The First Economist lays out his theories about growth and income inequality in an interview:
“If the economy is growing, everybody feels invested. Everybody feels as if we’re rolling in the same direction.”
The tide is high and he's holding on...
Will this prioritization of growth over stability and low inflation terrorize Wall Street?
Addressing for the first time one of his most anticipated decisions, Mr. Obama said he had narrowed his choice to succeed Ben S. Bernanke as chairman of the Federal Reserve to “some extraordinary candidates.” With current fiscal policy measurably slowing the recovery, many in business and finance have looked to the Fed to continue its expansionary monetary policies to offset the drag.
Mr. Obama said he wanted someone who would not just work abstractly to keep inflation in check and ensure stability in the markets. “The idea is to promote those things in service of the lives of ordinary Americans getting better,” he said. “I want a Fed chairman that can step back and look at that objectively and say, Let’s make sure that we’re growing the economy.”
This does not have to be bad news for Wall Street. QE Forever may boost asset prices forever. Let's see what gold does next week now that we know that Obama is looking for a Fed chairman (or woman!) who won't be watching inflation.
WHY WOULD THEY THINK THAT? This shows a certain Obamaesque oblivion to the impact of Affirmative Action pseudo-quotas:
A few days after the acquittal in the Trayvon Martin case prompted him to speak about being a black man in America, Mr. Obama said the country’s struggle over race would not be eased until the political process in Washington began addressing the fear of many people that financial stability is unattainable.
“Racial tensions won’t get better; they may get worse, because people will feel as if they’ve got to compete with some other group to get scraps from a shrinking pot,” Mr. Obama said.
If people think they are competing with "other groups" rather than other job applicants (most of whom are still human), it is because of the sort of race-based diversity hiring Obama enthusiastically supports.
You mean like this bit of wisdom in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Just like this result was 'unexpected'
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/27/military-experts-say-us-losing-leverage-in-iraq-as-violence-escalate/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 10:35 AM
I know what difference does it make, right;
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2013/07/the_same_gun_was_use.php
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 10:38 AM
This is a companion piece to the Malanga one;
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/24/in-detroit-racial-rhetoric-concealed-corruption/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 10:41 AM
And Congress can go pound sand:
While Congressmen are by definition (that is, Constitutional definition) charged with writing the laws, Obama really thinks their opinions on the laws are of little concern.
Being a Constitutional lawyer to Obama means he gets to ignore the Constitution when it will benefit him. Of course, what he really means is that Being Obama means he gets to play by his own rules - the Constitutional lawyer thing is just his cover.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | July 28, 2013 at 10:42 AM
To which McLuhan's reply in 'Annie Hall 'you teach a course in this, you know nothing (of my work, seems superfluous).
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 10:52 AM
OT. I put this on the other thread -
My church has James Brown (the sportscaster) as a visiting pastor today. He was great. "Break the Huddle, Run the Play".
The next service is at 10:45 & can be viewed live here - http://live.mcleanbible.org/
(a good chance to peek inside one of those big, evangelical churches & see what goes on!)
Posted by: Janet --- -... .- -- .- ... ..- -.-. -.- ... | July 28, 2013 at 10:52 AM
But ultimately, I’m not concerned about their opinions — very few of them, by the way, are lawyers, much less constitutional lawyers.
Sixty percent of the Senate and 37% of the House are lawyers. The President is a 100% dumbass.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 28, 2013 at 10:57 AM
How true is this;
http://twitchy.com/2013/07/28/chris-wallace-offers-hard-truth-about-middle-class-under-obama-makes-jack-lew-squirm-pic-video/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 11:02 AM
Yes, CH, but none of them are much less a constitutional lawyer than Obama.
Posted by: bgates | July 28, 2013 at 11:06 AM
.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | July 28, 2013 at 11:10 AM
It's really clear when you have an Ed Schultz like lunkhead in Maduro, down south in Mark Lloyd's 'wonderful democratic' revolution,
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 11:11 AM
If one no longer has a law license, is one still a lawyer?
Posted by: pagar | July 28, 2013 at 11:11 AM
Obama doesn't have a law license, neither does his ugly wife.
I watched a few minutes of THIS WEEK on ABC. Unfortunately, I'll never get those minutes of my life back, Katrina Vanden Heuvel is a clown. But she doesn't know it. She is editor and part owner of THE NATION. I'm not sure which nation she lives in, but she's not on the same planet as me.
She blamed THE REPUBLICAN WRECKING CREW for Obama's dismal record. HOLY SHIT these Commies are deluded. Vanden Heuvel believes that MORE SPENDING is the answer, we just haven't SPENT ENOUGH via government.
In the 5 calendar years Obama has been in charge, 2009-2013, our "NATION" has spent more than a TRILLLLLLLLLLLION dollars more than any admin in HISTORY.....EACH YEAR. WTF? How do dumbfux like this broad come to their conclusions??? I don't give a fiddlers fux what PRINCETON degree she has, she's a fuxing clown.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 11:11 AM
Nothing like a MCA heir, to tell us about how 'us folks' should feel.
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 11:16 AM
The Lew/Wallace interview - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgbTDo9Fk_8&feature=youtu.be&a
Posted by: Janet --- -... .- -- .- ... ..- -.-. -.- ... | July 28, 2013 at 11:25 AM
I would be proud to be blamed for stopping Obama.
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 11:28 AM
So it seems that Axel-forehead listened to Dan Hicks and His Hot Licks in the 70s. LUN
Posted by: peter | July 28, 2013 at 11:29 AM
Lew evaded questions and prevaricated throughout the interview. I found him surly, arrogant and one of the most repugnant of Barry's dhimmi's.
Typical Obama administration prog....
Posted by: OldTimer | July 28, 2013 at 11:32 AM
One thing in that Lew interview....I'm sick of the federal govt. always whining about needing more money for education. Why do we pay local property taxes? Ol' phony Cherokee Warren campaigned on more money for education.
I don't think some LIVs even understand the different levels of govt. & how there is so much overlap & repetition.
Posted by: Janet --- -... .- -- .- ... ..- -.-. -.- ... | July 28, 2013 at 11:35 AM
Reposting from the previous thread, MarkO linked this:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/zimmerman-redux-the-breaking-louisiana-self-defense-case-of-merritt-landry//#more
The most interesting thing is that if the neighbor had done a George Zimmerman and called the police earlier when seeing a black youth behaving suspiciously, that youth might not in the hospital with a gunshot to the head. He didn't, he says, because he didn't want to be accused of "profiling."
No doubt Sharpton and JJ are en route to N'Orlins as we speak.
Posted by: jimmyk | July 28, 2013 at 11:36 AM
If I were to call the police, I would say I could not tell the race of the suspects and only say that if pressed by the dispatcher.
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 11:45 AM
Janet, that might have been the church Nancy took us to after the 9/12 march. All I remember was driving up river in that direction. My first mega church experience.
Posted by: Manuel Transmission | July 28, 2013 at 11:47 AM
" I would say I could not tell the race of the suspects and only say that if pressed by the dispatcher."
What difference does it make,what their race is, if some one is trying to break in to your home?
Posted by: pagar | July 28, 2013 at 11:54 AM
"What difference does it make,what their race is, if some one is trying to break in to your home?"
That idea is so last year.
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 11:59 AM
Cool, MT. I thought some of the sports lovin' JOMers might enjoy hearing James Brown preach (I think he works for CBS).
Posted by: Janet --- -... .- -- .- ... ..- -.-. -.- ... | July 28, 2013 at 12:00 PM
"— very few of them, by the way, are lawyers, much less constitutional lawyers."
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/the-supreme-courts-9-0-rulings-against-obama-reveal-disregard-for-the-constitution/
Even leftist judges can't put up with his
"disregard for the Constitution".
Posted by: pagar | July 28, 2013 at 12:05 PM
"While Congressmen are by definition (that is, Constitutional definition) charged with writing the laws, Obama really thinks their opinions on the laws are of little concern."
Considering approval ratings for Congress hover in the low-teens, he's got some company.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 12:17 PM
Lawyers in Congress? HA! Don't even go there. How many voted against the Patriot Act (Thank you Feingold)?
It seems none of them are Constitutional lawyers; Maybe correspondence school and internet classes.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 12:20 PM
much less constitutional lawyers
Obama taught a course on the equal protection clause. That's it. He never taught constitutional law.
James Brown is a Harvard alum, Janet.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 28, 2013 at 12:21 PM
When he's without his prompter;
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100228232/president-obama-calls-the-united-states-and-europe-developing-countries-in-latest-embarrassing-gaffe/
What is somewhat amusing is James Warren's piece, about how Obama's brilliance was overshadowed by the Zimmerman jury and the royal family birth, facepalm with a Cthluthu
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 12:23 PM
And his course were basically crib notes by Derrick Bell, the Jeremiah Wright of Academia.
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 12:25 PM
Phony scandals?
Jack Lew - how can a simple cheese sandwich and apple for lunch, religious man sell his soul to a political party? Did he check his integrity when he signed on as an Obama enabler? After a day's work for the WH, does Lew go home and vomit or does he sit down with his family and enjoy his simple dinner? Is it like being a member of the Mafia?
Posted by: Frau Argwohn | July 28, 2013 at 12:33 PM
Yes, it worked out, about as expected;
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/07/28/rob-portmans-unfavorable-rating-jumped-by-double-digits-in-ohio-stronghold-after-gay-marriage-announcement/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 12:34 PM
It appears that Obama believes that "income inequality" is (a) bad, and (b) a circumstance that can and should be addressed by the national government.
He is an economic illiterate.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 28, 2013 at 12:38 PM
And you thought this would work out better this time, why;
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/anthony-weiners-campaign-manager-calls-it-quits/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM
In all seriousness, it is correct to say 'Growth is good' because a stagnant economy causes much ugliness as people compete for a shrinking pie (see EU euro nations the past 20 years). Course that dumbass Obummer has done everything possible to strangle growth -- obummercare, continual tax increases threats of moar and moar increases on producing classers. Obummer has killed the job market and is strangling GDP growth -- it may be zero 2Q. So Bernanke has to pump to at least countact Obummer stagnation, and QE does that,but in order to avoid broadbased inflation, BenB puts tight collars on use of the QE thereby limiting its GDP growth effectiveness. So all this proves is that Obummer is an effin" ignorant prat and or a patholical liar. To get low inflation growth,do a reagan /haer, slash federal spending as a %of GDP, cut marginal tax rates and allow the Fed to monitor inflation. The opposite of what obummer is doing.
Posted by: NKonIPad | July 28, 2013 at 12:49 PM
reagan/harper (canada)
Posted by: NKonIPad | July 28, 2013 at 12:51 PM
Just because it feels so good, here's A. Weiner as a yute:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 28, 2013 at 12:56 PM
Vizzini just facepalms, twice;
http://www.rightwingnews.com/economy/obama-will-evaluate-keystone-xl-solely-on-its-climate-change-effects/
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 12:57 PM
But it's cool to have our first black POTUS, right?
Posted by: Dana, Prince Of Fools | July 28, 2013 at 01:00 PM
He is doing this because the radicals blame the very real economic stagnation due to too much previous governmental intervention and regulatory overreach on "growing economic inequality" instead.
Which of course simply requires additional governmental intervention to correct. And the spiral continues, all the while being blamed on capitalism. So then you get demands for a new economic system to solve the problem of so many unmet job expectations.
As with ed, the remedy is more of what caused the problem in the first place because what doesn't get reported or incorrectly couples with Orwellian language so that few but the benefiting connected insiders see the overall picture.
Posted by: rse | July 28, 2013 at 01:03 PM
Danube, this may help explain Vizzini:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0
It has an equal chance of making things worse...
Posted by: Threadkiller | July 28, 2013 at 01:06 PM
Capitalism running riot with little to no oversight, is what brought us to this condition.
But you like re-runs because you find them entertaining.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 01:12 PM
True, you take the Russian collapse, in the 90s, interesingly one of the movers in this was Larry Summer's pal Scleifer, who was cited in Malanga's journal piece, re the noxious effects of ethnic politics on city governance, typified by Coleman Young,
the state's monopoly were transferred from the public sector, to many of the same figures in private hands, similar circumstance obtained in privatization in Argentina, Venezuela, et al, hence capitalism itself is implicated, although it is the inefficient state that is the problem.
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 01:13 PM
--Capitalism running riot with little to no oversight...--
Only a person who has been perched in the ivory tower and never been subjected to the overwhelming regulatory gauntlet even the smallest businesses have to run could say that with a straight face.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 01:23 PM
This is like like the whizzo chocolate assortment, each more cringeworthy then the last,
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/07/obama-says-racial-tensions-wont-get.html
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 01:28 PM
Rules for living are inconvenient, but necessary because there are those who think rules don't apply to them.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 01:29 PM
Obama thinks income inequality in general terms is bad.
Obama thinks the tax code is the place to reduce income inequality
Obama hires very well-paid experts that spend countless hours ensuring that Obama takes advantage of every tax break he's got coming to him to keep Uncle Sam's hands off of every last dollar he can keep for himself.
Obama has issued himself an income inequality waiver.
He can do that. He's Obama.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | July 28, 2013 at 01:38 PM
Capitalism running riot with little to no oversight, is what brought us to this condition
Can we all agree that this is such ill-informed twaddle that it ought not to be debated here?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 28, 2013 at 01:43 PM
Posted by: Danube of Thought | July 28, 2013 at 01:44 PM
DOT and Ignatz, I'm just sure that twin falls' computer inadvertently deleted the phrase "big government sponsored crony pseudo" before the word "capitalism" in twin falls' 1:12 PM post. With that emendation of twin falls' text, the statement makes sense. As to the statement without the emendation, one has to be studiously ignorant not to understand that the 2007-2013 period could not possibly have played out as it has and is playing out if capitalism had run amok.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 28, 2013 at 01:53 PM
'the 2007-2013 period could not possibly have played out as it has and is playing out if capitalism had run amok."
Now THAT's some discursive twaddle worthy of immortality in bronze.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 01:56 PM
Sure, twin falls. As an example, capitalism running amok would have produced the same kind of lending practices as occurred under the framework of the mortage market distortions caused by Fannie and Freddie. Perhaps you need the comfort of your delusions, so believe that if you must.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 28, 2013 at 02:01 PM
Dana, why don't make love to yourself.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:06 PM
"market distortions." Heh, if you need the comfort of your delusions, and it sure seems you're stickin' with the one that brung ya.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 02:08 PM
Just sticking to reality, twin falls. If you are really a poly sci prof, surely you must have the intellectual integrity to make the case directly that a government regulated economy is better than capitalism, as opposed to making believe that a government regulated economy is capitalism running amok.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 28, 2013 at 02:13 PM
When does the RECOVERY start? We've had 5 TRILLLLLLLLLION dollar stimulus attempts. And we've got less than 1/2% GDP growth last quarter. Is it POSSIBLE, that MARXISM doesn't work?
Maybe Dana in Twin Falls can weigh in?
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:13 PM
You can't fault his screwy ideas anymore than you could blame a chimpanze.
You want to blame someone for this catastrophe?
Blame the flaky college kids, even flakier women and batshit crazy Jews who elected that monkey to do a man's job. providing the necessary votes that put him over the top.
Stupid cunts!
Posted by: Linus | July 28, 2013 at 02:14 PM
But don't you know, Gus, that Obama's stimulus and green energy programs are capitalism running amok?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 28, 2013 at 02:15 PM
" If you are really a poly sci prof,"
As usual it's the wrong-headed premise which forms the foundation of so-called argument, and thusly runs the industrial mechanism of yesteryear. "Best dang buggy-whip I ever bought"
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 02:16 PM
""ignorant prat and or a patholical liar""
Yes and yes.
Capitalism is the ONLY THING that creates wealth. Even the fucking Russians and Chinese get that. But leave it to some limp dicked former College Teacher to get it wrong.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:17 PM
Thomas, LIBTARDS believe taking a dollar bill, and handing half of it to the GOVERNMENT, so that the government can grow is somehow WISE.
It's like giving a bottle of gin to a drunk and expecting the drunk use it wisely.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:18 PM
There you go again. Obama IS a capitalist, like to the 10th magnitude. That you don't get that says volumes.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 02:21 PM
I thought some of the sports lovin' JOMers might enjoy hearing James Brown preach (I think he works for CBS).
A fellow DeMatha Stag who probably would've been a Terp (one of Lefty's early recruiting targets he didn't land) were it not for the interference of the Chappaquiddick breast stroker.
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 28, 2013 at 02:22 PM
Ah, twin falls, you're being very clever. You're embedding cronyism in your definition of capitalism, notwithstanding that embedding cronyism goes against Adam Smith's view of capitalism. And if you are Dana Ward, I know from your background that you have the intellect to figure that out. So I can only conclude that you still haven't gotten over the notion that undermining modern technological societies with the techniques of anarchism produces a more just society, as opposed to a more statist, crony oriented one. But if you are Dana Ward, I guess we are just rehashing ground we covered a few years ago.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | July 28, 2013 at 02:33 PM
Has Althouse disabled all comments from her royal pronouncements?
Posted by: Captain Hate | July 28, 2013 at 02:33 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahaahah!! Obama is a capitalist!!! Hahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahaahahaaa.
That's like saying a shit sandwich tastes like roast beef.
Hahahahhahahahahahahahahah Dana, you're cracking me up you effeminate douche bag!!
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:34 PM
"Chappaquiddick breast stroker"
Cold. Accurate on many levels, but cold.
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 02:34 PM
Cold. Mary Jo Kopechne has been at room temperature or lower for 40 plus years. Think about it MARK O, libtards hate George Zimmerman for shooting someone who was viciously assaulting him, and they love Ted Kennedy for killing a woman.
Only a ex-Pitzer would be so stupid.
I don't see anything cold about making sport of Ted Kennedy.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:38 PM
Excuse me while I whip this out.
Drudge: WEINER VOWS TO STICK IT OUT
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 02:38 PM
CH, profs don't accept criticism from the unwashed.
Posted by: henry | July 28, 2013 at 02:38 PM
"Has Althouse disabled all comments from her royal pronouncements?"
I think her exact words were, "We are not amused."
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 02:39 PM
I've seen nothing untoward spoken about cronyism here pre-2009, so I'm not sure you have any credibility invoking Smith when it suits your purposes.
Cue the Alien and Sedition Act so you can see how cronyism is a by-product of Federalism just as any other ideology.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 02:39 PM
--Obama IS a capitalist, like to the 10th magnitude.--
Not sure what a like 10th magnitude capitalist is, but if you define a capitalist as one who uses the coercive power of govenment to grab private capital to dispense it to his cronies both in and out of government then I guess you're not far off.
If you define it as one who through private means invests capital in ventures to induce other persons to enter into voluntary and mutually beneficial transaction then you're far off indeed.
There is little Barry perceives as voluntary or mutually beneficial and close to nothing of that nature he wishes anyone to be allowed to engage in.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 02:41 PM
From today's Althouse, a glimpse into the superior mind:
"Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I accidentally left the comments display available, and some comments came in, so I published them.
What have we learned?"
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 02:42 PM
Chris Wallace and Juan Williams.
Juan Williams says the GOVERNMENT needs to get in the game and that GOVERNMENT spending helps the economy. (total nonsense that my 6th grader could easily refute)
Wallace says. Well we spent $800 BILLION on the STIMULUS and it didn't change thins.
HELLO?? We have spent that stimulus plus interest FIVE TIMES. There is a reason why the Senate never passed a budget.
Is it sinking in yet friends??
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:59 PM
I'm sorry, but Ann Outhouse is useless as Dana Gilbert Ward.
Posted by: Gus | July 28, 2013 at 02:59 PM
a rising tide lifts all ships, except ones that
were already sunk before the tide went out.
Posted by: Linus | July 28, 2013 at 03:00 PM
Can we have a voluntary ban on the term "selfie"?
And while we're at it how about a ban on them period; unless pre-approved by, say, me. :)
Dudes and those that will not be pre-approved please refrain from substituting samples.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:00 PM
Will there be a fee, Iggy?
Posted by: MarkO | July 28, 2013 at 03:02 PM
Only for ones I find unworthy.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:06 PM
Ig:
Can we have a voluntary ban on the term "selfie"?
And while we're at it how about a ban on them period
I am happy to self-ban myself so that any pictures of myself won't be given the name selfie, at least by myself.
Just note that a pic of my nose will probably be on the pages of JOM at some point in the next seven days.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | July 28, 2013 at 03:13 PM
Imagine if there were just three sock puppets here?
But wait, Ignatz, Mark and Gus are all that ARE here.
Watch, I'll poke Gus, and all three will grunt.
Whenever one speaks, my hand will be up his ass.
Posted by: Dana | July 28, 2013 at 03:15 PM
That would be fine if it was just your nose and not some flatware or countertop kitchen appliance protruding through it.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:16 PM
--Whenever one speaks, my hand will be up his ass.--
To each his own I suppose, but personally I am less than inclined to humor your inclinations.
Suggest you approach WeeDavey if you've got your mind made up. He seems to be similarly fixated.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:20 PM
Yike! That 3:16 of mine was directed at H&R's 3:13 not Anne's 3:15. :)
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:22 PM
Ignatz @ 3:20PM - LOL Better to be thought
a fool than to speak and prove it.
Posted by: Dana | July 28, 2013 at 03:40 PM
There's capitalism and then there is crony capitalism that is acceptable to communists. See New Zeal's article about Coleman young, the commie who killed Detroit.
LUN
Posted by: Frau Kommunismus verrecke! | July 28, 2013 at 03:43 PM
You can't fault his screwy ideas anymore than you could blame a chimpanze.
You want to blame someone for this catastrophe?
Blame the flaky college kids, even flakier women and batshit crazy Jews who elected that monkey to do a man's job. providing the necessary votes that put him over the top.
Stupid c*@ts!
I am guessing that the above post was sock puppeted by Dana.
Posted by: peter | July 28, 2013 at 03:45 PM
Duda bowed out until the 2014 election. You mean he lied?
These neo-coms will be the death of us all-- those of us who evade the death panels, that is.
Posted by: Frau Kommunismus verrecke! | July 28, 2013 at 03:46 PM
That's the delightful Anne, peter.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:47 PM
FWIW - Iggy, I liked the picture of MarkO on his horse. Is that part of the proposed ban?
Posted by: Frau Kommunismus verrecke! | July 28, 2013 at 03:49 PM
Scaphism would be just desserts for our modern-day 'Federalists'.
Posted by: twin falls | July 28, 2013 at 03:56 PM
Certainly not, Frau.
A boy and his horse; such a love story will always have a place.
Posted by: Ignatz | July 28, 2013 at 03:58 PM
Both the Malanga piece, I excerpted earlier, and the Bellamy piece, illustrate the Detroit m.o, that Loudon describes.
Posted by: narciso | July 28, 2013 at 04:00 PM
A succession of administrations and congresses cajoled, provided incentives, and ultimately coerced developers and lenders int transactions that never would have occurred in a free market (otherwise the cajoley, incentives and coercion would not have been necessary). The result was gross distortion of prices and, in the end, a bursting bubble. This is not capitalism.
I don't think anyone who calls himself an anarchist has the foggiest inkling about what would occur in a modern anarchy. It's just an intellectually lazy means of trying to appear iconoclastic.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | July 28, 2013 at 04:04 PM
A succession of administrations and congresses . . .
I don't think you meant to imply an equally shared culpability for this mess, but it seems to me you did . . . and that's simply not on. A couple of favorable mentions from GWB does not equal enabling legislation, blocking reform, and outright obstruction of oversight by our friends on the left.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 28, 2013 at 04:08 PM
C!eo can call himself anything he wishes. He's as much an anarchist as Barry was "down for the struggle." Imposters...
Pfui!
Posted by: Frau Kommunismus verrecke! | July 28, 2013 at 04:15 PM
I do indeed hold the GOP responsible - though certainly not on the scale of the Dems. The GOP never took any opportunity to put a stop to the depredations of Fannie and Freddie, although Bush did propose to have Treasury oversight of them.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | July 28, 2013 at 04:18 PM