March 05, 2009
Truth in Advertising

Defenders of Obama will no doubt recoil at Karl Rove pointing out the increasingly profound differences between the way Obama coyly campaigned versus many of the actual steps he is taking as President.

Fine, if you think Karl Rove is the font of all evil, that's your right. Nevertheless, could you explain why Chris "thrill going up my leg" Matthews is vigorously objecting along the very same lines:

As alluded to early this week, at some point the more centrist Establishment - that always remained comfortable with Bill Clinton - is going to revolt against Obama if the trends of the last couple weeks continue. Sure, public opinion will probably be the last indicator to catch-up to that reality given Obama's obvious capacity to portray himself as likable and trustworthy (part of the reason he crushed McCain in last year's debate). But, it sure looks increasingly like that shift is possible.

Posted by Eric Earling at March 05, 2009 09:02 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I'll fire first.
It must be like sitting on a cheese grater for the libs these days when the policies 'bama is foisting on us, and the results, are exactly what the vast right wing conspiracy warned of.
Now the only thing they have left is Limbaugh=evil.

Posted by: PC on March 5, 2009 09:00 AM
2. I say Saul's son can't camoflauge his radical roots much longer. Even the pie in the sky dreamers like Buckley Jr., David Brooks, Jim Cramer, et als whom bought the fertilizer salesman Obama's pitch during the campaign are waking up to the fact that he's a shrewd, Chicago machine politician who has no intentions of holding to his promises of dispensing with the "politics of the past". We just have to weather the remaining destruction this Alinskyte will impose upon this country and hope the "man on the street" wakes up to the harsh reality that a true blue American hating socialist is occupying the Nations house and steering this ship straight into the rocks.

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 09:26 AM
3. Fackless
played in outing an undercover CIA NOC
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HAHAHAHAHA, you poor fool.

How about we hang Leaky Leahy, who really did out our undercover people.

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 09:45 AM
4. "Why has he not been hung for treason for the role he played in outing an undercover CIA NOC? ~ Unkl Facz

Who? Joe Wilson, who introduced his wife regularly at D.C. Gala's as a CIA officer? Do you have anything to refute Rove's points on the schizophrenic Obama or are you just content with spreading falsehoods you can't back up about Rove?

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 09:49 AM
5. Eric must have hit a sore point- Factless is changing the subject. Factless- you do realize that it was Obama supporter-Colin Powell- who blew the whistle, don't you?

Obama is an unmitigated flop. Time for impeachment. The guy doesn't have a clue to run a business and yet, genteel folks like Factless wanted him to run the biggest business in the world.

Posted by: swatter on March 5, 2009 10:05 AM
6. Factless

Just in case you can't look it up.
*************************************
Leahy gained some notoriety as a member of the Intelligence Committee. He was charged with revealing classified information during the Achille Lauro terrorist incident, outraging administration officials. leading to his resignation from the intelligence panel. Behavior like this earned for him the sobriquet "Leaky Leahy."
___________________

So what were you saying about Rove again?

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 10:10 AM
7. You hit it on the head Swatter.
Have you looked at the stock market? Down 200.

Just think of what Cap & Trade will do. More taxes for all.

Jezzz No-one trust this man.

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 10:16 AM
8. Factless- you do realize that it was Obama supporter-Colin Powell- who blew the whistle, don't you?

Actually, it wasn't. It was Richard Armitage.

Though Joe Wilson's listing of his super secret spy wife in Who's Who in America helped.

Plus, she wasn't even covert at the time. She was actually writing memos to staff with her name on the documents at the time of the 'outing' of the desk jockey.

But yeah. 'Facts' wants somebody hung for treason over an event that didn't even happen.

Posted by: jimg on March 5, 2009 10:16 AM
9. I read Karl Rove's piece in the WSJ. The left may keep ranting about Rove, but he is still probably one of the more astute observers of the national political scene.

Anyway: The title and lead of Rove's piece sums it up very well:
''Presidential Bait-and-Switch:
What Obama once promised, and what he's delivering''

Posted by: Methow Ken on March 5, 2009 10:21 AM
10. ...and Unkl Facz~ Novak said he learned of Wilson's wife's occupation when the Super secret, uber-hypertopsecret agent Ms. Plame was also outed by her dunce husband in his bio in "who's who in America" as JimG pointed out above. Feel free to check out the Wilson bio article for yourself for proof:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/252_wilson.gif

facts are inconvenient things aren't they "Facts"?

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 10:26 AM
11. #10 Agree. Unfortunately he has an equal or better on the other side, Rahm Emanuel.

Posted by: Duffman on March 5, 2009 10:27 AM
12. #11 Rick
+++++++++++++++++

Hey buddy, it's "factless" (-:

Odd isn't it. All these lies/less facts coming from a person who swears he own's 3 businesses.

You've got to wonder.

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 10:34 AM
13. @ 11~ Oops, wrong link inserted, that one was a DU mocking of the "who's who" bio:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1457846/posts

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 10:36 AM
14. Yup Medic/Vet, I think old "facts" needs to up the meds or seek some anger management couseling. This constant railing of "the bush crime family" and drooling obsession with Karl Rove is unheatlhy, but certainly entertaining for us. The Daily Kos and Goldy's goat farm at HA will certainly cause that irrational behavior in some of the more already imbalanced among us. :~)

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 10:42 AM
15. POTUS Obama and Europe
Oh My! Suppose our President will be departing for Europe soon?

Posted by: Duffman on March 5, 2009 11:08 AM
16. Eric, reread your post: "Fine, if you think Karl Rove is the font of all evil, that's your right."

Unless you are using some unusual English, I think it is time for strong cup of drip and a quick edit. ;)

Posted by: Boxxerace on March 5, 2009 11:51 AM
17. Rush Limbaugh is not evil. He's just a pompous, hypocritical windbag whose time is long over. He was last relevant in 1994 when he helped to sweep the GOP into power. He should just give up the stupid gasbag radio show and retire to his palatial Florida estate where he can ponder his material possessions all alone.

The greatest joy an anti-Limbaugh person can have is the fact that Rush is alone and no woman would ever have him!

Posted by: Crusader on March 5, 2009 12:10 PM
18. BTW, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney should be frog marched off to Leavenworth for blowing the cover of a CIA operative. This is coming from a lifelong neoconservative!

Posted by: Crusader on March 5, 2009 12:12 PM
19. 'The greatest joy an anti-Limbaugh person can have is the fact that Rush is alone and no woman would ever have him!'

Yep! But conversly he likely has MANY! However, a man without the true love of a woman...is not complete.

Posted by: Duffman on March 5, 2009 12:18 PM
20. Crusader,

To quote Dean Wormer:

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

Now go and read and educate yourself that Karl Rove and Dick Cheney weren't involved in the leak at all.

If you really are conservative, then you'll take the effort to educate yourself, and when you learn you were wrong you'll apologize.

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 5, 2009 12:21 PM
21. jimg, you are technically correct. However, when employees of a pol go public or spill the beans, I tend to blame the leader- ergo, I stand by the Powell quote.

Cramer, Brooks, Frum and even the liberal Buckley. Matthews is upset about his stocks.

Read yesterday, Boehner let the dogs out (courtesy to Duffman the Husky fan) and Obama is cannon fodder. They gave Obama his 15 minutes and will now go after him.

I am waiting for Olberman to go bonkers. Then, we will know for certain global warming is dead because hell has frozen over.

Posted by: swatter on March 5, 2009 12:43 PM
22. They gave Obama his 15 minutes and will now go after him.

Sure, this will happen in the GOP fantasy world.

People still love the Obama merch (which is promoted by the media, how many commemorative Obama items do we really need), and he's continuing to try and look bi-partisan. It's going to take more than 45 days for the Left and the Media to turn on him. People see him as trying to make things better and the GOP is looking like they're a bunch of whiners with no actual plans of their own.

If the GOP has some leadership now would be a good time for them to lay out their own plans for fixing the economy/housing/credit crisis and demand they get heard on the floor of Congress. This would be a great alternative to the whining, crying, and pouting that the GOP is doing now.

Posted by: Cato on March 5, 2009 01:05 PM
23. Cato
leadership now would be a good time for them to lay out their own plans for fixing the economy/housing/credit crisis.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Are you stuck on stupid?

You asked the same question what, yesterday and the answer was. Yes they did and Obama said NO! I won and it's my way.

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 01:22 PM
24. Cato, in my opinion, the collapse of the stock market is at Obama's feet. His guy is supposed to be coming out with the bailout plan. It is the lack of details of the banks and housing that has caused the market to crash more dramatically than under natural circumstances.

The lack of confidence is driven by Obama's inexperience and socialist tendencies and that is coupled with lack of performance by his people. It is a terrible combination.

The devil is in the details. How can the Republican party hacks (or Democrat hacks, for that matter) prepare a counterproposal when it is the Treasury Department charged with writing the program? Once Obama (i.e. Geithner the tax cheat) presents the details and the money people say it is a good plan, then I expect the market to bounce back. But, until they do, you and I and Medic and Duffman can kiss our royal rears and retirement goodby. Probably the same goes for the State retirement system.

Posted by: swatter on March 5, 2009 01:29 PM
25. Here's a thrill for Chris matthews' leg: We find out that three more House Democrats in DC from Georgia owe federal back taxes. "Do as we say, not as we do???"

Posted by: Michele on March 5, 2009 01:39 PM
26. Bob pretty much sums it all up.

Whew!

I really feel his rage.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 5, 2009 01:52 PM
27. Ack! Missing link!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 5, 2009 01:55 PM
28. "People see him as trying to make things better..."

What people? and what exactly has he tried to do to make things better? Taking multiple vacations, getting a dog and attending a Bulls/Wizards game while the economy is in the crapper may seem like an accomplishment to some, but not for those with a work ethic.

"...and the GOP is looking like they're a bunch of whiners with no actual plans of their own."

So the idea you're proposing is for the people out of power, with little or no say on what is drafted up and/or finalized should solve the problems for those elected by the American people to lead? Interesting philosophy, Cato. Just try that in your everyday life and see how far it gets you. Report back to us your findings.Also, you'll note that the whining is coming from the whitehouse about an AM radio talk show host...at least they have their priorities straight.

Obama fiddles while Rahm Burns.

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 01:58 PM
29. re: Dan @#21,

Trust me, "Crusader" doesn't have a conservative bone in his body. Many things make me sick about leftists but it's their constant lying that makes me the angriest. Yesterday on another thread this creep ranted about Limbaugh and then referred readers to FAIR, an organization run by communists, (read some of their bios and you'll see what I mean).

I'm tired of dealing with this imposter. Instead of gaining converts all this moron does is confirm what most of us already know about leftists. They are mean, unprincipled people.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on March 5, 2009 03:37 PM
30. Yeah Bill, I'm with ya. Crusader does go back and forth. O-well, we know how libs are. (-:

Posted by: Medic/Vet on March 5, 2009 04:37 PM
31. Rabbit is a switch hitter? Who knew?

And Rabbit, step away from the bong before you confirm your blithering idiocy on the Plame Lame Game.

Posted by: Hinton on March 5, 2009 05:33 PM
32. Talk about a timely thread. "Truth in advertising" indeed:

MSNBC's parent company GE(headed by a guy Obama brought onto his staff for advice even though he's run it into the ground) finished the day on Wall Street at an Interesting number [last trade]. Definately an underlying message there somewhere.

Posted by: Rick D. on March 5, 2009 05:55 PM
33. For those of you claiming that Pres. Obama is still enjoying great support comes this analysis from Peter Wehner at the Corner:
"Here�s an interesting data point comparison: Barack Obama�s approval rating in the Gallup Poll today [3/05/09]is 61 percent, with 28 percent disapproving (the Real Clear Politics aggregate of polls has his overall job approval rating at 59.8 percent). A March 5-7, 2001 Gallup poll found President Bush's job approval at 63 percent as well, with only 22 percent disapproving. So George W. Bush, at a comparable time in his presidency, was in marginally better shape than Barack Obama is right now, at least based on the Gallup Poll survey".

The bloom is off this rose.

Posted by: WillH on March 5, 2009 06:33 PM
34. Rove and Cheney may not have been directly involved, but they were complicit to what was going on during the Bush Administration. Two wrongs don't make a right - although Rove is effective, just as Carville is in being an operative.

It would be nice to hear a respected voice by those in the middle (Rush is not) that would step up and be the voice of opposition. Jim Cramer has more respect (although he isn't the best choice) as a spokesman for the fact that the Obama Administration has destroyed retirement savings for millions and the economy - a very sad situation - am not sure it will be coming back anytime soon & he voted for Obama. We are the victims of greed and it has us by the short hairs and shows no sign of letting go.

Posted by: KDS on March 5, 2009 07:51 PM
35. Jim Cramer has more respect (although he isn't the best choice) as a spokesman for the fact that the Obama Administration has destroyed retirement savings for millions and the economy - a very sad situation - am not sure it will be coming back anytime soon & he voted for Obama.

So let me get this straight... Cramer pawned off absolutely hideous financial advice that ruined the finances of anyone who believed him, and you trust HIM? That's just fifty kinds of stupid, really.

Posted by: demo kid on March 5, 2009 08:04 PM
36. "So let me get this straight... Cramer pawned off absolutely hideous financial advice that ruined the finances of anyone who believed him, and you trust HIM?"

What advice are you talking about ? You are just trying to deflect criticism of Obama's economic policy but there is no adequate defense, other than neo-Marxists like yourself would like totalitarian government, which makes economic growth much more difficult. If that is the case, you be a useful idiot...

Posted by: KS on March 5, 2009 09:14 PM
37. "So let me get this straight... Cramer pawned off absolutely hideous financial advice that ruined the finances of anyone who believed him, and you trust HIM?"

What advice are you talking about ? You are just trying to deflect criticism of Obama's economic policy but there is no adequate defense, other than neo-Marxists like yourself would like totalitarian government, which makes economic growth much more difficult. If that is the case, you be a useful idiot...

Posted by: KDS on March 5, 2009 09:15 PM
38. "So let me get this straight... Cramer pawned off absolutely hideous financial advice that ruined the finances of anyone who believed him, and you trust HIM?"

What advice are you talking about ? You are just trying to deflect criticism of Obama's economic policy but there is no adequate defense, other than neo-Marxists like yourself would like totalitarian government, which makes economic growth much more difficult. If that is the case, you be a useful idiot...

Posted by: KDS on March 5, 2009 09:15 PM
39. Slavery Party Failed Abortion wrote:

So let me get this straight... Obama pawned off having a clue about economics and ruined the finances of anyone who believed him, and you trust HIM?

Fixed that for you...

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 5, 2009 09:57 PM
40. @30 Bill - lol. Amazing all the OTT comments one finds on blogs. Yeah I'm a leftist because I think Rush Limbaugh is an idiot. I've never voted for a Democrat in my life.

Posted by: Crusader on March 5, 2009 10:18 PM
41. The Dow opened at 8281.22 on the morning of Obama's inauguration.

Today it closed at 6,594.44.

Once again little liberal pets let me explain why.

American investors are voting NO bambi CONFIDENCE with their wallets.

Let's extrapolate a few numbers, shall we?

My spouse and I are NOT funding our IRA for 2008. That's $12,000 NOT going into the market. Our 3 sons are NOT investing their eligible $5,000 each. For our family that's $24,000 NOT INVESTED.

Stay with me here.

Our closest friends and their adult children are NOT investing...so

Couple A = $12,000
+ 3 sets of married children + 1 unmarried child of couple A @ 5k each = $35,000. For Couple A family that's a total of $47,000 NOT INVESTED.

Couple B = $12,000
+ 2 sets of married children + 1 unmarried child of Couple B @ 5K each = $25,000. For Couple B family that's a total of $37,000 NOT INVESTED.

Couple C = $12,000
+ 2 sets of married children of Couple C @ 5K each = $20,000. For Couple C family that's a total of $32,000 NOT INVESTED.

Couple D = = $12,000
+ 4 sets of married children + 2 unmarried children of Couple C @ 5K each = $50,000. For Couple D family that's a total of $72,000 NOT INVESTED.

Just FIVE families and that's $212,000 NOT INVESTED.

We live in a community of about 100 households. If our 5 families are representative of just half of them, that would be $10,600,000 NOT INVESTED.

Let's extrapolate a little further, shall we?

Over 62 million people voted in the 2008 presidential election. bambi received 55% of those leaving about 27,900,000 who did not. Let's be CONSERVATIVE: if only 25% of those 27,900,000 people (6,975,000) are similar to our 5 non-investing familes that is $1,478,700,000,000 NOT BEING INVESTED (if I have all my zero's!).

And the financial headline AT THE MOMENT:
Asian stock markets resume slide after US rout.

bambi can not force us to participate in our own ruination.

Hope and change!
How do you like it now?

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 5, 2009 10:45 PM
42. @37-38: Blah, blah, blah. You don't like what someone has to say, you call them a Marxist? I'm not surprised that the conservative brain trust can't do much more than name-calling right now. Major financial institutions aren't the only things bankrupt around here.

@39: Wow. You haven't proven anything. Why don't you actually make an argument, or just don't bother replying? You're pretty much a waste of space here, aren't you?

@42: Garbage. A Republican administration falls asleep on the job, the Federal Reserve tries to manipulate the economy like a Friedman wet dream, and you try to blame an administration that's been in power for a MONTH and peg every hiccup in a single market index on them.

And why should you count the bad business decisions made in the private sector? Obama was on the board of directors of AIG and GM when they were making pretty disastrous financial choices, right?

Geez. After "geniuses" like you controlled the government for eight years, I'm surprised we aren't in even more of a hole than we're in now.

Posted by: demo kid on March 5, 2009 11:55 PM
43. All through the campaign, many of the lefty commenters posting here railed against Bush's huge increasing deficits. And rightly so. Now Obama will eclipse the entire eight years of Bush deficits in short order.

Crickets chirping.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 6, 2009 01:01 AM
44. Slavery Party Failed Abortion,

What was the DJIA on September 30, 2007 (the last day of the last GOP/Bush Administration budget)? What was it on September 30, 2008? What is it now?

The trend is unmistakable. Budgets and tax rates mean things to investors. Promising $20 TRILLION in deficits over the next 5 years is NOT the way to bring back investor confidence.

I was sick over the $150-$300 billion deficits of the first 6 years of the Bush Presidency; I'm sure you'll decry the $1.3 trillion deficit that President Obama has wrought (with its $1 billion per DAY in interest payments alone).

Unless you are just a partisan hack?

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 6, 2009 04:08 AM
45. "You are just trying to deflect criticism of Obama's economic policy but there is no adequate defense..."

Actually, there's no defense of it because there isn't a coherent Obama economic policy. Hear you can see the messiah stumble around and eventually show his vast ignorance on the most basic market principles. "Price and Earnings"? WOW!! ...and he wonders why investors are in a wait and see mode. My advice to the OJT president: First and foremost, develop and clue, followed by a plan.

Posted by: Rick D. on March 6, 2009 05:35 AM
46. @ 46: correction- Obama said "profit and earnings ratios".

Posted by: Rick D. on March 6, 2009 05:39 AM
47. @45: You fail both economics AND simple addition, apparently. Why do you even bother commenting if you don't understand either?

If conservatives are so stupid (or so willing to blatantly lie!) as to use a SINGLE NUMBER to gauge the success of an administration that's been in office for a month, and one that tells more about the economic policies of the last eight years than those of the last eight weeks, you jokers shouldn't be anywhere close to economic policy.

@46: Actually, there's no defense of it because there isn't a coherent Obama economic policy.

Better than Bush, who practically fiddled while Rome was burning, and FAR better than Congressional Republicans, who can't seem to devise any coherent policy beyond repeating "tax cuts" over and over and over again like babbling idiots.

Posted by: demo kid on March 6, 2009 08:08 AM
48. "Better than Bush, who practically fiddled while Rome was burning,..."

Get your fact straight. Bush tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie and was denied by your Democrat run congress buddies (the video I linked previously so go find it.


"...and FAR better than Congressional Republicans, who can't seem to devise any coherent policy beyond repeating "tax cuts" over and over and over again like babbling idiots."

Correct me if I'm wrong here, Demo Kid. Didn't the nation elect the Democrats to lead the country? Didn't they give them the House, the senate AND the whitehouse? Once again, your fallback position for a failure to act by democrats is "well, the Republicans aren't putting forth any ideas". I think we rehashed this elsewhere and it was a pathetic excuse then, and it's still a pathetic excuse. You make a perfect liberal...take no action or the wrong course and then blame someone else because you're going nowhere or you're off course. Truly a microcosm of the Democrat party.

Posted by: Rick D. on March 6, 2009 10:44 AM
49. Slavery Party Failed Abortion writes:

You fail both economics AND simple addition, apparently

Said with no proof of either. How Marxist of you - make a claim with no backing, and leave it at that!

If conservatives are so stupid (or so willing to blatantly lie!) as to use a SINGLE NUMBER to gauge the success of an administration

Then use the S&P 500, or the NASDAQ. Down as much as the DJIA.

And if that is YOUR POSITION, then you can't assign the drop in the DJIA, the S&P 500, or NASDAQ to President Bush, either, because it doesn't gauge the success of an administration...

administration that's been in office for a month... than those of the last eight weeks

Uh, there's 7 days in a week, 31 days max in a month. Who has trouble with math?

HOPE AND CHANGE!

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 6, 2009 11:19 AM
50. @42: Garbage. A Republican administration falls asleep on the job, the Federal Reserve tries to manipulate the economy like a Friedman wet dream, and you try to blame an administration that's been in power for a MONTH and peg every hiccup in a single market index on them.Posted by demo kid at March 5, 2009 11:55 PM

Wakey wakey dim kid. I wasn't talking about BLAME. I was talking about and extrapolating reaction to the toddler. Your bambi can't force us to participate in our own demise. WE THE PEOPLE are withdrawing from the process. Let him try without us.

Nice try.

Hope!
Change!
Failure!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 6, 2009 12:55 PM
51. ...and he is either not listening or simply doesn't care...

Obama's Radicalism Is Killing the Dow

Characteristically, Walter Williams cuts to the core:
"Two-thirds of the federal budget consists of taking property from one American and giving it to another. Were a private person to do the same thing, we'd call it theft. When government does it, we euphemistically call it income redistribution, but that's exactly what thieves do -- redistribute income. Income redistribution not only betrays the founders' vision, it's a sin in the eyes of God. ... No human should be coerced by the state to bear the medical expense, or any other expense, for his fellow man. In other words, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another is morally offensive. ... One of the wonderful things about free markets is that the path to greater wealth comes not from looting, plundering and enslaving one's fellow man, as it has throughout most of human history, but by serving and pleasing him."

Jaw dropping

"I have a question for you Obama voters: Is this what you voted for? The Dow closed at 9625 on Election Day, the Day of Hope. Since then it's down a third, $3 trillion in wealth. A record 31.8 million Americans are on food stamps, up 700,000 in one month. Unemployment jumped to 8.1% in February. Is this what you voted for?" -Rush Limbaugh

'Obama Bear Market' Punishes Investors as Dow Slumps
President Barack Obama now has the distinction of presiding over his own bear market.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen 20 percent since Inauguration Day, the fastest drop under a newly elected president in at least 90 years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

This week's 'Alpha Jackass' award:
"What I'm looking at is not the day-to-day gyrations of the stock market but the long-term, uh, ability for the United States and the entire world economy, uh, to regain its footing. Uh, and, y-y-you know, the stock market is sort of like a tracking poll in politics. It bobs up and down day to day, uh, and if you spend all your time worrying about that, you're probably going to get long-term strategy wrong. ... What you're now seeing is profit and -- and earning ratios are -- are starting to, to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it. Uhhh, I think that consumer confidence, as they see the American, uh, Recovery and Reinvestment Act taking root, uh, businesses are starting to see opportunities for investment, uh, and potential hiring." --Barack Obama

"The comparison to daily tracking polls is ... inapt. Whereas those polls serve only a predictive function, stock values (and dividends, which are also plummeting) do measure real wealth. Further, if a candidate's performance in tracking polls had been declining steadily for three months, surely it would be time to change strategy or drop out of the race. A 30% decline is a heck of a fit, and Wall Street hasn't had anything that can be called a start since before Obama's election. ... As for the so-called stimulus as confidence booster, suffice it to note that the Industrial Average closed at 7933 on Feb. 12, the day before Congress passed the bill. [Thursday] it closed at [6594], a decline of [17%] in ... three weeks." --The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto

If Obama Is Wrong, the U.S. Will Be Bankrupt - Tim Reid, Times of London

Obama's budget: Wanton recklessness

Obamanomics

In reality, he's giving with one hand and taking with the other. He's telling the poor he's only soaking the rich, when he's in fact soaking everyone.


When Will Media Blame Economy and Bear Market on Obama?


Dear President Obama: Dear President Obama: Your economic stupidity is killing us.
Make no mistake, Mr. President... you OWN this economy now, and your obvious inability to fix it is entirely on YOU.

He's got what it takes...

OR he's destroying America on purpose.

Hope!
Change!
Incompetance!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 6, 2009 01:19 PM
52. "Two-thirds of the federal budget consists of taking property from one American and giving it to another."

Really - almost 1/2 of the budget is for defense spending....guess if you lie big, then some stupid right wingnut (like ragnut) will copy it and put it out as a fact.

Does this fool document his alleged 2/3 number? I thought not. Another big lie from Ragnut.

Keep quoting liars ragnut - you have no credibility.

Out of 2.1 Trillion total in 2007:
Defense: 548.8 billion
Homeland security: 200 billion
CBO has estimated that "war-related defense activities" in 2007 were "roughly $115 billion"
Veterans benefits: $72.6 billion

I get close to 950 billion in defense costs alone out of 2.1 trillion. so how are 2/3 redistribution of wealth?

Must be these budget items:
Interst on debt: $243.7 billion
Medicare: $394.5 billion
Transportation: $76.9 billion

That is another 700 billion - and unless you include taking care of the health of old people as redistribution....that would be about 1.6 trillion or more than 2/3 of the budget right there....with only 1/3 left to go.

Here are some of the rest - where is the redistribution?

$43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
$33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
$32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
$27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
$26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
$25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
$20.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy
$20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government
Link: Wikipedia

Posted by: correctnotright on March 6, 2009 03:31 PM
53. I don't accept "facts" from Wikipedia ... or the Wikidiots who persist on quoting them.

The "sources: [/snicker] you always "quote" provide interesting insight to the color of your koolaid IncorrectAndAlwaysWrong.

Furthermore, Walter Williams, PhD has just a tad more credibility than an IncorrectAndAlwaysWrong lemming:

Dr. Walter E. Williams holds a B.A. in economics from California State University, Los Angeles, and M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in economics from UCLA. He also holds a Doctor of Humane Letters from Virginia Union University and Grove City College, Doctor of Laws from Washington and Jefferson College and Doctor Honoris Causa en Ciencias Sociales from Universidad Francisco Marroquin, in Guatemala, where he is also Professor Honorario.

Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980; from 1995 to 2001, he served as department chairman. He has also served on the faculties of Los Angeles City College, California State University Los Angeles, and Temple University in Philadelphia, and Grove City College, Grove City, Pa.
Dr. Williams is the author of over 150 publications which have appeared in scholarly journals such as Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, and Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy and popular publications such as Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader's Digest, Cato Journal, and Policy Review.

Care to post your expertise via YOUR curriculum vitae... after you look up the meaning?

Keep trying.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 6, 2009 05:20 PM
54. Always Wrong,

almost 1/2 of the budget is for defense spending....guess if you lie big, then some stupid Marxist/leftist wingnut (like me) will copy it and put it out as a fact.

I fixed that for you. Because your LIE was the following:

Out of 2.1 Trillion total in 2007:

To paraphrase Dan Ackroyd: AlwaysWrong, you ignorant slut

The President's budget was $2.8 trillion. So everything else you posted was not just wrong, but a LIE.

Just like a Marxist Slaver, always making things up, assuming no one will check those pesky little things called "facts"...

Posted by: Shanghai Dan on March 6, 2009 05:58 PM
55. dk -

You don't like what someone has to say, you call them a Marxist? I'm not surprised that the conservative brain trust can't do much more than name-calling right now. Major financial institutions aren't the only things bankrupt around here.

Nice try, dude. You never answered my question about Jim Cramer. Name calling you say ? How does it feel - BTW, that's the pot calling the kettle black. Your left wing ideas are becoming bankrupt, as are right-wing Republicans on this blog that are too partisan. I am not a Rush fan, in fact he is a distraction and not a very good debater - he is not my voice. Meanwhile, from you its the same old droning and it's boring and pointless. End of story.

Posted by: KDS on March 6, 2009 06:25 PM
56. Oh Incorrect, Incorrect... Where fort art thou Incorrect??


...with apologies to Shakespeare.

(... look it up, Incorrect).

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on March 6, 2009 10:56 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?