For those of you who may have caught President Obama’s speech before a joint session of Congress last night, you know that he proposed a $440 Billion program to stimulate the economy through a jobs program and tax lower proposals.
There will be those who come down on both sides when discussing how effective this will be to actually improving our economic situation.
So I basically have three questions for you:
- Do you think it has, if passed, any hope of working?
- Do you think that Republicans will oppose it solely because any success will help Obama’s re-election hopes?
- Do you think the Republican actually want the economy to stay bad so it improves their chances of defeating Obama?
Wheat & Tares 
The AP Fact checked the speech. Obama lied his tail off, as usual.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_JOBS_FACT_CHECK?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-09-08-19-52-31
Do you think it has, if passed, any hope of working?
If passed, more jobs will be created than will be if it doesn’t pass. But no matter how many jobs that is between now and November 2012, it will be deemed “not enough.”
Do you think that Republicans will oppose it solely because any success will help Obama’s re-election hopes?
Yes, but few will be doing so consciously. There is always some valid reason to oppose virtually every plan, and those inclined to find that reason will do so. But if it were John McCain proposing the exact same thing (and he would be proposing something very similar if he were president), Republicans would be supporting it.
Do you think the Republican actually want the economy to stay bad so it improves their chances of defeating Obama?
Well, when Rick Perry labels even a good faith attempt to improve the economy as “treasonous” one has to wonder.
There is no quick fix for this. The job market will not operate properly until people can move to where the jobs are. But they can’t move because they are underwater on their mortgages. What would clear this up faster than anything would be for the government to buy up foreclosed properties and hold them off the market (possibly renting them out). That would reduce supply and drive up real estate prices. Once prices rise enough that people can move while covering their existing mortgages, the job market will begin to recover. Then, the government can slowly put their properties on the market without being disruptive. This will take years, but fewer years than just waiting for the real estate market to clear on its own.
#1 EL: You and I must have different definitions of “lied his tail off.”
The first stimulus was not nearly big enough. Whether this one is is unclear.
Surely Republicans have an interest in stalling any effort to improve the economy between now and the election.
“1.Do you think it has, if passed, any hope of working?” Not really. Obama’s lack of private sector experience shines through. He’s attempting to help the wrong people and to create the wrong types of jobs. The newly unemployed are skilled, middle class people, mostly from corporate America. So let’s try to create jobs in small business (risky in any economy, but even worse now), government / education (surprise, surprise), and low paid / low skilled jobs that assume people need basic skill training. Companies don’t hire employees when there’s no demand for their products & services. Until there’s demand, there are no jobs. The companies with the best bet to create new jobs are those with global reach.
“2.Do you think that Republicans will oppose it solely because any success will help Obama’s re-election hopes?” If they really want Obama to fail, they should let him throw away $440B on impractical ideals.
“3.Do you think the Republican actually want the economy to stay bad so it improves their chances of defeating Obama?” Dumb question. All candidates, including the incumbent, want the planets to line up at the right time to demonstrate they are the hero we need.
Even economists are doubtful that this proposal will work. They have said that Obama is attempting to stimulate the wrong way.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/shovel-ready-take-ii-would-obama-infrastructure-plan-create-jobs-now/
This isn’t about playing politics, this is about a President who has been “laser focused” on jobs for 30 months, but has yet to put a bill on the floor.
The House has passed 12+ job bills since the R’s got control. The Senate can’t even be bothered to pass a budget in over 800 days. The Dems owned Congress for the first two years of Obama’s presidency, this isn’t the GOP fault. This is all on Obama.
Do you think it has, if passed, any hope of working?
Probably a little, but our problems are much bigger than these quick fixes they keep trying. But it won’t pass anyway.
Do you think that Republicans will oppose it solely because any success will help Obama’s re-election hopes?
Is this a question that even needs asking? Opposing Obama at all costs seems to be the very definition of Republicans these days. How did Mitch McConnell put it? Oh ya… “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”.
Do you think the Republicans actually want the economy to stay bad so it improves their chances of defeating Obama?
Again, I think this is stating the obvious when it comes to Republican politicians. But I think that most regular people want to see the economy improve, regardless of the political ramifications. Corporate america seems to be doing it’s part to contribute to the problem as well by holding on to the mountains of cash they currently have on hand and not hiring. They know that any Republican president would yield a friendlier business environment for them, so why would they do anything that might help Obama out? If a Republican does manage to beat Obama next year, I’ll bet that corporate money starts flowing again, and jobs numbers improve based solely on that.
From what I am hearing, the “proposal” isn’t even a bill yet. It hasn’t been written up into a bill, just a speech.
Which means that Obama hasn’t even sent it to Congress yet. Hard to block a bill that doesn’t even exist.
I think the body language last night says it all. And the rhetoric we will hear this weekend will confirm.
If it was really about keeping the economy bad so Republicans could win the presidency, the best move would be to pass the president’s Stimulus 2.0, wipe their hands clean- watch it not work, and then hang it around his neck.
1. Do you think it has, if passed, any hope of working?
Solyndra anybody? I don’t know why people think that a central planner(s) can figure out what is best for hundreds of millions of people. The free market let’s those people decide for themselves and gives incentives to those people to decide for themselves what is best for themselves.
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2011/09/solyndra.html
2. Do you think that Republicans will oppose it solely because any success will help Obama’s re-election hopes?
Two wings of the same bird of prey. If the republicans were in office they would be doing the same things and the democrats would be opposing it.
3. Do you think the Republican actually want the economy to stay bad so it improves their chances of defeating Obama?
Sounds like the questions you hear from the republicans, that some believe the democrats are purposefully crashing the economy right now so that they can introduce one more step to the new world order.
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sen-mcconnell-making-obama-a-one-term-president-is-my-single-most-important-political-goal/
Nothing else needs to be said. Americans were stupid enough to give power to these kinds of idiots, then we get what we deserve.
Welcome back Dan.
EL,
“The AP Fact checked the speech. Obama lied his tail off, as usual.’
A Politician Lied? Shocking, it has never happened before!!!!!!!!!
Oh, I guess it did the night before at the Republican debate. Maybe, that was the first time?
I think Obama said it will be paid for, not that it was paid for. he actually has no control over that, Congress does.
Hawk,
“Dumb question.”
My, Hawk, I thought there was no such thing as a dumb question. I am crushed……
“Oh, I guess it did two nights before at the Republican debate. Maybe, that was the first time?”
The Republican debate was the night before, not two nights before. At least get your dates right if you expect to be taken seriously.
Jeff,
At this point, it doesn’t matter if we have a Republican or a Democrat in office, it doesn’t change the systemic problems we have in our economy. It doesn’t matter if we raise taxes or cut taxes. It wouldn’t make a difference if we collected 100 percent of the income from the rich. We have a spending problem – a huge spending problem, with entitlements and defense taking the lion’s share. The American public will never voluntarily cut these expenses, so the problem will progressively get worse until it collapses. Until this problem is solved, our economic woes will continue.
We have just dropped to the 5th most influence economy in the world. Our credit rating has dropped. In 2008, we were #1 with an AAA rating. It is going to get progressively worse until we solve our systemic problems. The people with money in this country understand this and so they are not going to invest. Unless, and until, they invest things will not get better. This is why the first “stimulus” didn’t work and this is why a second “stimulus” won’t work.
Will,
I partially agree with you. it doesn’t matter who is in office as long as special interests and the self-interest of politicians take precedence over the good of the country and the people.
We do have a spending problem, but right now, we have a revenue problem. The tax base is much lower due to out of work people and tax breaks given to special interests and corporations.
The money is there for investment, but giant corporations are sitting on it.
The supreme fallacy is that entrepreneurs will not invest on new ideas. this is wrong, there are plenty of people making tons of money off of our bad economy or in spite of it. Corporate profits have never been higher.
Obama gave a speech, about passing a jobs plan that he hasn’t even made into a bill yet, and hasn’t submitted to congress.
On the other side, the among the bills the house has passed, but are stuck in the Senate are The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act, The Energy Tax Prevention Act, Disapproval of FCC’s Net Neutrality Act, The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act, The Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act and The Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act. That doesn’t even touch the various bills the House has passed to reenergize the Gulf. Oh yeah, plus the House passed a budget.
But it’s the Republican’s that are the problem and are obstructionists…
Welcome back Will.
Dan, I still love you man.
Jeff,
“The money is there for investment, but giant corporations are sitting on it.”
Not entirely true and my first point will lead to my second point. Some American corporations are doing well, but they are not investing within the United States. They are investing their resources outside of the United States because it is a better investment. Ford, Caterpillar and Wal-Mart are three good examples. Ford had a 260 % increase in sales in India; and, CAT now gets more revenue outside the US than inside. Within a few years, Wal-Mart will have more stores outside the US than inside.
“The supreme fallacy is that entrepreneurs will not invest on new ideas. this is wrong, there are plenty of people making tons of money off of our bad economy or in spite of it. Corporate profits have never been higher.”
Look at Corporate P&L statements and look at their revenue sources. As indicated above, they are doing well because they are investing outside of the US – Brazil, China, India, Russia and Mexico. As indicated we have dropped to the 5th most influential economy in the world. The US has 25% (which is more than China, India, Russia, Brazil and Mexico combined) of the worlds GDP and we are ranked 5th. If that doesn’t tell the story, I don’t know what does?
It is an expense problem my friend. $2,500,000 times $1,000,000 (2.5 TT TT=Trillion, BB = Billion) is plenty. It is more than China 1.2 TT, Brazil 460BB, Russia 262BB, Mexico 237 BB and India 153BB COMBINED. We have plenty of revenue.
“On the other side, the among the bills the house has passed, but are stuck in the Senate are The Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act, The Energy Tax Prevention Act, Disapproval of FCC’s Net Neutrality Act, The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act, The Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act and The Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act.”
Thank goodness they are stuck.
“But it’s the Republican’s that are the problem and are obstructionists…”
You mean they are trying to stop the mad spending. Thank Goodness.
Dan:
Question 1: No.
Question 2: No.
Question 3: No.
Answering 1 in the negative vitiates any need to respond to 2 or 3. So let me respond specifically to 1.
Suppose Robert E. Lee, after seeing Pickett’s Charge smash itself to pieces on the third day of Gettysburg, gathered up the die hards on a day four and told them that sending half the same force against the Union Center was REALLY, REALLY going to work this time, and that anyone who thought differently was putting politics above the interest of the country. Think Longstreet might have considered that Lee was a complete fool — for reasons other than politics?
If Obama thinks that THIS time it’s going to work, than HE’S the idiot we’ve got to vote out of office. If Obama doesn’t think this is going to work, than HE’s the politician putting the interests of his cronies ahead of the good of the country by spending as much for them as possible for as long as possible, and he’s the Chicago-style machine politician we’ve still got to vote out of office.
Harsh? Well, after Obama set the Afghan withdrawal date for September 2012, right in the middle of the fighting season (but conveniently right before the Presidential election) instead of before OR after the fighting season, increasing US casualties for no discernible military purpose, the Pickett’s charge analogy is more than apt.
Jeff:
The last half of the following link explains why businesses and consumers alike are holding on to their cash:
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2011/09/09/human_nature_isnt_part_of_the_monetary_handbook_99242.html
We all expect to need our resources much more later as long as the political and monetary leaders of the Western world continue to behave in the same grow-the-government mindset.
“The Republican debate was the night before, not two nights before. At least get your dates right if you expect to be taken seriously.”
It’s OK with me if you don’t take me seriously. I will feel much less guilty if it is reciprocal. BTW, I fixed it, smart guy.
Firetag,
“The last half of the following link explains why businesses and consumers alike are holding on to their cash:”
The problem with these links is that always support our own POV. there usually not very objective.
“They are investing their resources outside of the United States because it is a better investment.”
Actually, this is not true. The American companies have always been successful growing their business outside the US without having to resort to massive outsourcing of jobs. Sure, you need some local resources, but what does growth in the Indian market have to do with sending all call center jobs and processing jobs over there?
In fact, the productivity level of those outsourced resources is so much lower than US resources that it takes 2X to 4X the number of people to do the same job as one person in the US or Western Europe.
but, as I am in process of analyzing labor allocations for a project I am working on, I can tell you that on paper the cost differences between the average US/ Western Europe resource and an Asian/African resource are mind blowing. So it is understandable why the spreadsheet managers do it. But the net gain is not so apparent.
Jeff:
I don’t know how a “theory” is supposed to be “objective” except in how well it explains observations. The observation of relevance here is that people are not spending despite fantastic levels of stimulus. The link suggests why. The Keynesians keep being surprised every month, instead.
When my theory always fails to match the next data point, I start looking for a less crappy theory. 😀
I am neither Republican or Democrat, and I am as unhappy as anyone else with things as they are.. But there is one thing that we all should remember, IMO. There would have been no Obama without George W. Bush. Furthermore, not to defend Obama in any way, but he walked into a crapstorm of historic magnitude in 2008. Would we be better today with McCain? I doubt it. We need another party or two to break the disfuntion that has become our Federal Government.
Firetag,
Um, a couple of things. Jeff never clarified what he meant by “working” when he asked question #1. Thus it is left to us to choose what “working” means. I believe that within the parameters of the bill Obama means to give to Congress, what that bill sets out to do will work. Is it enough to push the economy out of this slump? Hell no! Obama needs a stimulus on the range of $2 trillion or so in order to get this economy stimulated. But he has no political capital to spend in return for a $2 trillion stimulus plan. So under the parameters of the $450 billion or so plan Obama put forth, it will work in achieving its limited goals.
The ironic part in all of this right now is that generally speaking you guys on the right claim we should heed the markets and do the market’s bidding. Well, right now, the market thinks US debt is solid gold! In fact, the market is essentially screaming and begging that the US government borrow money right now! The market is saying “please borrow, we won’t even charge you interest, that’s how much we hope you borrow our money!”
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates-bonds/government-bonds/us/
just look at those prices! There has never been a more golden opportunity for the United States government to borrow than right now. Free money. No interest for the life of the loan! That’s the market speaking. But you guys on the right were never actually for the market. You’re overriding concern has ALWAYS BEEN to make Obama a one term president. That overrides everything else, including your most supposedly cherished principles and ideals.
Ouch! I just strained my ocular muscles on that eyeroll.
So, everyone that disagrees with Dan is a fascist only motivated by getting their guy in power. Nobody has principles and ideals but Dan. Right. So much for rational discourse.
hawkgrrrl,
You have to excuse Dan, he hasn’t read “Economics in One Lesson” by Hazlitt. Especially the part where he talks about when you take money from the productive sector and give it to government you ruin your economy, not help it. The difference between a good economist and a bad one, the bad one only sees the seen, the good one also sees the unseen.
Once again, don’t know why people think a few “wise” men in a dark room are smart enough to know what hundreds of millions of people need.
Dan:
Yep, given my choice between investing in the US and investing in nations in Europe today, I’d invest in the US, too. But where Europe is today, the US will be soon if we continue down the big government path.
I don’t see you making the argument anymore about how wonderful things are in the European economy that you were making in some of the earlier threads in the archive. That’s because their money is fleeing here. You are, of course, free to put your euros where your mouth is — or will that be drachmas by the time Obama actually submits a bill to Congress? 😀
You gotta admit things are pretty bad when even the Germans are trying to put curcuit breakers between themselves and the EU economies.
By the way, when the credit card companies send you all of those 0% credit applications, throw them away. 0% interest isn’t free; you still have to pay back the principal you borrow, and 16 trillion dollars is a lot of principal.
GC:
The only quasi-party that can have any effect by the 2012 election is the tea party movement. Parties in the 2 party dynamic can be replaced in only limited ways. The most common is for one party to become so disliked that it vanishes. Bush may have done that for the Republicans, but Obama’s overreach blew it for the Dems for the 2010 and 2012 cycles. We’ll see what happens after that.
Firetag
I just wonder how France got its seven parties.
It appears that the model economy may be Australia as was pointed out sometime ago by Geoff-A. they are virtually unaffected by the current crisis in the world. I’ll need to do some more research on how they did it.
GC:
They probably didn’t start with two. 😀
Firetag,
They started with a guillotine ….
hawkgrrrl,
Firetag,
Europe’s problems are, ironically, not related to the social services they provide their citizens. Ironically, they’re too capitalistic!
I guess you tell that to everyone who borrows money to invest, eh? You shouldn’t do it, because after all, you’ve gotta pay it back at some point.
What idiocy
my comment is in moderation
GC: Yeah, but it was more than two guillotines. 😀
Dan:
I approved your comment. It’s so ironic to think that ultimately it was the European right that seems to have sold the left the rope to hang ITSELF — exactly the opposite of what the Communists predicted at the height of the Cold War.
And your argument about borrowing is EXACTLY why we got bubbles in housing and spiraling credit card debt. I tell that to people (and governments) who clearly don’t know how to handle credit.
So Dan, I would think you would be a Brownian (pure statism, government creates the money directly) (monetarily) but you choose the fascist (mix of private/governmental entity) route of Keynesianism instead, why?
Firetag,
The economic success of the world over the last 200 years is built upon credit. You can’t create capital without credit. You can’t create anything without credit. To dissuade someone from borrowing is not good, Firetag. You’re gonna tell someone they can’t borrow far more than they have in order to purchase a home? You’re gonna tell someone they can’t borrow far more than they have in order to purchase a car? Or to go to school? It is plain stupid to say, ‘hey, let’s get rid of credit altogether and all live within our means.’ The US government, right now, is capable of borrowing trillions more than it currently borrows without breaking a sweat. That’s why we’re currently fighting two wars on credit. That’s why our debt is the safest harbor for those seeking refuge in a harsh financial world. To make a claim that the US is like Greece, that it can’t handle its debts just flies in the face of the markets you guys on the right claim we should listen to.
Um, Dan, as long as the Fed is around there cannot be a free market, so there is no free money, the zero percent interest would cost something, eventually, it may be unseen to you but that is the difference between a good economist and a bad one, the Keynesians apparently don’t see the downside. That’s why we have bubbles. Like what led to the great depression and then made it continue, thank you Federal Reserve.
Jon,
Your understanding of the market is terribly below par. You don’t even understand what the treasury bond yield means to actual brokers and market specialists. Forget your silly Mises crap theory. It has absolutely no effect in real life.
Jon,
“Um, Dan, as long as the Fed is around there cannot be a free market, so there is no free money, the zero percent interest would cost something,”
The fed is one reason and the manipulation of the economy by the financial community is the other. One is the master, the other the slave. I am not sure which is which.
Dan:
I understand credit quite well, thank you. I also understand the difference between credit worthiness and lack of credit worthiness.
Credit isn’t all or nothing, as you (intentionally?) seem to accuse me of thinking. Buying a $200K house doesn’t mean I can buy a $500K house, let alone a summer home as well, plus a couple on the side to flip. Being able to support a debt/GDP ratio of 25% doesn’t remotely imply you can support one of 125%.
You are going to have to show some consistency: are the evil bankers forcing people to buy more than they can afford, or are the evil bankers starving people of credit that carries no risk? Or does it just depend on the day of the week, or the needs of the Democratic administration at the moment?
Jeff: Your master-slave analogy ignores the possibility that the relationship is actually symbiotic, with government the third part of the trinity. Officials may change hats, but they are still the same officials and move easily through all three forms of power.
Jeff,
The Fed is the financial community and the government rapped up in one bundle, the federal reserves is a private business with ties to the government, I guess you could call it a pseudo-governmental pseudo-private company.
AKA fascism (Merger of business and government, as I define it).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_reserve
Dan,
OK, so you want me to listen to the likes of Paul Krugman, the Keynesian, Nobel winner, who called for a housing bubble to get us out of the dot com bubble, the guy who continually commits the broken window fallacy saying that earthquakes, 9/11, etc are good for the economy? The guy that says we should spend more money from thin air to solve our problems, contradictory to what the prophets have taught us?
No, I think I will stick with the people that make logical sense. You know, the ones that said as far back as 2004 (if not even earlier) that there was a housing bubble. (The keynesians didn’t even do that, or maybe they did believe it would happen but chose to lie to us and say everything is just fine). I choose to listen to the people that teach personal savings are good. Hmm, isn’t that what the prophets have taught us? Isn’t that what Christ taught us? Isn’t that what the bible, Book of Mormon, etc have taught us? But the Keynesians teach us that personal savings are bad and that we should spend, spend, spend. No, I’ll listen to the people that actually care about principles and the poor and humanity in general.
Dan,
You going to answer 42? Why do you choose fascism over socialism? You say you’re an avowed socialist so why do you also say you like fascism?
Jeff,
Factor this into when you study Australia and let me know if there is truth to it, as I am not planning on looking into it:
Firetag,
You probably don’t know this, but credit capability is not a one size fits all, and is dependent on many factors. Right now, Greece cannot borrow. Their treasury yields are off the charts. That’s because the market has analyzed the Greece situation and judged their ability to pay back their loans as pretty bad. On the other hand, the United States has rock solid credit worthiness and ability, as judged by the fact that investors are fleeing into the safe hands of US debt. They trust the US government as always paying its debts. The only reason why the S&P downgraded America’s debt worthiness by one point was because they recognized that a segment of the Congress (i.e. Republicans) were willing to hijack America’s credit worthiness in order to defeat Barack Obama. So they said, “you know what guys, I think investors should start getting just a tad worried that America might not be able to pay off its debts…Americans elected idiots to Congress in November 2010, and we’re worried they might actually destroy the economy.”
I’m trying to be nice here, Firetag, but this comment is completely dumb. I honestly have no idea what comments of mine you base this desire for consistency on. I don’t know where I said bankers are “forcing” people to get into more credit than they can afford. Nor do I see where I said bankers are not lending out credit that carries no risk. Perhaps you can clarify this attempt at a quip.
so Jon defines fascism as the merger of business and government. That’s one of the most whacked definitions I’ve ever heard.
as a typical free marketer, Jon fails to attribute comments to the rightful owners….see, in Jon’s world, there is no copyright…after all, that’s controlled and enforced by the government. All ideas are not your own, but the collective, belonging to all, and to none. So Jon’s comment on Australia is his own, except that it is not
http://mises.org/Community/forums/p/23036/401644.aspx#401644
“The only reason why the S&P downgraded America’s debt worthiness by one point was because they recognized that a segment of the Congress (i.e. Republicans) were willing to hijack America’s credit worthiness in order to defeat Barack Obama.” Downgrading our S&P rating IMO does more damage to Obama’s viability as POTUS than do the threats of a pool of GOP ignoramuses who think walking away from debt is a reasonable solution. Are you implying that the S&P is a tool of the GOP? Or that the GOP outfoxed them?
The real problem with the GOP isn’t that they are fiscally conservative. It’s that the Tea Party is not the real GOP but a front for the right wing evangelical pod people who’ve taken over the GOP over the last 30 years. There are rational conservatives out there. But their voices are drowned out by the hubris and nonsense.
fascism as the merger of business and government, … actually, most fascist states have that sort of merger, though I’ll admit many socialist states do as well.
I’ll have to think about the implications of that.
As for the Tea Party, the Tea Party is a populist reaction to many things, completely co-opted at the moment by anti-populist forces.
The entire situation is fascinating to watch as some groups jump in, others are lost and the entire movement starts to evolve. I’m hoping it does not turn into something completely fearful, but it certainly is an amazing thing to see.
Populist movements reacting against business groups who have overrun their regulators usually do not end up where this one is at the moment.
Business groups overran the regulators because the regulators were too stupid or corrupt (possibly both) to shut it down. Loopholes exploited by less reputable people result in an unfair free market. Lack of foresight or too much complicity – the result in the same.
“The real problem with the GOP isn’t that they are fiscally conservative. It’s that the Tea Party is not the real GOP but a front for the right wing evangelical pod people who’ve taken over the GOP over the last 30 years. There are rational conservatives out there. But their voices are drowned out by the hubris and nonsense.”
AMEN!
The religious right that will ensure we get another Bush type elected ( heaven forbid). Unfortunately, they won’t allow either of the two most qualified (Romney or Huntsman) to get the GOP nomination because of our faith. These two have the best mix of public and private sector experience of anyone running. In the last go round, Romney was 10 times more qualified than McCain, but lost because of the religious right. What a shame. Obama might not have been elected if we wouldn’t have put Bush II (McCain) as the nominee.
The trick is to appeal to the base to win the nomination and move to the Center to win the general election. But, the fractures are very deep in the Republican party at this point, which is why I say they still lose next November. if one of the far righties (like Rick Perry) get the nomination, he has no hope of moving left enough for the majority of voters who are solidly in the middle.
The only caveat to that is how bad the economy is by that time. Then it might be a question of anyone but Obama, like it was for Carter and Ford.
right wing evangelical pod people
I need to do a post on that. I think the common perception is dramatically unfair to many, but without explaining why I don’t think anyone will hear me.
Though a good start is reading (some very old entries) by Brad Hicks, such as http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/118585.html
Is that why Ben Bernanke has to print money. What’s he call it? Quantitative Easing, that’s right. If we were doing so good there wouldn’t be much reason for “Quantitative Easing”. Come on Dan let’s see some honest analysis here.
#54, Dan,
That’s why I put it in quotes and as you could tell, it was really easy to find, you’re the one that says you don’t like seeing links to Mises, so I didn’t put it in for you, you saying you want to see Mises links now? No you just like attacking the person, you don’t like discussing the actual ideas because you wouldn’t have legs to stand on.
You going to answer my question yet? Why do you support the Federal Reserve? Why don’t you let it be the actual government printing up all the money instead of some private institution?
“GOP ignoramuses who think walking away from debt is a reasonable solution.”
Actually, we could walk away from 1.5 trillion pretty easy since it is just money that the fed created out of then air and then lent to the US government.
“Business groups overran the regulators because the regulators were too stupid or corrupt (possibly both) to shut it down. Loopholes exploited by less reputable people result in an unfair free market. Lack of foresight or too much complicity – the result in the same.”
That’s the history of regulation, monopolies created by government sponsored by businesses that make it harder for the smaller, less connected businesses to compete against the larger companies. Read “Conceived in Liberty” by Murray Rothbard for a fairly thorough analysis of this happening in the 13 colonies back in the 1600s and 1700s. Quite fascinating.
One of the problems with solely reading materials written by ideologues is that you turn out the same way. Their analysis becomes your analysis but without the basic fundamentals that derived that analysis. Whether it is correct or not. And so it becomes a parroting exercise rather than a discussion.
I worked in politics at local, state and national levels. Staffing and some delivery of funding.
Priority #1: get re-elected. Priority #2: get the money to achieve priority #1.
Everything else is secondary: spending out of whack, our children go to war because there is little employment here at home, rebuild America when we can spend billions for our contractor friends in Iraq and elsewhere?
Take care of your friends who take care of you is the political motto and it always will be.
If you do not vote every single one of them out of office you are sending them a message. That message is we are lemmings who follow the propaganda your political party (pick one: dems, repubs, tea whackos, indies) puts forth.
BOHICA in 2012 and you are to blame.
For those of you who are busy tongue bathing Paul Krugman…
“What happened after 9/11 — and I think even people on the right know this, whether they admit it or not — was deeply shameful. Te atrocity should have been a unifying event, but instead it became a wedge issue. Fake heroes like Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and, yes, George W. Bush raced to cash in on the horror. And then the attack was used to justify an unrelated war the neocons wanted to fight, for all the wrong reasons.
A lot of other people behaved badly. How many of our professional pundits — people who should have understood very well what was happening — took the easy way out, turning a blind eye to the corruption and lending their support to the hijacking of the atrocity?”
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/the-years-of-shame/
Krugman is filthy waste of flesh.
I consider myself a member of the “TEA Party”, and I am not a right wing evangelical pod person.
TEA – Taxed Enough Already.
My objections have nothing to do with the Presidents skin color. However culturally Bill Clinton acted of darker skin color than this Ivy League Ill Corn Fed Professor we have in the White House now.
My objections are completely based on his policies and his lack of intestinal fortitude.
@Jeff,
You directing 66 at everyone in the discussion or something or are you trying to single people out? If I not discussing something properly please let me know, but I going from the basic principles. I know I don’t understand everything, neither do I claim to, I don’t study this stuff all the time, neither do I want to. I do know, though, that some people take pleasure using violence to tell others how to act and behave, and that, I resent.
“My objections have nothing to do with the Presidents skin color. However culturally Bill Clinton acted of darker skin color than this Ivy League Ill Corn Fed Professor we have in the White House now.”
So, what you’re really saying here is that Bill Clinton is by far the “bigger n*****” than our current President?
Perhaps it’s time for you to slowly back away from the keyboard for awhile before you go all “white and delightsome” on us.
Jon,
“You directing 66 at everyone in the discussion or something or are you trying to single people out?’
It was merely a general statement allowing those to whom it applies to self-select.
Rich Brown
This is not a good time to play the race card. Obama’s failure has absolutely nothing to do with race and everything to do with lack of experience. He has never had a real job. He has never had to make payroll, or provide benefits with his own money. He doesn’t have a clue how to run a small business let alone the largest economy in the world. He is a true blue socialist that actually thinks the economy should be managed by the government and not by the people. He is a miserable failure because of his ideology not his race.
Holy crap! I just “liked” a Will comment. Isn’t this a sign of the second coming??
Thanks Hawk. I have had a significant change of heart. If you only knew how much. I have been out due to some serious family issues – issues that have significantly changed my outlook on life – hopefully for the better. Suffice it to say it was an Alma like experience for my family.
Will, Ron was responding to EL Frederick, who was the one playing the race card. (and, btw, EL, when someone starts a comment with “this isn’t about race”, it’s almost always about race. Nobody would have thought it if you hadn’t made sure everyone knew it was on your mind.)
regarding #69 – Um, I’m trying hard this month not to mock others, but can we do something about that comment? Surely, it violates just about every reasonable comment policy ever written. Maybe just including a “stupid comment” note at the beginning would work.
Dude, you started out on shaky enough ground. That one EPIC.
Sorry, meant to type “Rich” and typed “Ron” instead.
Thanks for pointing that out, Ray.
I appear to have wandered into a game of Angry Birds on this blog. Lots of name-calling. Perhaps the underlying problem isn’t that Obama is a socialist or a foreigner or a post-colonialist or whatever (and I don’t think he’s any of those things) but that he’s a Democrat. And there are folks who simply can’t accept the legitimacy of a Democratic President.
There were forces at work planning Clinton’s impeachment before he even took the oath of office. Many of those same folks are doing all they can to make Obama a one-term President. But if he’s reelected (and if he runs against an empty-hat like Rick Perry there’s a good chance he’ll get a second term), there will suddenly be a lot of talk about impeachment.
Well, I’m an independent, and I voted for Obama. But I wouldn’t do it again. However, if the GOP isn’t offering up anything better than Bachmann and Perry I might just abstain.
As for impeachment, the dogs may already be out… FBI raids Solyndra last week. Since this was Obama’s pet green jobs project, which lost half a Billion in tax payer loans, this could blow up worse than Fast and Furious and the rabid incompetence over at the ATF & Justice.
Riddle me this batman;
IF deficit spending on two wars is what caused the recession; how is more deficit spending on an infrastructure bank going to fix it?
I think Obama’s got it in 2012. Even if we are in a depression by then, he can accuse big business Republicans of economic foul play trying to insure him as a one-termer. He can say the magic word “racism ” and that’ll be that.
All the opposition has is impeachment. Again, any way you look at it, we are still paying for GW Bush. If only we woulda let Gore have it in 2000, where would we be? He woulda been a lame duck. Bush mighta gotten in in 2004, but who knows. It’s hard to believe we would be any worse.
OK, now I’m getting silly. But it is interesting to condider. In any case, I blame the electoral college.
(and, btw, EL, when someone starts a comment with “this isn’t about race”, it’s almost always about race. Nobody would have thought it if you hadn’t made sure everyone knew it was on your mind.)
We TEA Party peeps get accused of racism all the time. Which I think is just silly. I have no beef with Obama’s skin color and when I used to blog I spent a good deal of time calling those *birthers* idiots. If nothing else, Hillary would have beaten him to death with the Birth Certificate thing in the primaries if he hadn’t been properly checked out.
I think Obama was fairly elected, and that his presidency is legit. (At least as legit as George W Bush in 2000.) I wish it had been Hillary or McCain – either would have been better than Obama, but such is life.
Obama has done nothing in office but blame other people for his failures. Even the signature law of his Presidency, “Obamacare” was written by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
Obama has consistently voted “Present” on the economy; has not come up with any new ideas, just continued the failed “stimulus” bills of G.W.Bush and Keynes.
He has regulated the energy sector out of being able to create jobs. He has put in regulations that cause Business not to want to hire. He is running jobs out of the US and into Mexico and other foreign lands like India.
He is a completely failure of a President. Which is too bad, it will put the civil rights cause back 30 years.
Obama says “pass this bill” 12x in less than 10m this morning in his little tantrum this morning on the Tele.
Pass the bill… oh you mean the bill that he hasn’t even sent to congress yet? Pass the bill… you mean the on that nobody has seen? Pass this bill… that way we can find out what’s in it, just like Obamacare.
Complete political theater, all rhetoric, no substance.
“We TEA Party peeps get accused of racism all the time. ”
Could it have been the signs, the chants and what the Tea Party clowns were saying last year?
Until someone told the children to behave themselves, that they are looking like a bunch of nutcases to the rest of the country.
So they cooled the show, but that does not mean the feelings have changed…..
“Could it have been the signs, the chants and what the Tea Party clowns were saying last year.”
*eyeroll* step back away from MSNBC…
@Jeff,
#72, Oh good, then you mean you were directing it at me. Mises is really well read and read all the different ideas about things.
Undirected comments like that don’t seem to be very effective since everyone thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong, so, unless the person is humble and open to criticism, open criticism without direction seems ineffective and useless.
As for impeachment. Obama should be impeached for the same reason GW should have been impeached, war crimes. Obama is just as much of a war criminal as Bush was. Of course, everybody has their team that they are cheering for, so they can never see if their blue team or red team is in the wrong. Ra, ra, ra, go team!
EL
Your comments suggest some type of machinations from Obama. With Obama, I think it comes down to a guy that is just way over his head when it comes to the economy. I know Rush and other are claiming his actions are purposeful – a willful and wanton destruction of the economy to achieve some type of social justice. As I stated earlier, this is a guy that has never had a job in the private sector. I will give the guy the benefit of the doubt and caulk up this great depression to pure incompetency.
“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
In order to get re-elected he has to change course; and stop doubling down on failed policies. The excuse that he is just incompetent isn’t going to get him re-elected.
“Obama should be impeached for the same reason GW should have been impeached, war crimes.”
Must be a Ron Paul supporter.
“*eyeroll* step back away from MSNBC…”
Bigger Eyeroll, Get real.
“Bigger Eyeroll, Get real.”
You tube? Seriously? Your telling me to get real, and you use you tube as proof?
Thanks for proving yourself a joke. You Tube is about as credible as Wikipedia for anything about the Church.
“Thanks for proving yourself a joke.”
Real nice.
“Real nice.”
Any idiot can use You Tube to post something that consists of cherry picked video and then over-dubbed with falsehoods. Michael Moore, and Anti-Mo’s have been doing it for years.
If you expect to be taken seriously, try not to use amateur tactics.
@E L Frederick,
Much good journalism comes from youtube. Yes, they should cite their sources, but then again Mainstream Media (MSM) typically don’t cite their sources either. So I don’t know why you would trust them either.
“Much good journalism comes from youtube.”
I have yet to see anything honest from you-tube when it comes to politics or religion.
“Yes, they should cite their sources, but then again Mainstream Media (MSM) typically don’t cite their sources either. So I don’t know why you would trust them either.”
I don’t trust them, but at least you can predict where they twisted the facts. As Reagan used to say; trust but verify.
@E L Frederick,
You must be looking in all the wrong places then. What you should say is, “I have yet to see anything that conforms to my previously established biases.” Then you would be talking. There’s a lot of good journalism out there. Take a look at copblock. There’s a tone of other ones too. You may find them offensive but this is the only true source for real information, i.e., citizen journalism. Yes, take all with a grain of salt because they all have biases and so do we, how are you going to trust your own bias, or rather, get pass your own bias to find the truth?
And I suppose your going to say next that the 9/11 Truthers and the Obama Birther’s and Ron Paul’s crazies are all quality Journalism.
Please!
I read as close to the raw news reports as I can online. I don’t need some idiot trying to squeeze a serious news story into sound bites for me. I read as many articles about the same stories as I can, and if it interests me I then follow up with more.
I find video to be a waste of time. I would much rather read the web-article with links and documentation.
That’s why I canceled cable over two years ago and now watch entrainment shows via Netflix or Amazon.
EL
“I have yet to see anything honest from you-tube when it comes to politics or religion.”
I have enjoyed the Mormon Messages Podcast on You Tube. I find it quite inspirational. I find President Monson and the Apostles words to be inspiring whether on You Tube or General Conference.
“I have enjoyed the Mormon Messages Podcast on You Tube. I find it quite inspirational. I find President Monson and the Apostles words to be inspiring whether on You Tube or General Conference.”
That I would get from the Mormon Channel or the LDS.ORG site. I prefer to go to a trusted source.
I have to admit, this has been entertaining in a really morbid way.
Back the OP: responses….
1) More Keynesian economics, the very delusion that donkeys and elephants alike bought wholeheartedly into that brought us into the current mess. Not a soft ice shard’s chance in a blast furnace will Obama’s plan succeed…
2) Some Republicans will oppose merely to appear to be against the “bad guy”. Most offer as the alternative, “bad guy lite”. A few with a grasp on reality oppose Obama’s plan because it’s further delusion, but they are few…
3) Typical loaded question from a liberal who refuses to discuss the issue on its merits alone. Do the Republicans want the economy to tank in order to get an elephant in the WH come 1/20/2013? Not by that method if they’ve any brains, because tanking the economy now would be effectively to elect another Herbert Hoover in the next go-round. The next President would surely shoulder the blame for a situation not necessarily of his (or her) making. Ethically, most couldn’t knowing do such a thing. Even those that could realise that it’d backfire big time.
The best reason to oppose Obama’s plans are the only legitimate ones: an honest assessment that the man in the Wh doesn’t have a friggin’ clue.
Will,
I thought you changed. Clearly you didn’t…
If it quacks like a duck….it ain’t a cat…
Dan,
I will apologize for the way that I responded in the past, but I will not apologize for the truth. The truth is Obama is a miserable failure. For the sake of those that are suffering I pray for success. I hope and pray this nation can escape the economic mess we are in – a mess made worse by the poor choices of Obama and the House and Senate for his first two years in office.
All,
Once again, as the scriptures say, if we, as a people are righteous, we, as a people will be blessed. We are not righteous, hence the reason we have the likes of Bush and Obama becoming president. Warmongers, keynesians, who don’t leave the people be to do their own things.
Douglas,
“Typical loaded question from a liberal who refuses to discuss the issue on its merits alone.”
A simple yes or no would suffice. A question is not a discussion. Lighten up.
Ray,
“I have to admit, this has been entertaining in a really morbid way.’
It has tended to mirror the sickness that pervades the country.
Will,
“Once again, as the scriptures say, if we, as a people are righteous, we, as a people will be blessed.”
Why not translated…. 😀
I’ll let God be the judge of the righteousness of the citizens of America. I’ve been taught by Jesus Christ not to judge others’ righteousness.
@Dan,
You must have missed the JST on that one then, and you must have missed one of the big points of the scriptures. Showing us righteous and unrighteous civilizations. So what are you saying about Mormon, who comments on the righteousness of societies constantly through the BoM.
Oh, Dan, the contrarian.
You still haven’t answered my questions.
you’re no prophet Jon and have not been given the authority from God to be a judge on the righteousness of a people.
By their fruits ye shall know them.
BTW, I have a testimony of Christ. I am a prophet.
Have you changed your mind Dan? Are you a supporter of the Iraqi war now? Is that what you are saying? Come on Dan, see what is right in front of your face. Even the apostles are on record about the wickedness of this people.
“Have you changed your mind Dan? Are you a supporter of the Iraqi war now? Is that what you are saying?”
I am a supporter of the Iraqi war. I am also a supporter of the War in Afghanistan. I spent time in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m a father, a husband, and I’m a Mormon.
I’m sure there are thousands of Iraqis right now who are just wishing for Saddam to be back.
“Gee, if we were just being gassed and raped by Saddam and his sons. How much better our lives would be. How I long for the days that my daughters, sisters, or friends were taken into Saddam’s palaces never to be heard from again. I really miss having the electrodes hooked up to my sensitive parts I could really use a good torturing right about now.”
A terribly poor one, if true. You give Jesus a bad name.
E L Frederick,
good thing we don’t do that…oh wait… DOH!
Thanks Dan, I love you to.