me! So screw you!” Unfortunately, we all do that to an extent! When we hate our neighbor, we are doing it…anyway, I’m as guilty as the next person. Is a struggle that’s for sure.
#224

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:39 am, right4life said:

don’t you think the destruction of the entire american economic system is SLIGHTLY more important???

but this is what the left wants..the US to become a socialist/fascist state..and no longer be a world power. they want us to follow the lead of european ‘betters’.

Since conservatives don’t bow down before the liberal elite in the US or europe, we earn the hatred of pseudo-elites wanna-bes like omu. what omu and his ilk don’t understand is they are held in more contempt by the actual liberal elite than we are. to the true elites people like omu are nothing more than lackeys..wanna-bes..
#225

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:40 am, GladzKravtz said:

Misscheryl said:

May I suggest OMU’s post go unanswered.

Good gosh yes! Time to move on!

thetoysurgeon said:

highjacked

You got that right!

right4life and jangar, Y’all kicked some extreem(’s) butt!
#226

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am, sonofdy said:

Did OMU really say “get your facts right” then link to an OPINION page???

LOL

BTW 1 million dead would mean 1 in 24 would be dead with about the same number crippled and twice that wounded. The country couldn’t be functioning with about 10% of its people out of the game.
#227

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am, publiuswarmac9999 said:

The other day, a Congressman was handed a tin and told to open it. Inside were tea bags. The Congressman was told to count the tea bags. He counted 29 tea bags. The man who handed the Congressman the tin said that every one of those tea bags represented an angry constituent.

Folks, the Tea Parties are scaring the hell out of the Obamanites and their socialist minions. The next step beyond Tea Parties is Tar and Feather Parties. We need to keep pressing until these socialistic bums are thrown out of office.
#228

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:42 am, jangar said:

Misscheryl – No better way to love a neighbor than to pray for them and help them see the truth. To haul an enemy to heaven takes a lot of humility.
#229

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:42 am, sonofdy said:

to the true elites people like omu are nothing more than ~~lackeys..wanna-bes~~ SLAVES..

Fixed it. Obamabots activate!!!
#230

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:45 am, jangar said:

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am, publiuswarmac9999 said:

Did the congressman then place the tin on top of his head and go to lunch?
#231

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:47 am, sonofdy said:

jangar. No, he probably just had a cup of tea.
#232

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:47 am, sonofdy said:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/17/gates_readies_big_cuts_in_weapons/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment

So much for supporting the troops.

OFF TOPIC but important.
#233

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:52 am, jangar said:

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:47 am, sonofdy said:
jangar. No, he probably just had a cup of tea.

Not a lot of sense trying to talk to most congressmen…they didn’t study history.
#234

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:54 am, sonofdy said:

Not a lot of sense trying to talk to most congressmen…they didn’t study history.

You mean something happened in the past with tea in america???
#235

On March 17th, 2009 at 9:59 am, jangar said:

sonofdy – They studied (how to undercut the system of constitutional) Law (for personal gain) 101.
#236

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:02 am, sonofdy said:

Well they all got an A in that class.
#237

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:04 am, torabora said:

duh1 is NOT a change agent, he is a chaos agent!
#238

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:11 am, jangar said:

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:04 am, torabora said:
duh1 is NOT a change agent, he is a chaos agent!

You mean a community organizer? More like community activist!
#239

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:13 am, chapoutier said:

sonofdy – They studied (how to undercut the system of constitutional) Law (for personal gain) 101.

No. Undermining the Constitution for Personal Gain is a 400 level third year course you can only take after having completed a number of prerequisites. First you have your Questioning the Constitution that every 1L takes. Then you usually take Undermining the Constitution either your second semester 1L or in your second year. Then, of course, you also have to have taken the Law of Gain (which is a survey course, covering both personal and non-personal gain, offered as an elective in most schools).

It’s very rigorous.
#240

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:17 am, jangar said:

It’s very rigorous.

No doubt! I stand corrected.
#241

On March 17th, 2009 at 10:19 am, jangar said:

That’s right up there with going to semenary and taking “The Bible Is A Hoax”. Must be a liberal thing…
#245

On March 17th, 2009 at 8:00 pm, Omu said:

May I suggest OMU’s post go unanswered. This person obviously has a bone to pick with God and his vitriol hatred is only flamed here which is why he posts here. He likes to feel rebellious, put upon so he can excuse his feelings of being cheated and wallow in them. Those who respond to him only serve this pathetic purpose and give him reason to feel superior to you and to God. Pray for him though. The Democrat party is almost completely comprised of disgruntled, rebellious, malcontents such as OMU and the answers he seeks will not be found, cannot be found on a blog. Some people don’t feel alive unless they are spewing hatred and feeling put upon. Don’t buy into it. If he didn’t really believe in God, he would be indifferent not just try to “appear” indifferent, instead he hates God, therefore he knows God exists – he just doesn’t like Him very much.

If you want to believe that, fair enough. Delusion is a pre-condition for faith in a God, afterall. But I can assure you that I really don’t believe in God. Any God, for that matter. I assume you don’t believe in Thor, Zeus, Appollo, Buddha, Ganesh, Mohammed, right? That makes you an atheist. I just go one god further.
#249

On March 27th, 2009 at 9:53 pm, skye said:

Tired of government bailouts and ’stimulus’ plans? Join the American Sheepdogs for a Tea Party!

Chester County Tea Party
April 4th – Noon till 1 pm
High & Market Streets
West Chester, Pa

http://americansheepdogs.com
http://www.midnightbluesays.com