The American Spectator : So Much Worse Than Carter

Text Size

So Much Worse Than Carter

By Peter Ferrara on 10.13.10 @ 6:08AM

What the numbers are telling us is that there has been no real recovery — and that there’s not going to be one under Obama.

The most important fact to take from the September unemployment report released last week is that almost three years after the recession began the economy was still losing jobs! Almost 100,000 (95,000) additional jobs were lost last month from the economy overall. That makes 400,000 jobs lost since May. Moreover, in a regular annual benchmark revision to calibrate unemployment rates for updated data, the BLS reported a further 366,000 jobs lost for March. The total number of Americans unemployed stands at almost 15 million (14.8).

In addition, the number employed part time for economic reasons rose to 9.5 million in September. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports, “These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full time job.”

The depression continues for African Americans with 16.1% unemployment, near that level for a year now. Hispanics suffer 12.4% unemployment, and Obamanomics is punishing teenagers the most with 26% unemployment.

The BLS reports the U6 unemployment rate, which includes the unemployed, those marginally attached to the labor force (discouraged), and those working part time for economic reasons, at 17.1%. That is the highest point over the past year, and probably since the Great Depression.

While the National Bureau of Economic Research declared the recession technically over last summer, for this poor performance to continue 33 months after the recession began indicates fundamental economic decline for America. What the numbers are telling us is that there has been no real recovery.

Sean Hannity’s Caller

Last week, a young caller to Sean Hannity’s radio program identifying herself as a liberal expressed the sentiment that still holds President Obama’s job approval in the mid-40s. She said, “President Obama has just had two years to turn the economy around. Didn’t the Republicans have 8 years to screw it up? Shouldn’t we be giving the President more time?”

President Obama himself is out there on the stump milking this sentiment for all it is worth, still blaming George Bush and the Republicans for the economy. Without this sentiment holding up what support he still has, he would have already been run out of town. Here are the metrics by which the President’s economic performance should be judged.

I have been reporting regularly in this column for a year and a half that the average recession since World War II has been 10 months, with the longest previously being 16 months. The recession began in December, 2007, 34 months ago by now. The sentiment expressed by Hannity’s caller, reflecting the views of Obama’s remaining base of political support, shows why these basic facts are so important.

Based on the long standing history and rhythms of the American economy, we should have had a booming recovery by now. Even more so, since the deeper the recession the stronger the recovery. Real economic growth in the first 4 quarters of Reagan’s recovery from the deep 1981-82 recession was a whopping 7.7%. Even the recovery under President Ford from the deep 1973-74 recession sported real economic growth of 6.2%.

But under President Obama we are already in another downward spiral, with real growth falling from 5% in the fourth quarter of 2009, to 3.7% in the first quarter of this year, to 1.7% in the second quarter.

Moreover, as the brilliant economist John Lott explained for FoxNews.com yesterday, the base unemployment rate has been stuck at least at 9.5% for 14 months now, over three full percentage points higher than the average unemployment rate during the recession. Since Obama became President, the U.S. unemployment rate has increased faster than 25 of 30 other major industrialized countries, as reported by the Economist.

As Lott summarizes, “For the last couple of years, President Obama keeps claiming that the recession was the worst economy since the Great Depression. But this is not correct. This is the worst ‘recovery’ since the Great Depression.” The extended stagnation, high unemployment, and the troubling potential for a double dip recession is starting to look more like the Depression itself now.

Stimulus Stupidity and Public Policy Malpractice

But the indictment of Obamanomics goes beyond the actual performance so far. Even worse is that the economic policies have been so illogical, so transparently doomed to failure, and so threatening to America’s future.

Page: 1 2 3 >

About the Author

Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (216) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Booger| 10.13.10 @ 6:32AM

From the desk of President B. Hussein Obama:

Dear Senior Voters,

As you unfortunately may have heard two weeks prior to these important mid-term elections, there will be no cost of living adjustment for those of you living on social security in 2011, just as there was none in 2010. I would like to take a few minutes of your time to explain to you why this has happened, and what can be done about it.

First of all, let me assure you that this is in no way the fault of Myself, My administration, or the Democratic Party in general. I am aware that those nefarious tea-baggers have attempted to take advantage of your admittedly reduced mental faculties (I know that old-timers disease gets a lot of you, and then you want to vote Republican) to try to convince you this is My fault. Well, as anyone without dementia can see, this is CLEARLY the Republicans fault.

No, TARP, the stimulus bill, the automakers' bailout, the teachers' union bailout, and the upcoming California/Pennsylvania public sector union bailouts had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the federal government will not be able to increase your monthly check. As my good friend P. Krugman has explained in depth many times, deficit spending actually brings the economy roaring back. After all, had we not passed My stimulus bill, unemployment would have passed eighteen percent, just as I predicted (please ignore the misprints that claimed I said "eight" percent, they are entirely false). In fact, all this extra spending is the only reason so many of your children, grand-children, great-grand-children and what not still have jobs to pay social security taxes to support you at the current level. So you should be thankful I've been able to keep this pathetic country afloat at all.

Just as the Republicans cut your Medicare payments to fund new health care for illegal aliens (yes, it WAS the Republicans who did that), so it is the Republicans who have refused to provide extra money for social security. Why, just the other day, that great american N. Pelosi was telling me how she tried to keep Congress in session to vote for increases in Social Security payments, but the Republicans insisted on adjourning early to go home and campaign because they're so worried about how we're going to thrash them in this election. So remember, it was the REPUBLICANS who slashed Medicare by five-hundred billion dollars, and it was the REPUBLICANS who voted to adjourn early without increasing your Social Security benefits.

Now, on a related topic, I hear a lot of you have been worrying yourselves about this end-of-life counseling provision in the new health care for all already healthy seniors law. Some of you have even been talking about so-called "death panels". Well, tell me, who did you hear about "death panels" from, anyway? That's right, it was Sarah Palin. A REPUBLICAN. So remember, if you're staying up all night worrying about death panels, it was a REPUBLICAN who came up with them.

So to wrap things up, remember, it was REPUBLICANS who adjourned early and didn't raise your Social Security benefits, it was REPUBLICANS who cut Medicare by five-hundred billion to finance health care for illegal aliens, and it was REPUBLICANS who came up with death panels for old people. So get out there and vote those evil Republicans out of office. And while you're at it, please remember that thanks to My new, expanded Patriot-Act II I can cross-reference your Social Security number with your voting record and adjust your waiting period to see a doctor appropriately.

Your President for Life,

B. Hussein Obama

Rick V.| 10.13.10 @ 8:38AM

Mr. President, you should be watching the extraction of the Chilean miners from the bowels of the earth. Great news - your approval ratings have been found!

Stillneedacoolname| 10.13.10 @ 10:18AM

Very funny! I laughed out loud!

(Or LOL as the kids say...)

PeteyKay| 10.13.10 @ 11:24AM

Ditto!

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:24PM

But it was an evil AMERICAN company that was rushed to Chile from AFGHANISTAN to save those miners. I thought according to the Dumb O, all we Americans were always wrong.

JoeC| 10.14.10 @ 10:03PM

Why does the author fail to mention that the private sector actually gained 64,000 jobs last month, but it was the government losing 159,000 jobs that brought the total down to -95,000?

hmm, that makes me think that he MIGHT have a partisan agenda, and I'm willing to bet he's for a smaller federal govenment. What a shame.

PJ| 10.13.10 @ 8:39AM

Once again, an excellent post. But, this time I can't laugh.

TYPICAL REPUBLICAN| 10.13.10 @ 10:12AM

NANANANA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I CAN'T HEAR YOU THE REPUBLICANS ARE VERY CONSERVATIVE AND FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE NANANANANANANANA

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 10:39AM

Karl Rove! Is that you?!

Buffo| 10.14.10 @ 11:26AM

"President Newt" another traitor to conservatives , no thanks !

Kevin| 10.14.10 @ 6:09AM

Did you read it? Or stop when you came to the first fact that showed the man you voted for is not doing so well?

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:02PM

Do NOT confuse a Democrat with the facts!

The first rule of Democrats: Never let the facts get in the way of your ideology.

BR| 10.13.10 @ 10:39AM

President Obama( it pains me to have to address him as that) campaigned on the premise that he was going to bring unity to Washington and get rid of divisive politics. Well, this as many of his other predictions, have been completely wrong. In his current campaign to "dog" the US Chamber of Commerce, his true colors as a community organizer are being prominently displayed. I am using the Chamber of Commerce attacks as just one example. He is definitely using the "bully" pulpit to divide the electorate. The president and the libs have pushed the panic button..........

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:41PM

Beh, you said the same of Clinton in '93- 4:
"the womanizing socialist nude Democrat HillarCare liar, Vince-Foster-murdering Clinstone will NEVER make it-- he is finished!"

Ye false prophets

Albert| 10.15.10 @ 6:53PM

Well, he SHOULD have been finished. All the allegations turned out to be true. Bill Clinton is dirt, period. In a sane world, he WOULD have been finished. But with ABC (Always Boost Clinton), NBC (Never Bash Clinton), CBS (Clinton Broadcast System), and CNN (Clinton News Network) carrying Clinton's water and covering up his crimes, how could he lose? Corruption is a crime, not a defense.

Joe Dokes | 10.13.10 @ 1:45PM

I don't blame Obama for the mess the economy is in - there are problems that go back 20 years. I blame him for not starting to reverse these trends. It's "business as usual."

http://whyyouexist.blogspot.com

Dave| 10.13.10 @ 2:27PM

BINGO! And both parties played their part in destroying our economy.

As to the "golden age" description, well yes you are partially correct. It was golden age.....for the rich(which include many elected politicians from each party) as now the income disparity in this country is on par with what happened during the Great depression.

BTW, I think Obama blows butt bubbles.

Kyle| 10.14.10 @ 4:18PM

Yes, it was the "golden age". The gov't finally figured out how to print money without actually printing it and business to put more "money" into people's pockets without giving them raises. It's called loans/credit. Follow the trajectory of debt usage in the U.S. and you will likely see that this trajectory follows our "golden age". The gov't is incorrectly trying to duplicate this by poorly taking on the roll as the debtee, as most Americans have little room left to take on massive amounts of debt. It's not that difficult to figure out, unless you're a left or right wing wacko!

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 5:14PM

a POTUS is not responsible for the economy; but is responsible for Defense as Commander in Chief

Chair Nobomba| 10.13.10 @ 5:58PM

Alan, alan Brooks: why are you reading this right-wing republican words since you are so devoted to the O?

Nunya| 10.13.10 @ 6:41PM

Alan,

I must wholeheartedly disagree with your first point. A POTUS has a DIRECT impact on the economy by the monetary policies that they put in motion. They have a Treasury Secretary who follows the POTUS's policies, or they find themselves looking for work.

Anyone with a clear head, a rudimentary knowledge of economics, and NO political agenda knows that Keynsian Economic theory doesn't work--all it does is grow the size of government, which is all it has done for Obozo. It's kind of like Communism--it sounds good in theory, but has never worked anywhere its been tried. Trying it again somewhere else just leads to the same results, and with Keynes' theory, it leads to stagnation and eventually high inflation.

As to your second point, you are absolutely correct.

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:21PM

"I must wholeheartedly disagree with your first point."

There can be no Commander in Chief for the economy: the economy is the aggregate of everything we do; how can there be an economic C in C?
Economics is no genuine science.

Nunya| 10.15.10 @ 10:33AM

When we have a central bank (the Fed) who manages monetary policy and controls the money supply, you'd better believe that we have a C in C for the economy.

I agree that Economics is not a typical science, but it is still of value in predicting how things will work.

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:07PM

We shouldn't have a central bank. The dems sold us out on that too. We now have foreigners dictating our monetary policy in the form of their representative known here as the "Federal" Reserve.

SamAdams25| 10.13.10 @ 10:28PM

I agree with you, with one exception. In small groups (Native American tribal groups), and in American communes in the 60s and 70s, an adjustable form of socialism worked inasmuch as, for example, a few ladies made clothes and shoes for the entire group, some kept the children, and some did the cooking for the entire group. Some men did the hunting, some the construction and livestock maintenance, and so forth. This is sustainable in groups of less than a hundred people or so, but has proven to be totally inequitable and prone to tyranny in larger groups. History has proven this to be true. As the group grows larger, bartering becomes a more preferable system.

florin| 10.14.10 @ 9:04AM

The argument for communism is irrational and the results are fatal.

What most people fail to see (i.e. C Mathews) is that people and communities helping each other in time of need is not communism. Communism is when a government mandates it. Communism is such a colossal failure in that its proponents fail to see this basic and fundamental difference. Anyone who advocates communism because, you see, it works and people help communally, it is a helpless ignorant.

I grew up in communism. Communism is nothing but a system where the drive for political power is the demagoguery on the behalf of the 'oppressed' working class.

Bill| 10.14.10 @ 12:40PM

For any of these kinds of 'communal' systems to work, whether socialist, communist, or some kind of commune like you describe, there has to be some external capitalist system from which to leech from. These systems never stand on their own, they are not at all sustainable without external economic 'energy' of some form or another.

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:16PM

Maybe in very small groups that are willing to fully cooperate with the collective. However, one of the first European settlements here (forgot the name), nearly starved to death because they organized themselves as a collective. Enough people refused to work because they could draw on resources without contribution, that the town failed. They had to institute the common sense policy of having to work to eat. Pretty effective welfare policy. Go figure.

Cogito Ergo Sum Conservativum| 10.13.10 @ 11:11PM

I recall Clinton running on a platform of "the worst economy since the great depression" blaming GHW Bush. Then I also recall Kerry running on a platform of "the worst economy since the great depression". In fact, I recall that every time a Republican President is in office, his democrat opponent calls the economy at that time "the worst since the great depression". So your comment is typical liberal hypocrisy.

Albert| 10.15.10 @ 7:01PM

This posting is by far the most hypocritical statement I have ever seen, anywhere. Coming from you, this statement is ridiculous. Every President you vote for and support with your big mouth is a classic interventionist in economics. Obozo and Clintonius Maximus both fancy themselves economic geniuses (when in reality they're idiots) and champion Federal intervention in free market economics, modelling their actions on Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. It is true the President is not responsible for the economy, but every President you vote for (based on your postings) practices just the opposite. You are a hypocrite, and that is ASSUMING you are not completely stupid.

dw| 10.13.10 @ 2:51PM

Dear President Obama,

For many of us, you may just be our President for life. Ha, Ha...but seriously if somehow you could be installed as our President for Life, we could then be afforded a perpetual sense of well being which when coupled with your health care initiative could assure our guaranteed welfare for the rest of natural lives.

Be secure in your mind that we will not abandon you in these most difficult times. We know the Republicans, as always, are at the root of all of our collective problems, from the Social Security scare to the bogus messaging on your Health Care law. We recognize the over the top rhetoric of the far right's assertion that under your Affordable Acts Bill there would be "death panals" and reduced medicare benefits that would directly effect us adversely. Also the Republicans adjournment of the congress in order to inhibit your ability to raise taxes to pay for our benefits is appalling.

We know the republicans are liars and if given the chance would generate policies favorable only to their special interest and the "Rich" and do so on the backs of us and the "poor".

You need no coerciveness or threats to maintain our loyalty... we know who butters our bread. However we would support the use of the IRS and any other pertinent government agency to put pressure on your antagonist in order to influence a readjustment of their attitudes.

Sincerely,
AARP and the Union of Senior Citizens Coilition
(USCC)

Cyraneau| 10.13.10 @ 3:47PM

President for life may be what we need be concerned about. I fear a Robert Mugabe moment when, faced with immenent defeat our Dear Leader declares a national emergency to suspend elections until the problem can be resolved and the Constitution ammended.

DavisJohn| 10.13.10 @ 7:01PM

This post is hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!

S.A.W.T.O.O.T.H.| 10.13.10 @ 8:57PM

Booger...You're a troll and a blind idiot.

S.A.W.T.O.O.T.H.| 10.13.10 @ 9:03PM

Booger...I'm only kidding if you are...There's really no real difference between Republicrats and Demublicans. They're 2 management teams working under the same corporation...2 wings on the same bird of prey...etc. RON PAUL/JESSE VENTURA 2012!

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:23PM

"[snip] JESSE VENTURA 2012!"

Try to locate him.
He's in Baja.

JoeC| 10.14.10 @ 9:48PM

This posting is loaded with misinformation guised as parody.

Social Security cost of living adjustments are based on the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of one year to the third quarter of the next. If there is no increase, there is no COLA. The law that determines this policy was set forth in 1972 by President Richard Nixon, and is not based on any budgetary decision by the President or congress.

Also, illegal immigrants will not be eligible for federally funded healthcare plans, and if you actually believe that there will ever be death panels then, well, God bless your heart .

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 2:35AM

Mr. President:
Thank you for straightening me out. I almost fell for those Republican lies that said you were the one signing the health care bill that stole $500 billion from seniors & the disabled. Now I know it is the Republicans fault that I have been told I must now pay for my entire Medicare with my disability pay. I destroyed my back as a Paramedic, went on disability, and the thanks I get for saving the lives of others is a bill from those evil Republicans forcing me to pay my health care from my disability so the rich can have a tax cut! ;D I am so glad that it wasn't you who signed that stupid bill that no one wanted!
P.S. Thank you for the transparency of your administration. It warms my heart to know we will find out what is in these huge Republican bills like the health care bill, the Stimulus, the Omnibus bill, etc., AFTER THEY ARE SIGNED! Oh, those dastardly Republicans don't miss a trick!

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 7:15AM

I haven't read the article, but let me guess: The numbers are telling us that the Democrats are really bad, and that to fix everything we really need to get them out and replace them with Republicans.

Is that right? Of course it is. I know this because that can serve as a summation of every article ever on this site (with the exception of Jim Antle's).

Darin| 10.13.10 @ 7:22AM

I haven't met you, but let me guess. You think you deserve the earnings from others hard work. You think morality is subjective but whine if someone uses that against you. You think deviant, destructive lifestyles should be embraced and championed. You think it's perfectly OK to kill unborn children.

Is that right? Of course it is. I know this because you've identified yourself as a mindless mouth-breather too arrogant and ignorant to even read an article before commenting on it.

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 9:40AM

You think you deserve the earnings from others hard work.

False. I oppose wealth redistribution and believe Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be discontinued - unlike the GOP. And you?

You think morality is subjective but whine if someone uses that against you.

I don't know what you mean by "uses that against you", but I do not believe morality is "subjective", and I emphatically reject what passes for morality in the US today (really it is anti-morality, or pure license), and urge a return to the Western, Christian values and virtues of our ancestors - something the GOP has done bupkiss to effect.

You think deviant, destructive lifestyles should be embraced and championed.

Incorrect. I believe the states should have the right to restrict such behavior as their citizens see fit.

You think it's perfectly OK to kill unborn children.

Wrong - I believe Roe should be overturned. Something which the GOP has done nothing to bring about, and something about which the GOP will never do a danged thing.

Sorry, but the GOP has been the willing partner of the Left in destroying America, and replacing Americans with third world aliens. It simply is not a case of Rep-Good and Dem-Bad any more.

It never really was.

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 10:20AM

You're right - to a point. The Republicans are balless idiots of late. Both Bush presidencies threw out Reagan Republicanism and we are worse off for it (dumbasses). But the Democrats are traitorous scumbags seeking complete control and socializing America. They are complete assholes who will do to this country what they did to Detroit. So where do you put your hope? Well, in the Republicans. There is at least some chance with them. The Democrats? Pure evil crap.

As for SS, Medicare, etc. the question is one of timing. The gubmint has taken the money of millions of people by force and has promised them certain things. Those promises need to be kept. The future needs to change - no more ponzi scheme.

As for your Rep-Good, Dem-Bad argument? It's Rep-At Least We Have A Chance, Dem-Evil Useless Scumbag Traitors. The choice is easy.

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 10:48AM

So where do you put your hope? Well, in the Republicans. There is at least some chance with them.

When has that chance ever borne fruit? What Republican president decreased spending or decreased the size of the federal government?

As for SS, Medicare, etc. the question is one of timing. The gubmint has taken the money of millions of people by force and has promised them certain things. Those promises need to be kept

Agreed - those people need their money back. Still, the GOP is not fighting to end these programs outright, afterward or otherwise. They are unconstitutional and are bankrupting us.

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 11:09AM

Well, hope spring eternal. If the Republicans can't (or won't) shrink the Obama budget or stop the power grabs, then they are truly worthless and we're doomed. For me, there is always Boracay Island and warm people to go to. For America? Say hello to the United States of Detroit. A sad ending for a once great nation.

BA Cyclone| 10.13.10 @ 12:15PM

As for the SS and Medicare et. al. ponzi schemes, I am not sure I need "my money back". I am fairly certain it is already spent. I'd be satisfied if they just ended the whole charade - guarantee benefits continue above a certain age and concurrently end payroll withdrawals AND benefits below a certain age. Make it an optional program if necessary.

John| 10.14.10 @ 9:23AM

Harding

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:31PM

The real difference between the two parties is their respective platforms--not the politicians currently running either party. The Republican platform is rooted in limited government. The Democrat platform is rooted in government expansionism. That is why we are currently trying to fix the Republican party via the Tea Party. If it works, we'll have real choice at the ballot box. Right now, yes, the difference between parties is one of degree, not kind. I see no hope of ever fixing the Democrat party. How do fix a party that genuinely believes in such a thing as "good government". It is a fantasy. Less government = more liberty. More government = more tyranny.

Rico| 10.13.10 @ 10:29AM

Sorry bub, it won't wash. If, in fact, you held the positions you claim to hold, you would be a political conservative. And we know of course that isn't the case.

It may well be that the numbers are bad and the Democrats are to blame, in which case it should be repeated endlessly, until every nincompoop responsible for electing them has been deprogrammed from their marxist death cult mental affliction.

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:49PM

Guesser,
Don't be intimidated by these people, they want the feds to help their kin. How many of them would you guess would tell their elderly relatives to forgo govt . benefits?:
Not a whole lot.

Having written that, from a zero-sum gain perspective they are doing the right thing! When it comes to economics, and getting the gravy for them and theirs', they are no fools.

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:53PM

PS,
"When it comes to economics, and getting the gravy for them and theirs', they are no fools."

Notice I wrote they are no fools concerning economics, but didn't mention politics or ethics.

George S| 10.13.10 @ 2:31PM

Just between us economic fools, here is a little formula that tells a good bedtime story:

F = A[((1 + i)^n - 1) / i]

where F is the future value of an annual investment A at i percent interest.

Ok... government benefits. About 2/3 of your income taxes go to "benefits" for other people, i.e., social security, Medicaid, Medicare, student loans, farm subsidies, and government pensions. Now, if one earns about 52,ooo a year, the 28% tax table says you owe, in round numbers, $15,000 a year. Two thirds of that is $10,000. Say that taxes are only for legit government funding, or 1/3 of the 15 grand. That means you would save $10k a year in taxes. If you invested that $10k in a savings account that paid 6% interest over a period of 40 years (from age 25 to 65), the future value of that $10k tax savings is:

F = 10,000[((1.06)-1)/.06] = $1,547,619.66

That's one million five hundred forty seven thousand six hundred and nineteen dollars and 66 cents. (... and 66 cents, Rain Man).

Now, what is the value of you social security or Medicare benefit? Would I forego these benefits and let the market take care of me? Notice I did not include money market, stocks or gold investments which can average 12 percent per year. If you wish to do the math on i=12, be my guest.

So which is it -- a $1,000 monthly check and a Medicare fewer and fewer doctors are taking or anywhere from 1.5 to 7.5 million on retirement?

Only fool would need to think about that.

George S| 10.13.10 @ 2:38PM

Before you flog me with you calculators:

F = 10,000[((1.06^40)-1)/.06] = $1,547,619.66

SoothSayer| 10.13.10 @ 7:22PM

First where are you going to find a 6% "savings account"? No such thing so you will have principal risk, which over 40 yrs could kill you. I can't tell also if you just wrote this poorly or are wrong. If you invest 10K ONCE and compound it at 6% for 40 years the total value will be about 110K NOT $1.5 Mil. To get anywhere close to 1.5 Mil you need ADD 10K EVERY year at 6%.

Please go back to your video game and stay away!

SoothSayer| 10.13.10 @ 7:22PM

Please go back to your video game and stay away!

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:16PM

"No such thing so you will have principal risk, which over 40 yrs could kill you."

Too many banks fail, the safety net fails-- and to be perfectly un-PC: you don't want to be in the ghetto when its denizens' checks bounce.

Cogito Ergo Sum Conservativum| 10.13.10 @ 2:04PM

You are correct Guesser.
That is why the truely conservative Tea Party is appealing to formerly party line Republicans. Our nation is currently a two party system, a third party at this time will only succeed in causing a loss to a liberal (Read: Perot giving us Clinton). For that reason the Tea Party places candidates in the Republican party, as they are at least more aligned to our mindset and easier to push to the right side. The Repubs have lost their way and are all too cooperative with the Socialist Democrat party. They are being changed for their own good by the Tea Party.

you're right!!!| 10.13.10 @ 7:57AM

and its easy to see why you are right...

THE DEMOCRATS ARE REALLY BAD!!!

20 days till we kick your sack up into your nostrils

Dave| 10.13.10 @ 2:33PM

Well we did it to the republicans in 2006 and 2008. Now it is time for the democrats to feel it.

Most importantly we need to do it again in 2012, 2014, 2016 so on and so forth until we drain the DC swamp(sorry swamps for insulting you, you at least serve a purpose) until they wake the hell up.

I will sum up our problem in one easy sentence....what we lack is content of character from our elected officials.

TS Alfabet| 10.14.10 @ 6:15PM

Very true, Dave, but I can go one better: if we really want to end the cycle of corruption (or greatly limit it, at least), we need to devolve as many powers and responsibilities as possible back to the States and return the Fed monster to its historically limited size.

The Plan (in a nutshell): 1) focused national debate about precisely what the Federal Govt and *only* the Feds can and should be doing --- hint: look at the U.S. Constitution; 2) Hold or threaten to hold a Constitutional Convention at which an amendment would specifically limit the Feds to those enumerated powers and make it clear that the "commerce clause" does not apply beyond its original intent; 3) Devolve the non-Federal programs -- like Medicare/Medicaid/Soc. Sec.-- back to the States while at the same time making all paycheck deductions for these programs go right to the States-- in fact, better yet, let all paycheck deduction FIRST go to the State where the employee resides and then the State passes along the Federal share *after* the State has taken its portion, then it is up to each State to figure out how best to utilize that money-- if the Senior citizens of Florida, for example, aren't happy with the their benefits then they can march on the State house or vote in politicians who will bankrupt Florida and then suffer the consequences for their foolishness without dragging down the whole country. Same for California and New York and Illinois and Michigan and.... oi vey. Let people then vote with their feet about where the best State is that balances strong growth with social safety nets.

coal carrier| 10.13.10 @ 8:10AM

Mathematics is not an opinion.

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.13.10 @ 9:15AM

The Guesser,
I see a pattern here. Eric Holder was ripping the new Arizona immigration law while admitting that he hadn't read it. Nancy Pelosi is on video saying that we "should pass Obamacare first and then read it later." So, the problem here is that you poor slobs don't read - you just guess! Well, "guessing" isn't going to get us out of this mess, is it.

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 10:11AM

I support the Arizona law, oppose Pelosi in just about everything, and believe Obama should be impeached.

Let me know if you've got any other great arguments.

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.13.10 @ 12:37PM

Dear Guesser,
If you support the Arizona Law, oppose Pelosi in just about everything and believe that Obama should be impeached, then YOU should be president of the U.S. I'll vote for you. Personally (and I think that I speak for many here), the Republicans are the lesser of two evils. Some of our Republican politicians are idiots and need to be removed from office (something that is already happening in places like Alaska, Delaware, etc.). One guy I want to see removed is Lyndsey Graham from So. Carolina. That moron helped put Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court. Also, as Bernard Goldberg points out in his book, "Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right", one side (the Democrats, of course) has lost it's mind, while the other side (Republicans) has lost it's nerve. The Republican party needs to re-discover testicular fortitude. We need to fire all Democrats, moderate Republicans and like you say, IMPEACH OBAMA. That should do it. Oh, also impeach all of the liberal wackos on the Supreme Court (can't forget that).

Kevin Wyman| 10.22.10 @ 8:48AM

Rev., the GOP is the lesser of two evil for sure, but I'm still not sure they get what we all are trying to tell them, that is we are sick of the same old song coming out of D.C.! We are tired of the spending without knowing how to pay for it, the pork barrel spending to get their names on a bridge to nowhere, the backroom dealing. This list could go on for hours but I will spare you all. The GOP heads are STILL trying to elect moderates & liberals and trashing conservative candidates. I used to like Newt until he backed that liberal woman in NY over a conservative, the one who when she dropped out of the race urged her supporters to back the Hypocrat candidate! I'm tired of a GOP that has returned to their losing, progressive ways to become what they were before the Reagan Revolution! They hate conservatives, they hate Christians, they love the northeast elite! We have to get these people out and get in true conservatives. Unless they get it this time, we may have to form a new party. I'm tired of hearing liberals & the MSM say the conservative ideas of the GOP don't work when the GOP is not using conservative ideas! They are mostly moderates, who sway with the political winds to which ever side is in power!

Jobe| 10.13.10 @ 9:36AM

Guesser: Guess this. obama and his corrupt congress have buried us deeper in debt than those Chilean miners. Even they are being rescued. Who is going to rescue us and our children. Certainly not "The One".

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 9:41AM

Oh - you must really hate irresponsible spending. I assume, based on that, that you voted against Bush when he ran for re-election? Or are you a hypocrite?

Jobe| 10.13.10 @ 10:19AM

Guesser: Don't be ridiculous. Who could vote for John "Viet Nam" Kerry, or Al "I've got your carbon credits right here" Gore? Good Lord! A bannana sucking chimp would have been better.

buckeyeman| 10.13.10 @ 11:51AM

Be careful what you wish for.

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:43PM

So your logic is: I hate out of control spending, so, I'll vote for the party that promises more of the same but at a much higher rate!

We're not hypocrites. We're voting for the lesser of two evils. Now, with the Tea Party, we're in the process of taking our party back from the socialists that have infiltrated it. You know, the Democrats that are posing as Republicans?

Kevin Wyman| 10.22.10 @ 8:53AM

Who was he supposed to vote for - Kerry? When you have 2 choices, you vote for the one closest to your ideals. We didn't have much of a choice, but the differences between Bush & Kerry were many. We are getting a idea of a Kerry style gov't now under Obama. Bush was a moderate, for sure, but Kerry is on the radical left. We need people voting in primaries because this is where we have our best chance of electing conservatives. However, when you don't have a conservative running you should just not stay home. You need to vote for the best of the worst.

JohnLeeHooker| 10.13.10 @ 2:31PM

Gee another Dem who doesn't need to read the bill/article in order to have an opinion on it.

mike siroky| 10.13.10 @ 4:21PM

Mr Guesser: It really would help if you read the article before commenting. It doesn't say the Democrats are bad - it says B. Hussein Obama is a clueless, arrogant narcissist who is hurting our country with his policies. It doesn't say replace the Democrats with Republicans. It says replace Democrats with Americans.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 2:38AM

If you are going to comment on an article, at least have the decency to read it! The truth isn't going to hurt you, "The truth shall set you free."

Appleby| 10.13.10 @ 7:18AM

The supporters of Obama that are left are proof positive of the results of many years teaching school children nothing but sexual gymnastics, brand name consciousness, hatred of religions except Islam, and how evil their country was before socialism.

Had they been taught anything about reality, things would be different.

For example, have you ever wondered why Haiti is a failure and the Dominican is not? In Haiti when they became a country, they killed all the White folks. In the Dominican, they did not.

But you will not learn that in an American school, or in Chicago. (My uncle Al, who lived in Chicago most of his adult life, used to make a differentiation between America and Chicago.)

PJ| 10.13.10 @ 8:53AM

"For example, have you ever wondered why Haiti is a failure and the Dominican is not? In Haiti when they became a country, they killed all the White folks. In the Dominican, they did not."

Actually it's a bit more complicated than that. One reason out of many: Haiti has been paying exorbitant taxes to France for many years since the beginning of its independence. That meant little development of the Haitian economy, resulting in power struggles that we are still seeing today.

KukeeAmerican| 10.13.10 @ 9:25AM

Regarding Haiti; you really need to study the history. Due to dictators and socialist leaders Haiti, which should be a beautiful vacation play-house with beautiful people, all you have is poverty and desitution. Haitians are beautiful people regardless of the massively corrupt government. The Government destroyed Haiti. Through failed leadership and egotistical (Narcisstic) rulers the country has become a hell-hole of drugs, gangs, poverty, depravity, and disease. The country, under the leadership of a narcist, dedecated their land to Satan for 200 years, ending in 2000.
Due to the prayer and help of God-fearing Americans , Haiti was stopped from dedicating it again. Aristead was thrown out. All is not well and there is continual violence in the streets of Port-au-Prince.

The once beautiful country was ravaged by a maniacle narcisstic leader who thought he should be president forever, Pappa Doc. He believed much like Obama that his ways were the only right way and that all opposition must be denegrated and stopped at all cost.

Timothy L. Pennell| 10.13.10 @ 9:30AM

You're close, but you're still off on this one. There's a REASON that the VOODOO side of the Island is a POS, and the CHRISTIAN side is not. There's a REASON that the VOODOO side of the Island was hit by an EARTHQUAKE, and the CHRISTIAN side was not.
Capeesh?

John Heymann| 10.13.10 @ 10:16AM

I can't tell if this is is sarcasm or not. Have we moved from racism to inane religious zealotry? Admittedly, I don't know much about the socioeconomic reasons Haiti is in the state it is, but I do know for an absolute fact that relative faith distribution has zero influence on where earthquakes strike.

Timothy L. Pennell| 10.13.10 @ 12:06PM

Oh, really? You know absolutely, positively that GOD has "Absolutely nothing to do with where earthquakes happen"? Then you must also be able to tell us where the Hydrogen Atom, that supposedly EXPLODED, and gave us the BIG BANG, came from. I mean, it had to come from somewhere.
If you'd like to look it up? You'll find it under the name: THE GOD PARTICLE.
Now, I wonder why they call it that?
Jackass.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 2:50AM

John, what proof do you offer that God is NOT in control? You are accusing Timothy of inane religious zealotry, do you accuse the Founding Fathers also? They knew without God our country would falter and I would say recent history is backing that. As the country moves further away from God and closer to Humanism, our country has become a land of gross immorality, murder of unborn children, socialist candidates put into power because they promise the gov't will take care of everybodys' needs. While we need good conservatives running the country (liberal Dems & moderate Repubs have made a mess of things), we need God to help us far more. Without Him, we will not see this country blessed the way it was. We need to return to being a Christian nation. We need to quit being ashamed, making excuses for our Christian heritage given us by the Founding Fathers. If you want to call me a radical, fine! The Founding Fathers were radicals too!

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 10:01AM

Appleby is exactly right. The Haitians killed their "evil slave-masters" only to race to kill each other off for that coveted position. And since there is always a winner in these things, there has always been a slave-master running Haiti leading to the present day Haitian slave mentality.

Watch the footage right after the recent earthquake (or erfquake is you are from Detroit). What do you see? You see ruble, dead bodies and more rubble. Oh, and you also see Haitians sitting on the ground looking up - waiting for food, medicine, water, money, clothes, tents, and more money to come falling out of the sky. Oh, and something soft to lay on while they wait for someone to rebuild their shack, thank you.

They have been trained to wait for others to come and help them (like Detroiters have been trained to stand in line for Obama money).

Contrast this with the flooding in Manila around the same time. The Filipinos got up, got out and started cleaning up and repairing the destruction, burying the dead and helping the injured ASAP. They didn't wait for "aid" to come falling from the sky courtesy of the Aid Gods.

Haiti is the perfect example of the Democrat mindset (like Detroit). Never, ever do for yourself when there is someone somewhere ready to be guilt tripped into doing it for you. It's the perfect Democrat motto: Can't someone else do it?

Nunya| 10.13.10 @ 7:42PM

Eric, I laughed out loud at your Detroit references.

I personally have seen some of what you speak, in business trips I've taken to Venezuela (this was before the current idiot Chavez took over). Venezuela is a very oil-rich country, and a part of OPEC. Every month the country doles out cash (or at least used to), to their citizens. It was not a lot of money, but enough to subsist on if one didn't want to work. Guess what?? Many people didn't want to work, and finding workers (especially good ones) for the company I was with at the time was difficult. We had good paying work, but finding people was a challenge.

figus janus| 10.13.10 @ 7:19AM

Sadly, we are speaking to the choir. Most Americans are ignorant of typical mainstream politics. They rather watch American Idol, Dancing with the stars or some other horrific reality show. The also are on twitter and facebook updating their status.."going to the bathroom."
WE MUST take our education institutions back! I think it was Hitler who said it right(sorry for choosing him) We must get the children they are the future." We must bring up the knowledge level of the average American to just above imbecile. Teach government again. History would be nice also. Prepare for the coming storm.

Yours truly,

Kelly Staples| 10.13.10 @ 7:21AM

President Newtie? Not hardly. Can you say President Sarah Palin?

KukeeAmerican| 10.13.10 @ 9:29AM

There is a long list coming from the Tea Party affiliates: Allen West, Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint, Michelle Bachman, & Sarah Palin.

I'll take anyone of these over the current set of fools-in-chief.

Sapwolf| 10.14.10 @ 3:39AM

I agree that the GOP Primary winner will have to have the favor of at least half the nation's Tea Party groups.

Sarah is positioned perfect as she has been Tea Party and a Constitutionalist long before the Tea Party Movement.

Allen West could be her VP, a devastating team that Obama could not beat in 2012, assuming Allan can defeat Klein in FL-22 race.

Bachman is needed in the House, and DeMint is needed in the Senate.

Rubio lacks courage and executive experience. Witness his waffling during the FL Senate campaign. However, he will be a great addition and solid vote in the Senate.

Palin/West 2012
Cuda & the Colonel

Old Fart| 10.13.10 @ 7:23AM

We need a Constitutional Convention to put in term limits. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Tim| 10.13.10 @ 10:03AM

Old Fart-

The thought of today's politicians getting their hands on our beloved constitution at a convention terrifies me. Whatever document emerged would be unrecognizable, and most likely much less a champion of individual freedoms.

If term limits, (which I happen to oppose), are demanded by the people, let them use the route already provided in the constitution- amend it! It worked for the President and the 22nd amendment...let's ty it again!

Joel| 10.13.10 @ 2:26PM

Constitutional amendments are proposed either by the congress (and they congress won't propose a limit on their own terms), or by the states through a constitutional convention. We aren't talking about rewriting the whole thing, just proposing the amendment behind congresses back.

Tim| 10.14.10 @ 1:45AM

Hello Joel-

I am well aware of how the process works. My concern lies with the prospect of the irrestible temptation, once assembled, to stray beyond their original mandate. Once a convention is convened, there are no limits on what it may do, if the necessary majorities agree. After all, the original convention had as is s goal, modifying the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they decided to trash the entire thing, and what emerged is our original constitution of today. Somehow, I doubt we would be so fortunate today.

I include text of a letter from Chief Justice Warren Burger, expressing his concerns about a "runaway" convention:

"I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the convention would obey. After a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don't like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the confederation Congress "for the sole and express purpose."

With George Washington as chairman, they were able to deliberate in total secrecy, with no press coverage and no leaks. A constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for special interest groups, television coverage, and press speculation. "

I humbly second his concerns, tenfold. With our politicians in thrall to political correctness and multiculturalism, the thought of what might emerge is terrifying to me.

skip| 10.13.10 @ 5:29PM

I don't think the Founders overlooked term limits. I don't think they made a mistake not installing term limits in the Constitution, the document spelling out numerous limitations on government. It scares me so many conservatives think they know more and/or are smarter than the Founders. What we need are more intelligent and more honest voters. It is the responsibility of the voters to limit terms by voting them out when it is warranted. Some day the reincarnation of George Washington or Ben Franklin or some other will be elected only to be forced out by term limits if you have your way.

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:54PM

Exactly! I too thought term limits was the answer for a while. Then, I realised that the problem is with a lazy and disinterested electorate. This is supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. And it is. We have, up to this point, gotten the government we deserve. The point is that you should NEVER trust ANYONE you send to congress or the executive seat. If we can't be bothered to watch these people closely, we deserve to lose our liberty. They will never look after our best interests. That's up to us.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:01AM

When we voted in term limits in Michigan, our federal reps killed it as it applied to them. Our legislature has term limits (praise God), but our federal reps no longer are bound by them. To expect congressmen to limit their power is pipe dream. The real problem is the majority of the voters do not check out candidates for themselves. They only go by the sound bites from the main stream media & political ads spewing lies and distortions. It is very frustrating to watch people vote that have no idea what the people running stand for. Obama is a classic example of this. He offered a catchy phrase and many were suckered by it. They thought voting for him would bring in a utopian state. They fell for the line saying it was all Bush's fault, totally ignorant that our economy didn't plummet until the Hypocrats got ahold of Congress. Had they check out his voting record, they would have know Obama is a socialist.

danny| 10.13.10 @ 7:26AM

guesser, you libs have a penchant for not reading things.

WRTolkas| 10.13.10 @ 7:49AM

Dear danny,

Yep, you are correct. The Obamacare bill is a good example of libs inability to read.

Tim| 10.13.10 @ 8:33AM

I also like how he's putting solar panels back on the White House.

"Nearly 30 years after President Ronald Reagan dismantled his predecessor's solar panels, the White House is once again going green."

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2.....72499.html

RIghtIsWrong| 10.13.10 @ 4:56PM

Say what ever you want about climate change but you cannot dispute the fact that the world is moving to clean energy and we are getting our butts kicked by countries like China because we can't let go of oil. What's wrong with saving money and reducing the amount of pollution we produce?

Albert| 10.13.10 @ 6:00PM

The world is moving to clean energy? We are getting our butts kicked by China because of oil? Are you serious? China is building COAL fired power plants by the scores. And China does not have the pollution controls we have in the USA. That is "clean" energy?! Oil is not the problem. Man-made global warming is a hoax. And you do not know what you are talking about.

Texas Mom 2010| 10.13.10 @ 6:39PM

Right is Wrong: you are a loon!
1. China has a monopoly on the rare earth metals needed to create solar panels and green tech. We closed down our last mine here and it will take up to 15 years to ramp up this mining again here in the states.
2. China has just invested in shale oil deposits here in Texas.
3. Sounds like we are screwed!

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:13AM

You completely fell for the Hypocrat lie about China. Don't you remember, just before the Olympics the concern for the atheletes because of the dense smog? Pictures of Beijing showed it was almost impossible to see a full city block -- that's about 1/8 of a mile! Oil runs a lot more than cars, but many are too stupid to realize this. The computer you used to type your blog is made up of a lot of plastic. Plastics rely on oil. Look around the room you're in and you will see quite a few things dependant on oil. Paint on the wall, finishes on the woodwork, carpets, all the plastics. There is NO SUBSTITUTE for oil! Get it through that thick skull. As far as pollution, it is no where near what it was when I was a kid in the 60's! Back then, we could smell our river that was a mile away because no communities had waste water treatment facilities. A river in Cleveland actually caught fire, Lake Erie was polluted with mercury. Everywhere you looked, you would see trash, along the highways and in the streams. Our country is far cleaner than 50 years ago, quit being duped by radical enviromentalism!

Clinton nee Publius | 10.13.10 @ 8:46AM

Surprise! The so-called "liberal economic policies" turn out to be nothing at all - just more of the same people using the same color of authority to steal money from the people and spend it on fattening the wallets of the ruling-class, liberal elites.

If you think they need to still spend more consider this analogy: if your spouse went out and blew $115,000 would you want a divorce? Would you want to put an end to it? What if you then found out that not only had your spouse blown $115,000 on his/her friends, but had signed contracts committing you to spending more than $800,000 additional spending on his/her friends, would you want to end it? Would that be enough?

Well, on a micro-basis that is what has actually happened. Your family's share of the $13 trillion national debt is more than $115,000 - that's what the liberal government has spent and your family is responsible for paying back. In addition, our government has over $107 trillion in unfunded liabilities - this is spending we are obligated by current law to undertake for which the government has no money to pay for, so you will be made to pay for it and your share is over $935,000 of this debt.

The next time you hear some liberal tell you we haven't spent enough, remind them that their policies have committed us to future spending - for which we have no money to pay for today - that is equal to almost twice the current wealth of the entire Planet Earth population combined.

Tim in FL| 10.13.10 @ 12:22PM

Right...cause there was no national debt or deficits in January 2009 when a REPUBLICAN left office...convenient to forget that eh?

Cpm| 10.13.10 @ 1:02PM

And yet, knowing that, the democrats quadrupled-down.

Rob CT| 10.13.10 @ 1:07PM

Tim = you seem to conveniently forget that the Dem's took control of both the House and Senate in 2006. They are the ones who set fiscal policy for the last 4 years. This begs the question, are you better off know than you were 4 years ago?

If you check the unemployment figures, the start of the employment decline seem to correlate to when Harry and Nancy took control and the One was in a big part of the problem, joining Harry, back then. Giving these clowns another 2 years is something this country can't afford.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:16AM

The moderate Republicans had some help. The liberal Hypocrats had control of Congress. Our economy didn't crash UNTIL AFTER they took power. They could have prevented the deficit from going up, instead, they quadrupled it! Naturally, you will never hear the FULL TRUTH from the Hypocrats or their supporters!

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 4:01PM

Ahh, so, like The Guesser, you didn't read the article either. No wonder the Dems in Congress freely admit to not reading the bills they sign. Apparently, reading has gone out of style for democrats as a whole. Intellectuals, are you?

Who here said there was no deficit under Bush? Are you blind, or, just stupid?

cedarhill| 10.13.10 @ 8:46AM

The old phrase "Yes, but do you want to make money today?" seems appropriate. A lot of folks bailed into bonds will get torched. All this talk of deflation, stagflation, etc., will pale when QE takes off. Regardless of what Obama does in the next two years, his economy is sealed. He absolutely will not do a Clinton-like econ move. Even if he did, the stage is set - if nothing else, energy will kill recovery. Even up to $200/bbl oil will be common place - US recovery will breed world wide recovery and really, really ignite inflation due not to monetary policies but to that old supply-demand thingy. Regardless, he's a dead economy man walking at this point.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 10.13.10 @ 8:48AM

This article just skims the surface of what is imploding the economy and Obama is just the icing on the cake of a corrupt ruling class, steeped in diversity and the other tentacles of the secular religion of big government

The federal government not only decides who the winners and losers are as Mr. Ferrara describes, they do it in dozens of other ways, including gender and race.

Since Obama became President three bills have passed which has launched another series of race and gender based assaults on the American business class. The Lily Ledbetter Law, Obamacare and the recently passed financial regulations bills.

Each bill was chock full of race and gender mandates that will only serve to further destroy the economy. Each bill was passed after it became certain that lending preferences by the federal government were what lead to our current financial debacle.

Until such time as the ruling class in Washington comes to grips with the fact that you can's legislate equality be creating special classes of citizens I don't see much hope for improvement.

Many companies either redesign jobs so they don't have to deal with the issues or simply move jobs overseas to avoid the litigation from idiotic laws by the Lily Ledbetter Law.

Even the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights noticed the discrepancies in Obamacare that will lead to racial disparities in how health care is dispensed. Section 342 of the financial regulations bill requires banks to hire people based on gender and race.

In short, the American citizen is drowning in the hubris of the debris of phony political equality, which in fact has become a rigged game, all financed by the taxpayer and backed up by the Justice Department.

While America continues to lose jobs, the ruling class will continue to print money until the currency is debased.

Will anyone have the courage to tackle the real issues? Will the government ever stop being the referee of the winners and losers? I personally doubt it but this is the end game in all collectivism. And everyone loses.

PerryM | 10.13.10 @ 8:53AM

Dummycrats are just failures at everything they get their hands on. Name one federal program that isn't bankrupt and staying alive with accounting tricks?

Dummycrats started this slide with Social Security - a Ponzi Scheme just like Bernie Madoff - there is NO difference!

So how does an immoral party like the Dummycrats exist for all these years? Simple we have lots of immoral citizens who ban together in the Dummycrat party.

Bankruptcy is the only way out of this mess - in the form of Jimmy Carter interest rates and Stagflation - we are right back where Jimmy Carter left us.

Inflation will hit - gold will climb to astronomical heights - thanks to immoral Americans.

Wait for it....... wait for it.....

Longplay| 10.13.10 @ 9:01AM

One can well-undestand the comment of Hannity's caller asking why Obama can't be given more time to get out from under the "Republican" mess. The GOP themselves are to blame for allowing the practical differences between the party's actions to be mimimized ever since Reagan left office. Young people especially, poorly taught as they are by the government schools, believe only the DEM=Good GOP=bad" rubric and can't see that the policies of both parties, at least in domestic affairs, hasn't differed that much legislatively. That's why the GOP MUST finally act on it's principles and act on them BOLDLY. No more Democrat Socialist lite.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:29AM

Longplay, the problem is the moderate faction of the GOP got control. We need to get back to conservatism and away from moderate policies that blur the distinction between the GOP & Hypocrats. Moderates tend to blow with the political breeze, swaying left to right. They are more easily enticed to spend like a liberal in the hopes they will be seen as being compassionate. Bush was a moderate. While I liked some of his actions, he was swayed to go along with the Hypocrats and allowed their huge pork spending to be included in bills, just to get it passed. He allowed Ted Kennedy (Enemy of the State) to pollute the "No Kid Left Behind" bill. We need people with backbone back in the GOP. The GOP themselves have attempted to submarine conservative candidates, opting to back even liberals! We also have many pseudo-conservatives that act conservative, quoting Reagan, only to get elected. Then they return to their moderate to liberal roots. We have a great opportunity with this election to undo some of the crap Obama & the Hypocrats have done. We won't get rid of it all until we get complete control, but if we put in a bunch of moderates, they will waffle as they did through most of the last 10 years and little will changs. Most of all, we as a nation need to return to God!

Black Saint| 10.13.10 @ 9:01AM

The Democrats infrastructure and construction bail-out jobs program is more of the same old scam?

The tax payers that have obeyed the laws, paid the taxes and fought the wars and built this Nation are getting screwed by Corrupt/Stupid/Worthless Politicians and Greedy crooks at every level!

This is the same old scam, reward the Rich Bankers with billions in tax payers money and the invading horde of illegal Aliens with Jobs, Free medical, Free education, Welfare, Prison cells and make American Citizens pay for every Crook, Criminal, Peon & Con man in the world!

The infrastructure and construction jobs without E-verify will put the millions of Illegal Aliens back to work, so they can send money home to support Mexico & South American at the expense of American workers and our economy! The contractors can charge the tax payers union scale, hire Illegals at slave wages, pocket the profits and American citizens pay both the wages and the billions in cost to educate the illegals many children, provide medical, welfare and prison cells.

You would think the Politicians would be content with just out-sourcing all the jobs that can be done offshore but No they want to bring in Slave labor & Welfare votes ( while ignoring Article IV Section IV of our Constitution against invasion, the rule of Law, and their Oath of office) to take the jobs that cannot be out-sourced! To add insult to injury they make the American citizens still working pay billions in extra taxes for schooling, provide medical, welfare and jail cells for the invading horde that are taking our jobs and driving down our standard of living! While keeping busy Robbing, Raping and Killing American citizens at an rate that Bin Laden can only dream about!

The Democrats love the millions of Welfare votes to further their Socialist agenda & the Republicans love the slave labor for their Pay Masters in the Chamber of Commerce and business.

If we are realistic and look at the havoc caused by the millions of invading Hispanics on our communities, culture, crime, economy, welfare, taxes, environment, schooling and standard of living the only conclusion possible is that no Nation can withstand or assimilate an tidal wave of Uneducated Third world citizens that come here illegally from another culture, for the jobs and welfare, while keeping loyally to their home countries!

This Nation is changing to the very same type of culture and society the invading millions have created, built and sustained for 100,s of years and are now fleeing in their own Countries!

One has to only look at Calif. which is basically an Bankrupt state that cannot afford to provide Welfare, Schooling, Medical, Prison cells etc. for millions of MS-13 Gang bangers, Drug dealers, Rapist and other assorted Criminals and uneducated third world rejects from Mexico!

In a very few years it will be impossible to see where Mexico ends and Calif. begins as both will be an third world cesspool!

Failure to secure our borders and reward the Invading horde for their invasion and their relatives in an never ending chain with American Citizenship is nothing less then committing National Suicide & will assure our future is an over populated Spanish speaking third world Nation that is an Cesspool of Corruption, Crime, Poverty and Misery just like Mexico!

Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 10.13.10 @ 9:02AM

Mr. Ferrara, this was an excellent column... up until that last sentence, "Can you say President Newt Gingrich?" No Mr. Ferrara I can't. I get ill from just the thought of it. There is no way Gingrich will be elected POTUS in 2012 & after the left leaning b.s. he's pulled since leaving Congress. The GOP would be nuts to coronate him to be POTUS. So many go on about Palin's "inexperience", personal baggage, the target placed on her back by the state-run media, etc. I don't know if she is Presidential material, but I know Gingrich is definitely not. Gingrich talks a good game, but is easily swayed by the left & the RINO GOP establishment who do not believe in the conservative ideas Gingrich claims to believe in & hold dear. From endorsing Dede Scozzafava to commercials with Nancy Pelosi to fight the "man-made glo-bull warming" b.s. to his bashing conservatives for not accepting his & The GOP's strategy in running Dede Scozzafava (that really worked out great, didn't it) to his own personal baggage (he has it all over Palin on this one!) this man is simply a fraud who enjoys the limelight & doesn't want to leave it. Gingrich is like the serpent in The Garden Of Eden. He is not to be trusted, period. Wake up Mr. Ferrara. You've been dreaming. Time to return to reality. If Gingrich is nominated expect four more years of Obama, guaranteed.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:35AM

Gingrich is a pseudo-conservative (moderate disguised as a conservative). I used to really like him until he allowed himself to be run out of Congress. That is when my eyes began to see cleary about him. When he backed that liberal woman I was sick! No conservative would ever help a liberal get elected, especially when a conservative was running, without the GOP's support I might add. The GOP is under moderate control at this time and that must be changed if this country is going to turn around. We will NOT get rid of Obamacare and his other garbage with moderates running the show. It will be difficult as it is, but with moderates, it will be impossible. They are the ones who got us into this mess, with help from liberals in Congress.

Timothy L. Pennell| 10.13.10 @ 9:10AM

The Bible tells us that GOD said: "Woe unto you, who go against my children in Israel."
Woe, indeed. The two big JEW HATERS. Both of them leading this Country in to the crapper.
Coincidence?

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:37AM

Timothy, I know Obama is one, is the other Hillary Clinton? There are plenty in his administration to choose from, I just wanted to know who you think the principle 2 are.

Jim in SC| 10.13.10 @ 9:12AM

I never hear about a very obvious driver of the current job crisis: the minimum wage was raised by 40% on January 1, 2007. Hello!?

While few people earn the minimum wage--except the teenagers who are suffering 26% unemployment--it has a psychological impact on hiring farther up the line.

Eyeball Chambers| 10.13.10 @ 1:24PM

Amen Jim. This is a crucial component as to why we are in this mess. As relayed in the article, the unemployment in youth is markedly higher than the average. Who do you think is doing a lot of the minimum wage work?
The reason they raised min wage is so that when union negotiators sit down with management they can point to the min wage and say that is the floor we begin with. If you raise the floor, you raise the salaries of union members. Management then cuts staff on the white collar side and keeps the white collar wages steady or cuts them back to 36 hrs a week with less pay.
A company will never do with less profit(nor should it) it will simply find places to cut back to break even.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:46AM

Jim, very good point! When you go to McDonald's now days, you see many adults working there instead of kids. The stupid minimum wage laws was/is a job killer, plain & simple! Our POTUS & Congress are just too stupid to realize it. They live in their McMansions and start to believe the rest of us live that way and those that don't should be paid more so they can live well. It all sound so kind, until you come down to earth and realize that employers can hire fewer workers due to expenses. They hire adults because they are more reliable, hence kids are out of luck. Take heart though, Obama seized control of the college loan system and now the gov't will pay kids way through college and they only have to be indentured to the gov't for 10 years! I find it ironic that a black man is returning the U.S. to slavery!

Stan Biyerman| 10.13.10 @ 9:19AM

Great, interesting and informative article.

And it's correct: Nancy Pelosi took control of the House after the November, 2006 election and, amazing but true, she took us right off the economic cliff.

I read a poll yesterday that said "independent" voters prefer GOP control of Congress over the Dems by 51% to 38%

Anyone have any idea at all what those 38% are thinking about?

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:43PM

Stan-the union thugs, the media and the academics. the blacks who continue to be brainwashed. other than that-most anyone willing to use there brains knows what Obama and the commiecrats are. thats why they will be thrown out next month.

RJ| 10.13.10 @ 9:21AM

In 2008, I thought Ron Paul was a bit extreme in saying "End the Fed." No more. My apologies, Mr. Paul. You are right. In fact, it is the single most important economic issue we have today. Certainly government spending needs to be reduced, but we also need to get back to a commodity-based currency and bring to an end government and government sponsored intervention in the economy. We have seen what that can do. It is only the 45 percent "slow learner" Obama supporters who refuse to stop following policies of proven failure.

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:47PM

Rj-remember this-in 1981, Reagan budget director David Stockman proposed just what Ron Paul did. The Fed reacted by purposefully prolonging the recession. I agree about the Fed-they are one of the big problems. Ending the Fed AND repealing the 16th (and 17th) amendments would go a long way toward economic stability. Any coincidence that it was Woodrow Wilson, the first leftist extremist president(and former president of Princetion) that wa behind both the creation of the Fed and the 16th amendment?

RJ| 10.13.10 @ 11:13PM

Thanks, Stormyweather. I didn't know about David Stockman's proposal. And I agree with you on the the 16th and 17th amendments. They have changed the basic structure of the federal government created under the Constitution. Perhaps they may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but the results have been very harmful to our Republic.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 3:50AM

RJ, or anyone else. I know the Fed IS NOT a gov't institution. How were they given control over our economy? Who was the fool who put them in charge? When did this happen?

George Pankin| 10.13.10 @ 9:26AM

Peter,
Your economic analysis, as always, is excellent. But the very last sentence leaves a bad taste:

"Can you say President Newt Gingrich?"

Huh? Perhaps you should avoid political analysis. Newt is yesterday's news and will never be president. Nor will Mitt Romney.

Sarah Palin in 2012.

idalily| 10.13.10 @ 7:24PM

I agreed with you until your last line. No Newt, but also (alas) no Sarah. Don't get me wrong. I love Sarah Palin. I live in Idaho, so I also understand Sarah Palin. However, she is (IMO) unelectable. It's not her fault, but she has become a lightning rod for hatred and vitriol from the left. Now, that in itself doesn't bother me, but their venom is pervasive and nonstop and will distract the country away from the ISSUES, which would be disastrous. The moderate-indie ranks don't like her, particularly the women. The nonstop media mantra that she's stupid, combined with resigning as governor, combined with being beautiful and having a hot husband (which is why a big chunk of moderate women don't like her--I can say that, I'm a woman, and I know how women think) and being McCain's running mate, and endorsing McCain for Senate, and Bristol-Levi, and the Katie Couric interview, and...see where I'm going here? She has too much baggage. It's not fair, but life, as we righties know, can never be made fair. She may run, but I don't think she can win. Even if the R's united behind her (which is uncertain) she would lose the indies, which means 4 more years of Obama as POTUS (or Hillary...ick). And frankly, I think we have other, more qualified, less divisive candidates to choose among. Personally, I'd like to see Mitch Daniels as POTUS, Paul Ryan as VP, because fiscal sanity is a platform that could unite all but the hard left and is the most important thing we need to develop in this country. I also like Christie, though his gun-control stance worries me. I think Sarah would make a fine head of the RNC. She'd raise so much money, even Soros couldn't match it. I could also see Sarah as Energy Secretary (although if I really had my way, we wouldn't need an ES because we wouldn't have a Dept of Energy. Others will disagree, but I say no, not only to Newt, but (sadly) also to Sarah.

Sapwolf| 10.14.10 @ 3:31AM

Sarah is a far better candidate than Daniels.

Sarah has convictions, courage, and charisma. She is polarizing, but less so than Obama.

Remember, Sarah only has to beat Obama.

And if she wins, we get the Presidency with someone who is NOT afraid and has guts to trim government back.

Daniels does not have the guts to take on 'leviathan'.

Todd S| 10.14.10 @ 9:45AM

You are completely correct in your assessment as much as some people refuse to accept it. Palin is more effective now out of political office, we saw what happened in Alaska which made it impossible for her to govern effectively like she had done before. Despite all her good qualities, she is not Ronald Reagan and is unable to rise above personal attacks like Reagan did and not get dragged in the mud. She has the right to fight back but it does not make for effective governance.

Surprised Ferrara would say Gingrich should be nominated for the Republicans, no way in hell that is going to happen and nor should it happen. We have far better potential candidates like Ryan, Christie, Demint, Daniels and even Pawlenty that don't have all the baggage Gingrich has accumulated. Seems Pete is letting his friendship get in the way of common sense.

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.13.10 @ 9:36AM

Peter,
Thank you again.

In my mind, Carter was a... lot of failures, BUT! I don't think he hated America. In my mind that is the crucial difference that makes Obama so much worse.

Cogito Ergo Sum Conservativum| 10.13.10 @ 2:13PM

Correct Ken. I don't believe Carter hated America, he just hates Jews and Israel.

Obama has been trained since birth to hate America and everything about it. He has been trained since high school to seek America's destruction. And he is trying hard to fulfill his imagined destiny.

hook| 10.13.10 @ 9:47AM

I must beg to differ. No one could be as bad as Carter who is a delusional man and an evil man. Obama is merely Mitterand or Chirac with a totally compliant media.

Obama would never say he was a better president than Reagan AND better than any living president. Obama is also merely left wing. He is not an out and out bigot like Carter--I don't think. However, because of his slobbering cheering center in the media, he may end up being more damaging. I personally think that LBJ was most damaging of the twentieth century. He enacted a counter productive legislative program called the "Great Society," and misled a war so grievously that he saw to it that the US doesnt have the guts to truly fight Islamist extremism.

Texas Mom 2012| 10.13.10 @ 7:17PM

I said before he was elected that Obama was Carter squared. I was wrong. He is more like Carter cubes on steroids. His policies are ao anti-business that it will take a decade to climb out of the whole he has put us in.
The current proposal reintroduced by the Dems to seize all 401Ks will start us on another downward
spiral... Not to mention a revolution when suffering taxpayers realize the government only wants ALL of our $$$ and plans to redistribute it as well.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 4:01AM

hook, I have to disagree with some of your comments. Obama is a radical leftist, Carter was just a liberal. Carter was naieve, believing if he made an agreement with the USSR to disarm, they would disarm equally. He cut & gutted the military mainly to appease the Soviets & American liberals. Obama is smarter than Carter. He is calculating. I don't think he cares if he gets re-elected IF he can push through his radical socialist agenda. He's gotten a lot of it through and it will be very difficult, maybe impossible, to remove it all until we can elect a new, conservative POTUS. Obama is also arrogant! He said the other day if the GOP regains Congress, they will have to work with him. After he was elected 2 years ago, he said that his election was a mandate and that meant the GOP had to get over it and go along with him. Well, if that was a mandate, what would you call the tidal wave that's coming? The GOP will REALLY have a mandate and it is Obama that will have to work with them! Hook, you are right on about LBJ, especially about the Vietnam War.

isnrblog| 10.13.10 @ 9:54AM

Thi is one of the best comments I have read in a while:

"No president of the United States can create either a budget deficit or a budget surplus. All spending bills originate in the House of Representatives, and all taxes are voted into law by Congress. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress before Barack Obama became President. The deficit he inherited was created by the Congressional Democrats, including Sen. Barack Obama, who did absolutely nothing to oppose the runaway spending. He was one of the biggest spenders."

Obama "inherited" what he helped create and is making it worse.

Obama's legacy will be that he will go down in history as the only President worse than Jimmy Carter. I didn't think anyone could be as bad as Carter. I hope no one else tries to beat that record.

Heywood| 10.14.10 @ 5:36AM

Yes but Bush had to sign all those big spending bills and huge budget bills to make them laws. So that's just one more reason why his base left him and he had such low approval numbers.
You can't appease liberals--and that's what Bush was doing back in '06.

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 4:07AM

Heywood, you are right. Bush, for the most part, was a moderate. Moderates tend to bend with the political breeze and have no backbone. I really take exception when the Hypocrats & followers say conservatives got us into this mess. That is a fabrication, since the moderates have controlled the GOP for sometime. They praise Reagan, but in secret despise him and wish to return to the heady days when the GOP was run by east coast snobs who were never in power. They hate evangelicals & pro-lifers, blaming us for ruining a great party. They don't want to give us credit for making the GOP a force to be dealt with.

popofhs| 10.13.10 @ 9:56AM

Booger,

You are a tool. The democrat party of today is not the democrat party we and our fathers grew up with. This democratic party is far more radical and will stop at nothing to increase the size of government. I find it ironic that one of the biggest Unions to get behind Obamacare initially has now been granted a waiver. Obamacare is designed to force us into a single-payer system - and this is why our economy is down. Companies and entrepreneurs are holding on to cash because we have a president that acts illogically. He is either very dumb or he is very wrong for America. We don't need to change our country from a Republic to a Democracy - the latter always fails as it's too easy to splinter off value-challenged fools as yourself. I'm sick and tired of peeps like you and the mainstream media bashing honest, hard-working Americans - those you call tea-baggers who are simply standing up in response to the daily assault on our freedoms. Please do us all a favor and move to Canada or better yet France.

Proud Tea Bagger

Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 10.13.10 @ 11:01AM

Easy there popohfs. Booger's posts are satire. They aren't meant to be taken seriously or personally. Have a sense of humor. Take care & GOD bless!

dw| 10.13.10 @ 6:25PM

Learn to recognize satire. Booger is on your side

AnyoneButNewt| 10.13.10 @ 10:14AM

Item 1, wreck the economy.
Item 2, swoop in and "save" it. (By essentially taking over the private sector).

Welcome To Bamalot!!!

Petronius| 10.13.10 @ 10:24AM

Carter had a congress of "what me worry" types and fixers. Obama has a congress of cultural vandals and vengeful Hugo Chavez wannabe's who view government as a Deus ex machina for getting their way and the results don't matter. Alinsky told them, in order to get control of anything, ruin it first.
Come 2012 the Republicans can win the White House with something old and something new.
They should nominate Governor Barbour of Mississippi on the 1st ballot. He is a Proven product. After hurricane Katrina he told FEMA and all other beltway shitheels, "no thanks, we'll handle it ourselves." And he cleaned up the mess and restored services without asking anybody outside to pony up. There were no media hit pieces as they couldn't find fault. And even though he is Old Guard, he's not a beltway bandit or social climber. As past Party Chair he can wrangle the blue bloods. With a Republican Senate he can get strict Constitutionalists confirmed as Federal Judges and keep the Supremes in stasis. He can also gut the budgets of the worthless cabinet departments that take away our liberties in tune with a new Republican House. He has the ability to make the political weather. Since nobody has put the question, does he have the moxie? I have just one bit of advice for him, If Trent Lott inites you to lunch at Sans Soucie, just say no.

RWinks| 10.13.10 @ 11:06AM

As Governor Barbour has said, "If I lose 40 pounds, I've either got cancer or am running for President, so watch my waistline". Seriously, Barbour did a good job on the Katrina recovery. A British group drove from Florida to NOLA to see hurricane damage two years after Katrina. Once in NOLA they lamented the devastation and "inaction" of the federal government to clean up the mess. They were apparently unaware they had traveled through AL and MS areas that had been hit just as hard. They also seemed unaware the areas they were filming were all private property and in this country, people are expected to clean up their own mess.

Redstateboy| 10.13.10 @ 10:41AM

and if Republicans capture one or both houses of Congress and do not begin to radically shake the foundations of this government... then they too will be voted out until we get a true majority of Conservative members. The Tea Party is NOT going away.

Albert| 10.13.10 @ 10:48AM

The true reason Democrats stick with Keynesian "economics" of spend! spend! spend! is because it is not about successful economic policy, but rather who gets the credit. (Like Dustin Hoffman in "Wag the Dog" who just wants the CREDIT!) In a free market, government gets no credit for a booming economy because government didn't create prosperity. Indeed, government CAN'T create prosperity. But with the Keynesian model, all economic activity is "caused" or "stimulated" by government spending. This is a myth of course, because it never works. But any economic activity is CLAIMED to be the result of government "stimulus" spending so people in government can therefore claim credit for "prosperity." Do not discount the ego factor in government centered economics, because it is the driving force. For Democrats, it is not how many jobs are created, it is how many jobs can Democrats take credit for. Democrat/Keynesian economic policy is not about providing jobs, it is about getting Democrats elected and it is nothing more. And it is something they will NEVER give up.

Albert| 10.13.10 @ 11:23AM

Incidentally, this also explains why Democrats from President Bozo, to Bahney Fwank, to Nancy Pelosi, are all up in arms over the "ingratitude" of the American voters for the "stimulus" and its "successes." They are not getting any credit, and glory, or any ego boost. And it is these things that Democrats crave like an addict craves heroin.

Texas Mom 2012| 10.13.10 @ 7:24PM

The democrats are getting the 'credit' for the porkulous spending. It is precisely why they are running scared. Everyone can see it was just a slush fund and not designed to stimulate the private sector and that it was designed to pay back their special interest groups. So we the people plan to give them all the credit they deserve at the ballot box, November 2nd! I can't wait to watch ms pelosi say 'i'm melting....'!!!!!!!

Albert| 10.13.10 @ 7:40PM

By "credit" I assume you mean "blame." Sweet.
:-)

Donald| 10.13.10 @ 11:03AM

I enjoyed reading this article except for that last throwaway line. Sorry but Newt has lost his conservative / serious politician cred a long time ago with all his compromises and baggage.

Albert| 10.13.10 @ 11:19AM

I agree completely. The Newtster should go home and be quiet.

Mimi| 10.13.10 @ 2:38PM

I love Newt...his books, his new wife, his sense of History, and insights on T.V. he converted to Catholicism...And is not the same Newt! I will always, be grateful to him , for pointing me to De Tocqueville. I think he will play an important role , after we win in 2012, but not as President. We will need men like him including others to serve their country once again ie John Bolton, and even Peter Ferrara!!!

rjh| 10.13.10 @ 12:09PM

You had me until the last line of the article. If the Republicans are dumb enough to run self serving windbag Gingrich, we may very well face four more years of obama.

duke de duke | 10.13.10 @ 12:14PM

I feel sorry for the most powerful man in the world. He is a victim. The government should do something for him.

Erik| 10.13.10 @ 12:58PM

I have said it before, and will probably have to say it again: Democrats will continue talking about Bush for an equivalent number of years that the Republicans talk about Carter. This being the latest article to bash Carter (after 30 years of being out of office) you can expect Dems to tone down their criticism around 2028. Enjoy.

Texas Mom 2012 | 10.13.10 @ 7:30PM

When Carter actually GOES AWAY, maybe we will stop talking about him. He is still talking down America and Israel. Every time he opens his mouth he harms this country. He gives legitamavy to evil dictators and regimes around the world while saying vile things about our country. He is a classless evil buffoon. I will be happy to stop talking about him after he finally is answering to his maker. ;p

Erik| 10.13.10 @ 1:06PM

Please excuse my early-morning math-2038.

Howard| 10.13.10 @ 1:26PM

Of course the Democrats used Hoover as a foil for nearly 40 years. It worked up until the late 1970's. I thought Carter was a bumbling fool, but not inherently anti-capitalist as is Obama. Carter supposedly ran a peanut farm, and was aware of the challenges of running a small business. Also, the first wave of deregulation happened under Carter's watch; most of it quite beneficial.

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:54PM

Howard-BILLY actually was the one who ran that farm. The old saw says Billy was the smarter of the Car DUH brothers. Jimmy has spent his last 20 yrs proving that Billy was the more intelligent one. And Billy wasnt all that bright.

Robert Thorpe | 10.13.10 @ 1:35PM

Terrific article, especially the notions that the Stimuluses were done for political reasons (i.e., public sector union paybacks) rather than for the pragmatic, economic good of the nation.

The government does not create the jobs in our county, the private sector does, especially small businesses. The government does not create the wealth and prosperity in our country, it consumes and squanders it.

Robert J. Thorpe, author of “Reclaim Liberty: 3-Step Plan for Restoring our Constitutional Government”, www.reclaimliberty.us, www.Amazon.com, “Laus Deo”

Perusha| 10.13.10 @ 2:05PM

"It's the economy, stupid" was perhaps the most pithy and salient aphorism that focussed the Slick Willie express enough to help them win their election, way back in what seems like only the beginning of the beginning of the liberal Dark Ages.

Well, NOW we have surely entered the end of this beginning, and all the mis-education brainwashing is in full flower, so that we can best understand the new admonition---

“It’s the stupid economics, stupid!”

You know, my grandfather was a farmer, and he was always outstanding in his field. Also, you could say he was stupid = stooped, whenever he picked his low-lying vegetables.

Thus, just imagine---thanks, John Lennon!---a field of garlic, and the harvesters aka the voters are at once stooped and outstanding in this field, aka economics, ready to rip out of the ground the logical “fruits” of their sowing.

This is at once a blessing and a curse. Most food aficionados know that “garlic” is a miracle gift, a transformation of seed, soil, water, sun AND human effort that in time yields a compact “package” of elements---expressions of light stepped down from the big bang---that when eaten by humans is totally beneficial: but garlic breath is sure a downside!

Just so, as we must go through the inevitable trough in garlic =economics terms, due to the stupidity of the majority of uneducated Americans---after all, they DID elect = choose of their own putative free will Obama AFTER putting Pelosi and Reid in control of the congress two years earlier---dare I harken back to an earlier truism?

“Ye shall reap what ye sow.”

And, THIS insight reminds me of a really old STUPID joke---

Some mice children were playing in the field. Along came a harvesting machine and one of them screamed to its mother, “Help, I’ve been reaped!”

Yes---the productive class of Americans, which is ever shrinking as a percentage, has been reaped, and it certainly looks like the reaping season has just begun!

Like a lot of what Peter Ferrara said about the people who still support Obama, and the bad economics being dumped on us ALL, what is wrong with these fools?

My conclusion, arrived at long ago, is that as long as they have their basic needs met, you can forget about waking them up. The perfect adjective for these fools is “oblivious”.

And, what’s absolutely entertainingly funny about this is that they, THEMSELVES, believe they are NOT fools! I have a brother who I visited years ago. He was married to an overweight woman with two boys from a previous marriage, and all the time I was with them it was a matter of fighting, arguing and suffering. I got him alone, for a moment, and asked if he was happy. His whole demeanor instantly changed, and he said—YES!

Not surprising to me, shortly thereafter, he got a bit “loose” on booze, and his true feelings came out in his wife’s face, and that was enough to make her divorce him! And, later, he was TRULY unhappy that he had blown up this “happy” marriage! Go figure.

Finally, while we are “hopeful” about the “change” in attitude by many independents, who have essentially woke up and realized they were fooled by Obama, what’s it going to take for the next ripe Obama lovers to also get that they have been taken to be fools?

I’m eagerly waiting for this next “shoe” to drop, so that a solid 60% of Americans will have become educated about true and useful economics, and only about 25-30% of the populace remains in the forever-fooled camp.

That’ll be the day---thank you, Buddy Holly!

Mimi| 10.13.10 @ 3:10PM

I think we are living to see it NOW !! Beginning April 15, 2009.... {ie} No mosque, No more spending, No fed. lawsuit for Arizona, Christie in N.J., Gov. of Va., New voters, protest marches, No DEMS...ELECTION DAY NOV. 2 2010.
CHEERS, Mimi

David Wang| 10.13.10 @ 2:15PM

Why is the author comparing Obama with Carter? Why not the Republican Messiah Reagan? Reagan, at this point of his Presidency, was more unpopular because of peak unemployment of 10.8%. It was above 10% for most of the first half of 1983. Only in time for relection, it came down to 7.5% (more than the rate when Carter left office) and he declared that it was good morning in America again. The average performance of Reagan in his first term was worse than that in Carter's first (and only) term. You may visualize (using graphs) and verify all this from the servlet provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
http://data.bls.gov/servlet/Su.....NS14000000

Howard| 10.13.10 @ 3:20PM

You have selected memory. For instance when Carter took office inflation was about 4%. Unemployment was fairly high, but the country was coming out of a severe recession. When Carter left office, inflation was 15% and unemployment was close to where it was was Jimmy took office. If you consider the inflation trend under Carter to be good, then, I'm not sure aside from polemics what your point is.

Rob S| 10.13.10 @ 3:45PM

Average performance is arguably irrelevant - instead, compare the 2-year trend at the end of Reagan's first term to the 2-year trend at the end of Carter's term.

james| 10.13.10 @ 2:18PM

Dear Mr. Ferrara & his gullible readers:

Mr. Ferrara

are you writing these articles/posts from prison?

certainly you must be serving several years given your involvement with Abramoff, Northern Marianas Islands & the Chocotaw indians.

further, it always amazes me that you "Christian conservatives" only seem to worry about gov spending, deficits, etc when we have dems in office.

you didnt say a peep when Pres G W Bush was in WH & repubs had congress...& they went from gov surpluses to biggest deficits in 200+ yrs.

plus g w bush didnt create any jobs in 1st term...and only 1.1 mil in 2nd term...even w/all those wonderful tax cuts for the rich that you love so much

Pres Clinton on other hand created 23 mil jobs by giving tax cuts to the poor & middle class...just like Pres Obama wants to

in closing Mr. Ferrara, say hello to Mr. Abramoff

i am certain scam artist like the two of you stay in touch

may God protect us from liars & criminals such as yourself

God bless USA

God bless Pres Obama

Ken (Old Texican| 10.13.10 @ 3:38PM

James,

Are you really that stupid...or have you been paid?

I do pray for our President. He doesn't listen.

I have NOT been paid...and you are a stupid is as stupid does...no matter how much you have been paid.
Tank you for the comic relief. Heh.

DRed| 10.13.10 @ 4:16PM

Hearing that you pray to president Obama is the most shocking thing I've ever read on this website.

dw| 10.13.10 @ 6:32PM

james, you and evan should get back to your sensitivity classes.
Remember, your frustrations are in your control, not others.
Repeat your personal manra...I am perfect, I am perfect....

Kjanlady| 10.13.10 @ 2:25PM

Great article until the last line....Newt Gringrich will NEVER be president......all you have to do to turn off the electorate is to show Newt on that bench with Nancy Pelosi touting the big lie of global warming and on the trail with the race baiter Al Jackson on education....he's a big fake...he's a Rhino.......has absolutely NO principles that he would fight for......few old DC insiders do.......President Sarah Palin 2012....we will accept no others.

Sapwolf| 10.14.10 @ 3:22AM

Right now, Sarah is the premiere champion of free-market / competition-based capitalism.

NotALiberal| 10.13.10 @ 3:28PM

"Can you say President Newt Gingrich?"

No, I can't. Nor can I say President McCain, Rove, Romney or Palin. All but Palin are still the same old establishment Republicans that care mostly about their own re-election and not the American people. Palin may have more experience than Obama had when he was elected but she has proven she can't handle the job by quiting her last one.

Ken (Old Texican)| 10.13.10 @ 3:42PM

OK, Not ALiberal...................

Who is YOUR nominee for President?

(dumbbunny)

DavisJohn| 10.13.10 @ 7:15PM

I liked what I heard from Palin when she gave her acceptance speech, but since then I have been very unimpressed with her interviews. She seems shallow and inarticulate. She basically just regurgitates the talking points and slogans of others (and rambles on and on). I cringed when I heard her interview with Glenn Beck and she stuttered and stammered to name a founding father.

Romney is a proven leader who I think could really address and attack the economic issues that we face.

Some of the current Republican governors look pretty strong too.

I could never support McCain.

Sapwolf| 10.14.10 @ 3:20AM

Romney would be Dem-Lite just like Bush.

He is not a conservative. We need a Reaganite/Tea Party Movement candidate. At this time, the only one is Sarah Palin.

If she wins the GOP Primary, she'll defeat Obama no problem. The Primary will be her test.

sub| 10.13.10 @ 4:30PM

Obama is certainly worse than Carter. His policy ideas are even more loony, yet he is more effective as a politician and back room arm twister. The combination of better skill and even worse ideas make this arrogant impostor, potentially, the worst American leader in 150 years.

jrjr| 10.13.10 @ 4:33PM

Many writers, including this one keep trying to explain Obama's politics, policies, and mouth, in terms of economic theory. Listen!! That is not what is going on -- his purpose is to change the American people, economy and way of life to become dependent on the Federal government. One doesn't require a scholar or Harvard professor to explain this. Merely look at his background, education, friends, mentors, and community organizing to see what is going on. It is not difficult to see if you want to do so but I suppose writers and scholars must have something to do.

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:49PM

BTW-Jimmy Car DUH can die knowing that he was only the 2nd worse president in American history. Hes just been supplanted as the worse.

Bernie| 10.13.10 @ 5:03PM

Try valuing the S&P 500 in terms of gold. Youl do this by dividing the S&P now at $1178.10 by the price of gold now at 1370,30. My answer is about 0.85 ouces. On january 5, 2010 it was valued at 1.02 ounces. That would mean its down 17%.

Pat| 10.13.10 @ 5:09PM

The mood around the Democratic National Committee’s hot tub was glum the other day – among the bubbling jets and glasses of sour, but very expensive French chardonnay, the consensus was, after the election, Obama should fire all his sitcom writers. Everyone recalls Season One of “Obama – My Life and Ain’t It Swell” where the president promised “hope” and “change” and hinted at bloody revenge on a certain political party. And every week’s offering after the pilot episode “Mr. Obama Goes to Washington” was just another laugh filled variation on “it’s all George Bush’s fault”. Rednecks, who owned guns and bibles, were the comical whipping boys during the election campaign, but it was all GWB’s fault in January beginning shortly after the coronation.

In the first season’s memorable episode, “Mr. Obama Has an Idea”, the president claimed he had the “Solution” – but the solution to what? Well, just about everything that ails us. Mr. Obama claimed he had “the power”, he knew he had “the power” because he was elected and he knew how to cure all our ills, starting with the UAW folks and every bank on Wall St., plus a few in other countries as well. His loyal minions in Congress heartily agreed and passed everything he suggested – nothing but net.

But in Season Two, every episode turned out to have a bad smell – one of those: “OK, who had the bean burrito for lunch?” smells – you know the one. In the season opener: “Mr. Obama Needs More Time”, a trillion dollars in taxpayer money bought us only 2,000 non-government and 180,000 government jobs – but give the bailouts a chance to work we were told as that dreary episode dragged to an end.

And as the season stumbled forward, the sitcom writers changed the theme to “you can’t expect the president to fix everything, he’s only a man”. The most recent episode: “Mr. Obama Gets Down and Dirty” has the president rolling up his sleeves to duke it out with Republicans if they should win a majority. Season Two is turning out to have a bittersweet poignancy and a whining demand for fairness from the electorate - just because he failed at everything he tried is no reason to get all mad and start acting out – or so we’re being told. However, one of those expensive media consultants polled the viewers recently and the consensus among viewers favored an episode not yet aired titled: “Mr. Obama Takes a Very Long Vacation”.

DavisJohn| 10.13.10 @ 6:54PM

I'm pretty sure everyone knew exactly who this article was about just from the title "So Much Worse than Carter". I never thought I would see the day when someone would say that a president was worse than Carter. I lived through the Carter years. Horrible!

scythe| 10.13.10 @ 7:12PM

Such a compelling and brilliant piece of writing. You said it all and then some. This SOB and everyone who has been alive for the last forty years KNEW what his policies would do. He knew as well. the template was there, the experiment over, the results in for over three decades. And yet....he thought he could turn back the clock, turn reality on its head and reinvent economics. Did he really? OR DID HE UNDERSTAND VERY WELL WHAT HE WAS ABOUT TO DO. CREATE MISERY AND MAYHEM AND POUR POISON ON THE HEADS OF THOSE IN A COUNTRY HE DESPISES. I wish I could say this cretin in the WH is a moron. At least his intentions might not be so repugnant. But I, as well as millions of like minded individuals, believe he knew full well what he was doing which makes him a spectacular avatar of pure evil. He is a sleazebag and it will be a very long time indeed before I EVER think of voting for a democrat. And that includes someone running fo a lowly position of town clerk. His party aided and abetted him and they allowed themselves to be swallowed whole by the fascist/socialist/communist/marxist psychotics who are running the show today. Do you think JFK would ever have had a chance in the contemporary democrat party? He would be regarded as a right wing extremist and be beaten down and thrown out. Such is the state of the democrats today. And they allowed it to happen. Has anyone come forward to denounce that freak show in DC on 10/2/2010? Didn't think so. Silence is assent. No more democrats. Ever again.

CalMark| 10.13.10 @ 8:04PM

Food for thought:

Consider: George W. Bush loves big government, socialism-lite, and being "nice" to our enemies while we fight them. He would probably have been a mainstream Democrat a half-century ago.

..and look at the Democrats today. How radically (pun intended) things change.

CalMark| 10.13.10 @ 7:57PM

Carter, like Woodstock and other 60s-70s era stuff, has become a kind of ego-talisman for the Boomers, AKA (oh-so-appropriately!) the "Me" generation.

Infuriatingly, the sentient among us (including a few Boomers who were awake) warned the "Me" generation how bad Obama would be. Too many crowed, "Oh, how bad can it be? We survived Carter!"

Many Boomers, you see, including far too many conservatives among them, are smug, comfortable, and lazy. They think that their experiences (like everything else about them) is unique and The Final Word.

So they defined Carter as the depth of suffering, and so either didn't take Obama seriously enough or voted for him for some arcane reason. That's why we got Obama, and that's why we're in this horrifying national mess.

ElAnneinPA| 10.13.10 @ 9:36PM

I think one of the only reasons why Jimmy's coming out of the woodwork more now is that he's glad that he lived to see a president in office that's worse than he was.

Also keep in mind: Reagan didn't complain about Carter on a frequent basis after the 1980 election. It's almost all we ever hear out of Obama.

Rockyspoon| 10.14.10 @ 9:29AM

Good point. Add to that the fact that the Dems belittled and fought Reagan at every turn. I'm surprised he was able to turn things around (I know this because I was 31 the year he was first elected and trying to raise a family).

leroi| 10.13.10 @ 11:23PM

"Of course, everyone knows what happened by the end of President Carter's term. Can you say President Newt Gingrich?"

Gingrich is no Reagan.

Bennet Cecil| 10.13.10 @ 11:28PM

If you think it is bad now, wait until inflation and unemployment are both above 10% as the dollar crashes. Remove corporate taxes for domestic manufacturing and fire Helicopter Ben. Enact a low flat tax and end the estate tax. Sound money and low taxes bring prosperity. Big government, high taxes and debased currency bring poverty. Voters will choose in November and in 2012.

Sapwolf| 10.14.10 @ 3:12AM

Can you say "President Sarah Palin"?

Heywood| 10.14.10 @ 5:06AM

They're just robbing money from us to expand government even more. Government isn't shrinking and there's been no layoffs for them. Government employees are still getting their full benefits while the rest of us have watched all our wealth being taken from us and given to them.
Those 45% are the ones who don't have a daddy--instead, they use the government to sooth their own insecurities.

JEFF GORDON| 10.14.10 @ 7:37AM

The chickens have come home to roost - we have been on a grand experiment since 1969 using fake money instead of real money - nothing backed by gold OR silver since 1969. The REAL culprits here are FDR, who took all the gold out of circulation, LBJ, who took all the silver out of circulation and Nixon, who did away with the Bretton-Woods agreement which kept the dollar on the gold standard, who created this economic nightmare and NOBODY, Obama or anyone else, can stem the tide. The economy is doomed.

Rockyspoon| 10.14.10 @ 9:24AM

The biggest problems the US faces now are due to programs put in place as the two "New Deals", which came from one of the Fabian Socialists helping Roosevelt start us down the path of destruction. These include income taxes, social security, and other realignments of our economy (some were deemed unconstitutional then and struck down). The runaway debt and unaccountability of our government started by these programs, buoyed by people who basically want to get something for nothing, is what's going to destroy us. Small government that is completely accountable to the people is the only solution. Otherwise our future generations will live with a third world economy.

Dobby| 10.14.10 @ 9:33AM

A Haiku...

Obama has failed
The worst President ever
Jimmy Carter smiles!

Sebastian Interlandi| 10.14.10 @ 10:08AM

Yeesh, I only read this kind of article to see what the other folks are thinking. Reading the comments here makes me sick.

Even though I never liked Bush, I was never so nasty and antagonistic about it. I wanted him to be better, he could just never seem to get there. I cheered when he made good decisions.

All you folks do is whine and be utterly disrespectful. Your deep-seated hatred and disgust shines through with every word. How can people publicly cheer on the failure of others? Where do you get this attitude from?

All I can conclude is that the readers of this magazine seem to share one thing: they're nasty people. I'm glad I don't have that nasty taste in my throat that you folks do. I'd be a very unhappy person.

The False God| 10.14.10 @ 11:06AM

How can we not cheer on his imminent failure? You don't cheer for the success of policies that undo everything you have ever believed in, held dear, and know is right. You don't cheer for someone who is destroying your very way of life, all while telling you how stupid you are and how this is all necessary "for the greater good."

Should the Europeans have cheered on Gengis Khan for bringing "resolute and sweeping change?" The Moors, for "fundamentally changing the culture of" Spain? Mao, for "pushing out the old, and bringing in the new?"

Why would we cheer on the enemy of our way of life? Are we so neurotic and mentally retarded that we would invite our suicide?

higgins1990| 10.14.10 @ 11:12AM

Obama's fiscal/economic policies are grounded in liberal ideology.

This means that liberal ideology = failure.

A.MEN| 10.14.10 @ 12:35PM

White House staff and First Grifters go play golf overseas. Stay there!

TaterSalad| 10.14.10 @ 1:26PM

John Conyers, (D), Michigan is a Socialist/Marxist sympathizer and here is proof.
Would you vote for this guy while his wife is in Federal prison at Addison Correctional Institution? Just another typical Democrat who flip/flops to keep his job while screwing over the Constitution.

http://therealbarackobama.word.....ment-24359

Vasu Murti | 10.14.10 @ 2:06PM

"So much worse than Carter" ?!

I refuted "so much"; "covering"; "full"; "three times"; "exactly", and other anti-animal sound bites a long time ago! You'd think the other side would move on. And they say *I'm* slow?!

Jimmy Carter: From disgraced president to Nobel Laureate

It can be argued that Jimmy Carter left the White House in disgrace, in over his head due to circumstances beyond his control. But he quickly turned things around and has become a respected moral and political figure.

Unlike many of his opponents on the political and religious right, Jimmy Carter has proven himself to be both deeply religious, yet able to separate church and state, i.e., his religion from his politics. Jimmy Carter monitors elections in Latin America and teaches Sunday School in Plains, GA. Only a blithering idiot would confuse the two!

Winning praise for diplomacy, charity and philanthropy (e.g., the Carter Center, Habitat for Humanity, etc.), by 1992, Carter was recognized as an elder statesman within the Democratic Party. Even Bill Clinton sought his advice when running for president.

Carter's post-presidential service has won him praise from across the political spectrum. When I commented to some conservative pro-life friends years ago that Jimmy Carter was one of the best presidents of the late 20th century, they were willing to concede he's one of the best *ex-presidents.*

Carter's post-presidential reputation has gotten recognition from many in the younger generation. In 2007, I had a weekend fling with a single mother I met through an online dating service. As we first got to know each other, she spoke favorably of Jimmy Carter.

Since she was born in January 1973, I wondered if she would have been old enough to even remember the Carter Administration! She was less than eight years old when he left office.

Jimmy Carter *deserves* the Nobel Peace Prize and the status of a respected moral and political figure.

TheOldMan| 10.14.10 @ 4:11PM

One little nitpick: Carter nominated Paul Volker as Fed chairman and he is the one who proceded to flatten inflation. While the Fed is nominally independent, Volker waited until Reagan took office to unleash his fury. It was a bone-crushing recession (I was lucky to have a job then) and millions of people would have liked to execute Volker but he understood what had to be done and had Reagan's unofficial backing.

AC| 10.14.10 @ 4:31PM

Oh, are we still pretending it's a recession? I thought we had agreed to face reality, and start calling the Depression 2.0?

JimmyNashville| 10.14.10 @ 5:44PM

Sometimes I wonder why otherwise reasonable people buy totally into inane, ‘drove it into the ditch’ and ‘mop bucket’ criticisms; but then place no credence whatsoever in what the promise of electing a president with a voting record left of avowed socialist Bernie Sanders might have done to investor confidence

TS Alfabet| 10.14.10 @ 6:47PM

What about after November 2nd? Will the lame duck Congress try to pass the rest of their radical agenda before the new Congress is sworn in?

Might it come down to patriotic Americans staging sit-ins to prevent the lame ducks from being able to hold votes?

Tenn Slim| 10.16.10 @ 8:47AM

Now, this is a good post.
Lame Duck sessions, controlled by Pelosi, Reid, etal will have lasting effects.
Recc. The Email system, overload the remaining incumbents, increase thier stress load levels.
My Incumbent has already packed up his DC site and is home. There were a lot of "retirees" previous to the November debacle. These could make a difference.
end
Semper FI

Frank Johnson| 10.14.10 @ 10:47PM

I like what I read here.

Tenn Slim| 10.16.10 @ 8:44AM

Just in passing.
Vt has UN employment near 20%, yet the Green State folks continue to love Bernie, love their stodgy building programs, love the wx, love the mountains, and love thier Socialistic state.
Unreal, indeed. There are some 900,000 folks there and hardly any are really concerned about the UN employment in Vt and far less concerned about the USA Depression. A true Ostrich in the sand state of affairs.
Not to knock Vt per se. They do have great Maple sugar and syrup.
end
We really do need to Prevail, come November 2.

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 4:08PM

"Even worse is that the economic policies have been so illogical, so transparently doomed to failure, and so threatening to America's future."
----------------------------------------------
I beg to differ. They are not illogical from the point of view of someone who is here on assignment with the goal of destroying our economy, and killing the free Republic. There are those in the world that have been waiting for us to fail for many, many, generations. It still has not happened. America continues to be a light of hope. So, the tyrants of the world will make it happen by first destroying us economically. They will try to make us submit finacially, so, they can dominate us. THAT is why Obama is here. And from that point of view, what he does makes perfect sense. He is not making "mistakes". What he does is on purpose.

Regarding "President Gingrich": Absolutely NOT! I don't trust him any more than any other career Republican who is consistently and persistently compromising our Constitutional freedoms with the Marxists in the Democrat party. When he joined with Pelosi on the environment, that finally killed it for me. He can go away--permanently.

weddingdress | 7.7.11 @ 5:30AM

Unreal, indeed. There are some 900,000 folks there and hardly any are really concerned about the UN employment in Vt and far less concerned about the USA Depression. A true Ostrich in the sand state of affairs.

wedding dresses uk | 10.12.11 @ 1:33AM

Bad news!

Latest Headlines

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr|150 comments

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple|85 comments

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara|64 comments

Restrain the Abusive Administative State

Doug Bandow|23 comments

Disabling American Sovereignty

Iain Murray|13 comments

The Other Gosnells

Jordan Gonzalez|13 comments

Can He Unite Virginia’s GOP?

Carten Cordell|33 comments

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell|26 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Issa Recovers

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

The Religion of Peace Strikes London Again

Aaron Goldstein | 5.22.13

Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack

Quin Hillyer | 5.22.13

House Judiciary: Constitutional Rights Vital in Wartime

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

U.S. Admits 4 Americans Killed by Drones

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

Colorado Governor Gives “Reprieve” to Murderer

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Steven Crowder: Jesus vs. Muhammad

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Kaminsky’s Corollary to I, Pencil

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

The American Spectator

The Obama Watch

So Much Worse Than Carter

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (216) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Booger| 10.13.10 @ 6:32AM

Rick V.| 10.13.10 @ 8:38AM

Stillneedacoolname| 10.13.10 @ 10:18AM

PeteyKay| 10.13.10 @ 11:24AM

stormyweather| 10.13.10 @ 4:24PM

JoeC| 10.14.10 @ 10:03PM

PJ| 10.13.10 @ 8:39AM

TYPICAL REPUBLICAN| 10.13.10 @ 10:12AM

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 10:39AM

Buffo| 10.14.10 @ 11:26AM

Kevin| 10.14.10 @ 6:09AM

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:02PM

BR| 10.13.10 @ 10:39AM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:41PM

Albert| 10.15.10 @ 6:53PM

Joe Dokes | 10.13.10 @ 1:45PM

Dave| 10.13.10 @ 2:27PM

Kyle| 10.14.10 @ 4:18PM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 5:14PM

Chair Nobomba| 10.13.10 @ 5:58PM

Nunya| 10.13.10 @ 6:41PM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:21PM

Nunya| 10.15.10 @ 10:33AM

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:07PM

SamAdams25| 10.13.10 @ 10:28PM

florin| 10.14.10 @ 9:04AM

Bill| 10.14.10 @ 12:40PM

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:16PM

Cogito Ergo Sum Conservativum| 10.13.10 @ 11:11PM

Albert| 10.15.10 @ 7:01PM

dw| 10.13.10 @ 2:51PM

Cyraneau| 10.13.10 @ 3:47PM

DavisJohn| 10.13.10 @ 7:01PM

S.A.W.T.O.O.T.H.| 10.13.10 @ 8:57PM

S.A.W.T.O.O.T.H.| 10.13.10 @ 9:03PM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:23PM

JoeC| 10.14.10 @ 9:48PM

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 2:35AM

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 7:15AM

Darin| 10.13.10 @ 7:22AM

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 9:40AM

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 10:20AM

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 10:48AM

Eric Cartman| 10.13.10 @ 11:09AM

BA Cyclone| 10.13.10 @ 12:15PM

John| 10.14.10 @ 9:23AM

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:31PM

Rico| 10.13.10 @ 10:29AM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:49PM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 12:53PM

George S| 10.13.10 @ 2:31PM

George S| 10.13.10 @ 2:38PM

SoothSayer| 10.13.10 @ 7:22PM

SoothSayer| 10.13.10 @ 7:22PM

Alan Brooks| 10.13.10 @ 10:16PM

Cogito Ergo Sum Conservativum| 10.13.10 @ 2:04PM

you're right!!!| 10.13.10 @ 7:57AM

Dave| 10.13.10 @ 2:33PM

TS Alfabet| 10.14.10 @ 6:15PM

coal carrier| 10.13.10 @ 8:10AM

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.13.10 @ 9:15AM

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 10:11AM

Rev. Jesse Jackson| 10.13.10 @ 12:37PM

Kevin Wyman| 10.22.10 @ 8:48AM

Jobe| 10.13.10 @ 9:36AM

The Guesser| 10.13.10 @ 9:41AM

Jobe| 10.13.10 @ 10:19AM

buckeyeman| 10.13.10 @ 11:51AM

jstwndring| 10.16.10 @ 3:43PM

Kevin Wyman| 10.22.10 @ 8:53AM

JohnLeeHooker| 10.13.10 @ 2:31PM

mike siroky| 10.13.10 @ 4:21PM

Kevin Wyman| 10.15.10 @ 2:38AM

Appleby| 10.13.10 @ 7:18AM

PJ| 10.13.10 @ 8:53AM