Media Cultists

“The facts of the crisis over the debt ceiling aren’t complicated,” writes N.Y. Times columnist Paul Krugman in a 7.28 posting. “Republicans have, in effect, taken America hostage, threatening to undermine the economy and disrupt the essential business of government unless they get policy concessions they would never have been able to enact through legislation.

“And Democrats — who would have been justified in rejecting this extortion altogether — have, in fact, gone a long way toward meeting those Republican demands.

“As I said, it’s not complicated. Yet many people in the news media apparently can’t bring themselves to acknowledge this simple reality. News reports portray the parties as equally intransigent; pundits fantasize about some kind of ‘centrist’ uprising, as if the problem was too much partisanship on both sides.

“Some of us have long complained about the cult of ‘balance,’ the insistence on portraying both parties as equally wrong and equally at fault on any issue, never mind the facts. I joked long ago that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read ‘Views Differ on Shape of Planet.’

“But would that cult still rule in a situation as stark as the one we now face, in which one party is clearly engaged in blackmail and the other is dickering over the size of the ransom?

“The answer, it turns out, is yes. And this is no laughing matter: The cult of balance has played an important role in bringing us to the edge of disaster. For when reporting on political disputes always implies that both sides are to blame, there is no penalty for extremism. Voters won’t punish you for outrageous behavior if all they ever hear is that both sides are at fault.”

  • actionlover

    Krugman, eh?

    I see.

  • SpinDozer

    microcosm of the last 11 years or so…

  • actionlover

    I’m totally blanking right now. WHO held the presidency and the House AND the Senate for two entire years just a little bit ago?

  • wester

    actionlover, sorry your memory’s so sketchy- mine is too! I THINK it wasn’t the party that threatened a veto on just about everything?

  • Manitoba

    I love one line in Paul Krugman’s July 28 “The Centrist Cop-Out” piece. Quote: “Bruce Bartlett who served as a policy analyst in the Reagan administration, argues that Obama is in practice a moderate conservative.”

  • drbob

    Wester:

    They didn’t threaten veto, they threatened filibuster. Obama and the Dems should have called their bluff.

    The Republicans are not holding anyone hostage. Obama has clear constitutional authority to raise the debt ceiliniamb his own via executive order.

    The biggest problem in this country is the Dems refuse to grow a pair.

  • Jeff and/or Danny Is Always Wrong

    The biggest problem in this country is the Dems refuse to grow a pair.

    And here I thought it was 9% unemployment, zero GDP growth, and an insane deficit.

    Kooky me.

  • Deathtongue_Groupie

    How about this:

    2 unfunded wars.

    A massive increase in security spending following 9/11.

    All while giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations.

    In other words, it’s like the people who built the bus, turned the key and pointed it down the road now refuse to apply the breaks or steer us away from the looming cliff.

    But my favorite part of this whole circus is the moron taxpayers who supposedly are saying a loud “NO!” to raising the debt ceiling don’t realize that their mortgages and other debt will increase. Yeah, that’ll show’em!

  • wester

    FUCK. Can’t believe I fucked up the Veto/Filibuster thing. Thanks for the correction, feel like a dumbo. Put me on the suicide watch.

    Yeah, I wish the Dems had called them on it too. But to imply, as actionlover did, that having presidency and majority in both houses of congress=rule by fiat, is also being a dumbo.

    I think it’s time for publicly funded elections where everyone gets a certain amount of free TV time and no more. Also, no yard signs. and any committee to elect so-and-so who buys a :30 on TV to support a candidate must pay for 1:00 and give the other :30 to the opponent. When you look at how much money it costs to get elected, it seems like TV ads are the problem. Also, again, no yard signs.

  • SpinDozer

    Yup, yard signs. The. Downfall. of. Democracy.

    Just glad someone finally nailed it: muchos gracias, herr wester!

  • DiscoNap

    Until about a month ago, this country didn’t have a debt problem. With low interest, our debt was manageable. We had, and continue to have, a serious demand/unemployment problem. We still do, and with the downgrade (which is probably coming either way), it’s about to get much worse. A pox on both houses.

  • http://www.insantiyworkoutdvd.com/insanity-workout-dvd jim

    Until about a month ago, this country didn’t have a debt problem. With low interest, our debt was manageable.

  • dogcatcher

    I don’t support what the Republicans are doing, and I blame them almost entirely for the “crisis” that they themselves created, but Paul Krugman is an insufferable idiot.

    That’s all.

  • dogcatcher

    Also, I do consider Krugman, and people like him, to be partly at fault because his religion may not be “balance,” he’s made that much clear, his religion seems to be that having a $1.6 trillion deficit simply isn’t a big deal. That position is every bit as ridiculous as the Tea Party belief that a default wouldn’t be that big of a deal and may even be politically advantageous to them.

    How can we get anything done when two sides oppose each other in such a stark manner and when people like Krugman describe a Democratic plan to reduce the deficit as being “dickering over the size of the ransom?”

    The biggest problem today with the economy is a lack of confidence. Companies that are flush with cash sit on it, instead of spending it, because they don’t know what’s going to happen. No one in their right mind will piss away their money, so they wait. Given the financial turmoil in Europe with the whole Greece bailout nonsense and the US holding such a high levels of debt, which is only increasing, investors and companies are not going to invest in such a climate. THIS IS WHY JOBS HAVE BEEN SO HARD TO COME BY. It’s a sad day when the Communist People’s Republic of China becomes the most stable fucking economy on Earth.

    So, yes, the liberals (the DailyKos crowd) are every bit as bad as the Teabaggers here.

    The debate shouldn’t be austerity vs. more spending, as the fucktard liberals like Krugman suggest. It should be WHAT should be sacrificed to get our fiscal house in order. Should it be a balanced approach (which I believe is the right way of going about it) or using cash-rich programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, none of which actually caused the deficit, to pay for Bush’s tax cuts for the rich and his ill-concieved wars?

    I’m sorry, but it’s very hard for me to take Paul Krugman very seriously. He has NO CREDIBILITY in this debate.

  • dogcatcher

    The Tea Party’s radical actions, and their stupid childish tactics, are only a reaction to the lack of any kind of action or timetable for dealing with the deficit by the Democrats.

    If the Democrats had attempted to deal with the deficit in any kind of meaningful way, instead of dismissing its importance as Krugman and the Daily Kos crowd do, then people who were worried about such a huge deficit would never have gone to the idiot Tea Party in the first place as there would have been a rational alternative for them to support.

  • SpinDozer

    Gonna have to assume that you had a bit too much to drink last night dogacatcher, cos the shit posted above isn’t anywhere near your usual standards.

  • Alboone

    I’m just upset at Obama not grabbing the bully pulpit and calling out these tea baggers for what they are. I mean this is truly inconceivable to me that a bunch of yahoos are taking this country’s economice future hostage. If we do go into default then we deserve it. This is what happens when the populace is more interested in what the Kardashians are wearing than what’s going on in congress. Its not government for the people, by the people. Its government for the informed, by the informed.

  • Owen Walter

    The larger context is this: we moved from an era where liberal New Deal economic ideas were at the forefront to an era where conservative Reaganomics became the norm. Eisenhower and Nixon were Republicans but so moderate by today’s standards that they really didn’t disturb the Democratic norm (Ike’s 90% top tax rate, for example). Similarly, Clinton was a Democrat but carried on Republican notions about deregulation, which with W.’s collusion with the corporate and financial world set us up for the series of disasters that almost started a new depression. According to one of Nate Silver’s geek-brilliant analyses on “538,” Obama is actually more conservative than Clinton.

    Reaganism, by which I mean the whole thought-environment of deregulation, demonization of government, corporate cronyism, anti-intellectualism, and tax-cutting at all costs, has presided over the stagnation and decimation of the American middle class, a repeated series of harmful bubbles (stock, housing, banking, high-tech), the deterioration of our infrastructure and our schools, and the inability to solve any major problems (remember, government is the problem). And I’m not going to get into the social side of conservatism, but I think the anti-science aspect on the right about global warming and the environment, which arises not out of principle but a desire to do the bidding of corporations and Christian fundamentalists, will be the shameful legacy that it is most known for. Scientists are trained to hedge and qualify, but I won’t: weather patterns have changed enough that thousands are directly dying each year and an untold number (perhaps millions) are not being born or are dying early.

    So, when I compare the stagflation and oil crisis of the 1970’s that precipitated the paradigm shift to Reagan and his followers, I’d have to say it’s almost infinitely worse now, and Republicans and Republican ideas are mostly to blame. The truly ironic thing about conservatism is that it’s manifestly proved itself to be bad for business, as in the current invented brouhaha. And if conservatives are not good for business, what are they good for?

  • dogcatcher

    What I said about Krugman is exactly what I mean. I’m not sure what I wrote that you’re against SpinDozer. I’m not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal. I’m an independent. I’m a realist.

    I defend Democrats against Tea Bagger craziness, when it’s deserved, because I feel that the Tea Party are stupid and dangerous; and, also, I think the overt partisanship of people like actionlover and others has helped this small, but very vocal, fringe group essentially take over the Republican Party and take over one of the Houses of Congress because they’ll support ANYTHING the Republicans do even when it conflicts with their other interests. But I don’t think that conservativism in itself is crazy. Only those who don’t understand how the government/economy works, don’t care to learn, and want to shut everything down without considering the consequences because they heard some slogan they liked or something. It’s the kind of politics that’s creates a race to the bottom which benefits no one.

    But that doesn’t change the fact that the deficit is real and the Democrats, during their first two years, did nothing about it. I don’t blame them for creating the deficit, but once in power they were responsible for it. They didn’t even deliver an outline on how they planned to tackle the $1.6 trillion deficit in the future. So here we are now with a gun to our head and these Democrats don’t deserve some blame for it?

    People like Krugman is the reason why, IMO. Even now he and the DailyKos crowd, whom I consider as crazy as the Tea Party in all honesty, don’t seem to care much about it.

    A 10% DEFICIT-to-GDP ratio is absolutely NUTS. They think that 8 to 9% unemployment justifies carrying on such a ratio? More nuts. 8 to 9% is high, but this isn’t the fucking Depression here. The unemployment rate was HIGHER from 1981-1982 and nearly reached this level in 1992-3, yet we didn’t carry this kind of deficit.

    So a recession is not an excuse to ignore your basic responsibilities in government: to pay your bills and do no harm.

    I could get on board, reluctantly, for an initial stimulus given the condition of the economy in 2008-9 teetering on the verge of outright collapse. I don’t support TRILLION dollar stimulus plans as permanent public policy though. That’s simply fucking ridiculous.

  • dogcatcher

    Owen,

    I don’t think Obama is conservative at all. I think he just gives in to blackmail and pressure. He’ll do anything for “a deal,” to get a hot topic off his desk, including supporting terrible policy decisions.

    If he believed the stimulus was the way to go, and thought we needed more – but backed down on certain aspects for political reasons then there was no point in doing it at all. Because otherwise it was just theater. Bad. Fucking. Theater. Theater to make it LOOK like Obama was doing something. Theater we’ll be paying for the rest of our lives. Same with the health plan. If you’re going to demand a health care bill, make it a good one. Simple idea right? Because if you’re going to negotiate away all the good parts of the bill (like the public option which I supported) and keep only the bad parts (mandate), because of political calculations, then you’re going to please NO ONE. And, you know what? It’s not only bad politics, but bad policy too.

    It might have better if he did nothing at all.

    I think Obama is just a pussy and a terrible leader. He can deliver a speech, but he can’t lead. Hillary Clinton was right about him. His style may have been suited for community advocacy, but it isn’t suited for the Presidency.

  • SpinDozer

    ‘I’m not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal. I’m an independent. I’m a realist.’

    No one ever accused you of being a liberal, it’s the last part of your statement that’s taking a hit.

    ‘The unemployment rate was HIGHER from 1981-1982 and nearly reached this level in 1992-3, yet we didn’t carry this kind of deficit. ‘

    No fucking shit. Was this before or after Reagan?

    ‘I don’t support TRILLION dollar stimulus plans as permanent public policy though.’

    Not sure that “support” is the right word, best of a lot of bad alternatives would be more, uh, realistic.

  • Jason S.

    I can’t wait for the eventual HBO debt ceiling crises movie.

  • dangovich

    Good post Owen.

    2012 Presidential ballot:

    Shitty (D)

    Shittier (R)

  • actionlover

    Me confused.

    Why would these “Tea Baggers” care at all about the dept ceiling or the deficit or the budget and taxes?

    Aren’t they just a bunch of racists who only hate Obama because he’s black?

    Wait a minute….. I get it. It’s CODE. When they say they want a freeze on federal spending, what they’re REALLY saying is “impeach that ni__er President!”

  • dogcatcher

    SpinDozer,

    Are you serious? Everyone complains about the Bush tax cuts being too expensive and contributing to the debt, etc., and that cost — all together — $3 trillion over TEN YEARS. You want to spend TRILLIONS more, in addition to the nearly TWO TRILLION already spent on what? Infrastructure? Roads? Highways? Things that aren’t needed, at least urgently so. You think Bush cutting taxes by $3 trillion over ten years is bad, but Obama spending $3+ trillion in less than FOUR is good?

    Are you even listening to yourself here? Here’s a “realist” hint: both are terrible ideas. Here’s a better one: let the economy mend itself.

  • DuluozGray

    Owen Walter, you sir, are an ignoramus.

    “And I’m not going to get into the social side of conservatism”

    And then proceed to…

    “but I think the anti-science aspect on the right about global warming and the environment,”

    What do you think of people who don’t believe in vaccinations? Or people who think DDT causes cancer? Or people who think snowstorms are going to disappear?

    Cause that would be a sizable number of people on the Left. Is the Left anti-science, as you accuse the right? Don’t both political parties use science for their own perverted ends?

    “which arises not out of principle but a desire to do the bidding of corporations and Christian fundamentalists”

    Spent a lot of time around fundamentalists, I see. Never mind all their literature about the end of the world and how global warming is the new plague that will wipe us all out. Nah, that shit don’t matter.

    And doing the bidding for corporations?

    As opposed to doing the bidding of Left wing governments and funding entities? Is there really no money to be made in global warming alarmism?

    “Scientists are trained to hedge and qualify, but I won’t: weather patterns have changed enough that thousands are directly dying each year and an untold number (perhaps millions) are not being born or are dying early.”

    Really? So you aren’t pro-choice? Or do you lament the millions that have been aborted over the years?

    And I thought people were the worst contributors to global warming? Isn’t population control a tenet of some anti-global warming initiatives?

    Where are these thousands that are dying due to global warming? Did you care about the millions of Africans killed as a result of environmentalists getting DDT banned?

    Why has there been slight warming recorded on other planets in the solar system?

    “So, when I compare the stagflation and oil crisis of the 1970’s that precipitated the paradigm shift to Reagan and his followers, I’d have to say it’s almost infinitely worse now, and Republicans and Republican ideas are mostly to blame. ”

    Folks, this is what happens when you grow up in an echo chamber your whole life. Good fucking lord!

  • BobbyLupo

    “If the Democrats had attempted to deal with the deficit in any kind of meaningful way, instead of dismissing its importance as Krugman and the Daily Kos crowd do”

    No, you’re just wrong. The deficit is not the major issue right now, and crippling our current economic recovery by insisting that “Well, we have to deal with the deficit someday, it might as well be now” betrays an ignorance of economics and history.

    The problem is that, when the Republicans are in charge, the Republicans refuse to compromise and the Democrats constantly compromise their own ideals. Then, when the Democrats are in charge, they constantly compromise their own ideals, and the Republicans refuse to compromise.

  • Kakihara

    dogcatcher: “Also, I do consider Krugman, and people like him, to be partly at fault because his religion may not be “balance,” he’s made that much clear, his religion seems to be that having a $1.6 trillion deficit simply isn’t a big deal.”

    Well, it wasn’t for Dick “Deficits don’t matter’ Cheney…

    “The biggest problem today with the economy is a lack of confidence. Companies that are flush with cash sit on it, instead of spending it, because they don’t know what’s going to happen.”

    No, they spend it on dismantling workers’ rights and social programs.

    “It’s a sad day when the Communist People’s Republic of China becomes the most stable fucking economy on Earth. ”

    That’s because they have all our fucking jobs, since the hypocritical conservatives who hate commies lobbied for corporations to outsource to ‘em.

    Duluoz: “What do you think of people who don’t believe in vaccinations?”

    That they’re just asking for dead babies? You do realize the person who wrote the story about vaccines causing autism was a fraud, rght?

    “Or people who think DDT causes cancer?”

    Um, that they did research on it?

    “Or people who think snowstorms are going to disappear?”

    Well, they’re certainly disappearing in the Midwest.

    “And doing the bidding for corporations? As opposed to doing the bidding of Left wing governments and funding entities?”

    Sorry, I don’t see left wing governments trying to strip workers of collective bargaining rights.

    “So you aren’t pro-choice? Or do you lament the millions that have been aborted over the years? ”

    Do you lament the millions of brown people we bombed and poisoned with depleted uranium in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan?

    “Did you care about the millions of Africans killed as a result of environmentalists getting DDT banned?”

    Did you care about the millions of Africans who died on the Middle Passage?

  • SpinDozer

    Thanks Kack

  • actionlover

    For the zillionth time, DeeZee. Asking another question is NOT answering a question.

    It would be fun to get DZ on the witness stand.

    “Where were you on the night of the 21st?”

    “Where were the CIA hit squads Reagan put in El Salvador?”

    “Uhhh. Your witness.”

  • SpinDozer

    dogcatcher:

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but I don’t think the economy is going to fix itself. The banking industry wasn’t going to fix itself. That doesn’t mean that I’ve been impressed with the execution of the stimulus. About 50% of the time I agree with your analysis of O’s leadership, but I’m not sure anyone can make this shit work anymore, Obama is determined to try.

  • DuluozGray

    actionlover, that was pretty funny.

  • Buk94

    @actionlover

    That was hilarious.

    @duluozgray

    You’re an idiot and a hypocrite. That is all.

  • dogcatcher

    Look the mistake the liberals made, and still make, was they believed that the stimulus was the solution to SOLVE the economy. The stimulus was NEVER going to jump start the economy the way the liberals had hoped. It was not a magic bullet. I can understand, again, using it to prevent a disaster, given that the credit crunch of 2008 essentially took TRILLIONS of dollars out the economy (since no one could borrow, bad credit or good) and you needed to replace it or risk an even greater decline in the economy. On that basis, and on that basis alone, I kind of supported the original stimulus package reluctuntly.

    But the liberals used it as a crutch, some still do, expecting it to be some magic bullet and that’s when the shit went off the rails. If you pass another stimulus, it’ll be just a redirection of wealth and for what purpose? A short term fix? One that would require yet ANOTHER infusion later just to keep it going? What do you get out of it in the end? More roads?

    Spending that much money on roads and infrastructer, just because our unemployment is 8 to 9% is honestly kind of demented. It’s irrational and stupid. It is such a waste of money. Honestly, and I say this as no partisan, but the Bush tax cuts would be better than that. A lot better. At least people will spend their tax cut dollars on things they need, want and will use. It’ll be far more productive use of money.

    Stop thinking about this as my side vs. your side and think about what it is you’re proposing. Think about it logically and don’t just support it blindly because Paul Krugman, whom I still say is an idiot, supports it and Rush Limbaugh opposes it. Both Krugman and Limbaugh are circus clowns trying to get peoples attention. Use your common sense.

    Yes, the economy would have fixed itself, why wouldn’t it? It always does. The system is itself self-correcting, it’s in its nature. There is nothing unprecedented about what happened in 2008. It was a bad situation, true, but not the end of the world. Again, I understand staving off disaster. But disaster was averted, now all we have is just a bad, sluggish economy. A bad economy is not, in itself, a disaster.

    Now it’s time to rebuild it from the ground up, organically. Let companies do buisness, let people work, let the money THEY EARN flow through the system. The government can’t create jobs, the private sector does, and these types of policies interfere with their ability to do so. Obviously some people “game” the system, especially in the financial markets, and that creates serious problems in itself. But the government “gaming” the system is NO BETTER. The government needs to regulate the market, to PREVENT future “gaming” which threatens its viability (the Republicans and their anti-regulatory religion is just bizarre), but otherwise STAY OUT OF THE MARKET.

    I just want to point out, as a quick aside, that regulations shouldn’t be, as sometimes they are, meant to punish people who are in the market simply because you don’t like the market; they should be there to prevent the kind of widespread fraud that existed and nearly brought down the entire economy. They should be there TO PROTECT the market.

    You see? A balanced approach. But one that is based in free-market economics. It’s always worked, and always will.

    If the government got their fiscal house in order things would improve on their own. Bush did a lot of damage to the economy by just introducing and passing every cockamamie idea he could think of or giving his rabid base everything and anything they wanted, no matter how contradictory and dumb (we all know how irrational they can be). That was sustainable, at first, when he inherited a strong economy from which to do this. When the economy turned sour, and it always will as the economy is always cyclical, the entire thing just collapsed. But two wrongs don’t make a right. Sorry.

  • SpinDozer

    I don’t believe your representation is terribly accurate, but even if it was, what is a President supposed to do, say, sorry folks, I know your blaming me for not doing anything, but uh, we’re just gonna have to wait for the economy to fix itself? Just in case someone does follow your advise, you ought to work up a campaign jingle to rally the electorate to the ‘do nothing cause’, because it will be worth a LOT of money.

  • qdpsteve

    …what is a President supposed to do, say, sorry folks, I know your blaming me for not doing anything, but uh, we’re just gonna have to wait for the economy to fix itself?

    Actually, there’s a president who tried that. His name was Herbert Hoover.

  • dogcatcher

    qdpsteve,

    People always throw around Herbert Hoover’s name and don’t even know what happened during his Presidency.

    First of all, the economy today is no where near as bad as the depression was so the comparison itself is not valid.

    Second, what caused the depression wasn’t the fact that Hoover tried to balance the budget. What caused the depression was 1) the freezing of the credit markets in the aftermath of the 1929 stock market crash; 2) the Smoot-Hartley Act of 1930 which raised insane tariffs that essentially destroyed all export-import trading; 3) the dust bowl which destroyed the agriculture economy (which at the time made up one-fourth of the GDP.)

    25% to 33% unemployment (where NO social safety net existed at all) and 8 to 9% unemployment (where it does) are very differnt situations. Comparing the two is kind of silly. Bad economics, bad history.

    The recession of 1981 is a more apt comparison to our present situation than what happened in the 30s (a decade of bad fiscal policies followed by a credit shock leading to a long, protracted recession).

  • dogcatcher

    spindozer,

    I don’t think Obama should be issuing bad policies because he has to “look” like he’s doing something. That’s how bad policies are created, my friend. Do no harm.

    I don’t totally disagree with Obama’s actions in his first days. Some of those policies were necessary to basically stop the bleeding and avert disaster. The situation could have easily spiralled out of control.

    I’m not sure all of the things that were done were necessary, but given the urgency of the situation those types of errors are unavoidable so I give Obama and the Democrats some leeway on that.

    However, once the markets settled and a potential crisis was averted, Obama should have focused on two things (neither of which he did):

    1. introduce certain financial regulations to avoid such a thing from happening again, thus instilling confidence in our markets and making it more difficult to “game”. Regulations designed to protect the market, not punish them, as I wrote above.

    2. Devise a sensible plan to attack the deficit.

  • Kakihara

    dogcatcher: “Spending that much money on roads and infrastructer, just because our unemployment is 8 to 9% is honestly kind of demented. It’s irrational and stupid. It is such a waste of money. Honestly, and I say this as no partisan, but the Bush tax cuts would be better than that. A lot better.”

    Well, if they are, then how come so many people are still out of work?

    “Think about it logically and don’t just support it blindly because Paul Krugman, whom I still say is an idiot, supports it and Rush Limbaugh opposes it. Both Krugman and Limbaugh are circus clowns trying to get peoples attention.”

    Except that Krugman’s a Nobel Prize winner. while Limbaugh’s a pill-popping fat-ass bigot.

    “Yes, the economy would have fixed itself, why wouldn’t it? It always does. The system is itself self-correcting, it’s in its nature. ”

    It didn’t fix itself during the ’29 crash.

    “Let companies do buisness, let people work, let the money THEY EARN flow through the system. The government can’t create jobs, the private sector does, and these types of policies interfere with their ability to do so.”

    The only money flowing is to executives who scammed the country in the first place. And the only jobs the private sector creates are the sweatshop kind.

    “I just want to point out, as a quick aside, that regulations shouldn’t be, as sometimes they are, meant to punish people who are in the market simply because you don’t like the market; they should be there to prevent the kind of widespread fraud that existed and nearly brought down the entire economy.”

    Yes, why should the risk be on the backs of the investors and not the consumers and employees? That’s just too much!

    “First of all, the economy today is no where near as bad as the depression.”

    Yeah, it’s worse.

    “25% to 33% unemployment (where NO social safety net existed at all) and 8 to 9% unemployment (where it does) are very differnt situations.”

    Technically, we’re also around 20% unemployment, but the government doesn’t count people who give up looking for work, or are denied jobs because of how long they’ve been unemployed.

    I do actually agree with you on what Obama should’ve done, however. I don’t consider feeding the Military-Industrial beast at the expense of safety nets to be “sensible”, though.

  • DuluozGray

    dogcatcher is channeling some Thomas Sowell brilliance with these posts. Sowell does a whole thing on how disastrous the policies are when the gov’t feels a need to “do something” when the economy is bad.

    http://www.creators.com/opinion/thomas-sowell/a-mind-changing-page.html

  • MechanicalShark

    Dulouz, you are an idiot. While the Left has its share of fuckwits, it pales in comparison with the mass of anti-science, anti-intellectual know-nothings on the Right, and to suggest an equivalence is disingenuous, although par for the course. You never bother to refute claims about how bad the Right has got, but instead suggest the Left does it too (to a lesser extent, but that doesn’t matter), as if that makes it acceptable or sane. Do you enjoy being a massive tool?

  • http://reviewsnotebooks.blogspot.com dachachai sukkulbaramee

    FUCK. Can’t believe I fucked up the Veto/Filibuster thing. Thanks for the correction, feel like a dumbo. Put me on the suicide watch.

  • http://www.supraskytoponline.org olivia

    I dont know what to say. This blog is fantastic. Thats not really a really huge statement, but its all I could come up with after reading this. You know so much about this subject. So much so that you made me want to learn more about it. Your blog is my stepping stone, my friend. Thanks for the heads up on this subject.

    Cheap Supra Shoes

  • alberto783

    Since Las Vegas does not have a professional sports team the 2007 NBA All Star game would have to be considered the biggest event in terms of professional sports. The Las Vegas Bowl Game is the largest college sports function that takes place since it is played at the end of the NCAA football season and it is housed at Sam Boyd Stadium (capacity almost 39000). NASCAR races take place at the Las Vegas Motor Speedway and there have been many boxing matches that have been broadcasted from there. sosh forfait sans engagement forfait illimite forfait sms illimite forfait internet forfait bloque rio sfr rio orange rio sfr rio bouygues rio virgin forfait bloque calcul imc

  • angelaict

    Gold Investment: Gold Investment at Malaysia? Public Bank (GIA. Gold Savings Passbook Account (GSPA) VS Gold Investment Account (GIA) comparison of gold investment between maybank and public bank. Silver a good investment right now, or is gold preferable? Yahoo. Best Answer: Both have equal potential especially if the US hyperinflates. In short go for the gold to protect your assets. It is true that when you. Is Gold Pamp A Good Gold Investment goldinvestmentguidelines.com. You are here: Home / gold investment / Is Gold Pamp A Good Gold Investment. Another popular gold bar is the London Good Delivery bar. It is of 99.5% purity and. Engelhard Silver Bullion Price