Obama lacks decorum

[briansd1]

Cole said. “Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened.”

A recovery to a lay person is different than a recovery for an economist.

To a normal person, a recovery is when the economic situation returns to previous levels.

To an economist, a recovery is an increase from the very bottom.

So yeah, if you let the bottom fall out and throw millions into poverty, then you’ll get a faster recovery.

I believe that Obama is doing the right thing by not allowing the bottom to fall out.

If you look at Zimbabwe now, they are experiencing an economic boom, but is it worth all the destruction of previous?

[meadandale]

[quote=briansd1]
Remember that the current bailout was a Bush-Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner creation. The AIG giveaway to the French bank, SocGen, was a Republican deal.

If you don’t like the bailout, you should punish Republican lawmakers first.[/quote]

First of all, your President and his Democratically controlled congress threw good money after bad and passed the almost $800 billion stimulus plan…despite enormous Republican opposition.

Geitner is Obama’s Treasury Secretary…you can’t blame him on Bush.

And I’ll certainly hold any Republicans responsible who voted for either the stimulus OR the bank bailouts.

Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.

[meadandale]

[quote=briansd1]
Remember that the current bailout was a Bush-Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner creation. The AIG giveaway to the French bank, SocGen, was a Republican deal.

If you don’t like the bailout, you should punish Republican lawmakers first.[/quote]

First of all, your President and his Democratically controlled congress threw good money after bad and passed the almost $800 billion stimulus plan…despite enormous Republican opposition.

Geitner is Obama’s Treasury Secretary…you can’t blame him on Bush.

And I’ll certainly hold any Republicans responsible who voted for either the stimulus OR the bank bailouts.

Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.

[meadandale]

[quote=briansd1]
Remember that the current bailout was a Bush-Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner creation. The AIG giveaway to the French bank, SocGen, was a Republican deal.

If you don’t like the bailout, you should punish Republican lawmakers first.[/quote]

First of all, your President and his Democratically controlled congress threw good money after bad and passed the almost $800 billion stimulus plan…despite enormous Republican opposition.

Geitner is Obama’s Treasury Secretary…you can’t blame him on Bush.

And I’ll certainly hold any Republicans responsible who voted for either the stimulus OR the bank bailouts.

Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.

[meadandale]

[quote=briansd1]
Remember that the current bailout was a Bush-Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner creation. The AIG giveaway to the French bank, SocGen, was a Republican deal.

If you don’t like the bailout, you should punish Republican lawmakers first.[/quote]

First of all, your President and his Democratically controlled congress threw good money after bad and passed the almost $800 billion stimulus plan…despite enormous Republican opposition.

Geitner is Obama’s Treasury Secretary…you can’t blame him on Bush.

And I’ll certainly hold any Republicans responsible who voted for either the stimulus OR the bank bailouts.

Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.

[meadandale]

[quote=briansd1]
Remember that the current bailout was a Bush-Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner creation. The AIG giveaway to the French bank, SocGen, was a Republican deal.

If you don’t like the bailout, you should punish Republican lawmakers first.[/quote]

First of all, your President and his Democratically controlled congress threw good money after bad and passed the almost $800 billion stimulus plan…despite enormous Republican opposition.

Geitner is Obama’s Treasury Secretary…you can’t blame him on Bush.

And I’ll certainly hold any Republicans responsible who voted for either the stimulus OR the bank bailouts.

Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.

[briansd1]

In my view, the bank bailout is much worse than the stimulus bill.

The bank bailout just put money into the banks to recapitalize them. So rather than bailing out the banks I would rather they had been nationalized.

The stimulus bill actually spends money into the economy to make work for the unemployed and create orders for businesses, which in turn create more jobs. Check with your economist friends.

The stimulus, by increasing the deficit and debt, may cause long term problems, but it was appropriate to deal with the immediate economic downturn.

I was disappointed by the choice of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. But that’s water under the bridge.

I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats are perfect. But they’re much more preferable than the alternative.

[briansd1]

In my view, the bank bailout is much worse than the stimulus bill.

The bank bailout just put money into the banks to recapitalize them. So rather than bailing out the banks I would rather they had been nationalized.

The stimulus bill actually spends money into the economy to make work for the unemployed and create orders for businesses, which in turn create more jobs. Check with your economist friends.

The stimulus, by increasing the deficit and debt, may cause long term problems, but it was appropriate to deal with the immediate economic downturn.

I was disappointed by the choice of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. But that’s water under the bridge.

I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats are perfect. But they’re much more preferable than the alternative.

[briansd1]

In my view, the bank bailout is much worse than the stimulus bill.

The bank bailout just put money into the banks to recapitalize them. So rather than bailing out the banks I would rather they had been nationalized.

The stimulus bill actually spends money into the economy to make work for the unemployed and create orders for businesses, which in turn create more jobs. Check with your economist friends.

The stimulus, by increasing the deficit and debt, may cause long term problems, but it was appropriate to deal with the immediate economic downturn.

I was disappointed by the choice of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. But that’s water under the bridge.

I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats are perfect. But they’re much more preferable than the alternative.

[briansd1]

In my view, the bank bailout is much worse than the stimulus bill.

The bank bailout just put money into the banks to recapitalize them. So rather than bailing out the banks I would rather they had been nationalized.

The stimulus bill actually spends money into the economy to make work for the unemployed and create orders for businesses, which in turn create more jobs. Check with your economist friends.

The stimulus, by increasing the deficit and debt, may cause long term problems, but it was appropriate to deal with the immediate economic downturn.

I was disappointed by the choice of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. But that’s water under the bridge.

I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats are perfect. But they’re much more preferable than the alternative.

[briansd1]

In my view, the bank bailout is much worse than the stimulus bill.

The bank bailout just put money into the banks to recapitalize them. So rather than bailing out the banks I would rather they had been nationalized.

The stimulus bill actually spends money into the economy to make work for the unemployed and create orders for businesses, which in turn create more jobs. Check with your economist friends.

The stimulus, by increasing the deficit and debt, may cause long term problems, but it was appropriate to deal with the immediate economic downturn.

I was disappointed by the choice of Geithner as Treasury Secretary. But that’s water under the bridge.

I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats are perfect. But they’re much more preferable than the alternative.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=meadandale]
Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Mead: BINGO! This was the crux of my argument regarding Brian and his inability to understand history, facts or the difference between polemic/rhetoric and reality.

This is someone who is never, ever wrong and has a convenient catchphrase, aphorism or metaphor when backed into a corner.

When confronted with facts, he’ll either “agree to disagree” or toss out some bon mot about Republicans (his particular bete noire) having no teeth and loving Jesus and Walmart. As has been shown repeatedly, he doesn’t know how to argue and relies instead on elision, sophistry or talking points from the Saul Alinsky “Handbook for Socially Awkward Leftists”.

If this all sounds like someone else we know (living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue), its not a surprise. They are, after all, working off of the same talking points.

Brian, read Amity Shlaes’ (former SEC Chairwoman), “The Forgotten Man”, a history of the Great Depression. She’ll completely shred your position regarding FDR and the supposed benefits of his programs. Again, this is prime Leftist country, and largely because acknowledging the facts of FDR’s abysmal handling would destroy their present position in support of ever larger Big Government paternalism.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=meadandale]
Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Mead: BINGO! This was the crux of my argument regarding Brian and his inability to understand history, facts or the difference between polemic/rhetoric and reality.

This is someone who is never, ever wrong and has a convenient catchphrase, aphorism or metaphor when backed into a corner.

When confronted with facts, he’ll either “agree to disagree” or toss out some bon mot about Republicans (his particular bete noire) having no teeth and loving Jesus and Walmart. As has been shown repeatedly, he doesn’t know how to argue and relies instead on elision, sophistry or talking points from the Saul Alinsky “Handbook for Socially Awkward Leftists”.

If this all sounds like someone else we know (living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue), its not a surprise. They are, after all, working off of the same talking points.

Brian, read Amity Shlaes’ (former SEC Chairwoman), “The Forgotten Man”, a history of the Great Depression. She’ll completely shred your position regarding FDR and the supposed benefits of his programs. Again, this is prime Leftist country, and largely because acknowledging the facts of FDR’s abysmal handling would destroy their present position in support of ever larger Big Government paternalism.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=meadandale]
Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Mead: BINGO! This was the crux of my argument regarding Brian and his inability to understand history, facts or the difference between polemic/rhetoric and reality.

This is someone who is never, ever wrong and has a convenient catchphrase, aphorism or metaphor when backed into a corner.

When confronted with facts, he’ll either “agree to disagree” or toss out some bon mot about Republicans (his particular bete noire) having no teeth and loving Jesus and Walmart. As has been shown repeatedly, he doesn’t know how to argue and relies instead on elision, sophistry or talking points from the Saul Alinsky “Handbook for Socially Awkward Leftists”.

If this all sounds like someone else we know (living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue), its not a surprise. They are, after all, working off of the same talking points.

Brian, read Amity Shlaes’ (former SEC Chairwoman), “The Forgotten Man”, a history of the Great Depression. She’ll completely shred your position regarding FDR and the supposed benefits of his programs. Again, this is prime Leftist country, and largely because acknowledging the facts of FDR’s abysmal handling would destroy their present position in support of ever larger Big Government paternalism.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=meadandale]
Sadly, it is obvious that you will do nothing of the sort.[/quote]

Mead: BINGO! This was the crux of my argument regarding Brian and his inability to understand history, facts or the difference between polemic/rhetoric and reality.

This is someone who is never, ever wrong and has a convenient catchphrase, aphorism or metaphor when backed into a corner.

When confronted with facts, he’ll either “agree to disagree” or toss out some bon mot about Republicans (his particular bete noire) having no teeth and loving Jesus and Walmart. As has been shown repeatedly, he doesn’t know how to argue and relies instead on elision, sophistry or talking points from the Saul Alinsky “Handbook for Socially Awkward Leftists”.

If this all sounds like someone else we know (living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue), its not a surprise. They are, after all, working off of the same talking points.

Brian, read Amity Shlaes’ (former SEC Chairwoman), “The Forgotten Man”, a history of the Great Depression. She’ll completely shred your position regarding FDR and the supposed benefits of his programs. Again, this is prime Leftist country, and largely because acknowledging the facts of FDR’s abysmal handling would destroy their present position in support of ever larger Big Government paternalism.

[Author]

Posts