I thought you couldn't pardon yourself.

The politics of this are very good for Obama.

His jawboning to the legal limit while the current resident fiddles wit turkeys is the most effective contrast of old and new that can be made.

If nothing else, Obama can help in some small way prevent the economy from really sliding off the cliff because of the incompetence of the current team.

Why do you think he says, "Help is on the way." It, at the present, is the most effective thing he can do at this time.

It seemed to me he realized he didn't have a choice. If the Big 3, and the markets, collapsed totally he'd have an insoluble problem on his hands.

Bush was sitting back and letting things play out. He wouldn't bail out the automakers, he'd love to break the unions, and his Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary was predictably looking at solutions that involved helping bankers shore up their institutions.

The country had no confidence that rank-and-file workers were going to get any relief, or that the auto industry was going to make it. Obama needed to let people know that he was going to do what needed to be done, and if he couldn't do it now, he'd do it soon.

Bush is counting the days till he gets out. Obama is restoring market confidence in a very calculated way.

Hah! Chocolate Thunder, yours and the first comment at ThinkProgress
are hilarious! I need a new keyboard!!!

The difference between Obama and Bush in press access is painfully obvious: Obama isn't intimidated by the press, or afraid that he'll say something which will make him look like a blooming idiot; Bush, on the other hand, is terrified that, if he answers media questions for long enough, even the sheep therein will realize that he has the IQ of a log.

It's big! It's heavy! It's wood!
-Z

All that media access, but none for FOX. From TP:

Fishbowl DC notes that Fox News has not been allowed to ask a question at any of the four press conferences that Barack Obama has held since winning the election.
Update - Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs insists that there's "nothing nefarious" going on. "I would tell them, get a good question and stay tuned," Gibbs said of Fox News.

Heh.

"I think it's more likely Obama is filling a leadership void and trying to settle the financial markets and offer investors some reassurance about the future."

It's working!

Obama needs to be challenged on his economic team. Having Robert Rubin's son helping select the team has meant that at the same time that Robert Rubin was begging for a bailout of Citigroup, Geithner was busy helping Citigroup as was Summers.

If the NY Times op-ed page from yesterday can question the economic team, and writers like R. Kuttner, Naomi Klein, and William Greider can do so also, why does this blog ignore the substance? Reporters need to challenge on this issue but they're not. Naomi Klein reported in Rolling Stone and the Nation that the British bank injection plan gave alot more control and influence to the government than the American ones have done. Someone needs to pick up from her reporting and mainstream the issues.

Sounds as if someone at MSNBC is aware of Internet traditions and has mastered the art of the Shorter.

To paraphrase the translation of my favorite Latin phrase:

"Cogito ergo sum" = Obama thinks, therefore he is the textbook definition of AWESOMENESS!!

:)

Has the press been giving him donuts yet?

Just think, if McCain had won, he'd have suspended his transition team half-a-dozen times by now and attacked Iran.

Bush held only 19 press conferences from the start of 2001 to the end of 2004.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/10/20/publiceye/entry2111365.shtml

It's going to take a while to adjust to having an adult back in the White House. Obama accords his countrymen a simple respect, one that is our due. That's what press conferences are all about, after all. It boils down to this: unlike Bush, a man pathetically incapable of admitting error, Obama is a genuinely self confident guy. Come that inevitable day when he errs and something hits the fan, he'll step up and assume responsibility. Or so I'd bet. Bush, on the other hand, once equated the average American as possessing the mentality of a 10 year old. True to himself, he conducted himself accordingly- like a 13 year old bully. The differences between the two can hardly be more stark, and thank God for it.

Obama has nothing to do with the stock market.

Remember this when the Dow plunges to new lows in a few months...

I doubt you'll blame Obama for the drop.

jonno, that is an oversimplified view of the world.

the truth is that the president (or president elect) might, in some circumstances, have some impact on the market. or maybe not.

investor confidence or lack thereof is certainly a factor in market performance. so in the absence of any more-likely driver - economic or other news or reports, for example - if there is particular and relevant action by the President (or President elect) on a given day that may well be an explanation, within the context of broader market forces, for the movement in either direction.

so some days, rah-rahing from Obama may not be responsible for market moves, up or down. other days it may be. it depends on the entire universe of what other factors are or are not pushing on the market.

"Is the president-elect proving his commitment to transparency, openness, and media access? Maybe, but I kind of doubt it. I think it's more likely Obama is filling a leadership void and trying to settle the financial markets and offer investors some reassurance about the future."

Yes, Obama's definitely filling a leadership void. And this country needs him to do that.

Though Obama has received much publicity about using Lincoln's "team of rivals" approach, I believe he's reflecting FDR's fireside, radio chats...TALK to the nation, communicate, reassure and act.

Either way, Obama frequently has been addressing everyone in this country. What a far cry from our current president, who has done none of the above. That's not leadership -- it's retreat, taking no responsibility and hiding out. Bush can't wait to leave office and dump his destruction on Obama to clean up.

With his inauguration less than two months away, President-elect Obama has shown more wise and effective leadership than Bush has in the past eight years.

This country can't wait until Jan. 20 for a new president.

So, I'm glad Obama's taken the lead the past week or so.

We need new leadership right now.

To jonno and like-minded people.... Serious people don't attribute wild swings in the stock market to politics. -- at least not when things go along as usual. (No major catastrophes to deal with, that might get bungled by the president)

However, according to GOP logic and quite a few of the conservative pundits on TV, we have soon-to-be President Obama to thank for this wonderful 1000 point+ recovery. After all, they've been trying to blame every one-day downturn on Democrats for the last several months.

- It's the Obama recession, and he isn't even the President yet.
- The DOW dropped, along with all the world markets, a few days before the election, and that was proof that the rest of the world didn't like the possibility of a Democratic President.

So.. according to Republicans' feeble logic-skills, the good news is all thanks to Barack Obama (oops forgot to insert the Hussein part)

The world is rejoicing, markets are trying to settle down, competent people being nominated for cabinet posts, reaching out to foreign leaders, including the so-called enemies, etc...

So far, none of the doomsday prediction from the far-right have come to pass.

I wonder why?

I am suggesting, however, that Obama may have contributed some calm to the markets.

And, with the caveats that you already wrote, Obama's election MAY have contributed to the 1,000 point decline that preceded the 1,000 point rise.

The current economic climate MAY be unrelated to the fact that Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress since early 2007. The housing bubble MAY be totally unrelated to the fact that congressional Democrats strongly urged banks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to engage in subprime lending. Or, the collapse of the housing bubble MAY be due to lax oversight of lending by the Republican administration in the last 7+ years.

maybe so. maybe so.

Another point about Obama's pressers: Some (especially at Politico) are kvetching about his taking few questions. But listen to his answers. Obama has had more to say, and has said it more sensibly, than any national political figure in recent memory. Will the MSM be able to cope with all this substance?

"All that media access, but none for FOX."

Their questions probably revolve around this type of thinking:

Why do Socialists like yourself hate America so much and want to take away our guns ?

And Marketeer, is that, perhaps short-hand for Amway Marketeer ?

Obama has had more to say, and has said it more sensibly, than any national political figure in recent memory. Will the MSM be able to cope with all this substance?
Well possibly after someone explains to them what it is, but based on past performance I certainly wouldn't count on it.