Geniuses In The Opposition (AKA My God, You’re Wrong On Everything)
Tweet
A Daily Kos diary explores the previous versions of the current Republican doomsaying on President Obama and the Democrat’s economic stimulus bill to be signed Tuesday. I especially like the freakout preceding the Clinton boom of the ’90s, as well as the statements on Medicare and Social Security that remind us that Republicans don’t seriously care about anyone besides rich white conservative men.
36 Responses to “Geniuses In The Opposition (AKA My God, You’re Wrong On Everything)”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
So blatantly wrong about so much. A simple apology would be nice. That goes double for the Wall Street Journal. Bastards.
“If I take my Flintstones vitamins, I can be Winston Churchill”-Eric Cantor
Every interview with these people should start, “You screwed up these predictions in the past, so why should we listen to you now?”
And if they can’t give a solid answer, the interviewer should respond. “Thanks for coming by today, but if that’s your answer, there’s little point continuing this interview.”
Name one economist that predicted this credit bubble who thinks the “stimulus” package will get us out of it.
You can’t beacuse it won’t.
So william, is Krugman right about the stimulous? He’s a Nobel Prize winning economist who predicted the credit bubble (plus he was right in 1993–unlike the unapologetic Republican braintrust cited in the link). So william, what do you think? Is Krugman right? Or is, say, Jim Cramer?
I’m unsure whether Repubs are (1) schizophrenic, (2) mentally challenged, or (3)so power-mad they’re willing to place party above country. I can find arguments for each.
1. Never mind ’93 and the last 8 years, we’re totally correct NOW.
2. The stimulus plan has too much spending!
3. We’re giving you zero votes and hope Obama fails.
the problem with Krugman is that he’s been predicting a recession every other column since 2001. Yeah, he got this one “right”, but only because of the broken-clock rule. Plus, were he held to the same standards Oliver holds Republicans, you would be contractually obligated to refer to him as “Enron Advisor Paul Krugman” each and every time you mentioned him.
william says: “Name one economist that predicted this credit bubble who thinks the ‘stimulus’ package will get us out of it.
You can’t beacuse it won’t.”
Krugman.
That list is fantastic. Printin’ that baby out.
SaveFarris says: “the problem with Krugman is that he’s been predicting a recession every other column since 2001.”
Two points…
1.) You are a liar.
2.) He’s been arguing that the economic situation was unsustainable for a long time now, and he was right. This is not a knock again him, because he has been right the whole time.
SaveFerris hasn’t seen CNBC’s House of Cards yet – (good show about unregulated greed. Greenspan’s blame gaming was especially pathetic). But wait a minute.. maybe he did but proclaimed it another ‘liberal media conspiracy’?
CSS, was he right when he said “Enron, not Sept. 11, will come to be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society.“?
EPIC FAIL.
Krugman had a point. 9/11 had a minimal impact on financial markets. After Enron however, Americans lost confidence in the financial markets and corporate governance in a big way. Because of this, lots of money left the market and went into real estate and other assets with “intrinsic” value. This helped inflate the housing bubble. In turn, as Wall Street securitized housing, the stock market reinflated as well.
Cue farris’ pithy (and unrelated) retort in 1…2…3..
“Greater turning point” not greater tragedy, SaveFarris. And if our entire economic system goes belly up then yes, I think that Enron will be looked back on as the first domino to fall. Did you even read the article? And really out of all the things he has gotten EXACTLY right your picking on this which, at best, could be considered only kind of wrong?
Oh but you consider yourself and your ideology as much smarter than this man. Who is your (living) economist of choice?
Also, especially in economics, someone can be quick to spot the disease but completely wrong about what is the appropriate cure. But this in no way relates to Krugman who very specifically lined up the things that caused this current economic crisis long before they occurred.
And Kruggs was way fucking right about the Iraq Invasion. How’d william and SaveFarris fare there (besides never considering enlisting, I mean)? Plus Kruggs was way right about the massive, regressive tax cuts from the Cheney Administration. william? SF? How’d y’all do with those? How’d y’all do with 1993 predictions? Yeah, I didn’t think so. Advantage: Reality Based.
Advantage: Reality Based.–’Special’ ed
Dow nears 10 year low
Advantage: Reality Based.–’Special’ ed
Dow Jones: 2,000 point tumble since Barack Obama won the White House.
SaveFarris says: “CSS, was he right when he said ‘Enron, not Sept. 11, will come to be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society.’?”
And he’s right. Unless you think the crisis of today has more to do with 9/11 than it does with Enron.
You are not that stupid, are you?
“EPIC FAIL.”
Yeah, I guess you are.
Dennis: “Dow Jones: 2,000 point tumble since Barack Obama won the White House.”
Does this mean Bush is 100% responsible for 9/11? Seems strange that the same people blaming Obama for the Dow troubles, which began under Bush, are the ones saying Bush isn’t to blame for 9/11.
“Dow Jones: 2,000 point tumble since Barack Obama won the White House.”
I also heard that there was “52 consecutive months of job growth” despite the fact that over the last eight years there was a net increase to the unemployment ranks of over 3 percent and a total net loss to the DJIA of over 3100 points. Get back to us after 4 years in the wilderness, dead-ender.
Get back to us after 4 years in the wilderness, dead-ender.
Indeed. We could get a pool going. Dennis could have a chance to get one right (after being loud wrong in 1993, 2001, and 2002-3). Dennis, do you think the Dow and/or S & P will drop more or less than they did during the Cheney Administration (in percentage terms)? And by how much? We could also do an over/under on the total number of completely unnecessary military invasions sold on a pack of lies that the Obama Administration undertakes.
No matter what side of the political spectrun you’re on, this should be today’s must read:
The Audacity of Irony
…There were many legitimate critiques of the Iraq war. But insisting, as Barack Obama did, that we invaded recklessly and in haste was not one of them. From the fall of the Taliban in December 2001 to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Bush administration deliberately and in public fashion sought debate in the Congress for over a year, received bipartisan authorization, and tried for months to win sanction from the United Nations.
In contrast, Barack Obama immediately upon entering office demanded the largest government expansion in the history of the nation. The staggering debt program will require nearly a trillion dollars in borrowing to fund all sorts of entitlements and redistributive efforts, and in revolutionary fashion redefine the role of government itself. Obama pronounced the current economic crisis the moral equivalent of war, and he wanted a national mobilization to meet it — pronto.…
Money quote…
…Liberals who once screamed that congressional opponents of the Iraq war were being unfairly tagged as unpatriotic by the Bush administration now yelled louder that the opponents of the Obama debt program were, in fact, unpatriotic.
Read on and see the light.
There were many legitimate critiques of the Iraq war. But insisting, as Barack Obama did, that we invaded recklessly and in haste was not one of them.’
Of course. Look at the loads of time we offered Blix / UNMOVIC to continually disprove aasertions that there were active programs and weapons stockpiles -a whole four months!
I’ve got your light right here…
Dennis: “Money quote…
…Liberals who once screamed that congressional opponents of the Iraq war were being unfairly tagged as unpatriotic by the Bush administration now yelled louder that the opponents of the Obama debt program were, in fact, unpatriotic.
Read on and see the light.”
Rush said he was hoping Obama would fail. That’s a little different than saying Bush, ‘Lied us into war.’ Especially since Bush did indeed lie you guys into war.
But I guess for a man who can’t count past two, this is too complex to understand.
The DJIA drop is because it’s looking like the banks precarious positions were only partly stabilized by McCain’s and Bush’s TARP. They’re still in trouble. Lack of oversight in the entire banking and mortgage industries have led to an irrational greed fest (from 2002 to 2007) and its collapse.
Virtually every president since Hoover had some kind of economic stimulus project. Eisenhower’s project was the interstate highways system, which spawned countless businesses from riding lawn mowers to trucking to king sized beds. Kennedy and Reagan disguised their space technology projects as national interest-oriented, but they spawned industries of their own, nevertheless.
Bush’s project appears to have been emulating Japan’s credit and real estate bubble of the 90’s, and having republican shills like Sean Hannity blame Obama when the bubble popped. Oh, and that trillion dollar war in Iraq that was marketed as paying for itself.
Sheer genius, from the Worst President In US History.
Dow Jones: 2,000 point tumble since Barack Obama won the White House.
I knew you were a Malkinite.
So now we’ve moved the starting date for economic responsibility to election day? How does that fit with the “Bush inherited a recession” t.p.?
But Bush was a “Christian”, and under attack by the postmodernists, looney liberals and the MSM, which makes him innocent. Yeah, that’s it.
…Liberals who once screamed that congressional opponents of the Iraq war were being unfairly tagged as unpatriotic by the Bush administration now yelled louder that the opponents of the Obama debt program were, in fact, unpatriotic.
Which was followed by absolutely no examples such talk. Most liberals actually pointed out the utter and un-shocking hyporcrisy of the f***sticks who were loudly braying “traitor!” to all opponents of the multi-generational treasury rape knonwn as the Iraq Invasion.
Interesting. A “money quote” that comes without an actual quote from any liberal as an example or in support of Hanson’s claim.
Dennis, would you care to do the work that Hanson felt was unnecessary and provide us with an example of liberals calling opponents of the bill “in fact, unpatriotic”?
I’m just curious.
Dennis writes:
No matter what side of the political spectrun you’re on, this should be today’s must read:
And then links to a National Review (motto: We’re winning!) piece. I’m clicking on that about never. But thanks for more Unintentional Comedey, Dennis.
There were many legitimate critiques of the Iraq war. But insisting, as Barack Obama did, that we invaded recklessly and in haste was not one of them.
Let’s got to the videotape:
Barack Obama, October 2002:
Whoa, hold on there, moonbat…
Apropos of everything, keep in mind that in October 2002, Commander Bunnypants still wasn’t aware that Iraq had two distinct Muslim sects, Shia and Suuni.
Advantage: NotDumbasses.
Dennis, would you care to do the work that Hanson felt was unnecessary and provide us with an example of liberals calling opponents of the bill “in fact, unpatriotic”?
I’m just curious.–fafaroo
For starters, fafaroo, here’s liberal sockpuppet douchebag blogger Steve Benen:
Republican Hypocrites Unveil Unpatriotic, and Untrue, Stimulus Attack Ads
—
And New York Times resident movie critic Frank Rich:Herbert Hoover Lives
“These are the same politicians who only yesterday smeared the patriotism of any dissenters from Bush’s “war on terror.” Where is their own patriotism now that economic terror is inflicting far more harm on their constituents than Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent W.M.D.?”
—
And Barack Obama: Republicans Voting for Stimulus Package Are Being Patriotic
I’m going to take a wild guess your purpose of asking me for this information is to bait me into the last link where Obama thanked the 3 Republicans who voted for the atrocity that is the Stimulus Bill as being patriotic that it was not necessarily calling the dissenters as unpatriotic, but given the liberal whining about just that it’s hard not to see his message as anything but that, especially given the context.
I honestly don’t understand why you continue to request the most obvious of points to be spelled out for you in some sort of Perry Mason fashion.
At least Obama’s being honest about the cost of his “patriotic” plan vs. requiring stooges to lie about the cost of “patriotic” remaking Iraq. (Wolfowitz, Natsios, Cheney…)
Not to mention that Obama’s picking up after Bush. With Iraq, at best, Bush was picking up after Bush.
…Liberals who once screamed that congressional opponents of the Iraq war were being unfairly tagged as unpatriotic by the Bush administration now yelled louder that the opponents of the Obama debt program were, in fact, unpatriotic.
You know what they say: payback’s a bitch.
…There were many legitimate critiques of the Iraq war. But insisting, as Barack Obama did, that we invaded recklessly and in haste was not one of them. From the fall of the Taliban in December 2001 to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the Bush administration deliberately and in public fashion sought debate in the Congress for over a year, received bipartisan authorization, and tried for months to win sanction from the United Nations.
The “haste and recklessness” refers to the actual execution of the invasion, not in deceiving people into believe that it was a good idea.
I’m going to take a wild guess your purpose of asking me for this information is to bait me …”
Dude. Why so paranoid? Is it really too much to ask for conservative commentators to provide evidence of their claims?
Does Hanson have an editor, or at least an editor who knows how to actually strengthen an argument with actual evidence in support of claims?
It’s like the trolls here have been burned so bad before regurgitating baseless right wing claims you get all nervous and defensive just being asked to provide evidence — even when it exists!
I hear a lot about conservatives being “independent thinkers” but if the very thought of doing your own research to verify an unsupported claim makes you suspicious — it may be high time to rethink where you get your information in the first place.
No, fafaroo, that’s not the point. Right here is just another example of my providing specific examples for you and I get no response whatsoever from you for the information provided.
No “Hey, thanks, Dennis, appreciate that”, or “Hey Dennis, thanks for the examples, but I disagree for the following…”, or anything close. No one here ever does. That’s why it’s frustrating, because I know it’s just a big huge waste of time.
And no one ever gives me even the simplest of explanations or verification to their claims when I ask.
That’s why I question your motives.