Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I happened to come across an article by a political analyst Derek Hunter which reflects my views 100%. I don't recall reading his other articles, but I am looking forward to it. Perhaps you might find his article as interesting as I did. The following is his link:
It's Mourning in America - Derek Hunter - Townhall Conservative
Fun read by a true partisan hack. He seems to be of the opinion that since things are bad now, and Obama is President, Obama is responsible for every bad thing. Despite this, he offers ZERO evidence to support his opinion and offers ZERO examples of what Obama did to make things worse.
Like I said, it was fun to read a piece by someone who was bent on only trying to assign blame, but over all, it's crap.
Wow are you fucking stupid.So Obama had no plan when he ran?
Obama Slams McCain's Economic Policies - YouTube
Gotta love that revisionist history.
Yes, Obama had an economic plan when he campaigned. But, if you're being honest, you would also talk about how the Financial Crisis didn't hit until the last month of campaigning. Obama was not elected to fix the Financial Crisis, but that's the only thing you guys ever use as a bench mark. Kinda funny in a sad way.
McCain, Obama headed to Washington for bailout talks - CNN
Obama was elected SPECIFICALLY because he appeared to have answers to the unfolding crisis while McCain was clueless. McCain had been gaining in the polls until then and when the crisis hit Obama pulled way ahead of him.
But even if what you write were true, Obama had from Sep to inauguration in January to formulate a policy. The Stimulus was the result of that. And we see how that turned out.
The snag is of course is McCain would have done much of the same things, presidents run the economy from the same playbook, regardless of party affiliation. And presidents may only implement the policies Congress will allow.
The author makes the same mistake as most partisan conservatives in that presidents have little short-term impact on the economy we often dont see the result of a given presidents policies until years, perhaps decades, after those policies are implemented.
Given the severe and comprehensive damage the economy sustained after the December 2007 recession, theres little or nothing Obama could have done to further damage the economy: one cant make a disaster out of a disaster. And any effort to fix such a devastated economy by Obama, McCain, Bush, or Reagan, for that matter - would be utterly futile.
If McCain would have done the same thing why do you support Obama? I thought everyone who voted for him wanted change.
Presidential administrations actually have quite a bit impact on short term economic cycles. it is the long term ones they have difficulty managing. Reagan's policies had enough immediate impact on the economy that he was able to get reelected based on them, and the fact that everyone could see that things were getting better. Obama's, on the other hand, have failed miserably.
Hmm. Obama's policies failed miserably huh? So, we lost the auto industry? We have 11% unemployment? The economy is shrinking? Fewer people have health insurance?
No?
Hmm.
So, you think I'm stupid, but then you post a link that totally supports and backs up what I wrote? Well, you are The Rabbi. You do tend to selectively ignore reality.
So, you think I'm stupid, but then you post a link that totally supports and backs up what I wrote? Well, you are The Rabbi. You do tend to selectively ignore reality.
I can live with woefully unaware. Show of hands?
I happened to come across an article by a political analyst Derek Hunter which reflects my views 100%. I don't recall reading his other articles, but I am looking forward to it. Perhaps you might find his article as interesting as I did. The following is his link:
It's Mourning in America - Derek Hunter - Townhall Conservative
Fun read by a true partisan hack. He seems to be of the opinion that since things are bad now, and Obama is President, Obama is responsible for every bad thing. Despite this, he offers ZERO evidence to support his opinion and offers ZERO examples of what Obama did to make things worse.
Like I said, it was fun to read a piece by someone who was bent on only trying to assign blame, but over all, it's crap.
Apparently Derek Hunter by quoting numerous actual facts supported by reality somehow escapes your ability to comprehend them into claiming that is "ZERO evidence" and "ZERO examples".
Wow are you fucking stupid.Gotta love that revisionist history.
Yes, Obama had an economic plan when he campaigned. But, if you're being honest, you would also talk about how the Financial Crisis didn't hit until the last month of campaigning. Obama was not elected to fix the Financial Crisis, but that's the only thing you guys ever use as a bench mark. Kinda funny in a sad way.
McCain, Obama headed to Washington for bailout talks - CNN
Obama was elected SPECIFICALLY because he appeared to have answers to the unfolding crisis while McCain was clueless. McCain had been gaining in the polls until then and when the crisis hit Obama pulled way ahead of him.
But even if what you write were true, Obama had from Sep to inauguration in January to formulate a policy. The Stimulus was the result of that. And we see how that turned out.
So, you think I'm stupid, but then you post a link that totally supports and backs up what I wrote? Well, you are The Rabbi. You do tend to selectively ignore reality.
If McCain would have done the same thing why do you support Obama? I thought everyone who voted for him wanted change.
Presidential administrations actually have quite a bit impact on short term economic cycles. it is the long term ones they have difficulty managing. Reagan's policies had enough immediate impact on the economy that he was able to get reelected based on them, and the fact that everyone could see that things were getting better. Obama's, on the other hand, have failed miserably.
Hmm. Obama's policies failed miserably huh? So, we lost the auto industry? We have 11% unemployment? The economy is shrinking? Fewer people have health insurance?
No?
Hmm.
Subsidizing the auto industry, and inundating the various Big Unions with payola for being Obama supporters, Immeldt, Obama's Jobs Czar, blatantly sending jobs overseas, having China build bridges for San Francisco and New York, ignoring the crippling 9.1 unemployment and 16% underemployment, the devastation of the stock market that is wiping out the Nation's savings, secretly foisting Obamacare from behind closed doors that 70% of the nation doesn't want, and is not only more expensive than the previous insurance but socialistic in nature that prevents free choice and rations medical care a la the patently flawed European model somehow escapes your delusional awareness ?????
Why doncha "Don't Be Stupid" ???????
Wow are you fucking stupid.
McCain, Obama headed to Washington for bailout talks - CNN
Obama was elected SPECIFICALLY because he appeared to have answers to the unfolding crisis while McCain was clueless. McCain had been gaining in the polls until then and when the crisis hit Obama pulled way ahead of him.
But even if what you write were true, Obama had from Sep to inauguration in January to formulate a policy. The Stimulus was the result of that. And we see how that turned out.
So, you think I'm stupid, but then you post a link that totally supports and backs up what I wrote? Well, you are The Rabbi. You do tend to selectively ignore reality.
It actually contradicts what you wrote. But you're too stupid to notice.
The snag is of course is McCain would have done much of the same things, presidents run the economy from the same playbook, regardless of party affiliation. And presidents may only implement the policies Congress will allow.
The author makes the same mistake as most partisan conservatives in that presidents have little short-term impact on the economy – we often don’t see the result of a given president’s policies until years, perhaps decades, after those policies are implemented.
Given the severe and comprehensive damage the economy sustained after the December 2007 recession, there’s little or nothing Obama could have done to further ‘damage’ the economy: one can’t make a disaster out of a disaster. And any effort to ‘fix’ such a devastated economy – by Obama, McCain, Bush, or Reagan, for that matter - would be utterly futile.
If McCain would have done the same thing why do you support Obama? I thought everyone who voted for him wanted change.
Presidential administrations actually have quite a bit impact on short term economic cycles. it is the long term ones they have difficulty managing. Reagan's policies had enough immediate impact on the economy that he was able to get reelected based on them, and the fact that everyone could see that things were getting better. Obama's, on the other hand, have failed miserably.
Hmm. Obama's policies failed miserably huh? So, we lost the auto industry? We have 11% unemployment? The economy is shrinking? Fewer people have health insurance?
No?
Hmm.
Do you ever think? There is no playbook solution to the fuck up that was George W. Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh.
So Obama had no plan when he ran?
Obama Slams McCain's Economic Policies - YouTube
Gotta love that revisionist history.
Yes, Obama had an economic plan when he campaigned. But, if you're being honest, you would also talk about how the Financial Crisis didn't hit until the last month of campaigning. Obama was not elected to fix the Financial Crisis, but that's the only thing you guys ever use as a bench mark. Kinda funny in a sad way.
I happened to come across an article by a political analyst Derek Hunter which reflects my views 100%. I don't recall reading his other articles, but I am looking forward to it. Perhaps you might find his article as interesting as I did. The following is his link:
It's Mourning in America - Derek Hunter - Townhall Conservative
The Solyndra debacle has cost taxpayers at least a half- billion dollars. But rather than take a breath and seriously re-evaluate its viability, the administration is rushing to push through $9 billion more in similar loans to green companies before the Sept. 30 deadline for the subsidy program. The examples go on and on.
The Obama administration seems to share the mindset of almost all progressives that the sheer force of their will can overrule reality. It cant.
Fun read by a true partisan hack. He seems to be of the opinion that since things are bad now, and Obama is President, Obama is responsible for every bad thing. Despite this, he offers ZERO evidence to support his opinion and offers ZERO examples of what Obama did to make things worse.
Like I said, it was fun to read a piece by someone who was bent on only trying to assign blame, but over all, it's crap.
Apparently Derek Hunter by quoting numerous actual facts supported by reality somehow escapes your ability to comprehend them into claiming that is "ZERO evidence" and "ZERO examples".
Did you actually read my post? Or are you just confused?
Hunter talks about the 9.1% unemployment, and yes that is a fact. He talks about a $787B stimulus bill, and yes, that's a fact. He talks about the debt numbers, again, fact. But then he claims "every move this president has made has served only to broaden the circle and expand the bottom" and proceeds to offer ZERO examples of HOW Obama did this.
But of course, maybe I missed it while reading. Perhaps you would like to quote for all of us the examples Hunter lists of HOW Obama has made the economy worse.
So, you think I'm stupid, but then you post a link that totally supports and backs up what I wrote? Well, you are The Rabbi. You do tend to selectively ignore reality.
It actually contradicts what you wrote. But you're too stupid to notice.
Really? How so? I said it was about a month left in the campaigns when the Crisis hit, and the article backs me up. At that point, Obama had not released any plans of a stimulus.
So what I said was correct. And you backed me up
That article makes perfect sense if you ignore all history previous to the day Obama took office.
Sadly for the GOP, the world of the reality based thinkers doesn't work that way.
