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 damning 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…

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

    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.

Leave a Reply

Use your email address to sign up with Gravatar for a custom avatar.
Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please read the rules before posting a comment.