Bush Blames Iraq For Widespread Disapproval Over The Economy
Bush Blames Iraq For Widespread Disapproval Over The Economy
“Ladies and gentlemen: The state of our economy is strong,” President Bush told a Wall Street audience today in his second speech this week devoted to shoring up Americans’ disapproval with the economy.
In an interview last night, Bush was asked why only 41 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the economy. ABC News’ Betsy Stark said, “Can that be summed up in one word? Can that be summed up as Iraq?” Bush responded, “I think so, yeah,” adding, “We’re in a time of war, and war’s unsettling. War’s negative.”
Stark asked Bush why 67 percent of Americans believe he doesn’t understand the problems of average people. Bush said, “I think it’s ’cause of the war again, and I think people are feeling pretty down about, kind of, things ’cause of the war.”
Watch it:
Americans have plenty of reasons beyond Iraq to be frustrated with the economy and worried about their quality of life. From American Progress’ new State of the Economy report.
– Job growth is the weakest on record. Job growth during the current business cycle, beginning in March 2001, has averaged an annualized 0.5 percent per month, the lowest of any business cycle since the Great Depression. In fact, this is less than a quarter of the average of all prior business cycles since World War II.
– Sharp spike in costs for necessities. From March 2001 through June 2006, prices for the five largest consumption items–medical care, housing, food, household operation, and cars–grew more than twice as fast as they did for the smallest five consumption items. At the same time, college costs continue to soar.
– Wage gains have been minimal. Real wages have barely moved during the recovery or since the period when the economy stopped losing jobs in August 2003. Between March 2001 and December 2006, real hourly wages grew at an average annualized rate of 0.5 percent, and real weekly wages grew at an average an nualized rate of 0.4 percent.
– Families spent all of their disposable income and then some. For the first time since the Great Depression, the personal saving rate became negative in 2005. In the third quarter of 2006, the saving rate was -1.2 percent, the sixth quarter in a row with a negative saving rate.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Thanks for the uplifting words, stupid little man.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:10 pmBush does not have a plan on health care for the American people. What every it is the american people will be screwed.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:13 pmWe have a great economy going right now. Who cares what the average American “feels”. The economy can be judged accurately by the numbers. The 4th quarter numbers just came out. The Economy is up 3.5%. We have an unemployment rate that is historical low and we are still creating more jobs with is kinda minblowing considering there aren’t many left without a job. So, once again, who cares what there “feelings” are. The numbers speak for themselves. The Federal tax receipts also help the cause. Our government takes in more taxes then they ever have proving once again the economy is booming.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:13 pmKeep listening folks, I the “war is a bummer, therefore people think the economy is bad” line is the latest Repug talking point.
Mary Matalin (ewwww) posted such an opinion over at hotsoup.com.
I think they are drinking the kool aid after they mix it up if they believe such NONSENSE. They are so far removed from average Americans, it is hard to fathom.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:20 pmWe have a great economy going right now. Who cares what the average American “feelsâ€.
Comment by Roger_Roger
I like your attitude, Roger. Lets hope that conservative attitude you and your party continues to show carries over to the 2008 elections. Thank you for being there!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:21 pmThis can’t be right. My Haliburton and Raytheon stocks are doing great!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:22 pm“We’re in a time of a Phoney War on Terrorism so Contractors like Haliburton can make shit loads of money, and the Rich get the best tax Breaks and Keep Getting Richer”
Bummer, man for the rest.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:24 pmWhat he more accurately means is that his personal economic situation is rising with each passing day - that’s what war profiteering can do. So while he may rue his depressing numbers and blame it all on the war, he smugly sits there counting his war profiteering profits. Of course, he sleeps like a baby at night, too! Wouldn’t you if you had that kind of fortune amassing for you? These men are totally devoid of a conscience and it becomes clearer everyday. They are capricious and cavalier - uninterested and egomaniacal - just the kinds of attributes we want in a Shrub in our yard - but certainly not sitting in the highest office of this country. How shabby, callous, and out of touch we look these days….ugh! downright embarrassing!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:27 pm#7….and how did we get ourselves into this “phoney war on terrorism”?????? Connect those dots….they’re sitting right there…..
And then see how we’ve lost all of our rights due to the new laws surrounding this fictitious war on terrorism….it’s Orwellian!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:28 pmRoger_Roger - it’s amazing to me how blind people like you can be. The four points made above are the areas which affect the average American. For stockholders, gains in the “numbers” are just terrific. Overall, corporate profits are way up. A low unemployment rate doesn’t mean much when it only counts those still collecting unemployment…not those whose 6 months has run out, and they continue to be either unemployed or underemployed. And many of those “new jobs” are low-paid service jobs, that offer no benefits or security to their workers.
This wonderful economy is one in which the rich simply get richer, the poor get poorer and the middle class is increasingly squeezed. Sorry…not my idea of a healthy economy. Add in the annual deficit, national debt, trade deficit, and the generally poor financial conditions most states are in and we are in trouble, my friend.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:31 pmMy portfolio is rocking this quarter. You guys need to stop charging up on non essential necessities (big screen TV, iPods, DVRs, Hawaii vacations) and get back to basics. Live within your means you whiney babies!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:31 pmAt what point during Bush’s response did he snap his bubble gum and do a hair flip?
Theresa
January 31st, 2007 at 2:32 pmWell, lets see where do we start, great economy, hmmmm… I guess it depends on if you were already wealthy and invested. The Stock market has certainly performed well. Certainly not the average Joe, there has been considerable pressure to reduce salaries the last 7 years, health Insurance takes a bigger and bigger chunk of your pay, oil, gas, housing and food prices are rising at a rate greater than salary growth for the average citizen. Congratulation to all those 25% who have been fortunate enough to already have money to invest, I am sure the economy feels great to you.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:33 pmIt takes 150,000 new jobs a month to keep up with the pace of new workers entering the workforce. We have been close to that, but the downside is something like 70% of those jobs recently have been in the historically lower paying service areas of the economy. So for more and more people the economy is not helpful.
….it’s Orwellian!
Comment by veritas
And Pogoian: “We have met the enemy, and he is us!”
Those 30%’ers will eventually endorse putting tracking chips in everyone, so they can sleep easy at night.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pmPlease allow me to congratulate Think Progress on the effective campaign to view any and all economic progress garnered during this administration as a negative. Bravo! You did forget to mention the spike in gas prices which progressives seemed to enjoy and encourage…..Just trying to help.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:41 pmThe negative personal savings rate is noteworthy. While Americans are going into the red to keep this economy growing, they don’t “feel” good about it.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:41 pmMy portfolio is rocking this quarter. . . . Live within your means you whiney babies!
Comment by RichRepub
Good for you, Rich. After a blue, depressing November for republicans, lets hope the market continues strong into 2008. Amazing how a shift of power away from the conservatives raises the public optimism and sense of well being in a more DEMOCRATIC America, don’t you think?
January 31st, 2007 at 2:42 pmBush has lied through his teeth about the economy. You want to see the truest measure of this economy and consumer confidence? Go to http://www.Alexa.com. Once there, enter any travel related web site into the search engine and look at the year over year web traffic to that site. They are all DOWN 50%.
http://www.Expedia.com
http://www.Travelocity.com
http://www.royalcaribbean.com
http://www.carnival.com
http://www.hilton.com
http://www.marriott.com
Enter any travel related domain name you wish - set the time frame at one year - and see what you get. Web traffic is off 50% at travel sites because the American Consumer has hit the wall and isn’t planning vacations like they used to. Thank Alan Greenspan’s Crack Cocaine of zero-interest ARMs for that. The banksters have the citizens in a death grip, with no room to move. America spent its nest egg - with Bush and Greenspan cheerleading the way.
‘Splain that away, W.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:43 pmRoger - aren’t you the fool who a couple of months ago also claimed that we could send an additional 400,000 troops to Iraq, bump up troop levels in N. Korea by another 400,000 - leaving us with 100 or so troops to cover everything else - and pay for it all by eliminating social security? And now you’re an economic authority too eh?
January 31st, 2007 at 2:43 pmA record 1.2 MILLION forclosures, and increase of 41% shows otherwise. Those peasants do not count though, not part of his base.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:45 pmThe value of the dollar has fallen 30%.
Go to Europe and tell me how rich you feel.
Americans have been bamboolzled.
The market is NOT at an all time high if you take into account the depreciating dollar. Your home value went up 30%? Perhaps it was just that the value of your dollars declined by 30% - and your home’s TRUE value remained constant.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:46 pmWhy does “protecting the American people” feel so much like oppression, secrecy, authoritarianism, and dictatorship?
January 31st, 2007 at 2:47 pmRoger - aren’t you the fool ……
Comment by Quadrajet
Yeah.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:49 pmRichrepub: “Live within your means you whiney babies!”
Maybe you should explain that to your fellow republican lawmakers. Ever since Reagain started borrowing and spending, we’ve become the world’s biggest debtor state.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:49 pm#10,
Look, I understand this is another attempt by the socialist left to try and claim free market democracies are no good. I understand that there is a strong push from the left to move toward a socialist ideal for the “greater good”. I understand that getting in bed with Castro and Chavez sounds appealing to you all.
Simply put, the numbers tell the truth. If business aren’t making money, they aren’t hiring. Currently, the markets are booming, unemployment is insanely low (and yes, they used the same math when your Dem presidents sat in office), and we still find a way to have job growth even though there are few left without a job. To point out that someone may or may not get benefits with there new job is pointless. Once again, we live in a democracy and that means we have the freedom to accept or not accept a job. It is there choice afterall. It boggles my mind that people still want to live in a fantasy land that claims are economy is bad. Personally, I would stash away those socialist ideals until we have another downturn in our economy.
How do you plan to sell socialism in a booming free market economy anyways?
January 31st, 2007 at 2:50 pmLong past being down about the War Failure in Chief. What we are down about is the 1.4 trillion in Corporate welfare and tax breaks while waging 2 wars. We are down about the first Failure in Chief who lost 2 consecutive wars. We are down about the record forclosures of 1.2 million. We are down about the 43% increase of the National Debt to 8.6 TRILLION. We are pretty down about and disgusted with a Failure frat boy who is incompetent about targeting terrorists who mean us harm instead of wasting our treasury and lives on an optional failure. Get it straight dumba$$.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:50 pmRove talking point=war causes people to be unsettled.
The missing ingredient=Bush’s war causes people to be unsettled.
-GSD
To all Republicans, please keep Rover on the payroll, he is responsible for 62% drop in Bush’s approval and for the loss of the Republican majorities.
Keep on keepin’ on Rover!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:51 pmhttp://www.breitbart.com/ news/ 2007/ 01/ 31/ D8N0F7GG0.html
Even the Federal reserve agrees with me!!
January 31st, 2007 at 2:55 pmQuestion: Why do you think that over 70% of Americans feel that the Iraq War and the war on terror is being mishandles by your administration?
Bush: Uh, ’cause of the war?
Go to sleep Mr. President……just go to sleep.
January 31st, 2007 at 2:56 pmEven the Federal reserve agrees with me!!
Comment by Roger_Roger
Yes, they waited for you to state it first though. Again the DOW Jones looks at how good businesses are doing in the economy. It does not look at the average persons wallet and/or purchasing power. So to talk about the DOW on a thread that is discussing the diapproval of the economy by the average person is stupid.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:00 pmEven the Federal reserve agrees with me!!
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Again, great for the investor class. Meaningless for everyone else. Dumbass.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:03 pmIn fact, the Dow measures only 30 of the largest and most widely held public companies.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:07 pmtypical, he just blames the victims
http://www.micropoll.com/ akira/ MicroPoll?mode=html&id=23186
January 31st, 2007 at 3:09 pmStark asked Bush why 67 percent of Americans believe he doesn’t understand the problems of average people. Bush said, “I think it’s ’cause of the war again, and I think people are feeling pretty down about, kind of, things ’cause of the war.â€
What a dumbass. A big part of the reason people dont think he understands the problems of average people is demonstrated in the very answer he gives to this question. He clearly doesn’t understand.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:10 pm#30 Companies only do well when average Americans OPEN there wallets to spend. It requires the average American to have a job and extra money to blow on what they want. These indicators indicate that the average Americans has alot of spending power and it also shows that most have a job that pays enough for them to blow excess money on “wants”. The numbers simply don’t lie. Inflation is even under control and the Feds even said the housing market is now coming around and stabalizing. There really isn’t any indictators left that are beggin your Dems to move us towards Socialism.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:10 pmRoger x2 has been reading fiction again.
Dude put down that “Super Shrub” comic book and pick up something more serious, say the “Economist” for example.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:11 pmHmmmmm Roger, does the article you linked to say that the economy is “doing great” as you proclaim in your post, or does it say that it isn’t doing as poorly as was expected?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:14 pmimpeachcheneythenbush
In fact, it measures the 30 companies least likely to be effected by local policies. In other words, it is the least valuable economic indicator you can imagine.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:15 pmWhy do you folks always try to talk about different class’ of Americans. Is it Edward’s and his “2 America’s” talk? Check out what he has to say these days about it:
http://www.carolinajournal.com/ exclusives/ display_exclusive.html?id=3848
He obviously understands how bad being and acting rich are. Furthermore, he shows by example how we should share the wealth. Kudo’s to you edwards!!
January 31st, 2007 at 3:15 pmSo rogerX2
You are going to go ask a government agency with a fair chunk of the responsibility for America’s economic policy about how America’s economy is going?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:20 pmWho cares what the average American “feelsâ€.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
Well, gosh, apparently not you. That’s the problem with people like you. You just don’t give a damn about anyone else. As long as things don’t directly affect you, why bother with any concern?
So what if over 40 million Americans don’t have health care. F*ck ‘em, you say.
My wife interviewed for a position as a substitute teacher last week. She’s attending college to get a degree in education. See, over 3 years ago she had a full-time job as a teacher’s assistant in a special ed class. But George Bush came along and gave us NCLB, which effectively ended her job. Strange how that works out, eh? Why? Because she didn’t have the required hours of college credit. Funny thing was, it didn’t matter if the courses she DID have related to being able to teach special ed kids how to count to 10 or how to spell their first name. For all Bush cared, the courses she had could have been in mastering basket weaving.
So now she’s juggling taking care of a terminally ill mother along with attending college and raising a 6 year old daughter. Her mother is 71 years old and has lymphoma, heart failure, and likely colon cancer (she will find out tomorrow). All this involves taking her to and from doctors offices for various tests (sometimes 40 miles out of town), lab work, and chemotherapy. As for attending college, she drives 120 round-trip miles to school once a week (sometimes twice a week, which at times resulted in $100 per week in gasoline expenses). She spends between 3 and 4 hours at each class, and depending on the class time does not get home until 11 pm at night.
Add to that taking care of a 6 year old who is in school, volunteering in our daughter’s class to tutor and to help out with various class functions (field trips, class activities such as pumpkin carving and Valentine parties, etc.).
You can imagine the stress she is under with all this. And yes, some of it she doesn’t have to do, but she does it by choice. So maybe I’ll take a cue from Roger_Roger when I go home today and say, “Hey, Honey, cheer up. The economy is doing great! Unemployment is at an all-time low, and tax revenues are pouring in! Come on, honey, smile!”
January 31st, 2007 at 3:21 pmOr is it Pelosi’s elitest attitude to screw American Somoa in favor of friendly corporate donors that gets you in the talk of different class’?
How about Biden being publicly racist to Obama? Nothing like a rich old white man to prove America is made up of different class’.
Maybe it is Clinton talking about Indians working at gas stations.
Please, do tell what gets this party fired up about class warfare.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:21 pmHow can we have a great economy and foreclosures are up by 42% ? wages are stagnant, and more over many of our seniors can’t afford to pay for their meds ?and don’t forget the 48 mil Americans who don’t have health insurance ?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:26 pmGreat economy my ass,Like everything coming from the WH and Repukes it all lies.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
You forgot Bush and Cheney giving no-bid contracts to Halliburton on a silver platter.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:26 pmComment by DutchHenry — January 31, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Don’t forget housing sales down, just the perfect timing for my Mom who put her’s on the market a month ago.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:27 pmplease,no more pictures of bush,they actually make me sick.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:28 pm#40
I regret to inform you that the government should not be focused on keeping or creating a job for your wife. The government’s job is to provide us the American people with a service that the lowest cost possible. The government should not be focused on keeping jobs simply because they exist. If the job changed or becomes pointless, I fully support them cutting it or changing it. If they can hire someone cheaper, they should do it. These are my tax dollars afterall and I hate them wasting it.
The repugs are just as bad as the Dems at spending which is sad. Pork is a huge problem. Social Security has bankrupted us and neither party cares. It is actually a very bad situation. Government needs to kill all these entitlement problems and cut the rest of government spending at least 50% across the board. It all may be in vein since Social Security may infact bankrupted us already. Very sad.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:28 pmFor us haves and have mores, with the exception of the war profiteers that are okay with investing heavily in Halliburton — I am not one of them, the domestic economy isn’t doing that much better than it was 6 years ago.
See, nothing screws with Republican Trickle-Down Economics like shoddy federal fiscal policy — that would be “Dropping $10,000,000,000 per month on a couple of unbudgeted land wars in Asia for years on end” — because shoddy fiscal policy drives the investing class away from domestic stocks, since those stocks are going to have to be re-evaluated the instant the shoddy fiscal policy comes back to bite the nation in the butt.
Is the war itself unsettling? Are we scared that we might lose? No. We think that the president has mismanaged our national resources — which is why investments in foreign and emerging markets are substantially outperforming domestic investments for the past many years, leading us to invest more in the nations that aren’t spilling their GNPs on foreign soil.
This administration is necessarily going to be followed by a Reformer. Get ready for a recession starting in 2008 as the presidential race gets heated up and the market-watchers start speculating on how much of an impact the reforms are going to have on their portfolios and making adjustments to protect their net worth.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:29 pmRogerX2
Frankly we don’t care about rhetoric, we care about results.
Clinton had a great big surplus: Bush a deficit.
Clinton achieved high job growth: Bush, well, read the article.
Clinton achieved a inflation adjusted stock market record which still hasn’t been beat: Bush, well you still have some gloating over four year records. (Which is to say, it is still weaker then when Bush came into office.)
Whether Clinton or any of the Democrats said or did something elitist matters not one whit to any of us, what matters is, they achieved results. Bush hasn’t.
End of story.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:31 pmIf they can hire someone cheaper, they should do it. These are my tax dollars afterall and I hate them wasting it.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Roger - Hreat news! Your boss is planning to give your job to someone in India who will work for 1/50th ofyou paycheck!
Aren’t you thrilled?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:34 pmRoger, where did you hear that the social security trust fund is insolvent?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:35 pmI was reading last night and was surprised to see that England got a national health care system in 1948. During this same time they had food rationing with things like an egg per person for a month and rationing on many other items as a result of the war, during which they were almost bombed into oblivion.
If our economy is so “great” and everyone should be so happy, what’s the hold up on a national health care system? Where’s the “trickle down” benefits they keep promising?
George Bush is delusional.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:37 pmUmmmm, the average American.
Do I win a prize?
January 31st, 2007 at 3:37 pmthanks for the tip on edwards! that house is huge!! the only way he could afford that is if he inherited money from a grandfather who did business with some disreputable germans.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:39 pm#48 Clinton didn’t have a surplus. Only in fantasy land was that a surplus.
Check it out yourself:
http://www.usatoday.com/ printedition/ news/ 20060803/ 1a_coverart03.art_dom.htm
“The Clinton administration reported a surplus of $559 billion in its final four budget years. The audited numbers showed a deficit of $484 billion.”
You see, even the government has to keep a set of real accountint books. The real ones they don’t publicly like to speak about show your hero failing badly just like every other modern president. Sad that you still live in a fantasy land where Clinton had a Surplus. HAHA
January 31st, 2007 at 3:41 pmA couple of new shopping centers will soon be opening in our town. New retail outlets galore, and about 6 new restaurants. Several hundred new jobs will be created.
That’s the “good news.”
The bad news is that a majority of those jobs will probably pay an average of $7 per hour and have no benefits. The ones that do provide benefits will likely cost the employee a couple hundred dollars per month in premiums for family coverage. For the companies that don’t provide healthcare coverage, there’s always the COBRA option and premiums of $900 per month for a family of 3. Hopefully the spouse (if there is one) has coverage. If there is no significant other, people like Roger_Roger can put all the blame on the individual for not being married.
But let’s take troll Kevin’s advice and eliminate the minimum wage. The companies will then pay $4 per hour and offering benefits will be pointless, because the employee will not be able to afford the premiums, let alone make enough to keep Roger_Roger’s excellent economy rolling along. But hey, all the folks needing a job can negotiate with the companies for a fair wage. Hell…several years ago my wife barely eeked out a $0.15 raise on her yearly job performance review. She had worked for the company for almost 10 years and was an assistant manager. So she quit the job because the company told her that her job was more important than her family (which included a dying father). Did they offer her more money to stay (something that troll Kevin says will happen)? Umm…no.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:42 pmRoger, where did you hear that the social security trust fund is insolvent?
Comment by Quadrajet — January 31, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
Two of the voices in his head were having a discussion…
January 31st, 2007 at 3:45 pmThe economy is actually in decent shape, but Bush has nothing to do with it.
Unemployent, inflation, and interest rates are at historically low levels. That’s great overall, but no thanks to W.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:46 pmI regret to inform you that the government should not be focused on keeping or creating a job for your wife.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
My gosh. You are an idiot.
Where in my post did I indicate it was the government’s job to provide my wife with a job?
The only government-related reference I spoke of was the NCLB Act and the idiocy contained within it.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:50 pmThe haves and have mores have only pieces of paper, promises, backed by nothing really.
Materialism, I think, and greed, why does a person need 8 billion dollars, will be the downfall of America. You can’t take 8 billion with you when you die, you can’t take your house or your car, you can’t even take your shoes. George is a prime example of why silverspoonism destroys mans virtue.
Inheritance is only another type of welfare and it works to raise kids who don’t know what it is to work. It creates a type of sickness. Monetary Sociopathics that care little about life and eveything about material.
Greedy haves and have mores will be the downfall of America.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:50 pm#57
Your mostly correct. The economy really isn’t something the president can effect much. They can hurt it by increasing taxes and they can help it by decreasing taxes. Outside of that, I guess you could take about laws forcing companies to give benefits and forcing new regulation. Those things hurt the economy badly as well.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:51 pmHey UB! How are you? Poor Roger, if he’d just remember to take the blue pill - or maybe he’s taking too many of them, it’s hard to tell.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:51 pmif you’re going to try and use that article as a club, you might want mention that it claims that the “real” deficit under bush is “$760 billion for 2005.” whether you want to “believe” in a surplus or not, bush has saddled this economy with a massive deficit.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:52 pmIf you post here, you are helping Hillary Clinton enormously in her bid for President in 2008.
This is after all people, her think tank. Think about it. Sure she didn`t have anything to do with the Obama smear. Sure she didn`t. Our country needs you in her darkest hour and where are you?
Entering entries into Hiollary Clinton`s blog day and night. In essence, helping her get elected whether you know it or not or even like it or not.
google- center for american progress clinton personal thinktank
Don`t take my word for it. See it for yourself. I can only wonder how many are thinking to themselves as pertains to thinkprogress,
†Boy, did I ever get screwed at thinkprogress, I actually was part of the band of villians that ousted Osama, I mean Obama.â€
Ooops. You get the message. You know what I mean I mean to say.
Chicago Tribune blames bloggers for Obama smears.
Should Read:
American Public Blames ThinkProgress Bloggers for Obama Smear.
You after all fellow posters, are more responsible than anyone for Osama being tarred and feathered.
Just posting on the oppositions thinktank ( Hillary Clintons ) blog, is enough to try and convict you in the blogosphere.
How does it feel fellow posters, knowing you had a personal hand in Barack Obnamas demise?
Are you proud of yourselves now? The Republicans are very proud and grateful for you and for getting Obama out of the way so they can have full and unfettered access to Hillary.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:54 pmI’m disappointed with you ThinkProgress. Bush didn’t give that answer…ABC gave it as part of their question. It was a totally leading question on the part of the ABC reporter.
What kind of legitimate journalist pulls that kind of crap interviewing? If she already knew what answer she wanted to hear then why even ask the question?
If anything, this story is less about how clueless Bush is, but instead it shows one more example of how ABC is trying to become the new FOX.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:54 pmHey back Quadrajet.
Does seem that ol’ Jolly Roger is a bit too jolly… I think you’re on to something : )
January 31st, 2007 at 3:55 pmAre you proud of yourselves now? The Republicans are very proud and grateful for you and for getting Obama out of the way so they can have full and unfettered access to Hillary.
Comment by Rachel/BeerNuts — January 31, 2007 @ 3:54 pm
Just wanted to give a big ’sup?! to our resident cut and paste troll, Rachel!
January 31st, 2007 at 3:58 pmOh, God, I hate this… thing. I hesitate to call “it” a man. That would be too insulting to the homo sapiens species of upright, carbon-based lifeform. IT is more of a… a… primordial ooze, SCAB-THING. I wish the hell it would just go crawl under a rock and die somewhere. IT forgot to add that the American people have become angry and disallusioned over the economy because it is dessimated due to treasonous acts, greed and ignorance. If it “hears the voices”, then hear the people, you twit, and step down now.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:58 pmNico - it’s disgusting to watch the left down the economy. The only economic problem we have is govt spending - one which the left has always endorsed unless of course, it’s done by a Republican.
What will the left do if we actually succeed in Iraq? You have no credibility on any other issue - just lies and left-wing propoganda.
The problem for liberals is they are so blinded with hatred for Bush they can’t see a good economy unless it’s under their beloved Bill. It’s sad.
January 31st, 2007 at 3:59 pmHow does it feel fellow posters, knowing you had a personal hand in Barack Obnamas demise?
Comment by BeerNuts — January 31, 2007 @ 3:54 pm
Stop watching Faux News (this was their claim).
There haven’t been many posts about Hillary Clinton or any by Hillary Clinton - so it makes your claim a little hard to follow…
January 31st, 2007 at 3:59 pm#62
Oh, I fully agree. Bush has done horrible with the budget, just like Clinton. Bush failed to cut or kill Social Security just like Clinton. Bush also failed to reduce the size of government and actually grew government. It is sad when both parties don’t have the interest of we the people in mind.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:02 pmIt is sad when both parties don’t have the interest of we the people in mind.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
And yet you defend one of them…
???
January 31st, 2007 at 4:06 pmThe economy is not good. This is a lie. The Psychopaths (a condition characterised by lack of empathy or conscience, and poor impulse control or manipulative behaviors….intraspecies predators who use charm, manipulation, intimidation, and violence to control others and to satisfy their own selfish needs. Lacking in conscience and in feelings for others, they cold-bloodedly take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without the slightest sense of guilt or regret.) who say this are talking about the 20%-0.1% who are rich. This has nothing to do with 80% of middle-class who are the working poor….enslaved and imprisioned in a culture that does not care about them.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:09 pmThe 1.2 million home foreclosures are just the tip of the iceberg, with many more to follow.Credit tightening and job layoffs are on the way…. Mass poverty will be the legacy of the Commander N Thief.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:11 pmYes, the Clinton-Obama catfight was debunked, for sure. That was FOX’s little baby. What DID come out in the last 24 hours that is especially discouraging is the economic waste and fraud inflicted upon the American taxpayers. Of course, this was known long ago to anyone with any degree of investigative interest. But now, it’s “out there” in the public light on the syndicated, corporate news for even the most blinded and disinterested to have to reflect upon and acknowlege. It’s the same, stupid story, tucked in between Idol and Survivor -somewhere.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:13 pmRogerX2
So basically: The audited books look worse because they include benefits for people who as a group tend not to make the profession which offers them such benefits, their final careers. (Most people join the military and then go on to something else, thus never gaining the full benefits offered to someone who has worked in the military for his or her entire life.)
Further, because this is a pet issue of mine with IFRS being evil, the same basic accounting standard which led to most companies in South Africa no longer offering medical aid to retired employees because it artificially inflated their running costs, making the bank a bit leery of them, has made it look like Clinton ran a deficit.
Futher, ironically, you have pointed to another thing Clinton achieved: Greater financial accountability.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:14 pm70. “Bush failed to cut or kill Social Security just like Clinton.”
I just read this and Oh My G*d get some help nutcase. And your only argument would be something like “I’m rich so I don’t care about other people’s retirement.” Like I said your a nutcase, airhead, your just waste on this planet.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:15 pmNow we have the oil barons and other greedy coporations, who have thru greedy congress, and lobbyists, true sellouts of the salus populi, working for special interest groups and working to keep people in poverty.
These same congressmen have sold out their brethren for money, empty paper promises, and will vote themselves a raise every chance they get while legalizing poverty.
Wars today are not about protecting America, our soldiers die for resources. Resources that the taxpayer, really, has paid for and that will be stolen from him and resold to him by they very same greedy people that want these resource wars. Georges backloaded taxes have not yet come due (2011) nor have the costs of this resource war been tallied.
To add insult to injury legalized poverty requires some form of national healthcare because those in poverty cannot afford it. Yet these very same monetary sociopaths want to also deny the very people, whose sweat created their wealth, a doctor.
Then they have the audacity to call themselves pro-lifers, but as soon as that baby is born, they no longer care. Screw them they say. Let them starve.
I think people like Bush and his ilk, the have and have mores, actually enjoy driving by slums and seeing people suffer. They know money is worth nothing really, but they still horde it anyway. Makes ‘em feel good. Makes them a better person, gives them class..heh heh, yeh right.
The great melting pot, the land of freedom equality and brotherhood, is smoke and mirrors. Drug dealers deal drugs because disparity is high. Illegal aliens find jobs in America because of greed and are easy to exploit and profit upon.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:17 pm“Bush failed”
at least we can all agree on some things
January 31st, 2007 at 4:19 pmIt is sad when both parties don’t have the interest of we the people in mind.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 4:02 pm
Roger, perhaps they subscribe to your thought here:
Who cares what the average American “feelsâ€.
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
The blue pill Roger, the blue pill.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:20 pmThanks Holy I enjoyed that.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:20 pmHas any president ever NOT said “the economy is strong?,” ie., signed their own death warrant and been escorted out of the building by security?
January 31st, 2007 at 4:22 pmIt is sad when both parties don’t have the interest of we the people in mind.
Comment by Roger_Roger
They are sellouts and yet people, all day long, bash one another in their defense. I have never seen anything like it.
People bashing one another for Politicians. Why would anyone ever?
They, monetary sociopathic politicos, are surely laughing at those that do their work for them.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:24 pmYour welcome USA
http://www.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 01/ 28/ business/ yourmoney/ 28every.html
Empires come and go. Economic systems come and go. There is no heavenly guarantee that capitalism will last forever as we know it.
It’s built on man’s notion that he can trust his neighbor with his money, and that if the neighbor misbehaves, the law will chase him and catch him, and that the ladder of law has no top and no bottom, that even the nobles get properly handled (Bob Dylan again) once they have been caught.
If that trust disappears — if the system is no longer a system for the ordinary citizen but only for the tough guys — how much longer can the miracle last?
EACH day’s newspaper, it seems, brings more tidings of unrestrained selfishness and self-dealing and rafts of powerful people saying it’s good for us to be robbed if only we truly understood the system.
The problem is, we’re getting to understand it all too well.
And there is no one in Washington — absolutely no one — to help.
Ben Stein
January 31st, 2007 at 4:30 pmThe economy is on the verge of collapse because of Bush bankrupting the Federal Treasury on his Iraq Fiasco War!
January 31st, 2007 at 4:34 pmRoger_Roger. You’re right in your #3 post, but I’m afraid you are wasting your time. The class envy and two America’s ideology have been stoked by progressives, and you or I could never put out that fire (the only thing that will, is, if the country were treated to another Carter presidency with 18% mortgage rates, high unemployment, and double digit inflation). It is interesting that TP posts that a dozen rich republicans vote against passage of a hike in the minimum wage (as if their wealth should prohibit them from legislating on economic issues) while ‘Mr. Two Americas’, John Edwards has a 28,000 sq. ft. mansion in NC with a $309,000 gym/basketball court. There are plenty of significant issues to debate in this country. Sometimes progressives have alot to offer. But if participants here can’t see the strong economic conditions that abound, they won’t (and don’t want) to see it. It only highlights their limited objectivity and jeopardizes their credibility on other issues that are less cut and dried.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:35 pmThere is no heavenly guarantee that capitalism will last forever as we know it.
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
Yes, that’s right… Out of Capitialism should evolve true Communism… (that was to rattle the trolls a bit : )
Great posts!
January 31st, 2007 at 4:36 pmHoly Kow
Haves and have mores aren’t the problem. You get lots of very nice, very rich people out there and good luck to them.
The problem comes in, with the guys who equate fiscal superiority with moral superiority. Just because someone is rich doesn’t make them a nasty person, make no mistake, but it doesn’t make them good either.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:41 pmThe class envy and two America’s ideology have been stoked by progressives
Comment by paul — January 31, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
I WILLINGLY left Corporate America. I don’t envy the bastards who take more than they need - because they are unethical gluttonous pigs who do not care about those whom they’ve stolen from (we live on a planet with LIMITED resources). I quit their system because it is a terribly immoral way to live.
If there are two Americas it is because your side has created them. George Bush - the Great Divider! Let’s see - he called his base the Haves and the Have Mores… and then gave them bigol’ tax cuts at the expense of hungry and impoverished children.
If you don’t get why this is isn’t about envy, you aren’t living in the same reality as the rest of us.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:44 pmA couple of real chestnuts dropped by Roger_Truth_Dodger:
These are my tax dollars afterall and I hate them wasting it.
Except for that pesky war which has been severely mismanaged and has benefitted oil interests and defense contractors more than American security?
Sad that you still live in a fantasy land where Clinton had a Surplus. HAHA
Using this same logic, how can we be led to believe that while Clinton publicized “bogus” economy numbers, GW is on the up and up with his “strong economy” line? I wonder how that works?
Our government takes in more taxes then they ever have proving once again the economy is booming.
How does this work when the top 2% received the largest of the tax cuts? Not to mention all the breaks corporations get? Hey, don’t those corporations who outsource American jobs to other countries with low labor standards become able to inflate their profits - making the number “look” great, while not doing a damn thing for the American people? Who cares what the numbers “look” like, the feelings of the “average” American are what counts here!
Hey Roger, you have got to be one of those dolts who confuses free market capitalism with a system of governance!
Hip-hip-hooray for Black Sunday! Roger will be crying in the bread line!!!
January 31st, 2007 at 4:44 pmHoly Kow
The thing I don’t get is: A leftwinger sees both parties as being corrupted beyond redemption, he or she votes for someone else (Hence the growth of the Green party for example.)
A rightwinger sees both parties as being corrupted beyond redemption, he or she votes Republican.
And yet the left gets called spineless?
January 31st, 2007 at 4:45 pmGood post Bruce Gorton.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:46 pm“participants here can’t see the strong economic conditions that abound”
and if other participants, like the middle class, notice that each time they buy gas or bread or milk, that it costs a little bit more, then all the henry paulson p.r. spin in the world won’t make them think the economy is strong. [poor o’neil and snow got booted ’cause they were bad salesmen]
January 31st, 2007 at 4:46 pmJust because someone is rich doesn’t make them a nasty person, make no mistake, but it doesn’t make them good either.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — January 31, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
Rich? You’re right… But I think he’s speaking of the 1%ers… Those who would cut their own mother’s throats to put a nickle in their pockets.
The bottom line is that when you take more than you need, in a realm of limits, you are forcing someone else in the world to do without. And that has nothing to do with being nice or not nice - but about being immoral.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:48 pmGreat posts Holy Kow–Maybe you should run for office so we would have someone in Washington to help us !
January 31st, 2007 at 4:48 pmGreat posts Holy Kow–Maybe you should run for office so we would have someone in Washington to help us !
Comment by Kid Clu
You wish me to become a hypocrite? =) (kidding)
January 31st, 2007 at 4:55 pmI say we elect Ben Stein! =)
January 31st, 2007 at 4:56 pmMany of the economic indicators about the health of the economy are misleading. They tend to reflect averages. What is unfair about that?
The vast majority of that has accrued to the top 2 percent of Americans. Indicators that are subject to the median number paint a picture much weaker than those suggested by the averages and they are far more meaningful.
Blaming the perception of the economy on Iraq is as misguided as the policy in Iraq itself. While it is a factor, the bigger factor is the economy that is tepid for all but the very wealthy. It also shows a President either in denial of the facts on the economy or not knowledgeable on what the indicators actually mean. Neither speaks well for Bush.
January 31st, 2007 at 4:58 pmRoger friggin’ Roger….You kill me dude. Oh, my sides my sides, stop it. I’m not laughing, I jumped towards my screen to wring your pencil neck and bruised a rib on my desk. This is the worst economy in 15-20 years. It’s true all of the corporations are getting paid huge dividends. It’s true the stock market is booming, it’s true that the rich are without question getting richer. The problem with you rhetoric is it’s not true. Average Americans don’t play in the stock market. Average Americans aren’t corporate CEO’s. And lastly, unemployment figures are inaccurate because they don’t take into account that those that are no longer eligible for unemployment come off of that number. That doesn’t mean they’ve found work yet. The average American has been deficit spending to make ends meet. But just keep putting your mellon in the sand. Everything is fine.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:00 pmDon’t forget housing sales down, just the perfect timing for my Mom who put her’s on the market a month ago.
This sentiment is indicative of almost all progressive criticism (healthcare does need more debate) of the Bush Administrations economic policy. The poster is lamenting a recent 3% downturn in the housing market, that will effect someone else, and places the blame squarely on Bush.
Well, I’ll bet your mother is glad she didn’t sell her house when Bush took office in 2000. I’m sure you’re not lamenting the 50% (conservative estimate) housing appreciation since that time. I’m also sure you aren’t willing to credit him for that appreciation.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:00 pmThe class envy and two America’s ideology have been stoked by progressives
Comment by paul
Only if you think money is class. I don’t.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:01 pmPeople are People are People.
Classes are for anthills and beehives.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:03 pmComment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Considering it is still only 5:20 pm, that’s an interesting trick…
January 31st, 2007 at 5:09 pmHow odd, I am a time traveler!!
January 31st, 2007 at 5:09 pmComment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Considering it is still only 5:20 pm, that’s an interesting trick…
Comment by unbelievable
I think it was TP. My computer clock has 4:18 pm.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:12 pmunbelievable
Funny thing about the 1%ers. If you meet them, most of them are just people like you or me.
The guys you have to keep an eye on are the fakes.
The maggoty CEO who sticks with one company only until the bills come in, the unethical contractor who will build houses on the cheap, and then vanishes when the owners come knocking. The kinds of guys who throw huge lavish parties complete with prostitutes, for their congressmen and bank managers benefits, and actually don’t enjoy any of it - and if you look you can see it.
The Jack Abramoff’s, Kenneth Lays, and Delay’s of the world are all easy to spot. Just watch for the guy who is all flash and no fun, and there you will see your fake.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:15 pmThis sentiment is indicative of almost all progressive criticism
The President, historically, has always been somehwat of a scapegoat.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:16 pmOkay. Maybe class envy is not the right way to describe it. Maybe this would be better.
Progressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be, should stop blaming someone else for their financial situation.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:17 pmI think it was TP. My computer clock has 4:18 pm.
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 5:12 pm
Yeah, it’s the same in other threads. They must’ve reset the clocks or something… Guess Judd didn’t leave them all the instructions : )
January 31st, 2007 at 5:20 pmFunny thing about the 1%ers. If you meet them, most of them are just people like you or me.
Technically - of course, but how many do you call ‘friends’? I think that’s part of it.
The guys you have to keep an eye on are the fakes.
And they are mostly all in the 1%. :D
The Jack Abramoff’s, Kenneth Lays, and Delay’s of the world are all easy to spot. Just watch for the guy who is all flash and no fun, and there you will see your fake.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — January 31, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
Yes - “evil” truly has no sense of humor : )
January 31st, 2007 at 5:24 pmProgressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be, should stop blaming someone else for their financial situation.
Comment by paul
Nope. I like to work with my hands and have no desire to be a millionaire. The fact is not everyone wants to become rich nor could societ function without those who do the work you detest.
I do not think it’s right to pay someone crappy wages because they don’t embrace exploitative practices.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:25 pmProgressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be, should stop blaming someone else for their financial situation.
Comment by paul
You should stop projecting. Me and my family are MORE than comfortable financially (although private school is $$$$). I have nothing and nobody to “blame” for my cherry situation, but I stil despise money grubbers who can think of nothing but their wallet, and look down on anybody who’s happy with their income.
Jesus is NOT smiling on you and your selfishness…
January 31st, 2007 at 5:26 pmProgressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be, should stop blaming someone else for their financial situation.
Comment by paul — January 31, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
That was even worse. Quit while you’re behind.
I’m as financially sucessful as I both need and want to be. I don’t blame anyone for my choices. I do still believe that wealth is unethical, as it takes away from others,since there is a limited amount to go around to everyone.
No matter how many times you re-phrase it, I will still hold this sentiment that rich=unethical. And it has nothing to do with me personally. It has to do with a basic understanding that anyone who hoardes what belongs to someone else is not an ethical person.
Go read ‘Ishmael’ by Daniel Quinn.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:28 pmThis whole conversation smells like your promoting S O C I A L I S M!! Sorry for the spaces, but you Lefty’s won’t even let that word be on your forums which is funny as you talk about those ideals as what you want.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:32 pmhis whole conversation smells like your promoting S O C I A L I S M!! Sorry for the spaces, but you Lefty’s won’t even let that word be on your forums which is funny as you talk about those ideals as what you want.
Comment by Roger_Roger
Fair wages are socialism? You seem to be advocating dictatroial monarchies.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:34 pmI think CEOs should make min wage and Roger calls that socialism.
Roger thinks everyone else should make min wage and call it capitalism.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:38 pmYOU are the Socilast Roger, you just call it by a different name.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:39 pmhow is the bush administration wanting snow and o’neil to fluff econ numbers letting the ‘invisible hand’ of the market guide the economy? that’s manipulation; that’s your socialism.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:41 pmPaul and Roger both promote socialism and classes.
But really both want to keep the working man in a ‘class’ and profit from them.
Yet if the working man wants to put CEOs in a ‘class’ and reverses the scenario it is then socialism.
Nice try Roger and Paul. I aint buying your socialist argument.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:45 pmTell you what Paul and Roger lets pay people by the calories they burn.
That is we get paid by the amount of true work that we do.
I would grow rich and healthy, while you would grow poor and overweight sitting on your buttocks all day.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:48 pmThis whole conversation smells like your promoting S O C I A L I S M!!
Comment by Roger_Roger — January 31, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
You mean like this:
Christian socialists draw parallels between what some have characterized as the egalitarian and anti-establishment message of Jesus, who — according to Christian Gospel — spoke against the religious authorities of his time, and the egalitarian, anti-establishment, and sometimes anti-clerical message of most contemporary socialisms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism
LOL, Roger…
January 31st, 2007 at 5:49 pmI would grow rich and healthy, while you would grow poor and overweight sitting on your buttocks all day.
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
It really is an arbitrary system for how we pay people…
The country would survive without the highest paid people (CEOs and lawyers) far more than without the lowest paid (teachers, police, garbage collectors, and fire fighters).
January 31st, 2007 at 5:52 pmBut the rich think they “need” all the stuff they have.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:54 pmThe term also pertains to such earlier figures as the nineteenth century writer Frederick Denison Maurice (The Kingdom of Christ, 1838) and Francis Bellamy — Baptist minister and author of the United States’ Pledge of Allegiance.
Ouch, thats gonna leave a mark on Roger^2 unbelievable. =)
January 31st, 2007 at 5:56 pmThis whole conversation smells like your promoting S O C I A L I S M!!
Comment by Roger_Roger
You mean like this Roger:
“Christian socialists draw parallels between what some have characterized as the egalitarian and anti-establishment message of Jesus, who — according to Christian Gospel — spoke against the religious authorities of his time, and the egalitarian, anti-establishment, and sometimes anti-clerical message of most contemporary socialisms.”
(from wikipedia)
January 31st, 2007 at 5:58 pmI am now coining a new word and Political ideology.
Calorism!!
You work in congress 3 days a week and burn no calories and take free meals from lobbyists? You don’t get paid much.
You work in a slaughter house and burn alot of calories? You get paid more.
January 31st, 2007 at 5:59 pmOuch, thats gonna leave a mark on Roger^2 unbelievable. =)
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
You mean like the Stigmata? : )
January 31st, 2007 at 5:59 pmBut the rich think they “need†all the stuff they have.
Comment by ForTruth — January 31, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Ken Lay needed gold shower curtains that cost several hundred thousand a piece?
How the hell does anyone justify that?
January 31st, 2007 at 6:00 pmYou work in a slaughter house and burn alot of calories? You get paid more.
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
Doesn’t that sorta contradict the whole ‘holy cow’ notion?
I’m vegan, I don’t place much value on killing animals.
January 31st, 2007 at 6:03 pmKen Lay needed gold shower curtains that cost several hundred thousand a piece?
How the hell does anyone justify that?
Comment by unbelievable —
Hey, Kenny Boy worked really hard at screwing his employees, he deserves it!!
January 31st, 2007 at 6:03 pmDoesn’t that sorta contradict the whole ‘holy cow’ notion?
I’m vegan, I don’t place much value on killing animals.
Comment by unbelievable
Naw, growing vegetables, farming is hard work, thus you would burn more calories. You would be wealthy under Calorism as well =)
January 31st, 2007 at 6:05 pmCalorism is simply capitalism reversed!
January 31st, 2007 at 6:08 pmYou would be wealthy under Calorism as well =)
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
I bet Roger would be dirt poor. Unless you can actually burn calories running your mouth….
January 31st, 2007 at 6:11 pmI bet Roger would be dirt poor. Unless you can actually burn calories running your mouth….
Comment by unbelievable.
lol
January 31st, 2007 at 6:13 pmI gotta sign off and go burn some calories. TTYL UB.
January 31st, 2007 at 6:14 pmI gotta sign off and go burn some calories. TTYL UB.
Comment by Holy Kow — January 31, 2007 @ 6:14 pm
Same here… Later!
January 31st, 2007 at 6:15 pmProgressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be[…]
Comment by paul — January 31, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
Holy mother of all logical fallacies, Batman! (Yes, I’ve been watching Batman with my kids)
So you really think that those of us who ask for a raise in minimum wage, do so out of resentment for the uber-wealthy!? Or that we are in bad financial situation?
Hasn’t it occurred to you it could be out genuine compassion for the less fortunate? What a Grinch you are.
January 31st, 2007 at 6:25 pmVery nice thread and goods comments, Holy Kow and unbelievable. Don’t let yourselves get called envious. That’s what they are telling me all the time, too and why? I don’t have a cleaning woman, however my husband is really quite successful professionally, and as a consequence financially. We drive a Renault Kangoo (just have a look at Renault’s webpage for details) although it would be adequate to drive something with a star on it. My father in law thinks it is embarrassing. My mom and my sister own a Mercedes Benz each and I don’t want it, neither furs, nor jewellery or expensive clothing. When I tell them such a large car is absolutely unneccessary for a woman aged 80 and driving something like 500 miles a year, they tell me I’m envious. Same goes for fur and jewellery and shoes and clothing. They are still telling me I’ll grow out of this eventually, when I finally do grow up. Well, I’m 46 and I think the most valuable things in my life are already there. A husband that I love and two boys whom I adore. Do I need more?
January 31st, 2007 at 6:29 pmPaul, what would you call someone who can’t tell the difference between a rich man who wants the minimum wage raised and a rich man who wants to block a minimum wage hike? A Bush cultist?
January 31st, 2007 at 7:05 pmGregor Samsa. I’m sure you are a compassionate person. But most of the postings here blame the rich (last nights post about rich republicans voting down the mininum wage hike) as the reason those on minimum wage make the money they do. The idea is devoid of the reality that what you make depends on the work you do. It’s not because greedy rich people don’t want you to have any of their money. It’s probably worth recalling that its the greedy, rich people pay most of the taxes that run the programs many here promote:
The Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes
The Top 1% Pay More Than a Third: 34.27%
What is very interesting, is, I believe that very few of those lamenting those on minimum wage, are actually on minimum wage. I’ll bet many working for the minimum wage understand the responsibility to make more money (if they want it) lies with them.
I’m curious, if you are currently making minimum wage, speak up. I doubt there are many here.
January 31st, 2007 at 7:08 pmThe Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes
The Top 1% Pay More Than a Third: 34.27% -Paul
Wouldn’t rasing min wage then help bring in more tax income?
January 31st, 2007 at 7:20 pmThe Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes
Then make less money Paul.
January 31st, 2007 at 7:21 pmPaul, are income taxes the only ones we pay? Of course not. In 1983, the Social Security tax was doubled. This was and is the largest tax increase in history. The idea was to create a surplus for boomers hitting retirement age with Social Security, but it turned out to be a huge “bait and switch.” A surplus was created, but Bush’s tax cuts transferred trillions of these dollars to the wealthiest 1 or 2 percent. Now, since the top rates during the 90’s were 3.5% higher than they are today and we experienced the longest peacetime expansion of our economy in history during that period, why on earth shouldn’t we go back to those rates to begin to fix our deficits and national debt?
January 31st, 2007 at 7:23 pmPaul, what would you call someone who can’t tell the difference between a rich man who wants the minimum wage raised and a rich man who wants to block a minimum wage hike? A Bush cultist?
Comment by Bluedog49
Scroogeists
January 31st, 2007 at 7:25 pmProgressives that are not as financially successful as they would like to be, should stop blaming someone else for their financial situation.
Comment by paul
WTF? I went to school and got my license. I am to blame for the low pay scale because Iliked to work with my hands and in the outdoors?
Do you think you can just leave some food out overnite and some motie is gonna repair whats broken?
Crazy Eddie!!
January 31st, 2007 at 7:37 pm“The idea is devoid of the reality that what you make depends on the work you do. It’s not because greedy rich people don’t want you to have any of their money. Comment by paul — January 31, 2007 @ 7:08 pm”
****Do you honestly believe that the wealthy - ‘do more work’ than the poor? That’s just too funny for words! Their money? So when the wealthy at Enron, Exxon or Halliburton get federal kickbacks of taxpayers money, they shouldn’t be taxed because the stole it fair and share? Is that your stance?
Now as for you claim of the share of the tax burden the wealthy have - that’s quite amusing!
You’re such an eloquent spokesman for the grinch party - who again is your candidate?
January 31st, 2007 at 7:40 pmModern republicans like Paul are passionate defenders of the economic elite. This is why they are so fired up about Clinton’s 3% tax increase for the most wealthy among us, but completely ignore Reagans doubling of the Social Security tax. Reagan’s tax increase was the biggest in history, but it only affected the working class. Defenders of the economic elite somehow manage to forget this.
January 31st, 2007 at 7:53 pmUNSETTLING??
January 31st, 2007 at 7:58 pmYou jackass, you’re mortgaging the future of America to pay for your gottendamerung war!
Piss off.
The idea is devoid of the reality that what you make depends on the work you do.
Comment by paul — January 31, 2007 @ 7:08 pm
Right. And the minimum wage hasn’t been