Obama says there is 'network of misinformation' about him

That would be the Fox network.

Well, I watched a little bit of it. Enough to see Beck setting himself up as another Jonathan Edwards, another Leader of another Great Awakening.

Glen is bringing us back to Jesus.

He was downright biblical.

However, he fell far short of attracting 2 million people to the Mall, the way Obama did.

And it wasn't even a cold day in January.....

Sorry, Glen. Next time you want to measure the size of your ***** against Obama's, best to pick a venue where the comparison won't show how SHORT you measure up......

Someone pointed out that Lincoln's opponents put out a rumor he was Catholic, and Roosevelt's enemies whispered he was Jewish....

Which tells you a lot about their opponents.....

So, in a way, the canards and false statements the right wingers are trying to spread about Obama are evidence of their desperation.....

They fear him as Lincoln's and FDR's enemies feared them.....

Such a hard-hitting interview!! He had thousands of people and vessels at the oil spill? Pure poppycock! They turned down help from the outset and the U.S. federal government basically did not respond to the crisis for days and weeks! The facts are the facts, Obimbo, and your presidency is ONE MASSIVE FAILURE!

Uhhh, mr. vacationer-in-chief...we don't need to see your "birth certificate plastered on your forehead"...we would just like to see it!
Oh, and not the short form birth certificate you tried to snooker the American people with...we'd like to see the long form, ya know...the one with the doctors signature, what time you were born, your father and mothers occupation, what country you were you born in?
We'd also like to see your grades in college and your medical records...Bush showed his and so did McCain...In other words...what are you trying to hide???

Paulo

I agree the network is the Main Stream Media. The truth is found in Obama's statements, his life and his actions. 20 years in a Black Liberation Theology Church. He sees Jesus as a historical figure, NOT a spiritual figure. In his book he talks about his friends in college:

To avoid being mistaken for a sellout,I chose my friends carefully.The more politically active black students.The foreign students.The Chicanos.The Marxist Professors and the structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.

“Structural feminist theory focuses on social structures, notably patriarchy and capitalism that oppress women. Theorists in this tradition emphasize the dominating influence of these social structures, but by doing so they also tend to construe women as passive. Despite their somewhat deterministic view of women’s circumstances, structural feminists nevertheless call for resistance toward the mechanisms in families, schools, and workplaces that serve to reproduce oppressive relations of power.”

Then there is his college friend that remembers Obama as a stanch Soviet Style Marxist/Leninist constantly arguing in favor of that philosophy.

http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2010/02/face-to-face-with-young-marxist-obama.html

Sure, he could have been a radical Marxist in college and changed like many did. Except that he didn't. He tried to minimized Reverend Wright, tried to lie about him, and finally threw him under the bus. Reverend Wright is a Black Liberation Theologian whose philosophy is based on...guess what?...Marxism.

Let's start with his faith - I personally don't care if he is muslim or Christian. I think the reason have a problem with believing that he is Christian is that he has a mixed background of being raised Muslim, Athist, and Christian. Yes, he attended Rev Wright's church fior 20 years. If he wants to put to rest some of the rumors, why doesn't he find a church in DC and attend it every so often?

His birth dertificate - he could juts produce and put the whole issue to rest (I think he was born in Hawaii - it would be one heck of a conspiracy if that Hawaiian newspapers from 1961 were in on it.) I truthfully think he wants this issue to continue to linger.

Both of these issues have their beilievers on the fringes just as there are plent of people out there that believe that President Bush knew that 9-11 was going to happen or was acutually carried out by the Bush Administration. Neither side has a monopoly on nuts.

BP Oil spill - "we had immediately thousands of vessels". I guess its how you define "immediately". Response was very slow.

On the economy - "Target areas like clean energy". Here lies part of his problem - he thinks this small slice of the economy will pull the whole economy from the bottom of cliff that his policies have put us. He wants the gov't to pick the winners and losers instead of the market place. Lower taxes and regulations and the private sector will put some of that $1.9 Trillion in cash that is sitting idle to use and watch the jobs grow.

The infrastructure spending basically was a shift in timing and a payout to the unions.

His financial system policies have caused credit to freeze and thus job creation has disappeared. The Dodd-Frank bill, although a couple of 1000 pages long, is very vague and the actual rules will be determined by regulators. Businesses don't know the rules, businesses sit on their capital.

I didn't watch Glenn Beck either - don't know if it was carried on any channel.

I think BO has been focused on the debt and deficits. Something as large as he has made them, how could he not focus on them?
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/05/past-deficits-vs-obamas-deficits-in-pictures/

He has added in his 19+ months about $2.6 Trillion to the national debt.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

The man who goes around touting a "Recovery summer" complains that somebody ELSE is spreading misinformation?
And a side note: the interview was by Brian Williams, formerly employed at Jimmy Carter's White House, for NBC, the network that joined with CBS and ABC to give Democrats 7 times as much campaign cash than they give Republicans.Biased media, anyone?

BTW, notice how The White House's Swamp auxiliary doesn't cover the massive Beck rally? The only Swamp "coverage" is a Democrat's response to the rally!
Wouldn't it be a refreshing change of pace to have a media that reported both sides?

There's been a network, since President Obama and Vice-President Biden were elected. The lead stooge is Fox Noise, partially owned by some Saudi prince, in the cavalcade of Corporate Media hit squads, made up of mindless Media marionettes!!
The priceless element in this whole, non-story, President Obama has been able to fulfill a good many of his campaign promises, in spite of the ventriloquists, the Corporations, and their dummies, the Republican-Libertarian-T.Baggers.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

What misinformation? Like when Barry said he never heard his crazy, racist, anti American Reverend say anything crazy racist or anti American? Thats a WHOPPER!!!!!!

I guess ultimately the birf cert thing ended up making the birfers look foolish at best and deranged at worst.

Let's see, what else? School transcripts? Some term paper? Medical records, showing what?

High cholesterol? Hay fever?

Is that all ya got? Better just concede '12 and save yourselves a lot of $$$.

Observations on 3 Anniversaries--Katrina, "I Have a Dream," and Mother Theresa

This past weekend witnessed a trifecta of momentous anniversaries. Katrina happened 5 years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream Speech” on the Washington Mall 47 years ago, and Mother Theresa was born a century ago.

It is already five years since August 29th, 2005, since the incredibly devastating Category 3 hurricane Katrina, the costliest storm in our history, the deadliest storm to strike the United States in 83 years, all but wiped out much of the City of New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward as well as laying waste to vast other areas of the Gulf Coast.

Testimony to the remarkable resilience of humankind and the human spirit, with the exception of that Ninth Ward, an area catastrophically flooded by Katrina’s storm surge, reinundated a month later by Hurricane Rita, and still largely devastated, most affected Gulf Coast communities have been rebuilt, if not fully recovered.

Much, perhaps too much, has been written about the failures surrounding Katrina: the failures of the levees, the failures of Michael Brown and FEMA, the failures of Democrat Governor Kathleen Blanco and the Republican President George W. Bush, the failures of the Superdome, the failures of government in general in not doing more to alert New Orleans of the impending disaster, to save more lives, to assist in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane, to reconstruct the destroyed, and to console the afflicted.

That focus on failure may have been “too much” for three significant reasons, the first of which is a reason based on the common sense shared by ten year olds but not by politicians, city planners, and builders. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1869)

Here is an example of MSM bias from Mark Silva. Used to "run" The Swamp. Mark also made sure that the tape of Obama with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and ???? never was released to the public. Mark is such a good leftist, and I'm sure is still obsessed with Sarah Palin.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/08/sarah_palin_glenn_beck_worth_w.html

I do not watch Glen Beck on television but I do watch the program that follows his, Special Report wtih Brit Baier.

I must admit that Beck did draw an impressive crowd to the Mall this past Saturday. I heard on ABC that it was between 300,000 and 500,000 individuals. Yes, they were mostly white people and were in middle age and they were respectful and appeared to be the type that you would love to have as your neighbors.

Al Sharpton drew all of 3,000 individuals to his event and it was reported that they were mainly affiliated with SEIU. Even the main-stream-media was ashamed of all of the coverage they gave this individual after they saw the paucity of the response they it received to the build up they gave it.

The scary thing for the Democrats is the crowd that Beck attracted is the fact that they are the most likely individuals to vote in a mid-term election.

If I were a elected Democrat politician I would be very afraid that I will be joining the unemployment line this winter no matter how much help the media tries to give me!

All one has to do is turn on Fox's coverage of combat troops leaving Iraq to see the real story. it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that enemy would make several attacks after we left for show. Now with the help of Fox, they can make a bigger show than they deserve. Bravo great "Americns", you now work for the Taliban.

Obama says there is 'network of misinformation' about him.
------------------------------------
If NBC news and others did their jobs & reported the "negative stories" as they happened instead of letting Fox News solely reoport on them, they would not be confused. The confusion comes when you are trying to catch up on 2 weeks of past reporting. Ignoring stories does not make them go away as they hoped. The only thing anyone is confused about is the GDP going down in 3 sucessive quarters but the Obama adm. continues to state the Economic Recovery act is working. Stop trying to BS us!

* * * * *
Posted by: bill r. | August 30, 2010 9:02 AM
.
Honestly, bill, I feel ashamed for you. This is one of the dumbest posts, or one of the worst attempts at tongue-in-cheek humor, that I have ever seen you make.
.
Do you honestly think that Iraqi terrorists are watching Fox News, or that they need Fox News, to tell them that troops are leaving? Are you serious? Every mother loving newspaper and television station from here to the United Arab Emirates has been covering the troop draw-down for some time now. See, e.g. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/08/201081818840122963.html , http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-08/17/c_13449411.htm , http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2010/1010/re2.htm , http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2010/08/05/115740.html , and so on. I mean, crimony, the plan has been a matter of public record for more than a year and a half, and the Iraqi parliament voted to approve the withdrawal timetable even before Obama took office. And YOU lay the blame at the foot of Fox News for disseminating this information? Either you are kidding or the Kool-Aid has been especially strong lately. Yikes!

John W., what are the odds of Obama even mentioning the SOFA in tomorrow's speech? I say 1/1000. The speech will be classic BO - nothing technically dishonest, but frequently intellectually dishonest. He will mislead people into believing that the deadlines he is following were his idea. The SOFA mandated troops out of Iraqi cities by July 2009, and out of Iraq completely by the end of 2011. It is to Obama’s credit that he complied with the former deadline, and appears on pace for the latter. It is also to his credit that he (at least implicitly) admitted he was wrong about the “Surge” by admitting it succeeded “beyond our wildest dreams”. Too bad these details will be missing from his speech tomorrow, but then again, facts don’t make good propaganda.

Do you honestly think that Iraqi terrorists are watching Fox News, or that they need Fox News, to tell them that troops are leaving?

Posted by: John W. | August 30, 2010 11:59 AM

Talk about dumb....The audience they are trying to reach aren't the terrorists...Duh!!!!! It's the mindless thinkers like you who see no progress in anything during this administration.

* * * * *
Posted by: bill r. | August 30, 2010 12:48 PM
.
Excuse me? YOU were the one who suggested that Fox News is somehow aiding and abetting the Taliban through its coverage of the troop draw-down. That was plainly stupid, and it makes your most recent assault asinine.
.
And you think I’m a “mindless thinker” (an oxymoron) who sees no progress during the current administration? Well, if you are talking about the withdrawal from Iraq, it’s nice that the administration is keeping its treaty and contractual obligations to Iraq. However, as Herbie H. alluded to previously, the troop withdrawal is not Obama’s doing. He didn’t broker the SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) deal back in 2008 that set the timetable. He is merely following through with it, which is good.
.
Other than that, I see unemployment progressing higher (with real unemployment numbers looming at greater than 17%). I also see the numbers for the GDP, housing sales, new jobs, and the economy in general progressing straight into the toilet. So, please, spare me the nonsense about not seeing progress during this administration. I see it all right, but I see the progress moving in the wrong direction.
.
Unlike you, I don’t see all the big price-tag items like Obamacare, the new financial regulations, higher taxes or a number of the proposed environmental regulations as “progress.” In case you can’t connect the dots, I’ll spell it out for you. They are job killers. This is the stuff causing the ‘capital strike’ we are now experiencing. Our non-business savvy administration doesn’t seem to realize that injecting uncertainty into the market and loading businesses up with these new mandates is what has caused businesses to stop hiring, and could well cause them to start laying off more people (if the same businesses don’t simply don’t go belly up entirely). These people are going to wait and see what happens as a result of all these new rules and obligations to calculate whether they can hire more people or even stay in business. Banks, too, are going to hold onto their money to see if they are going to take a bath. Many of them are still worried about fallout from the housing crisis. Yeah, some progress bill, some progress.

* * * * *
Posted by: Herbie H. | August 30, 2010 12:37 PM
.
I don’t hold out any hope that Obama will ever mention the SOFA. Unlike you, however, I would consider it both technically and intellectually dishonest for Obama to omit any mention of it and/or claim credit for the result of the agreement on troop withdrawals in which he had no hand. Our withdrawal from Iraq is, after all, merely compliance with an agreement that was inked and ratified before he became President. It’s great that he has fulfilled that agreement, but the alternative would have been to break a treaty. Yet, Obama has been claiming that HE is keeping a campaign promise by withdrawing troops from Iraq. He makes it sound like he is responsible for the deal, when he never was. How you call that anything but dishonest, I don’t know.

John W.....You obviously can,t connect the dots, and while you want the hole filled in on the economy that took you 8 years to create in 18 months, outside of the 1 year surge, that seems to leave about 8 years of mismanaged wars at a tune of how many billions? I guess unlike you, i can't see the high price paid for mismanaging money and lives.

John W.,
Perhaps you'd like to comment on the recent study published by independent economists who agree that the Stimulus produced between 2.5 - 4.5 million jobs? Of course you wouldn't because that would be giving credit to the other team. You're partisanship is transparent. Oh before you or any of your lemming friends chimes in about a promise that unemployement wouldn't exceed 8%, that was already breached before ARRA was signed into law. So we'll never know if that promise couldn't be kept but we do know we were losing 3/4 of a million jobs per month prior to passage and that has been greatly reduced. Would you like me to bring more facts to the table?

Posted by: bill r. | August 30, 2010 2:22 PM

Any thoughts on the role congress has/had played in creating the current economic situation? Or... do you plan on sticking to your imperial presidency view of our government..?

For context- one of the first- (if not the first)- act of congress once the DEMS gained a majority was to immediately raise the minimum wage- if that wasn't an omen of the coming job and investment killing assault on business and employers I don't know what was... DEMS began their assumption of power by immediately introducing fear and uncertainty into the economy... your "American Idol" view of the role of the prez in this economy is naive, and typically, liberal.

I'd say it the liberal media - claiming this idiot is intelligent. The liberal media
cbs, nbc, cbs, comedy channel, msnbc etc. misinformed the country over and over about obama.
This guy is scum, a typical corrupt chicago politician, and that's not a rumor - that just a matter of fact

Hey, Johnny Wannabe, are you still thrilling the audiences with that old carny act? That crystal ball of yours is getting too old and too foggy for you to come up with any guesses, that mean anything. Give it a break, buddy! Your's is a tired. old act. Retire it!! You're just an embarrassment to the Swamp!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

Posted by: janet | August 30, 2010 2:57 PM

Janet- Obama sold the stimulus on the less than 8.5% promise- effectively giving "moderate" DEMs cover on passing a new massive spending bill under the guise of being an economy saving "must have"...are you really going to give him a pass on this because he already missed the target before it (the bill) passed?

He also promised job creation of 3-4 Million jobs as a result of stimulus...where are those jobs?

You can be a fan of Obama and be critical of his performance at the same time- you are intentionally ignoring the failures of this president.

@Terry... You don't let facts and the truth get in the way of any argument, do you? Your credibility = zero.
Nice argument. He doesn't go to Church, but I don't care about his religion. Then why care if he goes to Church? Backhanded at best. But that is sloppy.
Obama wants the birth certificate to linger? No. Liars like Paulo, libidiot and meltdown make it linger.
We get it. You hate unions. But you can prove what you say here, right? NO you can't. This is not an opinion it is a blatantly false thing to say.
And the Dodd bill is holding up the economy? You are basing this on what? A right wing website. Only getting you news from one source - That is biased - is a terrible way to form an opinion.
And you say that Obama is trying to force the green market. You hate the envrionment, we get it. Presidents do this a lot. I forgot about how you were writing that Bush was pushing "hydrogen" cars and had the same complaint. Oh, you didn't? A little hypocritical.
Terry, don't let facts ever stop you from making a fool out of yourself again. Too funny.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday signed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, calling it a "booster shot" for the American economy.

"The bill I'm signing today is large enough to have an impact, amounting to more than $152 billion this year, or about 1 percent of the GDP (gross domestic product)," the president said in the brief ceremony in the East Room of the White House.

Posted by: heartburn | August 30, 2010 3:47 PM
;
Yes I will give him and the Dems a pass, Rome was burning. The GOP dithered and obstructed and 8% was breached as a result of their obstruction. We all know the GOP is capable of passing laws quickly. Just look at Terry Schiavo. They wanted America to fail. Second, where are the jobs? You'll have to ask economists Mark Zandi and Kenneth Rogoff. Their findings of creation of 2.5 - 4.5 million jobs is backed by IHS Global Insight, JPMorgan Chase and Macroeconomic Advisers. Anymore facts you'd like for me to bring to the table?

Posted by: janet | August 30, 2010 4:50 PM

Those are not facts- you have provided the opinions of two economists...using a model that associates Keynsian spending increase with job creation- it does not measure actual jobs... it is comparable to saying if you do X and Y you will get Z... without ever measuring for Z.
--
From the department of labor statistics;
In 2008 - there were 135.1M people working-- Obama at the time, promised 3.5M new jobs by December 2010 with stimulus and the jobs bill.. Meaning... there should be 138.6M people working by the end of the year. ( Uh oh)
--
In July 2010 there were 130.2M people working.. a deficit of +7Million jobs…( Uh Oh squared)
--
Is there some magic plan that will actually create almost 2 million jobs/month to meet the goals of Obama and the vaunted team of economic experts he had assembled that were screaming for stimulus spending in early 2009?
--

Those are facts-

John W., I think the intellectual dishonesty is worse. It’s like. . . lying about the fact you are lying. But we both know Obama will not mention the SOFA. He has to stay true to his principles – (1) Everything good that happens is his doing; (2) Everything bad that happens is Bush’s fault. Anything that gets in the way of that, including the truth, is just an obstacle that needs to be removed or ignored. As long as he has people dumb enough to swallow his rhetoric, he will continue to dish it up. Thankfully, the middle of the country is finally starting to wake up to it.
*
Janet, you completely miss the point of the stimulus. I don’t doubt for a second that we can borrow a trillion dollars and create some temporary jobs. That wasn’t the point. The point was to provide a “jolt” to the economy with an infusion of public money into a private marketplace. The idea being that the economy would be juiced, and start humming on its own again. A snowball effect. That obviously hasn’t happened. So now what is the brilliant plan of the Keynesians – let’s do it again. Hey, what a great plan. Try coming up with something that: (1) Has some chance of sustained success; and/or (2) doesn’t involve spending other people’s money. When freakin’ old Europe is telling us to rein in the government borrowing/spending, maybe we should listen.
*
Lastly, the Administration needs to show some class. Even if one believes in the bogeyman Obama made up about what would have happened without the stimulus, any clear thinking person realizes that it’s an awful thing to borrow that much money against future generations. If I had to raid my kids’ college fund to pay the monthly household bills, I would feel awful about it, but would do what I had to do. What I wouldn’t be doing is riding around the neighborhood the next day like a complete tool telling people I “saved” my family. As if raiding money from people with no voice is some kind of an accomplishment.

ugghh,

Not a backhanded remark at all. If BO is concerned that Americans don't think he is a Christian, then he should go to a Christian church every now and then. I really don't care if he does go. The up side of him going to church is that it would be one less hour he would be screwing-up the country.


BO wants the birth certificate issue to linger, so he can piant the entire right as nuts based on a few fringe folks.

As for union jobs - I was a union member at one time, but then I grew-up and was able to take care of my own career. As for the point that this was nothing a payback to the unions. Fact proven

http://www.constructiondigital.com/VP-Joe-Biden-Stimulus-aimed-boosting-union-jobs_18607

As for the Brothel Barney-Friends of Angelo Bill, which right-wing web-site did I get that from?

"Ultimately, it will be regulators who determine the true impact of the law"

http://www.oliverwyman.com/ow/49558.htm

Is this my one-source right-wing web site?

If there was an article of Hydrogen car subsidies during the Bush administration that I read, I would have been against them

You are as pathetic as your name. Back to the kids table.

Berlet98,

You forgot on other event on August 28 - 1968 - where all the leftists hippies rioted in Chicago. Wasn't BO's old buddie Bill Ayers there?

BillyR,

Your friens at NBC/PMSNBC had live footage of the troops leaving Iraq into Kuwait - even had the road they were on. So if any one was aiding and abetting, the would be Chrissy and Overbite.

As for that Stimulus Bill, Bush screwed the pooch on that one - he signed a piece of legislaion that Harry and Nancy passed.

MAybe BO didn't watch BEck, but he is getting under the skin of plenty of loons:

Beau Friedlander, the last editor-in-chief of Air America has offered a $100,000 bounty on anyone with evidence that would take Beck down.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2579985/posts

Ahhh, the compassionate left.

Terry, pretty disturbing to see deranged lefties trying to silence a political opponent. But that is nowhere near as disturbing as deranged lefties wanting to see Glenn Beck in a sex tape.

* * * * *
Posted by: bill r. | August 30, 2010 2:22 PM
.
bill,
.
I am more capable of connecting the dots than you are at staying on topic. We were talking about your idiotic suggestion that Fox News somehow aided and abetted the Taliban with its coverage of the troop draw-down. I guess you just don’t want to talk about that any more, so you’ve moved onto other things. That was wise.
.
Contrary to what you suggest, I don’t expect the government to fix the economy in 18 months, 8 years, or at all. Unlike the Democrats on this board, and too many of the Republicans, I don’t believe the government has the controls or capability to fix the economy. The Keynesian economic policies of the government are ineffectual and failing precisely because the government doesn’t have the power to fix the economy as many claim. Only the market players and the economy can set things right, and only without government interference.
.
The only thing one can reasonably expect is for the government not to trash the economy. Unfortunately, all the job killers that I described above are doing just that. We need capital investment. Trillions of dollars in capital are sitting on the sidelines. Those holding the purse strings are withholding capital investment because of the new uncertainties and hostilities injected into the weakened market by the government. (That is the ‘capital strike’ to which I referred.) Without that capital, there will be few jobs created by the private sector and little economic expansion. As a result, we are going to have a jobless recovery, if at all; and jobless recoveries take a long, long time.
.
And speaking of one’s inability to connect the dots, YOU are the one who believes the government, and Bush and the Republicans in particular, tanked the economy. Neither you nor any of your Democrat buddies here on the board have been able to defend that position, and for good reason.
.
The economy tanked because of the overextension of credit. Unbeknownst to greedy bankers and lenders, housing construction had boomed, creating many more new housing units. Greedy lenders, however, believed that housing prices were on a trajectory to keep rising for the foreseeable future. Thus, they made loans to the greedy and less creditworthy on outrageous terms in the belief that foreclosures would return their capital in the event of a default. They were gravely mistaken. When the borrowers started defaulting on their loans owing to their inability to repay and/or obtain new financing, the foreclosures dumped so many more units onto the housing market that, in combination with all the new housing units, prices went spiraling downward and banks were laden with unrecoverable debt and real estate with dwindling value. In turn, even the value of creditworthy borrowers’ homes dropped to less than the outstanding balances on their mortgages, thereby destroying all of their equity value and leaving them “under water.” Many of those folks turned in their keys instead of continuing to pay for a house less in value than their debt obligation.
.
All of this bled into the securities market because the debt obligations on the mortgages that eventually went into default had been bundled into paper traded widely around the world. After all, what could be more secure than investing in Americans buying homes? When all the mortgages went into default, the debt obligation paper went toxic too. The problem is that potentially trillions of dollars of bad debts were traded this way, and there was no way to segregate the bad debts from the good ones. The biggest banking houses found that many of their assets had effectively become worthless. Housing construction businesses were the first to land in bankruptcy court. And, just this year alone, 118 banks went belly up; and the end is still nowhere in sight. We haven’t even begun to see all the commercial real estate defaults and attendant bankruptcies. This is one of the reasons banks aren’t lending money: They are still too concerned about their balance sheet to let any of the money out.
.
And that, bill, is a better job of connecting the dots than you ever have.
.
But what I would like to know is how you can blame the government, or Bush in particular for the housing-financial meltdown that tanked the economy. The federal bank regulators at the F.D.I.C. already had in place regulations that forbade making loans on the basis of land value alone, without consideration of the borrower’s ability to repay. The other bank regulator – which isn’t really a government entity, e.g. the Federal Reserve Bank – was asleep at the wheel. Not only did it fail to take note of the banks’ dangerous lending habits, it fueled them by making money available cheap to member banks. Alan Greenspan admitted all of this. So what was Bush and his administration supposed to do? Contrary to popular belief, Bush did not have dictatorial powers and he couldn’t order banks, lending institutions or the FRB to do anything. Not even Congress had that kind of oversight power. If he wanted something done, he had to ask Congress to do it. In fact, in 2003, at the latest, he told Congress that a problem in the housing market was on the rise. Congress’ response was: Problem? What problem? We don’t have a problem. And so nothing was done.
.
So, to put it bluntly, the Democrat refrain that Bush ruined the economy is one big fat lie.
.
And – BTW – Don’t push Shrub’s war in my face. I have always believed that the invasion of Iraq was totally foolish, and I don’t agree with the way Bush prosecuted the Afghan war. In general, I detested Bush’s foreign policy and his willingness to shred the Constitution in pursuit of his adventurism. These are the reasons (along with Republicans’ lack of fiscal conservatism) that I left the Republican Party. Or did you forget that I’m not a Republican? (Of course you did; which is further proof that you are dot-connecting challenged.)

* * * * *
Posted by: janet | August 30, 2010 2:57 PM
.
Would I like to comment on the study published by so-called independent economists on the effect of the stimulus? Sure.
.
First of all, these economists are hardly independent. The guy from Moody’s was a proponent of the stimulus bill before it passed. As such, he’s been an administration water carrier for a long time; not to mention the fact that he has his own reputation to defend. Given the methodology used (and see more on that below), I also question the bona fides of the other economist or economists involved in the study.
.
In the second place, the methodology employed in this study is the stuff of why economics has the reputation of being a pseudo-science and the refuge of charlatans. The study in question is not based on a count of actual jobs created, and no one even bothered to go from business to business to acquire even an estimate of how the stimulus actually affected job growth. It is merely a guess regarding the number of jobs supposedly created by the spending bill. This is not unlike the methodology used to (over-)estimate the number of casualties in Iraq.
.
In addition, the study entirely ignores the independent decision-making process of those in the private sector. Hiring and firing decisions are based on a plethora of factors (e.g. market share, business cycles, ergonomic efficiency of each employee, cost of labor, etc.), that can override the government’s decision to spend money on job creation. In which case, I would fault the study for giving too little credit to the business owners, and too much credit to the government, for the private sector’s decision to hire people.
.
In the third place, as noted by heartburn and Herbie H., the stimulus bill was supposed to be a means to an end: to revive the economy. It is failing that task. Hiring people to perform temporary jobs (which a lot of the stimulus spending has accomplished) is not going to keep all of these people off the unemployment rolls forever. That will only happen when businesses are confident enough and secure enough to spend money on full time employees for a long term business goals. That’s not going to happen as long as the government keeps businesses and investors worried about the burdens of labor and business. People are not going to expand business operations and hire new people unless they can be sure they won’t be operating at a loss. New taxes, new health care mandates, new financial regulations, and potentially new energy regulations, have all created a lot of uncertainty, and that is keeping trillions of dollars in investment capital sitting quietly on the sidelines. In short, all of Obama’s legislative projects are full of job killers.
.
And, finally, you claim my partisanship is showing. That implies that I belong to some party in this fight. What party do you think I belong to? I am not a Republican. I am a member of the dreaded Libertarian Party. (As for the “dreaded” part, just ask Don Fitzgerald.) I have fundamental disagreement with a lot of the Republican political agendum. That’s because Republicans are sell-outs who no longer believe in small government. They accept the large government model promoted by FDR. When it comes to economics, however, we are even sharper critics of the administration than the Republicans.

* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | August 30, 2010 3:37 PM
.
Don,
.
I’ll take advice from you when I am sure you’ve regained your sanity. Right now you are raving. It’s the long term effect of the Kool-Aid, I think.
.
But in the meantime, will you, please, learn how to use, commas, and other punctuation marks, correctly?

If I had to raid my kids’ college fund to pay the monthly household bills, I would feel awful about it, but would do what I had to do. What I wouldn’t be doing is riding around the neighborhood the next day like a complete tool telling people I “saved” my family. As if raiding money from people with no voice is some kind of an accomplishment.

Posted by: Herbie H. | August 30, 2010 6:35 PM

I love this analogy! Well said- a clear and concise construct that in a couple of sentences exposes the vacancy of liberal ideology along with its required component politics of good intentions... thanks

Johnny Wannabe, don't you ever get tired of pontificating. If you're a lawyer, than the Bush&Cheney had a brain, between them. That is the joke of the day. Your act is too tired to continue. Get a new crystal ball, buddy. Oh, by the way, Johnny Wannabe, is Governor Blagojevich in jail yet. What do you think, oh great Carnac, by January!! Keep posting, Johnny Wannabe, I need good laughs, that only your confused posts provide. Oh, that's right, your an english Professor, too. Ooh, I better get my punctuations right, or da Professor will tell on me!! I am surprised you have time to entertain all of us, with all them degrees, you are supposed to have !! Keep on, cracking wise, Johnny Wannabe!! Then maybe you can make yourself a philosopher, next!! Keep me laughing, Johnny Wannabe, that's all I ask!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.

* * * * *
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | August 31, 2010 12:08 PM
.
You have nothing to say so you resort to ridicule. Typical pseudo-liberal BS response. Of course, coming from a madman like you, the criticism means nothing. You will find out your heroes are frauds only after the damage is done and it's too late. I would pity you were you not so contemptible and despicable.
.
And, of course, I really don’t expect you to correct your glaring punctuation mistakes. I was making fun of you, you simpleton.

Thank you, Heartburn. I’m like a stopped clock. Twice a day I am right. You just have to catch me at the right moment.
*
John W., lighten up on Don Fitz. You have to understand what is bothering him. Ever since Roger Morris started posting here again, Don has been relegated to second banana as far as raving liberal nuts. That's tough for him to handle. Don, I'm behind you. Pick yourself up. Don't let this poser Roger Morris out-crazy you. Now put your helmet back on and get typing.

Union Terry...Had your uncle not got you into the union, how would you have broken into construction or hvac or plumbing? You owe everything to your connections and then turned your back on the people that got you started. But hey, anything for a buck, that is the republican way. You hypocrisy is ridiculous. You have no critical thinking skills and can't counter anything. An anti-union website says its true. That is fact? You are an idiot. So obvious that you don't have a high school degree.
I know you. And I don't like you. You are the ignorant arm of the Republican Party. You would push your own mother down for 3 points off your taxes. Greed is good, right?

Uggh,

My uncle didn't get me into the union. The quote from the website was just that - a quote from BIden.

I've forgotten more critical thinking than that 83 IQ brain of your will ever learn.

Once again - back to the kids table.

Herbie - I think there is a family realtionship between PFUTZ and Morris.

* * * * *
Now put your helmet back on and get typing.
.
Posted by: Herbie H. | August 31, 2010 6:01 PM
.
Didn't you meant to say tin-foil hat, Herbie?

The Numbers Game and Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Rally

The results are in on Saturday’s Restoring Honor rally in Washington and the news isn’t good for the news media.

The MSM seem to become arithmetically-challenged when it comes to counting heads at conservative gatherings or, dare I suggest, once again biased against reporting the truth at those get-togethers for the purpose of slanting their reporting.

It happened just over a year ago at the 2009 “9/12 Project’s” March on Washington organized by former Repubican Rep. Dick Armey, the Freedom Works Foundation, and Glenn Beck which drew upwards of a million participants to D.C. The mainstream media reported that thousands and upwards of 100,000 were in attendance.

Now, that’s a highly significant undercount especially since hundreds of pictures clearly revealed that the crowds were far more massive than “thousands” or even a paltry hundred thousand.

Why the liberal mainstream media feel compelled to lie and distort attendance numbers, inflating liberal rally figures and deflating conservative turn-outs, is no mystery.

That compulsion and that distortion are rooted in a deep-seated insecurity as to the honesty and validity of their leftist beliefs but, even worse, they reflect a contempt for the integrity of their journalistic profession and a total disregard for their ethical responsibilities.

It happened again at the Beck non-partisan Restoring Honor rally last Saturday which by happenstance took place on the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s memorable “I Have a Dream” speech and at the same venue as that address, the Lincoln Memorial.

CBS estimated the crowd at 83,000, ABC at “more than 100,000,” NBC said, “tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands, the Associated Press described a ”sea of people standing shoulder to shoulder” as a crowd numbering “tens of thousands.” Beck and special guest Sarah Palin guessed anywhere from 300,000 to 600,000 and Rep. Michelle Bachman a cool million: http://tiny.cc/zthma
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1874)