63 responses so far ↓

• 1 R.A.M. // Mar 10, 2009 at 6:21 am

  “All hail Obama!” Curer of America’s ills, both economic and physical! That is if you buy into the lib “Obama-bot’s” ignorant hype!

  I will believe he can perform “miracles” when he waves his hand and makes Demon-RATS stop spending OUR tax dollars like a drunken Kennedy!
  THAT, would be a miracle!

• 2 camojack // Mar 10, 2009 at 6:35 am

  Ah, yes…politicized political science.

• 3 Darthmeister // Mar 10, 2009 at 7:34 am

  Scott, I thought partial birth abortion was a cure for Global Warming.

  Well, at least Nancy Pelosi thinks so.

  Obama of Oz … making the world more dangerous for western civilization with each passing day.

• 4 onlineanalyst // Mar 10, 2009 at 7:54 am

  With their overweening hubris, Obama and his vacuous mouthpiece Pelosi devalue language accuracy, science, and human life. It is breathtaking (literally) to grasp how much they believe that throwing tax payer dollars at creating utopias, “brave new worlds,” is their mandate. The cult of personality believes its own propaganda in the destruction of life and in the limiting of carbon-based life as a means to power. This pride is worth no more than a pile of spent cinders.

  Succintly said, camojack.

• 5 Newsman // Mar 10, 2009 at 9:18 am

  Seems to me Darth that the training camp for jihadists in Iraq that was created by Bush’s invasion was/is the real danger in this world !

  That and a climate that fostered the scum like Madoff to come up out of the primal ooze, admittedly aided by some Democrats as well.

  Seems to me that some similar scum came out of the ooze during Old Man Bush’s tenure as well such as Neil and Marvin Bush et al to feed on the S&Ls.

• 6 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 10, 2009 at 10:22 am

  Bottom Line: To separate morality from science is to deny Almighty God.

• 7 Hawkeye // Mar 10, 2009 at 11:53 am

  Another great article Scott. I particularly enjoyed the two reasons why stem cell research is important…

• 8 onlineanalyst // Mar 10, 2009 at 1:11 pm

  NRO has a great editorial on Obama’s life-chilling decision.

  Hey, newsman (and your adolescent-like buddies): Take your Axelrod astroturfing posts elsewhere. They are a distraction, wholly off-topic and predictable of your alternative-reality mindset.

  Your hero, the man-child who would be king, is doing just a dandy job in destroying the economy through redistribution of wealth, killing capitalism and entrepreneurship, and back-dooring taxes. He insults our allies and curries favor with our adversaries. He parties as if it is 1999 and disregards the Constitution that he swore to uphold. His leadership is only as deep as his puppetmasters and his teleprompters allow him. Now, go away, or post on the topic at hand.

• 9 Godfrey // Mar 10, 2009 at 1:15 pm

  RAM and OLA: re: the future of the GOP (previous thread):

  Some thoughts on the subject:

  In my opinion, David Frum has far more intellectual validity than Rush Limbaugh and other professional loudmouths like Mark Levin, Sean Hannity or Michael Savage, primarily because Frum’s audience is different. These guys are radio hosts: their rhetoric is intentionally bombastic, tailored to appeal to people who are mainly seeking to have their worldview reinforced. All Rush has to do is say something incendiary about “liberals” and he’s done his job; his listeners chuckle knowingly, glare at the Prius driver in the lane next to them and go on about their day. They’re all very smart people (Sean Hannity aside, perhaps) but their goal is to agitate and entertain.

  Frum and other intellectuals, on the other hand, face different expectations. They are expected to provide more support for their assertions, and their audiences expect a cogent argument rather than just a pithy sound byte.

  I used to listen to Rush a bit and found his wit fairly enjoyable. Often while surfing the net I’d come across his website and, based on my experience listening to the so-called “EIB Network”, I’d read transcriptions of his show.

  Fairly soon I realized that, absent his booming voice and well-timed inflection, he doesn’t really have that much to say. It’s all “mainstream media” this and “liberal elite” that. He’s funny, he’s witty, he’s pithy… but most of his reasoning is vapid. It is, no matter how often he rails to the contrary, intended to amuse.

  Most of the others are the same. The conservative radio people who do have an intellectual bent, like Dennis Prager, have been falling behind in the ratings race for years. It’s no wonder David Frum and other Republican intellectuals are worried by the ascendancy of Rush and his ilk to de facto party leaders.

  If I were a Republican and I saw my party’s message being reduced to a frenetic morass of shouting and spittle, I’d be worried too.

• 10 RedPepper // Mar 10, 2009 at 1:33 pm

  Newsman #5: Bernard Madoff, like many, many other members of the NYC financial elites, is a Democrat.

  He was politically active, donating $25,000 a year to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee as well as recent races by New York Sens. Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton and New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine.

  From Usa Today.

• 11 Newsman // Mar 10, 2009 at 1:41 pm

  Godfrey - very interesting and thoughtful comments !

  RedPepper - crooks are not defined by party affilliation. Dems can be just as crooked as Repubs and vice versa ! Neither has a lock on that skill !

• 12 upnorthlurkin // Mar 10, 2009 at 3:15 pm

  Brilliant as usual, Maestro Ott. What they refuse to acknowledge is the remarkable success with adult stem cells and of course, the fact that the embryonic research has been going on all along (since President Bush authorized it) with little to no sign of success. Of course, throwing (other people’s) money at everything seems to be the solution to all the problems facing the first affirmative action administration.

• 13 Darthmeister // Mar 10, 2009 at 4:28 pm

  Paliwood: How Palistinian Radicals Fake the News For Benefit of Western Media Outlets

  RedPepper - crooks are not defined by party affilliation. Dems can be just as crooked as Repubs and vice versa ! Neither has a lock on that skill !
  

  True, but this superficial “analysis” ignores the demonstrable fact that crooked and unethcial Democrats are often re-elected to office by brain-dead partisan Donks/liberals whereas crooked Republicans are dumped by Republican/conservative voters. This reality says far more about the moral character of your typical Donk voter.

• 14 Darthmeister // Mar 10, 2009 at 4:56 pm

  BTW, I can cite any number of Democrats who, in the midst of scandal and serious federal investigations, get re-elected … starting with Governor Blago of Illinois (DEMOCRAT).

  Here’s a list of scandalous Democrats who bluffed and blustered their way into being re-elected:

  Daniel Inouye
  Gus Savage
  Barney Frank
  Fred Richmond
  William Jefferson
  John Young
  Gerry Studds
  Mel Reynolds
  Ted Kennedy
  John Murtha
  Marion Barry
  Kwame Kilpatrick …
  to name a few.

  And if the nutcase Al Franken of Minnesota slimes his way into the Senate, he will have done so despite running afoul of tax laws with respect to his various political endeavors including Air(head) America.

  And when it comes to unethically feathering their own nests, Democrat officials are four times more likely than Republicans to commited tax fraud or attempt to enrichen themselves through illegal means.

  I wonder how Hillary Clinton really turned a $1000 “investment” into a $100,000 profit? Amazing how the media never really held her accountable for this transparent scheme yet left no stone unturned or trash can unmolested trying to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin.

  As is typical of the national socialist media, one only hears what liberal journalists and editors want the general public to hear.

• 15 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 10, 2009 at 4:58 pm

  Repent!

• 16 Libby Gone // Mar 10, 2009 at 5:08 pm

  Careful,
  I’m an Ott-Bot.
  Asivmov built me with Sue’s help .
  Global warming is a myth. The Earth is cooling.
  We will need to ride the Heavens in the not so distant future.
  _Libby

• 17 mindknumbed kid // Mar 10, 2009 at 5:28 pm

  The left is always looking to justify wrong behavior/bad decisions. They often have misplaced hope, even going as far as to place it in Barack Obama!

• 18 camojack // Mar 10, 2009 at 5:33 pm

  onlineanalyst // Mar 10, 2009 at 7:54 am
  Succinctly said, camojack.

  I presume you’re familiar with what Shakespeare said about brevity…

• 19 Laughing@You // Mar 10, 2009 at 5:43 pm

  Darthmeister,

  As a child, were you a “biter”?

  L@Y

• 20 mindknumbed kid // Mar 10, 2009 at 5:59 pm

  To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

  A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

  A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

  A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
  ( and a time when laughter is inappropriate…

  http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=14&chapter=30&version=9&context=chapter

• 21 mindknumbed kid // Mar 10, 2009 at 6:14 pm

  ) - Sorry, I’m literally nodding off as I sit and look at my computer screen. I had the same problem 24 hours ago.
  We could sure use some glowbull warming here this week, I fought with my 2008 International truck all day today. If we were to have 30 days of below zero weather, I could see myself driving through neighborhoods looking for parked Prius type vehicles to run over! Give me an older non-”green” truck any day. Maybe this truck has a problem and could be repaired to be useful in northern climates, but I am not convinced that there is a cure for whatever ails it. I was hoping our cold weather was over until Decemburrrr….

• 22 Newsman // Mar 10, 2009 at 8:11 pm

  Hey Darth:

  You recall what happened in the National Elections in Florida some eight plus years ago last November? That was a pretty neat grand piece of crookery wouldn’t you say ? Beats most anything the Dems have accomplished in the 75 years I have been on the scene !

  Now shall we argue over which party has the better grad school on political theft and chicanery ?

• 23 onlineanalyst // Mar 10, 2009 at 8:38 pm

  Heh! Obama Playing Cards for the Masses

  Scroll down to view the full deck.

• 24 Left Coast-Right Mind // Mar 10, 2009 at 9:25 pm

  Remember the good old days when the dead voted for Chicago politicians? Now we’ve got a Chicago politician in the White House who is going to let scientists grow embryos in a lab, then John Edwards will be called in to channel their thoughts and emotions (but don’t mistake the thoughts and emotions of human embryos for the thoughts and emotions of actual human beings), relaying to the world that if they were allowed to live until their 18th birthday, they’d want to vote for Obama. Then, after their votes are tallied (and the census bureau, under the supervision of Rahm Emanuel, certifies “temporary constituents” as a valid voting bloc) they’ll be summarily slaughtered in the name of science for medical discoveries already produced through the use of adult stem cells, and all on the taxpayers’ dime.

• 25 onlineanalyst // Mar 10, 2009 at 9:40 pm

  A reality check on the failed Obama presidency… Charts and graphs and facts-oh, my!

• 26 Darthmeister // Mar 10, 2009 at 10:16 pm

  Mr. Obama gets an “F” at MSNBC Poll

  Be sure and vote your conscience.

  Hey, Newsman, still regurgitating that ol’ left-wing crappola that “Bush stole the 2000 elections.” You truly are an ignorant moonbat.

  Even the liberal rag, the New York Slimes, had to admit that George W. Bush won in whatever reasonable recount scenario Gore could have availed himself of.
  Also the liberal rags Washington Post and the Miami Herald as well as three other news organizations involved in reviewing the 2000 Florida elections said that Bush would have won in all recount scenarios excepting a single scenario where all “dimpled chads” on a statewide basis MAY have given AlGore the narrowest margin of victory … a scenario which was never asked by the Gore let’s-steal-an-election-team and one which would have been impossible to have fairly accomplished given the electoral college deadline that had to be met and the lack of uniformity in determining what a “dimpled chad” really was on a county-by-county basis.

  If any court was trying to rig that election it was the Florida State Supreme Court comprised of all Democrats with the exception of one Republican. But of course conspiracy theorists such as yourself continue in your rather pathetic sour grapes revisionism about how “Bush stole the 2000 elections.”

  Also, what is often missing in these election analysis is the historical fact that the liberal media originally called the Florida election for Gore before the polls in Florida’s panhandle closed one hour later because they were in the Central Time Zone.

  Some election experts concluded that this irresponsible, stupid and utterly avoidable action on the part of the liberal media (if there was a conspiracy theory to be made about the Florida 2000 elections, this is the one) may have cost George W. Bush anywhere from + 35,000 to 55,000 votes in that mostly conservative part of Florida, thus rendering moot any trolling-for-votes-in-Democrat-precincts attempts on the part of the Gore team.

  I don’t know what you’ve been smoking the last eight years, Newsman, but maybe you ought to stick these historical facts in your pipe and smoke them instead.

• 27 R.A.M. // Mar 10, 2009 at 11:25 pm

  godless re #9: If I were a lib, (thank GOD I am not!), I would be more worried about my party, (again, not to be confused with those things the “boy wonder” is throwing almost nightly while America burns), losing complete power back to the Republicans, (Congress, BOTH Senate and House in 2010, and the Presidency in 2012), because of the inept incompetence of Prez Chancy Gardener after ONLY 50 “daze”!

  I guess you have to “Be(ing) There”?

  The fact that ANYONE could or would defend the indefensible actions Prez Moron has taken so far, speaks to your left-wing lack of intelligence.

  Seriously, don’t any of you Obama-bots find it a bit odd that Barry cozies up to our enemies while offending our allies? Probably not a good question to ask of Obama-messiah worshippers.

  PS: Does anyone know if Hussein Obama got that gold curtain he likes to stand in front of from his cousin Saddam? It looks a LOT like the one he used to make speeches in front of.

  PPS: I have been noticing that more than a few of Obama minions all use the same, “Uhs” and “Ahs” that the annointed one uses.

  Just listen to Hillary, or White Crib spokes-geek Gibbs and count the “uhs”.

  According to the trolls, these are intelligent people. Kind of shows their “intelligence”, now doesn’t it?

• 28 R.A.M. // Mar 10, 2009 at 11:34 pm

  BTW, as I said on the previous thread, I don’t listen to Rush personally, his head has gotten much too big, and I am not a fan of ANYONE who lets pride or ego take over. Also why I am not an Obama fan. He loves himself more than he loves ANYTHING including America!

  Also godless, opinions are like trolls, it seems EVERYBODY has at least one!

  I AM, (at least until/if their head gets too big), a fan of Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, and Dennis Miller.

  Hannity’s head and ego has gotten too big also, along with the fact he gets on one subject and beats it to death!

• 29 Laughing@You // Mar 10, 2009 at 11:37 pm

  “Mr. Obama gets an “F” at MSNBC Poll”

  Goofmeister,

  This is sad! How many times did you vote?

  To how many nutballs, besides the nutballs here, did you send this?

  Sure makes MSNBC look unbiased, doesn’t it?

  Keep voting, loser!!

  I am, as always,

  Laughing@You

• 30 Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:21 am

  RAM: I don’t think 2012 is a realistic timeline for Republicans taking back the White House. They’re in a major disarray at the moment, unable to agree on exactly that they stand for (much like the Dems after Clinton). It’s possible that they’ll see some gains in the legislature in ‘10, though… and maybe they’ll win the WH back in 2016, assuming they get an Obama of their own (i.e. someone who can inspire the base and woo the coveted middle)… and assuming they are able to shrug off the Limbaugh faction.

  RE: “Barry cozies up to our enemies while offending our allies…”

  That sounds familiar (freedom fries, President Musharraf ?). In the real world, of course, a president does what he thinks is necessary, without regard to the protestations of the teeming (and usually ill-informed) masses. Usually, of course, this catches up with them around Year Six or so… we’ll see.

  So far, Obama hasn’t done anything to warrant much contempt… other than that ridiculous “stimulus package”, which would have been a political necessity regardless of party.

  P.S. I’m pretty sure Saddam is dead. He was, like, executed or something.

• 31 Fred Sinclair // Mar 11, 2009 at 7:41 am

  o/t
  Prov. 16:25 There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

  The bad news is that the American economy is in serious trouble. (that’s not really news, it’s just bad) If a slow wit like myself can see the trouble, then it’s really bad, really, really bad.

  The good news is on Jimmy Carter’s side of the moat. I’m sure that he is beside himself with joy as he sees his name being removed from the top of the list of “America’s Worst Ever Presidents”. He is probably giving standing ovations with loud applause. Yelling “Go Barry. Go! Screw up something else! (oh yes, that’s right, there’s not much left to screw up) you’re doing good boy, keep up the good work, you’re making me look so good.”

  By comparison Jimmy is looking better and better. and also, by comparison, Conservatives have a rare opportunity, not seen since the Carter/Reagan Administrations. Carter tried his best to flush America’s economy down the sewer (and almost succeeded) Following Margaret Thatcher’s incredibly successful lead in reversing Britain’s “in the toilet” economy by slashing taxes to the bone. Reagan cut taxes, cut taxes and then cut them again. His first years in office 1981-2 were not fun but slowly he managed to turn the Ship of State around and by the time he handed it over to William Jefferson Clinton, America had the strongest, greatest economy in the history of the world. Unemployment figures, that had skyrocketed under Clinton fell to an all time low.

  Spending your way out of a recession is an economic boondoggle. Spending money like a drunken sailor on his last night in port is not only silly, it’s very, very foolish. You don’t “max out” a wallet full of credit cards to the tune of 30 - 40 thousand dollars and then solve your financial problems by taking a second mortgage on your house for a hundred thousand dollars and instead of paying off the credit cards, you blow the entire amount on junk (porkulus non-essentials).

  That’s exactly what B.O. and his gang of thugs in Washington are doing but on a previously unimaginable scale. Multi trillions of dollars of unsupported debt.

  We had “The War on Poverty” (which we lost) - we had “The War on Drugs” (which we also lost). Now B.O. has declared “The War on Business” which he, by golly intends to win. He has the playbooks of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez so how can he lose his war? Confiscate all firearms. Raise “effective” taxes to about 90% (like India had at 95% until recently) drive all businesses into bankruptcy bwo “Cap and Trade”; “Card Check”; etc. then nationalize them so all Americans must turn to Uncle Sugar, whether they want a cookie, a glass of milk or a set of tires.

  That’s called Socialism. (In some countries it’s called Communism).

• 32 gafisher // Mar 11, 2009 at 8:10 am

  ola Re#23: That’s all good fun but not very accurate. After all, it’s clear Obama’s not playing with a full deck — and even that’s an empty suit.

• 33 gafisher // Mar 11, 2009 at 8:38 am

  Fred Re#31: Socialism and Communism have both failed everywhere they’ve been tried. What’s being implemented now is a progressively changed hopeful variation, “Obamunism.”

  wv - adjust MURPHY — “If anything can go wrong … it’s Bush’s fault.”

• 34 onlineanalyst // Mar 11, 2009 at 8:53 am

  VDH notes the folly of “at least we’re liked now.”

• 35 onlineanalyst // Mar 11, 2009 at 9:06 am

  The little piggies in Congress at the trough again are looking at a Stimulus II bill. What? Haven’t the Dems paid back their political obligations yet?

  gafisher: Re #32, I had considered commenting on Obama’s “not playing with a full deck,” too.
  I’m inclined to think that his crew is playing with a Marx-ed deck though. It’s difficult to determine who is playing the role of Joker in the FAILED Obama presidency.

  Hey, that Chas Freeman nomination was surely a honey, wasn’t it? It’s a good thing that he withdrew his name before too many in the public learned what a worm he is, notwithstanding our Pravda-like media suppressing any real news about the anti-American-interests of the Obama administration.

• 36 onlineanalyst // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:12 am

  Obama has the LBJ Syndrome, and like that predecessor and FDR before him, “the focus is always on the problem, not the results”.

  As with all warm and fuzzy, do-good Dem projects (that always commit a bottomless pit of expenditure), there are always unintended consequences.

  I’m inclined to think, though, that the consequences ARE intended. The aim is to grow government so that the citizens are dependent. They give up their own means of self-determination because most of their income is “owned” by Uncle Sam.

  In just several weeks, the Obama administration has indebted the nation to more than all the presidents from George Washington to and including George W. Bush. Ackbar OWNS his own failures, along with Pelosi, Reid, and the others who wallow in pork-filled futures.

• 37 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:13 am

  ola…”failed presidency”? after 50 days? that’s easily the dimmest thing I’ve ever seen you post.
  Didn’t you see the markets yesterday? Apparently Wall Street is in love with Obama (well, you blamed him for the decline so now you have to praise him for the uptick even if he had nothing whatever to do with either thing…)
  The praise can commence…now. Please be enthusiastic…

• 38 R.A.M. // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:24 am

  Godfrey: I do agree with a “part” of your post, and this is what you said that makes sense:

  Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:21 am

  RAM: I don’t think-

  At least you are one lib who admits your lack of thinking!

  boberim: And your post is pretty dim too. The market tanks for 50 days, down by 1200 to 1500 points and you get excited about a one day upturn?

  You are kidding-right?

• 39 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:50 am

  ram, no more than anyone calling Obamas tenure “failed” nor more than anyone blaming him for either the current mess or the state of the stock market.
  either that or he’s the most amazing person ever (president or not) having the kind of power y’all attribute to him.
  to my eye he inherited a whole bunch of deficit and a huge mess on wall street (blame whichever party/whomever you will) that was already being poorly addressed before he took office.
  What am I missing? Are my assertions untrue?

• 40 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:56 am

  Look at what Obama just did last night…

  Teenage gunman attacks German school, kills 15

  For shame Mr. President, for shame

• 41 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 10:58 am

  and that mess in Alabama as well…is there no end to the inhumanity of this President? Has he no shame?

• 42 Laughing@You // Mar 11, 2009 at 12:15 pm

  bober,

  Re: 40

  Is everyone accounted for here?

  Anyone here in jail yet?

  Listen Scrapplefussers,

  If writing snotty stuff about “liberals” is no longer filling your need for aggression, and if anyone here starts feeling that “old trigger finger itch”, please talk to a Progressive immediately!

  We want to help! Just holster your pistol, or otherwise lay your weapon down, and let’s talk some. Do it now before you do a “family friendly” thing you may regret.

  Remember, those shooters were once conservatives like you.

  L@Y

• 43 RedPepper // Mar 11, 2009 at 12:27 pm

  boberin #39: What am I missing?

  The stock market is, among other things, a bet on what economic conditions will be in the near future - will they improve, or will they be worse.
  Thus, with regard to Obama, whether the policies he has announced/is implementing will work. That’s why people interpret the prolonged downward slide in the DJI as a vote of no confidence in those policies.

  Yesterday’s rally was a reaction to some unexpectedly good numbers reported by Citibank. Note, however, that the Dow remains below 7000, even after that uptick. To quote an AP story: “Analysts have cautioned against calling a bottom in the market just yet, noting that it’s common for the stock market to blip up after a prolonged period of selling.”
  The latest thing I’ve been hearing, BTW, is talk of yet another stimulus(!) bill. I seriously doubt that news is going to inspire confidence …

• 44 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:09 pm

  red, I maintain that the market has nothing whatever to do with what Obama does or doesn’t do. It may, in fact, “react” to that news but that reaction has no basis in fact whatsoever.
  The market rallied nicely the day the Titanic sinking hit the news, was that “cause and effect”? Doubtful. You can look up many, many similar examples…days when delieriously good or bad news had a seemingly opposite effect on the market. The market is doing badly because it has to, things are lousy…just like they were last year and the year before that (and who’s fault was that?…no ones). We were being lied to about the value of our homes, the value of those companies, the value of just about everything. We are being lied to now (by both the market and the current administration) because as Jack Nicholson pointed out…”you can’t handle the truth”. We were flat out greedy, more than willing to steal from our own poor as well as the rest of the world to maintain a lifestyle we neither earned nor deserved. So now we pay the piper but the odd twist is that we get to bring down the rest of the planet with us.
  Deep down you know these things to be true but it is way more fun to rail against those in power. If McCain were there right now we’d be in exactly the same predicament minus the slim ray of hope that the rest of the planet (and most Americans) see in Obama…don’t discount that small sliver…

• 45 Laughing@You // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:26 pm

  “If McCain were there right now we’d be in exactly the same predicament …”

  No my friend, if John McCain were there he would have have it solved by now!

  TAX CUTS! That’s the only answer!

  Heck, if Dumbyah had another six months we wouldn’t have to be talking about saving anything. Of course, there would be nothing left to save.

  All the old gang has a plan to move to “the land of the big beach” soon anyway!

  Salam-alaikum, y’all!

  L@Y

• 46 Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:35 pm

  RAM: “At least you are one lib who admits your lack of thinking”…

  Where’d you get the idea that I was a “lib”? I don’t think you’ve been paying attention.

  When someone is so quick to judge, it seems reasonable to wonder what that person’s judgment is worth…

  RedPepper/Boberin: it is far too soon to tell whether Obama’s stimulus package will have the desired effect. I personally hope it does, and that everything ends up rosy. But when government interferes to the extent represented by that package, things rarely end up well.

  Remember, whichever party you blame, the real reason for this mess can be traced to government interference in the free market - without Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac inducing banks to make risky loans, there would be no credit crisis.

  It’s noteworthy, I think, that Fanny Mae was founded in 1938. In other words, the problems we’re having today can be directly linked to the overzealous government expansion of the Roosevelt administration.

  This doesn’t seem like such a difficult concept to grasp… and yet, based on recent headlines claiming that this crisis is evidence of the “failure of capitalism”, we appear not to have learned a thing.

  It’s not a failure of capitalism, it’s a failure of big government.

• 47 Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:39 pm

  Boberin: “We were flat out greedy, more than willing to steal from our own poor “

  As I mentioned above, this crisis did not come about as a result of greed - it came about as a result of well-meaning people trying to alleviate the effects of poverty by using government to encourage banks to engage in what turned out to be suicidal business practices.

  More of the same is hardly the answer…

• 48 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:52 pm

  godfrey, at least this administration is attempting to make a few (a stunningly small few) of the people that benefitted from “tax cuts” pay a small share of the “solution” as flawed as that solution may well be. Yes, it’s too soon to tell, we will never know for sure because if things get better many will say they did so despite the effort and if they don’t the argument will be made that things would have been worse without it so there is no “winning” this thing, no way to come out looking good to approx 1/2 of the people.
  But things like alcohol and cigarette taxes along with the greatest scam of all time…the lottery/legalized gambling are nothing but the rich stealing from the poor…those most likely to avail themselves of such things…because the rich “deserved” a tax break. And they got them, by the boatload andwell…we are where we are…they did not “stimulate” anything…they led us directly here…George cut taxes and the deficit grew…that my freind is “cause and effect” of the most obvious sort…the deficit George left was nearly dollar for dollar the revenue “lost” by cutting taxes. But the “pubs” want more of that…then they can bitch some more about the deficit…round and round.
  Let’s TRY something different. Most Americans were/are screaming for it…it hasn’t been tried…no other viable plan is being advanced (just kvetching about the plan that was advanced) so…let’s give it a shot.
  P.S. it may take more than 50 more days to work…or not…

• 49 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 1:56 pm

  oh…and yes…all failing businesses should have been allowed to do just that…fail. That’s what makes the world go ’round…not throwing good money after bad…but Obama didn’t start that process either…
  Mind you, I’m very unhappy that he continued it but it is safe to say that he didn’t start it.

• 50 Fred Sinclair // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:01 pm

  This I didn’t know (until now): Excerpted from from “Dick Morris Reports” -

  President Obama and his big spenders are moving quickly, to the relief of those who are facing foreclosure on their mortgages. But the program they are offering will do nothing for those most in need.

  In the fine print, Obama’s plan provides no relief for any homeowner whose mortgage exceeds the total value of his home. But these folks are the ones who have been conned into taking sub-prime mortgages so loaded with brokerage commissions, interest rate subsidies, bank fees and lawyer and title-company charges that the amount of the mortgage has ballooned. These high mortgage amounts, coupled with declining property values, have turned about 20 percent of American mortgages upside down, so that the debt exceeds the value of the property.

  By excluding these homeowners from help, Obama is guilty of a holier-than-thou hypocrisy. Was it not Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that encouraged such over-mortgaged properties? Was it not the Democrats in Congress who passed legislation urging Fannie and Freddie to weaken the standards to allow more low- and lower-middle-income families to buy homes?

  How can Obama suddenly pretend to be so shocked — shocked — that about 20 percent of America’s home mortgages are now worth more than the property they finance? It was the insistence of liberal Democrats that made it so.

  Each and every one of the eleven times the Bush Administration tried to stop the foreseeable housing boondoggle. The Democrat controlled House and Senate was quick to throw sand into the gears.

  So this entire mess is properly laid at the feet of the Democrats.

  Worldwide finances were, at the time BO won the nomination pegged at about 47 trillion dollars when he won the election it was down to 33 trillion dollars. On Jan 20th 2009 it had slipped further to 29 trillion dollars. Now about 50 days later it stands at 22 trillion dollars or a financial loss to the world’s economy of 25 trillion dollars directly traceable to the failed policies of BO and the worldwide reaction to them in the financial markets.

  Way to go Barry I was thinking small. I just thought you were trying to force America into bankruptcy - turns out you want to bankrupt the entire planet!!!

• 51 RedPepper // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:22 pm

  boberin #44: How the market reacts on any given day to various news items is a crap shoot. Trends that occur over several months are a better subject for analysis.
  ” … more than willing to steal from our own poor … ” Hey, whaddaya expect, bob? We clearly are willing to steal from our own children and grandchildren!

• 52 RedPepper // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:31 pm

  Godfrey #46: Hi, Godfrey. Where you been hiding?

  I’m quite confident that the “stimulus” bill will have the “desired effect” - which is to grow the government!

• 53 Fred Sinclair // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:50 pm

  RP #51 You’re 100% correct the baloney issuing from the Obamanation and his gang of thugs is all part of his “War On Business” and baloney it is. Dad said that “if you’re in and out of the market for a quick profit - do yourself a favor and go to Vegas where you’ll get better odds. If you sell a stock in less than a year, you have no idea where it may go and you’re just a two bit gambler playing at a bigger table”.

  Will Rogers had it pegged: “”Politics are not the high class, marvelous thing that lots of you picture. Our whole government workings are crammed with ‘baloney.’” -humorist Will Rogers (1879-1935)

  baloney |b??l?n?|
  noun informal
  1 foolish or deceptive talk; nonsense : typical salesman’s baloney.[ORIGIN: corruption of bologna .]

• 54 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:51 pm

  fred..#50…do the math on your own figures…even given that Obama is responsible for every penny lost since he took over (and he obviously isn’t) then George “caused” 18 trillion of the losses and Obama “caused” 7 trillion since. That’s a much slower rate of loss, thanks for the evidence…

• 55 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:57 pm

  fred…”war on business”? How do you figure? I’m hopping mad that he is, to my eye, “coddling” business…handing out our good cash to idiots that lost 45% or more of everything that every one of us had and now they want more of our cash to keep operating when its obvious to a child that they should not even be allowed to operate let alone encouraged

• 56 Laughing@You // Mar 11, 2009 at 2:58 pm

  RAM: “At least you are one lib who admits your lack of thinking”…
  

  Godfrey: “Where’d you get the idea that I was a “lib”? I don’t think you’ve been paying attention.”

  “When someone is so quick to judge, it seems reasonable to wonder what that person’s judgment is worth…”

  See RAM, how many times have I tried to tell this. Now, I’m so embarrassed for you!

  L@Y

• 57 Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 3:04 pm

  Boberin: “George cut taxes and the deficit grew…that my freind is “cause and effect” of the most obvious sort.”

  That’s an oversimplification: the deficit is less a result of tax cuts than it is a result of Bush’s big-spending policies (including but not limited to the so-called War On Terror).
  Tax cuts coupled with responsible spending and minimal government interference would have been a better route to take (of course it’s hard to be a spendthrift when you’re at war).

  Likewise, I think the pressure to do “something…anything” may to prove to be as catastrophic as the recession itself. What we should have done ten or twenty years ago is abolish government assurances of bad home loans. As you say, failing businesses should be allowed to fail; same for failing mortgages.

  What we should do today… I’m just not sure. I don’t think anyone is. But I don’t subscribe to the notion that “anything” is better than nothing, at least not without some sort of evidence.

  RedPepper: not hiding so much as working. Hope all is well with you.

• 58 boberinyetagain // Mar 11, 2009 at 3:28 pm

  godfrey, I stand corrected…apparently George managed to blow a LOT more than just the tax cuts…he left office with a 1.6 trillion deficit but the cuts were just a small part of the story…but it’s still no wonder that most of us support taking back those cuts and then a wee bit more just for good measure…

  Since 2001, changes in tax law have cost the federal government $929 billion, including $860 billion in direct cost and $69 billion in interest.1 Proponents of these tax cuts promised stronger economic gains than were typical of the past, but that did not occur. Unfortunately for most Americans, almost every broad measure of economic activity—GDP, jobs, personal income, and business investment, among others—has fared worse over the last four years than in past business cycles.

• 59 Godfrey // Mar 11, 2009 at 4:04 pm

  Boberin: “…almost every broad measure of economic activity…has fared worse over the last four years than in past business cycles.

  True, but it would be specious to attribute those shortcomings to tax cuts without some sort of evidence. If anything, the recent economic shortfalls would have been worse without the cuts - especially in the four areas you named.

  Either way, I have a fundamental problem with viewing lower tax revenues as “costing” the federal government, in much the same way I’d find it hard to look at my fine silverware as a “cost” to the burglar who failed to get into my house and steal it from me.

• 60 Newsman // Mar 11, 2009 at 4:35 pm

  Oh, stick em all you know where Darth but don’t smoke them ! Bad for your lungs !

• 61 Darthmeister // Mar 11, 2009 at 5:44 pm

  Can’t handle the truth, eh, Newsman. No surprise there. If you still believe Bush stole the election in 2000 when the most liberal rag in America says he didn’t, then you’re a total whacked out leftist or anarcho/socialist who probably thinks the New York Slimes actually a part of the “right-wing conspiracy”.

  BTW, when will people like you start looking in a mirror and dealing with reality?

  I know better than to hold my breath on that ever happening.

  More news on Obama’s lying hypocrisy. Remember when candidate Obama said “we can no longer accept a process that doles out earmarks based on a member of Congress’ seniority, rather than the merit of the project. We can no longer accept an earmarks process that has become so complicated to navigate that a municipality or non-profit group has to hire high-priced D.C. lobbyists to do it. And we can no longer accept an earmarks process in which many of the projects being funded fail to address the real needs of our country”? Remember that one?

  Today President Obama signed into law more than 8,000 earmarks for FY 2009, part of the $410 billion omnibus spending bill. But he pledged to work with Congress to reform the earmark process.

  Buwahahahaha … yeah, right. In other words, “I’ll start my diet tomorrow.”

  Typical lying Donk.

  Obama’s socialist policies have deepened the recession and now he and the Democrat Congress own it … not Bush

  That’s the reality and no amount smoke and mirrors by trolltards here will change that fact.

• 62 Darthmeister // Mar 11, 2009 at 5:46 pm

  Sorry, bad hyperlink. Link here

• 63 Laughing@You // Mar 11, 2009 at 7:08 pm

  “Obama’s socialist policies have deepened the recession and now he and the Democrat Congress own it … not Bush”.

  Wha… Buwahahahaha … yeah, right! Buwahahahaha, Buwahahahaha,

  Did you get that from another one of your goofy polls? Buwahahahaha Buwahahahaha. Buwahahahaha.

  Try another yellow one, something’s got to work for you!

  L@Y

You must log in to post a comment.