This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

GOP Announces It Will Oppose Obama's Latest $300 Billion "Jobs Plan"

Tyler Durden's picture


In a move that will surprise exactly nobody, the Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions has signaled that "Republicans would oppose the jobs plan President Obama is expected to announce Thursday, saying it would only put the United States further in debt at a time when the debt is already weighing on the economy." So while nobody even knows yet just what the full presidential proposal to create "millions of jobs" looks like in its entirety, we do already know it will almost certainly not happen courtesy of a republican controlled congress. As a reminder, the US is currently supposed to be laboring under a regime of austerity (more in its latest, and vastly watered down Italian iteration than real cost cutting but still) and thus it will be rather complicated for the GOP to explain why the party is cutting with one hand and spending more with the other. As such, any hopes for a quick and decisive passage of laws to build more bridges to nowhere are about to be dashed. From The Hill: "There’s no doubt in my mind that the debt that we’ve now incurred is already weakening our economy,” Sessions said on the Senate floor. “It comes to a point that you can’t keep borrowing in a futile attempt to stimulate the economy when the increased debt itself is weakening the economy.” Cue Keynesians of all shapes and sizes kicking and screaming how more stimulus this time will be different and how one last Heroin injection is really all it takes.

From The Hill:

Sessions read one press report on the Senate floor that said Obama could propose as much as $300 billion in new spending in his Thursday night address to a joint session of Congress. According to that report, Obama is expected to propose extending payroll tax cuts for another year, and extending expiring jobless benefits. Those two measures combined will cost $170 billion.

He may also propose a tax credit for companies to hire unemployed workers, costing $30 billion, and a public works program that is expected to cost at least $50 billion for such items as school construction.

Other reports say Obama's total proposals could total less than $300 billion, with some putting the number at $200 billion.

There is still, however, some hope: cut and spend.

Regardless, Sessions indicated Republicans will oppose any new spending plan that is not offset by spending cuts. The senator noted that while Obama has talked about the need to reduce federal spending, Obama is not expected to describe how to pay for these new programs in his Thursday speech.

If the debt ceiling debate highlighted, it is that the US population is no longer that stupid to realize that $2.4 trillion in deficit spending now, offset by $100 billion in cuts in the next 9 years and about $2.3 trillion in the final year, makes absolutely no sense.

Yet unfortunately this is what will likely end up happening. The final outcome will be that between this, and the next 10 or so fiscal stimulus programs, all of which will fail, will be to back-end load about $100 trillion in spending cuts in 2020, a year when the government will probably collect one 50th of this in revenue.

At some point someone will ask how this makes any logical sense.

But not yet.

For now, look for much more posturing both tomorrow, and in two weeks, when the "transitory" $14.69 trillion debt ceiling is breached about half a month ahead of schedule.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:51 | 1642533 PolishHammer
PolishHammer's picture

Obama is such a convenient excuse for Republicans if you really think about it.  Anyone looks good compared to him.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:58 | 1642565 DormRoom
DormRoom's picture

Republicans still the No party.  Half the stimulus was intended to be tax cuts.  If Raegan were alive he would have supported it.  But heck, bad economy may mean Republican majority in '12.  But it's short sighted thinking because, if they slash social security to the bone to reduce debt, once in power,  it will lead the US into the Great Depression.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:13 | 1642631 ratso
ratso's picture

You might be right.  What does seem farily clear is that the Republicans would rather sabotage any plan by Obama that might help the economy and the working men and women of America than allow Obama to appear to be successful.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:24 | 1642675 spiral_eyes
spiral_eyes's picture

If Warren Buffett loves job creation so much WHY DOESN'T HE USE HIS OWN FUCKEN MONEY TO DO SOME OF IT? 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:32 | 1642686 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

*Speaking of Warren 'Thanks For the Bailouts, Sucker Taxpayers!' Buffett, here's how his latest brilliant investment, BYD Automotive of China is doing:

BYD Cuts Jobs But Denies It's Shuttering Business

Back to Japan -

Japan has poured more concrete, asphalt and other road and bridge materials, and has spent more on any other nation in terms of public works projects, over the last 20 years, and still their economy is mired in funk, and the Nikkei has lost 82% of its value in nominal terms, and about 98% in real terms over the same period of time.

Keynesians, Keynesians, my eye teeth for Keynesians.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:06 | 1642866 spiral_eyes
spiral_eyes's picture

No amount of government stimulus can create creativity.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:41 | 1643334 tekhneek
tekhneek's picture

Whatever bro.

$300,000,000,000.00 will give us at least 3,000 jobs. You do the math. I think the GOP should really reconsider. I think we need to spend at least 1 trilion (That's: $1,000,000,000,000.00) to get a few (10,000) good jobs here.

The last thing we need right now is the government to get the fuck out of the way and balance it's budget. God forbid they get the hell out of the way.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:07 | 1643197 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Yes, but if they were just a tad bit more sincere with that stimulus, the Great Pumpkin would have appeared in their pumpkin patch and delivered a great economy.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:28 | 1642688 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Yep, they should give him the money. Give him the whole trillion.

That way his failure will be so epic he will live in the history books forever.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:10 | 1643212 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Like FDR?  He got his way, destroyed the economy, trampeled on the Constitution, and was written into the history books as a hero.  His actions sowed the seeds of what we see today, but his myth lives on.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 20:43 | 1644182 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

Hoover was SO much better!  </sarc>

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:53 | 1642761 Hugh_Jorgan
Hugh_Jorgan's picture

Don't kid yourself that a "Jobs Plan" is anything but campaign funding (the majority of which will benefit Dems) paid for by you and I. The boobs in DC don't give one CRAP about the jobless, except to the extent that it threatens their political future. It is time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and acknowledge that our Government is too big and we lost control of it while we were busy buying McMansions, gigantic TVs and cars we couldn't afford. It is time to take the medicine that we should have taken 60 years ago as we cleaned up after FDR.

The failed $864B stimulus package that "had to pass yesterday or a wormhole will open up and suck the United States into the core of Betelgeuse" isn't even fully spent yet and here they are back at the counter asking to pad their political slush fund again! That's right, the 2009 Recovery Act (gag) funds are only ~65% to 70% spent. The remaining stimulus funds are slated to be spent during FY 2012... That's odd, isn't that about the time time that everyone is on the campaign trail?

Look at the approval ratings for the POTUS and Congress, they are out of political capital and haven't had an idea since they were in grade school. They are gambling that $300B will not look too greedy, but WILL allow them to buy congressional seats so that the Tea Party doesn't fully take over the Federal Government. This is a political stunt nothing more on the part of the Globalist element in the Democrat and Republican parties, they are taking us to hell on purpose. They cannot control Americans until we are flat on our backs economically, so that is what they intend to do...

NWO Bitches!!

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:54 | 1642809 DocinPA
DocinPA's picture

Horseshit.  The only path to prosperity is cutting the living crap out of regulations and getting the bureaucrats out of our lives and our wallets.  More stupid stimulus will result in the same thing we've already gotten over the past two years-more debt and no permanent jobs.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:00 | 1642836 orangedrinkandchips
orangedrinkandchips's picture



LAZY-FAIR (For those who dont speak French and are dumb enough to not understand what it means so I spell it out phonetically).






It IS as simple as that.....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:05 | 1642860 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You actually believe the shit you just wrote?

The only path to prosperity is cutting the living crap out of regulations and getting the bureaucrats out of our lives and our wallets.

What regulations are stifling the economy? Can you name two?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:23 | 1642977 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

The state nothing but the state, flaky licks the boots of his masters. I will lay odds you never had a job or income that did not originate from the state or your parents.

 "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." Bastiat


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:31 | 1643013 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

And I'd wager that you are an idiot.... I'll take straight up odds.

There is a lot to bitch about, but I get tired of empty headed rhetoric that sounds like the latest soundbite from some right wing talking head.

And with regards to other people, you really should be careful, you have nary a fucking clue about what I have done in the private and public sector....

Can you name two (2) regulations that are job killers?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:49 | 1643101 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

Can you name two (2) regulations that are job killers?

You actually believe that implied shit you just wrote?  It's funny you ask for merely two regulations that are job killers, when there are hundreds that are.  Have you spent time studying the U.S. food industry and FDA regulations? --> small farm killer.  Not to mention the small farm death sentence if some obscure gopher, owl or wetland plant shows up.

Have you studied the regulations that create endless headwinds for U.S. small businesses and, at the same time, provide tailwinds to parasite corporations?  Hundreds of them.  So, this 'show me 2' bullshit is incredibly naive.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:17 | 1643240 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Sounds like your gripe is with corporate influence in the government.... Now that is something different.

You're loosing the forest for the trees buddy.

It's called Regulatory Capture and it is merely another manifestation of how the US is becoming Fascist.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:36 | 1643260 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

It's called Regulatory Capture and it is merely another manifestation of how the US is becoming Fascist.

For crap's sake have you and I found common ground??

edit:  in your other posts you seem to think the .gov and Corp. are separate entities.  They are not and cannot be surgically parted at this juncture.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:49 | 1643367 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You would be surprised at the common ground that I share with people here. I have never fit into the partisan divisions of American politics, I am very capable of taking on the left as well as the right.  What makes me different is that I am a pragmatic realist.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:55 | 1643383 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

Generally speaking, pragmatic realism is shared quality among many here. Not all, for sure.  But every site I've ever visited has their idealogues who part from reality a fair measure.

From my observations, and correct me if I'm wrong, what really makes you different from most here is that you do not believe in individual liberty, and is probably why you catch so much flak, Meister.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:11 | 1643441 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I certainly do believe in individual liberty, but I am very aware of what people do in the name of that liberty.   

I am willing to forego some liberty to insure other liberties. All things in balance.

Put it another way, we are not at "liberty" to do whatever we want to this planet.  You might see things differently if the guy upriver decided dumping PCB and Dioxins into your water supply. After all, that is merely an expression of *his* liberty. 

And I do own a gun and am not afraid to use it.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:30 | 1643511 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

'in the name of Liberty..'  Isn't that the rub?  Or, 'in the name of God.'  Humans are constantly perverting ideologies to get what's theirs.  I think that one who truly respects liberty, equally respects another man's liberty. Else, it's false..

Agreed, it's about a healthy balance.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 20:46 | 1644191 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

Go long e-coli and welfare for mega Ag firms that REALLY kill family farms.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:56 | 1643142 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

Too easy.

1.  The EPA's ozone regulations (which even Obama just abandoned)

2.  The NLRB's regulatory attempts to prevent Boeing from expanding in right-to-work South Carolina

I'll take cash or a check, but I prefer gold.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:15 | 1643231 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Re: Boeng And I suppose the jobs lost elsewhere don't count

How does the Ozone rules kill jobs? Please explain....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:42 | 1643317 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

1.  Boeing has to expand somewhere to build the Dreamliner.  They chose South Carolina.  The NLRB has prevented them from doing so, so for the moment those jobs are in limbo.  The NLRB admits they would have no say in the matter if Boeing decided to expand outside the US (which they may do if the NLRB doesn't back down).

2.  "If the first step is admitting you have a problem, then President Obama may have begun rehabilitating his presidency last Friday when he announced that his administration was rescinding proposed ozone regulations that the Environmental Protection Agency estimated would cost the U.S. economy $90 billion a year"

The EPA may have done some useful things in the few years after it was created.  For most of the recent past, however, they have been nothing but a bunch of true-believing zealots with not the slightest concern for anything resembling a cost/benefit analysis.  They would cheerfully regulate the US back to stone age hunter-gatherer days if they though they could get away with it.
Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:42 | 1643344 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Did the $90 billion cost benefit analysis include the effects of ozone on the public health? Lost work days? Or was it simply the bottom line for polluters?

The Dreamliner move is to bust the union, simple as that. Basically, replace ~500 jobs in Tacoma for ~500 jobs at 2/3 the net labor cost... sounds like the same old screw the middle class game plan....

Dollars to donuts, the "increaesed productivity" is cooly pocketed by the Boeing execs....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:12 | 1643445 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

Yes, the $90 billion cost/benefit analysis did include the public health benefits.  It was the EPA's analysis, so if anything the public health benefits were overstated, perhaps wildly so.  When even Obama slaps you down, you know you have gone way off the reservation.

Why should Boeing be micromanaged by the NLRB on where they can expand?  Their South Carolina workers would have the same rights to unionize as their Washington workers, they just can't be forced to join the union if they don't want to.  The increased productivity isn't simply pocketed by Boeing, it makes Boeing more competitive in a very competititive global market where they have to go head to head with Airbus and others all the time.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:58 | 1644085 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Not being pocketed by the Boeing board.... yeah, keep believing that fairytale. We only have ~40 years of history of corporate execs pocketing those productivity gains.  Just look at CEO to FTE worker pay ratios in Fortune 500 companies as a function of time....


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:47 | 1643360 connda
connda's picture

...and how about the repeal of regulation that keeps the predators at bay such as Glass-Steagall.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:33 | 1643022 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

NAFTA and GATT. Would you like me to name more for you? I'm sure i could fill an entire page with just Federal ones that hamper the economy.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:01 | 1643166 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

For the record, the number of jobs rose after NAFTA.  Check your history.  (Note that I didn't say they or imply they were good jobs)...

As for GATT, why don't you look into how often the US uses it to protect local industry against dumping...

BTW, in case you didn't notice the same group of asshats and thinktanks pushing for less regulation are for the most part  the same that pushed for NAFTA and the like....

Take the issue up with the right wingers like the Kochs and the Cato Institute....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:14 | 1643223 DaBernank
DaBernank's picture

You mean, "Jobs rose during the tech bubble, which happened to come after NAFTA".

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:03 | 1643409 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

  Here is a chart of manufacturing jobs...

Looks to me that the inflection point was when the deregulators took over.....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:14 | 1643456 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Look at output vs jobs. You seem to be sad over the much higher productivity as businesses switch from illegal line workers to automated machines. Oh, those illegals were fired because deregulation corresponded with the change! Does correlation prove causation?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:41 | 1643059 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

These are just two minor regulations.

The DHS regulations related to airport security. How have they helped the airline industry? More expense, flyers have to risk being molested (literally!), failure after failure in terms of security. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this hasn't helped the airline industry.

Little known regulation called CLIA. CLIA was in response to pap smear controversy. Helped increase the cost of the test while making it more difficult to provide it to women. Government collected fees for years before their QA program started. QA at CMS has been a total joke. Women died of cancer because of it. Pap smear is largely obsolete today but the office that collects fees for it at one agency still exists and does nothing. That one is close to my heart.

Government doesn't just hurt business, it hurts itself too. Check out the Paperwork Reduction Act regulations. All it does is create paperwork for no reason but to report to OMB. 

You've been misled and lied to Flak. Put your faith in the Santa Claus before the Federal Government.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:53 | 1643125 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Why the fuck does everyone assume I have faith in the gubbmint???

What I do not have any faith in whatsoever is corporate interests. The gubbmint may fuck things up, but I usually dont have to worry about being poisoned or cheated by them.

Sure they may provide services and goods that may be of use, but most of those can be provided by much smaller accountable entities.

FWIW, as much as I despise the DHS, it has not been a jobs killer.

Can't comment on CLIA....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:59 | 1643156 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

You don't think the government which publishes a stack of regulations every month in the Federal Register has two regulations that impede business? That seems like faith to me.

The idea that DHS hasn't hurt the airline industry is just silly. It seems your faith doesn't allow you to look at it objectively.

By the way, corporations love the government. You don't think DuPont loves the government? How else would they have sold rehydrogenated veggie oil to help give countless people heart attacks? Do you think GE or GM hates the government? The list goes on and on.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:07 | 1643191 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

The gubbmint is hostage to the corporate interests.... you have to align your rifle sights.

Provide concrete examples where regulations have killed jobs...

One reason we have TSA and the like is that the airlines convinced the gubbmint that we could have half assed security at airports... Compare flying in Europe and the US pre and post 9/11. 

Yes, there is a lot of bullshit regulations. I'm all for cleaning out a lot of deadwood but I sure as hell don't want the Koch Brothers and those of similar ilk deciding what goes and what stays....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:09 | 1643204 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Concrete examples? I just did. You don't want to hear it. It isn't the blessed Federal government's fault, it's corporations. Target corporations and for some reason the problem doesn't go away. I wonder why?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:29 | 1643283 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You provided no evidence that your examples killed jobs. None. That is the thesis being debated, not whether the regulations are good or bad.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:41 | 1643340 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

CLIA charged fees which served no purpose up to today. Where did the money come from? The fees created productive jobs in labs by increasing costs needlessly? I have to produce a paper proving simple logic? You are being silly.

People drive instead of fly because they don't want to be molested including myself. Does reduced business correspond with reduced jobs? Do I have to provide a paper for that too? Give me a break.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:43 | 1643357 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

This is evidence? Can you provide data and a statistical analysis proving this or is merely a matter of opinion.

FWIW, I go back and forth between NY and Chicago ~15 times a year, right now, it is far cheaper to fly than to drive and I am now flying (despite my distaste for the police state methods at the airport).

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 18:11 | 1643799 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Oh yeah, hey, the public health schools at Johns Hopkins and Emory haven't produced any papers documenting my point so it has no merit. I mean, obviously if they could do the research that says their number one funder of research and employer of MPH graduates is worthless they would, right? 

Oh, and I guess you travel more now so the opportunity for molestation has increased business for airlines? Seriously, no physicist would make these ridiculous arguments honestly.

WTF is this? Ben Bernanke could produce a million papers that prove everything he's done is great and saved us from something much worse. The common sense argument that Ben is full of shit then doesn't matter?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:35 | 1644017 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Quit with the strawmen....

The TSA is simply the Police State....

I went rooting around for evidence of the TSA being responsible for the loss of jobs.... I can't find any good statistics on Airline employment spanning enough time. Post 9/11 the industry went into the shitter but that was not due to TSA...

As much as you and I despise the TSA and their methods, there ain't a shred of evidence that it cost jobs. 

EDIT: came across this FWIW

I cannot verify anything at BTS, but it looks like the airlines have been loosing jobs for a long time....

Wait one sec...

umm slight increase in FTE jobs..... Damn, if it wasn't for TSA it could have been a lot more...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:04 | 1643179 SilverRhino
SilverRhino's picture

how about two full agencies .... OSHA, EPA

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:09 | 1643202 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

How old are you? Do you remember the air quality in '60s and early '70s? Do you recall Love Canal and the state of Lake Erie?

The only jobs the EPA has killed is undertakers and respitory therapists....

How does the OSHA kill jobs? Can you quantify it?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:14 | 1643224 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

The government relies on market innovations to pave over its worthlessness. The drag of government has been overcome by innovations in technology. Sooner or later the golden goose won't be able to take any more.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:36 | 1643319 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Nice rhetoric, I have no idea how it applies to the current discussion though....

BTW, the greatest "market innovation" of the past 40 years, the Internet/WWW was a product of public funding and, most noteworthy, money from the DOE....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:46 | 1643359 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Yeah, when research funding is dominated by a central state that prints money innovations come from the state thus the state is wonderful. You're being played.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:58 | 1643399 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

but, but, but... Al Gore said he invented the internet.

Seriously, isn't a lot of credit due to DARPA (Department of Defense)?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:16 | 1643463 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Don't confuse the backbone with the means to use it. The WWW was basically invented at CERN to utilize that backbone.

I am old enough to remember when the WWW was accessed at your Unix box by typing www and getting the 9 web sites as a numerical menu....


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:22 | 1643489 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

I think this is your problem. You remember a time when the government could actually get crap done like WWW or build interstates. It can't even wipe its own behind these days.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:35 | 1643525 mr_sandman
mr_sandman's picture

If by CERN invented the "internet" you mean they connected a small HTTP client/server between a few UNIX timesharing machines--then yes--they invented the "internet."


But if you believe that government involvement somehow was what spurred the massive innovation and growth of a global industry linking all of facets of our society.... then I would point you to the French government's "internet" of Minitel which they provided as a public utility starting in 1982.  10 million people, and only 10 million people, still use Minitel.


Minitel has been a colossal waste of money, and it never took off because the driving force behind the internet was capitalism, not some centrally-planned bureau.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:45 | 1643569 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

What the fuck has Minitel have to do with anything?

I said they invented WWW...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:00 | 1643612 mr_sandman
mr_sandman's picture

The World Wide Web became worldwide because bureaucrats weren't in charge of it.  Minitel was a competing standard to what eventually became known as the "internet."  It was adopted in most of the European nations as well.  It's a perfect control experiment, and if you can't see the relevance, you're either daft or dishonest.


In 1985, France had over 25 million taxpayer paid internet-like terminals (far more like today's internet than anything CERN ever produced).  Yet somehow, despite dwarfing the U.S. in the number of connected terminals the program stagnated and is slated for abolition in 2012.


I wonder why that happened.....


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:37 | 1643695 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Believe what you want to believe....

I also have a recollection that corporations tried their damdest to make a captive audience, the fortunate thing was the barriers to entry were low enough to insure competition. You remember AOL keywords?

After all, I am only one of the first people to use the world-wide-web so what would I know about its history. Once upon a time, there was no browser....

BTW, I've used a MiniTel, the problem was the bandwidth. It was never a "competing standard". When it came out it was ahead of its time, the technology simply wasn't there.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 18:04 | 1643768 mr_sandman
mr_sandman's picture

Just because you're old doesn't mean you're an authority on the matter or know the "history" of the web.  Nor does it mean you can honestly evaluate obvious evidence contrary to your views.


As you say, MiniTel was "way ahead of its time," and yet it didn't keep up with an American private-sector decentralized internet.  This fact is undisputable.  


*Why* didn't MiniTel keep up?  In America, people had far slower connections to the Internet and they kept getting faster.  MiniTel just sat there.  It's still sitting there.  It won't be sitting there much longer because it will be dead.


Your argument is Minitel didn't have the bandwidth--but neither did American ISPs.  (And some bandwidth is undoubtedly better than no bandwidth at all; MiniTel had bandwidth covering half of France when 99% of America had never even heard of the WWW.)  However Americans kept upgrading modems and demanding more bandwidth.  In contrast, the French government just sat there.  This is classic central-planning government action at work.  They have this Utopian idea whereby they'll command all sorts of resources at a problem at once for "efficiency" reasons instead of iterative progress like a market.  After endless bureaucratic finagling and an inability for decision makers to adapt to changing circumstances, it eventually dies.



The evolution of the Internet was the closest thing to technological anarchy we've ever had and it started from a point far behind that of the French government MiniTel.  It beat the pants off of it in mere years because of market mechanisms, good standards, paltry governmental funding and an absent regulatory structure.


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:52 | 1644070 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Why do you keep putting words in my mouth???

All I said is that the birth of the WWW arose from public research funds. That is beyond dispute. And perhaps it flourished because it was not in the control of bureaucrats *or* the corporations. I will grant you that.  

Do you remember the days when you relied on the phone lines and 2400 baud was a kick ass modem?

Yeah, so MiniTel did not work out but it did predate the WWW by many years. And by the time the technology caught up, it was clear that a browser based interface was superior. BFD.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 20:52 | 1644218 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

And if truckers from Mexico want to drive 21 hours straight on our interstate system high on meth to stay awake I am guessing that is alright with the Reichwingers here too. 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:45 | 1643545 Dr. Acula
Dr. Acula's picture

>BTW, the greatest "market innovation" of the past 40 years, the Internet/WWW was a product of public funding and, most noteworthy, money from the DOE....

This is like having a cage match with a toddler.

Please learn some basic economics. This shit's over a hundred years old


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:51 | 1643587 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You are like a Johnny One Note... or is your understanding of the history of the WWW completely non-existent.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:39 | 1643328 piceridu
piceridu's picture

yeah sure and we need the gov to pick up our trash too. Everything great that was created out of the minds of men and women...inventions that changed our lives have been confiscated by government... Radio, TV, telecommunications, medical inventions, food and safety, automobiles & roads...and internet is next.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:15 | 1643230 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

You could add at least two full Departments, Education and Energy

Strange that no one has yet mentioned one of the biggest job killers of all:  Obamacare.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:33 | 1643299 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Considering Obamacare hasn't even started yet, to say it kills jobs is quite a stretch.....

How has the DOE killed jobs?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:42 | 1643339 piceridu
piceridu's picture

You are lost. The education of the future minds and the future of our country in the hands of DMV workers (DOE) have a lot to learn my friend

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:17 | 1643470 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You clearly don't have a fucking clue as to what the DOE actually does, do you?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:54 | 1643381 Capitalist10
Capitalist10's picture

I run a small business employing about 65 people.  I can assure you that the anticipated increased costs to employers of Obamacare have factored into our plans for some time now.  Most other employers I know have been doing the same.

As far as the Department of Education killing jobs, piceridu put it quite well with "The education of the future minds and the future of our country in the hands of DMV workers".  I could only add "DMV workers and teachers' union hacks".

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:30 | 1643510 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I will not be sucked into defending Obamacare. I thought it was brutally bad compromise that incorporated the worst aspects of the US health care system...

What is occuring is that the hidden costs of health care are coming to the front. The US hid the real cost for a long time with the tax treatment of employer benefits and the free ride (so to speak with Medicare) Another example of corporate welfare, in this case for the insurance cos....and lest we forget the flawed prescription plan

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:24 | 1643265 SilverDosed
SilverDosed's picture

OSHA... Really? Are you high? Pull your head out of your ass and quit buying into the wrong side of a two-headed coin... again. Seems like all the de-regulation has worked out just fine in the financial sector, now you want to go after worker safety? The problem is not about over-regulation, its about beauracratic corruption in the regulatory agencies. You're just dumb enough to buy into the big-business side of less regulations to fix things. Sure India can build their houses for cheaper using lead paint and asbestos insulation but do you want to live in that house? They've switched the focus like always and you bought into it.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:34 | 1643310 piceridu
piceridu's picture

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax

Workers Compensation Tax 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:34 | 1643025 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

Repugnants hoisted by their own petard. One thing the dumb uhmerkins DO understand is that they need jobs. They don't care from where they come.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:03 | 1643174 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

I find it amazing that you give any legitimacy to either party.  Spending has been completely out of control since Reagan, and that includes both parties.  Bush and Obama both put GS officials in the Treasury, Bernanke in the Fed, boots on the ground in war zones, and taxpayer money in the hands of the people who caused all this.  It is ridiculous to even discuss political parties anymore. 

Obama has no plan.  Don't be ridiculous and fall for this drivil.  He ran on jobs and change, and then did exactly what George Bush did.  If his plans to create jobs didn't work the first time when we weren't insolvent, how is his "plan" going to work now?  The recession is global.  Even if a President could create jobs, who are they going to sell stuff to, the government?

The USA is like a bankrupt family with 25 credit cards.  Replacing Dad with another head of the household isn't going to make us solvent.  There is no plan to sabotage.  The only plan going on right now is to kick the can and quietly buy up gold without the Western public noticing, so that when all is said and done, we can start out with a new monetary system "backed" by gold, and such a low standard of living in the West that we can actually export things.  Yes, you're going to see little blonde California surfer girls selling their asses on mail order bride web sites.  That's the only plan I see.  How's that for change?  You voted for change, right?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:18 | 1643237 LongBalls
LongBalls's picture

When will you guy's on the left and right realize that the government can not give to the people what it does not take from the people in the first place? The private sector is the only way to generate real wealth. The government takes then gives it back at interest. Hell....they even give us money and charge us interest on monies they have yet to even collect!!!! THIS IS THE PROBLEM!!!

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:47 | 1643364 Paul Bogdanich
Paul Bogdanich's picture

Two things.  First Senator Sessions complaning about the debt is profoundly offensive to anyone with an intellect and a functioning memory that is over 25 years old.  All one would need do is remember his speeches on the Iraq war and the tax cuts and how those were going to create oh so many jobs.  So i guess the qualifications of intellect and memory are in short supply in Alabama.  Second Obama has no plan to increase employment.  If one takes his speeches and replaces the words "jobs" and "entrepenuers" and all like words with the phrase "corporate profits" one comes much closer to the true meaning of his speeches.  "We are going to create jobs" translates "we are going to create corporate profits" and so on.   

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:14 | 1642633 MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

You have it wrong. There needs to be AT LEAST $1000 billion in job spending to get a mere $100 billion of actual affect. This has been proven time and again by Obama's pervious job creation spending. So $300 billion is far to low.

Make it $2000 billion for the heck of it and go for broke!


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:08 | 1642842 ReadySteadyGo
ReadySteadyGo's picture

Throwing blanket statements saying they are the party of "NO" is disingenious.  I agree they they are more often that not are not "Conservative" as defined today, and only pretend they are, but it's never a bad thing to say no to stupid shit.  Nothing wrong with saying no to someone when what they're asking for is dumb/damaging/theft.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:20 | 1642954 HoardeBilly
HoardeBilly's picture

Doesn't matter who wins in 2012.  Depression is starting...tho to hear the Fed talk: "feels like a recession".  This rollarcoaster about at that point just before the big dive...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:32 | 1643688 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

We are already in a depression.  We may get out by doing a chew and screw on our debt and switching to a gold standard, but it all depends upon how much gold can be amassed before the can kicking comes to an end.  It's either a gold standard or debt default, or more likely, a bit of both.

The real losers will be the people who don't hold gold (like all the mom and pops in the West who listen to the MSM).  They will see the value of everything they have decreased by the amount gold prices increase.  Nothing is created by prices changing, it just moves wealth around.  When the central banks have enough gold, they will ramp the price of gold and wealth will just woosh out of everyone's pockets without ever filling out a tax form.  There is a reason Asia is pushing their citizens to buy gold but the Western countries are not.  They WANT your standard of living to decline so they can set up a more viable system of global trade. 

None of this is happening by coincidence.  This is what central bankers do all the time, it's just that the scale is bigger in this crisis.  They are going to change the measuring stick by which wealth is valued by switching to a gold related system.  They are going to forgive part of each other's debt.  Then they will ramp gold to the sky to make themselves solvent.  Anyone without gold will pick up the tab.


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:01 | 1642584 MillionDollarBonus_
MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

$300 billion jobs plan!? We should be planning $3 trillion fiscal programs at this point! I can't believe these republican wimps are opposing even miniscule cowardly programs. What has happened to the republican party?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:23 | 1642653 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture



Paul 'Let Them Eat Fellow Debt Slaves' Krugman agrees with you, but Nouriel 'Disco Boy' Roubini [Ph.D] is kicking it up a notch, as he wants a new federal program to build an 8 lane  bridge to the moon, at an estimated cost of 9 quadrillion Bancors.

Party Boy Roubini Shows His Moves Off To Bewildered Japanese

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:37 | 1642728 Confused
Confused's picture

obama = bush = clinton = bush = reagan etc etc etc.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:57 | 1642824 gdogus erectus
gdogus erectus's picture

Democrats+Republicans=Controlled Opposition=Wake the fuck up everyone

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:02 | 1642849 ReadySteadyGo
ReadySteadyGo's picture

Fucking-A, truth right there.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:04 | 1642852 orangedrinkandchips
orangedrinkandchips's picture

Cocksuckers through and through....with a different name on the box!


right on Confused.




You cant tell me a black man/woman, Asian, White, Latino's bladder, heart, lungs, colon etc. etc. ARE ANY DIFFERENT!!! Like computers...they are all the same shit inside but a differnt name on the outside.


Politicians are the same....SAME SHIT...DIFFERNT PERSON....FUCK EM ALL...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:52 | 1642799 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." -anon

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:14 | 1642913 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture


I'll drink to that (it's gotta be 5 o'clock somewhere)

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:59 | 1642830 Ruffcut
Ruffcut's picture

Obviously a set-up of complete bullshit.

Repukes are hard line against the people to serve their masters.

Dipshitocrats act so inept, as well.

They both play dumb. I wish they would all play dead.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:12 | 1643639 eureka
eureka's picture

Republicans are real Americans. GOP will win 2012, kick the lazy and spoilt rotten poor and unemployed, lower and middle classes off entitlements with some good old common sense austerity. 

AND - to make up for the relative loss of that micro-dispersed micro-liquidity - to get the wheels of the US economy spinning - they will print war bonds and Federal Reserve notes (USD) for legitimate purposes only: namely to thoroughly bless defense contractors and Pentagun with the start of World War III.

I say vote for Backmann (is that a jewish name?) and Palin (definitely caucasian) - and let them have a joint first female presidency. Yuhuuu.

Two women bombing the world and telling all Americans how to live, while jerking off the fundamentalist right and Pentagun. Look out Iran - Israel & US are coming.

Super Cool, dude. Let the US bitching bitches bithcify the world, Bitchez. GOP rules.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:53 | 1642546 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Mark Steyn in his new book argues that the Republicans are too coopted by the "system" and cannot solve the problem with their current leaderrship.  It may indeed take a tough reformer (Palin?) to shake the Rs into resolving THEIR giddiness to spend.

At least Sessions is pretty good re talking about cutting spending.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:55 | 1642552 astartes09
astartes09's picture

Did you seriously just call Palin a "tough reformer"?  Laughable. 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:13 | 1642630 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

I once saw that movie "Boning Palin" and... SHE HAS NICE TITS!!

Just remember: People drive 500 miles to see a monkey. 1000 MILES IF IT HAS TITS!! My money is on her. Ass and tits...



Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:41 | 1642749 Moneyswirth
Moneyswirth's picture


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:55 | 1642815 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

4 junks... I guess not everybody like tits like I do :(

Must be Greeks. They are more backdoor kind of people....

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:18 | 1642927 gmrpeabody
gmrpeabody's picture

Your backdoor, I assume.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:05 | 1642863 orangedrinkandchips
orangedrinkandchips's picture

Yes, her funbags are nice.....and she is hot...I have to admit and I dont find many people on TV to be worth fucking...but she does it for me....


centerfold...not a politician...



Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:23 | 1642965 knukles
knukles's picture

The Beaver Party!


"Skanks for the Mammaries"

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:57 | 1643143 eaglefalcon
eaglefalcon's picture

palin is as ugly as home made lasse soup.  if you have some extra luv, give it to blythe masters so that she stops mess us around

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:18 | 1643475 JB
JB's picture

it was "Nailin' Palin."


just sayin.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:57 | 1642563 drink or die
drink or die's picture

Wow, the Rs can't cut spending without a change in leadership?  Who would have thought. 


Do you honestly think Palin would be any different?  She'd just be the same old Neocon dumping trillions into the military for some more BS wars against arabs.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:00 | 1642576 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

You're probably right.  That's why Steyn is so pessimistic, he doesn't see the even the Republican Eloi to do it...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:07 | 1642867 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Buck up, DoChen.

People who tell the truth are rarely popular.

We are exactly in line with the historical 200 year reset of a democracy.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:56 | 1643138 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

Democracy is mob rule.  The neo-cons are addicted to their own version of big government, as such they are Leftists.  No top down solution.  Corrupt money and corrupt government go hand in hand, can't have one w/o the other.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:15 | 1642625 drink or die
drink or die's picture

I can't believe I'm getting junked for saying that.  Must be a lot of Status-Quo Republican pukes out today.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:43 | 1642757 Rick Masters
Rick Masters's picture

The comments used to be a lot higher quality because of higher-quality people (finance-wise); now probably about 90 percent of posters are Republican or Tea Party aparatiks that are no different than reactionaries of any point in history. (I just hate that name. Tea Party? Seriously, it makes no sense. The Boston Tea party had everything to do with a growing conflict about trade, tariffs, and respect not about the fact the country went into huge debt to gain independence...anyhoo)....What is the Republican jobs plan? And the problem with the economy IMHO is demand. All they suggest is cutting taxes and getting rid of Obama's health care plan. They have never had any serious plan to address the number one cost of our long-term situation which is rising health costs. Ending friviolous lawsuits will solve nothing. All the republicans care about is making sure Obama doesn't get re-elected. Most people believe Bush is to blame for the country's dire straits. I don't believe that per say, he certainly added to it, but it was a long time coming. The sad fact is we have no leadership anywhere to be found in this country. No statesmen. No visionaries. The one thing I do see happening is that next year's election will be so vile and disgusting from both sides that it might turn the electorate onto a third choice: Ron Paul. I don't agree with him on everything, but he cares about this country (I generally think Obama does to unlike Palin or Perry [they are just vile and both are associated with seccessionest movements. Palin is an idiot that will lead to war with iran and Perry probably will to]) Perry will end up a stooge just like Obama.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:08 | 1642877 Dumpster Fire
Dumpster Fire's picture

Yes if we could only get one more jobs plan everything would be solved.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:40 | 1643052 ExistentialSkeptic
ExistentialSkeptic's picture

I think you're missing a /sarc tag there.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:23 | 1643256 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

People are just sensitive about Palin. They feel she represents them because she seems a little middle American. When they see her ripped by the elite media, they take it personally and by default like her more. Same thing happened with W even though he was the son of George NWO Bush. Look, they know how to manipulate people pretty well otherwise they wouldn't have done so well.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:05 | 1642599 kito
kito's picture

dochenrolling does comedy!!!!!!!!!!

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:22 | 1642636 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

The first fallacy of you arguement is to presuppose that Republicans are fiscal conservatives. If you look at historic real spending under every administration you'll see that republicans outspend democrats across the board. The main difference is that the republicans tend to pay their bills with debt. The republicans created a myth of fiscal conservatism that stuck. Just look at Reagan, the small goverment icon - the f*ckhead ADDED $2 trillion to the nat'l debt even after he raised taxes multiple times.

It's been talked about before on ZH, the war between the parties is an intentional distraction. What people should be concerned with is the overall corrupt system. A system that, in its current form, is beyond repair.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:25 | 1642678 kito
kito's picture

+1000 macgruber.

problem that repubs have now is trying to convince the multitude of conservative unemployed republican families who need food on their table that they should not back a "jobs program". substance of this jobs plan aside, a republican parent without income doesnt care much about federal debts and deficits when they have young mouths to feed. 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:41 | 1642747 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

You're absolutely right, as they say - all politics are local. An empty mouth is an empty mouth. The problem is educating the public enough so they understand where their bread comes from. Neither party is interested in doing that and frankly I don't think the populace is hungry enough for an education... Just yet, there may soon come a day.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:29 | 1643007 HoardeBilly
HoardeBilly's picture

We Americans could probably live off our fat reserves for 6 months.  Hell, I could drop 100# and be healthier.  Might be good for some to actually have some hunger.  Unfortunately poverty hurts worst those who deservite it

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:32 | 1642708 gwar5
gwar5's picture

What.... So vote for dems and die faster? The dems are unbridled crypto-totalitarians feeling up 6-year old girls in the airports, and surveiliing all your finanacial transactions -- can you imagine what it would be like if a collapse ocurred with Dems in charge itching to call for martial law ?

You're right about the two party system as a distraction, but for Chrissakes, the national debt has doubled in 5 years since the dems took over congress in 2007. Get real, the only way to stop the bleeding is to start by bleeding less first. 

We know the banksters and MSM hate the Tea Party because they want to stop the spending and the banks, but a third party candidate now will just hand victory to the socialist dems every time. A popular movement taking over GOP looks like the only likely vehicle.





Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:38 | 1642737 kito
kito's picture

i saw a recent photo of rick perry kissing a baby. may the Good Lord bring us a Third Party Prophet..............

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:51 | 1642789 pods
pods's picture

If he is like the rest of the scum in DC he probably eats them when the cameras are off.


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:54 | 1642785 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

Haha, you seriously think a group of people that run on such social platforms as gay pride, gun control and preserving the rights of the grey spotted owl are seriously that interested in creating martial law? May I remind you that it was George W. that first created warrantless phone taps and suspension of habius corpus - you can't really get much closer to a fascist police state than that. Not that Obummer is any better, the spineless weasel maintained the suspension of such basic rights, and has actually increased domestic spying.

I'm not saying the dems are any better than the repubs, I just think people are better served if they don't look at life through a partisan prism. My point was to say that Palin or any other republican should not be viewed as some sort of turnkey fiscal solution. The fact is none of the candidates outside of say Ron Paul is really serious about fixing the underlying issues, and I even doubt if he has the constitution to really fix anything. OUr nation will be a boat adrift regardless of who is elected this round.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:10 | 1642888 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Don't confuse them with facts, GWAR.

They are too high on their hubris to listen.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:43 | 1642756 ceilidh_trail
ceilidh_trail's picture

dems controlled both house and senate under Reagan. Little he could do to overide them...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:00 | 1642835 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

Oh, you mean like presidential veto powers under the constitution? I guess your point is that Reagan, in addition to being a fiscal spendthrift, was also a pussy that couldn't stand up for what he believed in. I guess I agree.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:14 | 1642915 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Poor Reagan.

He had a commie congress, a nasty recession and a cold war to win.

He won.

It is hard to argue with success, but go ahead and try.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:20 | 1643248 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

OK.  I'll play... let's say he was a chicken shit:


1983 Beirut barracks bombing
Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:26 | 1643271 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Didn't agree with him on his response to the Col. Higgins thing, either, but the whole arab sucicide thingy was kinda new back then, and targets were hard to identify.

He could, and did, bitch slap Qdaffy, even while France was trying to hamstring us.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:53 | 1643731 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Looks like he didn't slap him enough:

Pan Am Flight 103
Wed, 09/07/2011 - 18:37 | 1643891 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

No, he missed and left him alive. War Powers Act was new, and commiegress fought him on every front.

The Soviet Union probably seemed like a priority. Not to mention dealing with the commie advances in Central America.

The President wasn't a king then.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:50 | 1643727 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Reagan got dealt a full house in a game of Hold'Em....

High interest rates with nowhere to go but down and increasing non-OPEC oil supplies...

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:19 | 1642650 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Steyn is a smart guy and so is Sessions. 


Palin is not really electable from a broad enough base, The MSM has already sabotaged her, but I'd still take her any day over: Obama, Maxine Waters, Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Charlie Rangel, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, and congressman "Nostrilitis" Waxman, etc. 

These Jokerfaces are the braintrust of their entire party. There is no recovery until they are defeated.....light up the Bat signal!


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:25 | 1642679 Hot Apple Pie
Hot Apple Pie's picture

Yes, Palin was sabotaged by the MSM. Her own ignorance, cluelessness, and inability to finish a job had nothing to do with it.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:07 | 1642817 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Can you name a single thing Obama has done right?  You're wrong. Obama is the one who is ignorant, clueless, and unable to finish a job. 


Palin is the one who has been with the majority of Americans on every single major issue.  Obama has consistently sided with the socialist 30% minority of American opinion ---  from border security, taxes, TSA screenings, EPA regulations, death panels, Obamacare, War, Gitmo, Energy policy, and foreign policy.

Obama never wrote a single paper as editor of the harvard law review, the only person in the history of the entire Ivy leagues, not just Harvard, to ever to blow it off. He never finished his term as senator, he never closed Gitmo, and he never created any jobs. The only job he cares abou is his own.


Palin had her church fire bombed by the Obamabaggers 5 weeks after the election in 2008, she was a sitting duck with 15 frivolous commie lawsuits pending.  She was smart to quit, make a buck, protect her family, and be free to call the Obama regime out.  And she looks damn good doing it!

Arson blamed in fire at Palin's home church - US news - Crime & courts -








Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:38 | 1643049 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

There's a poster here who keeps vomiting in their mouth. I concur.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:24 | 1643264 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

If she were on the ballot (which I doubt she will be) I'd cast my vote for her.  Why?

Because we'd end up in 15 more wars, crash the economy, and we'd have a total fascist state.

Then we could get this thing burned to the ground and start over.

Tweaking the existing knobs and dials is getting us nowhere.

There, I said it.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:40 | 1643331 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

Yes you did. Bravo.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:13 | 1643452 krispkritter
krispkritter's picture

But he was SO experienced:  

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:28 | 1642692 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Ok I would personally love to see a Barney Frank/ Maxine Waters ticket.  If you ever wanted a sign to short America that would be the signal, shining more brightly then a thousand suns in the sky!  And hell with what passes for intelligence among the mass man in America I think though would have a chance at winning "You are voting against them because you are a racist homophob!"

1. Go offshore

2. Bet Against US

3. Profit

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:10 | 1642891 gwar5
gwar5's picture

You made me laugh with Barney Frank/ Maxine Waters ticket!


Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:26 | 1643269 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

I'd vote for that ticket for the same reason I'd vote for Palin!  As outlined just above.

Just give me the stupidest and most misdirected folks you can find and I'm in.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:25 | 1642677 Shameful
Shameful's picture

All you need to know is the Republican leaderships hatred of Ron Paul. If that's not enough look at their record. I would rather trust the Gambino Crime Family to do what's right. There is no hope inside of the political parties. They get paid off and in many ways operate like the mob. AKA they don't trust people they don't have dirt on, so a person who is clean is a threat.

And the talk is all that it is talk. I've believe them when actual cuts happen, until then it's just pillow talk. Besides real cuts have to include the military, and the red party would rather see every American homeless and starving then see cuts in murder spending.  Both parties are there for pillage, pure and simple to beleive otherwise is simply insane.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:05 | 1643184 Shell Game
Shell Game's picture

the red party would rather see every American homeless and starving then see cuts in murder spending.

Hear, hear.  The problem with the two parties is that they are both Leftist, in that they are for big, controlling government and centralized planning. It's just simple observation.  And agree, their hatred of Ron Paul is the big tell.  I wonder if/when these Republi-philes get their ever increasing totalitarian police state, will they grin and bear it and wave that flag - cuz it's their guy in office...?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:36 | 1643036 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

Where's the bozo button?

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:54 | 1642549 drink or die
drink or die's picture

Looks like they won't need a rebuttal of his speech, as they already took the wind out of his sails. 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:10 | 1642622 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Funny part is Pelosi is already hopping mad that the Repubs said they will not do a rebuttal speech tomorrow nite. 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:24 | 1642674 knukles
knukles's picture

Funny that. 
Like WTF is she on about?

Brilliant politics, BTW.
No rebutal, which leaves no room for criticism of the rebutal.

AKA: "Go suck a fucking egg, Nancy." 

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:56 | 1642550 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

The problem we mere mortals have is in understanding that politicians thinking very differently than you and me. Their first instinct is not the say "How can we solve this problem" but rather "How can we make political hay from this problem".

To believe that thinking of this sort will produce anything other than more problems is foolish thinking on our part.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:59 | 1642574 Falcon15
Falcon15's picture

Today's "political hay" is the campaign bullshit a politician has to dodge tomorrow. It is all the same, different players, different jerseys. Same game.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:00 | 1642579 RealitiveMind
RealitiveMind's picture

ZH 8/30/11 Walter Williams

Something Jesse Helms told me at one of our luncheons made me realize some things I had not realized until then. He said, “Walter, I agree with you 100% that these farm subsidies ought to be eliminated.” But then he asked, “Can you tell me how I can remain the senator from North Carolina and vote against them? If I do what you say, I would be voted out of office.”

So now what do we do?  Go back to just two laws?  Leave me alone, leave my property alone.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:07 | 1642606 drink or die
drink or die's picture

Exactly.  All governments have corruption...the smaller the government, the smaller the corruption.

Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:17 | 1642632 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I see the problem right there.

Why is it that Jesse Helms thinks he should not serve his constituents in order to get re-elected so that he can not serve his constituents?

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!