Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Memetrics
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktStocks are lower this morning after the Bank of Japan declined to add further stimulus measures to the economy. Bonds and MBS are down.
First quarter GDP came in at 0.5%, lower than expected. Consumption and the core price index both rose. This is the advance estimate, so it will be revised twice over the next two months. Positive contributors to GDP included personal consumption, residential fixed investment, and state / local government spending. Negative contributors include inventory, non-residential fixed investment, and federal government spending. This is the lowest quarterly print in 2 years, although weakness in the oil patch does explain a good chunk of it.
The Fed maintained interest rates yesterday, and made few changes to the language of the FOMC statement. The most substantive change was that they removed the language regarding weakness in global financial markets. They noted the US economy slowed recently however the labor market continues to improve. Housing and capital expenditures continue to remain soft. After a few headfakes immediately after the release, the bond market finally decided that the statement was good news and rallied a couple basis points. Stocks took the “glass half full” view and rallied as well. Here is Mohammed El-Arian’s take on the statement.
Initial Jobless Claims rose to 247k last week. The Bloomberg Consumer Comfort index rose to 43.4 from 42.9 last week as well.
Realtor.com lays out the hottest real estate markets this month. The West Coast and the Rust Belt lead the pack. Has the Rust Belt finally become too cheap to ignore?
Traffic down? Warm weather will help things.
Filed under: Economy, Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
Frist!
LikeLike
Another legacy piece to go with the Atlantic one on his foreign policy:
“President Obama Weighs His Economic Legacy
Eight years after the financial crisis, unemployment is at 5 percent, deficits are down and G.D.P. is growing. Why do so many voters feel left behind? In conversations with our writer, the president offered a theory.
By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN”
LikeLike
This should go over well:
LikeLike
http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/04/28/john-boehner-talks-election-time-in-office/
In which Boehner calls Cruz a “miserable son of a bitch”.
He didn’t like the hijacking of his Speakership, I take it.
LikeLike
Mark:
In which Boehner calls Cruz a “miserable son of a bitch”.
You buried the lead. He also called him “Lucifer in the flesh”.
LikeLike
Word choice on Vox is always revealing:
“How a too-clever attempt to oppose women in combat turned into a bill opening the draft to women”
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11526292/women-draft-open-combat-military-amendment
I’d have gone with “subjecting women to the draft” myself, but who knew that being forcibly inducted and possibly killed in a war was the overriding goal of feminists these days?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Women have every right to be uprooted from their lives and force to fight and kill (and be killed) in whatever random wars DC politicians decide to get us into, because they can die just as good as any man!
That being said, I’ve known a lot of women who seem to have a perfect temperament for combat.
LikeLike
KW:
Women have every right to be uprooted from their lives and force to fight and kill (and be killed) in whatever random wars DC politicians decide to get us into, because they can die just as good as any man!
If ever there was an indication of the feminist culture of victimhood, women getting exempted from the draft being described as discrimination against women has to be it. Feminist lunacy knows no bounds.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s all about who is perceived to be making the decisions, if you ask me. If exemption from the draft was something foisted upon us by SCOTUS because of a lawsuit brought by feminists, it would be hailed as an achievement for the sisterhood.
And like so, so, so much of this stuff, it’s an argument about absolutely nothing. The chance of us having a draft outside of outright Hollywood-style armageddon is negligible. At which point, most of these idiotic arguments would not matter.
LikeLike
Absolutely hysterical.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-republicans-still-must-not-rally-around-trump/2016/04/27/432f1aca-0c96-11e6-8ab8-9ad050f76d7d_story.html
LikeLike
McWing:
Absolutely hysterical.
Leave it to the WaPo to turn this particular Trump hater into a Trump defender.
He is a unique threat to the Republican Party and to the country.
He is certainly a threat to the Republican Party, but the country? Please. The socialism of Sanders, which is in large part adopted by Hillary, poses a far bigger threat to the nation. As does the on-going abuses of power being perpetrated by the WaPo’s own favorite Barack Obama.
This is not because beating Mr. Trump is a likely outcome. It is because, morally, there is no other option.
Morally? Seriously? Someone who endorsed Bill Clinton twice is going to lecture us about morality?
He erodes the discourse, frequently and flagrantly lying about things such as whether “scores” of terrorists have recently entered the United States as migrants — one of numerous false claims he made in a speech on foreign policy Wednesday.
Spare me the crocodile tears about an “eroded discourse” and frequent lying. Trump lies with no more frequency or flagrancy than Obama, Hillary, or Sanders. The only difference is that his lies are not in service to policies that the WaPo likes.
He proposes undermining foundational civic institutions such as the free press. He shows contempt for the separation of powers by threatening the speaker of the House.
The WaPo endorsed Obama. Twice. ‘Nuff said.
Where his policy agenda is not thin, it is scary, such as his call to ban Muslims from entering the United States.
“Scary”? Please. Whether or not it would be good policy, there is nothing about it that should “scare” anyone. It is not as if the safety of the US depends upon allowing Muslims into the country.
None of these options promises to put a Republican in the White House. But each would at least spare some Republicans the moral stain of association with Mr. Trump.
An editorial staff that has endorsed the Democratic nominee in all but one presidential election since 1976 (it endorsed no one in 1988), including both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama twice, is in no position to lecture anyone about the “moral stain of association”.
Frankly, I am more concerned about the “stain of association” I have with the WaPo as a fellow Trump hater than I am with the stain of association I will have with Trump should I be forced to choose him over the execrable, loathsome, corrupt, contemptible, and ideologically bankrupt Hillary.
LikeLike
“Frankly, I am more concerned about the “stain of association” I have with the WaPo as a fellow Trump hater than I am with the stain of association I will have with Trump should I be forced to choose him over the execrable, loathsome, corrupt, contemptible, and ideologically bankrupt Hillary.”
Trump’s most effective tool to unite Republicans behind him will be his enemies, especially if they keep up the morality lectures like this.
PL today features a robust defense of how the protesters who got in a riot with the Orange County Sheriffs department were “incited” to do so by Trump’s rhetoric.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/29/protests-outside-trump-rally-turn-violent/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_protests-550am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&tid=a_inl
LikeLike
As McWing likes to say: “Why you make me hit you, baby?”
LikeLike
The biggest threat Trump poses to the country is some liberal in his administration proposing some Sanders-like proposal and him saying: yeah, that sounds good. Fabulous. Do it.
And the Democrats going: hey, let’s do this thing, pack it with more goodies we want, and then take credit for it.
My problem with the criticism of Trump from the left is my problem with most political criticism. Dedicated ideological partisans often become detached, and will continuously gloss over the facts to make their point. Trump hasn’t called to ban Muslims, he has called to temporarily halt the admission of Syrian refugees, and potentially other immigrants from terrorist states, until some way can be found to vet them. What this way would be and win immigration would be allowed again is not addressed to my knowledge, but he simply hasn’t called to ban al Muslims from the country.
But, indeed, any limitations or restrictions on immigration should not be considered particularly “scary”. It’s a policy that would be voted on and challenged and would work its way, with modifications, through the political process or stall entirely.
“Morally? Seriously? Someone who endorsed Bill Clinton twice is going to lecture us about morality?”
No one who will endorse Hillary should lecture us about morality. I consider most politicians to be largely amoral creatures driven by their own ambitions, but the Clintons have been entirely amoral through their political careers. I can’t think of a candidate more likely to abuse the power of the presidency and neglect her duties than Clinton. I think even Trump would be a little more likely to have some sense of duty, if none of decorum, when it comes to the presidency.
The amazing thing to me is that such editorials make any pretense at attempting to convince anyone but the choir. Warning Republicans that, if they don’t do as the WaPo tells them, it will stain their souls . . . that is not a compelling argument to make to someone who disagrees with you. I doubt there will be a single Trump supporter he reads such an editorial with anything but derision. They might drive a few to go and check and make sure their voter registration is up-to-date.
LikeLike
KW:
The biggest threat Trump poses to the country is some liberal in his administration proposing some Sanders-like proposal and him saying: yeah, that sounds good. Fabulous. Do it.
Precisely.
LikeLike