![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Excellent example of journalism shown by Luke Rudkowski.
Clear case that lefty pro-Obama media bias exists.
People misinformed about Obama and his policies.
After all those people are folks complained about FOX bias. :)
I think it worth 7 minutes of your attention.
Obama Supporters Actually Hate Obama's Policies
BTW, I don't think Romney will be better on liberties, but I am sure he will do better on economy.
With added at least 6 trillion of debt by end of 2016 Obama will make another great depression inevitable.
This will inevitable destroy "welfare network" his supporters so excited about.
Clear case that lefty pro-Obama media bias exists.
People misinformed about Obama and his policies.
After all those people are folks complained about FOX bias. :)
I think it worth 7 minutes of your attention.
Obama Supporters Actually Hate Obama's Policies
BTW, I don't think Romney will be better on liberties, but I am sure he will do better on economy.
With added at least 6 trillion of debt by end of 2016 Obama will make another great depression inevitable.
This will inevitable destroy "welfare network" his supporters so excited about.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 00:54 (UTC)Oh god... you are trolling us.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 07:15 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 01:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:14 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 18:06 (UTC)However huge government is much dangerous than really big government.
Marshall law and price control under Obama is possible, while Romney won't do that. IMO
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 01:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 01:57 (UTC)http://www.dailykos.com/
Romney is the worst candidate that has ever existed ever.
This is fact and therefore everyone who thinks otherwise is either stupid or deceived.
If you don't take me seriously you must also be a sheep.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 19:12 (UTC)He likes teachers
And Israel
And coal
And Big Bird
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 02:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 18:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 21:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 03:44 (UTC)Also, you seem to have a memory lapse of the previous 8 years before Obama when republicans ran up enormous debt on wars and let the country fall down around them. Infrastructure spending was needed after all of that neglect.
What "welfare network" are you speaking of? Since as an Obama supporter I have neither heard of this nor am excited about it.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 08:12 (UTC)Governor: "We have accumulated a huge deficit".
Colbert: "See, Clinton left surpluses, and Obama inherited a huge deficit. Tell me governor, who chloroformed you and took all that money?"
OOO SNAP.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 03:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 05:06 (UTC)The conservatives warn us about "going the way of Greece." Greece's debt-driven issue being, of course, that it can't refinance its debt, because bond markets are demanding too high a price on bonds that it's not confident Greece will pay back. And so, in order to secure refinancing, Greece finds itself forced into cutting back drastically on spending and increasing taxes, which negatively impacts the economy, which negatively impacts tax receipts, which exacerbates the debt problem, etc.
In other words, conservatives are saying: We believe that government spending plays an important role in economic growth. By not maintaining some arbitrarily-chosen level of debt, we risk being forced into negatively impacting our economic growth by the bond markets, at some point in the future, as we see happening now in Greece. So what we should do now is take that bad medicine before we have to do it under duress. But whereas, in the future, that rollback would result in economically disastrous consequences, if done now, it would result in a virtuous cycle of increased confidence and economic growth. Short-term, self-imposed economic contraction will apparently increase the bond market's confidence in American debt, thereby avoiding the "Greek scenario," while externally-imposed austerity in the future will put us in the feedback loop that has put Greece in such a spot.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 04:48 (UTC)I believe he didn't do very well as Governor of Massachusetts, did he?
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 04:58 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 07:12 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 18:22 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 06:04 (UTC)I couldn't stand to watch much of the video, but the bit I did see had to do with drone-strike assassinations of U.S. citizen(s) with links to "terrorist" groups. I think we can admit it's kind of depressing and disappointing, from the perspective of the left, but to suggest that things would have been better under McCain or could be better under Romney is ignorant or, worse, insane.
I mean - why has Obama continued and bolstered the military misadventures of the Bush administration? Drone strikes are appealing to the Obama administration because (1) they're relatively low-cost, in terms of resources; (2) their human costs (i.e., in terms of innocent bystanders and the due-process implications of assassinating terrorist suspects) are relatively remote from everyday American attention; and (3) they're potentially high-return, in terms of appearing to be "fighting terrorism," as we can see from the few high-profile assassinations that have occurred. The calculations aren't going to be any different for Romney than they have been for Obama, and they wouldn't have been any different for a President McCain. Really, the only thing difference we can expect of Romney is that he might miscalculate and decide that a more costly military engagement is really the better route. Which would be just fantastic.
So much of the argument Republicans make against Obama falls into the "time to give the other guy a chance" mode. But that's such a bizarre way of framing the choice; that we didn't make the better choice four years ago (if we didn't) doesn't mean that literally any other decision we can make now is the better one.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 06:29 (UTC)Well, now I know you have no idea what is worthy of my attention.
(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 07:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 07:51 (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 16:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/11/12 21:34 (UTC)No, no, no. Paying down debt will take that money out of the economy. Make it disappear. Running up debt, of course, will incur interest that will make the later paying more difficult, but paying down as soon as possible will bankrupt the country. The choice is bankruptcy now, or bankruptcy later.
Our debt is our money supply. That's the problem. It needs to be addressed as an endogenous systemic consequence after first being explained to the people, not with pablum and nostrums.
Bottom line, there is no easy way to "fix" this economy simply because in order for it to be sustainable it would have to be rebuilt to different specifications, and would therefore not emerge as "this" economy.
(no subject)
Date: 4/11/12 09:22 (UTC)We'll do this by creating jobs while also claiming that the government can't create jobs.
(no subject)
Date: 10/4/13 06:56 (UTC)You are wrong. Not only that, but you know that you are wrong. And as evidence of that, set forth a set of metrics, including time frame (must be before 2020), and what exactly you mean by depression, and if I accept them, then I will wager you $100.00 that your predicted depression does not happen