So going in and sabotaging is okay now? Really? How are you with that when it works against your sainted Obama?
Oh, and: every time you write "sainted Obama" it just makes you look like a total jackass.
How do you think this makes you look?
I know a lot of conservatives who pretend they are centrists. I see you giving 90% of your criticism towards the Dems here on a2k, and rarely if ever commentating negatively towards the GOP; you are, of course, free to call yourself whatever name you like.
When I see you call out the GOP for their constant obstructionism and intentional attempts to destroy our economy for their own gain, perhaps I'll change my opinion. I would also say, if you don't want to be seen as a right-wing mouth-breather, you'd be well served to forget the 'sainted Obama' ****. You're repeating the tropes used by the dumbest and worst of that crowd, do you even realize that?
Sounds like bombastic adolescent bullshit to me.
I think the inspirational factor has become far less effective and broad in its appeal over the last few years. Indeed in several respects Obama's support appears to be unravelling.
I don't fear Obama so much as fear for my country while he is in office. Happily he increasingly appears to be self limiting and destined for defeat in November. Far rom being powerful and logical, his arguments are generally vague and abstract, increasingly vapid and laden with familiar cliches instread of concrete specifics. Moreover he is becoming repetitious and a bit shopworn. The part time university instructor (I mean Professor of Constitutional Law) looks increasingly one dimensional and in over his head.
We shall see, here in a few months. Let me submit that I would be far more worried, were there a more competent opponent placed against him. For all I see attacks against Obama from people on this board, I rarely see supportive statements in favor of Romney. Why is that, if the man is a figure destined for victory? In fact, I rather rarely see anything posted about Romney at all, from those who should be his biggest supporters here. No mention of him, just continual criticism of Obama.
I get the sense that A2K's republicans simply have no desire to discuss the man.
Uncertainty fostered by the world-wide financial crisis (itself a consequence of excessive public & private debt)
Rip Van Winkle Economics
by David Frum Jun 7, 2012 10:25 AM EDT
There's an ancient corny joke: How do you get down off an elephant? Answer, you don't get down off an elephant, you get down off a duck.
A lot of our economic debate takes the form of getting down off a duck, such as, for example, today's oped in the Wall Street Journal by Phil Gramm and Glenn Hubbard.
Here are two of the smartest men on the economic right, one a former chairman of the Senate banking committee, the other a former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers.
Yet they insist on treating today's economic crisis as a repeat of 1979-81—and Europe's agony as a debt crisis (which it isn't), not a currency crisis (which it is).
Why? Well you will consider only one policy solution—cut taxes and regulations—then you must insist that there can be only one policy problem.
Yet in almost every way, today's economic problems are exactly the opposite of those of 30 years ago. Then we had inflation, today we are struggling against deflation. Then we had weak corporate profits, today corporations are more profitable than ever. Then we had slow productivity growth, today it is high. Then the to-individual income-tax rate was 70%. Today it is 36%. Then energy regulations produced energy shortages. Today the removal of banking regulations has produced an abundance of debt.
Europe's problems are especially difficult to address on the Wall Street Journal, because they are caused by exactly following that paper's editorial advice. That paper fiercely advocated the Euro currency, without which today's European sovereign-debt problems would be manageable in every economy except Greece's.
One of the saddest ill effects of age is that the brain freezes in patterns set long ago. The mind finds it difficult to acknowledge new realities, much less devise or even accept new solutions. And as our societies age, such brain freezes becoming an ever more endemic challenge to the making of sound public policy.
As Macchiavelli wrote 500 years ago: "For this is the tragedy of man: circumstances change and he does not."
I put less relaince on poll data than you, and note that the observed trends often have as much to do with the biases of the poll taker as the thing being measured.
in 2000 and in 2004 I voted for George W. Bush.
There are not a few economist who believe a higher rate of inflation than what we currently are experiencing would in fact be a very healthy thing for the US in many ways.
Do I speak, indirectly, ill of you dj?