The April 30th GDP report issued by the Bureau of Economic Analysis ("BEA") of the U. S. Department of Commerce was a freeze-frame quarterly snapshot of a highly dynamic economy -- an economy that another source indicates was in significant transition while the snapshot was being taken.

Compared to the 4th quarter of 2009, the annualized growth rate of the GDP had dropped by 43%. Depending on your point of view this could be interpreted either as a glass that is "half-full" or a glass that is "half-empty":

1) The "half-full" reading would mean that the GDP numbers confirm that the recovery had at least moderated to a historically normal growth rate. In this scenario the good news would have been that "the economy is still growing," albeit at a historically normal rate. The bad news would have been that a normal growth rate would only warrant normal P/E ratios in the equity markets.

2) The "half-empty" reading would have meant that the near halving of the GDP's growth rate confirmed that (at the factory level) the economy had finally begun to "roll over". If so, the BEA's announcement portends even lower readings in the quarters to follow.

What was clearly missing in the "half-full/half-empty" debate was a feel for whether the level seen in the snapshot's glass was stable or still dropping. At the Consumer Metrics Institute our measurements of the web-based consumer "demand" side economy support the "half-empty" reading of the new GDP data. The new GDP numbers (which are subject to at least two revisions) agree with where our "Daily Growth Index" was on November 24th, 2009, 18 weeks prior to the end of 2010's first calendar quarter -- and when that index was in precipitous decline.

Why does the Obama administration want to kill the popular Senate Bernie Sanders amendment to audit the Fed? The amendment may be up for a vote later this week and there are reports the amendment vote will be hit with that magical, fictional 60 to pass, instead of 50, which is the norm for amendments.

According to the Wall Street Journal:

Obama administration officials have declined to weigh in on any specific amendments, with one exception: a move by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) to give the government more power to audit certain operations at the Federal Reserve. Fed and administration officials have signaled they would fight to stop it at all costs. Mr. Sanders has more than a dozen co-sponsors.

At all costs. Really? Including a veto? What is wrong with wanting to know what happened to $2 trillion dollars? Why would the Obama administration demand to remove public disclosure out of the financial reform bill?

These are strange days. There was a time when there was a clear divide between fiction and reality, but those days are passing. For instance, this amusing article from Andy Borowitz.

(The Borowitz Report) – Eleven indicted Somali pirates dropped a bombshell in a U.S. court today, revealing that their entire piracy operation is a subsidiary of banking giant Goldman Sachs.
There was an audible gasp in the courtroom when the leader of the pirates announced, “We are doing God’s work. We work for Lloyd Blankfein.”

The article was meant to be snarky and not taken seriously, but those are the kind of stories you have to keep the closest eye on. They tend to have a way of transforming from punchline to headline.

"I have always noticed that people will never laugh at anything that is not based on truth."
- Will Rogers