Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

User avatar
Mattb
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Maine
Contact:

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Mattb » Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:38 am

m.b. wrote:
Mattb wrote:I'd wager that has more to do with most Americans not having a very good handle on the facts of the matter.
awesome. more liberal condescension. "you're not smart enough to really understand what's going on...."

how long till you guys figure out that americans get it, they just don't want your leftist agenda? we see it for what it is...
This whole "liberal condescension" thing is getting old. The modern world is complex, and your average joe on the street, regardless of party affiliation, isn't the best person to ask about macroeconomics, climatology, or quantum mechanics.

If you look at the polling, it's obvious that people just don't understand a lot of the issues on more than a very superficial level, and none of the major media outlets are doing their jobs in explaining them- preferring instead to focus on horse race coverage and the political back & forth.

Your endless rants about a "leftist agenda" pointedly ignores the fact that the first year of the Obama administration saw objectively very moderate programs pushed and enacted.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
m.b.
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: U.S.-occupied Texas

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by m.b. » Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:47 am

Mattb wrote:This whole "liberal condescension" thing is getting old.
agreed, it's getting VERY old.

of course, we know that's not gonna stop you (or most of the other libs) from continuing with it...
Mattb wrote:The modern world is complex, and your average joe on the street, regardless of party affiliation, isn't the best person to ask about macroeconomics, climatology, or quantum mechanics.

If you look at the polling, it's obvious that people just don't understand a lot of the issues on more than a very superficial level, and none of the major media outlets are doing their jobs in explaining them- preferring instead to focus on horse race coverage and the political back & forth.

Your endless rants about a "leftist agenda" pointedly ignores the fact that the first year of the Obama administration saw objectively very moderate programs pushed and enacted.
incredible how you use liberal condescension to justify liberal condescension. and i'm too dumb to even realize you did.

your endless liberal condescension pointedly ignores the fact that the american people get it and simply don't want it. bayh and a few others have figured it out though; how long till you do?
III

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Plow » Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:51 am

gadflyfisher wrote: So its the Obama's fault that businesses he did not opine about,those not taking guvco money, pulled back on their spending for corporate toys?
Lot of small businesses and little guys make a living fueling, flying and maintaining corporate aircraft. Obama’s remarks sent shock waves through the whole industry – the good guys also. You got to remember that was back when people took him and the dem controlled congress seriously.

gadflyfisher wrote:
Overcast wrote:I think Evan Bayah summed up the business situation pretty well and just how fucked up the democrats are on creating jobs. And hell he's a democrat.
Evan Bayh: "If I Could Create One Job, That's More Than Congress ...
Senator Even Bayh told reporters this morning that, "If I could create one job in the private sector, that's more than Congress has done in six months............
gadflyfisher wrote: Of course the republican idealogs and their 40 no votes at all times on all issues have no impact on that. They deserve a free ride.
Obama and the Dems got everything they wanted to create jobs. The problem is the “plan” is not creating jobs.
gadflyfisher wrote: Definately proves that if you have your own PR firm (fox) that spews lies often enoough many people that don't read or think for themselves will believe anything!
Is that whole free press thing getting to be a drag for you? Anyway it’s a New York Times/CBS poll and I bet even NYT and CBS reported it.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
Mattb
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Maine
Contact:

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Mattb » Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:58 am

Plow wrote: Obama and the Dems got everything they wanted to create jobs. The problem is the “plan” is not creating jobs.
It's tough to conclusively prove (or disprove) causation on this stuff, but the data shows that things have rebounded pretty sharply since the stimulus package went into effect. It requires some pretty creative accounting to claim that the plan isn't creating jobs.

Image
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by BigCliff » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:16 am

I find the praise of Bayh ridiculous. He decided that congress sucks and isn't functional, and that means he should give up on it.

His actions over the next ten months could prove me wrong, but for now, he sucks. (and I'm betting he'll replace Tauzin as head of PhRMA)
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Plow » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:54 am

Mattb wrote:
Plow wrote: Obama and the Dems got everything they wanted to create jobs. The problem is the “plan” is not creating jobs.
It's tough to conclusively prove (or disprove) causation on this stuff, but the data shows that things have rebounded pretty sharply since the stimulus package went into effect. It requires some pretty creative accounting to claim that the plan isn't creating jobs.
How about just making the unemployment numbers go down - thats how it was done in the old days for both parties. I'm not buying the "jobs saved" BS.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2247
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Upsetter » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:55 am

m.b. wrote:they spent $787B to create 2M and save 1.1M jobs.... i'm no rocket surgeon but that's ~$254,000 a job...what kind of jobs are these again? you're paying people how much to do what?
They didnt even spend a third of that money during fiscal 2009. Learn the difference btw an appropriation, which means the money has been approved for spending by the legislative, and actual money spent by the executive. There are websites out there that track the actual money spent, it didnt even hit 250 bil. I dont even think they plan to spend the rest during fiscal 2010, some will trickle out in 2011.

And it certainly did create jobs, just about every road construction project in my county right now is partially or fully funded by stimulus money. My local and state govts are engaged in hot debates about accepting that money for this or that infrastructure improvement project. It has become a hot topic because all of it is, in theory, deficit money, so many local and state govts are rejecting the money so as not to look like hypocrits for criticizing the stimulus in the first place. Be sure to figure that lil diddy into your argument about job creation.

User avatar
BigCliff
Posts: 5925
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:59 am
Location: SanAntonyo

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by BigCliff » Wed Feb 17, 2010 11:09 am

Plow wrote:
Mattb wrote:
Plow wrote: Obama and the Dems got everything they wanted to create jobs. The problem is the “plan” is not creating jobs.
It's tough to conclusively prove (or disprove) causation on this stuff, but the data shows that things have rebounded pretty sharply since the stimulus package went into effect. It requires some pretty creative accounting to claim that the plan isn't creating jobs.
How about just making the unemployment numbers go down - thats how it was done in the old days for both parties. I'm not buying the "jobs saved" BS.
Like this?
The unemployment rate in the U.S. unexpectedly declined in January to 9.7%, the lowest level since August, while payrolls dropped as companies boosted worker hours and overtime instead of taking on new hires.

Employment fell by 20,000 last month, reflecting a plunge in construction jobs and a drop in state and local government hiring, figures from the Labor Department in Washington showed. Economists had forecast a gain. Manufacturing employment, factory hours and overtime increased.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/wor ... z0foWyvwd8
Buy better hooks and bourbon.

Image

User avatar
m.b.
Posts: 5567
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: U.S.-occupied Texas

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by m.b. » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:40 pm

Upsetter wrote:
m.b. wrote:they spent $787B to create 2M and save 1.1M jobs.... i'm no rocket surgeon but that's ~$254,000 a job...what kind of jobs are these again? you're paying people how much to do what?
They didnt even spend a third of that money during fiscal 2009. Learn the difference btw an appropriation, which means the money has been approved for spending by the legislative, and actual money spent by the executive. There are websites out there that track the actual money spent, it didnt even hit 250 bil. I dont even think they plan to spend the rest during fiscal 2010, some will trickle out in 2011.

And it certainly did create jobs, just about every road construction project in my county right now is partially or fully funded by stimulus money. My local and state govts are engaged in hot debates about accepting that money for this or that infrastructure improvement project. It has become a hot topic because all of it is, in theory, deficit money, so many local and state govts are rejecting the money so as not to look like hypocrits for criticizing the stimulus in the first place. Be sure to figure that lil diddy into your argument about job creation.

haha, you took the bait...


Mattb wrote:
Plow wrote: Obama and the Dems got everything they wanted to create jobs. The problem is the “plan” is not creating jobs.
It's tough to conclusively prove (or disprove) causation on this stuff, but the data shows that things have rebounded pretty sharply since the stimulus package went into effect. It requires some pretty creative accounting to claim that the plan isn't creating jobs.

Image
if things are going so well why are the wheels coming of the obama administration? why can he not get anything done, even when he had a supermajority? why are democrats losing elections all over the country, and why are members of congress dropping out before re-election? that dudn't tell you anything?

what's gonna be great is to see what happens in Nov.


if things are going so well, why don't we curtail spending on the rest of the stim. money and do away with all the stuff that's bee appropriated over the next few years? why are we now robbing from out grandkids? why do we keep spending money we don't have?

let me guess:

"but, but, but....it's bush's fault!"
III

User avatar
Plow
Posts: 5058
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Deep South Port Isabel to the Keys

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Plow » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:04 pm

BigCliff wrote:
Plow wrote:
How about just making the unemployment numbers go down - thats how it was done in the old days for both parties. I'm not buying the "jobs saved" BS.
Like this?
The unemployment rate in the U.S. unexpectedly declined in January to 9.7%, the lowest level since August, while payrolls dropped as companies boosted worker hours and overtime instead of taking on new hires.

Employment fell by 20,000 last month, reflecting a plunge in construction jobs and a drop in state and local government hiring, figures from the Labor Department in Washington showed. Economists had forecast a gain. Manufacturing employment, factory hours and overtime increased.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/wor ... z0foWyvwd8
You had to go all the way to Canada to find a story that didn't talk about the underlying problems with that number. That's rich.

The economy and jobs will improve on their own even with Obama shitting on it. That's the strength of this country.

My favorite part of the unemployment number is the 7 or 8% who are not counted as unemployed because they have become so frustrated that they just gave up looking for work. How cool is that for the politicians? Otherwise unemployment would be 17 or18%.
Better Reds than dead...

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2247
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Upsetter » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:05 pm

m.b. wrote:if things are going so well why are the wheels coming of the obama administration?
Because nobody is better at lying than the rightwing spin machine and the dipshits that listen to those fuckwads are the braindrain on the nation. Smart conservatives know the stimulus worked, are aware of the actual numbers that are easy enough to find, but are rightly concerned about the deficit spending anyways. The dipshits think BO is a socialist, is trying to ruin america, is a terrorist sympathizer, is going to take their guns, ad nauseum. Im sure you see the difference. Most of the dipshits didnt care a whit about DC until they lost their jobs, then glenn beck told them it was all BO's fault, and they believed his dumbass.
m.b. wrote:why can he not get anything done, even when he had a supermajority? why are democrats losing elections all over the country, and why are members of congress dropping out before re-election? that dudn't tell you anything?
Again, cause the right wing spin machine has been very effective at reframing the debate so much so that for the dems to have tried to push anything thru would have resulted in trouble come 2010. AND, that is why folks like evan bayh are saying "fuck it", their colleagues on the left are spineless, are more concerned about being reelected than actually doing anything. Same goes for the right. I guess it goes to show that no matter how many speeches BO makes lambasting congress for being a bunch of pussy pos's, for the most part, they could care less.
m.b. wrote:what's gonna be great is to see what happens in Nov.

if things are going so well, why don't we curtail spending on the rest of the stim. money and do away with all the stuff that's bee appropriated over the next few years? why are we now robbing from out grandkids? why do we keep spending money we don't have?
Worst case, the spineless twats on the right will gain some seats and continue to ensure nothing gets done for the next two years as well. Your last points I cant really disagree with. I can only say the "need" is hidden in the various economic health stats that come out each quarter and economists far more knowledgeable than you or I are making those calls. It seems as though the executive is being cautious in its spending, so what you ask for just might happen.

User avatar
Mattb
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am
Location: Maine
Contact:

Re: Yep, he's soft on terror, and clueless on business...

Post by Mattb » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:22 pm

Plow wrote: You had to go all the way to Canada to find a story that didn't talk about the underlying problems with that number. That's rich.

The economy and jobs will improve on their own even with Obama shitting on it. That's the strength of this country.
I didn't pull out any quotes, so you might've missed it, but I posted an extensively researched article from today's New York Times earlier in the thread. Here it is again http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/busin ... yt&emc=rss -
Just look at the outside evaluations of the stimulus. Perhaps the best-known economic research firms are IHS Global Insight, Macroeconomic Advisers and Moody’s Economy.com. They all estimate that the bill has added 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs so far and that its ultimate impact will be roughly 2.5 million jobs. The Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency, considers these estimates to be conservative.
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: V Wake and 22 guests