Krugman Calls Out GOP Hypocrisy On Job Creation And Defense Cuts
Krugman Calls Out GOP Hypocrisy On Job Creation And Defense Cuts
In February, only three Republican senators broke party ranks to vote for the economic recovery package. Zero House Republicans voted for passage. Part of their opposition centered around the belief that an increase in government spending would do nothing to create jobs:
– “And first off the government doesn’t create jobs. Let’s get this notion out of our heads that the government creates jobs. Not in the history of mankind has the government ever created a job. Small business owners do, small enterprises do. Not the government.” [RNC Chairman Michael Steele, 2/2/09]
– “Instead of focusing on three major issues — job creation, housing and compassion for Americans who have lost jobs through no fault of their own — to boost the economy, this bill has morphed into a bloated government giveaway.” [Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), 2/10/09]
– “When it comes to slow-moving government spending programs, it’s clear that it doesn’t create the jobs or preserve the jobs that need to happen.” [House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), 1/21/09]
However, when Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced plans to end production of the F-22 at the current 187 planes — down from the 381 planes the government was expected to order — many of these same conservatives were up in arms over the jobs that would be lost.
Chambliss, in particular, said that he was concerned people in his state would lose jobs if F-22 production was cut, because “when it comes to stimulating the economy, there’s no better way to do it than to spend it in the defense community.” Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who also voted against the economic recovery package, similarly said, “I also believe that it is unacceptable that this administration wants to eliminate 2,000 jobs in Marietta and potentially 95,000 jobs nationwide at a time when unemployment rates are rising across the country.”
Today on ABC’s This week, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman called out this hypocrisy:
KRUGMAN: What’s so wonderful is watching Republican congressmen saying, “But this will cost jobs!” The very same Republican congressmen who were denouncing the stimulus, saying government spending never creates jobs, but cutting defense spending costs jobs. It’s wonderful.
Watch it:
Military correspondent David Axe has pointed out that it’s possible very few workers will lose their jobs because of Gates’s announcement. In fact, thousands of workers will likely be “snapped up for active production lines churning out F-16s, F-35s, C-130s and modernized C-5s for Lockheed, not to mention the prospect that industry rivals Boeing and Northrop might lure Lockheed workers for their own active production lines for the F-15, F/A-18 and others.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Put Krugman in charge.
April 12th, 2009 at 2:38 pmBut but but…what was the reaction to Krugman’s statement!?
April 12th, 2009 at 2:41 pmThe look on his face is priceless. He really did enjoy that.
April 12th, 2009 at 2:42 pmChambliss, in particular, said that he was concerned people in his state would lose jobs if F-22 production was cut, because “when it comes to stimulating the economy, there’s no better way to do it than to spend it in the defense community.”
Yes there is, Senator. You can spend it on infrastructure (something whose purpose in life is to be used, not unused), Medicaid spending (these people aren’t hording their dough; they’re going to spend every penny they get), and unemployment benefits (you know they need it, too), to name just a few.
April 12th, 2009 at 2:51 pmCalling out GOP hypocrisy is a full time job. That’s the only way rebubs create jobs. It’s too bad it doesn’t pay well and there are no health benefits (of course).
April 12th, 2009 at 2:54 pmThis has been going on for 17 years. What is being created, I think, is more too big to fail industry.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:02 pmSo, government spending doesn’t create jobs (and governments in general never create jobs), but federal budget cuts can cause job losses?
How does that work out?
Republicans must work with a different math…
April 12th, 2009 at 3:04 pmI tought I read somewhere that red states take more in federal dollars than they contribute and blue states give more and take less. Complain away, welfare righties!
April 12th, 2009 at 3:14 pmOf course, Republicans have always known government spending creates jobs.
These Republican senators, specially, want to protect the interests of the industrial-military complex because 1) government spending generates lots of jobs in their respective states, 2) military contractors likely have contributed to their senatorial campaigns (and generously so, I might add), and 3) they like their cushy government jobs with all those perks and benefits -the same kind of benefits they are keen on denying to the rest of us.
It’s a disturbing trend when the only jobs worth saving are at weapons manufacturing plants, while most other jobs are relocated to “low cost centers” abroad to the point where the bulk of the consumer goods average Americans buy are made elsewhere.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:20 pmYes. If the repukes actually, truly believed in the depths of their “souls” that Keynesian spending would fail, they would have gone ahead and let Obama have it, then sit back and watch it fail. But they know it works. It’s right there in the history books, for anyone who believes that 2+2 does NOT equal five to understand. But repukes don’t believe in jobs, they believe in poverty. They don’t believe in the middle-class, they believe in a desperate work-for-anything working class. They don’t believe in the promise of America for everyone, they believe in the promise of America for a few. And they manage to fool far too many.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:28 pmKrugman points to the obvious: The hypocrisy of the republicans. Too bad there are far too many interviewers not willing to do the same.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:46 pmmarlow..”red states take more in federal dollars than they contribute and blue states give more and take less.”
Two exceptions, Texas and Florida (which is more like a purpley-blue state now).
April 12th, 2009 at 3:51 pmIf they hold back on the F-22, maybe they can start churning out whatever will stop all the head injuries, for one.
For every single dead soldier, ten come home debilitated with brain injuries and/or psychosis.
April 12th, 2009 at 3:53 pmSee all the Republicans dressed in black!
April 12th, 2009 at 3:54 pmSee all the Conservatives dressed in black!
Must be the hypocrites coming back!
No hidin’ place down here!
This is the pattern of Empire-building, facist, nations like the USA. And we are that.
We are controlled by the MIC including the MSM. Unless we regain our senses and revolt then this trend will continue until this empire collapses from within or is defeated from without.
The British saved their empire by pulling out of India, etc. They made a smart choice to stop trying to build a world-wide empire. Otherwise, most empires were conquered or destroyed within.
Empire building cannot be sustained long term by even the richest, smartest and greatest of nations. History proves this over and over again.
April 12th, 2009 at 4:06 pmO/T but I just had to throw this in somewhere, a short post from Krugman yesterday called “Armey of Darkness” included a link from TP about Freedom Works.
Krugman:
Aha. So the “tea parties” are to a large extent being run by Freedom Works, which is basically Dick Armey with a lot of Koch-Scaife-Bradley-Olin support.
He also includes another link full of info on Freedom Works.
April 12th, 2009 at 4:20 pmI guess I should have said it included a link TO TP..
Thanks Paul Krugman!
April 12th, 2009 at 4:23 pmA Pretty Purpley-Blue, thank you! :}
Good Day Mate, what a night at the Zoo.
April 12th, 2009 at 4:36 pmYou can always tell when a Republican is being hypocritical. It’s every time they move their mouths.
April 12th, 2009 at 4:49 pmAnd wasn’t it the Senate republicans who recently voted against the 2010 budget that funds the Iraq occupation, the Afghan war, and the tax cuts for the uber wealthy that will sunset eventually? Wow! They voted against our soldiers & the wealthy! Shocker. Do their constituents know this? Oh boy.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:07 pmIt’s surprising how few people know why the RED states are red. They are usually the ones with the corporations holding defense contracts, which the congressional appropriations committees gave to the states which had high unemployment and lower costs of living. Congress had spread the defense contract wealth around the country for the past 30 some odd years.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:08 pm5th Estate Says:
April 12th, 2009 at 5:11 pmThank you 5th. You’re probably right and at least Florida is much more purple than previously. In the past at least, lots and lots of federal dollars flowed into those states. The space program comes to mind. Texas did have the advantage of being laid out on hundreds of billions of barrels of free oil as well. Mother nature’s welfare giveaway is what Hanny-boy would be calling it if that state were blue.
dixie….”The British saved their empire by pulling out of India, etc. They made a smart choice to stop trying to build a world-wide empire. Otherwise, most empires were conquered or destroyed within.”
I agree with your larger point, but your synopsis of British imperial history and the lessons of empire is mistaken I’m afraid.
Britain practically ran-out of new imperial prospects by about 1830–it then consolidated what it had already claimed and/or won from it’s European rivals (France in particular).
Britain began to lose it’s empire as a financial and political consequence of WWII, and giving up its colonies was quite a reluctant process. Without WWII Britain might still have had the same empire today–but then I’d imagine we’d simply being seeing the beginnings of an inevitable dissolution of empire today.
I’m just saying… . CHeers!
April 12th, 2009 at 5:28 pmWe have so much use for the current workers currently on the MIC lines to restore manufacturing for a variety of products here at home & implement a clean energy economy, and the republicans think that building extremely expensive weapons the country doesn’t need is the only way to save or create jobs.
I’ve never bought into the whole free enterprise = republican shtick. They’re just an expensive welfare roll and too stubborn to admit it.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:34 pmLooks like Krugman needs a lesson in economics 101.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:56 pmThe exorbitant cost of the F-22 and all this fawning over it makes me wonder how much of the price tag is based on kick-backs.
April 12th, 2009 at 5:59 pmSo many Nobel laureates in Economics do these days.
Explain?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:00 pmThe government cannot and will not create jobs in a capitalistic society such as the Unite States. Instead of creating jobs, the government just creates problems. We need to freeze useless government spending EXCEPT for military. That will fix the economy and start up more jobs.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:05 pmProgressive Republican Says:
The government cannot and will not create jobs in a capitalistic society such as the Unite States. Instead of creating jobs, the government just creates problems. We need to freeze useless government spending EXCEPT for military. That will fix the economy and start up more jobs.
Thanks for explainig. Now can you explain how the government is incapable of creating jobs, yet cuts in military spending threaten jobs? Aren’t those jobs that are threatened created by the government in the first place?
This is indeed puzzling.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:07 pmHow many jobs would it create if there was actually a job calling out Republican hypocrisy?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:07 pmBy the way, PR, I’m going to forward your analysis to the Nobel committee. Surely a perspective as bold, expansive and sophisticated as yours must attract their attention, no?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:09 pmThe Republicans had this private little club called defence procurement that goes back to the Reagan days. How dare an upstart like “this man” Obama even dare to tell us what to do?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:09 pmTheir true colors come out. So much for their principles and ethical stand against big government. The corruption of the whole machine is coming out.
I continue to be amused by the bipolar best country in history wrap flags around all sorts of shit while b itching that the big bad government is so much the problem. What is it with these frickin’ mental patients?
I wonder if Progressive Republican can help explain this weirdness
April 12th, 2009 at 6:12 pmSounds like someone is stupid enough to have fallen for the myth that, under identical circumstances, the New Deal created jobs and rebuilt the economy. This fact was never in dispute until a bunch of stupid, greedy, Reichwhiners ran the economy into the ground (like their ancestors before the Great Depression) and realized their only hope, to avoid being marginalized for 60 years, is to rewrite history.
Thankfully, it’s super hard to rewrite history in the Information Age.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:13 pmI’m no Nobel prize winner, but my solution goes like this. Tax the living crap out of the War Profiteers and spend that money on building up our country…you know, bridges, schools, educated population, scientific research…the stuff that used to make our country great. Health care for our hardworking citizens would go a long ways toward making us competitive with the rest of the world.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:13 pmCapitalism is about companies competing to create the lowest priced product not becoming a parasite latched onto the taxpayers derrier.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:14 pmNo doubt he can. Did you see how concisely and efficiently he explained the fundamentals of economics in 29?
Of course, he left a few threads hanging, but when you get in-depth analysis of tis caliber, you can’t quibble over a few nonsensical conundra.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:16 pmNow Jeff, that’s just silly.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:18 pmThis whole thing is Sarah Palin fault, Im sure of it.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:18 pmI made a major syntax mistake! My previous post at #35 should have begun:
“Sounds like someone is stupid enough to have fallen for the myth that, under identical circumstances, the New Deal did not create jobs and rebuild the economy.”
Sorry!
April 12th, 2009 at 6:19 pmTHanks for the correction, pete.
By the way, did you see I time-traveled? Cool!
April 12th, 2009 at 6:20 pmThere is no need, today, for the huge expense the military industrial complex leeches. We dont need a bigger military, we have some 760 bases around the world. We dont need more weapons producers.
We dont need the fear factor from the warhawks who instill fear into people not because we are threatened but because they want to increase their profits, to keep the too big to fail MIC from imploding because it cannot generate enough profits to exist on their own.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:21 pmThat is one fast locust.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:22 pmWhere did our new oxymoronic friend go?
He drops this bombshell on how to fix the economy, and then he just splits without taking questions.
I’m beginning to think he doesn’t really know what he’s talking about… anyone else get that feeling?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:23 pmWell the way this dragonfly’s eyes see it, the Progressive Republican is admitting that military spending is useless, but wants to continue that useless spending.
Dragonfly eyes are funny that way.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:24 pmIn a capitalistic society, poverty is necessary to measure how rich one is!
April 12th, 2009 at 6:28 pmBasic principle of republican politics #1: ANY institution or standpoint which serves to advance the right-wing cause is fair game, no matter if you were heaping scorn or derision on it yesterday or will be tomorrow. For example, the Federal government is the greatest of all evils and needs to be carefully restrained, unless of course the voters put you in charge of it. In that case, what you need to do is you need to take it out for cocaine-and-tequila-fueled joyride all the while blowing snot on the Constitution that brought it into being. Basic principle #2 if a repubelican succeeds a democrat EVERYTHING that goes wrong in that administration is the fault of the democrat. If a democrat succeeds a repubelican, everything that is wrong when he takes office is his fault, presumably the intervention of some sort of time-warping phenomenon.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:29 pm“Progressive Republican” is turning out to be a real disappointment.
Like a shiny plastic toy that breaks as soon as it’s out of the box.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:34 pmProgressive Republican Says:
Looks like Krugman needs a lesson in economics 101.
It looks like this critter needs a lesson in Eisenhower Farewell Address 101.
What the hell does a basic economic course have to do with pointing out your hypocrisy?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:34 pmKudos to Krugman in seeking to dispel the myth that government spending cannot create jobs. Anyone who has had the pleasure of reading Caro’s books on LBJ know that the company which begat Haliburton, specifically, Brown&Root,survived the Depression primarily due to gov’t contracts secured by LBJ to build bridges and other public works.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:38 pmPR:We need to freeze useless government spending EXCEPT for military. That will fix the economy and start up more jobs.
I’m on board, ralph. This is a mind-numbingly stupid analysis. It’s not even rooted in basic economic principles, but through failed rigid ideology.
I thought right-wingers were opposed to a government-planned economy, so then why are they shoving bloated military spending down workers’ throats?
April 12th, 2009 at 6:44 pmChicano2nd Says:
In a capitalistic society, poverty is necessary to measure how rich one is!
ABSOLUTELY. You drive by a homeless person lying in rags on the sidewalk or by a tent city out in some dirt-caked field, and you say “there but for the grace of God go I…maybe I’d better leave well enough alone and vote against the union, maybe I’d better NOT bother my boss about that raise I haven’t received in five years of hard work…” Nothing shuts up people who should be howling in the streets like a drive through Skid Row. And they fcuking know it.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:45 pmralph at 49 is so correct. I had such higher expectations…
April 12th, 2009 at 6:46 pmSo, government spending doesn’t create jobs (and governments in general never create jobs), but federal budget cuts can cause job losses?
April 12th, 2009 at 7:03 pmWhat’s really funny is that the biggest cuts to the F-22 program were under Chimpy. He cut it several times and, from what I can find, no orders had ever been placed beyond the 187 on the current order.
In what seems to be an endlessly repeated cycle with U.S. weapons, they built the best one in the world, only to discover they don’t really need it and it’s too effing expensive. The whole program amounts to another problem Chimpy left to his successor. My guess is that the program would have been wound down even if the ol’ Navy-boy had won the election.
April 12th, 2009 at 7:07 pmProgressive Republican Says:
The government [...] and start up more jobs.
___________
Ya hafta wonder… how many times did the kid repeat this line to himself while standing in front of a mirror… and he STILL got the shakes when it was time to go on stage.
Saaay… do you think he’s quoting from “George Will For Dummies” here?
April 12th, 2009 at 7:09 pmHow can anyone say, “Not in the history of mankind has the government ever created a job.”???
Drug prohibition alone has created tens of thousands of jobs: cops, farmers, prosecutors, smugglers, prison builders, helicopter mechanics, pot trimmers, prison guards, Mexican hit-men, drug testers, sniffer dog trainers, grow-light dealers, rehab counselors, and this guy!
April 12th, 2009 at 7:14 pmdbadass Says:
ralph at 49 is so correct. I had such higher expectations…
__________
Huh?? Higher expectations? From a troll?
Yer kinda new here, aren’t cha?
Unless you meant, “Higher Expectorations”…
Hmmm… isn’t that one of Chas Dickens’ lesser known works… the sad yet uplifting tale of the orphan Phelgm, who becomes the cabin boy aboard the HMS Influenza and makes history on the first voyage to the far flung Isles of Langerhans???
April 12th, 2009 at 7:17 pmhttp://www.fikrinne.blogspot.com Says:
So, government spending doesn’t create jobs (and governments in general never create jobs), but federal budget cuts can cause job losses?
_____________
In Wingnut Bizarro world, yes.
It’s along the lines of Cutting oversight of pollution will lead to “Clean Skies” or increased logging will lead to “Healthy Forests”… that sort of thing.
April 12th, 2009 at 7:24 pmAll I would like to say is thank God for republicans. They have potrayed the GOP as standing for and meaning Gods of the People. They are stuck in the past and the assume that the majority of Americans haven`t seen the light. I`m anxious to see what will happen when they begin to wake up and realize that the rest of the world have changed, and for the better.
April 12th, 2009 at 7:30 pmjustsayingNO
April 12th, 2009 at 7:38 pmIf “Government doesn’t create jobs”, what the F are all those TSA people doing at our airports? They don’t look unemployed to me (I know they don;t look like they’re doing anything very productive, I grant you, but still…).
If “Government doesn’t create jobs”, how come Blackwater got so big, so fast?
If “Government doesn’t create jobs” how can it ‘create’ the loss of jobs when it ends a government contract–like for the F-22?
April 12th, 2009 at 8:21 pmOh, TRoHS, you know what we mean. We expected PR to provide hours of Whack-A-Troll™ enjoyment. He certainly came on stage with promise –the promise of a bottomless well of simplistic, reality-challenged talking points that he seemed willing to defend with his last troll breath.
But alas, he proved to be just a flash in the pan, a David Clyde, if you will.
Sad, familiar story.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:23 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
But alas, he proved to be just a flash in the pan, a David Clyde, if you will.
Sad, familiar story.
____________
So, you’re saying the kid was no Rick Ankiel?
April 12th, 2009 at 8:32 pmDr. Moth Matt Says:
Proof?
__________
Kid’s already been optioned to the farm team, Dr. Matt.
He started out w/ a bold entry but…
He just wasn’t ready for the bigs yet.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:36 pmah, that’s “CleaR Skies”, tros @60…
as al franken used to say, “to CLEAR the SKIES of birds.”
April 12th, 2009 at 8:36 pmThe F-22 has pods in 48 states, where various parts are either designed, or manufactured, or assembled, or tested, or polished, or shipped, or stored, or refurbished, or replaced.
It would be premature to believe that the program is over.
By the way, I believe the record for that kind of logistic dispersal goes to the B-2 bomber, which (I think Chalmers Johnson is the source for this, but I’m not sure) has pods in all 435 Congressional districts.
Untouchable.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:40 pmEver heard of freedom, liberals? You supposedly don’t value life, and we bank economic growth on industries that don’t value life.
Less health care, more profit.
More indiscriminate killing done with more weapons we don’t need, more profit. I want them built regardless of what some republican secretary of defense says because if workers don’t want to build weapons and only weapons, they can leave my free country.
Less regulation on tobacco companies, no taxes (in fact, a reduction would be dandy), more profit.
We conservatives are pro-life-to-quick-death.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:43 pmI love how the status quo is tough to do away with. I love it.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:47 pmProgressive Republican, I loved your post. When we say it’s a free market, it’s a free market. If we could just get these fact-finding liberals out of the way, we could successfully get through to a lot of people that the Lockheed Martins would somehow remain standing if it weren’t for government contracting. We could make it seem as if these massive weapons could instead be sold to the average consumer if not the government. One chicken in every pot, that’s the ticket!
April 12th, 2009 at 8:56 pmTranslate to neoconish Says:
Is this for real? Sometimes I think TP posts silliness like this just to give us a stupid troll to whack. I can’t seriously believe anyone is stupid enough to post this something this idiotic.
Despite the last thirty years, I still underestimate the stupidity of the average Republican.
April 12th, 2009 at 8:58 pmI’m being as clear as a modern conservative as I can possibly be. We are trying to destroy this country because we are bankrupt of ideas. We cannot see liberals succeed.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:01 pmDr. Matt, I could be wrong, but my Locust-sense tells me that translate to neoconish is a parody troll, employing a rather sophisticated appreciation for the finer points of trollese and a willingness to push an already absurd worldview just that much further.
The wit is very dry — think a jigger of gin mixed with a kind thought for the vintner who developed vermouth — and let’s face it, genuine trolls are getting so hard to parody these days that it’s hard to tell the difference.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:04 pm74 translate to neoconish Says:
You want to get liberals out of the way? Does that mean you want to kill liberals? Sure sounds a lot like it to me. What you gotta understand, is that it is against the law to kill people because they are liberal.
See, Republicans are in the minority now. America isn’t going to do what you want anymore, and there isn’t anything you can do about it. Threatening to kill liberals to advance a political agenda is a crime.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:04 pmIt’s the governments job to build a huge ucking military and to keep the dollar strong so people can pick up more Chinese drywall for the buck at Wal-Mart.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:04 pm#71 translate to neoconish Says:
Ever heard of freedom, liberals?
Yes, why do you ask? And what form or level of freedom are you referencing?
You supposedly don’t value life
So conservatives like to claim…
and we bank economic growth on industries that don’t value life.
who is this we to which you refer? You are mixing the personal with the impersonal
Less health care, more profit.
True, but that isn’t a sentence, let-alone an argument
More indiscriminate killing done with more weapons we don’t need, more profit. I want them built regardless of what some republican secretary of defense says because if workers don’t want to build weapons and only weapons, they can leave my free country.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:05 pmI give up.
hmmm, was I suckered by a snark troll?
April 12th, 2009 at 9:05 pmYou can be forgiven, Levi. This one’s pretty good.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:07 pmLevi, I’m a parody. Sheesh. No threats here, just look at the moniker. It’s translating the neocons true intent.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:08 pmSorry, after that last 8 years, its a knee jerk reaction.
Must kick troll…
April 12th, 2009 at 9:09 pmMust kick troll…
Liberals, prove that guns actually kill people.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:09 pmI love it when they unintentionally prove a valid point. One of the reasons to cancel the F-22 is to free resources for the F-35, and other programs, which will not only preserve/create jobs but, will enable Lockheed/Martin to produce planes they can actually export.
Like it or not, foreign arms sales are very good for the economy. The F-22 was never going to produce revenue.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:10 pmtranslate to neoconish: Levi, I’m a parody.
Of a neocon? I’d give it 4 out of 10. ‘Dinged’ for lack of focus
As a “teabagger” though? 9 out of 10.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:16 pmPete, if the program is efficient I don’t want to hear about it. Modernizing and streamlining is still cutting defense spending with a democrat is in office. We will do anything possibly to pigeonhole a democrat no matter their good intentions. They are our opponents. We need them to fail so we can fail harder.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:16 pmOh god. I thought I was as conservative as I can be. I need to better myself. What, oh what, must I do to be a better neocon, 5th Estate?
April 12th, 2009 at 9:18 pmhttp://www.fas.org/asmp/resources/govern/109th/GAO06319r.pdf
Defense exports are about 11.5 billion a year. I dont see how this rather small amount, when compared to a $14 trillion GDP, is going to make or break us.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:20 pmtranslate to neoconish Says: Liberals, prove that guns actually kill people.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:20 pmOkay, slow down, you’re chewing the scenery now.
http://www.fas.org/ asmp/ resources/ govern/ 109th/ GAO06319r.pdf
I’m going to to ignore this and talk about the “ills” of socialized medicine.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:23 pm*prince
April 12th, 2009 at 9:26 pmExpound the virtues of lobbying congress to spend more for things that can kill while driving fear deep into the psyche of the base while expounding your belief that Jesus was the price of peace who was also pro-empire =)
April 12th, 2009 at 9:27 pmThink of it more like the stock market and AIG its soo big its gonna fail and will require a bailout when it crashes.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:31 pmAbsolutely correct, Jesus employs a pentagon lobbyist and has a personal IT expert, Darryl.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:34 pmAny republican agenda item is bound to receive Jesus’ endorsement, through Darryl of course.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:37 pmWhether in jest or earnest, simply inventing fantasies is best suited to one’s MySpace page or favorite Evangelicon(TM) forum.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:38 pmTo be a better neo-con troll, you have to be up to date on the latest talking points. You are, however, free to bring up old talking points at your discretion. I did notice you changing subjects that earned you a lot of troll cred.
Trolls aren’t afraid to insult anyone that questions them in any way so let the vulgarity fly. Trolls also like to state something is a fact, without providing any supporting evidence, and if pressed for evidence will attempt to change the subject or insult the person asking for evidence.
I would recommend that you brag about your own intelligence a lot more if you are trying to be a better troll. Remember, a troll always is more intelligent than anyone else and he won’t be afraid to tell you so, as well as how stupid everyone is compared to him.
You also need to be familiar with the Rovian book of dirty tricks. Don’t let your morals stand in the way of your mission to be a wingnut troll so get as immoral as you can. I would also recommend you continue the thinly veiled threats of violence, as they are commonplace in wingnut trolldom.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:39 pmpete Says: Like it or not, foreign arms sales are very good for the economy. The F-22 was never going to produce revenue.
Hey there pete!
It’s hugely ironic that the only country that could ‘afford’ the F-22, can’t afford it!
When the F-22 came under serious scrutiny a few years ago about the expense of the program McDonnell trod water by working-up an ‘export’ version that they claimed would balance out the rising costs through foreign sales to allies.
But even the proposed export version ( minus a whole bunch of its electronic) was still too expensive. And the UK, Spain, Italy and a few other NATO allies were already invested in the F-35 anyway.
I don’t have a link but whilst the F-22 program was under threat of reduction and possible cancellation, McDonnell hedged its bets and rigged an F-15 with some of the F-22’s features–thrust vectoring and detachable fuselage-conformable missile bays to reduce radar signature. It’s a hell of a lot cheaper than even an ‘export’ F-22, and the F-15 is a proven platform.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:41 pmI’m off to the thread below to complain about Obarki’s leadership, maybe it will help with our side’s poll numbers, since people tend to feel snuggly and warm when a neocon controls the pentagon, no matter the security lapses. Put ‘pentagon’ and ‘republican’ and it will have a cooling effect, with the help of a little Preparation H, of course.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:43 pmRead all about terrorist William Ayers: http://www.anncoulter.com
April 12th, 2009 at 9:47 pmtranslate to neoconish:
These threads aren’t just for your own personal amusement, matey. You are now being being a dick.
Good luck with that!
April 12th, 2009 at 9:47 pmGood evening 5th.
The fact is that the arts of aerodynamics and avionics made much of the reason for stealth unnecessary. Aircraft already functioned at the limit of human capability and the weapon systems have finally caught up. It doesn’t look like anyone else is rushing to produce a next generation manned fighter and there’s only a few hundred potentially hostile modern fighters anyway.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:49 pmLevi, in the short time you’ve been posting here, you have accumulated an impressive amount of knowledge of the common troll and its habits.
I’m quite impressed.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:49 pmtranslate to neoconish you also need to talk about the global currency al la Bachmann and those things Beck that surround you that you surround that arent there when you pull back the curtain.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:50 pmOkay, I’m calling it. translate to neoconish , time of virtual death, 9.48 pm. Cause: too stupid and self important to live.
April 12th, 2009 at 9:52 pmand a fine evening it is too, pete
You write: “The fact is that the arts of aerodynamics and avionics made much of the reason for stealth unnecessary”
I don’t quite understand your correlation (I’m a pre-stealth buff, btw) in that the smaller the radar signature, the more an aircraft will be lost in clutter.
However, I don’t know how much ‘clutter’ there actually is at 30,000 feet so If I’m pootling along on patrol and I can see what looks like a swallow I might ignore it—unless its doing 500 MPH in which case I’d think “hmmm, that’s odd! I wonder if it is an African swallow carrying a coconut?”
And then hopefully with a couple of million dollars of training under my belt I’d realize it was actually an aircraft intent on ruining my day.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:10 pmSo if that’s really how it works,yeah the stealth thing would seem to rely rather a lot on a stupid enemy pilot.
5th Estate Says: You are now being being a dick.
Well, they say you are what you teabag.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:14 pm5th, I think its been established that an African swallow could not carry a coconut, since they’re non-migratory.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:26 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
Dr. Matt, I could be wrong, but my Locust-sense tells me that translate to neoconish is a parody troll, employing a rather sophisticated appreciation for the finer points of trollese and a willingness to push an already absurd worldview just that much further.
__________
Hmmm… why do I get the feeling someone is trying to put us on here… mebbe we should do a quick head count, see who’s missing.
But… it is a pretty good impersonation.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:32 pmralph the wonder locust Says: “5th, I think its been established that an African swallow could not carry a coconut, since they’re non-migratory.”
Ah! But has it not also been established that both witches and ducks weigh the same? I rest my case.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:37 pmThe F-117A was stealthy but all those weird stealthy angles made for a rather slow jet
April 12th, 2009 at 10:37 pmProgressive Republican Says:
Looks like Krugman needs a lesson in economics 101.
———————————————————–
Looks like you and the rest of the Republicans need a lesson in Ethics 101.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:38 pmWhat I was getting at, 5th, is that the quality of standoff weapons has reached the level where the need of a manned invisible launch vehicle is reduced. Plus, when it comes to real world battlefield survival, it looks like avionics, low level performance, and maneuverability will remain at least as important as Radar Cross Section for the foreseeable future.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:43 pmXisithrus Says: The F-117A was stealthy but all those weird stealthy angles made for a rather slow jet
Well from what I’ve read there wasn’t a hell of a lot of confidence in the Nighthawk’s stealth when it was sent in over Baghdad in 1991. It was accompanied by ‘Wild Weasels’ and Prowlers (and Aardvarks too?) to jam radar and clear a path using HARM weapons.)
For 2003 Iraq, I don’t think there was much left of SAM defenses that the more conventional aircraft couldn’t handle.
April 12th, 2009 at 10:46 pmpete Says: “What I was getting at, 5th, is that the quality of standoff weapons has reached the level where the need of a manned invisible launch vehicle is reduced.”
A-HA! Having fallen into my stealthy trap of asking for a clarification, pete, you have left yourself vulnerable to my agreeing with you! :D
April 12th, 2009 at 10:52 pmtranslate to neoconish Says:
Read all about terrorist William Ayers: http://www.anncoulter.com
translate,
Perhaps you could answer this question.
Why is Ann Coulter’s e-mail address tom@anncoulter.com?
Who is Tom?
April 12th, 2009 at 10:57 pm#112 5th State, I wish I weighed the same as a duck,,LOL..More like 7 stuffed 20 pound turkey’s. …Blessings
April 12th, 2009 at 11:18 pm# 120 Witch1,
Somehow the ducks avoided guilt by association ( not so with the cats)–probably because they ducks are delicious, a-l’orange!
And where you offer Blessings (always), I in turn extend my most heartfelt ‘contrafibularities’ to yourself. :D.
April 12th, 2009 at 11:40 pmThere must be something in the constitution to protect the people from hostile political parties. Once they turn hostile they hardly serve a useful purpose anymore. At best they just get in the way, and at worst they could still ruin everything.
April 12th, 2009 at 11:42 pmBefore I came here I played whack-a-troll for eight years on a game forum that had a political off-topic section.
April 12th, 2009 at 11:42 pmEight years!?
Holy crap…
April 13th, 2009 at 12:00 amApe-Man Says:
The DofI has something to say about hostile governments; it’s getting more relevant every day.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:16 amLevi,, what was the game> ( Inquiring minds want to know! It wasn’t ‘Zork’ was it?) :D
April 13th, 2009 at 12:16 amProgressive Republican Says:
Looks like Krugman needs a lesson in economics 101.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You mean Krugman the NOBEL PRIZE WINNER IN ECONOMICS? THAT Krugman? And YOU feel qualified to make that judgement HOW? You got YOUR degree in economics WHERE? That was a really lame joke you do get that dont you?
April 13th, 2009 at 1:42 amjeff2001 Says:
This whole thing is Sarah Palin fault, Im sure of it.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You’re an idiot I’M sure of it
April 13th, 2009 at 1:57 amProgressive Republican Says:
The government cannot and will not create jobs in a capitalistic society such as the Unite States.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
This statement is patent nonsense and it is clear you are a brainwashed idiot for even regurgitating such stuidity. The government created thousands of jobs with rural electrification. Jobs building and maintaining the grid. Jobs producing the increased demand for the electric gadgets and appliances FOR the rural consumers. That is just one quick example. I am sure you have been programmed to believe this and regurgitate it on demand but it is plain ignorance.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:00 amThe Government created jobs for George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. Well-paying and quite profitable jobs, one might add. Failed Republican Presidential candidate John McCain has never worked a day in his life in a non-government job.
April 13th, 2009 at 4:54 am5th Estate Says:
ralph the wonder locust Says: “5th, I think its been established that an African swallow could not carry a coconut, since they’re non-migratory.”
Ah! But has it not also been established that both witches and ducks weigh the same? I rest my case.
The military industry should begin investigating the potentials of bovine aviation.
April 13th, 2009 at 8:19 amEisenhower: “Every gun that is fired, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed….”
http://100days.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/how-to-end-a-war-eisenhowers-way/?ref=opinion
April 13th, 2009 at 2:59 pmI dont know if tranlate is doing peformance art or is just stupid beyond measure
April 13th, 2009 at 5:41 pmOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 5:30 amsac ekimi