This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Niall "Hit The Road Barack" Ferguson Responds To The "Liberal Blogosphere"
Two days ago, historian Niall Fergsuon had the temerity to voice a personal opinion, one which happens to not exactly jive with the rest of the media's take on current events, on the cover page of Newsweek (Newsweek is still in print?) titled, succinctly enough, "Hit the road Barack: Why we need a new president." The response was fast, furious, and brutal, particularly emanating from what Ferguson has dubbed the "liberal blogosphere." Naturally in an election year, said blogosphere has much CPM-generating rumination to do (after all who knows what happens to all those ad revenues if the US corporate base implodes and all that cash on the sidelines stays there due to "policy uncertainty"), so Ferguson merely provided the chum in the water (once the time comes to pick up the calculators again after the presidential election, things will immediately quiet down but until then there is, sadly, at least two more months of ever rising cacophony). So did Ferguson back off having said his piece? Hell no. In fact, he has just made sure that the "liberal blogosphere" is will be burning the midnight oil for weeks to come engaged in completely meaningless point-counterpoint between itself and the historian, when, in reality nothing changes the simple fact that come August 2016, the US will have a simply idiotic 130%+ debt/GDP completely independent of who is in the White House, or in other words, there very well may not be another presidential election. For now, however, we have much needed bread and circuses. Below is Ferguson's just released interview from Bloomberg TV in which he responds to the salient accusations that have been leveled at him (a more essayistic version can be found here).
Ferguson on whether he’s surprised by the response to his story:
“No because the liberal blogosphere has a very tried and tested method of attacking an argument it disagrees with. That’s what has happened in this case. The first tactic is to ignore completely the arguments of the piece. The second is then to engage in nitpicking and claim to be fact checking when in fact all you're offering is a series of alternative opinions. And then you round it off by making hysterical calls for the office resignation. This is such a tried and tested method and I was fully expecting it. The usual suspects, led of course by Paul Krugman, have obliged. But they have not addressed any of the arguments I have made in the piece so I will dismiss them pretty briskly today.”
On why it makes sense to compare the net cost of the Affordable Care Act vs. the gross cost:
“The critics are the ones splitting hairs. It absolutely clear what the CBO has said, which is the costs of the ACA will not be met by new sources of revenue. They will only be met, in full, if the cost of Medicare ceases to grow at around 4%. In fact, that rate of growth will have to be halved if that is to be the case. You have to distinguish here between the direct sources of revenue created by ACA and the indirect way the CBO says it will not increase the deficit. By the way, if you go to the CBO’s long-term forecast for health spending, just take Medicare from 3% of GDP all the way up if you go to the very end of their forecast in the 2080s, to something around 13%. Either that will require a substantial increase in taxation, which is another thing President Obama pledged would not happen, or it will increase the deficit. I really do not think there is any middle ground there. This is really quite unambiguous. Krugman is being disingenuous. And sadly, my old friend Andrew Sullivan does not really understand the issue that well, which is clear from his recent post.”
On acknowledging that Obama and his team could not have foreseen how bad the economy would be:
“Right. I say that. That is why this is a classic storm in a blogger’s teacup. The point of the piece is not to go through the economic record and say, you see, he did not produce an economic miracle. I think that is not a reasonable standard. The point of the piece is to say, under those very difficult circumstances, how effective was the president as the head of the executive branch. The core of the argument, which not one of my critics has address, is that he did not manage well his economics team. More seriously, he delegated the legislation. He delegates the detail on the key issues: stimulus, health care and financial reform to his own party in Congress. We should really talk about Pelosicare, not Obamacare. That’s the key issue. It’s not about how the economy performed. We all know this was a tremendously difficult inheritance. It is about how he has performed as the leader of the executive branch and I feel it is very clear he has fallen short.”
“What I say that it is not that we should judge him as an economist. We should judge him on the promise of effective leadership and decisive change. If you assess him as a leader, not as an economist, I think it is not an impressive record. That is really the sad truth.”
On how Obama scores as a leader compared to past presidents:
“I think a fair comparison, if you accept the argument that this is more like a depression than an ordinary post war recession, would be how does he compare with Franklin Roosevelt. It is clear if you look at the economy or the boldness of the policy response, that it is not in any way of a comparison favorable to Mr. Obama. Roosevelt had a far more decisive grip on his own party and a far greater mastery of the detail of the New Deal legislation. The other point which we have not touched on is a crucial point: how effective is President Obama as a commander in chief. I think there are two points here which are absolutely crucial. The first is the really serious mishandling of what we have come to call the Arab spring, but is more understood as the general revolution in the Middle East going back to Iran in 2009, if not Iraq with Saddam Hussein. The other point is that there's not been a coherent strategy on China. The single biggest challenge this country faces is China, which will be a larger economy according to the IMF in four years’ time. That seems to be the things the critics to not want to engage—that there has not been a coherent strategy in the White House. Really, since Barack Obama entered it.”
On how he can be sure that companies will invest and hire in a Romney/Ryan administration:
“Of course, we cannot be sure about anything of that sort. What we do know is that both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are committed to raising the growth rate and it is achieving higher growth that is the key to solving most of the domestic economic issues. Remember, we were promised back in the 2010 financial year budget financial growth by this year of 4.6%. What we are actually going to get is more like 2%. What is encouraging for example about Paul Ryan’s path to prosperity is that it is fundamentally aiming at achieving growth using in some cases, Reaganite tactics which I think would be bound to have a positive impact on business confidence. If there were not a big bounce in business confidence after a Romney/Ryan victory, I would be very surprised indeed.”
On where the economy would be if Romney/Ryan were in the White House in January 2009:
“I wish we could put them in the White House in 2009. It seems to me the first thing you would not be dealing with would be the extremely time consuming exercise that we call the Affordable Care Act. That would not have been undertaken. If there had been a Republican administration, it would have been a John McCain administration rather than a Romney-Ryan administration. I certainly think there would have been significant economic pain. Would they have embarked on the same as fiscal strategy? The stimulus that the Democrats designed? No. This would have been a tax-cutting strategy rather than a spending strategy. That would have had a very different effect. What is certain is that policy would have been very different and foreign policy would have been radically different. It is hard to imagine John McCain sitting on his hands while people were in the streets of Tehran trying to overthrow one of the most dangerous regimes in the world. So, I think the differences would have been very significant.”
»
- 22949 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I wouldn't say Obamtard is a failure. The bankers and war-profiteers are happy as can be!
I am being forced to choose between a screwing I can understand and and a group of ass-hats who scare the shit out of me.
You must be voting for Ron Paul... Hope that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside...
"it's not left vs right, it's YOU vs the State" Ludwig von Mises www.mises.org
Wake up it's time to choose the red or the blue pill, they are just different sides of the same bankster coin...
And release your fucking tax returns already. It makes you look like you have something to hide. Winning this election should have been a SLAM DUNK for the Republicans given the state of the economy - but somehow, I think Republicans actually want to lose.
Would be real interesting if Romney told Obama, "I'll release my tax records as soon as you release your school records".
The Obama allegiances are borderline crazy. I wonder sometimes what it would take for them to be critical of him. I know it works both ways but I personally have never seen such fanaticism. Reminds me of teenage girls watching a Justin Bieber concert.
It should remind you of something a bit more sinister in our not too distant past.
Make your own conclusions on that.
UPDATE: 2:05 p.m. -- Also on Tuesday, Ferguson published a response to bloggers' criticisms of his Newsweek story on The Daily Beast. He defended himself against Matthew O'Brien's fact-check, saying that O'Brien should read "a little more widely than just official statistics."
Ferguson wrote that the overall reaction to his piece "looks suspiciously like an orchestrated attempt to discredit me." Read his full response here.
UPDATE: 3:25 p.m. -- Paul Krugman published a New York Times blog post on Tuesday in which he called Ferguson's mistake the worst kind of "wrongness." From the post:
Matters are quite different when it comes to the third kind of wrongness: making or insinuating false claims about readily checkable facts. The case in point, of course, is Ferguson’s attempt to mislead readers into believing that the CBO had concluded that Obamacare increases the deficit. This was unethical on his part – but Newsweek is also at fault, because this is the sort of thing it could and should have refused to publish.
... free speech anyone?
It never ceases to amaze me when I see seemingly intelligent people still suffering from the delusion that it makes one singular lick of fucking difference who the president is.
Here's a newsflash kids: It don't matter if it's Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, The ghost of Ronald fucking Regan or Britany Spears fucking hairdresser. It don't mean shit because they are just the mouthpiece for the true powers who's names we are not privileged enough to know.
the unusual part is Newsweek having a negative piece about O (or whatever his name is today). Add the article today or yesterday about the US military double tapping (aka striking emergency response personal after killing people in Iraq etc), and the MSM has been softer on Romney than other Republicans (or maybe I am just tuning them out more). When Clinton was running back in '96 for re-election there were no negative articles coming out about him, there seems to be an effort to discredit O from the top. We'll have to see the next couple months what is 'leaked' via MSM.
Perhaps it's all a plot to make him look bad now and then build him up as the new and improved 'comeback kid' and try to build some momentum that way. Or maybe the light of reality is starting to seep into the liberal/MSM mindset.
Saw that in the Republican primaries too, the building up and tearing down of candidates through a cycle of positively spun, then negatively spun stories. It's almost like they had it planned...imagine that! Bernays would have been proud of the emotional whipsawing of peoples' emotions through these "campaigns." Absolute horseshit...all of it. That includes the concept of the "liberal media." It's the corporate media!
Ferguson--a douche "Champagne socialist" Brit dick speaking from Martha'S Vineyard between cocktauls with Bill Clinton and the Kennedy douche clan. Do you trust his Oxford-trained voice replacing Christopher Hitchens (now dead)? But, hey, at least one MSM takes aim at the O on real terms.
The reason why this is allowed by Newsweek is because Ferguson is a Brit.
No white American can say anything bad about the mulatto chosen one and be published.
Newsweek is a dying liberal rag. They needed cause a stir to generate sales. No different than Madona stripping at concerts. But, Grannyporn isn't selling very well either.
Thnx Niall!! Dearest Leader and Klack is squrming...hit the bricks indeed!!
it amazes me that people can have these 'debates' with a straight face. as if ANY of the points they are arguing are german to how the real world operates. it's smoke and mirrors.
intended to make you think you are 'choosing' anything by voting for obamney.
"Nobody could have seen just how bad his woud b in 2009"
Bullshit we all knew how bad it would be.
I heard that and thought the exact same thing.
Furgeson is just as much of an idiot as Obama is.
Sorry Rommney/Ryan can't avoid economic collapse any better than Obama can. Very easy when you realize that all of them are whores to those who create the problem.
Funny he doesn't remember about half of the 'stimulus' was tax cuts. So if Obama only wouldn't of spent that 350 billion and instead of making 350 billion in tax cuts 700 billion, we would have recovered? What a douche bag.
How about instead we would of Glass-Steagall'ed the banks? Who needs to bail out Citibank, Wells Fargo, Chase, etc if their deposits aren't the collateral for the wholly worthless fraudulent bets? Should of let all the fraudsters fail in 2008 while separating the banks. Maybe there would have still been some sort of stimulus. But there wouldn't of been a bailout. No trillions of dollars of backstops. No QE1. QE2. Twist. Or all the back stuff you know we haven't really heard about. Let's see who is the problem? The fraud. The fraud caused the deficits. The fraud caused the bailouts. The fraud caused the QE. Take the fraud out of the equation, and suddenly just about everything else looks managable.
Business confidence, unlike psychos who believe in psychology, cannot turn around shit in the world of the wholly fraudulent.
Will business confidence turn around housing fraud because of Mitt? What if he wears two layers of his underwear for double magic?
Will confidence reduce the risk of TBTF?
Will confidence reduce the amoutn of rigging on LIBOR?
Will confidence reduce the bid rigging for municipalities?
Will confidence reduce the risk to retail stock holders about crap.com during the tech boom and faceturd.com now, with many other examples in between?
If confidence is supposed to be about willingness to spend.....what happens when everyone is tapped out? Has no credit lines? Worse yet, know the peril we face?
Is it confidence really what we should be looking at? Or should we be looking at the actual deficiencies that are preventing real physical economic and human growth from taking place, and along the way....impacting people's confidence. Oh you mean it's not the central part of the equation like the idiots thought? But a byproduct? Oh yeah.
Niall Ferguson. As stupid as Obama. Still knows dick about the economy.
Still a dumbass about foreign policy as well. He talks about recovery, when all his positions also lead to collapse and WWIII. What a fucking moron.
Glass-Steagall
Careful, Ferguson is a pitchman for the elites, the big money boys. Always was and always will be. What, he's telling us something we don't already know? Wow, you're so smart! In reality, he's a bum with his nose so far up the rectums of the rich even his ears are clogged. If he had his way, there would be a king, he would be the court jester and we'd be the serfs toiling away so that we could provide the royalty with more tax revenue. Oh, I forgot - that's the way it is now. Ferguson - always one step behind.
Obama is an accolyte of the European model, which is an extension of the bankster hegemony.
Romney or Obama = money from PACs and lobbyists to keep us in chains of perpetual debt.
www.opensecrets.org
Dig a little bit; both sides get money from the corporatocracy to represent them against us.
The system is designed to produce the same person. Until the system is changed who gets there is irrelavant.
Ferguson's core point - how does Obama stack up as a leader - is well taken. Obama is a weak, ineffective leader who tries to make up for it by working hard at appearing to be a nice guy, but who is really a nasty little bully who hasn't a clue about how to manage people, solve problems, build concensus, or make effective policy - economic or otherwise. Just like the previous president, the little dry drunk from Crawfish Texas, he tries to distract from his shortcomings and sidetrack his critics by using military belligerence and selective handouts to hide his real agenda which is to gut the constitution and prepare our country for a dictatorship by the plutocrats. At that job, and that job only, he has succeeded all too well.
Osama bin Laden agrees with you that Obama is a weak ineffective leader. Goof!
Barack, you didn't lead that SEAL team (as if it really happened).
Obama made the potheads on the Choomwagon pay penalties if they did not blow their smoke out of the window. Isn't this the primal allegory behind ACA? As if some "High Times" dripfeed phantasy were made into a law for which millions will pay in their iPhone $$$.
And so the wars and massive and continuing transfer of wealth from all of us to the one percenters that will occur if Romney and Ryan get elected will be preferable? Accelerate the corruption and greed, is that the idea? I'm sure that will work out just fine.
Perhaps Niall Ferguson doesn't have the evidence to back up his claim that Obamacare will make our healthcare system more costlier than ever, but he would be right to say that Obamacare does absolutely nothing to fence in, much less rein in, healthcare costs.
Though I don't have the hard numbers to prove it, I can personally attest to the fact that because Obamacare has mandated that patient satisfaction scores be tied to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement, hospitals are spending an enormously amounts of precious healthcare dollars paying outside consultants to advise them on how to boost patient satisfaction scores. This has resulted in hospitals hiring a large army of full-time and fully benefited RNs, along with a very top heavy management team, to call up newly discharged patients and ask them what they liked and disliked about their hospital stay. They are doing this not because they are looking for better ways to satisfy their patients. Nor are they doing this to improve patient outcome or reduce hospital readmission rates. They are doing this because outside consultants like the Studer Group claim that by simply having RNs call up newly discharged patients at home to inquire about their recent hospital stay, these patients are more likely to give the hospital a higher satisfaction score than they otherwise would. Is this total nonsense, or what!
It's hard for me to believe that hospital administrators are falling for this Studer-ized nonsense given that there is plenty of data out there proving that high patient satisfactions scores are strongly correlated with higher readmission rates, more costly hospital stays, and higher patient mortality rates. As emergency physician 'WhiteCoat' aptly puts it, “High satisfaction with a health care facility means that you’re more likely to be admitted, you’re more likely to pay more for your care, and you’re more likely to be discharged in a body bag”:
http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/02/a-death-knell-for-press-ganey/
What I find particularly troubling about this, at least from a patient confidentiality standpoint, is that this information from newly discharged patients is being emailed to all doctors and nurses who work or had worked on the unit where the patient was staying, providing them with their medical record and room number. I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't want my medical record and the hospital room number I was staying in posted on hundreds of emails throughout the hospital! Then again, I'd refuse to talk to any stranger who calls me at home asking about my hospital stay. Now if either a doctor or nurse who had cared for me called me up to ask how I was doing and to answer any questions I had with regards to my discharged medicines and follow-up visits, I would be happy to speak with them.
This emphasis of patient satisfaction scores has caused hospitals to waste precious healthcare dollars on providing wildly frivolous things like free 30 minute massages for patients and dishing out five-star meals to them. Now it is causing them to waste precious healthcare dollars on creating an entirely new nursing department whose only job it is to find out what patients liked and disliked about their hospital stay. Needless to say, this can only lead to higher healthcare costs -- and higher healthcare costs that play no role whatsoever in improving patient outcome or reducing hospital stay.
Mr. Ferguson is not an intellect with integrity. His arguments are not worth taking on seriously because they are not serious or responsible. He is a dissembler and a publicity hound, to be dismissed. The musings Newsweek chose to publish are not worthy of discussion by zerohedge contributors.
Amazing ... for 51 weeks a year Newsweek pumps out Democrat talking points and then one issue that is a little different and Liberals come unglued
E uterus unum...
give us a visual------pleeeeeas
Idiot!!!! A disgraceful article riddled full of errors and misprepresentations and outright lies. Newsweek should be ashamed ... if it actually had any journalistic integrity ... which it obviously does not!
Mr. Wilson,
Keep your rich Liberal Canadian views in Canada. You have the luxury of spouting of what you don't know or understand.
Well, that's good news for John McCain.
Ferguson's indictment of Obama is unanswerable - but Ferguson also does miss some rather important points, mostly because he's still of the view that the system, as is, works. The belief that there is some way to create wealth other than by making, mining and growing things is deeply ingrained and only a few people of the Ruling Class have freed themselves from it. That Obama let Pelosi and Reid make policy is true, and irrelevant: if Obama had made policy then it would have been just as bad because Obama would have been working on the same false assumptions that Pelosi and Reid (and all the rest of the Democrat leadership) used - that you can actually borrow and print your way in to wealth.
To be sure, Romney is also of this basic mindset - and no surprise because as he rose to wealth (true, he wasn't born poor - but he is vastly richer than his father ever dreamed of being) it was the very system which has now failed which allowed Romney to build up his wealth. It won't be easy for someone like Romney to actually see what is happening and draw the proper conclusions - on the other hand, Romney is clearly intelligent and as he'll be faced with a "fiscal backs to the wall" situation in January, he just might implement the correct policies out of sheer necessisity.
You are right. The only way wealth is actually created is by mining, extracting or growing things. And by taking the goods that are mined, extracted or grown and manufacturing them into usable products. Everything else, including the entire service industry, including government (in theory a service), is just redistribution. If I pay a guy to shine my shoes I'm redistributing a small chunk of my wealth to him.
Unfortunately, the ruling elites have figured out how to create fraudulent tokens of wealth out of thin air. These are distributed to insiders and then mingled in with actual wealth. This distorts the entire economic structure. But it makes powerful people fabulously wealthy and, at this point, all the powerful will fight tooth and nail to hold on to their source of free wealth and power.
I disagree about Romney being clearly intelligent. Both he and Obama have a high degree of what my old Uncle used to call "superior rat-like cunning". This is the trait that is required to climb to the top of power structures. True intelligence is a detriment to a politician, a lawyer or a corporate executive.
IT WAS THE FUCKING FRACTIONAL RESERVE SYSTEM THAT CRASHED EVERYTHING. All this other stuff does not mean a thing. It will repeat and repeat. Niall Fergsuon as historian, my ass. Maybe a useful tool from Harvard for TPTB, but not a historian. They actually know something about history.
How about this fight between him and Krugman? It is bread and circus for smart people.
For those that don’t believe that TPTB exists, don’t bother reading this comment.
But for all others, note: NewsWeek is the Ultra Liberal Bell Weather Publication of the planet. When they put this Obama bashing – Mitt “Rino” Romney article on the front cover, then you know TPTB has shifted their support to Mitt, and the repubs will win, hands down. The Lib Blogosphere can whine all they want, it will not matter a hoot. And for all you repubs, don’t expect Mitt to change the financial course of America, it is too late for that, even if he wasn’t a raging RINO.
Things are heating up.
Go to CNBS and check out the interview this morning with the economist Richard Duncan. He was speaking about his new book "The New Depression". There is great wisdom in what he said.
I'm all for small government and getting government the hell out of the private market, BUT if this guy is right and we are past a point of no return, cutting government spending (in its current form) will end democracy as we know it. His thesis is simple, pour $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) a year into technology development and innovation (no, not the facebook type, rather super battery cells to end energy dependency, etc...) and this will lead America out of the impending death spiral by creating jobs and services round what comes out of this spending.
Give his words some serious thought - it he's right and this course is not taken, we're in for some very, very serious times.
Do you believe in free markets or not?
Like in the Loch Ness, more so as the market has been SEEN to function at village, local community level; alas not at the oligarchy national level. Even less so at the monopoly global level.
Like Solyndra and other politically connected green companies? No thanks.
Because 5,000 Solyndras are better than 1.
Makes sense.
0 still leads MR by 15 points:
http://www.intrade.com/v4/home/
nial wants a job with the romney administration.simple. that is all. he cant get a job with obama. he's probably tried hard 4 year ago, got snubbed by krugman , and now he's getting flack from the people whose jobs he wanted.
What a [typically] stupid comment! He even says in the interview that he was a McCain supporter (go figure!).
Dude, it's pure divide and rule: Ferguson obviously drew the "No matter what you personally believe, you'll be supporting the red team" straw while another of his/RedShield's mates drew the "No matter what you personally believe, you'll be supporting the blue team" straw. Then they both go out and pretend to disagree with each other so that people like you can work yourselves up into a lather over their mock points.
It's how they retain their jobs and committee positions. It's WWF.
PS. In this particular case, I believe it's a manoeuver to rally the liberal blogosphere behind Obama. Support must have been waning! "How dare that guy with the plummy accent tell us what to think! We'll show him!"
obligatory wrestlemania clip --
Macho Man Vs Million Dollar Manhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eLc8MUU9iA
The big question in November will not be who will be better at improving the economy, it will be who will be better at prosecuting the new war against Iran that Isreal started.
Most people wont want to change horses mid stream even if the horse is mildly retarded, has a broken leg and is swimming into deeper water.
Obama wins. The country collapses sooner rather than later and we have to start fighting the zombies.
The way to kill a zombie is to starve it to death by hiding its EBT card under its work boots. FYI.
"The way to kill a zombie is to starve it to death by hiding its EBT card under its work boots. FYI."
Effing Brilliant!!
Supposedly the Israelis hate Obama and like Romney. Why would they start a war that could make Obama look presidential as a wartime president? Wouldn't they better wait until after the election?
That question ignores the possibility they know time is running very short.
Its pretty much conjuecture at this point.
If Isreal does decide to attack Iran I would hope we would say to Isreal when the ask for our help: "Um, yeah, we are broke and so, yeah, um, good luck with that."
Let Iran and Isreal have the mother of all holy wars and kill each other off entirely. The world would be at peace for a few years while we figured out who else we should hate and fear. Then it would start all over again, but those few years of peace and nuclear fall out would be awesome!
I don't give a nickel or a dime for blue-red politicians of today; stool pigeons of the oligarchy.
I do give a damn about the electoral process, about republican values, about ad-hominem take downs.
This guy used a mass media circulation to take down one of the oligarchs of the "gang of two" electoral system.
Put the picture back in the frame, never debase the electoral process for media hubris.
From the above: so Ferguson merely provided the chum in the water
Help me out please. Instead of "chum in the water," I am sure that the author meant 'CHOOM in the water.' Doesn't that make more sense?
Why am I going to listen to Henry Kissinger's apologist, er, biographer?
Nial is says under good Repubican leadership we would have cut spending, but also invaded Iran. This is typical nonsense neocomical doublespeak. Obama proved he is just a Socialist willing to run the country down. But joining the new Republican party does not help your case. Nial and Obama are both dicks.
As much as Obama complains about inheriting such a rotten economy I for one will be glad to see him go so I don't have to hear the fooking crybaby whine about it any more!
Sheesh, I get enough of the fooking whining and crying from my children. Fooking grow up brah and do something, do anything, try starting off with a budget, maybe.
"The single biggest challenge this country faces is China, which will be a larger economy according to the IMF in four years’ time."
Why does China having a larger economy than the US pose a "challenge"?
Oh, right. It might make it more difficult for the war-mongering hegemon to destroy the world.
Bush did TARP. McCain wanted TARP. And no POTUS dictates Federal Reserve policy. As Greenspan told the News Hour, "No one tells us what to do, not even the White House."
So Ferguson can have his pipe dream that McCain and now Romney would be doing anything differently. All this interview and the article behind it do is to keep everyone's eye on politics, which is the theatre of the blind, instead of focusing on real issues, namely, that the dollar is not real in anything other than hope and faith, and if there is anything that hope and faith is, it is that hope and faith are passive emotions that imply that action is absent.
Action must be taken to get rid of the fiat "money" standard. All Central Bank vaults must be raided and the gold seized by the people. People need to take their power back, and that will be done when people take the money back.
Buy Silver/Buy Gold
Meanwhile Mittons via the RNC is handing the election to Obama. If Ron Paul isn't allowed on stage at the RNC convention and ultimately 'the ticket', this serf aint voting...period. The DNC and RNC are the same cabal.
Sorry, but you people in the USA are more fucked than we socialists in Germany. At least, we have decades of experience with crappy state-sponsored health-care for geriatric hypochondriacs. You guys, with ACA and your 52% nanny-state parasites (EBT-card rednecks of whatver color and college-educaed unemployed AAPL entitled shitheads) are just starting down the road to perdition. USA is totally fucked. A total paradox that it houses the "reseve currency."
Perspectives that originate from outside the USA can at times be quite refreshing.
I believe ZH is not 'just' libertarian. I read it for about a year now, never had a typical 'libertarian experience' reading the posts. Sometimes i had that feeling reading the comments, and today is such a day.
First they laugh about you, etc etc
ZH is MUCH more than just libertarian. ZH provides truth.
Hit the road Barack and take Barry Soetoro and Barry Davis with you.
PS your speeches sound like they are from an idiot.
Yes, all derivative liabilities (200 Trillion) will magically dissapear and our productive infrastructure (real economy) will reappear magically under Romney/Paul. Cmon, this guy is giving everone the big red herring.
with articles on here debating one puppet over another... ZH has fallen into its own dark pool
of puppets of soros
In the first sentence of this piece the word "jive" should be "jibe."
I'm not a Democrican or a Republicrat, I don't really care who wins as between Obama and Romney.
That said, it is beyond me why Rs could only come up with a candidate who is clearly WORSE than Obama; and, it's not even close. Rs don't even like him and are only being coaxed into backing him by assinine media coverage of the type that msm is known for. Such as, for example, that which newsweak published.
By the way, though, has anyone noticed or commented, on the cover photo? Of course it's photoshopped. But if you look closely, it sctually makes Obama look competent and commander-in-chiefy in a casual way, no less. Very appealing, subliminally. Look at it.
That picture just upped Obama's already commanding poll lead another 2 points. Far more people are going to judge on the basis of the cover than on either the headline, let alone the text. And, since it's newsweak, I'm certain the text is edited down to the attention span of the average American. 5th grade maybe?
As always with dumbed-down msm, read between the lines for the subliminal messaging; and, most of all, look at the pictures.
Libruls, keep your shirts on, newsweak has done your boy a favor. Progressives, this isn't our fight. Amongst the likes of us, who cares?
I agree that Obama is not the greatest president and besides I personally do not like him much, but, I will vote for him because the alternative is so much worse than Obama that it is just unthinkable that we would elect yet another 1% neocon-lite. We do need a new president, and as soon as I am offered one I will vote for him or her, but I can assure you that they will not be a republican because those fuckers are mentally ill, meaning anybody identifying themselves as one of that party are sick and every single one of them has brought this nation that much closer to total destruction.
Obama isn't a 1% neocon-lite?
I think you just lack the guts to admit that voting for a black 1% neocon-lite makes you feel all morally superior, while the white does not. In terms of income level and policy BO certainly falls into that group.
Hey Leadenass, I did NOT vote for Obama in 2008 and if the right would offer ANY reasonable alternative to him this year they would get my vote, but I am NOT voting for that pussy poster child of the 0.01% Romney and his Nazi VP. Unlike you I care nothing at all what color a person's skin is, and since you bring it up I say it is YOU who are the racist here not I.
I think his analysis of Obama is right on, I think there will be litle or no difference with romney, or perhaps worse. I know I can not vote for the man who hired Geithner, took summers as an advisor, and rreappointed bernanke. talk about putting those who cused the mess in charge. the biggest mistake of his presidency and why things haven't gotten that much better. When your economic policy is to restore the wealth to the 1% instead of fixing the economy that's what happens
After all kinds of circles and voltes, the best that Niall can come up with is that a Republican gov't would have handled the Arab spring uprisings better?
And in all seriousness, Phil Gramm would have been (or will be) still worse than Larry Summer, as hard as such a thing is imaginable.
Neither of the big two candidates is a viable choice.
I am planning on writing in Nigel Farange in November. I know its a silly gesture but no sillier than voting for either of the "candidates".
Flip the turtles, Ron Paul 2012
Mitt Ferguson.
I think one of the most dangerous regimes in the world is in Washington DC.
Hootmon! Fer fooks sake Furguson! Pull ye self together Mon! Can't you see we are fooked no mater which poopet is een da White house?
Million Dollar Bonus: To pay for one negro (or any free loader) from cradle to grave .... including baby sitting head start education, a life of leisure and fucking off, state of the art medical care including transplants for self inflicted maladies (lung cancer, aids, diabetes, venereal disease, alcoholism, drug abuse) and burial at public expense .... could easily cost a million dollars @ each going forward ! I can feed 10,000 Somalis for one year with a million dollars ! We have the richest poor people the world has known !
There are plenty of other sites that encourage hateful, ugly, retarded racisist remarks like yours. Why crap up this one with your imbecilic bile?
Neither party will cut spending.
The only issue, on which $1B is being spent this election cycle, is deciding the USE OF PROCEEDS.
Pretending otherwise is insanity.
I don't really give a fuck about Niall Ferguson or his opinion. This brand of propaganda should be wilting in the garbage or strewn outside a beer hall putsch. Fuck Romney and fuck Ryan. I'm sick of paying congressmen to legislate personhood bills, make fantasy budgets, not show his/her tax returns or something else completely insane. Mormonism is equivalent to believing in Thor/Allah and for anyone who believes a Jew parading around Jerusalem 3000 years ago telling Roman Sentors he is the son of god then I have some fucking news for you. Ferguson's veils his ridiculous propaganda with some legitimate points like a half right half wrong SAT answer choice that fools hungover 17 year olds thinking of pussy, beer, or some amalgam of the two. No one is fallling for this, and it will be a COLD DAY DEEP INSIDE (MINE IS LONG)THE BOILING PUSSY OF AN EQUITORIAL SEX TRAFFICKER WHEN I LET AN ENGLISH PRICK GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE ABOUT MY COUNTRY ALBEIT FLAILING. GO BACK TO YOUR FUCkING MONARCHY AND HAVE SOME TEA WITH ANTHRAX. BITCH ASS. WE SHOULD HAVE LET THEM ROT AND LEARN SOME GERMAN. His assertion that Republicans would have better managed the economy holds about as much water as liters upon liters of dehydrated monkey ejaculate. PEOPLE JUST SAY WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT THESE DAYS AND SUBSTANTIATE THESE IDIOTIC OPINIONS (MOLDED BY SHIT INFERENCES AND THE HUBRIS OF PRIVALEGE) WITH NOTHING EVEN RESEMBLING OBJECTIVE PROOF. GO MAKE SOME GUESSES ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF MCCAIN WON ON YOUR OWN TIME....I WISH YOU CHOKED ON A SCONE IN 2002. LET'S PLAY OUT OUR TEMPORAL FANTASY SCENARIOS. WHAT IF MR. FERGUSON"S PARENTS NEVER FUCKED? How was Bush Sr or his mongoloid offspring with the economy? Were the early 80s high watermarks for the American economy? Anyone endorsing Romney/Ryan has a dimunitve IQ, average penis dimensions, boring northern european haplotypes, and no integrity. Business confidence? Are these the same business that will "hire" or "repatriate profits"? This guy is a joker but what else would you expect from the Rothschild's biographer?
RIGHT FUCKING ON Larry D. thank you for saying what I wish I had, and next time don't hold back OK.
The Iraq War was supposed to have paid for itself. Where is the dry drunk former president?
Why would anybody in the US want to spend money on training an Iraqi police force?
What is the total dollar amount that gets laid at Phil Gramm's feet?
How could anybody at a bank expect a mortgage payment to reset to a higher monthly payment when US jobs are getting sent offshore? Republican issues, all.
Results of the almost finaqnciqal market collapse:
The loss of $34,000,000,000,000 of uS wealth that took over 220 years to create and will take decades to recover.
The loss of approximately 8,000,000 jobs.
The loss of 3,600,000 homes foreclosed, millions more to follow, and 2,000,000 currently "underwater" in their homes.
The average loss of equity for every homeowner=$100,000.
Over 400,000 families pushed into poverty.Source: Las Vegas Sun editorial on 7-19-11
The middle class lost 40% of it's wealth and 10% of it's income reduced.
National Debt:
"U.S. budget deficit: Borrowing and spending the GOP way"
Http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/26/opinion/la-ol-lofgren-budget-r...
"Bruce Bartlett destroys every Republican fiscal talking point in 5 minutes"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/28/999759/-Hardball-Bruce
"Obama's and Bush's effect on the deficit in one graph"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/obamas-and-bushs-def......
Republican obstruction and Sabotage of the economy:
"Did Republicans deliberately sabotage the economy?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/09/did-republican...
"McConnell's ow words on Senate gridlock"
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/58-11/McConnell's-Own-Words-On-Se...
"Republican strategy: Vote against funding for public jobs, unemployment rate goes up, reap political benefit"
http://crooksandliars.com/node/38902
Don't let the Republican Big Lie affect your opinions, gather the cold, hard facts
I was hoping for a better insightful critique and alternative to Obama, but Romney is no different.
At this point I'm voting for Roseanne Bar.
I, personally intend on writing Ron Paul's name in. I will not vote for Romney, I do not trust that dude. Either one is the opposite side of the same coin, the status-quo coin, it make no fundemental difference if either one is elected.
I agree with you about trust, and by the way, I have atrocious "Gaydar" but every time I hear Romney speak it sets off every alarm I do have, I think he is a major closet case.
But, the choice is between two men, and no matter what side you take one is bad and the other is worse, still that is the choice you have. Not voting as a form of protest will never work, it plays into the hands of the wealthy manipulators yet again. Voting for someone you know can not win is worse, it is electoral vandalism and we will all have to live with the results of this childish pouting protest.
In 2008 I did not like Obama and I believed he should have to prove his status as a natural born citizen because there were LEGITIMATE questions about that, I still believe the democratic party pulled some dirty, unethical, and probably illegal tricks to screw Clinton out of the nomination and because of that I will never again consider myself a democrat.
I did not like McCain either and it really pained me deeply in the heart to vote for a republican, especially one I believed too old and out of touch, a warmonger, but when two people who neither had been president and both so flawed ran against each other I decided the lesser of two evils by a small margin was McCain. Obama and the birth cert issue struck me as profoundly dishonest.
To rub salt in the wounds all my fellow democrats in my life acted like he was a religion not a politician, they accused me point blank of racism and nothing could have been further from the truth. I think there is nothing more dangerous in politics than religion, be it Mormonism or a cult of personality such as Obama enjoyed last election. I think that was the deciding factor in hindsight for my vote for McCain.
I sincerely think Romney is even more dishonest than Obama. I think if we have problems now, and we do have some life threatening issues on a global scale, but a vote for Romney would be suicide for America and everything we supposedly hold dear. End of story, the completion of the fascist feudal 1% dream. Evil incarnate. And yes, I plan to leave America if he were to somehow pull off a miracle win. I think there is very little chance of that but with the caliber of people we are talking about you never know when an inconvenient truth will come out about either.
"When are libertarians going to start giving something back to the community?"
As soon as I get back the money I lost as an MF Global customer and Eric Holder prosecutes Jon Cozine and his stooges. I man that's the job of the government isn't it? Protect people from fraud and theft? chase down the guilty and throw them in the hoosegow? Serioulsy , I had some construction projects that I cancelled because of the money I lost to MFG including legal fees. What's the community doing for me ?