Powered by TypePad

« James O'Keefe, With "A More Sleazy Persona Than Normal" | Main | My Name Is Karen Owen »

October 01, 2010


From Outside of Time

Happy September 31st :)


Every line in that "I believe..." paragraph is socialist b.s., except the first one.

How does Obama propose to reward "hard work and responsibility"?

hit and run

I'm going to give a hand up, join hands with folks and try to lift all of us up so we all have a better future, not just some - but all of us.

First it was changing "jobs created or saved" to "lives touched". And now this.

Stop touching me. Seriously. What is it with you and your frickin hands trying to feel me up all the time? Keep your damn hands to yourself.

"The ten most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to touch you.'"
--stuff Ronald Reagan (almost) said


"Two midnights gone !"


"How does Obama propose to reward "hard work and responsibility"?"

By taking every single thing you have worked for and giving it to those that are unwilling to work. The reason they should be given what you have worked for is simple. They are willing to vote for him, you're not.

hit and run

"It's not that I want to punish your success. But get this -- it's not that I'm afraid to either. But don't think of it as punishment. Think of it as a reward for your hard work and responsibility. Because I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."
--stuff Barack Obama (almost) said


"The ten most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to touch you.'"
--stuff Ronald Reagan (almost) said

Like this ??? ... No Pressure

Captain Hate

Thanks for reading Thully so I don't have to give Atlantic or whatever garbage site that subsidizes his lunacy a blog hit; I'd vote for anybody that made a campaign promise to deport that vat of AIDS as soon as he or she was sworn in.


Was that 10:10 video a parody?


TM claims: ``But if the money is saved by hard-working greedy exploitative Americans, in the grand flow of funds through our financial system it will be borrowed by other Americans, such as the US Treasury. Net US debt to foreigners won't budge.''

Hardly. The rich don't pay hedge fund managers 2 and 20 to pile into T bills. Rather, the 4.5 percent of taxable income that people making over 250,000 a year will be told to pay is far more likely to go into structured debt like CDOs, precious metals ETFs, emerging market debt and so on.
Is there a simpler question than: Who will pay for the deficit?
Though waterboarding couldn't get a teabagger to admit it, their core political idea is two words, all caps: NOT ME!!!
If you make over 250,000 there is at least a certain short-sighted logic to that, but if you make less, it's just pathetic to think that keeping tax rates down for the wealthy is going to somehow magically reduce your tax bill.


BuBu-- thy name is idiocy.

TM-- "Excitable Andy" I like that appellation for my former email pal. In a bygone day I would have charitably called EA a "romantic". For 7 years EA has just been an idiot. Hey, has anyone ever seen BuBu and EA post online at the same exact moment?

L!ink U!nder N!ame, where there are two threads about it.

That 10:10 video is viral in the skeptical blogosphere. It was apparently done by serious alarmists, but there is a question whether or not they've been had by the screenwriter. Most think not and think that it is simply over the top, vile propaganda. A wonderful commenter named Lucy Skywalker calls it 'florid psychosis' and the bottom line for most of the skeptics is that it seems to be a marker for the desperation of the alarmists, who see the tide ebbing.

Fred Beloit

Well, bunker, I can't understand your testicular affinity, but it is a free country. Do you mouth your own or someone else's?

Got to remember, folks, that there is serious money backing this scientific hoax and political putsch.

I've been deleted, moderated, banned and otherwise summarily disappeared at enough alarmist blogs to feel that video viscerally. And that's not even to mention the abuse I've met.

hit and run

That's what I believe.

Well, I believe in the soul, that Biden's a c*ck, and Obama a p*ssy. I believe in the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the legal opinions of Sonia Sotomayor are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and that Obama was born in Hawaii. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter and I believe in the full repeal of ObamaCare. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core Chris Christie political pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094812/quotes>That's what I believe.


It didn't look like a cheap production, and the 1010global.org website appears to be legit.

Well at least they're becoming more honest in their desperation. Hopefully the Democrats will follow suit.


the $700 billion it means we will have to borrow from China

The $939 billion, if we measure it over 13 years, 5 months.

That's the psychotic part.

Ext., what shocks most commenters is how out of touch the alarmists who paid for the video are to not realize just how damaging that piece is to the alarmist cause.


Well, at least they believe in the Bush doctrine of preemption. So they shouldn't mind when people conclude that they need to be dealt with.


700 Billion?


It's not like it's a trillion.

Then we'd be talking about serious money, in terms of ObamaWorld budgets.


Was that 10:10 video a parody?

Apparently not.

Captain Hate

serious alarmists

Oxymorons anybody? Those wanks are masters of projection of their twisted little fantasies on to people that have laughed at them all their lives.

This may be cover for some politicians to have a 'Sister Soulja' moment about the climate and energy.

Be sure to check out the trailer available near the end of the post at Neo's link. One of the child actors is filmed saying 'I think it is alright to blow up children for a good cause.'


Thanks Fred! While I'm not physically attracted to men, I'm flattered nonetheless that you would, unbidden, choose to imagine me in a sexual way.


Look, Obama is a centrist, much like Clinton. And Dinesh Desousa (sp?) is a birther. I know this because Geraldo said it was so on F&F this morning. Why do they still have Geraldo appear to ruin my Friday mornings?

I'm not sure.  Through some routes I can still view it hosted on YouTube.  Others not.

Heh, YouTube seems to be trying to shove this down the memory hole. Someone finally woke up.


Did you guys see this Byron York piece on Obama, speaking at a $34,000 per plate at the home of health-care ho, Linda Douglass?

Obama: 'I'd appreciate a little break'


I guess liberals really are the choice ideology....You get to choose - agree with them or they kill you.


I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper...

If I remember correctly, the LORD didn't ask Cain to be Abel's keeper- he expected Cain NOT TO KILL HIM.

And why did Cain do that? Because he was jealous of the favor that Abel found with the LORD.

BONUS QUESTION: Could we describe Abel as someone who made over $250K/year?


Yep, Ex. And didn't you like his subtle hint (snort) about the opulent Italian villa, before saying he'd appreciate a little break?

Damned grifter.

Sue, it is my hope that whenever Geraldo's contract is up, he is not renewed. But, I am not betting on it. They keep him and Alan Colmes around (both are nuts) to be their extreme left voices, I think.

I was shocked to see that Catherine Herridge has filed suit against FNC for discrimination against her (age, sex). Not quite sure what to think about it really.

Gad, this guy's a mess.

Heh, E, I like York's juxtaposition of 'The snowy streets of Des Moines' with 'Tuscan Sun'.


Kim, if you've seen the video, it's on your hard drive. I just retrieved my copy and moved it to the desktop.



Obama=Grifter; very true

Danube of Thought

Minus 18 at Raz today.


I have asked this question at least one hundred times and still no answer. How did Bush's tax cuts cause a worldwide recession?

Captain Hate

Marty Peretz: Here's lots of money and my opinion

Harvard: Send money not opinions

Marty: I'm sorry

Ruth R. Wisse: WTF (LUN)


His speech knocked Andy's sox off - I'm gonna frow up


Libs seem to think that wealthy people save their money in the form of coin and currency in a secret vault ala Scrooge McDuck. That would explain the Keynesian belief that investors take money out of the economy and that government stimulus creates, rather than consumes, wealth.

Danube of Thought

What and where is the 10:10 video?

Danube of Thought

If we don't let the tax rates go up for those making over $250K, unemployment may exceed 8%.

Rob Crawford

One of the child actors is filmed saying 'I think it is alright to blow up children for a good cause.'

Yay multiculturalism! Yay the left's alliance with jihadis!


The other problem with the admin arguing about the "expense" of extending the upper-bracket tax cuts is the middle and lower bracket tax cuts "cost" much much more.


The president often repeats the refrain that extending the Bush tax cuts for upper incomes will add $700 billion to the deficit over ten years. He tends to not mention that his proposal to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone else will cost more than four times that amount to the deficit -- an estimated $3 trillion -- for which he, like President George W. Bush, has not budgeted.

Ric Locke

DoT: Several places, but here's one of them.


Rob Crawford

screenwriter Richard Curtis – you know, Blackadder

Ah, hell. One of my all-time favorites, stained by the irredeemable mark of fascism. I guess if I can stomach Alexi Sayle (self-proclaimed Marxist) in "The Young Ones", I can still enjoy Blackadder.


The left really does think that willingness to commit violence is an admirable trait, don't they?


Captain, that Harvard "Social Studies" crowd is made up of 100% Marxists (big surprise), about as tolerant of dissent as Stalin was. I once had a discussion with them about affirmative action where I gingerly raised the possibility that it might result in some kind of stigma against the favored minority groups. They reacted as if I had just said "The earth is flat."


Pat Buchanan has a provocative column this morning, isolationist in tone. I think he's wrong in thinking that Americans are ready to simply "come home," but I believe he's right (as I was discussing with my wife yesterday evening) that Americans are not up for more wars any time soon--and that pulling in our horns some could result in enormous reductions in spending without harming preparedness. I also disagree with his assessment of what will be needed to build bi-partisan majorities. The key here, I believe, is the Senate, and due to the rolling Senate elections there are still plenty of Democrat Senators who will be looking over their shoulders and may be willing to cut, even slash, domestic spending. The nation is looking for a smaller government footprint, right here at home. Anyway, here are some of Buchanan's comments:

Tea Party vs. War Party?

"We're all on the same page until the polls close Nov. 2," Richard Viguerie, the longtime conservative strategist who has allied with the Tea Party, told The New York Times. After that, "a massive, almost historic battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party begins."

Indeed, such a battle seems unavoidable. Consider.

The great issue uniting and motivating the Republican Party and Tea Party is the deficit-debt crisis, a national debt nearing 100 percent of gross domestic product and a deficit of 10 percent of GDP.

As to the cause of the deficit that could precipitate a run on the dollar, double-digit inflation, even a default, the Tea Party and GOP also agree -- federal spending that consumes 25 percent of GDP.

Both are also on the same page in their opposition to closing the deficit with new or higher taxes.

This means spending must be slashed. But to cut the budget to 20 percent of GDP, where it was before George W. Bush and Barack Obama, requires spending cuts of an astronomical $700 billion a year. Even then, the 2011 deficit would be $700 billion.

As interest on the debt must be paid, or we default, there are only two places you can find that kind of money. The first is the major entitlement programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security -- and social spending for education, veterans benefits, earned income tax credits and unemployment compensation.

But a Democratic Party, brutalized and bled on Nov. 2, returning to Capitol Hill with its moderate wing annihilated, is unlikely to collude with a resurgent Republican right and Tea Party caucus in hacking away at social programs that are the Democratic Party's pride and joy, and the reason that party exists.

Which leaves one place where a bipartisan majority may be found for major spending cuts: defense and the empire, the warfare state.

The "agonizing reappraisal" of commitments abroad that John Foster Dulles predicted half a century ago may be at hand.

And here is where the Tea Party and War Party split the blanket.

If Obama makes good on his pledge of full withdrawal of the 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by the end of 2011, will the Tea Party and Republican right oppose that withdrawal and join the War Party in demanding that we retain an army in Iraq indefinitely?

If Obama refuses to go to war against Iran, a war that would send oil prices soaring, close the Persian Gulf and be a disaster for the global economy, will the Tea Party join the War Party in denouncing Obama for not launching a third war in the Near East?

If Obama begins his promised withdrawal from Afghanistan next July, will Tea Party Republicans join the War Party and the generals in accusing Obama of inviting an American defeat?

The neocons are nervous the Tea Party may not sign up to soldier on for the empire. Writing in The Washington Post, Danielle Pletka and Thomas Donnelly of AEI have sniffed out the unmistakable scent of "isolationism" among Tea Party favorites.


Sorry, but the old neocon name-calling won't cut it this time.

After Iraq and Afghanistan, the American people are not going to give the establishment and War Party a free hand in foreign policy. Every patriot will do what is necessary and pay what is needed to defend his country. But national security is one thing, empire security another.

Why should Americans, 65 years after World War II, be defending rich Europeans from a Soviet Union that has been dead for 20 years, so those same Europeans can cut their defense budgets to protect their social safety nets?

President Eisenhower told JFK to bring the troops home from Europe, or the Europeans would wind up as permanent wards.

Was Ike a closet isolationist?

Almost $14 trillion in debt today, we borrow from Europe to defend Europe, borrow from Japan to defend Japan, borrow from the Gulf Arabs to defend the Gulf Arabs. And we borrow from Beijing to send foreign aid to African regimes whose U.N. delegations laughed and applauded as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told the General Assembly that 9/11 was an inside job by the U.S. government. Have we lost all sense of self-respect?


National security, yes. Empire security we can no longer afford.



IIRC Andy also was a big supporter of the Iraq war until he realized that soldiers shoot to kill and sometimes without proper supervision do really bad things like *gasp* put panties on the heads of detainees.


Rob, there are some who think Richard Curtis and his wicked sense of humour have pulled a fast one on the ecofascists. But then, there seems to be some indications that he's committed to the Greenie cause. I don't know the answer, but it is amazing that those paying for this video didn't see the damage coming.

Rob Crawford

Rob, there are some who think Richard Curtis and his wicked sense of humour have pulled a fast one on the ecofascists.

Perhaps -- it would be a brilliant joke.

But the ecofascists went along with it, and don't appear to consider it a joke. These are the people who nodded along with the Unabomber's manifesto -- and now they're endorsing his methods along with his message.

Someone had to bellow in their ear before they came to their senses.

Ho, ho, ho. This video is being removed and re-uploaded at a frantic pace. The 10:10 group has removed it from their site. As I said, someone woke up.

DoT, there seem to be fresh uploads near the end of the comment stream at the thread that Ric links.

Melinda Romanoff

Anybody want to learn "How to write a NYT October Surprise column."?

Doug Ross has an easy guide for the untrained scribe..

Army of Davids

Rafael Correa....Ecuador.....A Hugo Chavez clone w/ nicer clothes.

Univ. of Illinois Doctorate in economics.


He does have the US government's full support.


Martin Young at ATO has a good article re Stuxnet:

Stuxnet raises virus stakes

HUA HIN, Thailand - The term "cyber-warfare" has until recently been reserved primarily for spy novels or the corridors of clandestine government security departments. That changed in recent weeks when a nuclear installation in Iran was attacked by a piece of malicious software (malware) called Stuxnet.

The viral code has been circulating since June, but the specific targeting of this particular attack sets a precedent as the first of its kind and a new era of cyber warfare.

The Bushehr nuclear power plant, on Iran's southwest coastline, was the target of the well-orchestrated digital assault. The method of infection would probably have been via a USB memory stick (or sticks), which may have been left in strategic locations to be stumbled upon by employees who would subsequently pocket the device and later plug it into their laptop or workstation.

Iranian authorities estimated that at least 30,000 computers at the reactor and owned by employees were infected. Efforts to remove the viral code were fraught with problems. "The virus is not stable, and since we started the clean-up process three new versions of it have been spreading,” said Hamid Alipour, deputy head of Iran's state run Information Technology Co.

Industrial control systems made by German company Siemens, which are widely used in Iran, were the targets of the worm, indicating that its creators had advanced knowledge of these types of systems far beyond the scope of a most information technology experts. The code is so specialized that it targets only two models of Siemens programmable logic controllers, the S7 300 and S7 400, and will execute only if it finds very specific parameters within the machine. These controllers are usually associated with the management of oil pipeline systems, electrical power grids, and nuclear power plants.

Alipour went on to state that due to the code's complexity, reach, and huge investment behind its creation it was likely to have originated from a foreign country or organization.

Writers and purveyors of malware and viruses have usually been motivated by a desire for notoriety or financial gain. Stuxnet breaks that mould by being malicious code designed as a weapon. It attacks industrial control systems and alters the code in them, allowing hackers to gain control of the physical machinery and manipulate real-world equipment. This makes the threat far more dangerous than a regular virus, which is designed to wreak havoc in cyberspace.


Danube of Thought

Thanks, Ric and Kim. Couldn't get any of them to play.


It's still here:

10:10 video: No Pressure


at the bottom


Big story from Gallup with commentary by Hotair:

Gallup: Hispanic voters drifting back to the GOP

Democrats have tried wooing Hispanic voters all year long, and thought they had a golden opportunity in April when Arizona passed a tough immigration-enforcement law. Barack Obama leaped at the chance to hammer Republicans on immigration reform, spending more time in April and May talking about Arizona’s law than he did about the Gulf oil-spill crisis. Handwringers in the GOP moaned that Arizona would make it more difficult to attract Hispanic voters whose inclination towards free market economics and pro-life sensibilities would make them a natural constituency for Republicans, or at the least a competitive one.


Hispanic voters’ support for Democratic candidates waned in August and September. As a result, Hispanics in September favored Democrats by a 13-point margin (51% to 38%), compared with 32-point margins in June and July. …

Hispanics present a different problem for the president’s party. While they voted strongly for Obama in 2008 and were supposed to be one of the building blocks of Democratic victory in 2010, Gallup’s recent polling suggests their support for Democratic congressional candidates is slipping. This is in line withHispanics’ dwindling approval of Obama as president, with the initial decline seen in May possibly linked to the Democrats’ failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

Well, that’s certainly one narrative, but not one that makes much sense. Republicans mainly held firm in their support for Arizona’s new law, and for good reason; it’s been tremendously popular in almost every state. Obama stopped talking about it during the summer after it became clear that he had lost his grip on the issue, and that people cared more about the economy than anything else.

That includes Hispanic voters. Gallup assumes that immigration reform is the only issue that matters to Hispanics, but that’s not just ridiculous, it’s also more than a little condescending. Hispanic voters, like everyone else, have to make a living and pay their bills. While immigration reform might be more important to them as a bloc than it is to other voting blocs, it seems not to have crossed Gallup’s mind that immigration reform doesn’t impact them directly — since, as voters, they’re already here, most of them by birth. As the economy soured over the summer, the benefit of the doubt given by these voters dissipated at the same time.

Yeah, so now Obama's trying to use the slavery issue. That should help turn out the youth and Hispanic voters, right?

Army of Davids

Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom.
Friedrich August von Hayek

Whatever happened to Obama Girl? I liked her video.

Strawman Cometh

very helpful firefox tip. While in my cache folder, I found the 10:10 video and a file from last night which I renamed to LevinAllredEvisceration.flv
I recommend VLC media player for playback.

Fred Beloit

bunker, so it's your own then.

Rick Ballard

Campaign 2012 - Give BOzo a Long Rest - is going to begin on November 3rd. It's going to be very interesting to see how the Dem survivors of "you've got me" react in the lame duck session. The Republicans should insist upon the employer (that's what the "rich" are) tax cuts being included and also insist on the package being made permanent. I just don't see an electoral downside to doing so and I don't see the Dems as being able or willing to block it.

I also don't see BOzo wielding the veto pen.


Dave Keene of ACU presents a contrasting view in some respects - contrasting with Pat Buchanan, that is - re some of the political dynamics that will be at work in the new Congress (via Ron Kessler at NewsMax):

Keene is one of the country’s most astute political observers, As outlined in the Newsmax story “Keene: Obama Will Overreach,” just after Obama won the presidency, Keene said that Obama “did not win for the reasons he thinks he did, and he can be counted on to overreach, helping to return Republicans to power.”

Keene predicts that as many as 1,500 Democratic professional staffers could be out of work when control of the House reverts to Republicans.

“So those 1,500 staffers are no longer interested in party loyalty,” Keene says. “They are interested in going someplace and finding a job. So at that point the only tool the administration has is promises of a job, and there are not enough jobs. When they start to go down, and there is no way out, things get ugly.”

As it is, a growing number of Democrats are breaking with the Obama administration and their own leadership by favoring an extension of the Bush tax cuts at all income levels.

“First of all, there are a lot of Democrats who down deep don’t buy into this class warfare stuff,” Keene says. “While they favor a bigger government than Republicans do, they aren’t for the Europeanization of America.

"They went along with it to follow their party leadership and their president, but once the party leadership and the president lose both their credibility and the ability to help them and have decided to jettison and put them out there on their own, they are going to do what they think is either best for them or best for the country. That is what’s happening on the tax cut issue.”


At another point, [Obama] told Democrats upset at a perceived lack of progress to think of the patience of onetime slaves. "You know, the slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs, they weren't sure when slavery would end, but they understood it was going to end," he said.

The Washington Post, via Drudge

Army of Davids


Pension Spiking

Thank you California. Thank you SEIU.

Cockroach Theory.....for every roach you see....there are dozens you don't.


Though waterboarding couldn't get a teabagger to admit it, their core political idea is two words, all caps: NOT ME!!!
If you make over 250,000 there is at least a certain short-sighted logic to that, but if you make less, it's just pathetic to think that keeping tax rates down for the wealthy is going to somehow magically reduce your tax bill.

Wait, what?
People who make under $250,000 who want only people making $250,000+ to pay more in taxes are quite obviously yelling "NOT ME!!""
That's the Dem position, and yours, I believe.



I'm skeptical. The deficit commission report will be out by then and it will prescribe tax hikes as the only fix. The report will probably include the debt and deficit in national security terms as well, as weather-ballooned by Adm. Mullen and Sec. Clinton a few weeks back. I just don't see the lame duck session all that productive for either side-staffers will be looking for new jobs or entering new jobs, the White House is going through a staff rotation and has to staff up legal councel (both the Executive Office and Legislative Affairs). And to Sue's point above, the tax cuts for the not rich cost much more in Obama's formulation than those for the rich. I think it adds up to all the tax cuts expiring, Obama vetoing any extension the Reps pass, and the Reps not getting enough votes to overcome the veto. Then Obama and the Dems gets to campaign for 2 years that the greedy Republicans caused the next recession.


It's like clubbing a helpless baby seal, isn't it Maybee? :)


Should have put this in this thread to begin with:

I need someone to help me with my math homework.
The claim is, extending the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 will "cost" $700 billion and extending the ones for lower earners will cost $3 trillion.
Since those making over $250K supposedly pay somewhere around 40-50% of income taxes how does the math work out for the $700B vs $3T claims?

Dave (in MA)
bunnyboy: Though waterboarding couldn't get a teabagger to admit it,
People on the side of the aisle of those who use that term are far more likely to be familiar with the taste of ball sweat.
JM Hanes


"You know, the slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs..."

Somebody's been watching Glory again.


I need someone to help me with my math homework.

I can't vouch for the exact numbers, but there's no contradiction. Remember that despite what the MSM says, the Bush tax cuts were across the board. In fact, proportionally they favored lower income people. (For example, the lowest bracket went from 15 to 10 percent, while the highest went from 39.6 to 35.) So it stands to reason that if you undo those cuts, more of the revenue is going to come from the non-rich.

Good luck getting that explanation from the MSM, which is stuck on the idea that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich. More evidence that the Republicans should not even bother trying to appease the left--they will get hammered anyway.


Thanks jimmyk. Had forgotten that.

Cecil Turner
What I particularly loved about the speech was his direct attack on the fiscal irresponsibility of the Pledge To America, the $700 billion it means we will have to borrow from China to sustain the unsustainable Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 a year.
Utter stupidity, besides being a straw man. First, as noted above, the 700 billion pales by comparison with the 3+ trillion the rest of the tax cuts "cost." But the better argument is the one the GOP is actually making. The cuts in question directly impact half of the "small" business income (p.12):
The staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that in 2011 just under 750,000 taxpayers with net positive business income (three percent of all taxpayers with net positive business income) will have marginal rates of 36 or 39.6 percent under the President’s proposal, and that 50 percent of the approximately $1 trillion of aggregate net positive business income will be reported on returns that have a marginal rate of 36 or 39.6 percent.12 [emphasis added]
And why should that matter? Well, maybe because small businesses account for about half of all job creation. So, let's raise the tax rates and watch the unemployment rate go up. Great idea, right?
Cecil Turner

And what I particularly love is the spate of articles like this one entitled "The Myth of Small Business Job Creation":

But it's a myth, they say.

The researchers concludes that there is "no systematic relationship between firm size and growth." Where there is a pattern, it shows that small businesses can actually detract from job growth. It cites, as an illustration, that in 2005, small businesses lost approximately 1 million jobs, even as the overall economy expanded by about 2.5 million.

What? Small businesses are most sensitive to economic factors and can actually destroy jobs too? Well, that means we should raise their taxes, right? (On the off chance the recession might not've done 'em in already.) Where do these people go to school?

Rick Ballard

"Then Obama and the Dems gets to campaign for 2 years that the greedy Republicans caused the next recession."


I'm basing my contention upon a probability that the survivors will have a semblance of sentience. Should they pursue the avenue which you suggest, then my assessment will be proven incorrect. If all the cuts are not extended and made permanent there is no reason for employers to put any additional capital at risk - and great incentive to remove even more capital from the market.


Do not look *askance* at me. (I love that word though not sure what it actually means.) I said a long, long time ago that the "brilliant" Obama was a dunce.


Okay--here's looking askance.



My favorite picture



According to the pool report, Obama thanked Phillips for the work he and his wife have done for Team Obama. Then the president mentioned that Phillips and Douglass have an opulent place in Italy and wondered why there had been no invitation to visit. “I’d appreciate a little break and some Tuscan sun,” the president said, according to the pool report. “Some pasta. I can use it.”

soon bambi, soon...

Exploding dear little ones.

OK, where's the Bambi/Godzilla YouTubes?


OK, where's the Bambi/Godzilla YouTubes?

Ask Ann. She just put up a screen cap from one.


Hey Cecil, recently you said the reason you were wasting my time with misinformation and disinformation was because you object to me "cluttering" the threads of your favorite web site. Well, by your definition, haven't I been cluttering today? I even cited a Pat Buchanan article that referred to "Neocons"! Shouldn't you be offering some disinformation? Or is it that you only object to "clutter" that criticizes American citizens who betray the US? You need to do more to hide your actual agenda, don't you think? People will catch on.

Danube of Thought

Oh, what a lovely article by Michael Wolff on the One.

A taste:

So to refocus the story: Some mass misperception put Barack Obama in the White House and now nobody knows what to do with him.

Thanks for the link. DoT - delish, as they say.

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet

Boy Wolff has it covered, doesn't he? I guess he wasn't the one we were waiting for after all.

The comments to this entry are closed.