Good lord in the morning. The market has been in free fall for a year and a half and now they want to pin it all on Obama for not reversing it in six weeks. I think these guys are still in shock that their world has changed. For a long time they were able to be fat, dumb, and happy with an ever-rising market and huge year end bonuses. May I remind them that they steered us into this ditch with the FOOLISH risks they took on exotic securities.

I'm not saying I am 100% happy with every part of Obama's economic plan, because I am not. But blowback from Wall Street and the WSJ was 100% predictable.

>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123629969453946717.html
>
>Snippet:
>
>It's hard not to see the continued sell-off on Wall Street and the growing fear on Main Street as a product, at least in part, of the realization that our new president's policies are designed to radically re-engineer the market-based U.S. economy, not just mitigate the recession and financial crisis.
>
>Martin KozlowskiThe illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end. Instead of combining the best policies of past Democratic presidents -- John Kennedy on taxes, Bill Clinton on welfare reform and a balanced budget, for instance -- President Obama is returning to Jimmy Carter's higher taxes and Mr. Clinton's draconian defense drawdown.
>
>Mr. Obama's $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents -- from George Washington to George W. Bush -- combined. It reduces defense spending to a level not sustained since the dangerous days before World War II, while increasing nondefense spending (relative to GDP) to the highest level in U.S. history.
>
>and:
>
>On the growth effects of a large expansion of government, the European social welfare states present a window on our potential future: standards of living permanently 30% lower than ours. Rounding off perceived rough edges of our economic system may well be called for, but a major, perhaps irreversible, step toward a European-style social welfare state with its concomitant long-run economic stagnation is not.
>
>Where is the supporting evidence for the standards of living statement? Everything I've read shows EU standards of living above ours.
>
>And Charles Krauthammer gives his 2 cents worth:
>
>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/03/a_dishonest_gimmicky_budget.html