What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[JohnnySavage]

For 9,000 posts now, this thread has been nothing but a bunch of uneducated children cluttering my first page with stupid insults. None of you can be over 12 years old.

Laurel should rename this, "The Neverending Extremists Cry Baby Blurt Thread"

For Christ's sake, give it a rest.

 

[koalabear]

For 9,000 posts now, this thread has been nothing but a bunch of uneducated children cluttering my first page with stupid insults. None of you can be over 12 years old.

Laurel should rename this, "The Neverending Extremists Cry Baby Blurt Thread"

For Christ's sake, give it a rest.

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/ththhair5-1.gif

 

[IrezumiKiss]

For 9,000 posts now, this thread has been nothing but a bunch of uneducated children cluttering my first page with stupid insults. None of you can be over 12 years old.

Laurel should rename this, "The Neverending Extremists Cry Baby Blurt Thread"

For Christ's sake, give it a rest.

Would've all been solved with a political forum section.

It is what it is. You just have to keep on living and outlast the next guy for the last word. Welcome to the Great Game.

 

[mercury14]

Bump.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Would've all been solved with a political forum section.

It is what it is. You just have to keep on living and outlast the next guy for the last word. Welcome to the Great Game.

I like the political threads here, but usually an actual discussion only lasts the first few posts before the extremists on both sides pollute it. This is a hall of fame thread for dumbassary though.

 

[koalabear]

I like the political threads here, but usually an actual discussion only lasts the first few posts before the extremists on both sides pollute it. This is a hall of fame thread for dumbassary though.

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn233/koalabear_photo/bicycle.gif

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

It is my opinion. I was a conservative before anybody ever heard of Rush Limbaugh. Obama has surrounded himself with some of the most radical people in America, and the fact that you don't or can't see it illustrates the futility of trying to educate you any further.

Yet you can't name one single judge that Obama has nominated that's an extremist. You can't even name one at all (they're difficult to find out about). But despite your utter lack of knowing well, anything about this topic, you've taken up the position that Obama's nominations are intolerable.

Taking up solid positions in the face of complete ignorance seems reasonable to you, huh? Apparently the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't even lead you to pause for one second in forming your "opinion"...

 

[eyer]

Germany May be Ready to Surrender in Fight to Save Greece

Germany may be getting ready to give up on Greece.

After almost two years of fighting to contain the region’s debt crisis and providing the biggest share of three European bailouts, Chancellor Angela Merkel is laying the ground for what markets say is almost a sure thing: a Greek default.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...nder-in-fight-to-save-greece-euro-credit.html

 

[koalabear]

Yet you can't name one single judge that Obama has nominated that's an extremist. You can't even name one at all (they're difficult to find out about). But despite your utter lack of knowing well, anything about this topic, you've taken up the position that Obama's nominations are intolerable.

Taking up solid positions in the face of complete ignorance seems reasonable to you, huh? Apparently the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't even lead you to pause for one second in forming your "opinion"...

Says Soros, MORON.

 

[mercury14]

Soros told me to iggy you.

koalabear
This message is hidden because koalabear is on your ignore list.

 

[koalabear]

Soros told me to iggy you.

koalabear
This message is hidden because koalabear is on your ignore list.

No doubt he did, MORON.

 

[koalabear]

As Harvard Law Dean, Elena Kagan Did Not Require Study of U.S. Constitutional Law But Did Require Study of International and Foreign Law.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RightField]

Of course Republicans have never attacked their own temporary stimulus policies for being temporary. Why not?

Gotta love this hypocrisy. Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and other Republicans have been asking for a temporary employer-side payroll tax cut for the past year. Now when they get it, they attack it as bad policy.

And you call this leadership? Waffling hypocrisy is what you want to see in our leaders?

There is a big difference between the gimmics that Obama is using to no avail and the successful marginal reductions that Kennedy, Reagan and Bush implemented. The "cuts" that you talk about are completely different and have different results and therefore there is no hypocracy at all.


The Latest Jobs Plan
More temporary and targeted tax cuts and spending increases..

If President Obama's economic policies have had a signature flaw, it is the conceit that by pulling this or that policy lever, by spending more on this program or cutting that tax for a year, Washington can manipulate the $15 trillion U.S. economy to grow. With his speech last night to Congress, the President is giving that strategy one more government try.

This is not to say that Mr. Obama hasn't made any intellectual progress across his 32 months in office. He now admits the damage that overregulation can do, though he can't do much to stop it without repealing his own legislative achievements. He now acts as if he believes that taxes matter to investment and hiring, at least for the next year. And he now sees the wisdom of fiscal discipline, albeit starting only in 2013.

Yet the underlying theory and practice of the familiar ideas that the President proposed last night are those of the government conjurer. More targeted, temporary tax cuts; more spending now with promises of restraint later; the fifth (or is it sixth?) plan to reduce housing foreclosures; and more public works spending, though this time we're told the projects really will be shovel-ready.

We'd like to support a plan to spur the economy, which is certainly struggling. Had Mr. Obama proposed a permanent cut in tax rates, or a major tax reform, or a moratorium on all new regulations for three years, he'd have our support. But you have to really, really believe in hope and change to think that another $300-$400 billion in new deficit spending and temporary tax cuts will do any better than the $4 trillion in debt that the Obama years have already piled up.

We've had the biggest Keynesian stimulus in decades. The new argument that the 2009 stimulus wasn't big enough isn't what we heard then. Americans were told it would create 3.5 million new jobs and unemployment would stay below 8% and be falling by 2011. It is now 9.1%. But this stimulus we are told will make all the difference.

Mr. Obama spoke last night as if he is a converted tax-cutter, asking Republicans to expand and extend the payroll tax cut that expires in December for one more year. Along with tax credits for certain businesses that hire new employees, he says this will cut unemployment, and no doubt it will lead to some more hiring.

But what happens in 2013 when those tax rates expire and Mr. Obama pledges to hit thousands of those same small businesses with higher tax rates on income, capital gains and dividends? He seems to think businesses operate only in the present and will ignore the tax burdens coming at them down the road. This is the same reasoning that assumed that postponing ObamaCare's tax and regulatory burdens until 2014 would have no effect on business hiring in the meantime.

The same logic applies to Mr. Obama's claim that everything in his new proposal is "paid for." Yes, but only according to the usual 10-year Washington budget window that pushes all of the hard choices into the future, in this case after the election. So Mr. Obama gets to spend more now while promising to save later. This is also how the Administration claimed that a new $1 trillion health-care entitlement would reduce the deficit. It also means he can put more money in the pockets of dues-paying teachers unions and government workers.

The larger political subtext of Mr. Obama's speech is that if Congress doesn't pass his plan, he'll then campaign against Republicans as obstructionist. Thus his speech mantra that Congress should "pass it right away." This ignores that Mr. Obama has been the least obstructed President since LBJ in 1965 or FDR in 1933, which is how we got here.

He passed $830 billion in stimulus, $3 billion for cash for clunkers, $30 billion in small business loans, $30 billion for mortgage modification, the GM-Chrysler bailouts, ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank, credit card price controls, Build America Bonds, jobless benefits for a record 99 weeks, and more.

The only priorities that a Democratic Congress blocked were cap-and-tax and union card check, and both of those would have further damaged growth and jobs. Even last December, after Republicans had retaken the House, Mr. Obama won his one-year payroll tax cut, more jobless benefits and most of what he wanted.

The unfortunate reality is that even if Republicans gave Mr. Obama everything he wanted, the impact on growth would be modest at best. Washington can most help the economy with serious spending restraint, permanent tax-rate cuts, regulatory relief and repeal of ObamaCare. What won't help growth is more temporary, targeted political conjuring.

 

[mercury14]

Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Now shut the fuck up.

You are a total ass, the Senate is run by a Democrat majority. If Obama is having trouble tell him to take to easy on the radicals, and all might get better. How many recess appointments has he had to make because they were too radical to get through the Senate. Obama has made at least 15 recess appointments that have failed to get Senate confirmation.

THOSE are your extremists? BWAHAHAHA!

But no, sorry. I was talking about outstanding judicial appointments. You know, the ones you have a rock-solid opinion about despite being unable to name even one of them?

Republicans are holding up nominations for reasons such as supporting abortion rights. Nevermind that it's long-settled law. Nevermind that circuit court judges are unlikely to ever hear an abortion case in their entire career. The fact is that Republicans want Obama to submit conservative judges. If they aren't conservatives, well they're going to get held up.

And with the election a little over a year out why would Republicans let any of Obama's nominations proceed?

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Van Jones fits the bill too, as does Lisa Jackson, and Valerie Jarrett.

I'll give you Van Jones as a maybe, but everyone else you've mentioned? You couldn't reach for more straw if you were locked in a hayloft.

 

[mercury14]

There is a big difference between the gimmics that Obama is using to no avail and the successful marginal reductions that Kennedy, Reagan and Bush implemented. The "cuts" that you talk about are completely different and have different results and therefore there is no hypocracy at all.

Nobody cares about your C&P tsunami. Nobody ever reads it.

Secondly, not even republicans are asking for a permanent payroll tax cut.

Thirdly, what's your plan to pay for a permanent rate cut? That has a profound impact on the deficit you know..

Fourth, as Vetteman pointed out, tax cuts on employers aren't going to create jobs.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

What else could a radical leftist say? Even Obama had to restrain Jackson.

I agree, every pres lets a fruit loop slip in now and then. That's what the confirmation process is for and I agree with it.

That doesn't mean that all the other appointees are extremists though. Republicans know health care reform cases are coming through circuit courts right now and it benefits their political agenda to have Bush-era judges there and not Obama ones.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

I didn't hear you complaining when Obama name 15 plus recess appointments to circumvent the confirmation process.

Well for one those 15 weren't even judges but mid-level executive posts in Obama's own administration. Obama warned the Republicans for months to stop stalling and let an up or down vote take place. What did Republicans do? They stalled even more.

The White House said the 15 appointees have waited an average of 214 days for a Senate confirmation vote. In all, the White House said, Obama has 217 nominees pending before the Senate, including 77 who are only awaiting a final floor vote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/27/AR2010032703085.html?hpid=topnews

Republicans simply don't want the Obama administration to be able to fill its own posts unless they're with conservatives.


Like I said, what's happening is that Republicans think they may be able to win the election that's {cough} 14 months away. So they're going to stall as much as possible in order to keep Obama judges out of the system. Nevermind that 47 open judicial posts are listed as emergency vacancies due to overwhelming caseloads. Party first!

 

[mercury14]

The vast majority of Obama's nominations passed unanimously once they got a vote. No Obama court of appeals nominees were confirmed with less than a 20-vote margin. And only 1 out of 74 nominees were confirmed in a vote that was even remotely close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_judges_appointed_by_Barack_Obama

How many recess appointments has he had to make because they were too radical to get through the Senate.

None are too radical to get through the senate. When it comes time to vote on them they'll all pass.