Politics & Economics Open Thread

Talk about politics and the global/national economy to your heart’s content, as much as it takes to get it out of your system so the rest of the site can stick to real estate and housing.

For previous political/economic open threads, click here.

As of 09/07/2010, global economic comments that do not directly relate to Seattle-area real estate go only in threads designated for this specific subject.


About The Tim

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

903 comments:

  1. 1

    By Blurtman @ 1195:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1194 – Liar = Politician. No harm, no foul.

    Unfortunately, you’re right. Politicians no longer care about telling the truth. They just want to spin everything, and use misleading talking points.

    I use a computer to record all the TV I watch and thus don’t see many political ads. Fast forwarding I do see that Inslee and McKenna are hard at attacking each other in the TV media. Being able to avoid all that, and more, means the computer that records the shows pays for itself every other year.

  2. 2
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1 – If everyone wants to be promised a pink pony, what politician would succeed if he did not?

    It is best to watch no TV or cable at all. It is programming for the masses.

  3. 3
    pfft says:

    NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL SUES JPMORGAN FOR FRAUD OVER MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ny-ag-sues-jp-morgan-for-fraud-over-mbs-2012-10#ixzz285ib3Swu

    yay!

  4. 4
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 2:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1 – If everyone wants to be promised a pink pony, what politician would succeed if he did not?

    It is best to watch no TV or cable at all. It is programming for the masses.

    so I guess you aren’t a sports fan?

  5. 5
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 3 – But President Obama said that Wall Street committed no crimes in March, 2009.

  6. 6
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 5:

    RE: pfft @ 3 – But President Obama said that Wall Street committed no crimes in March, 2009.

    maybe he meant just for that month? although even that would be stretching it.

  7. 7
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 6 – No, what he said in March 2009, when he was on the Leno show, was that no crimes had been committed by Wall Street.

    Wrong again. Despicable corporatist. We deserve better.

  8. 8
    David Losh says:

    RE: Blurtman @ 7

    Today it was American Express’s time to pay, and wasn’t it last week it was Bank of America?

    This is real simple, because we have no true banking regulation, or legislation.

    The banking industry, and financial markets make bets, one way or the other, on each piece of legislation to come out of Congress.

    They know the laws before they are passed, they know what discisions will be made because they pay for them.

    There is no crime against that. If you wanted to go for insider information you’d lose because this is all public information. Nobody looks at these laws, unless you have a stake in it.

    Our system is corrupt, but them that make the laws, make the money.

  9. 9
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 6

    You’ve been losing ground lately.

    Obama did say no crimes were committed, and that has been echoed throughout politics, and financial circles.

  10. 10

    By David Losh @ 9:

    RE: pfft @ 6

    You’ve been losing ground lately.

    Obama did say no crimes were committed, and that has been echoed throughout politics, and financial circles.

    And not only that, pfft went through another exchange on this issue only about a month ago.

    I’m serious when I say pfft has a memory problem.

  11. 11

    Apparently there’s incredible wage growth in Iran! ;-)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19798655

  12. 12
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 10 – He/She/They is/are a partisan hack, who espouses to the philosophy that if you repeat a lie enough times, it becomes the truth. While Pfft does invest time in preparing the argument for the Democratic machine, many of his/her/their arguments have been shown to be false. It is unfortunate that someone would invest so much time with the intent to mislead. That is the worst of what is wrong with this country.

  13. 13
    Blurtman says:

    Anyone who endured the Insley-McKenna debate yesterday may have come away with the opinion that McKenna is the far better debater. Insley seemed a bit unfocused by comparison, although McKenna did come across as a cold in his put downs of Insley’s evasive answers.

    In the Obama-Romney debate today, I think the clincher will be how each canbdidate’s soft shoe version of Kicking the Can Dowm the Road excites the crowd. Can’t wait to hear Bruno’s reviews of the dance sequences. I do expect Obama’s version of Still the One to top Romney’s hard rocking version of Boring White Man.

  14. 14

    We’re All On the Average About $300/mo Poorer in 2013

    Why? The temporary tax breaks end and it may be forever too.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/popular-tax-breaks-dead-happens-070040145.html

  15. 15

    I was setting up tonight’s debate to record a few days ago, and went to the cable news channels to record their after-debate analysis. None of them seemed like a good choice. I think maybe I’ll see what the web has to offer. Quite a few places are streaming the debates live, and some probably have analysis afterward.

    http://gigaom.com/video/presidential-debate-live-stream/

  16. 16

    RE: Blurtman @ 1 – I really can’t get into the race for governor for some reason. I’d give a slight edge to McKenna just to have a Republican win and thereby hopefully give a slight indication that there is a significant portion of our public that is not hyper-partisan.

    As far as Bruno, I wish the elections could somehow get rid of him.

  17. 17
    David S says:

    WSJ has a presidential election map here:

    http://graphics.wsj.com/MAPMAKER/#

    What I find interesting about it are the metrics they feel are important for each state on the election outcome.

    Un-employment %
    Per Capita Income $/yr
    Mortgage Delinquency %
    Gas Price $/gal

    I looks like the higher the mortgage delinquency the higher the probability the states’ electoral votes will be for Obama.

  18. 18
  19. 19

    By David S @ 4:

    I looks like the higher the mortgage delinquency the higher the probability the states’ electoral votes will be for Obama.

    They’re the 47%. Unemployment could be 25% and they’d still vote for President Obama.

  20. 20
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 13 – I think a laugh track would add a lot to the debates. Also, if they could lift the curtain to show the same pupeteer working both candidates might be illumintaing. Or, after each point, a cut to the video of that guy throwing the shoe at George W.

  21. 21

    In the race for King County Sheriff, both the incumbent , Steve Strachan, and his opponent, John Urquhart, have endorsed Initiative 502, which is the marijuana legalization initiative.
    Strikes me that we’re living in Bizzaro World. Strachan is a right wing Republican who served in the Minnesota legislature before becoming a police chief,, and Urquhart is a one time narcotics detective. The initiative is also supported by the former head of the Seattle FBI office , and the former Republican US attorney. It is opposed by some pro marijuana advocates. I am predicting that it will pass. Given that marijuana is still against the law federally, it might not ever get enacted.

  22. 22
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 15 – Romney is a toker. Merkel, Hollande. They are all around.

  23. 23

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 15 – I think a lot of people in law enforcement realize how absurd the law is.

    If it does pass, the one thing it should accomplish is leaving the Feds the only entity enforcing marijuana laws in Washington state (although I’m not sure what the laws would be about growing the stuff, or if there would be tax avoidance issues).

  24. 24
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 23 – It is clear that Obama tends to over compensate to defeat stereotypes about the Dems with regards to drug law enforcement and weak on defense claims.

    Of course, there is no down side to the weak on prosecuting fraud claim, as both sides are sucking from the same teat.

    Lastly, one of the most popular presidents of recent times was a stoner.

  25. 25
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 7:

    RE: pfft @ 6 – No, what he said in March 2009, when he was on the Leno show, was that no crimes had been committed by Wall Street.

    Wrong again. Despicable corporatist. We deserve better.

    it was joke.

  26. 26
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 12:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 10 – He/She/They is/are a partisan hack, who espouses to the philosophy that if you repeat a lie enough times, it becomes the truth. While Pfft does invest time in preparing the argument for the Democratic machine, many of his/her/their arguments have been shown to be false. It is unfortunate that someone would invest so much time with the intent to mislead. That is the worst of what is wrong with this country.

    right.

  27. 27
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 19:

    By David S @ 4:
    I looks like the higher the mortgage delinquency the higher the probability the states’ electoral votes will be for Obama.

    They’re the 47%. Unemployment could be 25% and they’d still vote for President Obama.

    the 47% makes no sense which is of course why you probably spout it.

  28. 28
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 24:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 23
    Of course, there is no down side to the weak on prosecuting fraud claim, as both sides are sucking from the same teat.

    I guess you don’t know about the Democratic AG from the state of NY that is suing Bear Stearns?

  29. 29
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 25 – No. It was not a joke. Obama repeated this claim several times later as well. Why do you keep lying? What is your motive?

  30. 30
    Blurtman says:

    Financial Fraud Conviction Scorecard:

    Bush: 1300+, Clinton: 1000+, Obama: 0.0 (+/-)

    http://dailybail.com/home/convicted-bush-1300-clinton-1000-obama-00.html

  31. 31
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 29:

    RE: pfft @ 25 – No. It was not a joke. Obama repeated this claim several times later as well. Why do you keep lying? What is your motive?

    what the heck are you talking about? my joke about maybe just that month was an obvious joke. I don’t know what you think I’m lying about. nobody would ever believe that obama was only talking about the banks not doing anything wrong just for the month of march of 2009. get a grip!

    let’s review the conversation.

    “But President Obama said that Wall Street committed no crimes in March, 2009.”

    to which I replied

    “maybe he meant just for that month?”

    I though it was funny. maybe you guys are too old.

  32. 32
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 30:

    Financial Fraud Conviction Scorecard:

    Bush: 1300+, Clinton: 1000+, Obama: 0.0 (+/-)

    http://dailybail.com/home/convicted-bush-1300-clinton-1000-obama-00.html

    I wouldn’t trust those numbers at all.

  33. 33

    By pfft @ 27:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 19:
    By David S @ 4:
    I looks like the higher the mortgage delinquency the higher the probability the states’ electoral votes will be for Obama.

    They’re the 47%. Unemployment could be 25% and they’d still vote for President Obama.

    the 47% makes no sense which is of course why you probably spout it.

    How does the 47% make no sense? The 47% was a reference by Romney to the percentage of people that will not vote for him. They are partisan Democrats. There’s a similar percentage that is partisan Republican. This election is about the 5-10% who are independent, and turnout for the base of each party.

    Maybe you don’t understand it because you’ve fallen for the Democratic spin of the comment?

  34. 34
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 25

    It was not a joke. Obama is correct in that there were no crimes committed. Everybody followed the laws that were on the books.

    One point that Romney made tonight which resonated with me is that he said this about Dodd Frank:

    “This is the biggest kiss given to New York banks I’ve ever seen,” he said. “I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank that wasn’t thought through properly.”

    Banks own this country, and dictate the global economy. The laws were tailor made for them to steal as much as possible.

  35. 35
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 34:

    RE: pfft @ 25
    “This is the biggest kiss given to New York banks I’ve ever seen,” he said. “I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check.

    that’s funny, I have no idea what blank check he is talking about?

  36. 36
    Scotsman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 23RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 21

    Enforcing the law is changing nothing but consumes huge amounts of money we don’t have. Legalize all of it and let Darwin’s fabled forces of nature sort it out. Spend 5% of what we spend on enforcement on education and eliminate drug related hardships from the safety net. Within a generation we’ll see meaningful change.

  37. 37
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 35

    “I have no idea what blank check he is talking about?”

    It’s hard to keep them all straight, isn’t it? Blank checks to the banks, the union buddies, the major donors and their companies, etc.

  38. 38
    Scotsman says:

    Best tweet of the night: “Romney just took Obama on a tour of the country, strapped to the roof of his car . . ”

    This just in- Queen Michele not happy- Barry O sleeping in the dog house. Bo evicted.

  39. 39

    I’ve been saying President Obama is a failure because of his inability to create jobs. Last night he was clearly a failure. At several points he was nodding his head in agreement when Romney was making points. He even laughed at Romney’s joke on green energy that President Obama doesn’t pick the winners and losers, he picks the losers!

    I mentioned in post 15 above that none of the cable news networks seemed attractive, but I decided to record MSNBC’s analysis to see what the liberal spin was. What I ended up with was several very irate liberals, most notably Chris Mathews. Part of that can be seen here, where he’s interviewed on NBC later.

    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/49285127

    What’s not shown there is these liberal commentators think President Obama needs to watch MSNBC! ROTFMAO. F’n idiots don’t know that their spin is spin. They even wanted President Obama to bring up the 47%, apparently being like pfft and not knowing what that means either. Romney would have knocked that out of the park too. Spin doesn’t work when your opponent has an opportunity to correct the record right after you spin. Morons.

  40. 40
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 35

    How could you not know what he’s talking about? Like I said, you are slipping. Most of the time you bring substance, but let me trot this out for you.

    Obama could have done nothing to provide stimulus. The economy, especially the banks could have crashed, and scrambled. We may, or may not have had defaults, but it would have been in the private sector without involving the government.

    Are you with me so far?

    Instead Obama chose, with the advise of the Goldman Sachs team, to create this huge safety net for the economy at the cost of $5 Trillion. It saved jobs, and companies, now determined to be too big to fail, like Bank of America.

    We need to break up Bank of America to get rid of millions of bogus loans they have on the books. What Bernanke last did is promise to buy up loans at the rate of $40 Billion per month. The loans are still bogus, and lenders are generating more, and more bogus loans each day.

    We have a mess Obama created, and now needs to be fixed. Hopefully Obama has a plan to fix it, and I like what he has said so far, but the fact remains in his rush to create this safety net he created massive problems for our government.

  41. 41

    You need to fact check the fact-checkers! On the cuts to Medicare:

    In fact, that $716 billion comes from trimming planned future increases over the next decade, not cutting funding. And those trims come from limiting payments to health-care providers and insurers — NOT limiting care to seniors.
    And Medicare’s chief actuary says Obama’s health reform “substantially improves” the program’s finances.

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/03/14207584-truth-squad-the-debate?lite

    Trimming future increases is a cut! Either that, or part of what is funding Obamacare is entirely smoke and mirrors.

    And as to insurers and health care providers being cut, where do they think Medicare funds go? Do they think Medicare cuts checks to Seniors?

    And yes, of course cutting spending would significantly increase the health of Medicare. You’d significantly improve the health of Social Security too if you cut spending there.

  42. 42

    RE: David Losh @ 40 – That’s not the blank check Romney is referring to. What you’re describing is what President Obama did to save the banking system–something I believe which was started under President Bush.

    What Romney is talking about is the provisions of Dodd-Frank which deems five banks “too big to fail.” Romney thinks that gives those banks some sort of competitive advantage. Like pfft, I’m not exactly sure what he’s thinking, because the point of that was to make those banks come up with plans to either recover or be killed off without government funding. Maybe by saying they’re too big to fail, you essentially say government will bail them out even if government says now they won’t be bailed out. But I don’t see how that puts them at an advantage over smaller banks.

    I have said that President Obama is not good at seeing unintended consequences. In this case I’m apparently no better than him, assuming Romney is right.

  43. 43
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 39 – Reality has nothing to do with it. It is always spin and making a point during that occassional blip in the average American’s brain activity.

    Obama was terrible last night. And it would have been so easy to call Romney out on bullshat. Interesting that he did not. May he is sick of the pretense. Maybe he still has a bit of his soul left.

    The audience came for a show and didn’t get it. The PTB are going to have to warn Obama that he must keep up the pretense of a real choice, or the curtain will begin to slip even more.

  44. 44

    From mid-week thread: By Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 6:

    I don’t think taking a political stance here is productive, so I won’t. But the President looks weak when he just keeps looking down, in a submissive sort of way. I know he will be coached and he’ll probably fix this next time around. But Romney will expect it and come at him in a totally different way. It’s too bad that in American elections hinge on things like debates. The European way is obviously so much better. The election season lasts about two months, then it’s over. A week later the new guy takes over. In America the campaigning never ends. It drives me crazy!

    I agree our elections go too long, but European elections are too frequent.

    As to the debates, they are crucial, and contrary to pfft’s assertions in the other thread, they can affect results. You get to see each side make their argument, and the other side gets to dismantle spin. In a debate, spinning is dangerous. In the rest of the election, spinning convinces idiots to vote for candidates.

  45. 45
    Blurtman says:

    Most importantly, and I am shocked that this is not circulating on the politcal Borscht Belt circuit, Romney looked muy Rico Suave last night. Next debate should be tuxedo mandatory, with a little formal ballroom dancing thrown in.

  46. 46

    By Blurtman @ 43:

    Obama was terrible last night. And it would have been so easy to call Romney out on bullshat. Interesting that he did not. May he is sick of the pretense. Maybe he still has a bit of his soul left.

    I note he did correctly state that the Ryan plan is not a voucher program. That was big of him.

  47. 47
    Scotsman says:

    RE: Blurtman @ 43

    Or maybe Obama just doesn’t know the facts that well and can’t think on h feet. Even John Stuart commented that O really does need a teleprompter to be at his best. Compare the amount of data R put forth compared to O. I came away convinced O really doesn’t understand how the economy works, and while he talks about math he doesn’t know that well either.

  48. 48

    By Scotsman @ 47:

    I came away convinced O really doesn’t understand how the economy works. . ..

    That’s been obvious to me for about two years. This election has made it more obvious. The country is in real trouble if he’s reelected, because the economy will be in real trouble if he’s reelected.

  49. 49

    By Blurtman @ 22:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 15 – Romney is a toker. Merkel, Hollande. They are all around.

    Show me. I need to see that photo of Andrea Merkel taking that bong hit.

  50. 50

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 48:

    By Scotsman @ 47:
    I came away convinced O really doesn’t understand how the economy works. . ..

    That’s been obvious to me for about two years. This election has made it more obvious. The country is in real trouble if he’s reelected, because the economy will be in real trouble if he’s reelected.

    I think the country will be in real trouble no matter who gets elected.

  51. 51
    Scotsman says:

    If O is re-elected just think of the economy he’ll inherit this time. Will it still be Bush’s fault?

  52. 52

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 50:

    I think the country will be in real trouble no matter who gets elected.

    I have hope. There’s a lot of capital sitting on the sidelines waiting for a more friendly knowledgeable President. Also, getting rid of President Obama would go along way toward at least reducing the gridlock in DC, because President Obama is responsible for it having gotten worse. I think that is repairable.

  53. 53
    blurtman says:

    What is certain is that Big Bird was shown to be part of that grabby 47%. Come to think of it, what does Big Bird do for a living?

  54. 54
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 37:

    RE: pfft @ 35

    “I have no idea what blank check he is talking about?”

    It’s hard to keep them all straight, isn’t it? Blank checks to the banks, the union buddies, the major donors and their companies, etc.

    again, what blank check?

  55. 55
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 39:

    I’ve been saying President Obama is a failure because of his inability to create jobs.

    5 million in the last 2 years? he’s gained back all the jobs lost since the beginning of his administration.

  56. 56
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 38:

    Best tweet of the night: “Romney just took Obama on a tour of the country, strapped to the roof of his car . . ”

    This just in- Queen Michele not happy- Barry O sleeping in the dog house. Bo evicted.

    I must be in a bizarro world. Romney lost that debate. He lied like crazy. he lied about medicare about 5 times. he still didn’t tell us how he’s going to close $5 trillion in tax loopholes to pay for his tax cut. he didn’t say how he’d pay for the $2 trillion increase in defense spending he’s proposing that the military doesn’t want. how’s he going to pay for extending the bush tax cuts. then there was his epic gaffe about outsourcing tax cuts!

    obama wasn’t on top of his game, I give him a C+ or B-. he’s still going to win.

  57. 57
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 51:

    If O is re-elected just think of the economy he’ll inherit this time. Will it still be Bush’s fault?

    depends. will he be able to implement any of this programs? will republicans still continue their unprecedented obstruction?

    They’ve blocked in the last year Obama’s jobs bill, a small business bill and a bill to hire veterans. yes, they filibustered a bill to hire veterans. all because they don’t like obama.

  58. 58

    By pfft @ 55:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 39:
    I’ve been saying President Obama is a failure because of his inability to create jobs.

    5 million in the last 2 years? he’s gained back all the jobs lost since the beginning of his administration.

    Okay, inability to create enough net new jobs.

    But seriously, you’re trying to claim that President Obama has created over 200,000 jobs each month on average for the past two years? There have been very few months where the net job gain was over 200,000.

    As to the reference to the beginning of his administration, that would be great but for the fact that there’s been job growth and a lot of people were out of work before he took office. Given those things are not the case, President Obama has been a failure at job growth.

  59. 59
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 56 – No. Romney won. You are entitled to your own opinion, but the overwhelming consensus is that Romney won.

    Obama could have easily poked holes in Romney’s statements, as you have illustrated, but did not. He got bogged down in detail trying to explain things, when a simple but accurate one liner would have been better.

    His posture, with one leg extended backwards, looked effiminate and submissive.

    This one clearly goes to Rico Suave. File it under “Teachable Moment.”

  60. 60

    RE: pfft @ 56 – I was about to express amazement that you haven’t been here claiming Romney lost the debate. Just couldn’t help yourself, could you.

    Just because you believe spin, that doesn’t mean Romney lied. It means you’ve fallen hook line and sinker for Democratic spin.

  61. 61
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 60:

    RE: pfft @ 56 – I was about to express amazement that you haven’t been here claiming Romney lost the debate. Just couldn’t help yourself, could you.

    Just because you believe spin, that doesn’t mean Romney lied. It means you’ve fallen hook line and sinker for Democratic spin.

    At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes
    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/

    Romney told the medicare lie over and over again last night. That’s been thoroughly debunked. Anyways paul ryan has similar savings in his plan too!

    just because you lie convincingly doesn’t mean you win.

  62. 62
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 59:

    RE: pfft @ 56 – No. Romney won. You are entitled to your own opinion, but the overwhelming consensus is that Romney won.

    that’s because the media has relentless spinned that he won. Romney lied his butt off. that’s why he lost.

    and the media’s long slow decline continues. we didn’t even get a he said she said story as in republicans say they won and democrats say they won.

  63. 63
    pfft says:

    from an earlier discussion.

    Do presidential debates usually matter? Political scientists say no.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/10/03/what-political-scientists-know-about-debates/

  64. 64
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 54

    Let me explain this to you again, but this is tiresome.

    Too Big To Fail means these banks have a blank check. They can do what they want.

    It means if these banks are declared insolvent the economy could collapse. So these big banks are out there generating loans on promises to pay, but have no need to have the value of the asset.

    Bernanke is now buying mortgages at $40 Billion per month so there are no consquences.

  65. 65
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 62

    I also have to agree Romney pulled it out with his enthusiasm. It makes no difference if he lied or was vague, all he had to do is hold his own, but he did better than that.

  66. 66
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 64:

    RE: pfft @ 54

    Let me explain this to you again, but this is tiresome.

    Too Big To Fail means these banks have a blank check. They can do what they want

    I don’t have any idea what this means. they can do what? too big to fail banks must have a living will. they will be wound down not given a mythical blank check.

  67. 67
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 65:

    RE: pfft @ 62

    I also have to agree Romney pulled it out with his enthusiasm. It makes no difference if he lied or was vague

    yes it does. it makes all the difference in the world. if two people were trying to sell you a house and one told you everything that was wrong and the other put on a dazzling display but totally lied about the condition of the house which one put on the better performance?

  68. 68
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 66

    They already have the blank check. Our banking industry is propped up artificially and they are still out there writing loans.

    My opinion is that Nationally, or globally, the price of Real Estate is artificially high. Banks don’t need to care about the value of the asset. They are supported by our government.

    There is no provision for winding down the banking industry. The hope was that banking would become stronger, which it did, but in the process they only built on the cash reserves they had. The crap, the paper, is being bought by the government.

    There is no recourse, there is nothing we can do about that.

    It was one of the unintentioned results of Dodd Frank. Romney creamed Obama with that comment when Obama had no response.

  69. 69
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 67

    You picked the wrong analogy. People buy crap houses every day by people with great hair, and a BMW. It’s all about the show for most people.

  70. 70

    RE: Blurtman @ 13
    Inslee -McKenna is another one I see as a snorefest. McKenna was something of a right wing bastid when a member of the KC Council. And Inslee just looks like some unfocused pretty boy. Inslee did vote againt the bank bailouts. And against the War in Iraq. So maybe those should count for something.

  71. 71

    By pfft @ 61:

    At Last Night�s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes
    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/04/958801/at-last-nights-debate-romney-told-27-myths-in-38-minutes/

    Romney told the medicare lie over and over again last night. That’s been thoroughly debunked. Anyways paul ryan has similar savings in his plan too!

    just because you lie convincingly doesn’t mean you win.

    How far into that list do I have to get to find the first lie by Romney, or the first item that isn’t a lie by the entity making the list?

    My favorite one was #6 where they point to some study and then claim that was the study that Romney was referring to. They must be F’n mind readers!

    Or number 8 where they claim he lied saying the significant increase in oil production this country has seen was due to increases on private land, not public, when the reality for them is the public production was up “slightly.”

    Or number 10, where Romney quoted a study that they disagree with.

    I ended at #10. Obviously not an unbiased analysis.

    What I will say Romney has a problem with is any time you mess with the tax code there will be winners and losers, even at the same income tax level. For example, if he lowers the tax rate and does away with the mortgage tax deduction, that would help the people without mortgages greatly. A lot of people won’t like that uncertainty. Also, I don’t see the point of reducing the tax rate for W-2 earnings, if that were revenue neutral for them. That won’t create jobs like it would for 1099 and similar earnings.

  72. 72

    RE: pfft @ 67
    Obama and Romney both lied during the debate. Romney was better prepared for it and on the attack . Obama had other things to do and didn’t need any advice anyway:)
    I’d be surprised if Romney gets elected, but things were looking a little too good for Obama lately.

  73. 73
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 72 – I saw his left index finger hit the drone #3 FIRE button while Romney was droning on about how low taxes cure male pattern baldness.

  74. 74
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 70 – Yes. A friend was at his house recently, and says Inslee has a bankers mounted head collection in his man cave. Lots of lava lamps, too, I am told. He has my vote.

  75. 75
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 69:

    RE: pfft @ 67

    You picked the wrong analogy. People buy crap houses every day by people with great hair, and a BMW. It’s all about the show for most people.

    great but romney still lied his butt off. with important things it’s substance that matters not style.

  76. 76
    Scotsman says:

    Seventy million people watched the debate last night. Now they know the truth- Obama is a rotten candidate, a lousy president, and he’s got precisely zero to run on.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=819q62ZMYVk

  77. 77
    Blurtman says:

    Of course Romney would not specifiy the deductions that will enable his pink pony land future.

    1.) They don’t balance at all

    2.) Clever wealthy folks will pay Goldman Sachs to invent fictious tax avoidance schemes and securities

    3.) The mortgage interest dedcution will be a goner. Romney does not want to alienate that segment of the voting public.

    The idea is to propose a shell game that sounds plausible on the surface or in the sound bite.

  78. 78
    Scotsman says:

    “As The Daily reported earlier this week, Boston College psychophysiologist Joseph Tecce has found that since 1980, the candidate who blinks the least during the televised debates has gone on to win the popular vote. In his preliminary analysis of last night’s debate, Tecce found that Obama lost in a landslide: he blinked an average of about 75 times a minute, compared to 55 times a minute for Mitt Romney.”

  79. 79
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 76:

    Seventy million people watched the debate last night. Now they know the truth- Obama is a rotten candidate, a lousy president, and he�s got precisely zero to run on.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=819q62ZMYVk

    keep dreaming. it’s going to be great when you take november off from posting. I am looking forward.

  80. 80
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 78:

    “As The Daily reported earlier this week, Boston College psychophysiologist Joseph Tecce has found that since 1980, the candidate who blinks the least during the televised debates has gone on to win the popular vote. In his preliminary analysis of last nightâ��s debate, Tecce found that Obama lost in a landslide: he blinked an average of about 75 times a minute, compared to 55 times a minute for Mitt Romney.”

    awesome. did you know that winning the popular vote means nothing? you have to win the electoral college. ask al gore.

    you have never answered, why did you mislead us about that filmmaker being brought in for question? will you ever answer that?

  81. 81
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 51:

    If O is re-elected just think of the economy he’ll inherit this time. Will it still be Bush’s fault?

    If the zero base line is a frozen bond market, collapsing banking system and losing 510,000 jobs per month, O looks to be inheriting a relative success. That’s not Bush’s fault – or is it?.

    http://www.epi.org/publication/job_losses_ballooned_in_final_quarter_of_2008/

  82. 82
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 81 – From your lik:

    “Since U.S. consumers are now under such strain that they are unable to consume what the economy is able to produce, the government is the sole remaining spender with the capacity to bolster aggregate demand and thereby create jobs. It is essential that government now embrace that role with swift action on a massive recovery package large enough to generate sufficient jobs to prevent further increases in the U.S. unemployment rate.”

    So it is clear that pfft wrote this article, and that the tremendous job losses in the last quarter of Bush’s term were in anticpation of the Obama presidency, clearly.

  83. 83
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 75

    No it’s not. We have had several conidates who lied, about a lot of things, but if you look good, if you sound good, that is all that matters to most people.

    Let me be more specific because Romney hammered home a point that he was governor of the great State of Massachusetts which we know to be a Democrat strong hold. He told the American people he can break the gridlock. Obama, once again didn’t have a come back, but a feeble joke about Romney’s busy first day in office.

    Obama may have been right, but Romney won the exchange. It’s all in the presentation.

  84. 84

    By Blurtman @ 77:

    Of course Romney would not specifiy the deductions that will enable his pink pony land future.

    1.) They don’t balance at all

    2.) Clever wealthy folks will pay Goldman Sachs to invent fictious tax avoidance schemes and securities

    3.) The mortgage interest dedcution will be a goner. Romney does not want to alienate that segment of the voting public.

    The idea is to propose a shell game that sounds plausible on the surface or in the sound bite.

    I’m not so sure it would be that hard to balance, given 47% of the people don’t pay taxes.

    The #1 reason he wouldn’t specify is because it would be political suicide. People vote for tax cuts and against the loss of tax deductions, and that would be true of many people who might actually benefit from the plan.

  85. 85

    By Scotsman @ 78:

    “As The Daily reported earlier this week, Boston College psychophysiologist Joseph Tecce has found that since 1980, the candidate who blinks the least during the televised debates has gone on to win the popular vote. In his preliminary analysis of last nightâ��s debate, Tecce found that Obama lost in a landslide: he blinked an average of about 75 times a minute, compared to 55 times a minute for Mitt Romney.”

    The President’s staff is already working on that problem.

    http://static.dangerousminds.net/uploads/images/clockworkorangegifd.gif

  86. 86

    By David Losh @ 83:

    Romney hammered home a point that he was governor of the great State of Massachusetts which we know to be a Democrat strong hold. He told the American people he can break the gridlock. Obama, once again didn’t have a come back, . . ..

    How could he possibly have a comeback? Obama creates gridlock. He proposes legislation which he knows doesn’t have a chance in hell of passing either house. He does that to make political points, so that people like pfft can say XXXX is against YYYYYY. President Obama’s goal has been to get re-elected, rather than to solve problems and help people.

  87. 87
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 84 – All Romney has to do to cement the Nixon “I-have-a-secret-plan approach” is to raise both arms in the V for Victory salute.

    You may be right that he really, really does have a plan, and that his numbers really, really do add up, but that he just cannot tell us the details. Of course, Bush was the “compassionate conservative.”

  88. 88
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 86 – Obama is one of them outside communist agitators. (Muslim) Thank Jesus we have patriots like Mitch McConnell defending our freedom. And thanks to his wife for her incredible service to our country.

  89. 89
  90. 90
    Blurtman says:

    Ahh, the Obama spin machine is alive and well. Gotta try to corral those pissed off justice seekers.

    Wasn’t it the NY Times that broke the story about the mobile WMD labs in Iraq? Glad to see that they are still on the job.

    Wall Street Regulator Ramps Up Enforcement

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wall-street-regulator-ramps-enforcement-175604944.html

  91. 91
    pfft says:

    So Republicans don’t believe in evolution, global warming, obama’s birth certificate, inflation stats and now jobs numbers. Probably the dumbest major political party in the industrialized world.

  92. 92
    David Losh says:

    I’m going to throw this in because it is one of the things I haven’t seen discussed.

    What if Obama let Romney shoot all of his bullets in the first debate. I think Romney hit all of his points, and was given great latitude in making his case to the American people, but where was the substance?

    He was muy rico, pero, he didn’t really say anything. Did any of the fact checking put Obama ahead?

  93. 93
  94. 94
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 92 – Yes, with his Romney spin machine mask on, it does. But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs, or working at part time minimum wage jobs, so this can be spun, but beware the blow back.

    You analysis of the labor force participation rate and the effect of retirees on the declining rate is incorrect, and another example of your use of maipulation to promote the party line.

  95. 95
    Blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 91 – Romney has a nice smile, and good haircut. The rest of that stuff is just too confusing. He is sincere. I believe him. He seems to be a nice man.

  96. 96

    By Blurtman @ 93:

    RE: But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs, or working at part time minimum wage jobs, so this can be spun, but beware the blow back.

    People have probably been dropping out of the labor force because of the presidential polls. Why bother getting a job if Obama is likely to be re-elected, sending the economy into a tail spin. Last hired, first fired. ;-)

  97. 97
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 95 – A future where we do not have to work, unless we wanted to, where we can have everything we want. I’m in!

  98. 98
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 94:

    RE: pfft @ 92 – Yes, with his Romney spin machine mask on, it does. But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs, or working at part time minimum wage jobs, so this can be spun, but beware the blow back.

    You analysis of the labor force participation rate and the effect of retirees on the declining rate is incorrect, and another example of your use of maipulation to promote the party line.

    nope but keep telling yourself that. the labor participation rate went up too!

  99. 99
    pfft says:

    republicans are bad for the economy.

    U.S. businesses have added more jobs under Obama in one term than it did under Bush in two terms.

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/05/14245777-obama-eager-to-tout-drop-in-unemployment-rate?lite

    that’s actually not that hard because in his 8 years in office bush lost almost 700k private sector jobs.

  100. 100
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 94:

    RE: pfft @ 92 – Yes, with his Romney spin machine mask on, it does. But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs

    except for the 5.2 million added in the last 30 months…

  101. 101
    pfft says:

    Romney is a liar. You can “win” a debate if you lie. You can even fool stupid people. You can’t fool those of us who don’t care how expensive the suit is if it’s telling lies.

    Romney Has ‘No Idea’ About Outsourcing Tax Breaks, But His Economic Plan Makes Them Worse
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/05/968751/romney-outsourcing-tax-breaks/

  102. 102
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 98 – Yes. Up 0.01. Whoopee! Food stamp rolls hit a record high today.

  103. 103
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 102:

    RE: pfft @ 98 – Yes. Up 0.01. Whoopee! Food stamp rolls hit a record high today.

    I was right about the labor part rate…

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-id8NoZUd9ro/UG7vI9i6i-I/AAAAAAAASUk/lxhi8Ehj-0w/s1600/EmployPop2554.jpg

  104. 104
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 101

    “You can even fool stupid people”

    You mean like these- found at an Obama rally?

    Seriously- do they even understand the question, let alone the implications? This is what happens when the social safety net replaces Darwin.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/05/Obama-Supporters-President-Should-Have-Teleprompter-At-Debates

  105. 105
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 104:

    RE: pfft @ 101

    “You can even fool stupid people”

    You mean like these- found at an Obama rally?

    Seriously- do they even understand the question, let alone the implications? This is what happens when the social safety net replaces Darwin.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/05/Obama-Supporters-President-Should-Have-Teleprompter-At-Debates

    why did you mislead us about that filmmaker? answer that and I will debunk your easily debunked teleprompter garbage.

    you actually think the liar won the debate? of course you do. you are a birther and a jobs truther before jack welch made it cool!

  106. 106
  107. 107
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 104
    Those guys are sure dumb. I wonder if they know whether 145,000 jobs created per month is better than 510,000 jobs lost per month?

  108. 108
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 103 – You are pathetically deceptive. The link describes employment in the 25-54 age range. One can wonder about the motives of the designer of a graph that excludes the segments experiencing the worst unemployment – the very young and very old – but your motives are clear. You are a pathetic pumper and eblematic of what is wrong with this country. A bold faced liar who tries to misrpesent the incompetence of the policies and leaders of the party you are pimping for – the Democrat party. Put up a simlar graph of 16-65 you fraud. And why aren’t you pumping the record high food stamp numbers? Why aren’t ypu spinning that?

  109. 109
    Blurtman says:

    At 46,681,833 million the persons hooked on SNAP, the July number crossed the previous record posted a short month before, as the foodstamp curve continues ‘plumbing’ newer and greater heights each month.

    Finally, and putting it all into perspective, since December 2007, or the start of the Great Depression ver 2.0, the number of jobs lost is 4.5 million, while those added to foodstamps and disability rolls, has increased by a unprecedented 21 million.

    Winning!

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/us-foodstamp-usage-rises-new-record-high

  110. 110
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 108:

    RE: pfft @ 103 – You are pathetically deceptive. The link describes employment in the 25-54 age range. One can wonder about the motives of the designer of a graph that excludes the segments experiencing the worst unemployment – the very young and very old – but your motives are clear. You are a pathetic pumper and eblematic of what is wrong with this country. A bold faced liar who tries to misrpesent the incompetence of the policies and leaders of the party you are pimping for – the Democrat party. Put up a simlar graph of 16-65 you fraud. And why aren’t you pumping the record high food stamp numbers? Why aren’t ypu spinning that?

    again I’ve told you a million times why we use the 25-54 range, it leaves out all the retiring boomers. my father for example retired years before 65.

    “And why aren’t you pumping the record high food stamp numbers?”

    didn’t even know they were out. do you pump every good number too or just the bad ones? spin that! as I’ve said a million times, the food stamp numbers are lagging. more people need jobs and time to build up savings.

    the question is what do you want to do about it? are you for more stimulus like the jobs act that Obama tried to pass last year? yes or no? what is your plan?

  111. 111
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 6:

    Breaking news! Hillary Clinton is gay?!

    http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Hollywood/2012/10/05/hillary-aguilera.jpg

    why did you mislead us about that filmmaker?

  112. 112
    pfft says:

    btw, the jobs numbers w/o seasonal adjustments were very popular a few months ago. well those numbers this month showed we added 500k jobs. funny they weren’t mentioned though.

    some people used to tell us about the ADP numbers, funny how they doesn’t mention them now that they are usually higher than the official numbers…

  113. 113
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 112

    Obama’s Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims

    “Another frequent Obama claim is that “we did all the right things to prevent a Great Depression.” But this, too, is false.

    The economy had pretty much hit bottom by the time Obama took office, and long before his policies were in place. The worst declines in monthly GDP and employment, in fact, occurred before he was even sworn in.”

    Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx#ixzz28UlvlaWV

  114. 114
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 112

    Bottom line on the unemployment numbers:

    114,000 new jobs is fewer than the working-age population growth of 206,000 and yet unemployment decreased? It may take a while to show up in these well manipulated stats, but that’s a loss any way you look at it. The economy is slowing, unemployment is worsening, and Obama is losing.

    Boom.

  115. 115
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 110 – It’s funny, because unbiased analysts report the standard 16-64(5) range used to calculate the classic labor force participation rate. When you omit the 16-24 and 55-64 segments, you omit the segments of the labor force that suffer the highest unemployment rates. Of course, that type of massaging will make the unemployment situation seem less dire. Hence, the claim that you are a pathetic pumper for the Democrat party. And the Calculated Risk blog owner is a disigenuous provider of statistics. He will lavish praise on the data from LPS, but will not point out that LPS is a criminal enterprise.

    Here is an unbiased summary of the recent data.

    Quick Notes About the Unemployment Rate
    •US unemployment rate -.3 to 7.8%
    •In the last two months the unemployment rate dropped .5%
    •Reversing a three-month trend, those “not” in the labor force fell by 211,000
    •In the last year, those “not” in the labor force rose by 2,643,000
    •Over the course of the last year, the number of people employed rose by 2,867,000.
    •Participation Rate rose .01 to 63.6%
    •Long-Term unemployment (27 weeks and over) was 4,844 million a decline of 189,000
    •Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 10%.

    http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/michael-shedlock/putting-employment-report-in-perspective

  116. 116

    By pfft @ 1:

    Romney is a liar. You can “win” a debate if you lie. You can even fool stupid people. You can’t fool those of us who don’t care how expensive the suit is if it’s telling lies.

    Romney Has �No Idea� About Outsourcing Tax Breaks, But His Economic Plan Makes Them Worse
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/05/968751/romney-outsourcing-tax-breaks/

    You’re in over your head. Of course costs of moving would be a tax deduction. Almost all business expenses are deductible. That’s a far cry from getting a tax break for moving jobs out of the country. Spending $1 to save 30 cents is not exactly an incentive.

    As to the Territorial tax system, not something I’m crazy about either, but I don’t think it will have the effect you believe. In any case, our current tax system is rather absurd, so something needs to be done. We’re basically subsidizing the corporate income tax of other countries, and keeping some capital from coming back into this country.

  117. 117

    By whatsmyname @ 7:

    RE: Scotsman @ 104
    Those guys are sure dumb. I wonder if they know whether 145,000 jobs created per month is better than 510,000 jobs lost per month?

    I wonder if some people here have ever heard about economic cycles? /sarc

  118. 118

    On the topic of lying, read this article from September 9.

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/romney-ryan-tax-loopholes.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    It talks about how Romney/Ryan will pay for their tax cuts by getting rid of unspecified tax deductions and credits. They were criticized at the time for not being specific on the deductions. pfft was making those same complaints here in the prior thread.

    Fast forward to the day after the debate which Obama clearly lost. Lots of talk of Romney changing his story suddenly during the debate by suddenly claiming there would be no loss of revenue from his tax cuts. They’ve been claiming that the whole time, as shown in the September 9 article above.

    I guess it is if partisan Democrats come out after the debate and claim they never knew anything about these deductions before. Even pfft here remembered the deductions were being claimed but weren’t being specified, and pfft has a serious case of CRS.

    There’s a fine line between being wrong and lying, but this situation is not even close to merely being wrong.

  119. 119

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 39:

    I mentioned in post 15 above that none of the cable news networks seemed attractive, but I decided to record MSNBC’s analysis to see what the liberal spin was. What I ended up with was several very irate liberals, most notably Chris Mathews. Part of that can be seen here, where he’s interviewed on NBC later.

    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/49285127

    What’s not shown there is these liberal commentators think President Obama needs to watch MSNBC! ROTFMAO. F’n idiots don’t know that their spin is spin. They even wanted President Obama to bring up the 47%, apparently being like pfft and not knowing what that means either. Romney would have knocked that out of the park too. Spin doesn’t work when your opponent has an opportunity to correct the record right after you spin. Morons.

    Apparently I wasn’t the only one who thought MSNBC was funny after the debate. Colbert covered it:

    http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/419820/october-04-2012/chris-matthews–impotent-rage

  120. 120
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 113:

    RE: pfft @ 112

    Obama’s Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims

    “Another frequent Obama claim is that “we did all the right things to prevent a Great Depression.” But this, too, is false.

    The economy had pretty much hit bottom by the time Obama took office, and long before his policies were in place. The worst declines in monthly GDP and employment, in fact, occurred before he was even sworn in.”

    Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx#ixzz28UlvlaWV

    so I can still blame the slow recovery on bush? AWESOME!

    and gdp isn’t expressed monthly but quarterly, nice try.

    you are also wrong about the unemployment numbers. the worst month of jobs loses was Jan 09.

    http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2012/10/summary-for-week-ending-oct-5th.html

    why did you mislead us about that filmmaker? why won’t you answer?

  121. 121
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 14:

    RE: pfft @ 112

    Bottom line on the unemployment numbers:

    114,000 new jobs is fewer than the working-age population growth of 206,000 and yet unemployment decreased? It may take a while to show up in these well manipulated stats, but that’s a loss any way you look at it. The economy is slowing, unemployment is worsening, and Obama is losing.

    Boom.

    keep telling yourself that. enjoy november off!

    “114,000 new jobs is fewer than the working-age population growth of 206,000 and yet unemployment decreased?”

    link. link. link.

  122. 122
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 15:

    RE: pfft @ 110
    �Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 10%.

    you mean were it not for boomers retiring early the jobs situation would be worse? the EMPRATIO is going UP!

  123. 123
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 104:

    RE: pfft @ 101

    “You can even fool stupid people”

    You mean like these- found at an Obama rally?

    Seriously- do they even understand the question, let alone the implications? This is what happens when the social safety net replaces Darwin.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/10/05/Obama-Supporters-President-Should-Have-Teleprompter-At-Debates

    Ha ha, stupid people. I’m still laughing about the implications of having written materials for the candidate to look at during the debate.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/10/05/you-be-the-judge-did-mitt-cheat.html

  124. 124
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 13:

    The economy had pretty much hit bottom by the time Obama took office, and long before his policies were in place. The worst declines in monthly GDP and employment, in fact, occurred before he was even sworn in.”

    You always bring up the best stuff. Job losses were averaging 510,000 per month in the last Quarter before O took office. That’s in interesting re-definition of hitting bottom to me.

    If 114,000 jobs per month is an objective failure; it is less a failure than the closing Bush/GOP numbers by an advantage of 624,000 jobs per month.

    http://www.epi.org/publication/job_losses_ballooned_in_final_quarter_of_2008/

  125. 125
  126. 126

    By pfft @ 120:

    By Scotsman @ 14:
    RE: pfft @ 112

    Bottom line on the unemployment numbers:

    114,000 new jobs is fewer than the working-age population growth of 206,000 and yet unemployment decreased? It may take a while to show up in these well manipulated stats, but that’s a loss any way you look at it. The economy is slowing, unemployment is worsening, and Obama is losing.

    Boom.

    keep telling yourself that. enjoy november off!

    “114,000 new jobs is fewer than the working-age population growth of 206,000 and yet unemployment decreased?”

    link. link. link.

    Here’s a quote and a link!

    The unemployment report is based on the so-called Household Survey and it measures the number of unemployed as a percentage of the labor force. It is notoriously volatile and economists don’t put much stock in it, even though it often becomes the talking point for non-economists, politicians and pundits.

    http://economywatch.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/05/14240541-unemployment-rate-falls-to-78-as-economy-creates-114000-jobs?lite

  127. 127
    pfft says:

    mitt romney wants to go easy on wall street but crack down on seasame street…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImYRbcDHBgQ

  128. 128

    By pfft @ 23:

    This should end this nonsense.

    Constant-demography Employment
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/constant-demography-employment-wonkish-but-relevant/

    From Krugman:

    One answer, which I’ve used before, is to focus on prime-age adults, between 25 and 54;

    As long as we’re cherry picking, how about excluding minorities and women? That will make the situation look even better! /sarc

    Seriously, just realize that the unemployment rate is a flawed piece of data for many reasons. Almost all data has flaws, you just have to know what those flaws are.

  129. 129

    By pfft @ 25:

    mitt romney wants to go easy on wall street but crack down on seasame street…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImYRbcDHBgQ

    That President Obama is really sharp. It only took him 24 hours to think of a response!

    This touches on the reason government spending is out of control. Politicians are not willing to make cuts. PBS is hardly critical to the nation, and in any case it wouldn’t go away without government funding. But the politicians won’t cut it.

    In their defense, it is a tiny amount of money in the overall scheme of things, but so are many other things. When you’re talking about millions of dollars across multiple programs, pretty soon you get to the point where you’re taking about real money.

  130. 130

    pfft, the link you requested is caught in the spam filter. It’s above my prior two posts.

  131. 131
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 121 – Not me, Mish Shedlock. Your contention seems to be that we should not use the classic Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) metric in comparing unemployment accross time as the wave of retiring boomers introduces an artifact that can only make the data look worse than it is today. You supply no data to back up this belief, and promote the exclusion of 16-24 year olds, and 55 and older from such considertion. I suggest that first we should continue to use historical measurements like the LFPR, and then see if there are artifacts.

    But what are the facts regarding boomer retirement. Here is one link that nicely examines this phenomena: Boomers Retiring Earlier Than Expected, Cite Bad Health, Job Loss
    http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/04/04/boomers-retiring-earlier-than-expected-due-to-bad-health-job-lo/

    Please read it. You will note that the average age of the frontal wave of retiring boomers is 63. So if the LFPR measgures 16-64, your argument, like many of your arguments, seems to be specious.

    Second, “The MetLife survey also showed that 37 percent of respondents plan to retire in the next year and, on average, plan to do so by the time they’re 68.” That is well beyond the range measured in the LFPR metric and contributes nothing to the skewing of this metric.

    Third, “Of those who have already retired, ….., 16 percent said their decision was the result of job loss or a lack of employment opportunities.”

    None of this supports your claim at all. Further, it is another gollying indication of this crappy economy.

    You did not earn your pumper fee on this one. So again my question – what is your motive for the constant deception?

  132. 132
    Trigger says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 113 – Scotsman – Obama could have stopped the printing and then we would be down in the gutter. So we printed and then printed some more and then we relaxed and we saw GDP rise and unemployment started going down. Now we are waiting for more printing so we can relax more comfortably.

  133. 133
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 104:

    You mean like these- found at an Obama rally?

    Seriously- do they even understand the question, let alone the implications? This is what happens when the social safety net replaces Darwin.

    Ha ha, stupid people. I’m still laughing about the implications of having written materials for the candidate to look at during the debate.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/10/05/you-be-the-judge-did-mitt-cheat.html

  134. 134
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 23 – Nice strawman, but Krugman wastes time correcting an irrelevant metric. Brilliant. Not.

  135. 135

    RE: Blurtman @ 129 – Very interesting economy.

    Some people retired early, because they were laid off and cannot find a job.

    Other people are retiring late, because they lost a lot of value in their retirement accounts/houses.

    This undoubtedly always happens to some extent, but it’s the volume which is now apparently different.

  136. 136
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 135 – The analysis linked into post 131 above would indicate that 16% of folks who retired at an average age of 63 did so because they could not find work.

    My complaint with pfft is that he/she/they are constantly shifting the goal posts to obscure the fact that Obama has failed to score a touchdown. The unemployment rate is admittedly a flawed metric. An historical and until recently (apparently) accepted metric was the LFPR. The contribution of the retiring boomer generation might skew the LFPR metric, which is pfft’s unsubstantiated claim, but the link above casts a lot of doubt on that.

    So a contiuing dismal LFPR, up only 0.01 on the latest data, and a continually increasing population of food stamp recipients, indicates that Obama has nothing to crow about. And I am not a Romney supporter. Both candidates are not very good.

  137. 137

    The link pfft wanted is now in post 126.

  138. 138
    Scotsman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 133

    Stupid people everywhere I guess. It’s a piece of paper. Watch the start of the closing statments when he wiped his face with it and it was magically cloth again. Amazing technology, it’s paper when you need it to be, but cloth when you use it to wipe your face.

    But if it’s all you’ve got . . . “Hanky-Gate!”

  139. 139
    David Losh says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 113

    This sales line gave me the biggest laugh, “”You can’t find a single deep recession that has been followed by a moderate recovery,” is how Dean Maki, chief U.S. economist at Barclays Capital, put it in August 2009.

    Recession is such an odd term to use for a global economic collapse that has yet to start.

    Governments will need to default. I’d like to see the data on that in the big scheme of selling you investment products.

  140. 140
    David Losh says:

    RE: David Losh @ 139

    My wife also noticed that Obama was reading a set of papers while Romney was talking.

    Based on that she has shifted her support of Obama some what.

    I also have to agree that Romney made an impressive showing.

  141. 141
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 136:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 135 The contribution of the retiring boomer generation might skew the LFPR metric, which is pfft’s unsubstantiated claim

    I have substantiated it many times. you’re in denial. I personally know someone who dropped out of the labor force years before 65. in fact the participation rate has been in a slow glide down for years. I’ve given you two good sources- a respected blog(calcuated risk) and a nobel prize-winning economist who hasn’t been easy on this administration or this slow recovery. remember krugman was the one who said the economy was not recovering fast enough and wrote a huge NYT magazine article about how ben bernanke wasn’t listening to ben bernanke.

    Earth to Ben Bernanke
    Chairman Bernanke Should Listen to Professor Bernanke
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/magazine/chairman-bernanke-should-listen-to-professor-bernanke.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

  142. 142
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 141 – No. Both sources do not address the LFPR. Krugman’s eamines 16-infinity. CR 24-54.

    You have again lied.

  143. 143
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 136:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 135 – The analysis linked into post 131 above would indicate that 16% of folks who retired at an average age of 63 did so because they could not find work.

    My complaint with pfft is that he/she/they are constantly shifting the goal posts to obscure the fact that Obama has failed to score a touchdown.

    complete nonsense.

    what about a Princeton economics professor don’t you understand?

    I have had one consistent point. that the economy is getting better slowly. you guys have the new goal posts every week. seasonally adjusted data, minimum wage jobs and etc.

  144. 144
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 42:

    RE: pfft @ 141 – No. Both sources do not address the LFPR. Krugman’s eamines 16-infinity. CR 24-54.

    You have again lied.

    nope sorry.

  145. 145
    pfft says:

    PRIVATE SECTOR JOB GROWTH UNDER BUSH: -646K. UNDER OBAMA: +967K

    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/10/justin-wolfers-the-scorecard-private-sector-job-growth-under-bush-646k-under-obama-967k.html

    STUNNING! Obama has done more in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years.

  146. 146
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 138:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 133

    Stupid people everywhere I guess. It’s a piece of paper. Watch the start of the closing statments when he wiped his face with it and it was magically cloth again. Amazing technology, it’s paper when you need it to be, but cloth when you use it to wipe your face.

    But if it’s all you’ve got . . . “Hanky-Gate!”

    He couldn’t have had a cloth and a paper? You must be a dream audience at the magic show – or anyplace where deception is used. I think you are bullmitting me, but perhaps you didn’t watch to the end as he clearly fumbles with the paper and then hands it off to an aid. Maybe you were interpreting this as “Here, boy -Take my letter size, rigid used hanky. Ah, Mitt, man of the people.”

    But here is my intended point. You ridiculed these stupid people for thinking that Obama could have benefitted from having access to written material. Well, it looks like Mitt is one of those stupid people too, since he clearly thought to bring in some written material.

  147. 147
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 145

    “STUNNING! Obama has done more in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years”

    How true. Unfortunately, almost none of it is good.

    If your private sector job growth claims were “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” as they say then this economy should be rocking right along. Instead it’s on the verge of collapse. You must have left something out of your analysis, eh?

  148. 148
    Scotsman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 46

    “He couldn’t have had a cloth and a paper?”

    He did have both. They are allowed to bring pen/paper to write notes on. They aren’t allowed to bring pre-written notes. Do you understand the difference? Am I typing too fast? Pretty much everyone agrees it was a hanky, and there were no notes on it. But there was paper at his lecturn. Amazing, huh?

    Why not check them for electronic ear buds, etc. if “cheating” was a major concern? There are so many more devious ways to cheat than obvious notes on a hanky/paper if that’s your objective.

    Mitt needed nothing. Choom boy was clearly “one toke over the line” and beyond hope:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/big-super-pac-donor-obama-looks-he-took-my-million-and-spent-it-all-weed_653844.html

  149. 149
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 148:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 46

    He did have both. They are allowed to bring pen/paper to write notes on. They aren’t allowed to bring pre-written notes. Do you understand the difference? Am I typing too fast? Pretty much everyone agrees it was a hanky, and there were no notes on it. But there was paper at his lecturn. Amazing, huh?l

    This is a fine rebuttal to “Watch the start of the closing statments when he wiped his face with it and it was magically cloth again. Amazing technology, it’s paper when you need it to be, but cloth when you use it to wipe your face.”

    Unfortunately, that was your own idiot statement. So perhaps you are typing too fast.

    But let me try to put this together in my own plodding way. if he had a handkerchief and he had a clean paper, then he couldn’t have had notes on the handkerchief or on other paper. And so, if he weighs the same as a duck, it is because he is made of wood?

  150. 150
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 144 – You certainly are.

  151. 151
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 45 – Are you speaking to the record food stamp rolls?

  152. 152

    By pfft @ 45:

    PRIVATE SECTOR JOB GROWTH UNDER BUSH: -646K. UNDER OBAMA: +967K

    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/10/justin-wolfers-the-scorecard-private-sector-job-growth-under-bush-646k-under-obama-967k.html

    STUNNING! Obama has done more in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years.

    You need to understand the difference between correlation and causation. Economies have cycles. You happen to pick an ending period and starting period where there was a serious threat of economic collapse.

    Things were very good during Clinton’s years. That wasn’t necessarily due to his policies. He was to a great extent just lucky.

    Getting back to correlation vs. causation: The economic collapse that was threatened back in 2008-2009 was clearly caused by the policies of those in the Senate in 2006-2008. /sarc

  153. 153

    RE: whatsmyname @ 49 – What’s stupid about this debate is that they don’t even have access to the rules they claim were violated. So it’s an assumption about facts on assumed rules.

    In contrast, we know what Romney said about his tax policy prior to the debate. And we know what President Obama repeatedly said about Romney’s tax policy at the debate, even after being corrected. How about comparing those to things and seeing what kind of assumptions you can make. I think Axelrod refers to it as being “fundamentally dishonest.”

  154. 154
  155. 155
    Blurtman says:

    So let’s look at where we are at econimically.

    A record number of folks on Social Security Disability.

    A record number of folks on food stamps.

    A record low of folks participating in the labor force. The retiring boomers do not substantially, if at all, skew the labor force participation rate metric, as they are not substantially measured in this metric.

    This is not a good snapshot of the USA. It is an indication of a horrific, jobless economy where even whatever job growth there is, is in temp jobs or low wage jobs.

    Denying these facts does not serve the country or the American people.

  156. 156
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 54 – Brilliant!

  157. 157

    The idea of Romney reducing his tax cuts if they could not eliminate sufficient deductions/loopholes was clearly never mentioned prior to the debate. /sarc

    A fatal ambiguity has been hanging over Mitt Romney’s pledge to reduce income tax rates and pay for it by eliminating deductions without doing anything to increase the tax burden on the middle class. The problem is that this is mathematically impossible. To get the rate reductions Romney has promised, you either have to increase the deficit or have to increase the tax burden on the middle class. It just can’t be done otherwise.

    So which did Romney have in mind? Well, now campaign adviser Kevin Hassett says neither, arguing that if Romney’s math doesn’t add up (and it doesn’t), he just won’t cut rates that much: “If you think the base-broadeners don’t add up, if you think he can’t get to 28 percent, then the right thing that would happen, as you know, if you’re going to have a revenue-neutral reform, is that they would have a different change in rates.”

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/26/romney_on_taxes_kevin_hassett_now_says_romney_may_not_cut_taxes_.html

    This article was from September. The debate was in October. Too bad President Obama’s team didn’t prepare for the debate by knowing the facts.

  158. 158

    On Saturday Night Live’s skit of the debate, President Obama was distracted due to the fact that he forgot to buy Michelle an anniversary gift. He blamed forgetting on being distracted by the mess he was left from President Bush’s economic policies. :-D

  159. 159
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 147:

    RE: pfft @ 145

    “STUNNING! Obama has done more in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years”

    How true. Unfortunately, almost none of it is good.

    If your private sector job growth claims were “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” as they say then this economy should be rocking right along. Instead it’s on the verge of collapse. You must have left something out of your analysis, eh?

    verge of collapse? you’ve been saying that for 2 years. I thought you said the other day that the worst was over when Obama took office?

    do you have a straight story?

    why did you mislead us on that filmmake?

  160. 160
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 50:

    RE: pfft @ 144 – You certainly are.

    if the participation rate is so bad why don’t the internals look as bad? I’ll tell you why. it’s because the largest part of the workforce right now is also the least likely to be looking for work. in your zest to tell us how bad the economy is you just can’t accept that. we all know that the economy isn’t that great. that’s just not good enough for you for some reason. we should be producing double the 114k jobs we got last month. ideally we should be near 300k to get us back to full employment asap.

    here is a good link for you that explains this:

    http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/196748-first-world-problems

  161. 161
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 52:

    By pfft @ 45:
    PRIVATE SECTOR JOB GROWTH UNDER BUSH: -646K. UNDER OBAMA: +967K

    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/10/justin-wolfers-the-scorecard-private-sector-job-growth-under-bush-646k-under-obama-967k.html

    STUNNING! Obama has done more in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years.

    You need to understand the difference between correlation and causation. Economies have cycles. You happen to pick an ending period and starting period where there was a serious threat of economic collapse.

    Things were very good during Clinton’s years. That wasn’t necessarily due to his policies. He was to a great extent just lucky.

    Getting back to correlation vs. causation: The economic collapse that was threatened back in 2008-2009 was clearly caused by the policies of those in the Senate in 2006-2008. /sarc

    obama was handing a much worse economy than Bush was and had 4 years less but still managed to create more jobs. how’d that happen given you think that obama’s suppposed tax increases have been holding the economy back? bush had those two tax cuts how did the economy turn out so bad according to you?

  162. 162
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 55:

    Denying these facts does not serve the country or the American people.

    nobody has ever denied these facts. you ignore that 5 million people have gotten jobs in the last 30 months.

  163. 163
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 57:

    The idea of Romney reducing his tax cuts if they could not eliminate sufficient deductions/loopholes was clearly never mentioned prior to the debate. /sarc

    A fatal ambiguity has been hanging over Mitt Romney’s pledge to reduce income tax rates and pay for it by eliminating deductions without doing anything to increase the tax burden on the middle class. The problem is that this is mathematically impossible. To get the rate reductions Romney has promised, you either have to increase the deficit or have to increase the tax burden on the middle class. It just can’t be done otherwise.

    So which did Romney have in mind? Well, now campaign adviser Kevin Hassett says neither, arguing that if Romney’s math doesn’t add up (and it doesn’t), he just won’t cut rates that much: “If you think the base-broadeners donâ��t add up, if you think he canâ��t get to 28 percent, then the right thing that would happen, as you know, if youâ��re going to have a revenue-neutral reform, is that they would have a different change in rates.”

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/26/romney_on_taxes_kevin_hassett_now_says_romney_may_not_cut_taxes_.html

    This article was from September. The debate was in October. Too bad President Obama’s team didn’t prepare for the debate by knowing the facts.

    if you believe that you obviously don’t pay attention to politics. republicans don’t care about the deficit. they enacted two tax cuts that added to the deficit the last decade. if Romney is elected his tax cut won’t be revenue neutral. nothing the Republicans have passed in the last decade has been revenue neutral. Romney will be lead by the House Republicans. they don’t care about revenue neutrality. most probably don’t even know what it means.

    remember when the House Republicans came to power vowing not to vote for anything that added to the deficit but had to ignore that in order to vote to repeal obamacare? I do.

  164. 164

    RE: pfft @ 161 – Totally non-responsive.

  165. 165

    RE: pfft @ 63 – Are you seriously trying to claim that the Democrats care about the deficit? They’ve both done what can only be described as a very poor job.

    We know President Obama has done a poor job in that area. We don’t know what Romney will do.

  166. 166
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 164:

    RE: pfft @ 161 – Totally non-responsive.

    obama did more in less time and he inherited a much worse recession than Bush was. spin that!

    You must not remember the 90s like I do. I remember Republicans telling us how awful the economy would be if the Clinton tax increases took effect. Sound familiar at all? The economy boomed anyway!

    FLASHBACK: In 1993, GOP Warned That Clinton’s Tax Plan Would ‘Kill Jobs,’ ‘Kill The Current Recovery’
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/173450/1993-quotes/

    Clinton: Over Last 50 Years, Two-Thirds Of Private Sector Job Growth Came Under Democratic Presidents
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/06/804471/clinton-over-last-50-years-two-thirds-of-private-sector-job-growth-came-under-democratic-presidents/

  167. 167
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 65:

    RE: pfft @ 63 – Are you seriously trying to claim that the Democrats care about the deficit? They’ve both done what can only be described as a very poor job.

    We know President Obama has done a poor job in that area. We don’t know what Romney will do.

    Obama has done a poor job in that area. He hasn’t run deficits big enough. He instituted a pay freeze and tried to cut spending. You don’t do that during a deleveraging. You spend what you need to get the economy growing. Pelosi shouldn’t have gone back to pay-go at the time she did.

    The deficit should be larger right now. Under the last 2 Democratic presidents, Carter and Clinton, our debt/gdp ratios went lower. Under Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 they sky rocketed. 2/3 our of debt is from Republican presidents.

  168. 168
    pfft says:

    Employment: A decline in the participation rate was expected due to the aging population
    Read more at http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2012/10/employment-decline-in-participation.html#LItkpy06PE78QxDw.99

    .

  169. 169

    By pfft @ 66:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 164:
    RE: pfft @ 161 – Totally non-responsive.

    obama did more in less time and he inherited a much worse recession than Bush was. spin that!

    Again totally non-responsive. Do you not understand the simple concept that correlation does not prove causation? That’s pretty basic stuff.

    Our economy would almost certainly be a lot better off today without President Obama and his anti-business rhetoric and constant calls for tax increases. I’ll give him credit for saving the economy the first year or two of his term, but since then things have improved despite of him, not because of him.

  170. 170

    Finally some post-debate poll results.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2012/10/08/romney-obama-debate-poll-shift-gallup/1619677/

    Romney jumped ahead in the nationwide poll of registered voters, but within the margin of error.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/10/us-election-2012?fsrc=scn/gp/wl/bl/statesofplayoct8

    In the state by state Romney is ahead for the first time.

    Having no record to run on and a strategy of character assassination doesn’t work when the public can see the two candidates on the same stage.

  171. 171
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 160 – How hurtful. I am still sobbing.

  172. 172
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 68 – Oh golly. Do I have to go back and read the source material from this link? That kind of stuff makes my head hurt.

  173. 173
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 170 – Romney’s momentum is indeed troubling. Obummer needs to go back and review the Bill Clinton archive.

  174. 174

    RE: Blurtman @ 173 – I forget where I heard this joke–some TV show. It pertains to not bringing up the 47% or Bain.

    During the debate, President Obama decided to take the high road, not realizing that road ends at building houses with Jimmy Carter.

  175. 175
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 174 – Would it be wrong to pull out the “There you go, again.” chestnut?

  176. 176

    I’m not certain of this, but Governor Brown’s actions to allow winter grade gas in California earlier may have an adverse (upward) impact on our gas prices. They may siphon some of our supply.

    http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/08/14292936-calif-governor-takes-action-as-gas-prices-surge?lite

  177. 177
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 172:

    RE: pfft @ 68 – Oh golly. Do I have to go back and read the source material from this link? That kind of stuff makes my head hurt.

    what can’t you dig into the internals like you do for unemployment rates and find declining particiapation there too? why can a Nobel-prize winning economist post 2 or 3 graphs showing people not dropping out of the workforce?

    Constant-demography Employment (Wonkish But Relevant)
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/06/constant-demography-employment-wonkish-but-relevant/

  178. 178
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 74:

    RE: Blurtman @ 173 – I forget where I heard this joke–some TV show. It pertains to not bringing up the 47% or Bain.

    During the debate, President Obama decided to take the high road, not realizing that road ends at building houses with Jimmy Carter.

    so you’re repeating a joke that dumps on Habitat for Humanity? Really?

    Habitat has built over 500,000 houses. bad joke.

  179. 179
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 178

    OK, you’re doing better today.

    Romney is moving up, and may well win the election. Get comfortable with that idea. You are making a great case for Obama, but it is a distant, and cold case. It’s too much behind the scenes manipulation, with some bad fails thrown in.

    It makes no difference really. I personally would love to see the Republican canidate win this election, because no matter what, things are going to get worse before they get better.

  180. 180
    David Losh says:

    I commented without reading today’s news. Romney wants to arm Syrian rebels through other countries in the area, and feels we have lost ground we made in Iraq.

    The Middle East policy we have now is the best it has been since WWII. We need to back off, and let the region settle it’s own differences. We got rid of a lot of dictator influence, but our oil interests are of no consequence now. The cash flow of the region is based on selling oil into a global economic decline. We don’t need to prop that up.

  181. 181
    Blurtman says:

    “The press wet its small-clothes over Mitt Romney’s ebullience in last Thursday’s so-called debate, as these joint interview contests are styled these days. What a jaunty fellow Mitt came off as, compared to poor Mr. Obama, cloaked in presidential gloom, the wearisome woes of high office and all that – or perhaps just some indigestible tidbit served out of Air Force One’s galley, an infected cocktail weenie, a shrimp with attitude, or an empanada with the E coli blues, who knows….

    To be sure, Mr. Romney’s ebullience had a crafted tang to it, like one of those pumpkin-flavored beers made for the season, especially since all that verve was employed in the service of ebullient lying, statistical confabulation, and self-contradiction. At times his sheer manic zest veered in the direction of what used to be called hebephrenia in the old clinical sense of someone euphorically out-of-touch with reality.

    Alienation from reality being at the very core of the current zeitgeist, the American public can only admire somebody who displays such a buoyant disregard for what is actually happening in the universe. To me, Mr. Romney just gave off the odor of someone who will do anything to get elected while Mr. Obama evinced the dejection of someone doubting it was worth it.”

    http://kunstler.com/blog/2012/10/empty-pagentry.html

  182. 182
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 179:

    RE: pfft @ 178

    OK, you’re doing better today.

    Romney is moving up, and may well win the election. Get comfortable with that idea. You are making a great case for Obama, but it is a distant, and cold case. It’s too much behind the scenes manipulation, with some bad fails thrown in.

    It makes no difference really. I personally would love to see the Republican canidate win this election, because no matter what, things are going to get worse before they get better.

    there is no way obama is losing to romney.

  183. 183
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 182

    Yeah, there is a way, it’s called the Electoral College.

    My feeling is that Rico Suave Romney may well capture the imagination of the public who want all of that promised freedom.

  184. 184

    By pfft @ 78:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 74:
    RE: Blurtman @ 173 – I forget where I heard this joke–some TV show. It pertains to not bringing up the 47% or Bain.

    During the debate, President Obama decided to take the high road, not realizing that road ends at building houses with Jimmy Carter.

    so you’re repeating a joke that dumps on Habitat for Humanity? Really?

    Habitat has built over 500,000 houses. bad joke.

    You’re such an Obama fanboy you don’t even realize that the joke is dumping on President Obama. It’s in no way dumping on Habitat for Humanity. It’s dumping on one-term presidents.

  185. 185

    By David Losh @ 183:

    RE: pfft @ 182

    Yeah, there is a way, it’s called the Electoral College.

    My feeling is that Rico Suave Romney may well capture the imagination of the public who want all of that promised freedom.

    More likely the 47% isn’t really 47%, based on the change in the polls. It’s actually good to know that there are not that many partisan Democrats in this country. It would be nice if neither party and no candidate could count on the votes of more than 30% of the voters. Even 40% is way too high of a percentage of mindless voters.

  186. 186
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 177 – Rut-roh. Mish say your sources are FOS.

    “Conclusion: While the Participation Rate trend is certainly down, and down was expected, most of the decline in participation rate since the start of the recession is due to economic weakness, not demographics.”

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/10/about-that-expected-drop-in.html

  187. 187
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 186:

    RE: pfft @ 177 – Rut-roh. Mish say your sources are FOS.

    “Conclusion: While the Participation Rate trend is certainly down, and down was expected, most of the decline in participation rate since the start of the recession is due to economic weakness, not demographics.”

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/10/about-that-expected-drop-in.html

    why can’t you show that in the other measures of the labor force? why is that so hard? does mish know more than Krugman? hells no!

    mish doesn’t go far around here…

  188. 188
  189. 189
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 83:

    RE: pfft @ 182

    Yeah, there is a way, it’s called the Electoral College.

    My feeling is that Rico Suave Romney may well capture the imagination of the public who want all of that promised freedom.

    obama is still the favorite in betfair and intrade odds. still a pretty good chance according to nate silver.

  190. 190
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 84:

    By pfft @ 78:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 74:
    RE: Blurtman @ 173 – I forget where I heard this joke–some TV show. It pertains to not bringing up the 47% or Bain.

    During the debate, President Obama decided to take the high road, not realizing that road ends at building houses with Jimmy Carter.

    so you’re repeating a joke that dumps on Habitat for Humanity? Really?

    Habitat has built over 500,000 houses. bad joke.

    You’re such an Obama fanboy you don’t even realize that the joke is dumping on President Obama. It’s in no way dumping on Habitat for Humanity. It’s dumping on one-term presidents.

    yes it is dumping on Habitat. building houses refers to Habitat.

    why am I even responding to you? I gave up days ago.

  191. 191
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 189

    There is no doubt that Obama is a favorite in a lot of circles, but Romney is promising to reinflate the bubble.

  192. 192

    By pfft @ 88:

    Mitt Romney Debates Himself, Loses
    http://gawker.com/5949818/mitt-romney-debates-himself-loses

    Do you actually fall for BS like that and believe it? Very gullible if you do.

    Take the teacher thing–the second example in the video. Where does Romney ever suggest he supports having the federal government pay for more teachers? How does he lose debating himself in that example?

    He supports the idea of more teachers, but not at the expense of having the government pay the states for them so that the states can then use the money they would otherwise spend on teachers on other things. We’re four years into the crisis now. It’s well past time that the states figure out how to pay for their basic services, rather than have the federal government borrow money to pay for such things.

  193. 193

    By pfft @ 90:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 84:
    By pfft @ 78:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 74:
    RE: Blurtman @ 173 – I forget where I heard this joke–some TV show. It pertains to not bringing up the 47% or Bain.

    During the debate, President Obama decided to take the high road, not realizing that road ends at building houses with Jimmy Carter.

    so you’re repeating a joke that dumps on Habitat for Humanity? Really?

    Habitat has built over 500,000 houses. bad joke.

    You’re such an Obama fanboy you don’t even realize that the joke is dumping on President Obama. It’s in no way dumping on Habitat for Humanity. It’s dumping on one-term presidents.

    yes it is dumping on Habitat. building houses refers to Habitat.

    why am I even responding to you? I gave up days ago.

    No, it’s not a dump on Habitat. Why are you lying trying to claim that it is?

    But in any case, it was a joke said by someone on TV, perhaps Conan or Leno, etc. And it was a funny joke. You’re just such a huge Obama fanboy that you take offense.

  194. 194

    By David Losh @ 91:

    RE: pfft @ 189

    There is no doubt that Obama is a favorite in a lot of circles, but Romney is promising to reinflate the bubble.

    President Obama is a favorite in a lot of circles, but those circles are not very well motivated. They feel deceived or at least let down by President Obama. He didn’t change things or improve things the way they expected. Perhaps they expected too much, but they do have good reason to be disappointed.

    President Obama is clearly not a very good leader. All he does is create partisan gridlock and for political gain he repeats proposals which were DOA in Congress the last time he proposed them.

    I still don’t understand why Hillary didn’t challenge him in the primaries. He would have been vulnerable, and she’d probably be walking away with the election at this point.

  195. 195
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 194 – Lot’s of Romney signs in the hood. No Obummers. Of course, it is Sammamish. As I walk my dog in the late evening, I am thinking of writing the name William K. Black over Romney’s.

  196. 196
    Blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 91 – Bubble! Bubble! Bubble! The tribe grows restless.

  197. 197

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 165:

    RE: pfft @ 63 – Are you seriously trying to claim that the Democrats care about the deficit? They’ve both done what can only be described as a very poor job.

    We know President Obama has done a poor job in that area. We don’t know what Romney will do.

    If Romney follows the lead of his Republican predecessors in the White House, he too will do poorly at it.

  198. 198

    By Blurtman @ 95:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 194 – Lot’s of Romney signs in the hood. No Obummers. Of course, it is Sammamish. As I walk my dog in the late evening, I am thinking of writing the name William K. Black over Romney’s.

    What’s so bad about Rocky Anderson? His name will actually be on the ballot.

  199. 199

    By pfft @ 82:

    By David Losh @ 179:
    RE: pfft @ 178

    OK, you’re doing better today.

    Romney is moving up, and may well win the election. Get comfortable with that idea. You are making a great case for Obama, but it is a distant, and cold case. It’s too much behind the scenes manipulation, with some bad fails thrown in.

    It makes no difference really. I personally would love to see the Republican canidate win this election, because no matter what, things are going to get worse before they get better.

    there is no way obama is losing to romney.

    Generally speaking, both candidates are pretty inept. As much as one or the other gets a lead in the polls, either one of them is perfectly capable of either saying something stupid or callous or insensitive( Romney), or looking weak and unresponsive( Obama).
    I still think Obama is going to win, but if that’s going to happen he’d better get his sheeyut together.

  200. 200
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 198 – Ira, I am liking what I am reading about Rocky. Thanks.

  201. 201

    By pfft @ 100:

    By Blurtman @ 94:
    RE: pfft @ 92 – Yes, with his Romney spin machine mask on, it does. But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs

    except for the 5.2 million added in the last 30 months…

    More than that was needed to put people back to work. That’s pretty obvious to anyone but a partisan Democratic President Obama fanboy.

    Why do you think there are so many people unemployed? Because they don’t want to work. Perhaps rather than “no jobs” Blurtman should have said “not enough jobs.” What he meant would be obvious to most people.

  202. 202

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 97:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 165:
    RE: pfft @ 63 – Are you seriously trying to claim that the Democrats care about the deficit? They’ve both done what can only be described as a very poor job.

    We know President Obama has done a poor job in that area. We don’t know what Romney will do.

    If Romney follows the lead of his Republican predecessors in the White House, he too will do poorly at it.

    It’s the known versus the unknown. We know President Obama can’t do reduce the deficit, and that his solution to almost everything is more government spending. That makes it very unlikely he will do anything.

    But you’re right about past presidents of both parties. Politicians like to spend money!

  203. 203

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 99:

    Generally speaking, both candidates are pretty inept..

    That’s an understatement!

    Our primary system doesn’t give us very good candidates. Bush/Gore is probably the best example of that. Back then I described the situation as each party picking the only candidate who could lose to the other. Little did I know how true that was! One of the closest, if not the closest, race in history.

  204. 204
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 201:

    By pfft @ 100:
    By Blurtman @ 94:
    RE: pfft @ 92 – Yes, with his Romney spin machine mask on, it does. But folks are dropping out of the labor force cause there are no jobs

    except for the 5.2 million added in the last 30 months…

    More than that was needed to put people back to work. That’s pretty obvious to anyone but a partisan Democratic President Obama fanboy.

    I don’t know what you’re talking about. are you talking about not enough jobs to keep up with population growth? I know we need better job growth than 150,000 jobs which is what we’ve averaged. we need twice that. why do you think I wanted QE? why am I still debating you?

    “That’s pretty obvious to anyone but a partisan Democratic President Obama fanboy.”

    sorry you’ve got the wrong guy. if you think I’m a fanboy you haven’t been paying attention to anything I’ve written over the years.

  205. 205
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 2:

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 97:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 165:
    RE: pfft @ 63 – Are you seriously trying to claim that the Democrats care about the deficit? They’ve both done what can only be described as a very poor job.

    We know President Obama has done a poor job in that area. We don’t know what Romney will do.

    If Romney follows the lead of his Republican predecessors in the White House, he too will do poorly at it.

    It’s the known versus the unknown. We know President Obama can’t do reduce the deficit, and that his solution to almost everything is more government spending. That makes it very unlikely he will do anything.

    But you’re right about past presidents of both parties. Politicians like to spend money!

    the President has a $4 trillion dollar plan to reduce the deficit. the Progressive Caucus had and even bigger budget cut.

    Romney will extend the bush tax cuts, which will add trillions to a deficit and add a tax cut on top of that that will add another $5 trillion to the deficit. if that really is his plan. we don’t really know what Rmoney’s plan is. it changes.

  206. 206

    By pfft @ 205:

    the President has a $4 trillion dollar plan to reduce the deficit. the Progressive Caucus had and even bigger budget cut.

    Almost half of which the Tea Party types squeezed out of him. Hardly something he should take credit for.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/04/barack-obama/obama-says-he-will-cut-deficits-4-trillion/

    Romney will extend the bush tax cuts, which will add trillions to a deficit and add a tax cut on top of that that will add another $5 trillion to the deficit. if that really is his plan. we don’t really know what Rmoney’s plan is. it changes.

    The $5 trillion has been debunked repeatedly. You yourself have complained that the deductions and loopholes Romney says will offset the cuts have not been specified. It’s a good thing I know your memory is really bad, otherwise I’d call you a liar for repeating that claim.

  207. 207
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 206:

    By pfft @ 205:
    the President has a $4 trillion dollar plan to reduce the deficit. the Progressive Caucus had and even bigger budget cut.

    Almost half of which the Tea Party types squeezed out of him. Hardly something he should take credit for.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/04/barack-obama/obama-says-he-will-cut-deficits-4-trillion/

    Romney will extend the bush tax cuts, which will add trillions to a deficit and add a tax cut on top of that that will add another $5 trillion to the deficit. if that really is his plan. we don’t really know what Rmoney’s plan is. it changes.

    The $5 trillion has been debunked repeatedly. You yourself have complained that the deductions and loopholes Romney says will offset the cuts have not been specified. It’s a good thing I know your memory is really bad, otherwise I’d call you a liar for repeating that claim.

    he and paul ryan can’t name a single loophole they will close. there aren’t enough loopholes to close to make it revenue neutral.

  208. 208

    By pfft @ 207:

    there aren’t enough loopholes to close to make it revenue neutral.

    That probably would be a valid criticism, but for the fact that he has said to the extent he cannot get enough deductions/loopholes cut, the rate reductions would be trimmed to keep it revenue neutral. And contrary to the claim of some Democrats, that wasn’t just announced at the debate.

    In any case, even if that were 100% true, Romney would not be the first politician to exaggerate his plans. ;-)

  209. 209
    Scotsman says:

    pffffft- what are you going to do with your month off?

  210. 210
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 209:

    pffffft- what are you going to do with your month off?

    you mean from you not posting on SB? YES!

    Obama isn’t going to lose. he’s still the favorite.

    http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election/winner

    http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2012presidentindividual

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

  211. 211
  212. 212
    Scotsman says:

    “Suffolk pollster: We’re not polling Florida, Virginia, or North Carolina anymore, because Romney’s going to win them”

    Trends and momentum tell the tale.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/09/suffolk-pollster-were-not-polling-florida-virginia-or-north-carolina-anymore-because-romneys-going-to-win-them/

  213. 213
    pfft says:

    Tupac knew it 20 years ago.

    “They got money for wars but can’t feed the poor.” He didn’t know they got money for bankers too but not for the poor.

    2Pac – Keep Ya Head Up
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfXwmDGJAB8

    things will get brighter…

  214. 214
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 12:

    “Suffolk pollster: Weâ��re not polling Florida, Virginia, or North Carolina anymore, because Romneyâ��s going to win them”

    Trends and momentum tell the tale.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/09/suffolk-pollster-were-not-polling-florida-virginia-or-north-carolina-anymore-because-romneys-going-to-win-them/

    you mean obama up 5 in the latest Ohio poll? The only state that really matters for Romney is Ohio. He’s losing the state still. There are still 3 more debates.

    Why did you mislead us about that filmmaker?

  215. 215
  216. 216
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 214

    “The only state that really matters for Romney is Ohio. He’s losing the state still”

    Or not:

    http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2012/OH12.html

  217. 217
    Scotsman says:

    RE: pfft @ 15

    “why did you mislead us about that filmmaker?”

    OK, I give up. WTF are you talking about?

  218. 218

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 29:

    By pfft @ 25:
    mitt romney wants to go easy on wall street but crack down on seasame street…

    That President Obama is really sharp. It only took him 24 hours to think of a response! .

    On Ira’s topic of the campaigns being poorly run, this is a good example. That would have been a great comeback at the debate, and was okay as a comment in a speech the next day. But they took it way too far, creating a commercial featuring Big Bird.

    Now the Obama campaign has the creators of Sesame Street upset with them, but beyond that they’re raising the issue of the Obama Administration’s lack of Wall Street prosecutions! I actually understand and accept their position on that, but most people don’t, and many of those people are in President Obama’s base. Yet another reason why they’re having a hard time getting their base excited about the election. I can hardly wait for the Obama campaign to run an ad featuring the war in Afghanistan! /sarc

  219. 219
    David Losh says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 212

    That is less of a reliable source than you bring normally, but it may well be true.

    It’s amazing that Romney has done this well, but that is because the Obama campaign is disjointed, and confused. The Big Bird thing comes to mind. That was a pathetic diversion, which seems to be the Obama campaign in general, diversions.

    Obama should stick to hammering on how ridiculous Romney is, like his statements about us becoming energy self-sufficient. Romney doesn’t want to raise taxes, along with Ryan, which is another ridiculous stance. Romney is promising to let free enterprise take its course when we just proved by near economic collapse that doesn’t work. Romney is basing his campaign on the great State of Massachusetts which is great in spite of him being a governor, rather than because of it.

    The list against Romney, and Ryan, is long yet Obama has let him get away with fantasy weaving. Obama should stick with repeating his plan for deficit reduction, which is actually a plan that can work, rather than empty promises. The other thing he should outline more clearly are changes to ObamaCare, rather than avoid the issue. Last he should show that his foriegn policy has worked. Iraq can double oil production, and Saudis are saying they have plenty of oil, which they do. For the first time since WWII the Middle East has a shot at a free market, which they understand completely.

    Romney would be a major step backwards yet that message has been lost. Romney has a momentum that needs to be crushed.

  220. 220
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 218 – This latest ad by Obama is sad. First of all, the logic is terrible. Obama is equating a funding cut-off with increasing regulation. Huh?

    Second, such gratuitous mockery may please the base, but it gains him nothing. And cheapens his stature.

    Third, he is vulnerable on his coziness with the banksters and lack of prosecutions. What the ad brings up, untintentionally, is that we have two poliburo vetted candidtaes, both having sworn an oath to not attack the powers-that-be.

  221. 221

    By Blurtman @ 20:

    Second, such gratuitous mockery may please the base, but it gains him nothing. And cheapens his stature.

    His stature was irreparably damaged when he repeatedly stated the 5 Trillion dollar claim during the debate. He let the electorate know he would say anything to get re-elected, regardless of the truth, or that he was ignorant of his competition. Either way, not a good day for the Presidency.

  222. 222
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 221 – I am voting for Putin.

  223. 223

    RE: Blurtman @ 222 – I wonder how he would get along with the House and Senate?

  224. 224
  225. 225

    RE: Scotsman @ 224 – Susan Rice on the Sunday morning shows after the attack was pretty incredible, trying to sell what even then was a pretty far fetched story given the information available at the time.

  226. 226
    David Losh says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 224

    I was watching some Hannity last night while he was trying to fire up the masses about this cover up.

    This is the most ridiculous set of claims the Republican base could have made, it’s completely unAmerican.

    This fantasy weaving is attempting to isolate Libya when the protests were across North Africa. You don’t announce a terrorist attack until you can find the terrorists. You don’t give intelligence information to the enemy through the media. The terrorists were found, and attacked by the people in Libya. The militias have been targeted as culprits.

    Security measures were put in place, and there was an escape route. The Ambassador could have done a hundred things to secure himself, and his staff, but chose to stay where he was.

    This is another example of why we can not allow the Republican base to run amock in Middle East politics. Billions of dollars have already been spent without direction, thousands of our people have been killed.

    Obama has been brilliant, and these cheap fantasies about the way things could have been are bluster, at best, and treason, in my opinion.

  227. 227
    David Losh says:

    Realogy is trading as an IPO! Who could have seen that coming? They are going to pay debt with the $1 Billion they raised.

    How many Real Estate companies are going for gold? How many investors will get hosed in the process?

  228. 228

    RE: David Losh @ 226 – The Administration was claiming it was a spontaneous attack when it was obvious almost from the beginning that it was an organized terrorist attack. Susan Rice compromised her integrity that Sunday morning when she was claiming otherwise.

    As to the Ambassador, nice way to blame the victim. They asked for more security and it was turned down!

    Foreign policy is supposed to be the Obamessiah’s strength, but he was unwilling to prepare for an attack in what was obviously an extremely unstable country, and apparently didn’t even provide additional measures on the anniversary of 9/11.

  229. 229
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 228

    Baloney, and complete fabrication when all indications are to the contrary.

    As to the attack, you don’t give information to the enemy through the media. Saying one thing, while finding the terrorist, and having the terrorists attacked by Libyians was appropriate.

  230. 230

    RE: David Losh @ 229 – Whatever, David. I know in your mind President Obama is great and can do no wrong. But it was obvious just from news reports after that it was a sophisticated attack, not just a reaction to the movie, and having Susan Rice appear on TV and lie to the public is appalling.

    I really doubt the terrorists in Libya watch Meet the Press, etc., but if that’s the excuse you want to create for the Administration lying to the American people in a very unconvincing way, fine.

    The Ambassador could have done a hundred things to secure himself, and his staff, but chose to stay where he was.

    You want to blame the murdered guy, so I guess in your mind anything goes when it comes to supporting President Obama.

  231. 231

    By David Losh @ 27:

    Realogy is trading as an IPO! Who could have seen that coming? They are going to pay debt with the $1 Billion they raised.

    How many Real Estate companies are going for gold? How many investors will get hosed in the process?

    Foolish. Their greatest asset is inertia. Nothing but inertia keeps agents from leaving, and without agents they have no value.

  232. 232
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 224:

    Obama lies, people die. Will the cover-up bring down Hillary and others?

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/10/10/krauthammer_on_libya_cover_up_hillary_clinton_told_video_story_while_body_of_ambassador_was_next_to_her.html

    cover-up? really? cover up of a something that the Ambassador said was a terrorist attack? are you made because they didn’t rush to judgement and make a fool of themselves like Mitt Romney did? Let’s not forget how scandalous what mitt romney said was.

    any idiot at home can make inferences. People in positions of power can’t do the same. they need evidence because they have to make important decisions.

  233. 233
    pfft says:

    Your wall street scandal of the week.

    E-Mails Cited to Back Lawsuit’s Claim That Equity Firms Colluded on Big Deals
    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/10/10/e-mails-back-lawsuits-claim-that-equity-firms-colluded-on-big-deals/

  234. 234
    pfft says:

    Romney is either lying again or he is too stupid to be president.

    Romney: ‘We Don’t Have People Who Die Because They Don’t Have Insurance’
    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/11/990281/romney-uninsured-hospital/

  235. 235
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 230

    He had a safe house he could have been in. There is nothing to say he needed to be in the embassy. He had resources he chose not to use at that time.

    There is no doubt that this was a planned attack. The militia was immediately targeted by forces inside Libya. Do you really think we should have announced our intentions?

    Foriegn policy should never be reduced to Meet the Press sound bites. It leads to more people being killed, and murderers escaping.

    This is rank unAmerican politics performed by the Republican Party. I guess if it was up to them we would shock and awe all of North Africa before we sent in more soldiers to be murdered.

  236. 236

    By David Losh @ 235:

    Foriegn policy should never be reduced to Meet the Press sound bites. It leads to more people being killed, and murderers escaping.

    Fine, then don’t go on three or four networks and lie to the American people!

    Why are you supporting their lying? If they wanted to keep something secret, they could have just not said anything. They didn’t have to go on the Sunday morning shows.

  237. 237

    By David Losh @ 35:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 230 – He had a safe house he could have been in. There is nothing to say he needed to be in the embassy. He had resources he chose not to use at that time..

    More blaming the victim. It had nothing at all to do with those who failed to protect him. He should have just taken the day off.

  238. 238
    Blurtman says:

    Romney in a Landslide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  239. 239
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 34 – You are just jealous.

  240. 240
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 236:

    By David Losh @ 235:
    Foriegn policy should never be reduced to Meet the Press sound bites. It leads to more people being killed, and murderers escaping.

    Fine, then don’t go on three or four networks and lie to the American people!

    Why are you supporting their lying? If they wanted to keep something secret, they could have just not said anything. They didn’t have to go on the Sunday morning shows.

    how do you know they are lying. I looked at the transcript of Rice’s interview. there is nothing there worth getting worked up about.

  241. 241
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 39:

    RE: pfft @ 34 – You are just jealous.

    of?

  242. 242
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 38:

    Romney in a Landslide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    romney still isn’t the favorite.

  243. 243
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 237RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 236

    They did need to make a statement. The statement was to calm the fears. It was a good move with news that followed.

    As to the victim, he was the Ambassador, he was in the embassy. How many troops do you personally think we should have sent? 100 more, a 1,000, a surge force?

  244. 244
    Scotsman says:

    Unlike Bill Clinton, I guess Joe Biden doesn’t “feel your pain:”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PCtemaHgjyA

  245. 245

    By pfft @ 40:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 236:
    By David Losh @ 235:
    Foriegn policy should never be reduced to Meet the Press sound bites. It leads to more people being killed, and murderers escaping.

    Fine, then don’t go on three or four networks and lie to the American people!

    Why are you supporting their lying? If they wanted to keep something secret, they could have just not said anything. They didn’t have to go on the Sunday morning shows.

    how do you know they are lying. I looked at the transcript of Rice’s interview. there is nothing there worth getting worked up about.

    The facts reported in the news as of that time made her claims very suspicious, if not downright unbelievable. Presumably someone actually in the administration has even better sources of information.

    But hey, partisan Democrats think lying only requires being wrong, so I don’t understand why you’re even asking the question.

  246. 246

    By David Losh @ 43:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 237RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 236

    They did need to make a statement. The statement was to calm the fears. It was a good move with news that followed.

    As to the victim, he was the Ambassador, he was in the embassy. How many troops do you personally think we should have sent? 100 more, a 1,000, a surge force?

    David, I’ve been playing along with this fantasy you’ve developed in your mind, where we were keeping things secret/lying to get the bad guys. You have no evidence of that. Yes some militias were attacked, but there’s no evidence the US was behind that or knew of that in advance. Given that they didn’t know of the attack on the consulate, and that it took the FBI weeks to get boots on the ground there, it’s doubtful that they did know.

    But let’s assume your fantasy vision is correct. if so then Biden began the debate last night with lies about how we still need to track down the bad guys. I don’t think Biden was lying, because I think the scenario you’ve set up is completely ficticious.

  247. 247

    They’re calling the debate last night a tie, and I would agree. They both proved they are not presidential material, just like the VP debate four years ago.

    Biden repeatedly acted like a buffoon. Did someone not tell him that the camera would always be on him?

    And Ryan might be smart, but his place is clearly in the House.

    Neither of them made very compelling arguments.

  248. 248
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 247 – How to improve the VP debate:

    1.) Bring out John McCain for a rousing rendition of Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran sung to the old Beach Boys Barbara Ann.

    2.) Ryan to strike Hulk Hogan poses as he countered Biden’s talking points.

    3.), Biden to deliver his talking points in rap, along with convincing gang signs.

  249. 249
  250. 250
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 249:

    “Slip-slid’n Away”

    Obama’s lock on the election is fading.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_race_changes.html

    so you want to go double or nothing? Two months away from SB if Romney loses?

    obama is still the favorite to win the electoral college and there are still 2 more debates.

  251. 251
  252. 252

    RE: pfft @ 51 – Assuming that’s from the same source as the one you posted after the Romney debate, it’s not even worth the effort to click on the link. I’ll just assume it’s BS as that one was.

  253. 253

    I think this is the biggest concern for Romney.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/12/us-usa-economy-sentiment-idUSBRE89B0U320121012

    Consumer sentiment is up. Things have been bad for so long, people no longer think it’s that bad.

  254. 254

    I don’t understand. I know pfft reads this guy, but for some reason he didn’t post this story! /sarc

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/oct-11-obamas-swing-state-firewall-has-brittle-foundation/

  255. 255

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 231:

    By David Losh @ 27:
    Realogy is trading as an IPO! Who could have seen that coming? They are going to pay debt with the $1 Billion they raised.

    How many Real Estate companies are going for gold? How many investors will get hosed in the process?

    Foolish. Their greatest asset is inertia. Nothing but inertia keeps agents from leaving, and without agents they have no value.

    At first I was a bit shocked that they could raise $1B in an IPO. But I just read that Apple lost $60B of value when investors figured out that aluminum was not a very hard metal.

  256. 256
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 246

    It’s simple. Libya is a nation in the making being controlled by militias. Even if the ambassador “begged” for additional security it would have been prudent for him to be some place other than the embassy during a protest in the making, or on September 11th. This was a seasoned diplomat who knew the risks.

    For the Republicans to make this an issue is another unAmerican attempt to undermine the President, and use this act of war for political gain.

    You have this idea that some how our troops are equipped to deal with militants who have been at war for 2000 years. The Koran has 34, or 37 references to killing and our New Testament has one. You can not fight these people. We will have to negotiate.

  257. 257
    Scotsman says:

    Pffffffffft says: Two months away from SB if Romney loses?

    You’re on. Loser is gone through the end of the year.

  258. 258
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 257:

    Pffffffffft says: Two months away from SB if Romney loses?

    You’re on. Loser is gone through the end of the year.

    obama is not going to lose.

  259. 259

    By David Losh @ 256:

    You have this idea that some how our troops are equipped to deal with militants who have been at war for 2000 years. The Koran has 34, or 37 references to killing and our New Testament has one. You can not fight these people. We will have to negotiate.

    Yep, experience wins over technology all the time.

    Maybe you should help President Obama by giving him a list of people, places and times the United States military cannot defend.

    Give it up. Not even Biden supported your version of the events. Your supporting a fantasy version of the facts which is different from even the administration’s fantasy version of the facts.

  260. 260

    Apparently I’m not the only one who thought Biden was acting like a buffoon. Google Biden and Buffoon.

    Very presidential. /sarc

    Seriously, even during the two years I liked President Obama, my worst fear was that idiot being a heartbeat away from the presidency. Candidate Obama apparently picked him for his foreign policy experience, which is rather ironic given the fact that Biden advised against going in and getting OBL. President Obama must be very loyal to keep him around for a second term. Either that or Hillary said no.

  261. 261
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 259

    What version? I followed the news reports, the same as you could have. I don’t need the White House to tell me what happened, it was clear, and made abundantly clear in the days following the attack.

    The fantasy is that the White House should divulged privledged information so you can make a cohesive blog comment.

    The Republicans know they are playing politics at the expense of these lives. The White House isn’t, the Republicans are.

    So who is the worse criminal here? The White House, or the Republicans?

    There is no winning a war in Iraq, Iran, Afganistan, or Libya. We don’t have the ability or any high moral ground. We can however negotiate for oil. Get used to that idea.

  262. 262

    By David Losh @ 61:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 259 – What version? I followed the news reports, the same as you could have. I don’t need the White House to tell me what happened, it was clear, and made abundantly clear in the days following the attack.

    The version I’m talking about is your fantasy claim that the White House was lying to the American people so that they could hide their intentions to somehow control reprisal attacks in Libya against the people who conducted the attacks. That was your claim above. At the beginning of the debate, Biden said we were still looking for the attackers and would hunt them down.

    And yes it was abundantly clear what happened in the days after the attack, but in the days after the attack the administration was still trying to claim it was some sort of spontaneous attack which was a reaction to a movie on Youtube. That position was very suspect even as the claims were being made, and since then the administration has finally admitted it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

  263. 263

    From Foreclosure thread: By David Losh @ 6:

    RE: Haybaler @ 5

    OK, but I also think that the election is going to make a difference to banking policy.

    I’m going to continue this thought on the politics, and economy thread, but I think I’m hearing Romney, and Ryan saying they will no longer prop up the banking system.

    President Obama has been anti-business, but pro-bank. Sort of an odd strategy four years into his term. The banks were a severe problem when he started, so his pro-bank policies made sense early on, but healthy banks do not by themselves create a healthy economy. You need businesses willing to take risk and expand. President Obama stomps that down, with the possible exception of “green job” companies.

    I wouldn’t expect a President Romney to totally abandon the support of banks, but I think his support of business overall would be a bit more even handed. And he would expect business to take the laboring oar in moving the economy forward, rather than having government spend money to create the illusion of the economy moving forward. That’s the key difference between President Obama and Romney. President Obama thinks the world revolves around government spending and government benefits, while Romney knows that it’s private enterprise which drives the economy forward.

  264. 264
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 262 – I am amazed and astounded at the micro-analysis of the unfortunate Libya incident. Can you direct me to similar Democrat analysis and criticism of Bush’s (and Cheney and Rice’s ) handling of 9-11?

  265. 265

    RE: Blurtman @ 264 – Do you think that once the second plane hit the Bush administration was as some point claiming it wasn’t a terrorist attack? That would be analogous, but it didn’t happen. So, Obama administration denies terrorist attack, Bush administration didn’t. Your point?

    As to preventing 9/11, there was a significant amount of analysis of whether or not the Bush administration had information which they might not have dealt with properly. That clearly occurred, so I don’t understand your question. So, Obama administration questioned, Bush administration questioned. Again, your point?

    But to be clear, what I’m focusing on is: 1) The reports that they asked for more security in Libya, but were turned down for political reasons; and 2) That the administration purposefully mislead the American people after the attack in trying to claim it was merely some spontaneous uprising, as opposed to the coordinated attack which it seeming clearly was based on the style of attack.

    Foreign policy is supposed to be Obama’s strong suit, but he seemingly screwed up in Libya and then tried to cover up the screw up.

  266. 266
  267. 267
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 262

    This is war, we are in a war that we chose. The American people sent troops into Iraq, then Afganistan, and now maybe Libya if Romney had his way. Our solders would be killed, no matter what the surge force might be.

    This is war.

    I don’t see why the White House should share information about war strategy.

    The Republicans are making a mistake here. They are looking for another boots on the ground profit motive for selling more military hardware when none is required.

    It’s shameful to use these deaths for political gain.

    Oh yeah, as far as the terrorist attack, yes they were highly armed militia. The protests however were across Northern Africa. Geez, that sounds like a pretty large network of diversion. Maybe we should be focussed on that, rather than the Mitt Romney election campaign.

  268. 268

    By David Losh @ 267:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 262
    This is war, we are in a war that we chose. The American people sent troops into Iraq, then Afganistan, and now maybe Libya if Romney had his way..

    WTF are you talking about? This wasn’t war. Libya isn’t at war. They had a revolution and are not in the process of “nation building.” This was a terrorist attack. No one is talking about sending troops into Libya, expect maybe Biden during the debate.

    But nice diversion from the administration’s claim it was just a spontaneous uprising.

  269. 269

    By David Losh @ 67:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 262 – I don’t see why the White House should share information about war strategy.

    Like perhaps publicly announcing the date of withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan two years in advance? /sarc

    Oh yeah, as far as the terrorist attack, yes they were highly armed militia. The protests however were across Northern Africa. Geez, that sounds like a pretty large network of diversion. Maybe we should be focussed on that, rather than the Mitt Romney election campaign.

    Which is it? A war or a terrorist attack? If it is either one of those, why did the Obama administration stay on it’s spontaneous uprising story for so long?

  270. 270
    David Losh says:

    It surprises me that in this Presidential election no one has mentioned that the economy is really bad globally. It’s greater than the American economy alone.

    Paul Ryan is an idiot to be pushing Tea Party politics that have no way of working. Introducing auterity hasn’t work so far, anywhere in today’s economy. Stimulus has been the solution most governments have used.

    So Romney is going to use his management experience to buy products from China, and promote Sports Authority sales hype of higher prices for less quality of goods.

    The problem is he can’t sell the United States for a profit to get out of the messes he causes. He could bankrupt the country, default is always an option for an LLC.

    What I am more interested in though is that this austerity will cut the life line banks have. No more stimulus means banks will fail. Profits will be converted to cash, and that cash will go some place else.

  271. 271
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 69

    They should stay on the spontaneous uprising talk.

    It’s a war.

    One attack out of hundreds is being used for political gain by the Romney camp. It’s shameful, it’s unPresidential, as well as unAmerican.

    The withdrawl from Afganistan is a Bush plan, as you have pointed out a thousand times. Bush screwed up both Iraq, and Afganistan, people died, and yet, we are focussing on another set of deaths for the Romney election campaign.

    It’s just shameful.

  272. 272

    By David Losh @ 270:

    It surprises me that in this Presidential election no one has mentioned that the economy is really bad globally. It’s greater than the American economy alone.

    That would be something for the Obama campaign to raise, and yes it would be a good point. The Romney campaign isn’t the only campaign in this election which is poorly run.

    Paul Ryan is an idiot to be pushing Tea Party politics that have no way of working. Introducing auterity hasn’t work so far, anywhere in today’s economy. Stimulus has been the solution most governments have used.

    Apples and oranges. The countries under strict austerity are ones in serious financial trouble. They owe so much more that they can no longer borrow. Other countries have to step in and bail them out, and part of the conditions for that is that they impose austerity.

    What the Tea Party is trying to do is keep the United States from owing so much money that they will be in the same situation.

    I agreed with the stimulus during the first year or two of the Obama presidency. But at some point it has to come to an end, and it can only come to an end if private enterprise takes over. That’s what President Obama fails to understand. He thinks everything is created through government action.

    So Romney is going to use his management experience to buy products from China, and promote Sports Authority sales hype of higher prices for less quality of goods.

    I have no idea what you’re saying there. What he’s going to do is use his understanding of business to create conditions where business expands on its own. One thing he can do right out of the gate is quit threatening tax increases. Just the threat of tax increases puts a damper on economic expansion. Romney understands that, President Obama has failed to understand that now for three years.

    What I am more interested in though is that this austerity will cut the life line banks have. No more stimulus means banks will fail. Profits will be converted to cash, and that cash will go some place else.

    Again, apples and oranges. Austerity won’t cause the banks to fail. Austerity will limit economic expansion, but you can’t artificially try to create economic expansion through spending for year after year after year. And no one is really calling for austerity. Austerity is what we would get if Congress doesn’t deal with the “fiscal cliff.”

  273. 273

    By David Losh @ 71:

    One attack out of hundreds is being used for political gain by the Romney camp. It’s shameful, it’s unPresidential, as well as unAmerican.

    It’s the only successful terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11, and it happened on President Obama’s watch. It was as successful as it was because his administration turned down requests for additional security. Once it happened the Obama administration denied what happened.

    Are we just supposed to stick our heads in the sand when we’re deciding who should lead us the next four years? I was calling President Obama a failure before this happened. This is just another example of his being a failure. This is another reason people should not vote for President Obama. But you think that should be kept quiet?

    The withdrawl from Afganistan is a Bush plan, as you have pointed out a thousand times.

    I have no idea what you’re talking about. The withdrawal plans are something developed by the Obama Administration and announced by the Obama Administration.

    Are you confusing the surge? Bush applied the surge in Iraq. Senator Obama claimed it would not work. It worked. President Obama applied the surge in Afghanistan. There are mixed reports on whether it worked. It’s actually hard to tell whether it worked because he announced the withdrawal deadline.

  274. 274
    Blurtman says:

    Lets compare the small minds to the larger minds.

    1.) President Bush freezing after learning about the 9-11 attacks.
    Democrat attacks – zero.

    2.) The Bush crime family’s continual linkage of Saddam Hussein to 9-11.
    Democrat attacks – zero.

    3.) The Bush crime family’s continual labeling of Iraqi occupation resisters as terrorists.
    Democrat attacks – zero.

    4.) The Bush crime family’s trivializing of warnings about an imminent Al Qaeda attack including via airplanes.
    Democrat attacks – zero

    And now that Obama is president:

    1.) The mistaken description of the US embassy attack in Libya as an angry reaction to the blasphemous Youtube video.
    Republican attacks – Massive and massively hypocritical.

    When you are motivated by hatred, and used to having your lizard brain overrule your higher centers of reasoning, this is what you get.

    These are sad, unhappy people. And yes, very dangerous if in positions of power.

  275. 275

    By Blurtman @ 274:

    Lets compare the small minds to the larger minds.

    1.) President Bush freezing after learning about the 9-11 attacks.
    Democrat attacks – zero.

    What are you now? Michael Moore?

    Seriously, what did you expect him to do? At that point the Secret Service was trying to assess the situation. They most likely wanted him to stay put, and he happened to be sitting in front of a school class. Not much he could do there. And not much he could do without information either.

    Otherwise really great point. /sarc

  276. 276

    How about this score?

    Real estate agent in Seattle recognizes on September 12, 2012 based on news reports that the attack was a terrorist attack.

    http://seattlebubble.com/blog/2012/07/01/politics-economics-open-thread/comment-page-10/#comment-177496

    Obama administration on September 16, with access to official intelligence, still doesn’t recognize that it was a terrorist attack, or is outright lying to the American people.

  277. 277
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 262:

    By David Losh @ 61:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 259the administration has finally admitted it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

    that is really stupid. they didn’t finally admit anything. there was an on-going investigation. you’re mad because they had an investigation instead of making a rush to judgement? you’re mad because they wanted facts? u mad bro?

  278. 278
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 64:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 262 – I am amazed and astounded at the micro-analysis of the unfortunate Libya incident. Can you direct me to similar Democrat analysis and criticism of Bush’s (and Cheney and Rice’s ) handling of 9-11?

    think about how worked up the Republicans got over Somalia under Clinton and how not worked up those same people got about Iraq…

  279. 279

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 276:

    How about this score?

    Real estate agent in Seattle recognizes on September 12, 2012 based on news reports that the attack was a terrorist attack.

    http://seattlebubble.com/blog/2012/07/01/politics-economics-open-thread/comment-page-10/#comment-177496

    Obama administration on September 16, with access to official intelligence, still doesn’t recognize that it was a terrorist attack, or is outright lying to the American people.

    Of course a real estate agent in Seattle knew what was going on on September 12th. Real estate agents always have great insight. If you don’t believe that, just ask one .

  280. 280
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 276

    I really don’t get your point. The American people are lied to every day. We do, however, have access to a free press.

    So, how does the White House telling us anything impact the fact we were attacked by an act of war.

    Oh yeah, as long as you are off an a conspiracy theory tangent, how about the New World Order speech on 9/11/1991, by George Bush Senior. Surely the administration of George the second could connect those dots. It’s interesting also that little George used this excuse to go into Iraq. It’s also interesting that Osama Bin Laden targeted the World Trade Center, and we now have a global economic collapse.

    Coincidence, or have you entered the Twilight Zone.

  281. 281
    David Losh says:

    You, know what? Why has the gubnent not told us the truth about Timothy McVeigh, or Ruby Ridge? How bout them there Branch Dividians? Huh? How bout them?

    The gubnet all the time lies to us in order to keep us suppressed under them boot jack thugs they call enforcement. Why don’t we get no truth bout that?

  282. 282
    David Losh says:

    Alright, I’m calmer now, I was just trying to get in as many comments as Kary had.

  283. 283
  284. 284

    By pfft @ 77:By Kary L. Krismer @ 262:

    By David Losh @ 61:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 259the administration has finally admitted it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

    that is really stupid. they didn’t finally admit anything. there was an on-going investigation. you’re mad because they had an investigation instead of making a rush to judgement? you’re mad because they wanted facts? u mad bro?

    By the 16th when they were parading Rice around all the Sunday shows it was obvious. But even accepting your position, they should not have been sticking to their story at that time. If they had said they need to investigate further, that would have been one thing. Instead they went with a fabricated story as being the facts.

    This whole Libya thing is like Martha Stewart’s security conviction. The incident itself wasn’t as bad as what happened after.

    Having the terrorist attack occur wasn’t something that would have been a huge political setback. To stop every terrorist attack is basically impossible. But for incompetent terrorists, we would have suffered a few terrorist attacks since 9/11. The underwear bomber comes to mind.

    But like Martha Stewart, rather than fess up, the administration tried to cover up. And they did it not once, but twice. The first being sticking to the Youtube movie cliaim. The second being Biden at the debate denying the request for additional security. As to the second, perhaps that request was late, perhaps it would have been insufficient, or perhaps it was for something else. Biden could have said a lot of things, but to deny a request was made . . .

  285. 285

    By David Losh @ 80:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 276

    I really don’t get your point. The American people are lied to every day. We do, however, have access to a free press.

    We have access to a free press. Maybe we should get TV for the White House so they can watch the BBC. They had a better analysis of the attack by the 11th or 12th than the administration had on the 16th.

  286. 286

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 284 – Going back over the transcripts, she did say that they did need further investigation. So my argument there was wrong.

  287. 287
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 286:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 284 – Going back over the transcripts, she did say that they did need further investigation. So my argument there was wrong.

    thank you.

    if people want to read what rice said here you go:

    But we don’t see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack. Obviously, we will wait for the results of the investigation and we don’t want to jump to conclusions before then. But I do think it’s important for the American people to know our best current assessment.

    http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/11/fox-news-reimagines-amb-susan-rices-remarks-on/190539

  288. 288
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 284 – We did suffer a few terrorist attacks since 9/11. Anthrax. But Cheney says we did not suffer any terrorist attacks since 9/11, so maybe he knows something, but ain’t telling.

  289. 289
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 84 – This pathetic climber, Susan Rice?

    “At an interagency teleconference in late April, Susan Rice, a rising star on the NSC who worked under Richard Clarke, stunned a few of the officials present when she asked, “If we use the word ‘genocide’ and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November [congressional] election?”

    Lieutenant Colonel Tony Marley remembers the incredulity of his colleagues at the State Department. “We could believe that people would
    wonder that,” he says, “but not that they would actually voice it.”

    http://www.esviolent love.ac.uk/armedcon/story_id/BystandersToGenocideRawanda.pdf

  290. 290

    We now know why Biden denied knowing of the request for additional security.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/12/white-house-clarifies-biden-on-libya-security/

    When he said: “”We weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security again.” the “we” was two people: President Obama and Biden.

    I guess we know also know why there have been no Wall Street prosecutions by the Obama Administration. Apparently no one has allowed President Obama and Biden to review the evidence necessary to bring a prosecution. Or maybe given their busy schedules they simply haven’t had the time. They simply haven’t personally reviewed the evidence, so it was impossible to bring any prosecutions. And you can’t blame the Obama Administration for that, because President Obama and Biden never saw the evidence!

    Some time ago I complained about President Obama blaming others for his own failures. He’s constantly blaming President Bush or Congress. I think I said something to the effect that for President Obama the buck always stops someplace else.” Now Biden is taking that to a whole new level. They’re not even taking responsibility for decisions and actions made by their own administration! Nothing is their fault unless either President Obama or Biden knew about it personally. If not, actions of the Obama administration are someone else’s fault. Using that standard, clearly President Obama and Biden deserve to be re-elected! /sarc

  291. 291
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 290 – You continue to pick at a scab that is quite inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. Nobody gives a crap. Time to move on to a pet peeve that has broader implications.

    Hey, I hear Obama drives an import.

  292. 292

    RE: Blurtman @ 291 – You may consider it inconsequential, but I consider it typical Obama.

    Don’t admit a failure. (Four Americans killed by terrorists on 9/11 anniversary).
    Create a distraction to assist with not admitting a failure (Youtube video).
    Blame someone else for the failure (The State Department didn’t increase security).

    If that’s what you want in a president, then vote for President Obama, because that’s what he’s done the last four years and that’s what he’s likely to do the next four years. But since the election is less than a month away, I think it’s rather relevant to a thread on politics.

  293. 293

    BTW, I agree it should have been inconsequential in the elections. It would have been if the White House had:

    1. Announced a terrorist attack in Libya.
    2. Announced that four Americans were killed in the attack.
    3. Expressed their sympathy for the family of those Americans.
    4. Vowed to conduct an investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice.

    Instead we got a side show, because the fact some people in the Middle East still don’t like the United States isn’t consistent with the political claims that President Obama has changed things. The Obama Administration’s claims that the people in Libya love us is about as true as the Bush Administration’s claim about how we would be received in Iraq.

  294. 294
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 293

    Arabs do love us, but hate our interference.

    Americans always dismiss the fact our country was founded on a Revolution by militias that fought against Imperialist forces.

    You should read a little bit about history, before making weird claims.

  295. 295
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 292 – Turn of Fox, and go out for a hike, You are going toxic.

  296. 296
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Look, the Repubs are desperately looking for an entry point to attack Obama on being weak on defense. The bin Laden assassination, and successful Libyan strategy has messed that up. Recall the the Repubs position was turned into utter nonsense by what did transpire in the overthrow of Qaddafi.

    This is the best they can do. But I hear that Rove is planning a flase flag attack on a McDonald’s franchise in Poughkeepsie.

  297. 297

    By Blurtman @ 95:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 292 – Turn of Fox, and go out for a hike, You are going toxic.

    Actually I hadn’t watched Fox yet, until now. They were second, after Meet the Press, but before This Week on ABC (which only covered the debates, so I fast-forwarded through them). Nor had I watched any Fox News since last Sunday’s broadcast on Channel 13, nor have I watched any Fox News Channel all year, except when setting up my HDHR Prime to make sure that channel worked. But nice try.

    Fox had Woodward on the panel and he noted that the request for additional security was a bit non-sensical, which could provide yet another reason to deny the request.

    Alexrod was interviewed in the first piece, and he repeated that absurd claim that “we” meant President Obama and Biden. I guess at future White House press briefings the press should insist on defining the term “we” when it is used. “We” might be meant to only include the Press Secretary and their cat! No longer can it be assumed that “we” means the administration. Very Clinton-like–“That depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is.

  298. 298

    By Blurtman @ 96:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Look, the Repubs are desperately looking for an entry point to attack Obama on being weak on defense. The bin Laden assassination, and successful Libyan strategy has messed that up. .

    I’m not sure I would describe the Libyan strategy as “successful,” but other than that I would agree. I would even add that Romney jumping in right away was a bad move. The Obama campaign and administration would have been much better off just focusing on that! That would have set them up well for the third debate, and now they will likely be on the defensive.

    If the Obama administration had just done the four things I said in post 293 above, this wouldn’t be a story now. They’re apparently trying to cover up something that doesn’t need to be covered up. Rather incompetent, but as I noted, the Obama Administration blames others for things that go poorly, and bad habits are apparently hard to break.

  299. 299

    By David Losh @ 94:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 293

    Arabs do love us, but hate our interference.

    Americans always dismiss the fact our country was founded on a Revolution by militias that fought against Imperialist forces.

    You should read a little bit about history, before making weird claims.

    Ironic you’d use the term “weird claims.” That entire post is weird.

    But you’re right David. Before your post I didn’t know a thing about the Revolutionary War. /sarc

  300. 300
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 299

    You’ve gone completely off the wall on this.

    Read a little history, read up on the Middle East, and read the news of the past three years.

    We will never win a war in Africa, any more than we could win a war in all of Asia.

    We can however negotiate for oil. Get used to that idea.

  301. 301

    RE: David Losh @ 300 – What are you talking about? Following one weird post with another is hardly helpful.

    What does reading about mid-east history have to do with the fact that there was no spontaneous uprising prior to the organized attack on the consulate, and that the White House apparently completely fabricated that story? Was the spontaneous uprising in 1463?

    My analysis of the situation there is a bit more recently based. Both Iraq and Libya went from being a country run by a strong man to being arguably being democratic. There are a lot of people in both those countries that lost out in that transition. They are now terrorists in their countries and they attack people besides Americans, even their own countrymen. So this is not necessarily based on long term history.

    But even if it were the case, what’s that have to do with the issue of possible insufficient security? Wouldn’t long term distrust and hatred of Americans call for more security, not less?

    But even if it were the case, what’s that have to do with the issue of the Administration apparently fabricating a story about a spontaneous uprising? Seems totally irrelevant.

    But even if that were the case, what’s that have to do with Vice President Biden misleading 60,000,000+ American citizens by using “we” to refer to only President Obama and himself, when such language would presumably mean the Obama Administration in the context used?

    The Obama administration is making a huge mess out of a molehill, and they have no one to blame but themselves.

  302. 302
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 301

    I’d take the time to read what you wrote, but it’s pointless.

  303. 303
    Blurtman says:

    Precisley the argument that I have raised, which was easy to do, as it was based upon my unfortunate experience.

    “If you have a [minority] applicant whose parents… put them in the top one per cent of earners in the country and both have graduate degrees, they deserve a leg up against, let’s say, an Asian or a white applicant whose parents are absolutely average in terms of education and income?”

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/10/affirmative-action-supreme-court.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

  304. 304
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 98:

    By Blurtman @ 96:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 93 – Look, the Repubs are desperately looking for an entry point to attack Obama on being weak on defense. The bin Laden assassination, and successful Libyan strategy has messed that up. .

    I’m not sure I would describe the Libyan strategy as “successful,” but other than that I would agree. I would even add that Romney jumping in right away was a bad move. The Obama campaign and administration would have been much better off just focusing on that! That would have set them up well for the third debate, and now they will likely be on the defensive.

    If the Obama administration had just done the four things I said in post 293 above, this wouldn’t be a story now. They’re apparently trying to cover up something that doesn’t need to be covered up. Rather incompetent, but as I noted, the Obama Administration blames others for things that go poorly, and bad habits are apparently hard to break.

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 93:

    BTW, I agree it should have been inconsequential in the elections. It would have been if the White House had:

    1. Announced a terrorist attack in Libya.
    2. Announced that four Americans were killed in the attack.
    3. Expressed their sympathy for the family of those Americans.
    4. Vowed to conduct an investigation and bring the perpetrators to justice.

    Instead we got a side show, because the fact some people in the Middle East still don’t like the United States isn’t consistent with the political claims that President Obama has changed things. The Obama Administration’s claims that the people in Libya love us is about as true as the Bush Administration’s claim about how we would be received in Iraq.

    God your grasp of current events is embarrassing. Instead of repeating your transcript fiasco why don’t you do some googling?

  305. 305
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 3:

    Precisley the argument that I have raised, which was easy to do, as it was based upon my unfortunate experience.

    �If you have a [minority] applicant whose parents� put them in the top one per cent of earners in the country and both have graduate degrees, they deserve a leg up against, let�s say, an Asian or a white applicant whose parents are absolutely average in terms of education and income?�

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/10/affirmative-action-supreme-court.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

    aren’t you then just discriminating against those who have money? just how many 1% black americans are applying to college? also do you know how many Asian students are at top schools? probably way disproportionate to their numbers in society. plenty of white students too at most of the colleges I’ve familiar with or have visited.

  306. 306
    pfft says:

    Austerity doesn’t work. Thank God Obama didn’t try it here relatively speaking.

    IMF: Austerity is much worse for the economy than we thought
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/10/12/imf-austerity-is-much-worse-for-the-economy-than-we-thought/

  307. 307

    Pfft said ” aren’t you then just discriminating against those who have money?”
    ….Is that so wrong?

  308. 308
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 306

    The IMF meeting was interesting because I think the conclusion is that somewhere along the line there will need to be more debt forgiveness, and just call it good.

    Germany’s economic growth is anemic. The whole Euro Zone has yet to deal with bank failures that are sure come when they mark to market properties in foreclosure that have no buyers.

    Would you really pay $400K for a condo in an economy that is going nowhere? Unemployment at 25%? Who will float it all when the people have no ability to pay?

  309. 309
    pfft says:

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 307:

    Pfft said ” arenâ��t you then just discriminating against those who have money?”
    ….Is that so wrong?

    in the context of the discussion about affirmative action being like racism, yes. I haven’t read the study or whatever but it could be a disproportionate number of black college applicants are relatively wealthy. if that is the case and you want black students on campus for diversity and opportunity then there isn’t really anything you can do. the only thing you can do is heavily recruit black students who aren’t wealthy. if non wealthy black students don’t want to go to college because there aren’t a lot of black students that would be a conundrum because you’ve kept black students out of the mix who are relatively wealthy, meaning the one’s most likely to apply to college…

  310. 310
    pfft says:

    This is how intellectually bankrupt the Republican party is, they can’t even go on Fox and explain their tax plan. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? This isn’t the first time either.

    Gillespie, Fox’s Chris Wallace Spar Over Claim That Six Studies Validate Romney’s Tax Plan
    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/gillespie-foxs-chris-wallace-spar-over-claim-that?ref=fpblg

    This is Chris Wallace on Fox we are talking about.

  311. 311

    By David Losh @ 2:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 301

    I’d take the time to read what you wrote, but it’s pointless.

    David, you don’t have the intelligence or intellect to understand what I write. So, yes, it is pointless for you to read it.

    It’s also pointless for you to post what you posted there. Learn from that, assuming you have any capability to learn whatsoever.

  312. 312

    By pfft @ 4:

    God your grasp of current events is embarrassing. Instead of repeating your transcript fiasco why don’t you do some googling?

    You should be the one who should be embarrassed. My post had nothing to do with current events. It was describing how the Obama administration should have handled the Libya attack. Rather basic. Apparently you can’t understand things that are not Democratic spin.

    I’ll note though that you’re not even able to respond to my arguments. Apparently the partisan Democrats haven’t come up with their spin yet, so you’re without any arguments whatsoever. Maybe you should Google some more to find their spin–spin that isn’t based on lies about spontaneous demonstrations.

  313. 313

    By pfft @ 10:

    This is Chris Wallace on Fox we are talking about.

    If you had any understanding of the world you’d know that Chris Wallace is not your typical Fox News personality. He asks very tough questions of both Republicans and Democrats. He was very tough on Axelrod prior to that interview. Axelrod has become pathetic–a partisan hack.

    But there are two very good reasons to not be specific. 1. Their claim they need to negotiate the cuts, which is valid. 2. The fact that voters are stupid, and will vote for any tax cut and against any cut in deductions, without any analysis at all. It would be political suicide. At least Romney/Ryan are a little closer to telling the American people the truth: Hard choices are going to have to be made to get us out of this mess.

    But it’s not like President Obama has any specific plans to create jobs. And no, proposing a tax scheme that is never going to get out of Congress, and which would at best cost jobs, is not a plan to create jobs.

  314. 314

    For those of you not keeping up on current events, here’s the latest AP story on the Libya matter.

    http://www.sfgate.com/world/article/Senator-White-House-hid-truth-on-Libya-3948536.php

    I don’t buy the Republican claim it pertains to being worried about the prior claims of the war on terror. Doing something as stupid as what the Obama Administration has done on this issue requires stupidity, not planning.

    BTW, I also don’t buy the conservatives’ claims that President Obama was referencing the video as a cause of the attack two weeks later at the UN. There he was clearly talking about demonstrations elsewhere, by using the term Embassy rather than Consulate.

    It is interesting though to compare how they dealt with this compared to how they dealt with the contraception issue under Obamacare. There they appeared to be geniuses, but they were helped a great deal by complete morons (Limbaugh and other Republicans), who managed to convert a First Amendment issue into a birth control issue.

  315. 315
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 311

    There, that’s much more like the Kary Krismer we all know.

    You don’t have a point, but are flogging a dead horse. It’s a daily event that I have taken on because you are the only person commenting any more.

  316. 316

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 311:

    It’s also pointless for you to post what you posted there. Learn from that, assuming you have any capability to learn whatsoever.

    Apparently Losh cannot learn. No big surprise.

  317. 317
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 313:

    By pfft @ 10:
    This is Chris Wallace on Fox we are talking about.

    But it’s not like President Obama has any specific plans to create jobs. And no, proposing a tax scheme that is never going to get out of Congress, and which would at best cost jobs, is not a plan to create jobs.

    I really was right, you don’t have a grasp of current events. You don’t remember the American Jobs Act?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jobs_Act

    “And no, proposing a tax scheme that is never going to get out of Congress, and which would at best cost jobs”

    yeah like during the Clinton years! Remember all those jobs the Bush tax cuts created? Raising taxes on the rich has basically no negative impact on the economy.

  318. 318

    RE: pfft @ 317 – I’m sorry, I should have clearly said President Obama doesn’t have any specific plans to have the private sector create jobs. I’ve been repeatedly critical of President Obama thinking that all things come from government, probably even saying that with respect to his jobs plan. We’re four years into the crisis now. Having the government spend money to create jobs cannot go on forever.

    Also, that fits within the other criticism I have for President Obama. Proposing things repeatedly that he knows will never get through Congress.

  319. 319
    pfft says:

    Can Mitt tell the truth about ANYTHING?

    Romney’s Unraveling Claim That Six Studies Validate His Tax Plan
    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/romney-challenged-on-six-studies-validating-tax-plan.php?ref=fpa

  320. 320
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 18:

    RE: pfft @ 317 – I’m sorry, I should have clearly said President Obama doesn’t have any specific plans to have the private sector create jobs.

    that clears things up?

    “Also, that fits within the other criticism I have for President Obama. Proposing things repeatedly that he knows will never get through Congress.”

    yes, it’s Obama’s fault that the other side has adopted a strategy of opposing Obama on everything(even things they believed in in the past) since DAY ONE:

    Lawrence O’Donnel
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPqOnSfwVhQ

  321. 321

    RE: pfft @ 320 – It is President Obama’s fault Congress is hyper-partisan. The Democrats shut the Republicans out the first two years of the Obama Administration. Does “We wrote the bill because we won the election” sound familiar? A lot of the blame for that goes to Pelosi, but Obama could have tried to do something about that. He didn’t.

    The Democrats are now learning that payback is a dog.

  322. 322

    By pfft @ 319:

    Can Mitt tell the truth about ANYTHING?

    Romney�s Unraveling Claim That Six Studies Validate His Tax Plan
    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/romney-challenged-on-six-studies-validating-tax-plan.php?ref=fpa

    Without knowing the deductions cut, any study of his tax plan is meaningless. Those on both sides.

    I’m not really a fan of his tax plans either. I don’t like his “territorial” solution for multi-national companies. For non-1040 taxpayers I would just make taxes paid elsewhere a deduction rather than a credit, and leave it at that. And while I get his idea of lowering the rates and reducing deductions for 1099 type taxpayers, I don’t see how that’s going to have any impact moving the economy forward for W-2 type taxpayers.

  323. 323
    pfft says:

    I wonder how climate change will affect housing markets in the future?

    Pew Study: 67 Percent Of Americans Recognize Evidence Of Global Warming
    http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/67-percent-us-global-warming.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

  324. 324
    pfft says:

    Probably one of the best political ads I’ve ever seen. Even though I don’t mind negative campaigning or commercials I like positive ads. If people like you you are insulated from negatives ads. Negative ads against someone that people like usually backfire.

    People Are Going Crazy For Morgan Freeman’s New Obama Ad

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/people-are-already-going-crazy-for-morgan-freemans-obama-ad-2012-10#ixzz29Ot4saBv

  325. 325
    David Losh says:

    Hilary Clinton stepped up to take the blame for Libya. That ought to put the panties in a bunch for the Republicans. It’s the day before the debate also.

  326. 326
    pfft says:

    Ha HA, People actually think the Ryan-Romney ticket is going to win?

    Paul Ryan Busted For Staged Photo-Op At Soup Kitchen Where He Pretended To Wash Dishes

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-ryan-wash-dishes-2012-10#ixzz29Qir5Nrl

    His dishwashing is as phony as his budget.

  327. 327

    By David Losh @ 25:

    Hilary Clinton stepped up to take the blame for Libya. That ought to put the panties in a bunch for the Republicans. It’s the day before the debate also.

    Yep, that really changes President Obama’s “The Buck Stops Someplace Else!” policy.

    That really changes the fabricated story the Administration was selling after the attack about the spontaneous demonstration.

    That really changes Vice President Biden deceiving millions of Americans during the debate by using “we” to mean only the President and VP.

    I’m not sure why you think that changes anything. President Obama still refuses to claim responsibility for anything. They still lied and then lied again. All for reasons that really are not at all clear.

  328. 328

    RE: pfft @ 26 – Now I understand why you support President Obama! You don’t have the slightest clue which factors which are important when deciding who to vote for in a Presidential election.

    I can hardly wait to see the polling bump President Obama gets off this news. /SARC

  329. 329
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 327

    She interjected herself into a nothing complaint Republicans have.

    Have you been to Libya? Do you have any idea of how things work across all of North Africa? Do you understand the concept of a militia? or an army that stops to pray, three times a day, every day?

    You can’t fight these people. They could overrun all of our interests at any time, but they don’t as long as we keep them at the table.

    Now I don’t know what’s going on in Libya, but I do trust my government is doing it’s job, because we still have assets there.

  330. 330

    RE: David Losh @ 329 – Have I been to Libya? What’s that have to do with the Administration fabricating a story about a spontaneous demonstration? What’s that have to do with Biden lying at the debate by using “we” in a deceiving manner? What’s that have to do with President Obama having never taken personal responsibility for a single thing, other than having not sufficiently explaining his policies?

    President Obama is a failure on many fronts, but he refuses to admit a single failure, and has now launched into a cover up of something that probably never needed to be covered up. So he even fails at failing! I wouldn’t hire him to feed my cats. He’s not qualified, and if something went wrong he’d never fess up.

  331. 331

    I need to quit hanging out here so much. I had a dream last night that a student from a wealthy family was suing a college because they offered lower tuition to students from lower income families. It turned out though that the suit was something that the college instigated, so that they could convert financial aid students into student loan students and bring in more revenue.

  332. 332
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 330

    So the answer is no, you have no idea how things in Libya work, but you insist that the White House keep you in the loop.

    A militia attacked an American embassy, maybe we should attack them, maybe send in a surge force?

    The Republican Party really hit a low point with this. It’s unAmerican.

  333. 333

    By David Losh @ 332:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 330 – So the answer is no, you have no idea how things in Libya work, but you insist that the White House keep you in the loop..

    Not at all what I’m claiming. I gave the four points the administration should have made after the attack. That’s fairly basic stuff.

    I don’t know why you’re supporting lying to the American people. If President Obama will lie when it’s seemingly not necessary, what will he do when something important comes up? There are two issues there. Incompetence and lying. Neither is a good quality for a President.

  334. 334
    Blurtman says:

    Mitt Romney – He’s a bad man.


    Except Mitt Romney was not a businessman; he was a master financial speculator who bought, sold, flipped, and stripped businesses. He did not build enterprises the old-fashioned way—out of inspiration, perspiration, and a long slog in the free market fostering a new product, service, or process of production. Instead, he spent his 15 years raising debt in prodigious amounts on Wall Street so that Bain could purchase the pots and pans and castoffs of corporate America, leverage them to the hilt, gussy them up as reborn “roll-ups,” and then deliver them back to Wall Street for resale—the faster the better.”

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/14/david-stockman-mitt-romney-and-the-bain-drain.html

  335. 335

    RE: Blurtman @ 334 – As opposed to President Obama, whose experience was getting people government benefits. And he’s done really well at that four years in a row now–$1T in deficits every year. Of course, that’s someone else’s fault.

  336. 336
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 333

    Because we have been lied to about Africa for sixty years. Our government propped up Saddam Hussein, and Mommar Gaddafi to protect American oil interests.

    We have carried out numerous covert operations, we have killed thousands of people, and yet this retribution, which is condoned in the Koran is a focal point for Republicans.

    Well, where are those militia men today? We should hear the truth about that also.

    Republicans are engaged in unAmerican activity. They hate America, and everything America stands for. They favor a fascist state where they tell us what to think, do, and believe.

    Like I said, I watched the news, and didn’t need the White House to tell me what happened.

  337. 337
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 335:

    RE: Blurtman @ 334 – As opposed to President Obama, whose experience was getting people government benefits. And he’s done really well at that four years in a row now–$1T in deficits every year. Of course, that’s someone else’s fault.

    yes, the economy crashed on bush’s watch. bush first had the trillion dollar deficit. obama has reduced the deficit by more than 25%(which actually isn’t something to be proud of). study up:

    5 Facts You Should Commit To Memory Before Watching Tonight’s Debate
    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/16/1018931/second-presidential-debate/

  338. 338
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 28:

    RE: pfft @ 26 – Now I understand why you support President Obama! You don’t have the slightest clue which factors which are important when deciding who to vote for in a Presidential election.

    I can hardly wait to see the polling bump President Obama gets off this news. /SARC

    paul ryan is a complete phony. he is a fraud.

  339. 339
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 30:

    RE: David Losh @ 329 – Have I been to Libya? What’s that have to do with the Administration fabricating a story about a spontaneous demonstration?

    wait didn’t you just admit that you were wrong about this? god you make my brain hurt. you make me wish scotsman was here more.

  340. 340
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 35:

    RE: Blurtman @ 334 – As opposed to President Obama, whose experience was getting people government benefits.

    oh no you don’t. for god’s sake romney has tens of millions in an IRA!

    Romney Invests In Several Bain Funds That Use Offshore Tax Havens To Boost Profits
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/18/406580/romney-offshore-tax-havens/

    Mitt Romney no stranger to tax breaks, subsidies
    Bain Capital profited from a steel company that got them, and he used them to attract business when he governed Massachusetts
    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/12/nation/la-na-bain-subsidies-20120113

    “(Bain)closed plant a year after harvesting $7.1 million in local tax breaks aimed at job creation”
    http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002910092

    Romney Persona Non Grata in Italy for Bain’s Deal Skirting Taxes
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-06/romney-persona-non-grata-in-italy-for-bain-s-deal-skirting-taxes.html

    Under Romney’s Bain Capital, Dade Behring received millions in tax breaks before it laid off hundreds
    http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/content/under-romneys-bain-capital-dade-behring-received-millions-tax-breaks-it-laid-hundreds

    Mitt’s modus operandi is buying a business and loading it up with debt. debt is tax advantaged as opposed to issuing more stock. another tax break and that was almost his entire business.

    Romney was fabulously successful in generating high returns for its investors. He did so, in large part, through heavy use of tax-deductible debt, usually to finance outsized dividends for the firm’s partners and investors. When some of the investments went bad, workers and creditors felt most of the pain. Romney privatized the gains and socialized the losses.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-15/romney-s-bain-yielded-private-gains-socialized-losses.html

  341. 341
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 335 – When the toilet us stopped up, and all you see are white and cream colored turds, it is time to call the plumber – William K. Black.

  342. 342

    By pfft @ 37:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 335:
    RE: Blurtman @ 334 – As opposed to President Obama, whose experience was getting people government benefits. And he’s done really well at that four years in a row now–$1T in deficits every year. Of course, that’s someone else’s fault.

    yes, the economy crashed on bush’s watch. bush first had the trillion dollar deficit.

    Did you already forget we discussed who’s responsible for that first $1T deficit, and you agreed it was mainly President Obama? Here’s a reminder: Fiscal year.

  343. 343

    By pfft @ 38:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 28:
    RE: pfft @ 26 – Now I understand why you support President Obama! You don’t have the slightest clue which factors which are important when deciding who to vote for in a Presidential election.

    I can hardly wait to see the polling bump President Obama gets off this news. /SARC

    paul ryan is a complete phony. he is a fraud.

    Biden is a buffoon. As I said earlier, the VP debate proved neither is presidential.

  344. 344

    By pfft @ 39:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 30:
    RE: David Losh @ 329 – Have I been to Libya? What’s that have to do with the Administration fabricating a story about a spontaneous demonstration?

    wait didn’t you just admit that you were wrong about this? god you make my brain hurt. you make me wish scotsman was here more.

    Your memory sucks. We’ve gone over your memory problem repeatedly.

    In post 286 I said I was wrong about her not saying they needed further investigation. In post 284 I said they did not say they needed further investigation. That’s what I was wrong about.

    The administration did fabricate the story about the spontaneous demonstration. That is now fact. Why they felt the need to lie is something we haven’t been able to determine. There’s no apparent reason for the lie. Apparently it’s just habit.

  345. 345

    As to the debate last night, I think Obama won simply because Romney didn’t have a clear win. I almost fell over though when President Obama actually took responsibility for something, although perhaps that was prompting from Romney. Maybe that was a President Obama impersonator?

    Both made some very good points and both missed some huge opportunities. Romney screwed up asking President Obama a question and trying to make a jump in logic on the Libya terrorist attack thing.

    The moderator’s performance was excellent, IMHO. The main negative was that was one boring debate. I had to watch it in three segments.

  346. 346
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 342:

    By pfft @ 37:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 335:
    RE: Blurtman @ 334 – As opposed to President Obama, whose experience was getting people government benefits. And he’s done really well at that four years in a row now–$1T in deficits every year. Of course, that’s someone else’s fault.

    yes, the economy crashed on bush’s watch. bush first had the trillion dollar deficit.

    Did you already forget we discussed who’s responsible for that first $1T deficit, and you agreed it was mainly President Obama? Here’s a reminder: Fiscal year.

    no, that budget was Bush’s. it was signed by Bush.

  347. 347
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 44:

    By pfft @ 39:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 30:
    RE: David Losh @ 329 – Have I been to Libya? What’s that have to do with the Administration fabricating a story about a spontaneous demonstration?

    wait didn’t you just admit that you were wrong about this? god you make my brain hurt. you make me wish scotsman was here more.

    Your memory sucks. We’ve gone over your memory problem repeatedly.

    In post 286 I said I was wrong about her not saying they needed further investigation. In post 284 I said they did not say they needed further investigation. That’s what I was wrong about.

    The administration did fabricate the story about the spontaneous demonstration. That is now fact. Why they felt the need to lie is something we haven’t been able to determine. There’s no apparent reason for the lie. Apparently it’s just habit.

    you grasping. it’s hilarious.

  348. 348
    Scotsman says:

    Honey Boo Boo Endorses Obama. Well that settles it!

  349. 349

    RE: pfft @ 347 – You’re apparently the only person in the country who still believes the Administration claims that there was a spontaneous demonstration. That information was fabricated–it did not come from intelligence services. It was a lie. Get over it. President Obama lied about how and why people died.

  350. 350
    Scotsman says:

    So pffffffft- what are you going to do on your vacation? We still on for double or nothing?

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx

  351. 351
  352. 352

    RE: David Losh @ 351 – Yet another “fact” David Losh pulls out of his ass thinking he is making a point. Again David, you don’t know squat about me or the world around you. You’re a joke.

  353. 353
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 352

    Kary, that is my opinion, I think you are hilarious.

    You are as clear as a bell. You are here all day every day offering opinions about anything, and everything.

    Whenever you are cornered, which is often, then you attack.

    That’s all I need to know.

  354. 354

    RE: David Losh @ 353 – Whenever you are cornered, you claim I don’t know anything about my business or real estate, etc. More things you don’t know squat about. But that never seems to stop you.

  355. 355
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 350:

    So pffffffft- what are you going to do on your vacation? We still on for double or nothing?

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx

    mos def.

  356. 356
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 348 – Honey Boo is white trash.

  357. 357
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 354

    You demonstrate your lack of Real Estate knowledge daily, here, on the Seattle Bubble, all day, every day. It doesn’t concern me because no one could be fooled by you at this point.

    This thread of comments has to do with your rehashing of the Republicans talking points about how President Obama should have protected the embassy in Benghazi.

    This is by far the very lowest any set of politicians could stoop, you picked it up, and are running with it.

    The foriegn policy we have Africa today is a great departure from previous administrations. We find people, and kill them. We leave the governments alone, find people, and kill them.

    The militia that carried out the attack on Benghazi were attacked by the people of Libya, we heard almost nothing about that, and today we have a target for the attacks: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-consulate-justice-20121018,0,2177659.story

    The article outlines how things are done in the Middle East, Northern Africa, according to tribal law.

    You want to believe Republican propoganda, but don’t want to believe the President when he says he will find, and punish the people responsible.

    There is no amount of security, or troops we can send into Africa that will secure our interests there. We will continue to be attacked, and we have the right to attack those people. There is no safety for those who go into Africa to negotiate our interests there. It’s hazardous.

    We will need to negotiate our interests in Africa. That is the only way we will be able to keep anything there. If we continue with the World War Two thinking that our troops will protect us on foriegn soil we will pay higher prices with less security. We will only spend money, we don’t have, for a big show that people laugh at, globally.

    We were defeated in Iraq, and Afganistan the same as every other set of occupiers before us. We gained nothing in Africa by this stupid display of troops, and military hardware.

    We are hated, targeted, and in return we got nothing but dead soldiers, and thousands of dead civilians.

    Have you been there? Have you met these people? Have you read the Koran, been to the mosques? Have you read the history of the region, or even the Bible?

    There is no way any one could buy into this Republican smear campaign if they are educated.

  358. 358

    By David Losh @ 57:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 354 – You demonstrate your lack of Real Estate knowledge daily, here, on the Seattle Bubble, all day, every day. It doesn’t concern me because no one could be fooled by you at this point.

    Pure BS. You don’t understand real estate (or anything else) so you’re in no position to judge me. You’re an admitted terrible real estate agent, and that’s because you don’t understand anything about anything, but more specifically you don’t understand anything about real estate. You’re nothing but a rambling imbecile.

    This thread of comments has to do with your rehashing of the Republicans talking points about how President Obama should have protected the embassy in Benghazi.

    Yet another example of your not understanding. That’s not my argument at all, but you’re either too stupid or too illiterate to understand. What I’m talking about is the coverup of something that didn’t need to be covered up. I’ve said that repeatedly, but you are not understanding.

    While President Obama would have taken some heat for being President during the first successful terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11, that was a minor issue. It wouldn’t affect many votes. As I said above, to defeat terrorist attacks you have to be right every time, which is impossible. As I said above, but for being lucky, we would have suffered more terrorist attacks (the underwear bomber was my example).

    But you’re too big of an imbecile to understand what I’m saying. What I’m complaining about is the Administration fabricating a story about a spontaneous demonstration leading to the attack. What I’m complaining about is Vice President Biden lying to 60 million Americans claiming that there was no request for additional security. What I’m complaining about is the White House, rather than disavowing Biden’s lie, coming out and saying that by using “we” Biden meant the President and Vice President. They’re digging themselves deeper every time they make a decision on this topic, and for no apparent reason. I’ve contrasted that with the great political moves the Obama Administration made on the religious organization contraceptive coverage issue. It’s like night and day. They were political geniuses on the contraceptive issue, but on Libya they’re acting like David Losh–total imbeciles. No wonder you like it.

  359. 359

    Yet another example of President Obama lying when there’s no reason to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444734804578063002501832488.html

    Very odd behavior lately out of the campaign. It’s almost like they’re choking at the end.

  360. 360
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 359RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 358

    Man, try to calm down.

    The protests across North Africa were real. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19567319

    Republicans now claiming the protests about this film were not real, is complete nonsense. As far as asking for added security I’m sure they did, but Joe Biden, or the President wouldn’t know that. I think that would be pretty clear.

    So I don’t see the conspiracy, or cover up in a free press society of public documented facts.

    I’m very comfortable by passing political spin in favor of the truth.

    I have spent time in North Africa. I’ve been to Israel, a topic for another time, and spend time with people from the Middle East to understand one of the most important aspects of our foreign policies.

    You’re uneducated. You want to rely on a thirty six year old degree to bully people on this blog. Well, I don’t mind matching wits with a bubba. It’s really not much of a contest.

  361. 361
  362. 362
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 56:

    RE: Scotsman @ 348 – Honey Boo is white trash.

    elitest!

  363. 363
    pfft says:

    I think what we’ve learned these past few weeks is you can be stupid and still be very successful in America. How else can you explain Neutron Jack Welch and this commercial.

    Thomas Peterffy – Freedom To Succeed
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4ysvJq2N4E

  364. 364
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 59:

    Yet another example of President Obama lying when there’s no reason to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444734804578063002501832488.html

    Very odd behavior lately out of the campaign. It’s almost like they’re choking at the end.

    Again you are wrong. Romney doesn’t really give a position about the issue. He’s too afraid to tell us what he will do. What he did was he said he supported the Arizona law when everyone was watching, but his campaign walked that back when nobody was really watching. Then when the Supreme Court ruled against most of the Arizona “Papers Please” law Romney finally said “states should be given more latitude.”

    The president was right only because

    1. Romney is deliberately not saying anything on the issue.

    2. He will probably flip-flop in the future.

    This is Romney’s modus operandi. Never a straight answer. Has he given a an answer yet on Lily Ledbetter?

    Romney Responds To Supreme Court Ruling On Arizona’s Immigration Law, Doesn’t Say If He Agrees With The Decision
    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/06/25/505728/romney-responds-to-supreme-court-ruling-on-arizonas-immigration-law-doesnt-say-if-he-agrees-with-the-decision/

    It’s telling to note that the write of the Arizona Papers Please law was and maybe still is a top immigration advisor to Romney.

  365. 365

    By David Losh @ 360:

    <
    The protests across North Africa were real. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19567319

    I never claimed they weren’t. There just wasn’t a spontaneous protest at the place that we’re talking about! Pretty simple. The administration lied about that, using the other protests as cover for their lies.

    And it’s not just Republicans making claims. It has been admitted by the administration that there were no protests.

    You simply can’t understand rather simple facts.

  366. 366

    RE: pfft @ 64 – If President Obama said Romney said something that he didn’t say, that is a lie. Romney not taking a position on that doesn’t change that fact.

  367. 367
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 365:

    By David Losh @ 360:
    <
    The protests across North Africa were real. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19567319

    I never claimed they weren’t. There just wasn’t a spontaneous protest at the place that we’re talking about! Pretty simple. The administration lied about that, using the other protests as cover for their lies.

    And it’s not just Republicans making claims. It has been admitted by the administration that there were no protests.

    You simply can’t understand rather simple facts.

    what are you talking about? there were protests at Benghazi.

  368. 368
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 66:

    RE: pfft @ 64 – If President Obama said Romney said something that he didn’t say, that is a lie. Romney not taking a position on that doesn’t change that fact.

    they weren’t talking about e-verify. the Arizona law they were talking about was Papers Please. that was a hot issue.

    romney doesn’t have a position, it’s his fault. if you know different post the debate transcript.

  369. 369

    By pfft @ 367:

    what are you talking about? there were protests at Benghazi.

    No there weren’t! At least not in any significant scale. That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over. That’s been my entire point. The protests were fiction.

    http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/usa-libya-consulate-idINL1E8KJ6PT20120919

  370. 370

    By pfft @ 68:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 66:
    RE: pfft @ 64 – If President Obama said Romney said something that he didn’t say, that is a lie. Romney not taking a position on that doesn’t change that fact.

    they weren’t talking about e-verify. the Arizona law they were talking about was Papers Please. that was a hot issue.

    romney doesn’t have a position, it’s his fault. if you know different post the debate transcript.

    Did you even read the link? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444734804578063002501832488.html

    President Obama has no record to run on, so he has to lie about his opponent. But if you think the WSJ article is wrong, please provide a link to a transcript where Romney said what President Obama said he said.

  371. 371
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 362 – She is already chubby and heading for the food stamp roles. I pray she doesn’t reproduce.

  372. 372

    By Scotsman @ 348:

    Honey Boo Boo Endorses Obama. Well that settles it!

    No, it’s a tough choice, because Lindsay Lohan endorsed Romney.

  373. 373

    Jon Stewart even tried to ask President Obama about the Libya message that the administration was trying to pass out, but President Obama ducked the question.

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-18-2012/exclusive—barack-obama-extended-interview-pt–2

    Start at 3:00.

    But hey, no one is paying attention to this issue but me, right? /sarc

  374. 374

    http://dianeravitch.net/2012/10/17/can-10-very-rich-people-change-public-education-in-washington-state/
    Once again, my vote will go with the side that loses. Honestly, though, I haven’t contributed to the “no” camapaign, because that would be flushing money down the toilet. The Gateses, The Allens, the Bezoses…they’ll get their way.

  375. 375

    Touching on the topic Ira and someone else have been discussing in the Mid-week and Weekend thread, about corporate support of political issues . . .

    I find it interesting that the reporters at the Seattle Times object to the Times running ads for McKenna and an initiative. It’s part of an effort by the Advertising Department to generate additional ad revenue by showing the effectiveness of newspaper advertising.

    Anyway, how is the Advertising Department at the Times endorsing something any different than the Editorial Board at the Times endorsing something? We can think that one is independent of the news department, but not the other? It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

  376. 376
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 370:

    By pfft @ 68:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 66:
    RE: pfft @ 64 – If President Obama said Romney said something that he didn’t say, that is a lie. Romney not taking a position on that doesn’t change that fact.

    they weren’t talking about e-verify. the Arizona law they were talking about was Papers Please. that was a hot issue.

    romney doesn’t have a position, it’s his fault. if you know different post the debate transcript.

    Did you even read the link? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444734804578063002501832488.html

    President Obama has no record to run on, so he has to lie about his opponent. But if you think the WSJ article is wrong, please provide a link to a transcript where Romney said what President Obama said he said.

    did you read where he said he’d drop the lawsuit, meaning Obama’s lawsuit against the papers please law? that’s certainly support. papers please would go into effect. persumably he’d not sue if all 50 states passed the same law. he also has the writer(or did) as an advisor or some sort. but no, it’s not a model for the nation. just like his Romneycare was a model for the nation but now isn’t. but of course he won’t repeal ALL of Obamacare just the part not like Romneycare! Or more specifically the parts that won’t work in all 50 states. nonsensical enough for you yet?

  377. 377
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 69:

    By pfft @ 367:
    what are you talking about? there were protests at Benghazi.

    No there weren’t! At least not in any significant scale. That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over. That’s been my entire point. The protests were fiction.

    http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/usa-libya-consulate-idINL1E8KJ6PT20120919

    ok yeah you were right. so what does it matter?

    “That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over.”

    wrong, that was their best assesment. doesn’t really change anything.

  378. 378

    By pfft @ 376:

    nonsensical enough for you yet?

    Yes, very Losh like. That made no sense at all! Was there a point there?

  379. 379

    By pfft @ 77:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 69:
    By pfft @ 367:
    what are you talking about? there were protests at Benghazi.

    No there weren’t! At least not in any significant scale. That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over. That’s been my entire point. The protests were fiction.

    http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/usa-libya-consulate-idINL1E8KJ6PT20120919

    ok yeah you were right. so what does it matter?

    “That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over.”

    wrong, that was their best assesment. doesn’t really change anything.

    It was not their best assessment. It was fiction. They knew it was false, but that didn’t send them from sending Rice out on all the Sunday shows.

  380. 380
    Haybaler says:

    I, like many of you, have watched each of the recent presidential debates.

    In addition, I’ve watched several of the Congressional debates.

    I made note of several instances where a candidate, such as President Obama recently, made claim to efforts to cut government spending through streamlining student loans….”cutting out the profit margins charges by the banks and lending at a lower cost to more people directly”.

    This is an existing precedent for ideas about the use of federal stimulus money that have been advanced and promoted by some such as Charles Hugh Smith.

    http://www.financialsense.com/

    see 9/21/12 Housing, Diminishing returns

  381. 381
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 379:

    By pfft @ 77:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 69:
    By pfft @ 367:
    what are you talking about? there were protests at Benghazi.

    No there weren’t! At least not in any significant scale. That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over. That’s been my entire point. The protests were fiction.

    http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/usa-libya-consulate-idINL1E8KJ6PT20120919

    ok yeah you were right. so what does it matter?

    “That is a lie that the Obama Administration repeated over and over and over.”

    wrong, that was their best assesment. doesn’t really change anything.

    It was not their best assessment. It was fiction. They knew it was false, but that didn’t send them from sending Rice out on all the Sunday shows.

    how do you know it was false? it was their best assessment of an event that hadn’t even been fully investigated yet. even when the investigation is finished we’ll learn new facts months or a year from now.

    what does it matter?

  382. 382
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 78:

    By pfft @ 376:
    nonsensical enough for you yet?

    Yes, very Losh like. That made no sense at all! Was there a point there?

    of course it’s nonsensical, we are talking about romney’s policies.

    translation, you’re wrong.

    let’s pose this question another way. Does Romney support the Paper’s Please law Kary?

  383. 383
    Blurtman says:

    Romney will usher in the ’80’s again. I liked the music of that era. And Back to the Future, Miami Vice, Pretty in Pink. Big hair, padded shoulders and ebullient phoniness. Repopularized materialistic excess. B-52’s. Psychadelic Furs. Demonization of poverty.

    Bring it on.

  384. 384

    By Blurtman @ 383:

    Romney will usher in the ’80’s again. I liked the music of that era. And Back to the Future, Miami Vice, Pretty in Pink. Big hair, padded shoulders and ebullient phoniness. Repopularized materialistic excess. B-52’s. Psychadelic Furs. Demonization of poverty.

    Bring it on.

    Finally a decent reason to support either of these two candidates!

  385. 385
    pfft says:

    Romnesia. LOL as they say.

    if you come down with a case of Romnesia, and you can’t seem to remember the policies that are still on your website, or the promises you’ve made over the six years you’ve been running for President, here’s the good news: Obamacare covers pre-existing conditions.

    Obama Diagnoses Romney: He’s Suffering From ‘Romnesia’
    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/19/1050691/obama-diagnoses-romney-hes-suffering-from-romnesia/

  386. 386

    RE: pfft @ 385 – Obama is suffering from being a total failure. Whatever. Obama has nothing substantive to say, so he makes up stupid things, and partisan Democrats eat it up. He discovered at the first debate that others don’t.

  387. 387

    RE: Blurtman @ 383
    And wasn’t They Live from that decade?

  388. 388
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 386:

    RE: pfft @ 385 – Obama is suffering from being a total failure.

    right. saved the economy and auto industry from collapse. got us out of iraq. got bin laden. passed obamacare. created more private sector jobs in 4 years than bush did in 8! all of this was done while facing unprecedented obstruction from Congress.

    a total failure compared to whom? W?

  389. 389
    Blurtman says:

    Obama created private sector jobs. Amazing!

    Anyway, here is a sizzling Bill Moyers, saying in effect, Kill the Bankers!

    http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2012/10/plutocracy-rising-moyers-freeland-and.html

  390. 390

    By pfft @ 88:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 386:
    RE: pfft @ 385 – Obama is suffering from being a total failure.

    right. saved the economy and auto industry from collapse. got us out of iraq. got bin laden. passed obamacare. created more private sector jobs in 4 years than bush did in 8! all of this was done while facing unprecedented obstruction from Congress.

    a total failure compared to whom? W?

    Losh is claiming we lost in Iraq, but clearly Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq. Senator Obama was against the surge which allowed us to win that one.

    Yes he did save the economy, and I’ve given him credit for that. That was the first two years. Since then he’s been an anchor on job creation and growth, and job creation should have been job 1 for him. Thus overall he’s a failure, although you’re right if the economy had collapsed unemployment would probably be worse now.

    Most people would consider passing Obamacare to be a failure. That can be for legitimate or incorrect reasons, but most people don’t like it. Failure.

    OBL was largely the intelligence services, but note that President Obama’s running mate would not have gone in and killed OBL.

    Auto industry–there he took the industry through bankruptcy, providing take out financing. I really doubt GM and Chrysler would have ended up in Chapter 7 without that help. Chrysler is now not even a US company any more, and the workers are getting about 1/2 the pay and benefits that they were.

    Finally, your jobs numbers are just the result of economic cycles. Bush’s numbers are low because he left office near the beginning of a huge recession. President Obama’s are higher because he started at the beginning of a huge recession. Happenstance, but in any case, the numbers would be higher but for President Obama’s incompetence on economic matters.

    But nice try. President Obama is a failure. No doubt about it. He didn’t make jobs his number one task. He didn’t deal at all with immigration until his fourth year, and then only in a half-ass manner to court votes. He didn’t close Gitmo (which was a stupid idea, so that’s probably a good thing). He ran up over $4T in debt. Failure.

  391. 391

    By Blurtman @ 89:

    Obama created private sector jobs. Amazing!

    Anyway, here is a sizzling Bill Moyers, saying in effect, Kill the Bankers!

    http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2012/10/plutocracy-rising-moyers-freeland-and.html

    Not sure that’s the right link, but as to that link, I don’t think there ever was a prohibition on companies telling their employees how they should vote. For federal employees there was the Hatch Act, but I don’t recall any restrictions on private companies–even private companies with government contracts.

  392. 392
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 391 – The intro describes the shocking disparity between the fabulously weatlhy banksters who parasitize off of the rest of the country, and the bottom dwellers of the 47%. Instead of jailing these scumbags, NYC is falling all over itself to kiss their arses. Nothing is more revolting than seeing that souless hemmorhoid, Charles Schumer, a Democrat of all things, defend these leeches.

  393. 393
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90 – Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq!!!!???

    You are kidding, right? That idiot should be in jail for war crimes.

  394. 394

    By Blurtman @ 392:

    Nothing is more revolting than seeing that souless hemmorhoid, Charles Schumer, a Democrat of all things, defend these leeches.

    Why would that be surprising? Anything Schumer does is revolting. ;-)

  395. 395

    By Blurtman @ 93:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90 – Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq!!!!???

    You are kidding, right? That idiot should be in jail for war crimes.

    He got us in, largely due to relying on his Dad’s people, such as Rumsfeld, who was an idiot. But he also got us out. He created a mess and got us out of the mess.

    After going in, which was something a lot of Democrats supported, all the Democrats were proposing was something they knew was a non-starter–pulling out. There was no way the United States could go in, destroy the government of a country, and then simply pull out. That was a moronic suggestion at best. While Americans were dying, the Democrats were just playing politics rather than trying to help find a solution. They should be ashamed of themselves.

    But war crimes? Isn’t that a bit over the top? Seriously, that might be something an extreme partisan Democrat might believe, but it’s total nonsense. But let’s assume it’s true. Wouldn’t President Obama be a war criminal too for his drone attacks?

  396. 396

    RE: Blurtman @ 392
    Unlike Charles Schumer, soulless hemmorhoids are worthy of respect.

  397. 397
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 395 – Good question. Let’s say Obama takes out a family including little kids to kill a a person labelled a “terrorist.” And can inciting others to attack the USA result in a death sentence?

    Outa sight, outa mind? I still can’t get over the images of Apache helicopters shredding civilians in Iraq.

  398. 398
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 395 – Romney is Bush Redux. He is using the same group opf moronic neocons.

    And Dan Senor? What a miserable, despicable cur. A true enemy of the American republic. This speaks volumes for what a piece of shyte Romney is.

    “Romney’s 24 special advisors on foreign policy, 17 served in the Bush-Cheney administration.” And yet, mixed in with that decidedly neoconservative crowd are a number of very thoughtful and moderate voices.

    Any foreign policy advisory board that seeks the counsel of Cofer Black, Michael Hayden, Dan Senor or John Lehman, to name just a select few, is a real cause for concern.”

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/11219/mitt-romney-foreign-policy-team-17-of-24-advisors-are-bush-neocons

    “Senor neither spoke nor understood Arabic and seemed to have little understanding of Iraqi concerns and customs. According to Rajiv Chandrasekaran, the author of Imperial Life in the Emerald City, Senor was known for the zealous spin that put a good face on the disaster unfolding in Baghdad. Information he released to the press at times had little relevance to the actual situation in the city. Such critiques led commentators to jokingly dub Senor as “Baghdad Dan”, a reference to Baghdad Bob, the Saddam regime’s spokesman whose grandiose and grossly unrealistic statements were met with widespread derision and amusement.[9] [10]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Senor

  399. 399
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 390

    Shock, and awe was the worst military blunder in history, which continued with the killing of Saddam’s sons, and ultimately we lost the war when Saddam was hanged.

    It’s about oil. It’s all about oil, and George Bush’s dad.

    The date of September 11th, 1991 is the date of the New World Order speech. It was just after the invasion of Kuwait.

    Bush packed up to leave Iraq in disgrace, and Obama had to follow the plan. The surge was the last act of a total loss.

    If you read the the foriegn policy breifings from the beginnings of the Bush Administration you can see Iraq was a target from the first day. September 11th, 2001 was just a convenient excuse to carry out the plans that were already in place.

    Shock, and awe killed thousands of civilians, and destroyed infrastructure that was vital to the people of Iraq. Many more died as a result.

    We were arrogant, unprepared, under supplied, and chaotic in our approach, but Bush didn’t want to lose the excuse of September 11th 2001. Thousands of people died, both Iraqi, and American for no reason what so ever.

    That is the basis of the war crimes.

  400. 400

    RE: Blurtman @ 97 – Apparently they have sometimes sent in a second drone several minutes later. The idea is to get more terrorists which come to help, but it also gets the emergency responders.

  401. 401

    By David Losh @ 99:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 390 – Shock, and awe was the worst military blunder in history, which continued with the killing of Saddam’s sons, and ultimately we lost the war when Saddam was hanged. .

    Now I understand why you keep saying we lost the war. You’re apparently an Iraqi national!

    Just like Vice President Biden, we need to remember to ask you who you mean when you say “we.” ;-)

  402. 402
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1

    We lost, we made no ground, we won no concessions, and never had an enemy to defeat. We killed a guy, and his sons, for financial crimes against American oil interests.

    George Bush Senior failed to negotiate with Saddam over his efforts on our behalf against Iran. http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch36-3.htm

    Afterward, George Senior gave his famous New World Order speech: http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/pal/pal10.htm

    In that speech he acknowledge Iraq lacked capability, but George Junior had on his agenda an invasion of Iraq that he carried out without regard to the very real threat of Al Qaeda. http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2006/09/20084913344170756.html

    We spent billions of dollars on a fool’s mission in Iraq, and came away with nothing.

    You can’t win a war against these people, but you can negotiate.

  403. 403
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 401:

    By David Losh @ 99:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 390 – Shock, and awe was the worst military blunder in history, which continued with the killing of Saddam’s sons, and ultimately we lost the war when Saddam was hanged. .

    You’re apparently an Iraqi national!

    Around 100,000 Iraqis died in the war. Millions were displaced internally or externally…

    Did we find WMD? No, then we lost.

  404. 404
  405. 405
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 90:

    By pfft @ 88:
    By Kary L. Krismer @ 386:
    RE: pfft @ 385 – Obama is suffering from being a total failure.

    right. saved the economy and auto industry from collapse. got us out of iraq. got bin laden. passed obamacare. created more private sector jobs in 4 years than bush did in 8! all of this was done while facing unprecedented obstruction from Congress.

    a total failure compared to whom? W?

    Losh is claiming we lost in Iraq, but clearly Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq. Senator Obama was against the surge which allowed us to win that one.

    Yes he did save the economy, and I’ve given him credit for that. That was the first two years. Since then he’s been an anchor on job creation and growth, and job creation should have been job 1 for him. Thus overall he’s a failure, although you’re right if the economy had collapsed unemployment would probably be worse now.

    Most people would consider passing Obamacare to be a failure. That can be for legitimate or incorrect reasons, but most people don’t like it. Failure.

    OBL was largely the intelligence services, but note that President Obama’s running mate would not have gone in and killed OBL.

    Auto industry–there he took the industry through bankruptcy, providing take out financing. I really doubt GM and Chrysler would have ended up in Chapter 7 without that help. Chrysler is now not even a US company any more, and the workers are getting about 1/2 the pay and benefits that they were.

    Finally, your jobs numbers are just the result of economic cycles. Bush’s numbers are low because he left office near the beginning of a huge recession. President Obama’s are higher because he started at the beginning of a huge recession. Happenstance, but in any case, the numbers would be higher but for President Obama’s incompetence on economic matters.

    But nice try. President Obama is a failure. No doubt about it. He didn’t make jobs his number one task. He didn’t deal at all with immigration until his fourth year, and then only in a half-ass manner to court votes. He didn’t close Gitmo (which was a stupid idea, so that’s probably a good thing). He ran up over $4T in debt. Failure.

    he didn’t make jobs his number one priority? He passed the largest stimulus bill ever. Congress blocked the closing of gitmo. Immigration is very tough to pass. even bush couldn’t do it. People have been trying to pass healthcare for 70 years. there are also about 100 other things I could mention that he passed with the most obstructionist congress ever. In his first two years he passed 3 historic laws with almost no Republican help- Obamacare, the stimlus and Dodd Frank. Historic bills.

    “He ran up over $4T in debt.”

    most of that is Bush era policies. study up. you don’t want to raise taxes anyway so how would you solve that? cuts like in europe? yeah, that will solve the debt problem…

    ” Bush’s numbers are low because he left office near the beginning of a huge recession. President Obama’s are higher because he started at the beginning of a huge recession.”

    unbelievable.

  406. 406
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 95:

    By Blurtman @ 93:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90 – Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq!!!!???

    You are kidding, right? That idiot should be in jail for war crimes.

    While Americans were dying, the Democrats were just playing politics rather than trying to help find a solution. They should be ashamed of themselves.

    unbelievable. Just unbelievable. I just don’t even want to really get into this…

  407. 407
  408. 408

    By pfft @ 3:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 401:
    By David Losh @ 99:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 390 – Shock, and awe was the worst military blunder in history, which continued with the killing of Saddam’s sons, and ultimately we lost the war when Saddam was hanged. .

    You’re apparently an Iraqi national!

    Around 100,000 Iraqis died in the war. Millions were displaced internally or externally…

    Did we find WMD? No, then we lost.

    pfft comes to the support of Losh’s nonsense. How cute.

    Clearly we went to war for the wrong reason–part of which was due to SH’s deception. But that doesn’t mean we lost.

  409. 409

    By pfft @ 5:

    he didn’t make jobs his number one priority? He passed the largest stimulus bill ever. Congress blocked the closing of gitmo. Immigration is very tough to pass. even bush couldn’t do it. People have been trying to pass healthcare for 70 years. there are also about 100 other things I could mention that he passed with the most obstructionist congress ever. In his first two years he passed 3 historic laws with almost no Republican help- Obamacare, the stimlus and Dodd Frank. Historic bills.

    “He ran up over $4T in debt.”

    most of that is Bush era policies. study up. you don’t want to raise taxes anyway so how would you solve that? cuts like in europe? yeah, that will solve the debt problem…

    ” Bush’s numbers are low because he left office near the beginning of a huge recession. President Obama’s are higher because he started at the beginning of a huge recession.”

    unbelievable.

    The stimulus bill was largely designed to help large financial entities. There was some infrastructure stuff which helped with jobs, but he clearly didn’t make jobs his number one goal. But let’s say he did. If so, then clearly he’s a failure and should be sent packing.

    You’re blaming Congress for not closing Gitmo and doing nothing on immigration? The Democrats controlled Congress the first two years! That’s how they got Obamacare passed.

    Oh, as long as you want to bring up the deficit, you’re clearly wrong on it being due to Bush. President Obama is saying that he’s going to take the savings from the war to spend on other things! He’s still going to be running the same deficits! He thinks that if you don’t spend money they you have to borrow, that you can then spend it on something else. With thinking like that we’ll be having $1T deficits (or worse) each of the next four years if he’s reelected.

  410. 410

    By pfft @ 6:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 95:
    By Blurtman @ 93:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90 – Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq!!!!???

    You are kidding, right? That idiot should be in jail for war crimes.

    While Americans were dying, the Democrats were just playing politics rather than trying to help find a solution. They should be ashamed of themselves.

    unbelievable. Just unbelievable. I just don’t even want to really get into this…

    Yes, you shouldn’t want to get into Democrats not even trying to solve the Iraq problem while Americans were dying. They were happy to score political points at the cost of more American deaths and injuries. Beyond pathetic. But it got a lot of D’s elected in 2006. So it doesn’t matter how many more Americans died, right? /sarc

    President Obama is still like that today, but the stakes are merely jobs, not life and death. He proposes things he knows will not fly, while people are left unemployed.

  411. 411

    By pfft @ 406:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 95:
    By Blurtman @ 93:
    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 90 – Bush deserves credit for getting us out of Iraq!!!!???

    You are kidding, right? That idiot should be in jail for war crimes.

    While Americans were dying, the Democrats were just playing politics rather than trying to help find a solution. They should be ashamed of themselves.

    unbelievable. Just unbelievable. I just don’t even want to really get into this…

    BTW, please explain how pulling out of Iraq in the condition it was in during 2006 was a viable option? And if it was a viable option, please explain why the Democrats didn’t try to do what they promised to do in order to get elected in 2006? They knew it was a stupid idea, and only proposed it to get the votes of gullible people.

  412. 412
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 403 – 100,000 were estimated to have died during the invasion alone, in a Lancet peer reviewed publication conducted by epidemiologists from the Johns Hopkins University. Most of those were killed by coalition (i.e., mainly USA) air power, and were women and children. Many, many more were killed after the invasion, not only by coalition forces, but by the hell of sectarian violence that resulted from the destruction of the ruling infrastructure.

    And George W laughed about the rationale for the war. What an evil man.

    There were no WMD’s. And what if there were? So what.

    Bush decided to invade Iraq from day one, way before 9/11.

    He fabricated a case for the invasion, and his cronies brutally punished those who would dare to challenge the lies.

    He is one of the most evil presidents of all time. He and his crime partners Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld, should be in jail for war crimes.

    And Romney is using the same gang of neo-cons as advisers. God help us.

  413. 413

    George McGovern died. I liked him, but he did run a horrible campaign. As I recall he only won one state–Massachusetts, even though by then it was fairly clear Nixon was heavily involved in the Watergate coverup.

    I remember McGovern was ridiculed for suggesting you could stimulate the economy by giving every taxpayer $2,000. How this country has changed. Now we do that routinely, stealing the money from Social Security funds to do it.

  414. 414

    RE: Blurtman @ 412 – I’m not sure what you think happens during war. Civilians die.

    Back when Losh thinks “we” lost the war against Japan by dropping two atomic bombs, hundreds of thousands of civilians died. President Obama is killing civilians today, but denying it by claiming they’re terrorists because terrorists were nearby.

    http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/414704/may-31-2012/the-word—two-birds-with-one-drone

    There’s also a Gitmo solution there at the end.

  415. 415
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 414

    What we gained invading Iraq was the killing of a dictator?

    If killing a dictator was the goal, then Obama is a genius, because without us sending in thoudsands of troops Gaddafi is gone, as well as Mubarack.

    We should have never invaded Iraq, or put political prisoners, if that’s what they are, at Gitmo. These are messes that need to be cleaned up, but they are just messes.

    We could have, and should have, brought the Gitmo detainees to the United States to be tried, but we didn’t, too much controversy, too much risk. We should have tried Saddam, but we didn’t, we left his enemies to hang him.

    All of these people should have been handed over to the international community, but they were not.

    Now, these are the things conspiracy theories are made of. The Republicans have drawn a curtain, and the American people don’t know why. The best defense is a strong offense so attacking Obama makes sense from that perspective.

    I really don’t think of all the conspiracies the Republicans could be involved with, but I have been finding it extremely odd that Republicans would be promoting conspiracy theories concerning Fast, and Furious, a long time government program, or the killing of the Ambassador to Libya.

    Why would Republicans take these kinds of chances if they weren’t desperately hiding the fact Iraq was a waste of human life with no upside.

  416. 416
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 414 – Of course civilians die in a war. Commonly, women, children and the elderly.

    That is exactly why war must be used only as a last resort. Was the war in Iraq a war of last resort?

  417. 417
    Blurtman says:

    Marco Rubio has massive ears. Scary.

  418. 418

    By Blurtman @ 416:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 414 – Of course civilians die in a war. Commonly, women, children and the elderly.

    That is exactly why war must be used only as a last resort. Was the war in Iraq a war of last resort?

    Last resort? You could always do more to avoid doing anything. That’s not the test for war crimes.

    The test for war crimes is currently whether you’re deliberately targeting civilians. During WWII, both Germany and England deliberately targeted civilians, and arguably we did in Japan with our selection of the two cities (they weren’t major military targets).

  419. 419
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 418 – That is one criteria for war crimes once a war has been declared. Another time tested definition is a war of aggression, where a country attacks another another that has not attacked it.

  420. 420
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 418

    Shock, and awe was targeted at infrastructure like electricity in 1991. In 2003 shock, and awe targeted shopping malls, and the main market place in Bagdad.

    It was done twice, by both Bushes in a failed attempt to break the Iraqi people.

    Obama just gave the people of North Africa the hope we would stand behind them, on his “apology” tour.

    The Republicans have a lot of blood on their hands. They are protecting both Bush legacies without much to run with.

  421. 421
  422. 422

    By Blurtman @ 419:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 418 – That is one criteria for war crimes once a war has been declared. Another time tested definition is a war of aggression, where a country attacks another another that has not attacked it.

    Pure Bull! There’s always a country that attacks first.

    Name one instance where anyone on earth has been tried for war crimes just because their country was the aggressor. Losers in wars sometimes get tried for war crimes, but usually it’s for things that occurred during a war. Almost every war has an aggressor.

    Just because some anti-war types want to create a definition of war crime out of thin air, that doesn’t make it true.

  423. 423

    RE: David Losh @ 20 – David, you just make up facts. Clearly electricity production has no military use. /sarc

    BTW, did you forget why we went into Iraq the first time? Are you really trying to blame the first Bush for that? Seriously?

  424. 424

    As long as we’re talking about war and last resorts, everyone seems to agree that the military option will come into play if Iran goes too far. If not by us, by Israel.

    So who do you want to be president the next four years? The guy who hasn’t slowed down Iran a bit, and actually allowed them to speed things up?

    I will admit that Romney might not have any better luck though. But sometimes a change in president changes history.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis

  425. 425
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 422 – Yes, of course, the Nuremberg Principles were established by a bunch of anti-war peaceniks. And please note the use of “or” in VI(a)(i).

    “Principle VIPrinciple VI states,

    “The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

    (a) Crimes against peace:
    (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Principles

    “A war of aggression, sometimes also war of conquest, is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense, usually for territorial gain and subjugation.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression

  426. 426
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 423

    We went to war because Bush senior ignored requests for money that Saddam wanted in his war with Iran, and second Bush failed to negotiate out the claims of slant drilling into Iraq from Kuwait.

    Bush played a dangerous game, and we all lost.

    As far as Israel, if they attack Iran they will be wiped off the face of the earth.

    Romney would never understand that.

  427. 427
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 417:

    Marco Rubio has massive ears. Scary.

    he also doesn’t believe in equal for equal work for women.

    Top Romney Surrogate Says Pay Equity Legislation Is ‘Nothing But An Effort To Help Trial Lawyers’
    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/10/21/1055021/top-romney-surrogate-says-pay-equity-legislation-is-nothing-but-an-effort-to-help-trial-lawyers/

  428. 428
  429. 429

    RE: Blurtman @ 25 – I asked you to name one person on the planet who has been charged with a war crime under your standard. There have been lots of wars, and in each one there is one party which is the aggressor. But no one ever charged.

  430. 430

    By David Losh @ 26:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 423 – We went to war because Bush senior ignored requests for money that Saddam wanted in his war with Iran, and second Bush failed to negotiate out the claims of slant drilling into Iraq from Kuwait.

    Bush played a dangerous game, and we all lost.

    You really are unbelievable. Yes, it was Bush’s fault that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. /sarc

    But I think the slant dealing issue was the first Iraq war, not the second.

  431. 431

    RE: pfft @ 27 – You’re going to start reporting on surrogates? I think the candidates themselves say enough stupid things–both of them. We don’t need to expand this.

  432. 432

    Maybe the administration has a defense on their Libya stories.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/1022/Presidential-debate-Do-new-reports-on-Libya-change-the-story

    Amazing though that it takes 10 days for the CIA to figure out what the State Department knew from the start, and what was apparent in some press reports early on.

  433. 433

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 432
    These were the same folks that assured us all that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. No, Romney is not George W Bush. But he’s depending on many Bush staffers for their “expertise”, so, no matter how they argue with each other tonight on foreign policy, it’s pretty likely that the foreign policy differences between Romney and Obama are miniscule.

  434. 434
    David Losh says:

    Your comment 423 references the First Iraq bombings of shock, and awe, with George Bush Senior.

    The first set of bombings targeted electricity, without an invasion of the country. Targeting electric grids impacted the civilian population much more than it had any use militarily.

  435. 435
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 431:

    RE: pfft @ 27 – You’re going to start reporting on surrogates? I think the candidates themselves say enough stupid things–both of them. We don’t need to expand this.

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 431: