First Time The MSM Has Ever Ignored Warren Buffett: The press accounts I've read have wildly underplayed Obama supporter Warren Buffet's criticism of the President on CNBC today. It's fairly pointed , and Buffett comes back to it , suggesting he has a message he's trying to deliver. [E.A.]:
BUFFETT : ...And, Joe, it--if you're in a war, and we really are on an economic war, there's a obligation to the majority to behave in ways that don't go around inflaming the minority. If on December 8th when--maybe it's December 7th, when Roosevelt convened Congress to have a vote on the war, he didn't say, `I'm throwing in about 10 of my pet projects ... [snip] ...
JOE : Yeah, but you might--might not have fixed...
BUFFETT : But I say...
JOE : You might not--you might not have fixed global warming the day after--the day after D-Day, Warren.
BUFFETT : Absolutely . And I think that the--I think that the Republicans have an obligation to regard this as an economic war and to realize you need one leader and, in general, support of that. But I think that the--I think that the Democrats--and I voted for Obama and I strongly support him, and I think he's the right guy--but I think they should not use this--when they're calling for unity on a question this important, they should not use it to roll the Republicans all.
JOE : Hm.
BUFFETT : I think--I think a lot of things should be--job one is to win the war, job--the economic war, job two is to win the economic war, and job three. And you can't expect people to unite behind you if you're trying to jam a whole bunch of things down their throat. So I would--I would absolutely say for the--for the interim, till we get this one solved, I would not be pushing a lot of things that are--you know are contentious, and I also--I also would do no finger-pointing whatsoever . I would--you know, I would not say, you know, `George'--`the previous administration got us into this.' Forget it. I mean, you know, the Navy made a mistake at Pearl Harbor and had too many ships there. But the idea that we'd spend our time after that, you know, pointing fingers at the Navy, we needed the Navy. So I would--I would--I would--no finger-pointing, no vengeance, none of that stuff. Just look forward. ..[snip] ...
BUFFETT : Well, I was going to mention to Joe that you've heard this comment recently from some Democrats recently that a `crisis is a terrible thing to waste.'
BECKY : Yeah.
BUFFETT : Now, just rephrase that and since it's, in my view, it's an economic war, and-- I don't think anybody on December 7th would have said a `war is a terrible thing to waste, and therefore we're going to try and ram through a whole bunch of things and--but we expect to--expect the other party to unite behind us on the--on the big problem.' It's just a mistake, I think , when you've got one overriding objective, to try and muddle it up with a bunch of other things.
P.S.: He's against "card check." ("I think the secret ballot's pretty important in the country.") ... 7:19 P.M.
Least convincing editorial ever?** WaPo 's ed board admits 1) earmarks aren't the problem 2) the "omnibus" spending bill now before Congress would mean a "significant jump in domestic spending" of either 6 or 8 percent 3) this increase will be "built into the annual baseline" and as a practical matter, set the floor for future spending; 4) if you add in the already-passed stimulus, the "overall increase in domestic spending is a staggering 80 percent;" 5) Obama's 2010 budget "appears to envision another increase in excess of 6 percent in this category."
Yet the Post endorses the omnibus bill. It argues the only alterntive is the GOP's spending freeze. Huh? Why not block the bill, cut the increase in across-the-board spending on existing agencies in half, and substitute equivalent spending on stimulus programs that actually are reversible once the economy recovers? A Third Way! It's the sort of thing a presidential veto might accomplish, if there were a president around. ... [ via Corner ]
** Harmless bloggy hyperbole. But it's a pretty strange editorial. ... 6:19 P.M.