They plan to ride it into success in 2010. Of course, the problem is they have no real solution to the economic problem besides the magical tax cuts that helped make the problem worse in the first place. That said, my guess is the economy will begin improving before election time next year – and while the GOP may actually pick up a few seats in the House, it ain’t gonna be anything like a 1994.
Unfortunately it’s expected to be a jobless recovery and the right wing will use that as a hammer.
The irony being that Obama’s inadequate ’stimulus’ plan was largely watered down to appease Republicans and now that effort at bipartisanship may boomerang and hit him in the face in 2010.
But when I read ‘Republicans expect to ride the economy back to power’ all I see and hear is that picture of the crazy pilot at the end of the movie Dr. Strangelove riding a nuclear bomb down to the ground screaming “YAAA HOOO!”
Republicans rooted for failure, sabotaged success, and now plan to ride their failures to ? more profit.
Hahahahaha! Newsie made a funny.
Fair questions: Will Obama be more disastrous for the economy than Jimmy Carter was?
Or is it even an honest thing to compare this disaster to the one Jimmy Carter put us through 30 years ago. Apples and oranges?
Dennis, where’s my plane ticket?
Violent right wing coward “Dennis” doesn’t understand basic math let along complex macroeconomics.
The Republican 2007 Great Recession is the worst economic record since the Republican’s Great Depression.
The question is will Republican President Bush be viewed as having been more disastrous to the economy than Republican President Hoover?
Or is it even an honest thing to compare this disaster to the one Jimmy Carter put us through 30 years ago. Apples and oranges?
Oh Britney, you weren’t even alive 30 years ago! Don’t ever change, you minx!
Here’s some basic macroeconomics: The more money the government takes from the economy, the more damage you do. The more money the government spends over and above revenue, the more damage is done.
I don’t care what party takes money from the economy; I don’t care what party creates the deficits: It hurts the economy. That’s all you need to know.
Bush was terrible on the economy. Obama is worse. He’s the next Jimmy Carter, IMO.
Or possibly the next FDR. Thing is, you cons don’t have the intellectual honesty to admit that if the economy turns around in a reasonable time period, Obama deserves to go down as one of our greatest presidents ever.
Bush was terrible on the economy. Obama is worse. He’s the next Jimmy Carter, IMO.
Such detailed insight! No wonder I turn to G-Mac instead Teh Kruggmeister for wisdom on the economy. Huzzah!
Here’s some basic macroeconomics: The more money the government takes from the economy, the more damage you do.
replace “basic macroeconomics” with “pompous oversimplification” and I and the majority of economists in the world would probably agree with you.
The deregulation craze has gone so well in the housing market
How many businesses has Paul Krugman ever ran? None. He’s a political hack, there’s never ran anything as large as even a local diner. I don’t know why people listen to his Keynesian nonsense.
Obama will be worshipped by the same type of people that still worship FDR. The ignorant, and the lower class. And the media elites such as the types that work for the NY Times.
The New Deal has a mixed record at best…
That being said, Obama’s economic policies will not work. They don’t even make sense.
How many businesses has Paul Krugman ever ran? None.
Whoa, really? I bet the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences was wholly unaware of that pertinent fact when they (foolishly!) awarded “Dr.” Krugman The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2008. You should alert The Academy forthwith, so that they might issue a formal retraction and apology.
That being said, Obama’s economic policies will not work. They don’t even make sense.
Whoa there professor, hold on! Don’t bog us mortals down with all that wonkish technical jargon.
Watch out, Indeed, he knows the word “Keynesian”, or at least how to spell it. You may be bearding a real intellectual lion here (or he could have a spell checker).
Why do all the people who learned all they know about economics from Ben Stein end up posting on this blog?
I don’t care for Ben Stein. Peter Schiff is my economist of choice.
Nobel Prize? Big whoop. He’s still never ran a damn thing in his life. And he’s a CREEP. Al Gore has one of those too. Real intellectual juggernaut there.
Real intellectual juggernaut there.
Again with the detailed analysis! I can see why your multi-sheepskinned girlfriend finds you to be such a catch. One can only imagine the in-depth, highbrow discussions–covering a vast array of topics–you two must have.
And he’s a CREEP.
Really? All CAPS? Why?
How many businesses did Hollywood entertainer Ronald Reagan run?
Did I miss that in Reagan’s deification?
As I remember Reagan started out as a bad movie actor, evaded military service because of some invented malady, went into propaganda and marketing, sold out the members in his Actors union, got a job in advertisement selling toasters, and then was on the government dole the rest of his life where he made disastrous economic decisions that nearly tripled the US debt before he was out of office.
Though it should be added that Republican Reagan also funded terrorists in Iran and Central America and may have had a hand in training Osama bin Laden as well before he became the cult leader of the Republican Party.
What was that you were saying about the Nobel Prize winner running a business again?
The current Republican 2007 Great Recession is similar in part to what precipitated the Republican Great Depression: Deregulated market mania and a cult like obedience to an “invisible hand”.
The “invisible hand” is inherently irrational, it’s the kind of thing that rational Republicans once derided as “Voodoo Economics”.
And then Hollywood entertainer Ronald Reagan got elected and showed how if you nearly triple the US debt it appears like you’ve got a good economy.
But of all of the fraud’s that Ronald Reagan perpetuated his “Voodoo Economics” was the biggest Ponzi scheme in recorded history.
It’s the Republicon Party and it’s amazing how many suckers get taken in every two to four years.
I find it rather amusing Democrats try to paint their party as for the “little guy”. Obama got more wallstreet money than McCain.
And I’ll definately take “voodoo economics” over Obama’s “doodoo economics” anyday of the week.
Maybe if we didn’t have so many donkeys sucking us dry through handouts we might not have such ridiculous deficits.
What do you suggest Mr. News Reference?
Peter Schiff is my economist of choice
That’s sort of like saying Martin Sheen is my president of choice.
Man, Indeed, I bet you’re having a hard time getting up off the floor after that “big whoop” to the jaw.
I find it rather amusing Democrats try to paint their party as for the “little guy”. Obama got more wallstreet money than McCain.
I know! My friend said the same thing just the other day, down at The Club. And you know, that’s what this totally bogus “Health Care Reform” is all about: further enriching the elites. Thank goodness for the Republicans (well, except for the unnamed “bad apples”) who have the guts to stand up for the meek insurance companies. And who speaks up for management? Who speaks up for the highest income tax brackets? Not the Democrats. That’s for sure. Thanks goodness for Republicans (except for the yet-to-be-revealed “bad apples”) who still fight to keep these United States from turning totally gay. Thanks non-”bad apple” Republicans. Thanks for championing the disenfranchised, like lone wolf G-Mac and white Christians from sea to shining sea.
Peter Schiff is a brilliant economist.
Austrian school of economics ftw
I see what you did there Mr. Indeed…This is a good liberal blog…
Republican McCain’s entire campaign was run by Wall Street lobbyists, most of the working for foreign interests while on McCain’s payroll, and many of them connected with the sleaziest countries and dictators on earth.
Even rich people realized how disastrous Republican Voodoo Economics had been to their wealth, the 2007 Republican Great Depression left many usual Republican donors stingy during the 2008 election.
Though it’s funny how Republican McCain, who has been one of those asses sucking off of the government teat for his entire life, still managed to find ways to get private donors to pony up nearly 30 times what was legal for most ‘average folk’ to donate to politicians even while took Republican McCain took government money to try and win the 2008 election.
Republicans love government handouts for themselves and their corporate cronies but not so much for those that didn’t inherit money (Republican Cindy McCain) or marry money (Republican John McCain).
I’m sorry if you’re jealous Republicans are oftentimes wealthy and successful. You’re little propoganda nutter site isn’t changing any minds here.
You know McCain did attempt to serve his country through the military. Though he was never an accomplished community organizer.
Are you really trying to say that many on Wall Street are not Democrats, and that Obama got more donations from Wall-Street?
Peter Schiff is a brilliant economist.
Still more of that patented detailed analysis. How do you do it?
I see what you did there Mr. Indeed…
And what do you think that was?
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20081031114947.aspx
The little guys!
You’re little propoganda nutter site isn’t changing any minds here.
Could we interest you in a little grammatical usage or spelling?
Sure, I’d love to learn things from Democrats.
The little guys!
George Bush, Jr.
Right winger “Gabriel McKee’s” complaint is apparently that while the Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidy of Wall Street and international corporations (which he’s okay with), Wall Street hedged it’s bets and made a down payment on the other Party?
He’s mad that for all of the loyalty that Republicans have shown Wall Street and international corporations over the years those darn investors were trying to buy off both sides.
That is a problem, though clearly we have a different idea of just what the problem is.
Yeah, we need more trustworthy folks like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd…they’re uncorruptable!
It’s those damned Republicans that are ruining this country! Damn them for giving people jobs, working and paying a majority of the taxes in this country!
Right winger “Gabriel McKee”: “It’s those damned Republicans that are ruining this country!”
Yes.
Baby steps, “Gabe”, baby steps.
Careful, though, if you have a conscience, think long enough, and follow the factual evidence soon you’ll be voting Democratic!-)
“And I’ll definately take “voodoo economics” over Obama’s “doodoo economics” anyday of the week.”
What are you, 12?
That said, we can all agree on one thing — what’s really bad for the US economy is having a GOP president and a GOP Congress. Americans have learned their lesson.
As for Krugman, he’s been right about a lot more things than you ever have. I’m not saying the guy is perfect, but he and Nouriel Roubini are about the only two economists worth listening to these days.
Peter Schiff was right about the bubble popping, but wrong about a lot of other stuff.
None of us know for sure if Obama’s going to get the economy moving again in a timely manner, but I certainly hope so. Do you, Gabriel? And if not, why do you hate America?
I wouldn’t vote Democratic if you paid me. I’ll leave that to the moochers of society. Sense I’m intelligent and self relient, I’ll stick to the GOP.
I wish Obama had sane economic policies, but he doesn’t. I’ll be praying for a turnaround though….
Krugman is a political hack for the DNC. At least Schiff isn’t tied to one particular party.
Err Since…Haha…It’s late.
“That said, we can all agree on one thing — what’s really bad for the US economy is having a GOP president and a GOP Congress. Americans have learned their lesson.”
What?? The unemployment rate was 4.5% in November of 2006 under Bush and the GOP congress.
4.6% in January of 07 under Bush/Dems……
6.7% in November of 08 under Bush/Dems….
and
9.5% currently under Obama/Dems
That 4.5% unemployment rate was awful!!!
“I see what you did there Mr. Indeed…This is a good liberal blog…”
This guy’s fucking brilliant!!
“I’m a 24 year old common sense conservative. My core principles are: balanced budgets, a strong national defense, federalism, limited taxation, and limiting the size and scope of government.”
You didn’t right this all by yourself … did you?
Simpletarian
The Republican 2007 Great Recession was the Republicans driving the economy off of a cliff and then handing someone else the keys to car.
Even “Gabriel McKee’s” rough math shows the plunge (assuming his numbers are more accurate than his other claims).
Under Republican President Bush unemployment went up 50%.
It was an economic jump off a cliff.
Republican Bush’s disastrous economic policies had the same disastrous results to the stock market: It fell off the cliff.
What’s sad about this is that those are observable facts that a rational person can observe.
Right wingers stopped being rational (and stopped being even moral) a long time ago.
“Sense [sic] I’m intelligent and self relient [sic], I’ll stick to the GOP.”
LOL.
“I wish Obama had sane economic policies, but he doesn’t. I’ll be praying for a turnaround though….”
The GOP drove the US economy into a ditch. Are you really going to try and defend 2001-2008? Really? Good, because it’s further proof that you’re a fucking idiot.
“What?? The unemployment rate was 4.5% in November of 2006 under Bush and the GOP congress.”
What was it when Bush left office?
Like I said, Obama has until roughly 2012 to turn things around. If he does, he’ll go down in history as one of our greatest presidents and guys like you will be forced to admit that your rooted against America in a pretty bleak time, economically speaking.
Of course Obama’s prospects for reelection hinge on the performance of the economy. But that goes for every president, IMO.
If a majority of Americans find their personal situation better 3 years from now, he’ll win..if not he’ll lose.
Not saying he was thrown into an ideal situation, but there’s good policy, and there’s bad policy…I think Obama went in the wrong direction with his “stimulus”.
By the way I’m not rooting against the country. I sincerely hope Obama isn’t the next Jimmy Carter. I hope his economic policies result in a booming private sector and widespread prosperity.
At this point, I don’t think that’s the case.
And anytime the balance of power gets out whack like it is now, with one party in control things usually don’t turn out very well. Our founding fathers were smart people.
“Right wingers stopped being rational (and stopped being even moral) a long time ago.”
Yeah, so what if we fund most of the programs you Democratic moochers take advantage of. So what if more and more of our money is wasted on useful government programs. So what if conservatives given more than liberals to charity. So what if hard working and wealth is looked down upon in certain segments of society. Keep demonizing. This country is nothing without wealth, and the prosperity it creates for people of all backgrounds.
*Useless government programs….
Wilbur, whether you, or for that matter, a bunch of polysyllabic economists does not deflect the truth one nanometer from its path towards your thick skull. I was taught basic economics (Macro + Micro) by an Economics professor, whose goal it was to, at least once, fill up all four blackboards during one class. I got a 98 on all of my exams, even though there were no errors, because “No one knows everything”.
[ an omission ] a bunch of polysyllabic economists accept my thesis … does not deflect
“I think Obama went in the wrong direction with his “stimulus”.”
Yes. It was too small and tilted towards unstimulative tax cuts.
People didn’t ’spend’ those cuts as much as they paid off their debts and ’saved’ that money.
That’s the problem with a recession, when people are in ’saving for the future’ mode any extra income gets saved instead of spent which further exacerbates the recession.
It’s astonishing how few right wingers understand that (or how few actually care).
“Gabriel McKee” is another one of the right wingers who have already forgotten the recent disastrous history of the Republicans total ownership of all three branches of government and the Republican’s complete failure on the economy, the war, the environment, and in following the law.
This is a half true statement: “with one party in control things usually don’t turn out very well”.
Yes, when Republicans are in control things get screwed up.
That’s actually part of their plan. Republicans claim government can’t work and then get in charge and prove it.
Republican Bush is fast becoming synonymous with Republican Hoover.
Right winger “Gabriel McKee” is living in Republican Fantasy Land.
FACTS:
Republicans blew up the debt.
Republicans increased the size of government.
Republicans increased the powers of government.
Republican states take more in Federal taxes than they contribute.
These are facts.
The question is whether right winger “Gabriel McKee” sincerely doesn’t know these facts, conveniently pretends to ignore those facts, or is too fanatically attached to the right wing’s ideology to be capable of rational thought or independent observations any more.
I’m not attached to anything or anyone. I have a set of principles I believe in, and that I believe are good for the country. And I’ll support those politicians that believe in the same things I do.
I’m a Republican, but I’m definately not a party hack.
News Reference seems to be upset with his lot on life, and is looking for someone to blame….You’re little childish anti Republican website isn’t going to do much for your cause…Whatever your cause is.
You could probably save a lot of time with your website by just posting: ARGHHHHH REPUBLICANS ARE BAD MEANY HEADS ARGHHH I HATE THEM…
(bold mine)
Jaim, if you truly believed wrote you wrote, and you can’t possibly, there’s no way you could square these two statements of yours with what Nouriel Roubini writes and thinks of this economy at at the moment. If you thought he was worth reading, and you were honest, which you are not, you’d surely have to conclude that he too will soon be forced to admit that he was rooted against America in a pretty bleak time, economically speaking
He paints a far bleaker picture than anyone here on this thread has so far. Your tone has taken nearly a 180 from just a couple months ago, but you’re still acting like the high school cheerleader for Obama.
FYI, here’s Roubini’s latest prognostications, nowhere close to the picture of the economic outlook you try to paint here, even the one you’ve back-tracked on, a quite cocky one indeed.
—-
Roubini Statement of the U.S. Economic Outlook
—-
….”I predict a peak unemployment rate of close to 11% in 2010. Such a large unemployment rate will have negative effects on labor income and consumption growth; will postpone the bottoming out of the housing sector; will lead to larger defaults and losses on bank loans (residential and commercial mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, leveraged loans); will increase the size of the budget deficit (even before any additional stimulus is implemented); and will increase protectionist pressures.”….
Th only way possible to square your statements, something you can never seem to do when called out to do, is to say Roubini was rooting against America. Nothing that any conservative here has said, Gabe McKee, Frank DiSalle, myself, or anyone else, has painted near as bleak a picture nor said anything more deserving of your scorn than what Roubini has, someone you refer to often and claim is worth reading.
Proving what a fraud and a weasel you are is not worth the two minutes it took do it, either.
I made a mistake in quoting Jaim. My error.
Should be …”and guys like you will be forced to admit that your [sic] rooted against America in a pretty bleak time…”
My sincere apologies to the teacher.
Sense I’m intelligent….
No one with any since would argue that.
Intelligent and self-reliant! Impressive. How else are you awesome, G-Mac? Did you ever finish up cataloging the “few bad apples”? Care to share them with us? The sooner you shame them, the sooner the Republican party can develop a better image.
First off racist coward Dennis, where’s my plane ticket?
Second, you’re a dumbass. Roubini is an economist — when he says bleak things about the economy he isn’t cheering for them to happen, he’s making predictions (and he’s been right about a lot of it). When Rush Limbaugh, leader of the GOP, says “I hope he fails” regarding Obama’s stimulus package, that’s a different thing altogether.
So let’s find some more quotations from your piece, shall we?
“I have said on numerous occasions that the recession would last roughly 24 months. Therefore, we are 19 months into that recession. If, as I predicted, the recession is over by year end, it will have lasted 24 months with a recovery only beginning in 2010. Simply put I am not forecasting economic growth before year’s end.
Indeed, last year I argued that this will be a long and deep and protracted U-shaped recession that would last 24 months. Meanwhile, the consensus argued that this would be a short and shallow V-shaped 8 months long recession (like those in 1990-91 and 2001). That debate is over today as we are in the 19th month of a severe recession; so the V is out the window and we are in a deep U-shaped recession. If that recession were to be over by year end – as I have consistently predicted – it would have lasted 24 months and thus been three times longer than the previous two and five times deeper – in terms of cumulative GDP contraction – than the previous two. So, there is nothing new in my remarks today about the recession being over at the end of this year.”
So he’s saying that the Bush Recession is winding down, but we’re going to see stagnant and/or low growth in 2010. He’s responding to people who said the Bush Recession was a “minor” one that would be over in eight months, instead of 24. And entering 2010, Obama will have been president for about one single year. I’ve consistently said (based on reading Roubini, in fact) that during the end of 2010 and through 2011, it’s going to be important for the US economy to show strong job growth and general expansion. Then again, even if the recovery is a soft one, the GOP is going to have to actually run someone against Obama and right now it doesn’t look good for them on this front. Palin is un-electable, Romney will be shot in the back by the fundies.
You’re truly a dumb, ignorant human being with below-normal reading comprehension skills. If you were one of my students, I would have called the developmental counselor in long ago.
And you owe me a plane ticket, coward. Try to avoid shooting your mouth off in the future when you go into Internet Tuffguy Mode.
(bold mine)
Thanks for being so bold, Britney.
Honestly, my true feeling is this would be a mistake for you to try to debate Jaim. It’s a fight that will produce no winners and will make a lot of people on both sides look bad. And you have much bigger fish to fry right now with all those other Liberals.
Forgot to add the money quote that you were so kind to leave out:
“So, yes there is light at the end of the tunnel for the US and the global economy. But as I have consistently argued, the recession will continue through the end of the year, and the recovery will be weak and at risk of a double-dip, as the challenge of getting right the timing and size of the exit strategy for monetary and fiscal policy easing will be daunting.”
My wishful thinking for the future, since I realize you hang on my every word:
End of 2009/early 2010: Bush Recession ends in some part due to the stimulus package. National media proclaims “Recession Over!” President Obama gives a press conference.
2010: Unemployment (a lagging economic indicator) remains far too high, but slowly starts to reverse its course. Stock market makes small gains, companies start feeling its a good time to invest in infrastructure and human resources, i.e., hiring.
2011: Economy still in a soft recovery, but a recovery nonetheless. I never predicted all sweetness and light for Obama’s economic handling, but you’ve failed to understand the timing of all this. Entering 2011, with a soft recovery going on, Obama has been president for only two years. Americans realize that given the catastrophic handling of the economy ca. 2001-2008 by the Bush White House, a soft recovery achieved in two years is actually a great thing, putting him in the top quartile of all American presidents in terms of job performance.
There’s nothing inconsistent about what I’ve said. Obama came into office at pretty much the worst time, economically speaking, giving him four years to try and clean up the Republican mess. If he does so in two to three years, his 2012 campaign writes itself: “Are you better off than you were at the end of the horribly failed Bush administration?” Survey says, yes.
Thesis: The “Austrian School” is not Economics, but a cult, similar to other cults like Libertarianism, Objectivism and Scientology. Discuss.
I was taught basic economics (Macro + Micro) by an Economics professor…
I guess that settles that argument.
My, the stupid has gotten thick around here in the last couple days.
problem besides the magical tax cuts that helped make the problem worse in the first place.
Ummm…no they didn’t.
I’ve said this before. Repeating something a zillion times does not make it true.
This country’s economy thrives because it’s economic model is capitalism. Capitalism cannot work unless people have access to…
CAPITAL.
How do you get more capital into the hands of people so they can spend and invest and really get our economy moving? You stop sucking it down the black hole of government spending where by the time it actually gets to something of any value, at least half of it has been lost to bureaucracy and inefficiency. The government cannot, has not and will not ever do anything to help the economy except to move the fuck out of the way.
Sorry, but only a fool believes that cutting taxes harms our economy. It’s total foolishness.
Thing is, you cons don’t have the intellectual honesty to admit that if the economy turns around in a reasonable time period, Obama deserves to go down as one of our greatest presidents ever.
Oh really? And I suppose you consider Ronald Reagan to be one of the greatest presidents ever? Obama didn’t inherit half the mess Reagan did when he took over for Carter (easily one of the worst Presidents EVER) and he laid out the groundwork that would see this nation go into a time of unparalleled economic prosperity.
“How do you get more capital into the hands of people so they can spend and invest and really get our economy moving?”
You create jobs.
“The government cannot, has not and will not ever do anything to help the economy except to move the fuck out of the way.”
In a Recession/Depression, the government’s job is to create, um, jobs. Obama didn’t pass the stimulus bill in a vacuum. He passed it because the GOP completely shit the bed and blew a hole in the economy (not to mention squandering a budget surplus from Clinton).
Investors and business owners don’t hire and increase infrastructure when they don’t have people to sell things to since they’re unemployed. That’s basic economics.
“Sorry, but only a fool believes that cutting taxes harms our economy. It’s total foolishness.”
So Reagan was a fool when he raised taxes in his second term to deal with the deficit? And more to the point, if you’re going to start and not finish wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, you have to pay for them. Not to mention Bush’s Medicare bill. Not to mention the GOP lust for expanding the size of the Fed from 2001-2006. If you increase the size of the Fed, you have to feed it. Republicans love to talk about smaller government, but they’re proven that they only love to make it bigger (DHS, TSA, etc.).
“And I suppose you consider Ronald Reagan to be one of the greatest presidents ever?”
No, but he’s up there for various reasons. Fall of the USSR. Pulling out of Lebanon and the Middle East was a good idea. Raising taxes to try and balance the budget was a good idea.
Reagan inherited a bad economy. Obama inherited a historically catastrophic one, one that happens about twice every century.
I’ve pretty much laid my cards on the table here. We can check back in early 2011, two years into Obama’s term, to see where the economy is. Given historical data, we’ll be in a soft recovery and headed towards a strong economy. I’m guessing there won’t be a second stimulus bill, although there should be.
If things are as bad or worse than they are now, feel free to start up another one of your crappy little blogs for Palin, Jindal, Rush, whomever. I’ll still vote Obama, but there will be plenty of proverbial ammunition for the GOP to make its case that they’ll be better stewards of the economy than they were ca. 2001-2008. Won’t there?
Gabriel McKee,
Did somebody suggest they were an Austrian school expert? Excellent.
Questions:
1. Simply put, Say’s Law suggests that demand grows as supply grows, and recessions are caused by supply shrinking, not demand shrinking. How does one get corporations to communally increase supply during a recession, without government assistance/coordination?
2. If bankruptcy protections were eliminated, who administers the debtor prisons/workfarms if it’s not the government?
3. Was our current economic situation stemming from the credit – real estate fiasco a “rational expectation”?
Jaim, I offered to pay for your ticket home in order to call me a racist to my face, a charge you can not and will not back up, other than to make the weaselly generic and cowardly claim of a ‘dog-whistle’. You weaseled out by saying you were coming home six months from now anyway, so you wanted me to pay for that ticket. If I’m paying, it should be on my terms when you come, and that would be now when you’ve just cowardly made a claim you can’t back up, not six months from now when it’s convenient for you.
And that typifies your weaselly ways. You’re an elitist white guilt liberal and you’re frustrated that your education doesn’t quite jibe with your relatively low achievement, so you expect the handout from me to pay for something you already had scheduled, when that offer was not extended to you. Lots of things can happen in six months to someone like you living in Korea…swine flu, bird flu, terrorist disaster, food poisoning from eating leg of dog soup, etc. Even still, I’ve offered to pay for that flight after we meet. What’s cowardly about that for someone as untrustworthy as you who I’ve caught in lies about me numerous times before here?
Another elitist white guilt liberal expecting someone else to pay his bills because he wants the good things in life without the work involved in paying his own way.
What’s cowardly about that for someone as untrustworthy as you who I’ve caught in lies about me numerous times before here?
You tell ‘im, Britney! You go grrl!
Dennis, you’ll still be a bigot, a loser, an idiot, and a coward in five months.
I knew you’d never back up your silly little offer but hey, I’m going to milk it.
“so you expect the handout from me to pay for something you already had scheduled”
Expected? You’re the one that offered. I was more than happy to get hits from you on my blog but you went full metal wing-nut and literally — literally — offered me a plane ticket.
“I’ve offered to pay for that flight after we meet”
Fine with me. I’ll be back in the DC area for the week between Christmas and New Year’s. I’ll print out a copy of my receipt for you. I’ll take cash, thank you.
More to the point, I spent more time than I should have shooting down your asinine argument that Roubini is on the level of a kook like Limbaugh. Care to respond to any of the substantive things I said? No? Not surprised.
You create jobs.
I love this. This is typical liberal blather. “We need to create jobs.” Jobs are not something that can made out of clay or with an etch-a-sketch. Nor do they grow like a chia-pet. Jobs come as the result of other factors. New construction, retail growth, expansion, research and development, etc. When those areas start to take off, more jobs become available and that’s when jobs are created. More jobs creates more tax revenue to feed the government behemoth.
In a Recession/Depression, the government’s job is to create, um, jobs. Obama didn’t pass the stimulus bill in a vacuum. He passed it because the GOP completely shit the bed and blew a hole in the economy (not to mention squandering a budget surplus from Clinton).
Wow.
A. It is not the responsibility of the government to create jobs in a recession.
B. Obama’s stimulus package has been a JOKE. It was $800 billion worth of PORK, nothing more.
C. The GOP did not “blow a hole in the economy.” The hole in the economy largely came out of the housing crisis which was created in part by the tactics of Democrats using their powers to push lenders into providing easy access to credit for those who shouldn’t have gotten it.
D. There was no budget surplus inherited by the Bush administration. There was a deficit by end of FY 01 (which started in 2000 and was the final budget signed by President Clinton). Get your facts straight.
Reagan inherited a bad economy. Obama inherited a historically catastrophic one, one that happens about twice every century.
Oh for crying out loud, will you just stop it?
Reagan inherited a near double digit unemployment rate. He inherited double digit inflation. He inherited double digit interest rates. Please. Do not even begin to pretend that what Obama inherited was anywhere near as bad as what Reagan was handed by Carter.
You dind’t shoot down anything, I didn’t say he was a kook, and nothing about Limbaugh was ever mentioned anywhere, so all those are straw man counterpoints. What’s the point of arguing with straw man arguments? My point is you glorify Roubini and he paints a bleak picture of the economy and what measures Obama has taken and what they may very end up doing for this country’s economic prospects. If anyone who posts here says essentially the same thing, which I’ve indicated none were near as bleak, then you paint them as traitors who are wishing bad things for the country, rooting against America.
You came nowhere close to squaring those two positions, you just obfuscated like you always do. So I won’t oblige your whining requests to counterpoint your straw man obfuscations. Sorry, Jaim.
“Reagan inherited a near double digit unemployment rate. He inherited double digit inflation. He inherited double digit interest rates. Please. Do not even begin to pretend that what Obama inherited was anywhere near as bad as what Reagan was handed by Carter.”
Name one reputable economist who claims the US economy ca. 1979 was worse than it was in 2008.
I mentioned that Reagan did some good things, in particular raising taxes in his second term. Obama has been in office for seven months, and you have to admit that’s a pretty small window to see a turnaround in the Bush/GOP Recession of 2008. As mentioned, let’s see how things are (hopefully much better) at the beginning of 2011. Better yet, let’s see how America votes in 2012.
F’ing Merrill Lynch dissolved, along with other super-major “lynchpins” of the economy. This didn’t happen in 1979-1980. Sorry, but you fail at history.
Dennis the Dulles Stalker writes:
“My point is you glorify Roubini”
My point is that I think he’s smart and knows what he’s talking about. I wouldn’t “glorify” a doctor if he told me someone has cancer, I’d simply listen and try to figure out what to do next.
Again limited Dennis, you tried to argue that taking Roubini seriously is akin to rooting for America to fail like your leader Rush. These are very different things. (For starters, one is a serious thinker and writer, the other is a drug-addled racist that you’re in love with.)
FYI, I bought my ticket with US dollars, so we don’t need to worry about currency changes. You’re going to need to meet me at Dulles with 1,400 dollars.
See you at Christmas!
And Jaim, go back and read nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel’s promises that Democrats made when they took over the House in 2006 and what they said about jobs and the deficit and taxes and helping the middle class. Then compare and contrast it with what really happened. If they had done even one tenth of the things they promised and the economy had done just ok or slightly better, they’d be bragging about what wonderful deeds they had done since taking over the House. Instead they, like you, act like moral cowards and blame everything, everything on Bush.
Democrats, and you, are doing the same thing even now. All upside is Obama, all downside is Bush.
More examples of your white guilt, elitist, cowardly, underachieving, America-fleeing liberalism expecting handouts, transferring blame and accepting no responsibility.
Wilbur: Until they give out Ph D’s in “All things”, and you get one, you’re just another voice from the end of the bar. You’ve lost even the ability to pretend to be smart.
“And Jaim, go back and read nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel’s promises that Democrats made when they took over the House in 2006 and what they said about jobs and the deficit and taxes and helping the middle class.”
Shorter Dennis: I have no fucking clue as to what I’m talking about please look over there.
Instead they, like you,…blame everything, everything on Bush.
Well, Britney, in their defense, Junior’s (Cheney’s) was a spectacularly horrible Administration. Truly bad. Awful. In the immortal words of Leonard Pinth-Garnell, “Really bites the big one.” Terrible! Terrible! Awful! Awful! Awful! Couldn’t be worse! Couldn’t be worse! Terrible! Simply awful!
I do know exactly what I’m talking about, Jaim I’ll list some promises if you’d like made by those two clowns that no liberals or the liberal media ever has honestly taken them to task for, instead just putting 100% of the blame on Bush for the economy, like you dishonsetly do. I also know you’ve mentioned Rush Limbaugh four times now already, when no one else has brought him up, and nothing you mention about him has word one to do with Roubini, my argument, or your argument that selectively chides people you don’t like as America haters for not liking Obama’s policies. I know that you are dishonest and can’t square arguments you make.
I know exactly what I’m talking about, Jaim.
Indeed, if I wanted to argue with the likes of Perez Hilton or one of his followers, I know how to look up his website. And I’d be likely to get better dialogue going there than with you.
Threads speak for themselves, stalker Dennis. See you and your cash at Christmas.
I know that you are dishonest and can’t square arguments you make.
Translated: I know you are, but what am I.
I know exactly what I’m talking about, Jaim.
Translated: Because I said so in a blog comment! Shut up!
You go, Britney!
And I’d be likely to get better dialogue going there than with you.
Indeed. They’re quite possibly big fans of yours, Britney.
Sounds good, Jaim-boy. How about somewhere in Tysons, actually, say, Maggiano’s. Airports suck. Let me know date/time and please do me the one favor of making sure your dental coverage is up to date. It’s the least you can do for the handout you’re expecting from me.
Let me know date/time and please do me the one favor of making sure your dental coverage is up to date.It’s the least you can do for the handout you’re expecting from me.
Translation: No anonymous blog commenter was, is, or will ever be tuffer than me! Hear me virtually roar!
You go, Britney!
I have no idea who you are or how long you’ve even posted here. The only time I see your name is when you’re saying something stupid about me, and it’s never when I’ve addressed you in any way. I don’t mind it in any way, it’s kind of cute and humorous, but it does fit the description of an obsessed stalker fwiw. Your fascination with me I take as a complement, but I also get the impression what you’re really after is a pic of me that you can photoshop a penis on and re-post to Perez’s website.
“How about somewhere in Tysons, actually, say, Maggiano’s?”
Nope. Dulles. December 27th. See you then. Check my blog for details.
No, actually, Indeed, and since you’re obviously a very big fan of his, it’s closer to Jaim acting like Perez Hilton when he called Will.I.am a faggot and being the smartass punk that he was. Jaim is the one acting like the tough guy and doing all the roaring. You just haven’t been here long enough to know that. He’s not man enough to list one example of racism from me yet he think’s he can get under my skin by repeatedly calling me one.
So, Indeed, why don’t you get off the trashy website kick and tell me how that’s not being a punk-ass coward on Jaim’s part, and how it’s tuff-guy bravado of me to tell him to put up or shut up.
I also get the impression what you’re really after is a pic of me that you can photoshop a penis on
I am sincerely sorry if you are wanting for a penis–even a photoshopped one, but in the immortal words of The PE: I can’t do nuttin’ for ya man!
Too many people around and you are well aware of that. You’ll be home for a week, so we’ll find a good agreeable time and place between now and then. Like I said, you’re a ungracious weasel for allowing me to pay and then you setting all the terms.
Jaim is the one acting like the tough guy and doing all the roaring.
Translation: “I know you are, but what am I.” Again.
I realize that’s your schtick, Britney, but you’re gonna have to bring something else to the table if you want to be a real anonymous blog commenter tuff gal.
I can’t do nuttin’ for ya man!
Er, that should have read “…(wo)man!”
“how it’s tuff-guy bravado of me to tell him to put up or shut up”
Says the guy trying to escape from paying me over a thousand dollars in cash. And moves the goalposts. And is a fucking moron.
Dennis, you fail at all things. Can’t think of one you don’t fail at to be honest.
But I’m going to happily take your money.
And don’t even think about trying to write a check.
Do you have something against transgendered people, Indeed, or are they just convenient freaks to you to be used as clubs for when you desire, but then pretend you’re on their side when you want to show you really care about all people?
Suspicions confirmed.
My guess is (M)ann Coulter transgender jokes are your favorite ones and ‘Ifuckedanncoulterintheass.com is also bookmarked on your computer.
You’re the welfare recipient in this case, Jaim. You shouldn’t be the one to dictate terms to my offer. I’m not the one who has failed, ever. You have admitted your failure to find a job teaching here in the US despite the degrees, and despite a 4.5% unemployment rate at the time. You’ve also admitted your failure to draw a decent salary, yet you accept your lot in life and do nothing but blame others for your situation.
Do you have something against transgendered people
Certainly not, Britney. All I wrote was that’s not how I roll, even if you do. You brought it up. I don’t know how I could be any clearer: I am sorry–really, I am–that you are wanting for a penis (even a photoshoppped one), but that’s just not my style. Free to be you and me and all that, but free to just politely say “no” too. So, no thank you on your offer.
Doesn’t jibe with your last comment at all, Indeed.
You’re a bigot.
Exposed.
Guys, please, get a motel room.
From one end of the bar to the other, Frank, have a drink on me.
OK, coward-bigot Dennis, here’s the original thread where you said you would buy me a round-trip ticket to Dulles to tell you that you’re a limited, racist, sad mofo:
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/07/14/jeff-sessions-why-doesnt-sotomayor-think-like-all-puerto-ricans/#comments
Here’s the quotation you keep trying to run away from:
“Jaim, tell you what, how about if I send you a roundtrip plane ticket home, my treat, and you can meet me at Dulles and I’ll give you the honor of calling me a racist right to my face? That should be something that would provide great satisfaction for you, right?”
Don’t want to put too many links in to ban my comment, but indeed, you mentioned Dulles Airport and me telling you you’re a petty little bigot to your face, and that you’d pay for it.
But now ZOMG, you couldn’t wait for Christmas. And that’s fine. And then it was some crappy Italian joint or whatever. And I needed a receipt. All well and good.
But now, it’s Dulles. December 27th. And I’m going to simply tell you that you’re a racist, and a shining emblem to the GOP (I added that part) and you’re going to hand over 1,400 USD to me in cash.
And then what? Feel free to take a swing at me, and I’ll happily laugh as the cops take you to jail. I’ll be off to go do librul things like see my family and buy some books.
See ya soon!
You don’t play this game well, Indeed.
Like I said, I don’t know you or even recognize your handle, but it sure didn’t take very long for you to show everyone your hypocritical bigotry.
Most other libs here are able to hide that for at least a week or two before it slips like it did with you.
Doesn’t jibe with your last comment at all, Indeed.
You’re a bigot.
I do not follow, but it matters not at this point.
I meant no offense to you or people like you, Britney. I apologize if you or anyone of your ilk was offended.
Stay tuff! You go, grrl!
I did say Dulles, but I didn’t say six months from now. Dulles wasn’t a good idea, and your need for cops around for a simple friendly exchange of ideas is just a bit cowardly, doncha think? Who said anything about a swing.
I just want to see you call someone that name to their face. My guess is you never have to anyone. ever, in your sad, pathetic, segregated, protected little weasel of a life.
Who said anything about a swing.
Then why would you care if any law enforcement is around? What are you afraid of? I like the Rule of Law, myself.
This comment, Indeed. This doesn’t jibe with your excuse that you weren’t bashing transgendered people.
But, apology accepted. Taunting guys by calling them girls is sexist too and you’re on the wrong website if you think you can get away with that and then pretend to be a caring liberal. Some guys here think it’s cute and all and maybe so did I in middle school, but it’s hardly caring to all segments of the population whose side you think you’re on when it come to equal rights and all sorts of liberal causes. Or do you need help understanding that?
The 14 Benjamins you hand me on December 27, 2009 at Dulles Airport (your idea) will be the most delicious ducats I’ve ever earned.
I love teaching. I love editing. I love writing reviews.
But your money, Dennis, will taste especially sweet.
Or do you need help understanding that?
Britney, I’m not sure I want to understand exactly where you’re coming from (no disrespect or offense intended, that’s just not how a I roll). I sincerely wish you the best of luck in your quest for a penis, photoshopped or otherwise.
“I did say Dulles, but I didn’t say six months from now. Dulles wasn’t a good idea, and your need for cops around for a simple friendly exchange of ideas is just a bit cowardly, doncha think? Who said anything about a swing.”
DC area Dennis, whatevs. Underneath the Washington Monument? In the shadow of the White House? Over by the Tidal Basin?
Either way, you will a) pay me like the little bitch you are or b) snivel out.
Both of these scenarios absolutely define who you are as a person.
Dulles is what you promised though. I take your money, I tell you the obvious. I go on to my vacation. And you remain a dickhead.
See you soon!
Sounds like you expect to be swallowing those 14 benjies for some odd reason, Jaim, so I guess you can tell me then if what you tasted was sweet.
I’m not the one who has failed, ever.
Says the coward who’s never told us what he did for a living.
Would you like to bet 14 benjamins that I have, freD?
I’m good for it if you are.
Would you like to bet 14 benjamins that I have, freD?
Britney (”Dennis”) is a wingnut welfare blog commenter, anonymous tuff gal, and speculator.
I’m a guy, Indeed. I’m married to a wonderful, beautiful woman and I have two beautiful, lovely daughters. Just what are you getting at by calling me a girl, exactly?
Indeed, what happened to freD?
Or is he combing all the threads back to February before he accepts the bet?
Would you like to bet 14 benjamins that I have, freD?
I’m good for it if you are.
About as dumb as challenging somebody from the internet to a fist fight. I honestly cannot believe that you were ever successful at anything, and for good reasons.
freD-
Didn’t challenge him to a fistfight. I have told people here what I do, and I have been and am successful, and quite gainfully employed.
And you appear to be the one who is a coward, not me.
What is it you do, freD?
Just what are you getting at by calling me a girl, exactly?
No, not just any female, specifically Britney (Spears). For two reasons: You’re worldview and language are practically indistinguishable from Britney’s (as documented) and you have a habit of hanging nicknames on other commenters, so I figured you could take it. Oh, and you apparently want a penis, photoshopped or otherwise, and I figured that’s how you roll (I am ignorant in this things and apologize again if you or your ilk are offended).
I was until recently, successfully employed in an engineering field. My avocation was rehabbing and investing in real estate. My vocation came to a grinding halt when I was screwed over by a Machiavellian sociopath, who was far better at ruining reputations than I was at protecting mine, and I got laid off when certain positions were offshored. My avocation pays some bills but things are somewhat slow right now.
Now your turn.
I’m in finance on the institutional side. Like in your business, there are very busy times and then slow times. I make hay when the sun shines but I still need to man the battle stations when it’s slow and I have three market screens in front of me, so this isn’t a bad diversion when it’s slow and it provides laughs. And laughs aren’t a bad thing for what I do. Sorry about your sitch, though. You don’t know me so I won’t hold your calling me a coward against you, but if there’s anything I can do to help you out or get your name in front of anyone, please let me know.
To be honest, I’d figured such (Good thing I didn’t call you ‘a churner’, eh?)
Successful sociopathy, I had never experienced such a thing. This person had expertly posed as a “friend”. Too complex, too many lessons learned to discuss here. But I acquired a nasty hyper vigilance that borders on paranoia. I do not trust anybody in a position of power or “success” where the checks and balances are few.
Maybe that’s where you can help – anyone in fact. A successful sociopath’s strengths are psychology, BS and political combat. Nobody is better. But their weakness is competency in what they’re actually supposed to be doing professionally. What are your experiences?
One thing I learned is that if you’ve got a pit bull by the ears you do not let go.
Here, Indeed, here’s David Ignatius doing his best Britney Spears impression, too.
Kicking the CIA (Again)
This came out the day after I said to Quaker in a Basement the things in candor that I said. There’s not a whole lot I said that he’s not saying as well, only he has the benefit of being a professional journalist and the time and tools to say it worlds better than I would ever be capable of on even my best day with the same time and tools. And I can easily take anything you can throw out, but it’s not me who you demean that’s the issue really, and we both know that.
I started continuing to read this thread and after awhile had to scroll back up because I forgot what the original post was!
David “Britney” Ignatius. Got it.
Thanks, Britney.
My fault, Jay. I shouldn’t engage some of these guys, I know.
Single weirdest thread I’ve ever read.
Bush was terrible on the economy. Obama is worse. He’s the next Jimmy Carter,
8 years. 6 months. 4 years.
How do you figure?
My fault, Jay.
It usually is.
My fault, Jay. I shouldn’t engage some of these guys, I know.
And if anyone’s totally awesome at staying on-topic, it’s Britney (”Look! Over there!”).
Maybe if we didn’t have so many donkeys sucking us dry through handouts we might not have such ridiculous deficits.
Whoa, really? Sure about that?
Thought I saw you in the bushes, there, Duros, but wasn’t sure if it was you or not.
What?? The unemployment rate was 4.5% in November of 2006 under Bush and the GOP congress.
4.6% in January of 07 under Bush/Dems……
6.7% in November of 08 under Bush/Dems….
and
9.5% currently under Obama/Dems
And of course, there was nothing else involved in that other than a change in the majority party.
Wow.
“I’m a 24 year old common sense conservative. My core principles are: balanced budgets, a strong national defense, federalism, limited taxation, and limiting the size and scope of government.”
What is that, your Hannidate profile?
At this point, I don’t think that’s the case.
Because 6 months is long enough to know? Do you know how long it takes to stop a cruise ship?
This country is nothing without wealth, and the prosperity it creates for people of all backgrounds.
Go Galt, bro.
I was taught basic economics (Macro + Micro) by an Economics professor…
‘cuz my shop teacher was TOTALLY wrong.
I’ve said this before. Repeating something a zillion times does not make it true.
Ironical, ain’t it?
And I suppose you consider Ronald Reagan to be one of the greatest presidents ever? … and he laid out the groundwork that would see this nation go into a time of unparalleled economic prosperity.
And THEN raised taxes and doubled the national debt. Did you forget that part, Jay?
Where’d everybody go?
It was $800 billion worth of PORK, nothing more.
Would have been a lot less pork if he hadn’t tried to get Republican support.
I don’t mind it in any way, it’s kind of cute and humorous, but it does fit the
I kinda think you do mind, Denny.
Thought I saw you in the bushes, there, Duros, but wasn’t sure if it was you or not.
Just watching the floor show, bro.
Republican “Gabriel McKee”:
“I’m not attached to anything or anyone.”
And this sums up the right wing’s mindset: Detachment.
It’s an almost perfect definition of a sociopath, someone who’s “not attached to anything or anyone.”
And this is the right wing mindset that the rest of US are facing.
(By the way, “Gabriel McKee”, does your “black” “girlfriend” understand that you aren’t “attached to anything or anyone”?
Putting quotes around black and girlfriend shows what a sick bastard you are News Reference. Why do you care what his relationship is with his girlfriend?
Seriously, that is fucked up, dude. Trying to somehow equate his personal relationship with another woman with the right wing shows what a very seriously deranged mind you have. It’s like you’re trying to do some kind of survey in your head, but you’ve already made up your mind what the conclusions are.
Right winger “Jay” apparently worships at the feet of Hollywood entertainer and part time cult leader Ronald Reagan.
Reagan’s tax cuts are directly correlated with unemployment getting steadily worse for a solid year after the tax cuts were enacted.
And for the record, the height of American power was in the 1950’s when tax rates were at their highest for the richest.
The Reagan Cult has been more damaging to our nation than any Jihadi terrorist has ever been.
It’s like you’re trying to do some kind of survey in your head, but you’ve already made up your mind what the conclusions are.
Indeed. But this is a pot and kettle situation, Britney. You routinely make wildly baseless assumptions about people here. Routinely. All the time.
Indeed, what is it that you find so intriguing about me?
If you were perceptive, a big if, you’d be able to ascertain that the routine assumptions I make are only to the people who make baseless assumptions about me.
I’d ask you as a challenge to show me one instance where that wasn’t the case, but you don’t strike me as the kind of person who would take the time or even attempt to provide any evidence of what you claim. And if you did, I will promise you five examples that I’ll provide of someone doing it to me first for every one you show of me doing that.
Since I’m a compassionate guy, I will pay for you to get the mental healthcare you so desperately need “News Reference”…if you’ll take me up on my offer…I think the internetz would benefit greatly from a 0.0001% reduction in crazy talk.
None of the “Austrian Schoolers” ever wants to play with me.
Dennis the little bitch, I need your e-mail for contact info. Please stalk me through my blog and drop me a line.
Right winger “Gabriel McKee”: “Since I’m a compassionate guy, I will pay for you to get the mental healthcare you so desperately need “News Reference””
That’s one of the significant differences between the left and the right: Right wingers only offer individual compassion and usually only if it creates the illusion of being decent even as it’s a back handed insult.
Left wingers believe everyone deserves more than just compassion but also actual healthcare, including mental health care.
“Gabriel McKee”, instead of making me offers, I’d prefer you tell your “girlfriend” that you aren’t “attached to anything or anyone”.
Doing so would show some true integrity and compassion.
As it is you come off like a very stereotypically smarmy right wing user (you are dishonestly using someone for your own pleasure).
Which brings US back to the right wing economic system: A dishonest con-job of false math that uses US (we, the People) for the enrichment of the top 10%, 01%, and increasingly only for the top 0.1%.