Obama on Fiscal Responsibility

[Tweedling]

Everything written here is so misleading and assumptive it makes me sick. This is the kind of crap that makes me not even want to participate in these kind of threads. Just because it's "not that much money" or "they can just offset it by other means" doesn't make it ok. It's socialism at it's finest. And I, for one, don't like it. So take this crap across the pond.

[dondoboy]

Oh man, Limbaugh is on CNN talking at CPAC. He's tearing President Obama a new one. He sounds and looks like he's having a heart attack.

[Moss]

Oh man, Limbaugh is on CNN talking at CPAC. He's tearing President Obama a new one. He sounds and looks like he's having a heart attack.

 

Like an idiot I turned the channel to watch it. He is sweating quite a bit, he's all red in the face and puffy. Maybe he's back on the oxy (or was that when he was skinny?) I'm expecting him to start rubbing his left arm soon because it's going numb.

[dondoboy]

Like an idiot I turned the channel to watch it. He is sweating quite a bit, he's all red in the face and puffy. Maybe he's back on the oxy (or was that when he was skinny?) I'm expecting him to start rubbing his left arm soon because it's going numb.

I had to change the channel. He's a raving lunatic. And those people are eating it up!

[John Smith]

I had to change the channel. He's a raving lunatic. And those people are eating it up!

 

They seem to like the extremist speakers at CPAC from John Bolton to Rush they love em all regardless of what these guys say. They have coulter there too. Is sadly funny that they take these people (Coulter, Rush, Hannity, now Joe the Plumber/Reporter/Pundit) seriously as if they are the idea people and the deep thinkers of the party. And in a sense they are as so much of what the party is doing right now is apeing Rush.

[dondoboy]

They seem to like the extremist speakers at CPAC from John Bolton to Rush they love em all regardless of what these guys say. They have coulter there too. Is sadly funny that they take these people (Coulter, Rush, Hannity, now Joe the Plumber/Reporter/Pundit) seriously as if they are the idea people and the deep thinkers of the party. And in a sense they are as so much of what the party is doing right now is apeing Rush.

I don't really know what this convention is all about. Other than a gathering of conservatives. It never fails to amaze me the lengths that some people (on both sides) will go to in terms of showing "support". All the signs and strange manner of dress, its all pretty embarrassing.

[Beltmann]

Although I lean left, I happen to believe that classical conservatism is a perfectly valid philosophy with a long, serious, and honorable intellectual tradition. But isn't it clear that modern American conservatism has become, to a large extent, an anti-intellectual movement linked to a party comprised of unserious people? After all, when you watch CPAC, it seems that these people are more concerned about Obama's birth certificate than the economy.

 

As Paul Krugman said, "the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead."

 

Even more damning, the conservative John Derbyshire recently asked, "Why have we allowed carny barkers to run away with the Right?"

 

I'm thrilled with Obama, but I also believe that we need a coherent, constructive opposition party to keep him honest. Unfortunately, all I see from conservatives so far are puerile ideological rants. Once upon a time the Coulters and Malkins were counterbalanced by the William F. Buckleys, but these days I can't tell The National Review apart from Sean Hannity.

[bjorn_skurj]

Although I lean left, I happen to believe that classical conservatism is a perfectly valid philosophy with a long, serious, and honorable intellectual tradition. But isn't it clear that modern American conservatism has become, to a large extent, an anti-intellectual movement linked to a party comprised of unserious people? After all, when you watch CPAC, it seems that these people are more concerned about Obama's birth certificate than the economy.

 

As Paul Krugman said, "the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead."

 

Even more damning, the conservative John Derbyshire recently asked, "Why have we allowed carny barkers to run away with the Right?"

 

I'm thrilled with Obama, but I also believe that we need a coherent, constructive opposition party to keep him honest. Unfortunately, all I see from conservatives so far are puerile ideological rants. Once upon a time the Coulters and Malkins were counterbalanced by the William F. Buckleys, but these days I can't tell The National Review apart from Sean Hannity.

That was a fine post, right there.

[calvino]

It is getting to the point where conservatives are thinking more about ratings; rather than popular and electoral votes.

[John Smith]

Although I lean left, I happen to believe that classical conservatism is a perfectly valid philosophy with a long, serious, and honorable intellectual tradition. But isn't it clear that modern American conservatism has become, to a large extent, an anti-intellectual movement linked to a party comprised of unserious people? After all, when you watch CPAC, it seems that these people are more concerned about Obama's birth certificate than the economy.

 

As Paul Krugman said, "the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead."

 

Even more damning, the conservative John Derbyshire recently asked, "Why have we allowed carny barkers to run away with the Right?"

 

I'm thrilled with Obama, but I also believe that we need a coherent, constructive opposition party to keep him honest. Unfortunately, all I see from conservatives so far are puerile ideological rants. Once upon a time the Coulters and Malkins were counterbalanced by the William F. Buckleys, but these days I can't tell The National Review apart from Sean Hannity.

 

I have always believed that the two differing phillosophies should balance each other out and they used to. Now however I feel as if the republicans have an all or ntohing approach. We get it all our way or nothing at all. They have no interest in meeting in the middle or moving off their position, to do so is to show weakness and is tantamount to losing.

 

It is getting to the point where conservatives are thinking more about ratings; rather than popular and electoral votes.

 

They pretty much said in their meetings that they want all obama plans to fail to enhance their electoral position for 2010 and beyond. Party over country and it's been that way for them since Gingrich took power and now he is even too middle of the road for a lot of these people. They take their marching orders from Rush & the punditry i.e. people who look for ways to win the argument rather than people who invest their time and energy's to actually solving the problems.

[mountain bed]

It seems to me that the Right has this very small patch of land to stand on right now - the only thing they can still sell is : 1) fear, and 2) no new taxes of any kind. They're bankrupt.

[bobbob1313]

I think it's really interesting to watch the political pendulum swing back and forth. 4 or 5 years ago the only thing the left had to stand on was "We oppose the Iraq war now".

 

 

The confidence by those on the left that they are on the verge of some type of permanent majority, as if the right is completely out of touch with America is exactly the same as what those on the right were saying following Bush's victory in 00.

[bjorn_skurj]

This is true. In politics, nothing lasts forever.

[mountain bed]

When you look around you just don't see anyone who could rejuvinate the republicans. Palin? Please....she is truly a joke - a bad one. Eric Cantor? he should have "weasel" tattoed on his forehead. Jindal? I was thinking he might be the guy until his disastrous 'response' on Tuesday. Someone has to appear with real ideas, and i'm sure someone will. But who?

[dondoboy]

When you look around you just don't see anyone who could rejuvinate the republicans. Palin? Please....she is truly a joke - a bad one. Eric Cantor? he should have "weasel" tattoed on his forehead. Jindal? I was thinking he might be the guy until his disastrous 'response' on Tuesday. Someone has to appear with real ideas, and i'm sure someone will. But who?

Grant Hart Remembers His Old Classmate

[ikol]

It seems to me that the Right has this very small patch of land to stand on right now - the only thing they can still sell is : 1) fear, and 2) no new taxes of any kind. They're bankrupt.

 

Maybe so, but it's not like Obama shys away from selling fear.

[futureage1]

Maybe so, but it's not like Obama shys away from selling fear.

 

Sorry but this is no joke. Look at the markets today. It looks like we might hit the 5k mark, which is depression territory. It seems like some of you guys are still into the left and right thing. I like Obama to a point but recognize he is compromised because of the money he took from the banks to get elected, probably out of the first TARP fund literally. But he is not crying wolf. In fact, I bet he did not know the severity of the situation until he actually became President.

 

These two political parties are two sides of the same coin, if you ask me. Obama's Bush Part 2 act, bailing out these banks with ungodly sums of money, is not working. When he finally nationalizes the banks that will be the first step toward recovery, until then it will be more sliding into the financial abyss. And all you crying socialism seem to be ignorant about this country's financial history. We never had privatized banks until 1913 and the FED took over our economy. It is not a Gov. institution but a group of private banks. The FED gives the President a list of 5 names to appoint FED chief, he is not allowed to appoint his own person. Since they have controlled our economy, a depression and numerous recessions. And now it looks like another depression with the FED manipulating our currency and our Government paying them interest to print our money. Think about it before crying socialism.

[dondoboy]

Limbaugh fires back at Steele

 

 

Limbaugh criticized RNC Chairman Michael Steele for his recent comments.

 

(CNN)

[futureage1]

Limbaugh fires back at Steele

 

 

Limbaugh criticized RNC Chairman Michael Steele for his recent comments.

 

(CNN)

[John Smith]

Limbaugh fires back at Steele

 

 

Limbaugh criticized RNC Chairman Michael Steele for his recent comments.

 

(CNN)

[mfwahl]

D.L. Hughley's on CNN?

[Analogman]

D.L. Hughley's on CNN?

 

He has a show on CNN.

 

Short on cash? Bartering making a comeback

 

By ANNE WALLACE ALLEN

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

BOISE, Idaho -- Tired of her pink bathroom countertops but short on cash for a remodel, Rachel Alemany decided to get the work done the old-fashioned way: through bartering.

 

Alemany has experience putting down flooring, so she and her husband traded flooring work with a neighbor who has tiling experience.

 

"It was that easy," said Alemany, a special education teacher from Pittsfield, Mass. She got the idea from her mother-in-law, who exchanged renovations for room and board, and she might try it again: "I have other rooms in my house that need work."

 

Bartering -- the trading of goods or services without using cash -- is making a comeback in a troubled economy. It can be as simple as trading baby-sitting with another family, or as complex as an exchange with strangers facilitated by one of the several Web sites that have sprung up to connect barterers.

 

Bartering ads on Craigslist have increased about 100 percent since last year, said Susan MacTavish Best, a spokeswoman for the online classified advertising service. Traffic is also up at local organizations like the Midwest Barter Exchange, a Kalamazoo, Mich.-based outfit that acts as a go-between for about 1,000 business clients.

 

"Before, we were out beating the bushes trying to get people to join, and now they're calling us," said Lance Dorsey, a customer service representative for the exchange.

 

Boise beautician Heather Wood has traded haircuts and pedicures for years of day care, kids' clothes, a paint job for her car, an oil change, a set of professional portraits for her family and dental cleaning.

 

"It's fun, and it builds a whole different kind of a relationship," said Wood, who has five children. "They're getting what they want and I'm getting what I want. I would much rather do that than make cash most of the time."

 

These days, making cash isn't always an option, so many have decided it is worth the effort to trade, say, an outgrown kid's bike for a neighbor's lawnmower, or a massage for some gardening supplies.

 

"I'm finding it a little bit difficult to sell anything right now," said Jeremy Kildow of Nampa, who chose bartering when he decided to get rid of a $1,000 camera, a kayak, a stainless steel kitchen range and other items.

 

Kildow put his stuff on the Boise-area Craigslist site under "barter" and suggested horses, pack mules, a four-wheel-drive truck, a computer or a flat-screen TV in exchange. So far, he's had an offer of a truck, some computers and a wedding ring.

 

Bartering can be less expensive than buying because there are few overhead costs for rent or staff. However, not all costs are eliminated. The IRS considers barter dollars as identical to real currency for tax reporting, and barterers must obtain a special form, the 1099-B.

 

But bartering can also be more fun than laying down cash.

 

"The human element and the relationship between buyers and sellers becomes more important when we get involved in bartering transactions," said Gary Forman, president of a company called Dollar Stretcher that publishes methods for saving money. "I'm not sure we don't have some longing for that."

 

The quirky, independent aspect of bartering is what Vermont resident Matthew Stewart likes. He got his Honda motorcycle in a trade with a stranger through Craigslist. Stewart gave up a wood-burning cook stove he'd acquired but didn't need.

 

"If somebody wants something that you've got, there's probably a good chance they've got something you want that they don't want," Stewart said. "With bartering you end up with something interesting."

 

Some things are easier to barter than others. While carpenters, massage therapists and hair stylists have a set price for their work and can easily trade it locally, other professionals, such as physicians who work in hospitals, can be constrained by the institutions that employ them.

 

Nevertheless, Forman estimates that 60 percent of the companies on the New York Stock Exchange participate in some kind of bartering.

 

Of course, there are no signs that bartering will ever catch up with cash. Professor Andrew Whinston at the University of Texas at Austin, who has written about bartering, said the Internet has made bartering easier, just as eBay has made it easier to sell things that used to sit in the attic for years.

 

He doesn't see bartering as something that will "take over the world," but said nobody knows for sure what's going to happen next with the markets that rely on credit and currency.

 

"Maybe if the economy goes totally down the drain, we'll all be bartering," Whinston said. "I'll be selling copies of my articles in academic journals for a meal at a restaurant."

[bobbob1313]

Sorry but this is no joke. Look at the markets today. It looks like we might hit the 5k mark, which is depression territory. It seems like some of you guys are still into the left and right thing. I like Obama to a point but recognize he is compromised because of the money he took from the banks to get elected, probably out of the first TARP fund literally. But he is not crying wolf. In fact I bet he did not know the severity of the situation until he actually became President.

 

These two political parties are two sides of the same coin if you ask me. Obama's Bush Part 2 act, bailing out these banks with ungodly sums of money, is not working. When he finally nationalizes the banks that will be the first step toward recovery, until then it will be more sliding into the financial abyss. And all you crying socialism seem to be ignorant about this country's financial history. We never had privatized banks until 1913 and the FED took over our economy. It is not a Gov. institution but a group of private banks. The FED gives the President a list of 5 names to appoint FED chief, he is not allowed to appoint his own person. Since they have controlled of our economy, a depression and numerous recessions. And now it looks like another depression with the FED manipulating our currency and our Government paying them interest to print our money. Think about it before crying socialism.

 

Didn't Andrew Jackson get rid of the national bank a few years back?

[Guest Jules]

And all you crying socialism seem to be ignorant about this country's financial history. We never had privatized banks until 1913 and the FED took over our economy.

My "cries of socialism" have nothing to do with the banks.

[Artifice]

Everything written here is so misleading and assumptive it makes me sick. This is the kind of crap that makes me not even want to participate in these kind of threads. Just because it's "not that much money" or "they can just offset it by other means" doesn't make it ok. It's socialism at it's finest. And I, for one, don't like it. So take this crap across the pond.

 

Wow. An entire post that missed the point, quoted things not said, and failed to contradict anything I said with factual information, yet denounced me all the same.

 

Rush posts on VC?