The American Spectator

Carol| 5.26.10 @ 7:02AM

Peter Ferrara:

Great piece and so on the point. Should be required reading for all Americans.

Once again I am not as optimistic as you are at the end of the article. I did have high hopes for November a couple of months ago but I think Obama has cemented the Democrats into power forever.

Just yesterday it came out that only 41% of the population are paying incomes taxes. That means 59% of the populace will vote for the Democrats.

I will pray for a different outcome in November but I just don't believe the numbers are there.

Tom| 5.26.10 @ 8:02AM

Carol,
I do not think whether someone pays income taxes or not is ever going to be the sole criteria for how he or she will vote. There are those people who pay little or no taxes today, ambitious college students, who may well know they will pay taxes in the future. There are people who vote against Democrats for reasons of spending, freedom, foreign policy, national security or frankly just because Dad did. It just means that Republicans will have to run on more than just cutting taxes.

JamieW| 5.26.10 @ 12:47PM

Exactly right. My family does not pay income tax and we are strongly conservative. Same for most of my extended family.

Not only do we all hope to make more in the future, but we are smart enough to see the darkness at the end of the tunnel, when people on the lower end of the scale will be forced to pay more taxes one way or another. I don't want my kids paying for this for the rest of THEIR lives.

Papoose| 5.26.10 @ 9:12PM

He's building his civil army corpssssssesssss.

Enslaving an entire Generation. Our Grandchildren.

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 8:59AM

"The only thing President Obama's stimulus is stimulating is a left-wing Democrat political machine."

But isn't the Tea Party being stimulated by Obama's stimulus?-- that has been claimed many times.

Doorgunner| 5.26.10 @ 9:43AM

The DNC coffers are overflowing with cash from the bailed-out "evil" banks and corporations; the RNC coffers are empty because the bankers are banking on the Corruptocrats -pretty much as they always have- and the Republican "base" is in an angry anti-incumbent mood; and the Tea Party...well, they don't have any coffers that I know of.

Which is because they are a movement, not a formal, organized party across state lines.

Try again. Later. After your life partner, Purpleboy, has made the coffee.

Tom| 5.26.10 @ 9:55AM

The picture is not quite as bad as you depict. Fund raising of the DNC and RNC are about equal so far this year although the DNC raises much more from wealthy contributors. But then again they are the party of the downtrodden, aren't they?

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 3:48PM

"Fund raising of the DNC and RNC are about equal so far this year"

Good thing for the GOP pocketbook that McCain was elected POTUS in '08,
right?

Nobama| 5.26.10 @ 11:23AM

Doorgunner: LMAO!

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:09PM

And, yet the RNC has collected more contributions, $ 7.x Million to the DNC's 5.5 Million in Q1 ... check your facts before you open your trap.

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 2:55PM

Nice comeback from the "purple peoplebeater"

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 10:02PM

REAL MEN wouldn't be whining about their lot in life. They would just deal with it and suck it up. They also wouldn't waste their time with verbal abuse. They also wouldn't be named Liam.

AmenBro| 5.27.10 @ 2:31AM

Your EUNUCNESS is noted.

Where in the world do you people come from???

Truthyness| 5.27.10 @ 3:47PM

Snort! You whine about Liam's name and you call yourself, Purpleguy? Turd, thy name is liberal.

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 3:15PM

Flattering you would erroneously assume that a young guy such as Purpleguy would be interested in an oldie like me.
And flattering that you would think I'm lib; a real liberal, a true progressive, would be positive on social 'issues' (verbiage). I am not.
Take "don't ask don't tell": what does it matter to someone in a third world cesspool undergoing nation building that the American serviceman shooting at him is a closet queen?
doesn't matter to me you understand, however to certain civil libertarians it does matter.

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 3:20PM

"Try again. Later. After your life partner, Purpleboy, has made the coffee."

The teapartiers offer tea:
six of one, half a dozen of another.
I am no longer optimistic on social issues... as far as I know, only material progress remains-- plus spirituality. Work for a good church and you've got it made.

Tim| 5.26.10 @ 11:43AM

Alan, Alan, Alan, you are still beholden to the myth that the Tea Partiers are subsidized by the corporations that are receiving Stimulus bailout money.
If that is the case, I am still waiting for my check. I have been to no less than two Tea Party events, on my own dime. I drove to those events on my own, no corporate bus or jet. I paid for my own Gadsden Flag, no corporate money.
Unlike the SEIU thugs that showed up on the front lawn of a Bank of America exec. this past week to terrorize him and his family. 14 busloads of losers paid for by SEIU . . . scratch that, paid for with yours and my tax dollars.

Campy| 5.26.10 @ 12:07PM

Escorted by Metro police, no less.

http://bigjournalism.com/acary.....aers-home/

no to obama| 5.26.10 @ 3:43PM

did you see what nasty looking people they all were?
this is like some banana republic thing! come to my house bee itch and check out my goose gun and my 38. you won't be on my property long.

Jacobite| 5.27.10 @ 3:21PM

Wrong! This time the Dems have made sure that barely more than half the electorate are Americans. FDR had to flim-flam a majority of Americans to vote against their own interests. BHO starts off with more than a third of voters having no connection with American ethnicity, heritage, culture, or language.

rlh| 5.26.10 @ 12:36PM

This article is pure unadulterated bunk. Anyone that isn't insulted by the intellectual dishonesty of this article deserves what they get.

Tim Singleton| 5.26.10 @ 1:10PM

Truth hurts, does it not?

NAvyBrat| 5.26.10 @ 1:11PM

If its such bunk, we're all waiting with baited breath for your well reasoned assertions as to why.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:13PM

Check mine out down below .. there is so much bs in this article, I'd have to write my own article to counter it... but I have selected a few sugar plums to address ... the most outrageous ...

Just one additional note - the AZ law - "the kidnapping capital" of America had 370 kidnappings in 2009, all of them drug cartel on drug cartel - they are killing their own, just like gang wars in the big city - let 'em, it'll thin the herd. In the meantime, shut down the border, and Obama is starting that too....

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 2:56PM

More tripe from the TROLL!

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 4:36PM

If it were only Mexicans coming through the border, it wouldn't be quite as bad. But there's all the OTM (other than Mexican)folks, many from places like Yemen and Pakistan. Ya think they're coming to cut your grass?

It appears to me, purpleguy, that you're one the left would categorize as an useful idiot. You love to spout your idiology, but the truth seems to pass you by.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:55PM

Did you miss the part where I said "shut down the border" ... that was not just shut to Mexican illegals, is it? You must read the WHOLE comment, if you are to be taken seriously... Have a nice day!

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 11:38PM

It's just a stunt, Obama's sending mostly paper-pushers, libtard.
No way would he offend his 'voters'.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:47PM

Way to support the National Guard there Liam... yep, you are soooo patriotic - these guys and gals mean nothing to you, even tho they are ready to take a bullet to keep your lame ass safe. fascist, racist pig.

K| 5.27.10 @ 10:44AM

O is not even making an attempt to close our southern border. The evident fact that you believe so is clear evidence that his cosmetic efforts are working,

Your comment about "killing each other" reminds me of testimony by fifties and sixties mafia dons trying to get the FBI off their backs.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:49PM

Nope, not my assertion - this is reported in the Washington Examiner - Google it and you can read it for yourself ... if you can read.

Bydand76| 5.26.10 @ 1:20PM

rlh
Where is your dissenting evidence in counter-point to the authors subject matter?

Or am I correct in suggesting that you disagree simply because you are a supporter of Obama and his policies?

In my estimation you are screwed either way.

Pro Libertate!

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 3:54PM

"rlh
Where is your dissenting evidence in counter-point to the authors subject matter?"

It's not what people say, it is what they do not say.
There's a name for it: info-mining.
A writer digs out that which supports what he wants to believe...
or what he wants others to.

Armand| 5.26.10 @ 1:24PM

dishonest? how?

Barbara Davis| 5.28.10 @ 9:52AM

Dear RLH:are you asleep or something? Can't you see what's going on in Washington and all over our country? If you are on the "receiving" end of the hand-outs, guess what? There is not going to be any money to hand out after Obama and the democrats get through giving it all away to the world "climategate", IMF funds, and all the union bail-outs so where will you stand then? If you are a working stiff like the rest of us, then you need to pay attention to what your union bosses are doing with your dues as they waste it giving it all away to Obama and democrats-I think over $98 Million dollars went into the 2008 elections and they are at it again trying to salvage their base. Do you think for one minute they "care" about you? They only care about "controlling" you and all the rest of us and we will all wind up living in project housing like they do in Russia if they get their way as they take over rights on everything they can get their hands on.....Oh well, do some research and see exactly what you are dealing with in Washington right now...It's simply amazing to watch them "spin" their failing programs...God bless America and hurray for November when we can all vote the worst of them out of office.

Ed| 5.26.10 @ 1:18PM

Carol,
What are you and Peter Ferrara doing to 'unfool' the people? Please see Letter “Unfooling the people” here:
http://www.durangotelegraph.co.....oapbox.htm
and for your possible convenience, I show it next:

The past is dominantly serial herd behaviors:
“Real Homes, Real Dow” at
http://homepage.mac.com/ttsmyf/RHandRD.html
Individuals’ experiences were overwhelmingly timing-dependent. People uninformed of these serial herd behaviors are people fooled. This fooling of the people is USA history to date.

Dramatic exception is provided by three recent articles:
“Adjusted for Inflation, Dow's Gains Are Puny”, E.S. Browning, Wall Street Journal, Dec. 28
“The Quiet Danger of Non-Inflation-Adjusted Stock Returns”, S.J. Dubner, New York Times, Dec. 28
“The Real Dow”, R. Chittum, Columbia Journalism Review, Jan. 5, ONLINE-ATcjr.org/the_audit/the_real_dow.php

Is unfooling the people at hand? I don’t know, but I surely hope so. I am certain that it is a far, far better thing for our nation if the people have their heads OUT of their fuming darknesses.

Jack Kinch(1uncle)| 5.26.10 @ 2:32PM

True. The demos have many special interest groups, people getting monthly checks form the tax payers. All too well paid for what they do. We are about to asked(told) to pay the union pension checks, after we already paid too much for the automobiles they were involved in making. I think the only way we can 'change' this is via amendments to constitution through 2/3 rds of the states.

Kitty| 5.26.10 @ 7:02AM

Meanwhile, zero hedge points out:

"The bottom line is that all of Europe is now incentivized to blow itself up, and it doesn't even have to put too much effort into it... After all the US has no option but to bail them out: Bernanke has made it clear that his Wall Street bosses will not allow their European colleagues to be dragged down by something as trivial as total insolvency, which in turn would uncover just how bankrupt our own financial system is. These are the perverse incentives in what is now officially known as farcist capitalism."

http://www.zerohedge.com/artic.....own-demise
.

Rick Stokes| 5.27.10 @ 5:52PM

If, as expected, Obama and the congressional majority opt for a VAT (Valued Added Tax), your worries will become moot, Carol, since even the poorest of the poor will pay a tax on every item purchased, with the possible exception of groceries. The VAT would, in effect, be an income tax, since it would affect everyone making any purchase, and purchases are inherently based on what one has the ability to afford through one's income.

old white guy| 5.27.10 @ 4:35PM

civil war would seem to be the only option. unfortuately americans have been dumbed down to the point where they no longer understand what is happening to them and their country.

Ret. Marine| 5.26.10 @ 7:13AM

And let us take this to the next level, I ask what happened when germany felt used and abused by the V-Treaty, now replace this mishap of the league of nations with the current mess with iran (and the United Nations) away with the global nuclear race with the weakness and the greed of the washington powerful liberals and their fantasy world, what happened, war that's what happened. The entire European nations went to war, and once again We the People lost big time, and gained big time.
We lost many good men and ladies of this Nation to what, another fantasy created by, guess again, the liberals and their fantasy world utopian dreams. Nothing has changed with the appearence of the "won" obomb-ah. Same thing just might happen again, it may take the world on fire to expose the dealings of the OWO crowd and their greed and anger against this Christian Nation. Are witnessing the repeat of history in the making? I'll leave that one for everyone to ask themselves. I am not willing to give a heads up to the GOP, gutless opposition punks, who sit idely by while the current CONgress is destroying our country they clearly must know We the People have about as much faith in them as we do the demonrat party. I may not be long in our future we will have to fend for ourselves, throwing these bums out is looking like a freight train comming at us at 100-miles per hour. Not good and we may not be able to stop it. This ought to piss on anyone's tea, the though of these criminals (demonrat-party) using our money against us to destroy our livelyhood, our security, our liberties and freedoms, and pursuit of our individual happiness. And for what? a fricken dream?

martin j smith| 5.26.10 @ 7:30AM

I did not live as an adult under the FDR period so I do not know what it felt like as I do the Obama "regime" but I will say this. First, at Least FDR recognized the value of Democracy in some general way and sided with Great Britian and --it had to be done--the USSof R. The nation during tWWII was on a real war footing etc. Obam is Neville Chamberlain on steroids..
Politically Obama comes thru as a thug,irresposible, an politcally closer to dictators that to a person who claimed to have idealistic values that FDR proclaimed--see his five freedoms. So from my perspective--not having been there--it may be true that from an economic poit of view there may be parallels but I see un-parallels as well

Tom| 5.26.10 @ 8:06AM

America entered the war woefully unprepared; the blame for this can be placed on FDR since he was first elected president in 1932. He was certainly a strident anti-fascist after the war started but he failed miserably at preparing the country for war priot to its outbreak.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 10:24AM

Tom,
I'm no FDR fan, but I must correct your impression vis a vi FDRs foreign policy situation.
Example: One of our greatest American "heroes" at the time was (Charles Lindbergh) the guy who flew the Atlantic in a single engine plane.
He and the "America First Committee" personified an intense isolationism.

FDR did just about everything he could to prepare...with no money...and no national will until after December 7.
First among his many efforts was the "lend-lease" and munitions supplying to Britain.

jd| 5.26.10 @ 8:54AM

My parents grew up during the Depression and experienced firsthand what it was like living in this country under FDR and his failed policies. Until the day my dad died in December of '08 (after knowing Obama was elected) he talked about the failures and consequences of FDR's policies and was worried for the future of his grandchildren under Obama. Although I wish my father were still alive, on one level I'm happy he did not have to live under an Obama presidency.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:44PM

Oh, you mean FDR that created the GI Bill? That silly ol' thing that brought middle class living to 14 Million GI's after WWII?

The verdict is still out on Obama, history still being made - but FDR is only eclipsed by Abraham Lincoln and George Washington as our Greatest Presidents in History. Note Ronnie isn't in the top 5. And Bush baby is just, just about the bottom ...

erp| 5.26.10 @ 10:42AM

Martin, FDR only sided with the Brits after Hitler attacked his pal Stalin. Prior to that we were neutral.

cuban pete| 5.26.10 @ 1:52PM

FDR and Winston were friends. Churchill was exhorting FDR to get in to the war. FDR allegedly said "I need an excuse." Japan provided one for Asia and shortly after Pearl Harbor Hitler declared war on us. Steven Ambrose contended we had no reason to declare war on Germany but Hitler made that a moot point.

AustinDave| 5.26.10 @ 11:01PM

We essentially declared war on them both long before that. That is what happens when the government is in control of all the schooling and media ... everything gets distorted to portray the government in a positive way. You can't supply weapons and support to one party and cut off supplies to the other party in the conflict and call yourself neutral. In fact it is very much declaring war... at least it would be if anybody did it to us. This article is pretty good. They are all criminals and everybody should be pressuring their state officials to demand that the federal government respect state's rights, call for all federal laws be examined by a board of independent attorneys and expert citizens and declare that all unconstitutional laws be nullified. Do you all really need to be baby sat all the time? Can you not make any decisions for yourselves? Do you really have to be spied on all the time to make you behave? Must your whole family really work just to get by after paying for all these criminals' pet projects and pensions? Do you really never want to actually own anything? Must everybody live solely to support these criminals? Whatever happened to serving your country? Shouldn't they be paid minimum wage? Wake the Fk up people!

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:53PM

Interesting revision of history .. ignorant but interesting... Since Hitler attacked the Soviets on June 22, 1941 and we didn't enter the war against Hitler until Dec 11th or 12th. (we declared War on Japan on Dec 8th)

Tim*| 5.27.10 @ 12:11AM

Lend-Lease came into existence with the Lend-Lease Act of 11 March 1941, which permitted the President of the United States to "sell, transfer title to, exchange, lease, lend, or otherwise dispose of, to any such government [whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States] any defense article". In April, this policy was extended to China as well.[4] Roosevelt approved US $1 billion in Lend-Lease aid to Britain at the end of October, 1941.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:19PM

It was FDR's 4 freedoms - Freedom of Speech Freedom of Religion, Freedom from Want, Freedom from Fear ... and here is the text of his speech, our Greatest Modern President:

"In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression--everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way--everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want--which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants--everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear--which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor--anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.
” — Franklin D. Roosevelt, excerpted from the State of the Union Address to the Congress, January 6, 1941

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 2:58PM

More STATIST garbage. Running on empty TROLL?

stephanie| 5.26.10 @ 3:46PM

why doesn't he go play on the HufPo?

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:30PM

Are you that stupid you never heard of this? Close the comic books and go learn something.

Ryan| 5.26.10 @ 3:02PM

It's the "freedom from want" is where the left has their misplaced ideals - that it's government's role to provide.

It isn't. It is my responsibility to provide for myself and my family.

If I want "freedom from want," I need to go out and work for it.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:39PM

And, yet, I'm sure you don't want the Mexicans coming across the border to do the same thing - do ya?

He didn't say "Freedom to let the government do it for you" ... and bless your heart if you are always able to provide for you and your family.

But, what do you do if you can't take care of you and yours? Would you be comfortable turning to people like you that "Take care of themselves"? Could you really count on friends, neighbors, the Church, family for years and years on end, if you needed it?

Any able-bodied person should work for their livelihood, but the BIG mistake y'all make is assuming that anyone that is accepting Government help is lazy, stupid, or corrupt. Especially in this economy, your Christian side should come to the fore, and your indignant side should shut up.

Austin Dave| 5.26.10 @ 11:56PM

It really does seem like you mean well but you act like this is the first time an empire has tried to provide entitlement programs for it's people. The government does not care about anything except staying in power so that they can pad their bank accounts through fraud, corruption and off the backs of hard working people.

I don't want to see Mexicans jumping across the border. There is a legal process for entering this country, if that does not take care of our needs then ratchet it up a little bit. Why would anybody want another country's criminals and pedophiles to swarm through their borders at will. Do you even have a clue what you are asking for? Why don't you pick some up and let them sleep in your daughter's bedroom. What do you think your chances are that entering this country illegally is the only illegal act of their lives. I would love to have the same freedoms as illegals. If I am stopped and don't produce ID then I go to jail until they can figure out who I am.

Yes we could count on family, freinds and community if the government did not steal all of our money because they thought that, because they know better than we do how we want to spend our earnings, studying how gays interact with each other in Brazillian bars is way more important than helping my neighbors. Children are taught all through school that they can survive without their family because the government will take care of them. Character and inovation sprouts out of desperation...I know so do bad traits but we each have to be given the chance to find out what it brings out in us or we are not men at all and will never ever regain control of our lives. I would put the amount of able-bodied people accepting entitlements at 95% compared to 5% that need it. Maybe someone knows of a statistic somewhere but all the people that I know accepting some form of assistance are able-bodied so spare me the holier than thou BS. People like you are destroying this country. Some people need to fall under hardship a few times before they shine. Take your liberal, moronic views and try to get your state to adopt them. You have the right to pursue your dreams but The Constitution does not allow for the Federal Government to impose your dreams on me, I get to have my own.

Liam| 5.27.10 @ 12:00AM

What's pathetic is that you're so oblivious to your own bias!

We are good Christians and we DO help others; unlike liberals like you who expect BIG Government to do everything. We give from the heart, you FORCE your views on others; like all Progressive Marxists do.

Our economy is in such a huge mess precisely because of the bloated pig Big Government that you love so much.

YOUR MARXIST POLICIES are destroying this country and NO, WE WON'T SHUT-UP, AHOLE.

See you November 2, jackass.

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 6:48PM

Just shut up, you're embarrassing yourself, numbnuts!

You liberals have quadrupled our debt in ONE YEAR, slimeball.

Nick| 5.26.10 @ 3:31PM

It's too bad Giuseppe Zangara didn't have better aim on February 15, 1933. He could've saved many American lives in the long run.

It also would've made John Garner president, who would have done a much better job.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

Greg Toombs| 5.26.10 @ 4:07PM

The "Freedom from Want" under FDR's or Obama's Democrat Socialism is the same as the "Freedom to Take".

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:43PM

So what do you think the Founders meant when they wrote " ...promote the general Welfare..." in the Preamble of the US Constitution? You think they meant - "You're on your own"?

Greg Toombs| 5.26.10 @ 10:46PM

"This, and the next part of the Preamble, are the culmination of everything that came before it — the whole point of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general welfare — to allow every state and every citizen of those states to benefit from what the government could provide. The framers looked forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of that."

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 12:42PM

Very well said ..

Federico| 5.27.10 @ 3:52PM

One troll brown-nosing another; you're both full of Marxist crap. Get off the government tit, losers and get a job.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:30PM

Ahh, but I have a job, and I have mine ... difference between me and you is that I don't mind sharing to give back the bounty that this country has blessed me with... Why else do you think I put up with all your sixth grade attitudes about America? I am your blessing ... Have a nice day!

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 6:54PM

Conservatives share far more than Liberal tightwads like you. Look it up, statistics prove it.

Liberals like you are selfish and cheap, that's why you want the government to FORCE others to give their wealth away. It's called THEFT, Ahole!

JmsA| 5.26.10 @ 11:12PM

Purpleturd,

How predictable. You cite the General Welfare Clause, as it perfectly suits your intent as well as those of the powers that be in applying it to reach their nefarious distributionist goals. In other words, the General Welfare Clause means just what I choose it to mean and as I choose to apply it to any and whichever argument or intent I deem appropriate. Isn't that pretty much what you're driving at? After all, for example, where specifically in the Constitution is the right to abort a defenseless human life enumerated? Seemingly quite prescient, and in direct opposition to you and others of your political and/or philosophical persuasion, in 1798 Thomas Jefferson put forth: "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." In other words, as Hamilton expounded: "[S]ince the powers of Congress are enumerated and limit Congress to those powers, any assumed authority outside those specified that don’t have a direct relation to those explicit powers must be contrary to the Constitution and therefore—unconstitutional." However, after 200-plus years of bastardizing the Constitution as a living and breathing document, the activist jurists and Congress have placed themselves above it, rendering it no longer the anchor of freedom it used to be, as it flails against the prevailing political winds, its meaning routinely changing per the whims of both elected and non-elected officials, in direct opposition to the original intent of guaranteed equal opportunity versus the modern day, non-original intent claim of constitutionally guaranteed equal outcome. Such, as events both past and present clearly show, gives rise to, as Frederic Bastiat aptly put it: "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

As always 11/02/2010

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:21AM

And, your point is?

Regarding the rights issue, all the Founders realized that enumerated rights might seem to limit us to those enumerated rights. In the end, Hamilton lost the argument that they should not be listed in a "Bill of Rights" and Thomas Jefferson won the argument that these Bill of Rights were so critical to limitation on Government power, they needed to be codified. However, that in no way was meant to limit other rights of the people, and so it has been an argument ever since what are the rights inherent, but not enumerated in the Constitution. The Right to Privacy comes to mind, especially in this technological society, where privacy is becoming a commodity, not a sacrosanct protected right.

As far as the general welfare and powers of Congress, the Commerce Clause pretty much covers the gamut, adding in the Supremacy clause for good measure, and what Congress passes, all States are to follow suit as the Federal is Supreme. The one route to a disqualification of a Congressional Law is through the Supreme Court, and for Healthcare we have yet to see the result.

But the prochoice/prolife issue is already settled law, from Roe v. Wade, so move on from that. Anything else is political, not legal opinion regarding that issue.

Tim*| 5.27.10 @ 12:29AM

That's The whole debate y'all ,y'all .
It meant different things to different Founding Fathers .
"According to James Madison, the clause authorized Congress to spend money, but only to carry out the powers and duties specifically enumerated in the subsequent clauses of Article I, Section 8, and elsewhere in the Constitution, not to meet the seemingly infinite needs of the general welfare. Alexander Hamilton maintained that the clause granted Congress the power to spend without limitation for the general welfare of the nation."

Tim*| 5.27.10 @ 12:51AM

" Actually, the General Welfare clause, as it became known, was a limitation of federal power written into the Preamble. Benjamin Franklin, during the Constitutional Convention, proposed a tax for canals. Canals were important for businesses to receive and ship merchandise.

Gouverneur Morris of New York argued that it wasn't right to tax the whole people while only those towns that had canals would benefit. This started a discussion about the powers of the federal government to tax.

They finally came up with the General Welfare clause which the Founders meant that unless the whole people of the United States would benefit from the tax, you should not promote it. Only the general, or the whole, welfare of the people should benefit from the tax.

In those days they did not call what we now call welfare, welfare. They called it "poor relief". The concept of the term "welfare" for poor relief was unknown and is a false modern interpretation. "

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 4:42PM

Just like Obama, FDR was a great speech giver. Big deal. Obama is just finishing the job that FDR started...moving us further down the road to socialism.

If FDR was so wonderful, why did Congress enact the 22nd amendment to the Bill of Rights before old FDR was cold in the ground?

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:46PM

I only hope Obama is 1/2 what FDR was...

But the real question is why Congress doesn't limit it's own terms? If it's ok for the President, why not limit Senators and Congressmen to 2 and 5 terms respectively?

Nick| 5.26.10 @ 11:48PM

You hope President Dither is paralyzed from the neck up, PurpleJackass? Or is it that you want O'Bama to have only one useless leg?

That's cold-hearted, even for you.

Missy| 5.27.10 @ 12:02AM

Nick: LOL!

Nick| 5.26.10 @ 8:34PM

Too bad polio didn't paralyze the rest of FDR, instead of just his legs.

How much better this great country would be today, if it had.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:33PM

FDR was a piece of Progressive Marxist crap whose stupid leftist policies turned a RECESSION into the GREAT DEPRESSION.

WWII brought us out of the Depression--not FDR's BS!

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 9:49PM

And, yet, FDR didn't even become President until the Great Depression was well beyond it's 3rd year ... How amazing that he controlled Herbert Hoover and his disastrous Republican fiscal policies...

Can you really be that ignorant of your own history. Good Grief... go learn something .. you can look it up. Great Depression/1929 Crash/1932 Presidential Election .../ 1933 FDR Inauguration. Get it?

Nick| 5.26.10 @ 11:34PM

It was just a depression, until the Polio Prince made it "Great", PurpleJackass.

How could the Great Depression precede the 1929 stock market crash, dope?

This is the sequence of events:
Stock Market Crash of 1929/Recession
President Hoover's Liberal Policies & FED Money Supply Tightening/Depression
Election of FDR/Run On Banks
FDR's Socialist Policies/Made the Depression GRRRREAT!

But, what should I expect from someone who thinks John Marshall was the first chief justice of the Supreme Court. Or, doesn't know that Virginia governors only serve for one term.

You have no business debating with adults.

Liam| 5.27.10 @ 12:06AM

Unemployment was 15% in 1938--FDR's leftist policies deepened and lengthened a severe recession and turned it into the Great depression.

Sound familiar?

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:07AM

No, since when FDR came into office in 1933, unemployment stood at 25% ... and it was already considered a Depression by that time. Does that sound familiar?

Remember, Bush is the only President since Hoover to leave office with fewer jobs in the economy than when he came into office ... But as Mr. Sensitivity said upon leaving " Wellp, I came in with a Recession and I leave with a Recession..." So much for the Bush economic policy.

Liam| 5.27.10 @ 11:47AM

Bush left office with 7% unemployment, Obama promised 8% and we're living with 10-20% unemployment.

Nice hope and change you got there, moron.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:28PM

And, Bush left with fewer jobs then when he started ... and left Obama to clean up the dumbass's mess.

All I can say is you better hope he can change it or you're going down with rest of us... and won't you be pleased standing in a soup line or picking garbage out of the local dumpster to eat ... so you can say "I told you so ..." you unpatriotic treasonous bastard.

Nick| 5.27.10 @ 11:50PM

"[...] you unpatriotic treasonous bastard." - PurpleJackass

Writes the commie loving stooge.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:04AM

This list is not in any particular order, but those who know their history would know that and realize I am asking you to Google all those items to learn something factual about them.

Nick| 5.27.10 @ 12:03PM

I thought you weren't going to respond to me anymore, PurpleJackass?

More lies from an ignorant fool.

Trust me, you will learn much more when you finally make it to high school, PurpleJackass.

Nobama| 5.27.10 @ 3:54PM

Don't think so, Nick; the poor troll rides the 'short bus' to school everyday.

Nick| 5.27.10 @ 7:42PM

Nobama,

Ha-ha!! Good one!

Although, that might be an insult to those fine students.

Nobama| 5.28.10 @ 6:55PM

You're right, I apologize.

Beck| 5.26.10 @ 7:36AM

As I read this, the conclusion was already being formed in my mind. Roosevelt could control information much easier than today. People didn't even know he was crippled.

The more balls he has in the air to juggle, the harder it gets for one or two not to fall, which is starting to happen. The world outside the US doesn't seem to be interested in more entertainment by the US president. I don't think Roosevelt traveled the world and trashed America. The picture I have in my mind of Roosevelt overseas, was him, Churchill, and Stalin on a ship looking old and tired.

We learn the most from our mistakes, they say, and with this President, it's no wonder the average American is quoting the Constitution like the Bible. We are learning a lot, it will just be a matter if the learning curve can keep up and take over the Obama curve.

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 9:04AM

"The picture I have in my mind of Roosevelt overseas, was him, Churchill, and Stalin on a ship looking old and tired."

They weren't spring chickens.

Alan Brooks| 5.26.10 @ 9:08AM

...I mean, would you expect the Big Three in, say, 1944, to all look like Justin Bieber at his 16th birthday party.?

Doorgunner| 5.26.10 @ 11:27AM

Um, Awan, who is Justin Bieber and why are you stalking him?

And I think ol' Joe Stalin and your Mum might be related just based on a mustache comparison.

Puroleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:21PM

Nice, 'Gunner - you can always count on a conservative for polite conversation ... go wash our your mouth now.

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 2:59PM

JERK!!!

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:36PM

Puroleguy? You must mean Puerileguy--look it up, bonehead.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:37PM

'Gunner, you're on fire today! Did you eat your Wheaties?

Blackwatch| 5.26.10 @ 9:42PM

Stalin was a butcher. you can't kill millions of innocents and not have it drain your soul. FDR was running the war against the Nazi's and the Japs from a wheel chair.

what's The Kenyan's excuse? He's aged 7 years in one. He ain't working either. Is it too much golf or does he have more than one whore??

Appleby| 5.26.10 @ 7:37AM

Obama got all his *experience* of life from books. Therefore, he is crafting *solutions* from those same books.

He reminds me of a new mother who has never even baby-sat, leafing frantically through ten different books in an effort to find the user manual that should have come with her child.

Forever Marine| 5.26.10 @ 10:50AM

Bingo! The guy just does not know how.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 11:31AM

He doesn't know, but he thinks he does. He's never had any experience in an economy and is being given the hard lessons - from which one hopes he learns.

If any one of his community organizing projects had involved making a payroll and ensuring his workers actually earned their pay he would be much wiser about the real world. This is no place for on-the-job training.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:37PM

That "making a payroll" is such a Republican red herring. It's not that hard. And, the head of company has completely different problems to deal with than does a President. It doesn't teach you anything about running the government. Now, Governor of a State experience, that would be saying something... But, even that would lack the experience in Foreign Policy so necessary for a President.

I do think it funny tho, that after your boy Bush, y'all complain about Obama's experience and knowledge.

Y'all complain about Obama creating public sector jobs, and yet it's the private sector that isn't creating jobs. Why not? Aren't interest rates low enough? Our taxes are the lowest in 60 years, so it's not that.

Could it be that we still could face a Great Depression? And, you want a Republican in office? Please ... we had enuf of Herbert Hoovers, didn't we?

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 3:00PM

Like the one we have now?

Ryan| 5.26.10 @ 3:03PM

Public sector jobs remove needed cash from the private sector in their creation.

carnot| 5.26.10 @ 4:27PM

and he's doing such a wonderful job!!!

- korea
- syria
- mexico
- israel
- national debt
- immigration policy
- health care
- unemployment
- energy

yup...a real winner!!!!!

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 4:50PM

Purple, I gotta give you this...you try hard. But when you have so little to work with, it does take lots of effort. Thank God I don't have to try to defend Obama...seems like a losing cause, and the only defense is comparing him to Bush.

You think making a payroll is easy, uh? You should try it when the bottom line is 40% off from two years ago. People are not buying what I'm selling, as they are afraid of the future. That hope went up in smoke and mirrors, and the change sucks.

Banks are not loaning in case you never noticed. The interest rate is immaterial. There is too much uncertainty and insecurity. Only the government borrows money that they can't repay. The rest of the real world is required to do so.

And yes, we may still face a great depression. Even your guy says our debt is unsustainable. Only a fool would take big risks in the present economic climate, or someone that money they can afford to lose. That leaves most of us high and dry.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 6:29PM

Making a payroll is hard. Money doesn't just pour in because the door is open and the lights are on. Wealth must be created by providing something of value to add to the raw materials. If you are a sole proprieter you have to sell it and make it. If you are an employer you have to hire, train and monitor your employees. O's experience has been spreading money about on projects. I can do that and I bet you can too. Now try doing something more valuable that schmoozing the Chicago pols for more and more cash.

Laughing at you, I find it ever so droll that you can say "Now, Governor of a State experience, that would be saying something..." in the same post as "after your boy Bush, y'all complain about Obama's experience and knowledge". Do you read your own stuff?

I case you haven't noticed, interest rates may be low, but taxes are going up. To suggest that taxes are the lowest in 60 years when we are spending as great a percent of GDP since the peak of World War II and many more jobs are now in the public sector indicates that you do not subscribe to Milton Friedman's maxim that every dollar spent by government is a tax. It has got to come from somewhere. Ask the Greeks.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 10:48AM

I have to agree you're right. When you realize that GW Bush was a Governor, using a Governor's experience as preparatory for President is laughable. So you got me on that one.

As far as the running of a business as preparatory for the President, there is no way running business prepares you for being President. First of all, as CEO and even more so the Sole Proprietor you ARE the boss, with no committee, no Congress, no "boss" to countermand your decisions or to stand in your way of what you want to do. Case in point, the Republicans becoming the "Party of No" is not something a businessman needs to deal with. The almighty dollar is King, as you are all well aware of the Wall Street greed pit, and the shortcuts that BP took to save money in the Gulf Oil Drilling fiasco. In addition, here are just a FEW of the functions that a head of a company NEVER has to deal with:

Conducting War
Leading the Armed Forces
Protecting the country
Diplomacy with other countries
Tax Policy
Congressional Liaisons
Fund Raising
Espionage
Trade Policy
Appointing Judges and Supreme Court Justices
Executing the Laws
Disaster Relief

As far as taxes being the lowest in 60 years, that is not my assertion, you can Google it and find out for yourself - that is a fact. Maybe that's why we are nearly broke? That's what happens when Greed takes over, and Government doesn't care about deficits.

Note the chart of the GDP vs Expenditures:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

You'll see the ratio continued to decline until - oops, we hit Reagan and Bush I ... it declined again under Clinton, and then - whoops back up under Bush. Now it is true that is up under Obama, and it sure feeds your frenzy that is a tax and spender... but he's actually mimicking the Republican Presidents - borrow and spend. And, it should be stopped as soon as we get out of this economic mess we're in, but not now.

John Navratil| 5.27.10 @ 7:23PM

"there is no way running business prepares you for being President" - really? What is the career path for President? Presidents tend to be alpha-males with leadership skills. One doesn't get to be the head of a company by following. Do you really think the decision making skills to run a company are not appropriate to be Commander in Chief, or to negotiate complex business deals are not valuable when meeting heads of state?

Deficits occur when the guzintas exceed the guzoutas. Either may be positive or negative. The chart shows deficits agains contemporaneous GDP which ignores the fact the fiscal policy has a tail and effect GDP in future years. In short, a gross oversimplification regardless of whose ox you would like to gore -- the chart shows coincidence and ignores corelation.

Notice the continuous descent from WWII until Nixon/Ford. In 1974 Congress passed the "Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974". Congress thought Nixon had been too free with enacting what was a Presidential veto of appropriations by simply not getting around to spending the appropriated funds. At that point, the President was essentially required to spend everything appropriated and the deficits rose from a typical 1/2% of budget to approximately 3%. Under Carter, spending increased, but the GDP expanded after the recession of the late 60's and early 70's (remember Nixon's wage a price controls - a wonderful example of a failed command economy). Under Reagan, tax rates dropped and revenues to the treasury sky-rocketed, but Congress spent like sailors. Tip O'Neill declared each and every balanced Reagan budget as "dead on arrival". Never-the-less, the economy continued to grow until the late 90's (remember the .com implosion) and even the Clinton Presidency, where outlays went from 1.6 to 1.9 trillion (real dollars) benefited from this growth leading to balanced budgets (through increased taxes). But the trend is unmistakable.

Presidents do NOT control the budget or the tax rates. The last one with any real modicum of control was Nixon. Every one since has asked for a line item veto.

So taxes are lowest in 60 years? Mine are higher than under Reagan. I don't have to google to see cigarette taxes up, or increased sign fees, application fees, permit fees, road tolls and automobile registration, or even the fees for a Federal Passport - I have direct experience. Unfunded mandates have increased state budgets causing rises in property and sales taxes - again I see these daily.

As to your greed argument, a government cannot be greedy, or happy or somber or ebullient. It can only command, control and restrict freedom. Any government which wants 25% of the total wealth created by its people (add state and local and push that to 50%) is too damned big.

You final statement is pure discredited Keynes. To bad Keynes didn't live to see that politicians loved the deficit part, but couldn't get around to running the surplus. The Chicago school doesn't have a problem with running a deficit in the bad times, either. But you cannot fund operating expenses any more than you can live on your credit card.

Now let's get onto the central flaw in your argument. If deficits were so good at stimulating the economy, why would the economy require stimulating, at all?

Stammon| 5.26.10 @ 7:24PM

Honestly purple you need to shut up, you undermine yourself with every word. A little lesson on meeting a payroll. I once was responsible for 150 people. That's 150 families. It was a big responsibility and burden. everything I did was to make sure I could meet payroll. I didn't have the luxury of wishful thinking, there was no Santa Claus or happy horseshit around the corner.
Obama is ruining the Democrat Party. When he is done they won't be in power for a generation. And we will get something worse than well-meaning Democrats, we will get flabby Republicans who only represent themselves.
I am a Repub, and I worry how far the dems will fall.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:40PM

Purpleturd's a liberal, the a-hole's probably never had a job let alone been responsible for a payroll.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 10:52AM

Oh, but I have, on both accounts. But I prefer Champagne to Beer and a Belch, unlike you...

Liam| 5.27.10 @ 11:45AM

Weenie elitist; I'm surprised you spend so much time with us bitter clingers. Don't you have a 14 year old boy to terrorize somewhere? Perhaps there's a 10 year old girl out there you can terrify next. Loser.

Brownshirt traitor.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:22PM

Wow - where is all the hostility coming from .. maybe you could channel it into, oh, I dunno - YOUR BUSINESS... if you have one. Ha!

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:01AM

Congratulations, but it wasn't clear if you "owned" the business or for someone else. And, I assume from your note, you aren't doing it anymore - what changed?

"It was a big responsibility and burden. everything I did was to make sure I could meet payroll." - THAT is exactly my point - the almighty dollar is King, and everything else is shit in business. I understand why, I've been there too, but that pressure and experience doesn't equip anyone to be President.

Liam| 5.27.10 @ 3:56PM

No, money isn't king, LOVE IS, dumbtard.

You stupid Progressive Marxists just don't get it because Big Government is your god. Idiots.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:21PM

Then you did not run any business and made no payroll - you simply lied. Otherwise you couldn't possibly argue - if you don't make a buck, you got no business - ergo money is King. But, just like we need politicians, journalists, and car salesmen, we need businessmen too. It's okay, but don't lie anymore.

Nick| 5.27.10 @ 11:46PM

More glass pearls of wisdom from PurpleJackass.

He didn't cover his employees with Workers' Comp. insurance, just to save a buck.

Typical liberal: Rules are for thee, not for me!

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 6:58PM

You're just a Marxist thief, Ahole. You don't care about people, you only care about power and control like all Marxist nitwits.

Tim*| 5.26.10 @ 11:39PM

Obama takes The Private Sector's Tax Money and buys those Federal Jobs Y'all Economic Buffoon.

Get A Freakin' Job Y'all .

DanMingo| 5.26.10 @ 3:31PM

Yeah, he sucks.
If only some guy with an MBA and a tax cutter philosophy, and real business CEO-type experience;
If only we had that guy for President, we would not be in this mess we are in today.
If only we had Mr. Bush back, the economy would be great.

BTW, how come the author does not mention the deregulation of the banks (Glass-Steagall) as a contributing factor?
Maybe because it implicates the banks instead of his favorite target: Obama

Nobama| 5.26.10 @ 9:42PM

Obama's a Marxist and his crappy social engineering policies that were facilitated through the CRA and Fannie & Freddie caused our economic meltdown.

It's ALL Obammy's fault.

R Martin| 5.26.10 @ 7:53AM

"Any free market advocate has to detest Goldman, which already has long been a central cog in the Democrat political machine."

That's a rather silly statement in an otherwise cogent piece of analysis. Evidence abounds of Goldman's vital role in free market economics which has made the American economy an engine of growth, innovation and prosperity. Those who "detest" GS are mostly envious of its success, and many of those enviers are in exactly the same business.

It seems what Mr. Ferrara really objects to is Goldman's support of Democrats. I do too. But GS is headquartered in liberal New York with heavy Jewish influence and that makes the firm almost genetically predisposed to favor Democrats. That's certainly wrong-headed politically, but it's not detestable.

Paul| 5.26.10 @ 9:19AM

Agreed. GS supports who's in power; it's "protection money." My firm, also on Wall Street, does the same. Unfortunate, but hardly "detestable."

Ryan| 5.26.10 @ 9:51AM

Not totally correct. Goldman often works with the government to create legislation and regulation favorable to itself. "Government Sachs" is a well-deserved nickname.

JC| 5.26.10 @ 12:08PM

As a Goldman Sachs investor, I want the company I own to do whatever it can to create an advantage for itself. It is government which is supposed to be incorruptible...not the other way around...didn't anyone watch Batman?

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:45PM

You're a greedy fool and your selfishness will destroy our country. In case you haven't noticed, Obama is running a Corruptocracy.

Jim O'Brien| 5.26.10 @ 7:57AM

Socialist Obama is a treacherous impostor whose goal is to undermine this republic of capitalism and freedom. When he took the oath of office, he lied.

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:00PM

He is successfully destroying America. It is not incompetence on his part. It is absolutely intentional. He is a traitor and should be tried for treason or at the very least impeached for his part in an attempt to bribe Congressman in PA with promise of a job if he would not run in the primary against Spector. Chicago corruption abounds in the White House like no tomorrow and if Obama has his way America as she is and was meant to be will see few tomorrows.

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:00PM

He is successfully destroying America. It is not incompetence on his part. It is absolutely intentional. He is a traitor and should be tried for treason or at the very least impeached for his part in an attempt to bribe Congressman in PA with promise of a job if he would not run in the primary against Spector. Chicago corruption abounds in the White House like no tomorrow and if Obama has his way America as she is and was meant to be will see few tomorrows.

Tim*| 5.26.10 @ 8:08AM

This is a wrist slap head fake by The Obama Administration to Government Sachs.

The Goldman Sachs A.I.G. Scandal is being covered up .

Follow The Money Trail !

Mimi| 5.26.10 @ 8:17AM

PETER, Another great article.....This President is President to 22-23% of Americans who are "very-likely"...Liberal. He favors and serves his friends, his county's, his states! He IGNORES his adversaries (ie) Louisiana and Arizona whose govenors have pleaded for help. LA. for help to keep oil off it's shores and Az. for federal help to protect it's citizens. Just recently, he is sending 1200 troops to the border, a pittance of what was asked for, and today will visit the gulf area. WHY SO LATE !! The MSM is starting to ask uncomfortable questions. WHY SO LATE?? Americans as a whole feel totally abandoned, are sick of political favoritism and his in-ability to even FAKE competance. Day after day, month after month the frustration mounts. You are so right Peter ..... the modern media of today...internet, talk-radio etc. are making the difference in our awareness....But the RACE is on...to shut it down. History is watching this self indulgent President. SO ARE WE !!

dcd| 5.26.10 @ 10:34AM

That was Rove's great insight. To win you only need the base. 51% of the base will get you the party, and the party will get you 51% of the country. Anyone not in your base is unnecesary and can be safely ignored.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 11:35AM

Much to the chagrin of conservatives, this also included the maxim that anyone safely in you base could also be ignored.

There has been too much focus on persuading those whose minds could be changed without any focus on maintaining what brought that base to the party in the first place.

Rahm Emanuel played that game as well and while it brought Obama to the Presidency it look that it may be the downfall of the Dems.

Tim*| 5.26.10 @ 8:22AM

"The bigger story, still unexplored by regulators and Goldman's critics, concerns that $2.5 billion in protection Goldman had acquired before the crisis hit. What became of those hedges? What did Goldman Sachs do with its AIG protection? "

Heatpacker| 5.26.10 @ 8:42AM

So much for Barack Obama's media portrayal as the absolutely new, fresh-thinking, open-to-all-ideas, New Age Messiah. The man is living in the past. His ideas are as dead and shot full of holes as Benito Mussolini. His solutions to the nation's problems are the failed solutions of the past, and have almost no relevance to current conditions. Obama, intellectually, exists in a state of arrested development. What he learned from his commie grandparents is what he still believes today, and everything that happens which contradicts his beliefs will simply be ignored.

Red Bubba| 5.26.10 @ 8:43AM

Goldman Sachs Obama corruption is everywhere, including ther partial ownership of the carbon exchange.

Bilwick| 5.26.10 @ 9:04AM

"Only an intellectually cloistered prep school Marxist could think the politics of the 1930s would be an effective model for today's modern America 75 years later. . . " Unfortunately, intellectually clositered prep school Marxists seems to be what "Il Dufe's" administration consists of.

Ran / Si Vis Pacem| 5.26.10 @ 9:19AM

Mr Ferrara, many thanks for another thought-provoking article. I've linked this article here in response. Cheers!

Ran / Si Vis Pacem| 5.26.10 @ 12:01PM

“nationalize the urban political machines dating back to New York City’s Tammany Hall that have long been the backbone of the Democrat party.“ Far more… Internationalize the Chicago thug machine.

This isn't about solving the problems of the human condition. This is about centralizing & consolidating power.

SPO101| 5.26.10 @ 9:52AM

So the Republicans are FINALLY admitting they’re OUT OF IDEAS and asking the public for input. Here’s my advice… if you want the Republican Party to make a comeback then QUIT being HO’s for those vain, self-serving, power mad, greed stricken silver spoon con artists that are running the multi-national corporations. Make Newt Gingrich, Tom Delay, Phil Gramm and those Conservative think tanks ADMIT they sold out the American middle class with the hidden legislation of the 90’s.

SOMEONE take responsibility for the Bush/Cheney DISASTER. Fess up to all the waste, fraud, abuse, scandal, sexual deviancy, corruption, lies, deregulation, incompetence, job outsourcing, off-shore tax evasion, reckless economics, corporate welfare, war profiteering, Constitutional violations AND a Corporate Crime Wave of epic proportions. The WORST looting of a nation’s wealth and resources in the history of MANKIND!

And even after the American PEOPLE were just starting to recover then the ghost of Bush/Cheney oil drilling deregulation comes back to haunt the Gulf coast Red States. Y’know, those right-wing nutcases were chanting “drill baby drill” and get the government outta of their lives like they belonged to a fanatical cult. NOW these hypocrites are blaming Obama/Biden for not saving them from BP’s oily disaster.

Bad timing huh? I’m still going to support Obama and the Democrats ONLY because the Republicans/Conservatives are #*~/’n INSANE! That oily disaster in the Gulf was NOT AN ACT OF GOD! It was the result of incompetent, scandalous government bureaucrats allowing the Oil Drilling Industrial Complex to cut corners… Collusion/Collaboration BETWEEN the Oil Industry and Federal Regulators? WHAT THE #*/!

The Republican/Conservative culture didn’t take the time to consider our coastal borders could be breached, people misplaced and natural environment destroyed for decades. All those tax dollars put into Homeland Security and we let BP, Halliburton and TransOcean do the equivalent of nuking the whole Gulf region of our nation. Oil radiating around Florida to reek havoc on the entire East Coast. AND FORGET ABOUT EATING THE SEAFOOD! AaaaaGgggggghhhhhhgggeerrr! #^*~’s

Remember when the Soviets used to say “America would be destroyed from within”? Who knew it would be the Republican Party to make the Red Commie pukes dream come true.

Is there REALLY Americans out there who were ignorant enough to vote for these Republican LOSERS?

I’m going to make sure the history textbooks show what a bunch of silly stupid, self-absorbed, victimized, apathetic COWARDS you Conservatives wackos turned out to be (1980-2010)

NOTE: I see 7 environmental activists were arrested in Port Fourchon, LA. So let me get this straight, those flunkies in law enforcement arrest American citizens who WERE RIGHT about off-shore drilling. But BP’s bonny Prince Tony Hayward, who oversaw the destruction of the entire Gulf Region of the USA, is still free and allowed to BS those HO’s in the mainstream media, OK? AND all those slimy inspectors taking industry kickbacks/perks are still walking free? Something STINKS! ? CAN YOU SAY CORPORATE OWNED POLICE STATE?

If one really thinks about it… had right-wing morons/dittoheads listened to Greenpeace instead of that loudmouth Rush Limbaugh YOU WOULDN’T BE IN THIS MESS! Right

consciousmc.blogspot.com

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 10:30AM

SPO,
Heh, OK, send your invoice to Mr. Obama for that dumb screed.
He owes you seventeen cents.

Johnno| 5.26.10 @ 11:27AM

Too bad Obammy was BP's BIGGEST recipient of campaign cash.

The Gulf disaster is Obammy's Katrina.
Read it and weep, liberal morons.

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:18PM

Does it occur to anyone that both the recent Coal Mining accident and this Oil Spill have no actual KNOWN catalyst? How opportune is it that just when the Admin finally agrees to off shore drilling in Virginia this oil spill happens. IT IS ALL A LITTLE FISHY TO ME. The Admin is against coal and against oil (or at least OUR oil). Obama's response was to send a swat team??? He is the terrorist, at least by my book. Today he is flying over the Gulf, why bother? He lost that photo op weeks ago.

NavyBrat| 5.26.10 @ 1:19PM

Debbie. You're not the only one who thinks that there's something rotten in the States of Louisiana & West Virginia. No conclusions yet, but suspicion. Hell, we still don't even know how Vince Foster bought the farm, so I won't be holding my breath on either of these events.

I will say that I know that BOTH oil drilling & coal mining is dangerous & that unforseen things happen. But methinks if this happened on a Repub's watch, the media woul've been screaming for the cause of these accidents that killed so many people. As it stands now, there's no mention of any of the casualties. Only blame. Dispicable.

RichieRich| 5.26.10 @ 3:13PM

Whatever SPO101 is smoking must be good stuff to allow him to believe any of the fantasy he writes.
Just so I get this straight .... everything bad that happens in the worls is somehow conservatives fault and even though Obama is terrible he is still good. OK got it.
I guess being a druggie on welfare gives one a long time to think up crazy BS. Ok SPO101 whatever you say.
Ok next tell me that Obama's 37% approval rating is Bush's fault as well.
Oh wait but you are an eco-lefty so that means that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be wrong. I keep forgetting that you lefties know better than the rest of us.

DanMingo| 5.26.10 @ 3:41PM

From May 20
http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....territory/

Job Approval Approve Disapprove Spread
Obama 46.9% 46.6% +0.3%
Congress 21.4% 72.0% -50.6%

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 5:25PM

At Rasmussen today the spread is -22. America awakens.

ZerObama| 5.26.10 @ 7:32PM

Rasmussen puts Obama's approvals at 42% today--must be negative fallout from the ecological disaster in the Gulf.

Can the 30s be far behind? Maybe even single digits after the Impeachment proceedings for bribing Sestak begin. Enjoy, libtards.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 11:26AM

SP101,

1)In case you haven't noticed, Bush has been out of office for 18 months. Get over it;

2)Pelosi and Reid have run Congress for the last 3 years.

3)Obama, Reid and Pelosi have borrowed as much money in 18 months as Bush did in 8 years.

4)Obama owns the BP disaster, not Bush, Cheney, or Haliburton. In the wake of 9/11 Bush never once mentioned Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, or Sandy Berger. Big difference between Bush and Obama. Obama blames others; Bushed took ownership.

5)This thread has to do with Obama, not Bush. You libs suffer BDR - Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Doorgunner| 5.26.10 @ 11:29AM

Meds. Get the meds adjusted.

Ellis Wyatt| 5.26.10 @ 11:47AM

Wow. I wonder if Spo really believes any of that or if it was just copied and pasted from a HuffPo adlib page. Quite funny. And Ken, $.17 is funny.

WL| 5.26.10 @ 12:41PM

So, Mr. I have it all figured out.

Do you drive a car? Do you ride in a plane? Do you mow your yard with a gas powered lawnmower? Do you support wind turbine powered tanks for national defense? Are the Russians, Cubans, Mexicans etc. who are drilling in the Gulf of Mexico really the ticket, so we can buy the oil from them? Where do you think the US would be without oil? Do you think other foreign powers want us to abandon oil for your perfect greenpeace world? What are your alternatives? Where has your "democrats" been for the last 4 years since they controlled congress? Where has your Messiah been for the last year and a half on creating a perfect drilling process for deep sea efforts, while at the same time appeasing the no drill anywhere else crowd you represent? Did Bush and Cheney cause Chernobyl? Did Bush and Cheney dump 180 million gallons of crude into the ocean from the Mexican disaster of the 70's? Are those corners that "the complexes" cut the reason that this Administration was about to give BP a safety award until the spill?

But then again, your answer is an overwhelming BIG BROTHER that wants to tell us how much salt to eat isn't it? You really think that is the answer don't you...After all your Soviet Boys had all that and Chernobyl melted down on them anyway. How about Fannie and Freddie? Did you enjoy watching Frank, Dodd, and others tell your PRECIOUS Regulators that they were racist Hacks because they said the FINANCIAL CRISIS was coming...Did you enjoy stopping the BUSH ADMINISTRATION from fixing that then too?

So you like the way the Democrats cheer on the Mexican president as he slanders one of our 50 states? About Chavez, Putin, Calderone, the Illegals, Rev. Wright, Obama, Ayers, Gordon Brown, Barbara (call me senator) Box-aa, Rahmy, Nazi Axelrod, Billionare DEM Mayor in NEW YORK , "I'm giving OBAMA and the DEMS more money than the Republicans" B-P, My lifes work is the financial crisis SOROS, etc etc etc etc ...

You think they like you don't you..You think you matter to them don't you? Do you pray to them and Chant to Obama every night? Do you like that they hold your hand and tell you how much salt to put on your food. Do you like that? Do you like that your president is refusing to attend Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington...at a tomb of a nameless soldier? Do you think the illegals are coming to help YOU? Do you think all of that??????????????

Just let this Union split buddy...you can have your side and we can have ours...Where is greenpeace gonna get you then?

Attacked and Conquered thats what....

WHILE THE FANATICAL WARMONGERING DRILLING BABY DRILLING NUCLEAR EVIL RACIST IGNORANT TEA BAGGIN CONSERVATIVES LAUGH AT YOU....
as we are not invaded...because deep down they know the same fact you do....
WE FIGHT THE WARS, WE PRODUCE THE GOODS, WE STARTED THIS COUNTRY, WE LIVE BY OUR MEANS, WE ARE FREE PEOPLE WHO JUST GOT TIRED OF IDIOTS LIKE YOU.

AND IF YOU CROSS THE NEW FENCE AT THAT TIME AND ENTER THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY...some CONSERVATIVE FANATIC IS PROBABLY GONNA PUT A FANATICAL BULLET IN YOU %(#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 4:57PM

well said. Need another bullet? Count me in.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 9:48PM

Good post, WL! thank you.

RichCanadian| 5.26.10 @ 2:50PM

Wow, Spo101 might be the dumbest person alive. I speak as Canadian, idependent. 90% of what you just said was wrong. There comes a time when Obama the Great will have to take responsibility for his massive failures. From what I can see as an outsider, Obama is terrible. He will spend his entire 4 years blaming everything on Bush. Its actually funny to watch from afar how unable he is to be president. Smart guy - sure, lawyer - yup, good president - not a friggin chance. Nothing he promised has happened and the one thing did happen - healthcare reform- was unwanted by the majority of Americans. The Democrats in your country seem to be great at being backseat drivers and blaming others but terrible at the actual driving.
Obama's platform now is great, if something doesn't work blame Bush. You have to remember Bush started with a bursting internet bubble and 9/11. But you didn't see GWB blaming either of those things for future missteps. Bush knows he made mistakes but he accepts that. I dont believe BO can actually admit doing anything wrong. He has the Unions and media on his side and still his approval ratings are awful. It took Bush well into his second term to have his ratings drop so much. Took BO all of a year and a half. The funny thing is that the US seemed to really go in the crapper right about the end of 06 right after the Dems took control of everything but the presidency. You donkeys tend to forget that. Hillary with a more central stand would have been a much better president for sure. If her supporters weren't strong-armed out by the Obama bullies in the caucus states.

I do find it interesting that Bush gets blamed for Katrina as if he made the idiots live 20 feet below sea level yet somehow now this oil spill is also Bush's fault. Very odd isn't it.
Sorry Mr Obama, you must take responsibility for this spill and the feeble efforts to stop it just as you were so eager to blame Bush for what happened after Katrina.

Thank you from an outsider. Not all Candians are socialist idiots. In fact most are not. Good day.

DanMingo| 5.26.10 @ 3:44PM

I do find it interesting that Bush gets blamed for Katrina as if he made the idiots live 20 feet below sea level yet somehow now this oil spill is also Bush's fault. Very odd isn't it.

By your reasoning then, it is the fault of the idiot people and marine life for living in and around the gulf, and not Mr. Bush.

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:04PM

Spot on, Canada.

One small disagreement. BP appears to be taking full responsibility for this mess, which was an accident, and yeah folks, sh** does happen. It's costing them zillions of bucks, so I feel certain that it's not what they wanted to occur. If they were not forced to drill so far offshore in such deep water, they would have been able to contain this accident days ago. As long as NIMBY always applies, this is what we can expect, or we can keep that dependence to foreign oil thing going forever. Make up your minds, people. We need oil from somewhere...and unfortunately, it doesn't grow on trees.

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 3:01PM

Kool-aid anyone?

Rich| 5.26.10 @ 3:08PM

If people listened to Greenpeace there would be no cars, no industry and we would all be living in caves, hunting game (oh wait GP doesn't allow hunting) and farming our food. Then we can all dance around, smoke weed and die at 37. Yes the world according to Greenpeace sounds just awesome.

Stammon| 5.26.10 @ 7:32PM

See folks; this is why the dems are going to lose so badly. Angry self deluded egomania doesn't sell politically, especially with the high inflation and unemployment that's coming.

JimE| 5.26.10 @ 9:12PM

SP, Nice KOS cut and paste, you must be purpletard's severly retarded brother.

Stephanie| 5.26.10 @ 10:19AM

I believe we have sociopath on our hands. Spoiled, childish, self indulgent and narsassistic is our president. After reading the news of yesterday's meeting between the prez and the Republicans, they way obama acted and the fact that he did NOT even mention to them that he was going to put the measly 1200 troops on the porous southern boarder speaks volumns. This man is out of his league and is not in this by himself. I just get this feeling that there is somone behind the curtain whispering in his ear. His totally ambivilance to the American people is astounding and sad at the same time and I wonder daily if that black gal in Florida who said during th election " obama gonna pay my rent and buy me a car" is disappointed in her man. He dispises these people he preys on, lies to. Sounds like something out of highschool, but this is pure evil.

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:28PM

I have also wondered who might be the man behind the curtain. Certainly someone like George Soros comes to mind. Obama was not raised here and has no allegence to the USA. His campaign contributions were in the form of hundreds and hundreds of small amounts (to avoid their having to be reported) from overseas and his college eduction was paid for by a foreign entity. Why in the world (in the name of transparency) are Obama's college records closed to the public? Does anyone besides me think it is suspicious that both Obamas (Barack and Michele) volunteerily surrendered their law licenses? To me that smacks of an effort to evade damaging disclosures.

Louis Jenkins| 5.26.10 @ 5:04PM

Yes Debbie, and we're still waiting on that certified birth certificate.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 6:34PM

One doesn't need to engage in conspiracy theory to observe that keeping one's records private isn't customary (John Kerry is an obvious exception). Much fun was made of Bush's 'C' grades.

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:07PM

Soros, Maurice Strong, Peter Lewis, Podesta...etal. There's plenty of money going around from those who want to impose their view of the world on the rest of us. The rest of the Kool-Aid gang can laugh all they want. Do a little independent research, and see if you come up with 2 + 2=4.

Kelly Staples| 5.26.10 @ 10:20AM

Mr. Ferrara, with all due respect, a more relevant question might be: "What were a majority of American voters thinking?"

martin j smith| 5.26.10 @ 10:26AM

SPO 101: or Liberal Reader or whatever, now that you have gone to the political"bathroom" why don't just wipe up and go back to class.
As an aside--I have an aquaintance who is one of those "gimmeee ' types-wants something for nothing has no clue that you get what you pay for
and when something is too good to be true it is. The same kind of mentality that led to the Bernie Madoff fiasco and the same kind of mentality that plays into to notion of crony capitalism--i.e if you " buddy up" with the governments, they'll leave you alone. In regards to my aquaintance its still" Bush's fault". I have to decide that kind of person with regards to political disucssion is a pure waiste of time. but I digress--
Never the les I will say it: SPO, it is not you it is your type. A pure waiste of time. But glad to tell you and nothing more beyond that.

Petronius| 5.26.10 @ 10:56AM

Oh goody! A troll for breakfast
Obama's malfeasance is Bush and Cheney's fault? He is doing as Alinsky instructed. To gain control of something, destroy it first.
The federal government has been gutting Our Constitution since Taft left office. And most people living in this country today do not know what real conservatism is except hearsay equating it to oppression. This stems from incessant bitching of the garden variety hedonist who's ultimate goal in life is to die in the saddle and does not want to hear any objections from people who don't want to be taxed to support his bastards as he can't or won't.
And you eco nazis aren't going to get away with that put up job of photos in yesterdays Piss Disgrace showing Port Fourchon in the condition it's been in for decades as it is an oil services maintenance and salvage depot, not a residential area or a public beach.
Thomas Jefferson is attributed with these words upon the Constitution being ratified: that we were to have "economic liberty in an ordered society."
The hippies destroyed social order. The radical left and their lawyers destroy our economy.
I am conservative. And I stand on My Constitutional Oath. So mote it be.

Missy| 5.26.10 @ 11:33AM

It always goes back to the Leftists; their ideology is based on chaos. Liberalism is a mental illness and the Democrat party is the Party of death.

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:31PM

I love you.

Stephanie| 5.26.10 @ 3:55PM

Ditto, Deb and Missy~

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:09PM

Conservatives are creators and builders. The left are destroyers.

SoCon| 5.26.10 @ 7:37PM

I heart all of you girls; including Wendy, Deborah and Margie. Conservative women rock!

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 11:18AM

Peter,
Thank you.
I suppose I am in a rather apocalyptic mood this morning, and your column title spun my mind out in a bunch of directions.

Let me see here if I can list the summary words that I have compiled over time to describe his thinkings/feelings:
Outsider from birth, anger, hatred, impotent rage, moral cowardice, overcompensation, muslim fatalism, self-absorption, peter-panism, proud lier to we infidels.

Due to all of the above, I think we finally have to face the reality that the man is bent on de-constructing the United States as "we the people".

.....out of "bare fear" on his part, (Look that up folks).....combined with a phrase from psychotherapy..."the will to power".

This is the motivation that the adolescent is exhibiting "trying to make the measure of manhood", and it is a very frightening motivational structure in a president.
It is the same structure that drives young men to rape and murder in order to achieve a sense of empowerment....and even personal safety.

To this kind of individual...the slightest "no" interestingly enough first provokes fear before anything else....followed instantly by lashing out type anger, then followed by cunningly backstabbing the source of the fear.

In the end, this type of motivational structure is self-destructing.
(imprisonment, execution, disgrace)

But this type of motivational structure in the president of the United States is truly a disater in the making; perhaps a rolling series of disasters embroiling us all.

One thing that truly does amaze me is the Democrats in Congress lollygagging along with him. Are they absolutely clueless, or are they just eager to follow along behind him eating his scraps for as long as their gravy train lasts?

Missy| 5.26.10 @ 11:30AM

Great article, Mr. Ferrara! Thank you.

Obama's administration is Crime, Inc.
Check out Glenn Beck's exhaustive expose of Obama's corruptocrat treachery.

JJ| 5.26.10 @ 11:31AM

You give Obama too much credit. I think he's just shooting from the hip. I don't think he's very bright or very cunning. I think he believes his own press and has a very dark side, a chip on his shoulder. He's brainwashed by all the communist college professors he met and his evil racist pastor. If he had his way he would be more like Marx, not Roosevelt.
And lets give Jimmy Carter a break here. Obama is less of a President than Carter. Carter stood up for human rights. Obama does not.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 11:35AM

Please don't defend that puker, Jimmah!

Malaise!

The guy was an arse then and is an arse still.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 11:40AM

Indeed he was. But now he is the second worst President in living memory.

Conservative Californian| 5.26.10 @ 1:45PM

Obama knew exactly what he wanted to do long before he was elected President. Do some research. He is determined to create HIS version of American, independent of the popular will of the people. He is not a servant of the people, but instead like most progressives--HE knows what is best for everyone. In giving us our medicine--he is removing our liberties one by one and will not give up his dream even when he is no longer in the office of the President. Obama is many things; stupid and unconscious are not part of them.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 3:13PM

The man in the WH is a tool and puppet of his Transnationalist kingmakers, Soros among them.

He and they are looters of America, much the way that African dictators siphon off all the wealth of the countries they rule and bring to heel. We're in the confusing and painful midst of such a heel-bringing.

The social justice language and its ostensible goal is merely propaganda employed by LOTUS and his puppeteers to disarm the politically unsophisticated masses and to provide cover for their looting schemes.

None of these people care a whit about America, its people, its history, its Founding principles; for them, America exists for the pure pleasure of giving them the opportunity to destroy what remains of the West and the Judeo-Christian ethos that animates it; in this, they are not so different from the worldwide-caliphate-seeking muslims.

Thank you for an excellent article, Mr. Ferrara; much of what you record is information I already know. But I appreciate your work here in putting it all together in one piece -- much more easy to copy and send off to friends this way.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 4:27PM

Darcy,
Well spoken. Welcome to the conversations here.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 5:30PM

Thank you, Ken. I have been a fan of yours for some time now, here at AS.

stevor| 5.26.10 @ 11:42AM

So, the question is still "what was he thinking?" For the answer, look to who his "advisers" are. They are George Soros and Brzezinkski. Just what do those two have in common? They are both for a New World Order (one-world-government).

So, how best to enable a government to take over the world? You get rid of the competition. You bankrupt the USA. You make the EU indebted to the USA so they'll go down, too.

When done, the United Nations will use the IMF/World Bank/Federal Reserve to run that new government (which "currency" is already designed for and the presses are ready to print).

Debbie| 5.26.10 @ 12:40PM

This is very scary because I absolutely believe it to be true. And am terrified that we are too late to stop it. Too late and too weak. I can't see that these elections in November will be much help. If it comes down to civil war I will stand with the "guns and bibles." This destruction of our country has been well planned and thought out and is working like a charm.

SoCon| 5.26.10 @ 9:57PM

Debbie, just remember; we've got God on our side.
"So do not fear, for I am with you." Isaiah

We can do this, we just have to stick together--our parents and grandparents triumphed before us and we can do it, too.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 11:49AM

There are differing opinions on why President Obama governs the way he does. One school of thought believes that he consciously governs in order to bring about a crisis that will allow him to declare martial law.

The other group believes that he and his governing elite are so ideological that they know no other way to govern. That is, because of thier education, ideology, and elitism they only see progressive solutions.

One group attributes diabolical causes for Obama's actions; the other see Obama and company as nothing but foolish partisans.

WL| 5.26.10 @ 11:57AM

Talk about a thunderclap...That was the fastest read I have had in months. This article cut through the bull-garbage and said everything we have all been thinking for a year and a half.
Bravo, Mr. Ferrara.

You saved the most important point for last. The "double dealing" from the "Blue Dogs" has got to be countered. However, I will go one step further and offer a solution. The solution is extremely simple but will take some guts... Guts that I am not sure the Republican Party has...
It is DECISIVE ACTION AT CRITICAL JUNTURES.

This administration gives so much ammo to our side that it is not funny, but we bury it and fail to use ANYTHING effectively.

For instance, right now WE HAVE THEM CAUGHT RED HANDED with Sestak STILL OPENLY SAYING THAT THEY OFFERED HIM A JOB....

Traditional Republican Response: Wa Wa Wa we need a special council...Please Mr. Holder, prosecute your daddy.... etc etc etc

DECISIVE ACTION: ALL MEMBERS OF THE REPUBLICAN DELEGATION IN HOUSE AND SENATE standing on the steps of the Capital and refusing to even enter the building until this ACCUSATION FROM ONE OF THEIR OWN CANDIDATES IS INVESTIGATED IN A WAY THAT IT IS NOT ONLY BY CROOKED DEMOCRATS.

ETC ETC ETC..
Until then, while we have a National Chairman feeling like he has to jump on the Criticize R. Paul Bandwagon and a randomly selected Republican MOLE showing up at EVERY critical junture...
We will always lose, and nincompoops will constantly believe that there are no crisp differences between the two parties....and the DAVIDS of FRUM and BROOKS will always be there to point out where we went wrong by not agreeing with the DEMOCRATS.

MarioG| 5.26.10 @ 11:58AM

Why is any of this a surprise for anyone who was paying attention during the presidential campaign and knew about the Grand Caliph Obama's past relationships with some of the most virulent anti-Semites and anti-Americans and pro-liberation-theologists and Saul Alinskyites in America? The standard response to his unaccomplished inexperience was that he was brilliant and would surround himself with wise advisors. Well, he has never been brilliant, only cunning, and he has surrounded himself with advisors to his left. 53% of the electorate were asleep at the wheel or busy demonizing the executively accomplished Sarah Palin, and we will now have to take the country back from these far left wing radicals starting this November. Stop whining, and get busy.

Occam's Tool| 5.26.10 @ 12:01PM

I never worry about WHAT Obama's thinking---that's as predictable as the rising sun. I worry about WITH WHAT Obama thinks---3 brain cells held together with two spirochetes, or what?

Wally Sandaber| 5.26.10 @ 12:23PM

Is Ferrara as ignorant as he sounds? The derivatives pyramid scheme came close - but for government intervention - to decimating the world's banking system and throwing the world into a massive recession. And the Democrats were too hard on them in the Finance reform bill? Um, no. The bill is weak and should include tighter regulation of the bombs known as derivatives and should shrink these behometh banks that have owned Washington since, well, Reagan.

No, Ferrara is not ignorant. But you guys are if you believe his "oh, poor little bankers" spiel. Even the friggin' Tea Party people have this one right. The bankers profited massively on unregulated derivitives trading and want to keep doing it. And they are paying millions to lobbyists and politicians to do so. Apparently, Ferrara wants them to keep their palatial estates in Napa and Provence and their billions too.

Ah, yes, the old Republican approach to politics. "I hate the guy so let me tell you what he is thinking."

You see Rightwingers are all sages. Mystics. Gurus. Liberals are just boring, in the trenches, practical people trying to make government work: e.g. cushion the recession; bring up U.S. healthcare to the 37 countries ahead of us; fix the Reagan master plan of deregulating investment banks; use free market methods to address universally scientifically accepted pollution problems; etc.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 1:20PM

And pray tell Wally, what brought about the need for derivitavies in the first place?

I will tell you: one former federal employee -namely Alan Greenspan; and 435 federal employees in Congress. Risk begats derivatives. And high risk mortgages were aplenty. And risk never tasted so sweet as when Greenspan allowed negative interest rates.

Now off you go -back to Kozland.

Wally| 5.26.10 @ 2:42PM

You are claiming that the only reason that the guys at investmenet banking firms came up with CDOs was because a Republican Fed Chair lowered interest rates? That seems, well, pretty creative and of course, in contrast with what every economist thinks. The mortgages did not threaten the banking system, the interlocking gambles on derivatives did. Economies can withstand bubbles, even those created by free market morons like Greenspan. But they can't surive interlocking trillion dollar pyramid schemes that tied all the big banks to some insane financial instruments.

I hope you are not one of these nuts but is your point that poor black people caused the financial meltdown?

JP| 5.26.10 @ 5:05PM

Wally,
You really show your ignorance of economics with your posts. To answer your last question: in California alone foreclosures cost banks over $1 trillion. The vast majority of these foreclosures were ARMs written for people who could not afford the adjustible rates. Those foreclsoures themselves drove home values in California another $1.5 trillion in lost values. Both the lost mortgages and home valuations have cost real people (pensioners, blue and white collar workers as well as the wealthy) trillions of dollars in lost investment capital. My brother's 401k lost 75% of its value from Sept to Dec 2008.

And yes, net negative interest rates provide the moral hazard necessary to have a market bubble in the first place. Investment firms and banks can take bigger and bigger risks with more and more capital (ie borrow more), and if the risks fail they are only out the capital and not the interest.

CDOs are no different. Investor had to hedge thier risks (high risk mortgage securities brought about by homeowner who received homes or home equitiy loans). CDSs and CDOs are used to hedge risk.

But the moral hazard and the risk got a huge assit from both Congress and the Fed. Nothing is free, and with so many high risk mortgages out there, investment firms used CDOs and CDSs.

And yes, people who are foolish enough to take out 0% ARMs on homes priced at 10Xs thier annual income are partially to blame.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 5:14PM

"The mortgages did not threaten the banking system, the interlocking gambles on derivatives did. Economies can withstand bubbles, even those created by free market morons like Greenspan."

You really need to take a few courses in economics. And I really don't think you even understan what derivatives do. You should also read up on the role of interest rates and economics.

The market bubble in stocks (crica 1928-1930) wreaked the US and European economies; Markt bubbles in 1907 came within a whisker of destroying the US banking system. The collapse of 2008 was due to trillions of dollars both here and abroad going into Mortgage Securties. The returns on those securities were dependent upon interest rates set by Greenspan. The spread between what the Fed charged and what mortgage banks charged along with the fees from the mortgage securities produced trillions of dollars in profits for those who purchased them. And as more and more people ( were encouraged to buy homes, millions of risky mortgages were bought and sold. This drove up home prices, which created an even higher demand, as homeowners were able to buy up. And investment banks spread the risk of the securities by bundling high and low risk mortgages.

This was all predicated by Congressional Housing laws and 0% interest rates. Once Bernecke began to tighten money in late 2006 the game was over. It was too late.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 5:36PM

And don't forget the role played by credit default swaps.

Please read Architects of Ruin by Peter Schweizer for a more complete understanding of the mortgage meltdown. Also, Peter Walliston of AEI has written broadly on this topic.

Wally| 5.26.10 @ 5:42PM

Duh! that there was a bubble in lousy mortgages that put many banks in tough situations. And duh! that most of those were loans by companies like Countrywide to poor white folk, NOT CRA loans.

All your arrogant blather about your own supposed expertise in economics does not convince me that the trigger for the int'l liquidity crisis at banks was only mortgages and the combination of bad loans, CDOs and other scam oriented deriviatives . Almost every single economist in the planet says that the bubble in mortgages would have caused economic problems but nowhere CLOSE to the damage that happened due to the interlocking nature of the derivatives deals between the banks. Most banks don't hold mortgages, Mr. Economics Expert. ALL big banks bought those sidebets known as CDOs.

So, no, poor people did not cause this financial meltdown and that particular Republican partisan line has been rebunked by the Treasury Dept., the GAO and any reputable economist. But keep bragging. And spinning.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 6:47PM

You better not be calling me arrogant, you asshole. You have no call to attack me for my comments which were informative in nature and in no way directed at pilloring "poor people."

Take a VALIUM AND SHUT UP if you can't be civil.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 7:41PM

Wally is probably Purpleguy, another SEIU purple shirted brownshirt thug. Gonna terrorize any more 14 year boys, loser?

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:16PM

You're arrogant, you asshole. one name called begets another ... if you can dish it, you gotta take it... thems the rules.

Nick| 5.27.10 @ 11:40PM

You started it!
Infinity!

Dai Alanye| 5.26.10 @ 3:15PM

"Liberals are just… trying to make government work"

Here we have the basic problem. In making this almost-depression government has worked all to well. Without Barney Franks, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer and a few others the housing bubble might never have existed. No housing bubble, no great recession. The problem has been precisely government, and libs like Sanddauber inevitably want more of it.

The liberal solution always seems to favor pouring oil on the fire.

Purpleguy| 5.27.10 @ 11:17PM

And the conservative solution is to pour oil in the Gulf ... it that it?

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 7:06PM

No, Conservatives would have fixed the ruptured well weeks ago.

Liberals' motto is 'SPILL BABY SPILL." Losers.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 12:36PM

Gosh Wally,
Stay on your knees and blow. I shan't.

send your invoice to obamagov.net for seventeen cents. heh.

psutopgun| 5.26.10 @ 12:39PM

Great article. I agree regarding the Fed and low interest rates but wasn't it the Community Fairness Act, Passed during the Carter administration, that gave the government(Barney Frank) the ability to black mail banks into giving out sub-prime loans. Clinton and Bush administrations let it continue although the Republicans tried to push through a bill in 2005 or 2006 that would have restricted Fannie and Freddie from taking additional toxic loans. The Democratic congress voted it down.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 3:51PM

It was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 enacted during Jimmy Carter's administration. Clinton, in 1995, modified CRA by lowering lending qualification standards and directing Janet Reno to go after lending institutions for non-compliance. All the while Fannie and Freddie were buying up these subprime mortagages on the secondary market, thereby placing the RISK of these dubious loans on the backs of the American taxpayer.

This is just one aspect of the mortgage meltdown; any honest investigation of the causes of the meltdown reveals that BIG government used the social justice meme to expand and entrench its own power at the expense of America's taxpayers.

Wally| 5.26.10 @ 5:49PM

This CRA theory is complete nonsense that has been completely debunked by various economists and the Treasury Dept. (Oh, but Glenn Beck says so, so it must be true.)

The CRA and FMae,Mac loans were actually some of the less toxic loans out there. But more importantly, they were a very small percentage of packages of mortgages that made up CDOs. And the CDOs were the key item - as you point out - that brought down Bear Stearns and Lehman. And that would have brought down AIG and the entire banking system. The bad mortgages (mainly due to lower middle class white guys buying lots of new Silverados and F-250s and jet skis off their mortgages), would have caused economic problems. But it was the CDOs that tied the banks to a domino situation. Sheesh. Quit trying to blame "libruls' and black and brown people for the scams of rich white guys on Wall St.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 6:58PM

Maybe you get your info from Glenn Beck, but I don't; sorry to disappoint you.

You're an obnoxious little pugilist, aren't you? Whatever valid points you MIGHT HAVE HAD are fully discredited by your racial innuendo -- no one listens when you spit out your ad hominem. I guess you think doing so enhances the force of your argument, when all it shows is your disdain for civility and human beings, generally -- you oh so caring liberal, sticking up for one group while trashing another. What a complete boor.

Moreover, for all you know I AM black or brown; I might even have black or brown grandchildren.

When you bring the class/racist card to the discussion, you merely embarrass yourself, you idiot.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 7:45PM

Everyone knows that BarneyDodd CRA Leftist social engineering policies facilitated by Fannie & Freddie destroyed our economy.

You have to destroy capitalism before you can replace it with something else. That's exactly what the Progressive Marxist assholes in the democrat party are doing right now. Cloward-Piven strategy--look it up.

Jim| 6.23.10 @ 7:53AM

Did you not just read Wally's comment? He debunked the CRA myth.

Stan Allen| 5.26.10 @ 9:50PM

Incredible - according to Wally, the entire mortgage house-of-cards is now the fault of "Lower Middle-class white guys" - Wally, where do you get your statistics from? And what's your beef with white people?

(I can hear it now: "Bill Maher said it, so it must be true")

jim| 6.23.10 @ 7:56AM

No ignoramus, it is from the Fed and the Treasury's OFFICIAL DATA. This is factually proven. All the CRA did was end redlining which had been accomplished by the mid-90s mostly. All of the liar loans, no money down loans, creative debt financing, etc did not appear on the stage until the early 00s following the repeal of glass-steagall.

JmsA| 5.26.10 @ 9:55PM

Darcy,

Good essay by Mr. Ferrara along with many good postings. particularly your summation of those most often ignored causative facts. Thank you.

Liz| 5.26.10 @ 12:43PM

Obama is now openly warring with our enemy, The State of Arizona. It takes a special kind of incompetence mixed with Unicorn Dust to waste national resources on internal warfare like this.

Wake me up at impeachment time.

Stephanie| 5.26.10 @ 4:00PM

INDEED!!!! wake me up at impeachment time.
I love it!

Northern Rebel| 5.26.10 @ 12:50PM

Old Tex:

Replying to your first post of the day on this subject, Linbergh was only one of many impediments FDR had to overcome, pre-war.

Let's not forget Joe Kennedy, an unabashed Hitler fan, and a man of tremendous influence in his day.

The Jews had very few friends in America, and they turned a blind eye to Nazi tactics, because they were perceived to be solving an age old problem.

Hence, the rumors that have persisted through the ages, that FDR allowed the Pearl harbor bombing, to gin up anti-axis emotion.

I am also the farthest thing from an FDR fan, but you can't have it both ways, Tom.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 3:53PM

Lindbergh was also a Hitler sympathizer.

Conservative Californian| 5.26.10 @ 1:38PM

Most of the people that took the time to read this know that something HAS to be done. I urge everyone on this list to stand up from the 'politically correct' shadows and get in the game. The left is frantically trying to form a permanent constituency with entitlements and the conscious open border to illegal immigrants. At some point, unless we ALL act AND SOON--this will be a moot discussion. It's getting late....

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 3:54PM

I am in the game: I've become a precinct committeeman, :).

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:18PM

Me too. Until about two months ago, I was a registered Democrat. When I registered to vote year ago, there were no Republican primaries in NC, and I never bothered to change, but had no voted for a DEM in years, except locally sometimes.

No I am precinct captain for my small town, and I'm working hard to get conservatives elected. Plus I send small amount of money to other people that I think may make a difference. At this point, I am doing all I can to make some positive changes. After all, I had my head up my a** for years.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 5:39PM

Nancy: I LOVE to read conversion stories. Way to go, girl!

Missy| 5.26.10 @ 10:00PM

Thanks, Nancy! Welcome.

The Blue Knight| 5.26.10 @ 1:39PM

I find leftist comments posted challenging articles such as this one to be ridiculous. Take the articles assertions point by point and articulate facts into your argument rather than how you "feel".

Jonathon| 5.26.10 @ 1:41PM

Wow, you guys are all so deranged, reading through your insanity almost makes me want to vote Democrat...

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 2:02PM

"The real causes were Fed mismanagement enabling a drastic collapse of the money supply" - Yep, and Bernanke did not repeat that mistake, did he?

"President Obama has also followed Roosevelt's creation of massive new entitlements with the Obamacare takeover of health care. " - You mean like Social Security? That horrible program that most of us will eventually count on in retirement? Or did you mean Workers Compensation if we are injured at work? What a horrible thought. Or was it Unemployment Compensation you don't like? Why help workers that are laid off. You mean all those horrible Roosevelt safety net programs that helped workers and retirees avoid the soup lines?

Sorry, but your article is filled with mistakes and 1/2 truths,

"Goldman, which already has long been a central cog in the Democrat political machine. " - and yet, the last Bush Treasury Secretary was the CEO of Goldman Sachs.... hmmm, another factoid incorrectly written.

"and the soaring protectionist tariffs of the Smoot-Hawley Act. " - Yep, pushed and passed by Republican Herbert Hoover.

"President Obama again used the crisis to enact further government regulation of Wall Street in the financial regulatory reform bill." - don't you mean to RESTORE regulation of Wall Street?

"institutionalizing bailouts with comprehensive new federal authority to seize any institution the government deems troubled." - yes, to dismantle the offender, not to bail it out... get your facts straight.

"Only an intellectually cloistered prep school Marxist could think the politics of the 1930s would be an effective model for today's modern America 75 years later." - well, it isn't the model from Roosevelt - he's following a mix of Roosevelt and Reagan ... and a brand all his own - the Obama Transformation... and it isn't Socialism. A healthy capitalistic economy needs the oversight of the government to set the rules for battle, settle disputes, and enable the innovative technologies and methodologies that may not be immediately profitable. And, that he is doing! God Bless America and Our President!

Convet| 5.26.10 @ 3:05PM

More drivel from the purple peoplebeater!

DanMingo| 5.26.10 @ 3:55PM

Challenge him on the facts, if you can.

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 7:07PM

We have--MANY TIMES, troll. Try reading some of our posts sometime, moron.

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 4:02PM

Before I read anything, I consider the source. That's why I gave up on TIME magazine and Newsweek, the NYT, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC a long time ago, all of them nothing more than liberal sycophants and mouthpieces.

That's why I also, whenever I see Purpleguy's tag, just scroll right past, without even scanning the words. From your earlier writing, P-guy, I got to know who you are; and I have no interest or inclination in wasting my time on your nonsense. Perhaps you'll have better luck getting traction on your specious comments from the more patient and pedantic writers among us.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 6:18PM

Of course, in the echo chamber of the right-wing establishment, heaven forbid your ears would hear any opposing opinions .. but trust me, you are no loss. Enjoy your li'l spin zone ..

Liberal Reader| 5.26.10 @ 7:08PM

Nobody should talk to purplegay until he gets help. You're just taking advantage of his mental illness. Show some compassion.

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:27PM

you're at it again, purple.

Obama has a number of GS former employees in his administration, and GS contributed hugely to his campaign.

I don't care how many laws and regulations that Obama makes...they are for naught if the folks at SEC are too busy watching porn.

I feel sorry for people that think the government will look out for their best interest. It may come as a big surprise but people did actually live before Social Security. If I had all the money that I have contributed to SS and had invested it, even with the losses, I would be ahead of the game. I am quite capable of looking after myself...I don't need government to hold my hand.

If you would look at all the countries with big government, you won't find any success stories. We were much more prosperous as a country before government took over every level of our lives.

The difference between me and you, purpleguy, is I believe in myself and other people too. I could survive without all this "help" from Washington.

Purpleguy| 5.26.10 @ 6:31PM

"If I had all the money that I have contributed to SS and had invested it, even with the losses, I would be ahead of the game. I am quite capable of looking after myself...I don't need government to hold my hand. "
- you really ought to look into what your saying before you look like a fool. If you're lucky, you paid $100,000 into Social Security over your lifetime... and if you're really lucky, you could accumulate $300,000 from that.
Now, I think we all know, or should know, that it is recommended that you spend only 4% of your nest egg/year in retirement to make it last.

If you are so lucky as to have amassed that $300,000 or so, that would give you approx. $15, 000 to live on for the year WITHOUT Social Security. Good luck with that.

The reason that Social Security and Medicare came about is because people COULDN'T take care of themselves and this was insurance that they would have a safety net. If the politicians had the stones to fully fund these programs instead of listening in fear to airheads that vote, we would not have this issue.

"The difference between me and you, purpleguy, is I believe in myself and other people too. I could survive without all this "help" from Washington." - actually the difference is that I don't need "help" from the Government and I firmly believe in MYSELF, but I also know "there by the Grace of God, go I " . There are plenty of people who can't take care of themselves - and we all may be in that boat one day.

I also believe in the Golden Rule - "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" ..

Instead, you probably prefer "Do unto them, before they do it to you" ... I prefer my world over yours.

But, you're most welcome to move to Somalia - I hear you're on your own there, with no Government interference at all... It would be heaven for all you "rugged individualists" but be sure to tote your gun - you'll need it. When are you leaving?
Have a nice day!

Liberal Reader| 5.26.10 @ 7:13PM

It is sad but purplegay thinks there is money to pay for all the progressive's bad ideas past and present. Somebody should tell him that the party is over. His brand of shake down fascism is going into the ash heap. Somalia by the way is just his warlord type of shake down system taken to the next logical step. At least they have real men doing the shaking instead of effete characters like himself.

JimE| 5.26.10 @ 9:16PM

Be honest purpleasswipe, your creed is " the government owes me". Don't worry obama is bringing somolia to you.

Stan Allen| 5.26.10 @ 9:55PM

Wow, I'm sure glad to hear that Social Security is as solvent as Purpleguy claims! Perhaps he will step in and make the payments to me when the Gov't tells me the system's run out of money?

dw| 5.26.10 @ 2:08PM

Al "make me a millionaire by pretending to care about the enviorment" Gore says the science regarding global warming is universally accepted. Say no more. End of debate. Just bend over.
Fortunately while his dense worshipers will aquiese their ability to think for themselves the rest of us will not fold to the liberal elitist sophist and their mendaciousness.

Morrisminor| 5.26.10 @ 2:15PM

So DW, does the fact that a majority of legit scientists do favor his view bother you? Or do you think that personal attacks and labels against him will win the Scientific debate?

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 7:09PM

You liars have already lost the debate, bonehead.
'ClimateGate" did you in.

"Hide the decline...."

Morrisminor| 5.26.10 @ 2:19PM

While I deplore most of Obama's policies more regulation of the banking and stock markets ARE NEEDED. Whatever the feds did wrong in their housing policies, the banks, investment people and mortgage brokers gleefully abandoned principles, scruples and common sense far beyond anything the US government asked them to do.

Nancy| 5.26.10 @ 5:30PM

And who, pray tell, is going to regulate the government? The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac deal was financed and pushed by the government. You can't legislate morality. If the government would stay out of things and let people fail, we might have a chance.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 10:05PM

Spot on, Nancy. Good post!

Wally| 5.26.10 @ 2:36PM

From Roll Call:

A regular on the cocktail and fundraising circuit, Boehner has long been friendly with a number of corporate and contract lobbyists -- a network that he is increasingly relying on now as he eyes the Speakership. Altria's Gates, along with his wife, Joyce Gates, who once served as Boehner's chief of staff, and Quinn Gillespie's Lampkin are considered key members of Boehner's inner circle, as are Gary Andres of Dutko Worldwide, Terry Holt, a former Boehner aide who is now with the Republican lobbying firm HDMK, and John Fish, an in-house lobbyist with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Ohio native Steve Clark of Clark, Lytle & Geduldig, his partner Sam Geduldig, who was Boehner's political director, and Glover Park Group's Brian Gaston, another one-time Boehner staffer, are also tight with the top House Republican.

"I think that he has an excellent relationship with a lot of people on K Street," Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.) said.

--------------------
And you guys would prefer the Boehner/DeLay/Abramoff system of being in bed with these corporate lobbyist whores to Obama regulating them so they don't destroy themselves?

Doctor Right| 5.26.10 @ 2:43PM

Welcome to the party, Mr. Ferrara...

I think Mark Levin has been saying this...Screaming it, actually...For at least 2 1/2 years..?

Oh well...Better late than never, TAS...

Mandy| 5.26.10 @ 3:08PM

You are being way too kind. Obama's policies are more akin to Joseph Stalin than FDR.

MattZ| 5.26.10 @ 3:20PM

"Economically, it didn't work, just as it didn't in the 1930s or the 1970s. Now 29 months after the recession officially started in December, 2007, unemployment is 10% and rising, and the stock market is again stumbling, with the Dow still 4000 points off its last highs. The recovery was overdue a year ago, and even now economic growth is not half what it should be. "

This is a bit of a stretch, even for this tired magazine. Here are the actual numbers, for people interested in the reality of the recovery efforts:

"ARRA’s policies:

•Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.2 percent,
•Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.5 percentage points,
•Increased the number of people employed by between 1.2 million and 2.8 million, and
•Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 1.8 million to 4.1 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.)"

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967

America is still in a shitty situation, no doubt. If you're serious about fixing it, however, you should at least be somewhat honest about what's working and what's not.
MZ

darcy| 5.26.10 @ 4:09PM

Why is it that you failed to point out that the bulk of the job creation has been in the public sector?

Why is it that you failed to point out that public sector employees are now commanding higher salaries (at the taxpayer's expense, I might add) than similar jobs in the private sector?

Why?

JP| 5.26.10 @ 4:15PM

MZ,
How about using data from the Dept of Labor Statistics and Commerce.

Since Jan 2009, 6.2 million people have lost thier jobs.

Since Jan 2009, the long term unemployed (more than 6 months) has increased by 4 million

Subtracting federal spending and employment, the GDP has grown less than 2% since June of 2009, while the total unemployed stays constant at between 17 and 19 million. Real unemployment is close to 20%.

What ever jobs were saved or created (probably less than 2 million -and even that is pusing it) has come at a cost of $2 trillion. Do the math. That is close to $1 million per saved job. The entire argument is absurd.

Add on the loss jobs in the future in the insurance and health industries, the extraction industries, finance and banking, and not to mention service industries, and the next 5 years look to be a repeat of the period 1974-1981.

Try spinning somewhere else.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 3:38PM

Whew boy,
The useful idiots are certainly out today. Sorry boys. You are simply outclassed here. Go peddle your stuff somewhere else.

DanMingo| 5.26.10 @ 3:58PM

An excellent line-by-line debunking with the facts.
Well thought out and well written.
Not you, old Ken, the previous writer.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 10:07PM

Give it up, Mingo--Obammy's a failure and the American people have turned against you, him and your Marxist crap.

See you November 2!

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 7:06PM

In 1982 Reagan refused to "fix" the economy. Unemployment when to 10.8% and was back to its pre-recession levels in 24 months. Here we are 27 months in and unemployment hasn't begun to turn down.

While a 4.2% annual increase in GDP may be something good (not exceptional), 1.7% is nothing to crow about. And these are Q1 numbers, only. Here's hoping it continues.

Only the government can crow about lowering the unemployment rate when the rate is actually increasing. I presume these are the "saved" jobs.

Finally, there is something fishy about decreasing the unemployment rate by .7% and simultaneously increasing the number of employed by 1.2 millipn which suggest that the total workforce is 170 million, or so. A pretty big number given that about half our population is in school.

John Navratil| 5.26.10 @ 7:06PM

In 1982 Reagan refused to "fix" the economy. Unemployment when to 10.8% and was back to its pre-recession levels in 24 months. Here we are 27 months in and unemployment hasn't begun to turn down.

While a 4.2% annual increase in GDP may be something good (not exceptional), 1.7% is nothing to crow about. And these are Q1 numbers, only. Here's hoping it continues.

Only the government can crow about lowering the unemployment rate when the rate is actually increasing. I presume these are the "saved" jobs.

Finally, there is something fishy about decreasing the unemployment rate by .7% and simultaneously increasing the number of employed by 1.2 millipn which suggest that the total workforce is 170 million, or so. A pretty big number given that about half our population is in school.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 4:22PM

One other thing MZ, the CBO blog you linked to has a number of issues; first thing the CBO uses complex computer modeling that utilized a number of assumptions. The biggest being that for every dollar of federal spending, an X number of jobs are created. The CBO's models therefore have a built in bias as regards to "job creation" and federal spending. And as economists from Vienna to Tokyo can tell you, this isn't always the case.

So when, the Obama Administration uses the spin that they "saved or created jobs", they are speaking not about real jobs, but are referring to computer generated model output. And that output will always show job growth as long as the federal government increases spending.

Check your sources next time.

Web Smith| 5.26.10 @ 4:13PM

The Fed is a bank owned and operated by bankers. Unlike all of the other banks that print money under the fractional reserve system, the Fed it has the ability to print money with no reserves and distributes it through the banks that it controls with the money supply. Do not think for one moment that bankers are going to continue to allow their money to be devalued as a result of low interest rates. We are looking at high interest rates in the near future and when that happens, the Great Depression will pale in comparison. The bankers will simply hold onto their money while it increases in value, the price of gold tumbles, and we starve.

Obama's financial reform, like the 1200 troops to the border, is nothing more than grandstanding for the American people who realize that the banks have been enabled by the government legislation that they invested in to strip the population, the real economy, of its wealth. Wall Street did this. No one in government is smart enough.

Banks want your money and they don't care what happens to you while they are getting it. This finance reform does nothing but relieve the bankers of their responsibility for financial malfeasance and places it square on the backs of American taxpayers. As usual, Obama, along with the rest of the government, is saying that he's doing one thing and actually doing another.

Our current crisis actually started with the Telecom Deregulation Act that was pushed for by the Fed in the name of competition. The act left the telecoms regulated while forcing them to sell their private property at below market rates and created a need for bankers' money as the gold rush started. The bankers fully protected themselves and were only too happy to oblige. There was no expanding market or new technology to support the investment and when the bubble popped there was nothing left over. Before the shrouds settled on the floor, Greenspan lowered the interest rate and, thanks to legislation paid for by the banks, the money found its way into the housing and, still ignored but just as plundering, credit card market.

The population, which generates 70% of the economy, has been stripped of its working capital by the banks and the government.

JDAdler| 5.26.10 @ 4:17PM

while our govt certainly helped the housing bubble along, it was deregulation (by both parties) that allowed the insanity on wall street which crashed the market.

and the only reason you dont see bread lines right now.. food stamps, no hobos... welfare, no runs on the banks last year.. FDIC, so thanks FDR for preventing a second depression.

I do love the revisionist history on Reagan as fiscal conservative. as if he didn't start the modern era of deficit spending without a repayment plan.

JP| 5.26.10 @ 4:32PM

JAdler,

And how might the same government which played a huge part in creating a huge market for risky mortgage securities, manage to "regulate" that risk? This is akin to asking the Gambino Family to manage bookies.

The moral hazard was created first by Congress, and second by the Federal Reserve. Defecit spending had nothing to do with the market collapse, and everything to do with Congress's injecting a huge does of risk into the mortgage and real estate markets. Derivatives are market tools to manage risk. Investment banks huge influence into the Beltway began not with Reagan, but with Clinton. Firms like Goldman Sachs began a revolving door where high level executives went from key WH positions only to go back the Wall St later. And I might add that the vast majority of these banker were and are Democrats.

You can regulate finance all you want, and the only thing you will do is create poverty. From 1982-2008 almost all G-7 nations depended upon the US financial markets to lift thier boats. Some $50 trillion of wealth worldwide was create -the vast majority of it outside our borders. If you want to change the system, remove Wall St executives from Treasury, the WH, and key Congressional staffs.

Wally| 5.26.10 @ 6:03PM

Where do you come up with these supposed statistics? You (authoritatively) "And I might add that the vast majority of these banker were and are Democrats. " I call BS. Prove it.

Now, your last sentence has some merit. Ban Wall st. Execs from Treasury, WH and Congressional staffs. But then you are stuck with academics and bureaucrats who most definitely don't agree with your revisionist history on deregulation and the gutting of Glass Steagall. Glass Steagall STOPPED the ability of banks to use deposits to fund their scams.
The only Demo who loved this was Lieberman. Sen. Graham initiated this movement and the Republican congress passed the bill. Clinton - doing his blue dog thing - signed the stupid bill. Banking should be boring. You want to roll the dice - use your own money at a hedge fund or Vegas. Don't take down depositers with you.

jdadler| 5.26.10 @ 7:01PM

I am aware that deficit spending has something to do with the market, what with the weaking of the dollar as a result. But that line was an aside about reagan.

arguing that the collapse was all about the govt and not wall street or the banks is like arguing that BP is alone in responsibility for the oil spill and the govt regulators did nothing wrong. there is plenty of responsibility to go around.

the solution isn't to make less people responsible. the solution is to make the responsible people accountable.
we don't need to create wealth, there is plenty of wealth. its just all in the hands of 1 percent of the population and they are hoarding it. what we need is to take it from them and build a state of the art infrastructure in order to create more opportunity.

JDAdler| 5.26.10 @ 4:30PM

I wanted to make seperate comment about stagflation because what happened in the 70's was so unusual and unlikely to be repeated.

you have a combination of Nixon changing us over to Fiat currency, women entering the workforce in larger numbers, and (in the early 70s) a war going on. all of which stimulates growth.

so the Keynesian thing to do (which both Nixon and Carter were) is raise taxes and interest rates in order to draw money out of the economy in order to prevent inflation.

then the war ends, which adds people to the unemployment roles. followed by an oil embargo and rationing, which hurts all sectors of the economy.

so now the keynesian thing to do is lower taxes and interest rates in order to stimulate growth. and possibly spend on govt projects if necessary. but they had just done the opposite and these things take a while to a) have affect and b) change direction.

thus you have stagflation due to the unexpected confluence of events. the likelihood that such a confluence will happen in the next year (as the author suggests) is unlikely.

it should also be noted that reagan deficit spending to stimulate growth is exactly what keynes recommends.

in fact, the only real difference between reaganomics and keynesian economics is that reagan wanted to give tax breaks to the rich, and Keynes wanted to give them to the middle class.
-oh, and Keynes thought it was a good idea to have police for the marketplace. (crazy right? we don't need badges.)

JP| 5.26.10 @ 4:40PM

I think you've made the mistake of correlating the growth of the 1980s with Reagan's defecits. If that was true Japan in the 1990s would have outpaced every nation. The defecit did grow under Reagan, but the ratio of aggegate wealth creation (net GDP growth) was such that the ratio of the government debt to total assets decreased. That is, the our economy grew at such a pace (8% in 1984 alone) that we as a nation could at that time afford the debt. The problem many people make is to look at the net growth of the defecit without looking at how large the economy actually is. IBM can carry hundreds of millions of dollars of long term debt, where a Mom and Pop Computer company cannot. So, if you look at the Mom and Pop company's debt load (let say less than $5000) and look at IBM's ($800 million), and ignore thier size one liable to make the assumption that the Mom and Pop company is healthier. The US economy grew by over $10 trillion from 1983 to 1989. That was new wealth that had nothing to do with defecit spending.

jd adler| 5.26.10 @ 6:55PM

the economy is affected by a laundry list of factors. Japan's had its own unique set of issues that I am not going to get into now.

the 80's in the USA were a period of growth for a number of reason including, but not limited to, the end of the oil embargo, tax breaks for business creating development, and Reagan deficit spending on military projects as part of his successful plan to break the Soviet bank.

there was also the influence of the new fiat currency allowing for unlimited cash to be dumped on the market without any regard for common sense. which also requires defict spending. and is the primary benefit of Keynes over Reagan, in that when you have fiat currency you need a cop to watch what the printers are doing.

your point about debt is legit.. but you forgot to mention that both the small and large businesses are supposed to have a plan for paying off their debt. Since Reagan we have not. our debt after WW2 was a much larger percent of GDP. but we paid it off quickly. now we cant cuz nobody has the money and our money isn't actually worth anything.

Ken (Old Texican)| 5.26.10 @ 4:37PM

JD,
You remind me of the blind guys describing an elephant. In your blindness, you discovered the anus of the elephant for a descriptive discourse. heh.

Oldefarte| 5.26.10 @ 4:46PM

THANK YOU, Peter Ferrera, for this/your truely intelligent article here today. I plead/beg every reader of same to forward it to every friend and family member for their educational purposes also. This concisely worded message NAILS IT, and is nothing but THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT.... The upcoming November elections are critical to the beginning of the process for this nation, and will represent only tow choices for us------[1] SURVIVAL or [2] DESTRUCTION!!!!!!

CalNeal| 5.26.10 @ 5:14PM

The real big Republican gains this year will occur when the RNC, NRCC, and NRSC figure out a way to run a winning campaign against "Blue Dog" "Rush Limbaugh" Democrats. I think that the author and the RINO's in DC are so used to being mini-me Democrats that they are in complete shock that anyone would run as a conservative mini-me Republican aka Blue Dog Democrat.

There a many Democrats in the House who have voted against Pelosi more than most Republicans but only one, Parker Griffith, has had the courage to actually switch parties. You can't run against them by hoping to expose their double dealings by election day. Many of them do NOT have double dealings. The Republican must take the moral superior position with Blue Dogs and then thank them for taking the correct position. You agree with them and then go just a little farther. Real "Rush Limbaugh" Democrats are Republicans.

So when the Blue Dog campaigns as a conservative you say welcome to the party and then go a little farther right and dare them to keep up. The Republicans have never run a race like this but the Id-01 race should be a first and I would hope some RINO in DC at the NRCC would get a clue.

Wally | 5.26.10 @ 5:55PM

Interesting post. But what are you saying? That centrist candidate victories in Repub. districts mean Republicans candidates should go FURTHER to the right? More ideological purity? The Rush Democrats, like Heath Schuler, helped the Democrats obatin a HUGE majority in the House. Without them, the Dems would have a small majority. I don't like these guys as they are too conservative. But unlike you, I am not going to primary them out (well most) because they don't reach the ideological purity test. (It is not morals buddy - Everyone has different morals). So, the Dems figured out how to stake the middle and you are claiming that the Republicans should go further right? Please tell me that is so. Then there will be about 150 reps with (R) behind their name.

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 10:10PM

Give it up, Wally! You Marxists are going down.

See you November 2.

CalNeal| 5.27.10 @ 5:40PM

Yes. For some reason the DC Republican Establishment has it stuck in their minds that conservatives don't win elections only moderates. This allows the Heath Schuler's of the world to run to the right of the Republican candidate.

Each Republican candidate needs to run a district specific and opposition specific race, not a bland one size fits all national campaign. In some districts this means moving to the right and in other districts this means moving to the center.

I'm not saying that the need is for ideological purity but just to run slightly to the right of their Democratic counterpart. All the while agreeing with their opponent that their conservative positions are the correct policies while looking for a crack in the opponent that the Republican can exploit.

Example: The difference between opposing ObamaCare and being in favor of complete repeal.

Chris| 5.26.10 @ 5:18PM

Peter,
Great article today I can always depend on your straight forward logic. Without you I would be stuck in a world of liberal ignorance. You always get the facts straight.
Thank you, Chris

George | 5.26.10 @ 5:19PM

I didn't subscribe to this site. I can say that it is a site that is a f__king joke. as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps you should send your unsolicited site to my tea party brother. He will agree with your ultra right wing rambling

Liam| 5.26.10 @ 10:12PM

Well, at least your mom got it right when she birthed your brother. You're just the result of a broken condom, ahole.

Oldefarte| 5.27.10 @ 11:03AM

No, Georgie, Obama, Pilosi, Reid, Schumer, Dodd, Rnagel,etc ARE THE F*&KING; JOKE, and the morons like yourself that voted/support them are the tellers of same!!!!!!

Ken (Old texican)| 5.26.10 @ 6:18PM

George,
give us contact info on your brother. Obviously he got all the brains in your family and we could enjoy his thoughts here.

James| 5.26.10 @ 6:32PM

A little late picking up on this, but better late than never. Also too many parallels with the 1930's in general, from Financial meltdown, to the rise of Socialism, Totalitarianism, and Fascism (Islamic-fascism).

The problem is, because we won the war WWII, Roosevelt was generally given a skate on his disastrous economic programs, and all was forgiven once the good times rolled in the 50's, and history was never really taught about the New Deal policies, just the War.

N.Korea and Iran are doing their parts to see that history repeats itself, let's hope the economy pulls through in spite of the massive Govt effort to bury it, and cooler heads prevail. I have a young son and I don't want him dying for these greedy SOB'S.

We have a President who doesn't care, apparently about anything other than his Utopian ideals, and sees himself as more intelligent and enlightened than the rest of us. Enlightened people rarely take responsibility, and are almost always wrong !

Truthyness| 5.26.10 @ 8:36PM

Leftists like Obama sacrifice economic growth to economic "justice" and the promotion of dependency on the state. The problem they have is to get the public to used to a no/slow-growth economy, on the grounds that it is "safe." Fortunately, dynamism is still a part of American character and we may yet so "No" to Obama, a monstrously horrific president.

paul streitz| 5.26.10 @ 9:20PM

Well, this didn't happen.

"the soaring protectionist tariffs of the Smoot-Hawley Act"

This is standard dogma among the libertarian Republicans, but the tariffs had no impact. They were minor and contrast to this thinking actually reduced the trade deficit somewhat, a good thing.

Milton Friedman never mentions them in his book on the monetary history of the United States, but attributes the Depression solely to monetary policy.

Smoot-Hawley is the big lie of the Free Traders to scare Americans, that they will lose their jobs, be worse off, and trade imbalances will happen, but they will get cheaper TVs at Walmart. The massive problems of Free Trade, China deficit, deconstructing American manufacturing and lowering the living standard of average and lower income Americans is simply ignored by free traders. Buy Walmart, made in China is their motto.

Paul Streitz
Author
America First: Why Americans Must End Free Trade, Stop Outsourcing and Close Our Open Borders.

Papoose| 5.26.10 @ 9:21PM

he proves hisself everyday. his people have horrendous ideas. Stop Them Cold.

Roger| 5.26.10 @ 10:16PM

Actually, the complete collapse of America is the best thing that could ever happen. There is no way to reform the current broken system. I will enjoy watching Liberal wackos suffer. A country boy can survive.

Truthyness| 5.26.10 @ 11:15PM

Thank the good Lord I dug that fallout shelter back in '57!! I knew it would come in right handy one day!!

Rev. Nathan Bickel| 5.26.10 @ 11:59PM

To be sure B.H.Obama is ultra liberal and damaging this country almost beyond repair. The 2010 and 2012 elections cannot come fast enough. TEA party participants, Republicans and even RINOS will have to come together and defeat the maniacal liberals -- and then, [later] sort out their differences.

Also, it cannot be underestimated the immorality of the Obama Administration, by virtue of the continued actions, policies and agenda imposed upon the American people and their posterity. Usually, referenced, is the debt the liberals are forcing upon our children's and grand children's generation.

But there is another huge problem, which doesn't seem to gain that much attention. It's the American genocide which is taking place, as a result of Obama's policies and the antiquated Roe V. Wade ill-fated decision that never did recognize personhood upon human life in the womb. Keep in mind, that the populous [and, its posterity] of a culture is the most important element of that culture.

Please reference the following link, as you will have to agree that Obama is more of a monster, than a man:

"The President of the United States: A Sex Offender? -- Why Obama's support of the abortion industry is the worst molestation of youth (9/20/09):"

http://www.moralmatters.org/Se.....ender.html

Nobama| 5.27.10 @ 12:21AM

I've always known Obama's a monster; ever since I found out that he supported killing babies who had survived abortion. He believes in infanticide--who is really safe with him as President?
There's something wrong with Obama; he's a cold, bloodless bastard. He's a sociopath.

Nathan Bickel| 5.27.10 @ 1:06AM

I couldn't agree with you more. BHO'S character is fully shown to be in full depravity mode by virtue of his support for infanticide. Too bad many voters did not do their homework and realize who they were electing.....

Truthyness| 5.27.10 @ 2:09AM

The worst part is he was given a 60% Democratic Congress to do his bidding.

darcy| 5.27.10 @ 2:28AM

In O's remarks in the Illinois State legislature, on one of the four occasions that exposing live-birthed aborted babies was at issue, he declared that to care for them would jeopardize the legal standing of a woman's right to choose.

He is an instrument of Satan, who was a murderer from the beginning. Heartless creature.

Gerald Stephens| 5.27.10 @ 6:05AM

And we all hope he visits Warm Springs, Ga. on a regular basis. Lightning could strike twice!

Ken Sears| 5.27.10 @ 6:45AM

My gut feeling is, Barack Obama effectively lost the 2012 election on the day in 2010 that he stood next to the Mexican president and dissed Arizona. My gut tells me that was a deciding moment. It crystallizes the whole thing in the minds and hearts of a majority of American voters. It's quite interesting to me, too, that, seeming to start with that moment, Obama's "star" has accelerated decidedly in its decline: the disastrous lunch with the GOP, the both cowardly and lame back-tracking on border control in response, demonstrating even further that the man is simply NOT a leader of any real kind, his own accelerating peevishness and all-over-the-map politicking.... Not to mention the Koreas and BP....
I really DO have a profound feeling that the month or so we have just completed will be defined, down the road, as the beginning of the end for Barack Obama.
When he was voted in, I gave him till January 2011 before the jig was up, before all the people whose gas tanks he wasn't filling up and whose mortgages he wasn't paying stormed the White House with torches and pitchforks. Well, they may still be on their way, but other, deeper and higher, realities are conspiring--way beyond Obama's control--to destroy him even sooner.
What a pity. Any tragedy is a pity. But, as a rule, tragedies are rooted in a fatal flaw of the protagonist.

andy_krow| 5.27.10 @ 12:48PM

For anyone interested in FDR, the Great Depression, and a whole bunch of interesting facts that liberals and the MSM don't seem to mention very much, I would suggest reading:

The Politically Incorrect Guide To American History by Thomas E. Woods

Muriel Goyette | 5.27.10 @ 3:25PM

Anyone who voted in a flag burning first family, a first lady who has never been proud of America, is getting exactly what they wanted. No one in the whole world has heard this disgraceful excuse for a president say one single favorable word about USA. Destruction of America was expected and that is why hardly a member of this congress or supreme court stood up to be ocunted. If he is not impeached, but runs his full term, he will be leaving behind socialists in the supreme court and anti American bills that were parachuted to the citizens of USA WHETHER THEY WANTED THEM OR NOT. Voting out incumbents in midelection will help postpone doomsday, but obama is lighting hell's fire in America, which will take an act of the God he doesn't believe in, to control. My heart aches for the youth of America.
They will just be part of the blur of society - individualism is all but stamped out. Many religions are getting all mixed up with cockamany
psychology, until one cannot be differentiated from the other. Integrity is almost a lost art. Remember no voter can afford to "hear no evil. see no evil", but must be informed. USA must remain ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

Erik Osbun| 5.27.10 @ 5:35PM

The article premise that it's not madness, but it's
a method seems correct. However, by the same
token, the method is un-American and Marxist.
Our only defense is to vote them out for reasons
that were unrealized in 2008.

Sgt. Stryker| 5.28.10 @ 7:48AM

Great piece, and the h/t to Amity Shlaes' book "The Forgotten Man" is spot on. I just finished that book, and couldn't help but feel that we are living the re-birth of FDR in the WH. Interestingly enough, a number of FDR's early supporters that had to traveled to Russia in the '20s expecting to duplicate aspects of central planning in the US became increasingly disillusioned when they saw how Big Government was failing all around. We can only "hope" Barry's sycophants start having some of the same thoughts, as he's done an incredible amount of damage in a short time.

Tenn Slim| 5.28.10 @ 9:18AM

Opine
Not to worry, the Creator is in control. Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Oil Spills, Natural responses to manipulative regualtory agencies, all contribute to the demise of the OBNA.
We WILL Prevail
Semper FI
end

Giovanni| 5.28.10 @ 3:03PM

This was a good article except for the nagging fact that George Bush is somehow left out of the responsible lot for this fiasco. I don't think AIG cares too much whether they are buying democrats or republicans.

''I abandoned the free market to save the free market.''

What a joker.

Liam| 5.28.10 @ 7:15PM

We know Bush was bad, many Conservatives objected to his profligate spending; but as bad as Bush was, he wasn't nearly as bad as Obama.

Obama has QUADRUPLED our national debt in only ONE YEAR. That's criminal!

fkd| 7.1.10 @ 3:59AM

beijing massage