Looking For Some Hot Models (And The Results Of The Stimulus)

Did Obama's original stimulus package, aka the American Recovery ad Reinvestment Act, aka Porkulus I actually succeed?  James Pethoukis says no and draws an intriguing rebuke from Ezra Klein.  I am especially drawn to this:

To be sure, Pethokoukis’s second argument is far superior to his first: he quotes an analysis by John Taylor, a Stanford economist, which attempted to measure the extra spending — as opposed to the net paying down of debts — induced by the stimulus, and found little effect. Case closed?

Not really. A few months ago, Dylan Matthews and I attempted to do a comprehensive job on the subject, asking an array of economists from both sides of the aisle which studies they found most persuasive and then summarizing those studies, as well as their methodological strengths and weaknesses. We ended up with nine studies — including Taylor’s — and 4,877 words of summary. It was not an easy task.

And as far as I can tell, it’s not a task Pethokoukis even attempted. Dylan and I found that of the nine serious efforts to estimate the stimulus, six found substantial positive effects, two found no effect, and one found a slight effect. Taylor’s paper was nowhere near the most convincing of the bunch, and Taylor, a longtime spokesperson for Republican economic policies, is not the most convincing messenger, either. But Pethokoukis neither attempts to deal with the flaws in Taylor’s study — he gestures toward one of them and then misuses a quote Larry Summers gave me about “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects — or the contrary results in, say, Feyrer and Sacerdote.

Let's dig in!  We may as well kick off with Feyrer and Sacerdote.  From their abstract:

A cross state analysis suggests that one additional job was created by each $170,000 in stimulus spending. Time series analysis at the state level suggests a smaller response with a per job cost of about $400,000. These results imply Keynesian multipliers between 0.5 and 1.0, somewhat lower than those assumed by the administration.

So we got less stimulus than the Administration promised.  Already we have a baseline problem - if Team Obama predicted 3 million jobs "created or saved" and utterly credible outside analysts conclude the actual figure was 100,000, did the stimulus succeed?  Critics claiming it cost the economy jobs are wrong, after all.  On the other hand, 100,000 is a lot less than 3 million.

Mr. Klein does not explicitly address this quandary, but since he scores this paper among the "Stimulus Worked" set, I infer that he is setting a low bar.  Certainly other critics have argued that, although the force of nearly $1 trillion surely created some jobs, the stimulus under-delivered (Mr. Klein quotes Douglas Holtz-Eakin to that effect).  Since the Feyrer-Sacerdote paper does not describe the extent of the gap between their estimates and the Administration vision, I am withholding judgment.

The next "Success" story is Chodorow-Reich et al.  From the abstract:

Abstract: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 included $88 billion of aid to state governments administered through the Medicaid reimbursement process. We examine the effect of these transfers on states’ employment.

What?  The $88 billion of Medicaid is roughly ten percent of the total ARRA package.  Even if this slice was stimulative, that hardly speaks for the whole package.

But the comedy continues.  The next paper is by Daniel J. Wilson of the San Francisco Fed, and he includes this tidbit:

In contrast to Chodorow-Reich, et al., I find no evidence of a positive Medicaid multiplier for total nonfarm employment, even when using the same instrument (pre-ARRA Medicaid spending). The difference likely derives from the control variables that I include and the fact that in my regressions I am also simultaneously controlling for the other two/thirds of ARRA spending.

That bodes poorly for the previous "Success!" paper, whose value was suspect in any case.  Mr. Wilson's broader conclusion:

This paper estimates the “jobs multiplier” of fiscal spending – by sector, by type of
spending, and over time – using the state-level allocations of federal stimulus funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. Because the level and timing of stimulus funds that a state receives is potentially endogenous, I exploit the fact that most of these funds were allocated according to exogenous formulary allocation factors such as the number of federal highway miles in a state or its youth share of population. The estimates suggest ARRA spending created or saved about 2 million jobs in its first year and over 3 million by March 2011.

OK, that sounds like a success.  I found a website that noted a "fallacy of composition" problem with this statistical technique, but let's checkthe scorecard.  Where Mr. Klein had three "Success" papers, I have one gray area, one discard, and one success.  Shall we press on?

Let's not.  The next three "Success!" papers amount to re-running macroeconomic models to verify that yes, the models said that when money is spent jobs will be created, and they still say that if the money was spent, jobs must have been created.  Pretty convincing.  Here is the CBO, and Mr. Klein's summary of the issue is well worth repeating:

b) Prediction versus evaluation: Some critics have discounted the CBO’s studies on the stimulus as, in Reason writer Peter Suderman’s words, “pre-cooked”, because the multiplier estimates are based on evidence known before the stimulus was passed, and thus are sure to produce similar results before and after the stimulus was enacted. However, this is arguably a strength of the CBO approach. Attempts to determine the effect of the stimulus by comparing spending and employment data have to control for other factors are affecting employment, which can be tricky. A modeling approach avoids these pitfalls.

In other words, the CBO didn't get bogged down with messy details or untidy reality.  And that's a good thing!

The CEA plugged and chugged with its own multipliers and models and found that their advice was spot on. 

Finally, Zandi and Blinder used Moody's econometric model and, after running different scenarios, concluded that more spending created jobs, just like their model says.  Mr. Klein delivers another laugher in describing this model:

Federal spending is treated as exogenous because “legislative and administrative decisions do not respond predictably to economic conditions,”

So the model which assumes Federal spending is independent of economic conditions is being used to evaluate an increase in government spending triggered by weak economic conditions.  Am I alone in being troubled by that?

So six "Success!" stories have, by my grim reckoning, been beaten down to one success, one fogbank, and four for the round file.  Hard to believe Mr. Pethoukis didn't even address any of these.

IT FAILED!  On the "Stimulus Fail!" side of the ledger, Timothy Conley of Western Ontario and Bill Dupor of Ohio State University paper's confidence intervals drew a No Confidence vote from Noahpinion.

Comments

[matt]

The telegraph says that the U.K. had two Falls this year. Darn that global warming!

[Danube of Thought]

Not much dispute about how much it increased the deficit.

[Clarice]

I think I have a breakthrough notion--FUTURE jobs caused by the stimulus: special prosecutor and staff; US Attys and Assts and paralegals to prosecute; journalists who if the get off their duffs will find tons of graft and waste..Prison guards and staff to oversee the convicted swindlers..Oh, and defense counsel, lots of defense counsel.

[Melinda Romanoff]

I see no analysis of things that were repealed by ARRA either.

Lets try and figure the cost of repealing the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, first.

Do that estimate, and we'll have something to build on.

[jorod]

They said we would get $1.50 for every $1.00 spent. So the economy should have grown about $2 trillion by now.

WRONG.

[Ignatz]

A question which might alter the results slightly might be what the effect on private sector employment was of the apparatchiks borrowing almost a trillion bucks that might plausibly have been lent elsewhere or at the very least not wasted on government boondoggles.
If Spain's experience with green jobs is any indicator we experienced a net loss.

[JJ]

Oh man, that was depressing to read but a good analysis of the analyzers. If the analyzers could stop soaking their heads in the political hot tubs they're in and deal with the pain, that'd be a good thing (speak Forrest Gump).

Maybe call the mutation of BDS, the DEDS or something. The Democrat Economic Derangement Syndrome?

[Danube of Thought]

The idea is to get the money out of the hands of people who have realized capital gains (now, how do we suppose they did that?), and turning it over to the visionaries who saw the smoldering potential of Solyndra.

Seems like a surefire way to get this country moving again.

[MarkO]

One of the first chants I learned about computers, and that was while working on a case for IBM, was "garbage in; garbage out.

The phrase "jobs saved or created," was chosen precicely because it was so vague as to be incapable of measurement.

These folks are grifters. Carney folk.

[Ignatz]

--Am I alone in being troubled by that?--

Am I alone in thinking Ezra Klein hasn't enough brains to fill a pea hen's brain pan let alone enough to know what John Taylor is even talking about?

[narciso]

Guess what lies behind door # 2:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/center-american-cronyism-and-saudi-progress_593703.html

[Melinda Romanoff]

MarkO-

You've got it backwards. They view you as the "carney folk" because you showed up and paid the admission fee, aka "taxes".

[MarkO]

Mel, my love. I always sneak under the tent.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Ig-

Young Mr. Klein may have discovered how to spell "Taylor" at his young age, but, as far the "Rule"'s definition, I doubt it.

[Melinda Romanoff]

MarkO-

That cool, metallic feeling, as you slip under the flap of the tent, is not a flashlight.

Just sayin'.

[Danube of Thought]

Here's a hot one: "Taylor, a longtime spokesperson for Republican economic policies, is not the most convincing messenger, either."

Ezra, on the other hand, should be understood as a reliable spokesman for objective truth--let the chips fall where they may!--and must therefore be taken as a highly convincing messenger.

[Rick Ballard]

"Am I alone in being troubled by that?"

Dunno but how the hell did you write that whole piece without unexpectedly using the unexpected word unexpectedly? I'm torn between whether sheep entrails or a decent Ouija board provides the best macroeconomic and world climate modeling at the moment.

[Clarice]

Certainly, DoT, well said. Woot. Now, think of this, a bi- coastal law firm, DoT and Feldman is our name; qui tam is our game.

If that isn't stimulating what is?
Niters..

[Danube of Thought]

David Brooks comes clean:

I’m a sap, a specific kind of sap. I’m an Obama Sap.

When the president said the unemployed can’t wait 14 more months for help and we had to do something right away, I believed him. When administration officials called around saying that the possibility of a double-dip recession was horrifyingly real and that it would be irresponsible not to come up with a package that could pass right away, I believed them.

I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged Republicans to play along. But of course I’m a sap. When the president unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip. This is a campaign marker, not a jobs bill.

When you've lost David Brooks--well, what exactly have you lost?

[Temperospatial chaos.]

The macroeconomicians are making mincemeat of the climate modelers.

Using pitifully inadequate digital simulacra for both tasks.
============

[Soros is Petrobras.]

That's good, narciso; pales Kochs into the Kansas sunset.
======================

[BR]

11:06, God, I love the way men express themselves.

[Rick Ballard]

Kim,

The macro folks have a much better grip on sophistry but I can't see how you could give them the edge wrt accuracy of predictions.

[MayBee]

Brooks can't help himself:

The president believes the press corps imposes a false equivalency on American politics. We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme. There’s a lot of truth to that, but at least Republicans respect Americans enough to tell us what they really think.

What in the world is the truth in that?

[Rick Ballard]

"What in the world is the truth in that?"

MayBee,

Same truth as always - Pinch signs his check. That's what make this the sole interesting Brook's piece in the last three years. The worm only turns when ordered.

[Danube of Thought]

Brooks is beginning to thrash about, wondering in what form a life preserver might appear. i'd be inclined to toss him a Danforth anchor and an ingot or two of lead.

[Iggy]

--"What in the world is the truth in that?"--

No kidding. He doesn't even know how to spell "corpse".

[Jim Ryan]

macroeconomicians are making mincemeat

Kim, you mean that the macroeconomists are pointing out that when it comes to systems as complex as planetary climates or planetary economies making claims about causation is foolhardy? But the climate scientists can easily counter that when there are hundreds of millions of dollars of research funds at stake, this argument only goes so far.

[BR]

Hee, I just think Kim was pretending to be over-prosited :)

[Danube of Thought]

As the Nobel-winning guy who just resigned from the APS said, we are free to debate whether the mass of a proton changes over time. But the question of the existence and degree of man-made global warming is out of bounds: it's all been fully and finally determined.

[Jim]

Hmm. If you believe that a bureaucrat / teacher ratio of about 50/50 is top heavy, then the stimulus which saved 'teacher' jobs was kind of a waste of money when we didn't have any.

If you believe that trying to 'innovate' low BTU sources of energy out of wind and solar is akin to harnessing your own methane, then it probably would have been better if Bernanke would have burned the money in the Fed's furnaces rather than giving it to Obama as a an IOU, and government cutting edge energy companies that private equity ran from.

If you think that government infrastructure systems and Medicare are broken almost beyond repair, like education, then giving them billions of dollars is like giving your dog a hammer and asking him to fix the garage.

If you think that any private enterprise that would design a marketing or advertising campaign that can not be measured should deserves to go bankrupt, then watching economists do multi-variate regressions on a complex system without concern for opportunity costs, crowding out, inevitability, and the like, is like watching a kind of surreal and macabre dance where the world has gone arguably and completely crazy.

[Danube of Thought]

Yo, Jim! Where you been, bro?

[Danube of Thought]

Newsweek coverp story, February 23, 1981:

"Are We Running Out of Water?"

[Comanche Voter]

Fisking young Master Ezra? For shame, for shame.

Also a bit of a waste of time; every sentient reader knows that Ezra is full of bull.

[Andrew_M_Garland]

Stimulus Plan

[0] Take $880 billion from the economy. ($2,930 per man, woman, and child). Do not adjust the GDP statistics, because this money was surely just lying around doing nothing.

[1] Spend (or give if you must) the money on worthy projects and people associated with the government.
  (see Crumbling Infrastructure at http://cafehayek.com/2011/09/crumbling.html )

[2] Make an accounting entry in the statistics "US GDP +$880 billion".

[3] Proclaim to the public that you have increased GDP by $880 billion and have created 3.3 million jobs (or job equivalents).
  How to compute jobs: Divide $880 billion by $30,000 per job = 30 million jobs (approximately). Over three years = 10 million jobs sustained each year. Adjust for government fraud and abuse (n/3) = 3.3 million jobs.

[4] Proclaim that all intelligent economists agree with you, to gain more public confidence.

[5] If it doesn't seem to work, try, try again until re-election or ruin.

Important Note:

Omit step [0] above from all interdepartmental communications and press releases. This step is classified. If you are questioned, and really pinned to the wall, go off the record and explain that we are merely transfering some wealth from the future (where it isn't yet needed) into the present (where we desperately need it for re-election).

Avoid any speculation that we cannot really take resources from the future. Yes, we can only take resources available today and put them to a different use, supporting our friends in the government and infrastructure community. The future will eventually arrive and take care of itself, when we may be out of office anyway.

Stimulus Does Not Cure a Recession

[South Sea Bubble. What, the Falklands?]

jim, the world has suffered an 'Extraordinary Popular Delusion and Madness of the Crowd'. Look at the torrent of capital draining into the great, gaping, insatiable green hole in the ground, with liars at the top of it.
===================

[daddy]

"When you've lost David Brooks--well, what exactly have you lost?"

Either you're ironing board or a decent Chinese Laundry Service to press your pants.

[daddy]

***your*** grrrrrrr

[I'll take the glass beads for $24. Venetian?]

David Brooks? Why I'll bet he doesn't know anyone who voted for McCain.
==========

[glasater]

Brooks was an acolyte of WF Buckley. Incredible that he's turned out the way he has.

The Bible says if we could see what the future holds our hearts would fail.
I rather think Buckley saw Obama coming down the pike and...

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

Dolores Hope, wife of Bob Hope died today at 102. She was a lovely woman who I'm proud to say I met one time. RIP.

[daddy]

Well I don't know about you guys but it's been tough living up here this year.

Put yourself in my shoes for a moment.

Imagine how hard its been on me having to deal with the guilt of not having to pay any State Income Tax, while knowing all the while that most of you poor bas#$%ds are being robbed blind by the California or the New York or the Massachusetts Tax Man.

Gad, that's been brutal:(

And just think what a downer its been for me to not have to pay any city or county sales Tax whatever, yet being fully cognizant that every time you poor wretches walk into a Restaurant or Mini-Mart or Liquor Store your Municipalities are picking your pockets clean and you're stumbling out with a handful of pennies. (Good Gawd we don't even let pennies in the State! Ugly little coppery doodad nothings!)
---Oh, doth my heart ache for you people so:(

Yessiree, this constant pressure I've endured, having to shoulder this tax injustice, this inequity, this downright unfairness, has truly been a burden I hope none of you suckers errr good folks will ever have to deal with yourselves. It tears me up inside something awful I tell ya' ---(sniff sniff)---which is why I sincerely hope that the State of Alaska has taken all my human suffering into consideration when our Governor announces tomorrow how much free money he plans to give me in this years PFD check for agonizing up here all year long with such guilt.

(If it's less than a couple grand I'm gonna' be PO'd!!!)

[cindyk]

Well I for one am glad you are willing to "take one" for the team, even though this "team" is our blessed northern neighbors :D!

[hoyden]

Pennies, "Ugly little coppery doodad nothings!"

daddy, I don't think they make them much out of copper anymore.

[DebinNC]

Attention Earlybirds! Around 7:15 this morning, JOM's jimmyk will be on NYC's WPIX News to talk about Obama's "deficit reduction" "plan". Click "watch live".

[Captain Hate]

Thanks for the link Deb, but I think I may have just missed it because they're now talking about diabetes. Is there any chance his spot is running late?

[DebinNC]

I'm reluctant to his JOM nic "jimmyk" after watching him on WPIX and finding out the impressive person he really is. The professor was great..calm, reasonable, believable, non-threatening, i.e. the perfect person to explain why Obama's higher tax "plan" is the wrong prescription now and disastrous for our future. Excellent job, "jimmyk"!

[jimmyk]

Thanks, Deb. The only point I didn't get a chance to squeeze in was on the lie that millionaires pay lower taxes than secretaries. To spout that lie and then claim "This isn't class warfare" would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

[Janet]

Excellent job, "jimmyk"!

Dittos...& thanks for the link Deb. That morning news program is loaded with pretty women that all seem to be fast talkers.

[DebinNC]

CH, the video may show up here at WPIX later. Did I mention jimmyk is handsome too?

[DebinNC]

The only point I didn't get a chance to squeeze in was..."

Actually, your unhurried, calm demeanor, especially given the time restraints, worked in your favor. Trying to cram in too much might have made you seem a partisan hack, rather than a calm, nonpartisan professor there to give his expert opinion. Perfect imo.

[Captain Hate]

I'll check it later because they seem to have clips from all their show.

[narciso]

True, but then so was Gary Wills and if I recall correctly Joan Didion, for a time.

[Jane]

I couldn't get Kimmy on my Ipad cause Apple doesn't allow whatever it is they need, so I am looking forward to the video.

Congrats Jimmy!!

[NK]

Thanks Tom M for fisking ezra klein. Is ezra a high school senior? ezra k is a perfect example of what high IQ and no wisdom looks like; I'm sure he'll mature, by the time he's 20 young ezra may even be a believer in the Austrian School. I also agree with MelindaR. WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE the carney folk, and the Obamaniacs don't even qualify as grifters. Grifters have to find and set up their marks. We the taxpayers have to play along with the STIMULUS! scam or go to jail.

[narciso]

No, he's a graduate of UCLA, who started out with the nutroots at Pandagon, moved up to
the Soros spread sheet the Prospect, and
'unexpectedly' made it to the Post.

[Danube of Thought]

Sure wish I'd seen you, Jimmyk. Talk about boffo reviews...

[Jane]

Deb, what was the name of Jimmy's (or Kimmy if it is early) segment?

[Jack is Back!]

jimmyk,

Couldn't catch it - on school run - but are you a poly sci or econ prof? This is blatant class warfare that I don't think will resonate with the "electorate". I don't see him having any credibility left on any issue. Even Durbin and Reid are yawning.

[DebinNC]

Jane, I don't know what segment it was. Professor jimmyk was seated to the right of the long-browned hair gal who introduced the segment as being about the wisdom of Obama's tax hikes. The prof began by noting the high costs of Obama's "social agenda" now and, worse, in the future. He also noted that no one outside the WH thought raising taxes in a recession was wise..he brought up Obama in the past agreed that was a bad idea too. He mentioned Herbert Hoover and 1932, but I can't remember what he said.

So look for a vid pic with a long haired "Asian" gal facing a handsome dark haired guy and "tax/es" in the subject line.

[centralcal]

Deb: such an unassuming poster name - "jimmyk" - thought you might be impressed with his distinguished career. I missed his appearance and like others hope a video replay posts today.

[DrJ]

but are you a poly sci or econ prof?

jimmyk is an economics prof, holds an endowed chair, and is department chair.

Off to the airport!

[sbw]

"jimmyk is an economics prof, holds an endowed chair, and is department chair"

Oooh! Does that make him a credentialed moron? ... or is he the exception that proves the rule?

[Tee hee!]

[narciso]

You can look up his CV, and it's very impressive.

[Ignatz]

--jimmyk is an economics prof, holds an endowed chair, and is department chair.--

Jeez, guess I better stick to talking about logging.

[Rick Ballard]

"Does that make him a credentialed moron?"

Nah. He neither argues nor asserts from authority nor does he lend his credential to specious claptrap.

Ivar Giaever and Steven Chu are both Nobel laureates in physics but only one is a true credentialed moron.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Ig-

Don't stick to your onions!

How else does one learn something around here if you don't stick your foot in it every now and then?

I learn something every day here.

[jimmyk]

You guys are far too kind, but thanks again. Of course I get my best ideas from the JOM crowd.

Incidentally, the jimmyk moniker comes from when I was at the Fed and probably could have gotten fired for posting here under my real name. (Not that it's a hard code to crack, but I needed plausible deniability.)

[Jane]

Jimmy,

Was it fun? Were you nervous?

[Jane]

I'm starting to think we should do a JOM podcast.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Jane-

Now yer talkin'.

[jimmyk]

I don't get too nervous with these things (though I don't have as much experience as Jane!), but as I'm usually still asleep at 7:15 I have to make sure I keep my talking points in mind and the energy level up. So it's kind of fun, but I can't imagine doing it on a regular basis the way Jane does.

[narciso]

Found the link, should I post it?

[Jane]

Oh it's my favorite thing of the week Jimmy. I get to call all the shots tho, and set the agenda, which is what I like about it most.

I'd love to do a JOM podcast, but it would have to be a group effort - someone needs to produce and post it, we could have different people on each week, so everyone could talk about what they are good at. I'd like to be the one asking the questions.

[Jane]

Post it!!!!

[Porchlight]

Yes, please, narciso!

[narciso]

Found it, by searching in their archive

http://www.wpix.com/videobeta/98bcf2c2-90cb-4b6c-8d9f-83ec33f68f33/News/Prof-James-Kahn-Explains-Obama-s-Deficit-Plan

[Clarice]

I'm not at all surprised about jimmy's cv or looks..everyone knows that all JOMers are uncommonly smart and good looking. I really hope someone can find a video.

[henry]

Thanks for the link Narc, great job JimmyK!

[Janet]

So calm, professional, & well spoken. No name calling.
We SO need some fresh new pundits.

I agree with Deb's observation - "Actually, your unhurried, calm demeanor, especially given the time restraints, worked in your favor. Trying to cram in too much might have made you seem a partisan hack, rather than a calm, nonpartisan professor there to give his expert opinion. Perfect imo."

[Jane]

Jimmy, you were great, incredibly even handed and low key. It was spectacular!

[Clarice]

Thanks,narc..Jimmyk , how do you stay calm when the interviewer is so stupid?

[jimmyk]

I was actually trying not to be low key, just non-partisan, but as I say, at 7:15am maybe that's the only key I can play in.

Clarice, without commenting on this particular interviewer, in general having the edge on one's interrogator is a great source relaxation.

[Captain Hate]

Thanks for finding the link, narc; well done jimmyk. Clarice, I think the interviewer is about as good as we'll get when she was obviously hired for looks and "diversity". That she was able to parrot talking points without insulting jimmyk is a small victory.

[centralcal]

Great job, Prof. Kahn!

okay, enough, back to calling you jimmyk. (wow! you are much younger than I imagined.)

[Captain Hate]

I agree cc; my mental image of jimmyk was about as erroneous as possible.

[Porchlight]

Nice work, jimmyk! Thanks narciso for finding and posting the link.

[MayBee]

Yay Yay Jimmy K!

[Jane]

Is that how you spell Yay? I'm shocked!

[jimmyk]

my mental image of jimmyk was about as erroneous as possible.

You mean you imagined me as Cindy Crawford?

[glasater]

So glad narciso found the interview for us. And so nicely done jimmyk, you handsome devil:-)

[Extraneus]

I figured he was older, too.

[jimmyk]

You guys are very nice, thanks again. I'm no spring chicken, but maybe the 30 seconds with the makeup lady they prodded me into took a few years off.

[Jane]

I figured he was older, too.

That's just because he's so smart!

[Captain Hate]

You mean you imagined me as Cindy Crawford?

Opposite direction; I had you pictured as more rough hewn for whatever reason. I had the dark hair right though....

[jimmyk]

Yeah, I forgot, Cap'n--Clarice is Cindy Crawford.

[pagar]

Nice interview, jimmyk!

[daddy]

Excellent job Professor.

Ditto's to all of the above. Your calmness worked beautifully in response to those rapid fire talking points. Very well done Sir.

"Did I mention jimmyk is handsome too?"

Didn't I tell you guys back when we drank Guinness in Manhattan last spring that JimmyK was way better looking than Charlie Manson?

Called that one correct didn't I!

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet]

I loved your even-handed, objective presentation, jimmyk. You kept her focussed on the main point -- whether we're in a recession or a very slow recovery, this is not the time for tax increases on job producers. And the dig on Boehner's coke analogy as "somewhat inflammatory" was a nice bi-partisan touch.

You're good, man. The networks should have you on their "go to" list.

[DebinNC]

You're good, man. The networks should have you on their "go to" list.

He passed the essential msm "Don't make me look like an idiot on live tv" test when Frances, in a rapid fire mishmash, stated the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2017. Professor JimmyK didn't even flinch.