The Republican Thread

[Texsox]

I agree with that. But I also think that it is silly to expect Republicians to see out thier agenda in the same breath. Why are they being vilified for doing exactly what the Democrats are doing?

 

Because maybe if we demand more, we may get? Maybe because we expect Republicans to be better than Dems instead of sinking to their level?

[lostfan]

The $190/barrel price is the incorrect part. Never got above $150.

It's just an arbitrary number he threw out there to make his point though.

[StrangeSox]

It's just an arbitrary number he threw out there to make his point though.

 

It's not really arbitrary, though. It's a recent historical price of oil, not a hypothetical situation.

 

I don't know if its the same sort of obliviousness as Bush not knowing that gas had reached $4. Biden's point was still correct and his incorrect number doesn't indicate a huge detachment from what 99% of Americans are dealing with every day.

Edited February 11, 2009 by StrangeSox

[lostfan]

It's not really arbitrary, though. It's a recent historical price of oil, not a hypothetical situation.

 

I don't know if its the same sort of obliviousness as Bush not knowing that gas had reached $4. Biden's point was still correct and his incorrect number doesn't indicate a huge detachment from what 99% of Americans are dealing with every day.

That's the point I was trying to make.

[southsider2k5]

It's not really arbitrary, though. It's a recent historical price of oil, not a hypothetical situation.

 

I don't know if its the same sort of obliviousness as Bush not knowing that gas had reached $4. Biden's point was still correct and his incorrect number doesn't indicate a huge detachment from what 99% of Americans are dealing with every day.

 

If he weren't perpetually saying stuff that made no sense, I might agree with you. This is a regular occurence for Biden.

[kapkomet]

If he weren't perpetually saying stuff that made no sense, I might agree with you. This is a regular occurence for Biden.

It amazes me, STILL, reading this stuff how it all gets "it doesn't really matter what Biden/Obama/etc. say" but when GWB said like things, they were "Bushisms". Even in this very thread there is a huge double standard.

 

Democrats = genius

Republicans = stupid

 

For saying the same things!

[lostfan]

It amazes me, STILL, reading this stuff how it all gets "it doesn't really matter what Biden/Obama/etc. say" but when GWB said like things, they were "Bushisms". Even in this very thread there is a huge double standard.

 

Democrats = genius

Republicans = stupid

 

For saying the same things!

Deliberate misperceptions of reality amaze me even more. Don't people on this board pretty much laugh at Biden unanimously? Hell, during the campaign people were even complaining about it in the Dem thread.

[mr_genius]

Hell, during the campaign people were even complaining about it in the Dem thread.

 

I remember Biden being held up as 'an amazing' pick at the time around here. The Democrat posters were very defiant when confronted with facts that Biden is an idiot. They actually got extremely angry when he was criticized or mocked.

[lostfan]

I remember Biden being held up as 'an amazing' pick at the time around here. The Democrat posters were very defiant when confronted with facts that Biden is an idiot. They actually got extremely angry when he was criticized or mocked.

When compared directly to Sarah Palin.

[mr_genius]

When compared directly to Sarah Palin.

 

 

well...

 

 

it's a fitting comparison.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I remember Biden being held up as 'an amazing' pick at the time around here. The Democrat posters were very defiant when confronted with facts that Biden is an idiot. They actually got extremely angry when he was criticized or mocked.

Careful with the whole "they" thing. I saw very few posters talking about Biden being "an amazing" pick or anything like that. I saw a lot of Dems calling it so-so, or OK, or in some cases not-so-great.

 

[mr_genius]

well Obama is now making fun of Biden during big pres confrences, so i think we know who was right

 

Edited February 11, 2009 by mr_genius

[kapkomet]

Clarification:

 

Generally, I don't mean this stuff for this board. 95% of the people here are somewhat intelligent. But the overall reflection of these people in the media, etc. astounds me. When I say "they", generally I mean a general broad brush, not soxtalk posters because at least even when I disagree with you all, it's somewhat intelligent most of the time.

[lostfan]

Clarification:

 

Generally, I don't mean this stuff for this board. 95% of the people here are somewhat intelligent. But the overall reflection of these people in the media, etc. astounds me. When I say "they", generally I mean a general broad brush, not soxtalk posters because at least even when I disagree with you all, it's somewhat intelligent most of the time.

kap, when you start making sense or speaking logically, it makes it hard to call you out.

[EvilMonkey]

Nice example of the Democrats version of bi-partisianship. Let's just not let the Republicans in the room!

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30667

 

Republicans Shut Out of Stimulus Conference Negotiations

by Connie Hair

 

02/11/2009

 

Republicans have caught the Democrats in a midnight “stimulus” power play that seeks to cut Republican conferees out of the House-Senate negotiations to resolve a final version of the Obama “stimulus” package. Staff members from the offices of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) met last night to put together the “stimulus” conference report.

 

They intend to attempt to shove this $1.3 trillion spending bill through in the dead of the night without Republican input so floor action can take place in both chambers on Thursday.

 

I spoke with House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-Ind.) moments ago about this latest version of Democratic “bipartisanship.” Pence told me, “I think the American people deserve to know that legislation that would comprise an amount equal to the entire discretionary budget of the United States of America is being crafted without a single House Republican in the room.”

 

Some Republicans reportedly were in the late-night conference. But -- at least from the Senate -- the official Republican conferees were excluded. HUMAN EVENTS has received e-mail confirmations from the staffs of both Sens. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and John Thune (R-S.D.) saying that they had no participation in the conference.

 

Today, the House-Senate deal was announced in a press conference held by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Reid especially praised Susan Collins for her tireless work in developing the $789 billion deal.

 

UPDATED: The deal was Snowe's and Collins's, according to a Senate source. Sen. Specter, who had been in Harry Reid's office for an earlier meeting on the compromise, left at about 7 p.m. At 8:45 p.m., there was another meeting at which Sens. Snowe and Collins were the only Republicans present. They made the deal, and Specter signed on to it later. He had given an indication of the deal earlier that evening in an MSNBC interview.

 

No House Republicans were at either meeting.

[Balta1701]

Pete Visclosky (D-NW IN) potentially caught up in the Murtha scandal?

[southsider2k5]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457303244386495.html

 

Obama's Rhetoric Is the Real 'Catastrophe'

In 1932, automobile production shriveled by 90%.

 

By BRADLEY R. SCHILLER

 

President Barack Obama has turned fearmongering into an art form. He has repeatedly raised the specter of another Great Depression. First, he did so to win votes in the November election. He has done so again recently to sway congressional votes for his stimulus package.

[Commentary] AP

 

In his remarks, every gloomy statistic on the economy becomes a harbinger of doom. As he tells it, today's economy is the worst since the Great Depression. Without his Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he says, the economy will fall back into that abyss and may never recover.

 

This fearmongering may be good politics, but it is bad history and bad economics. It is bad history because our current economic woes don't come close to those of the 1930s. At worst, a comparison to the 1981-82 recession might be appropriate. Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites. In the last year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs. That's a grim statistic for sure, but represents just 2.2% of the labor force. From November 1981 to October 1982, 2.4 million jobs were lost -- fewer in number than today, but the labor force was smaller. So 1981-82 job losses totaled 2.2% of the labor force, the same as now.

 

Job losses in the Great Depression were of an entirely different magnitude. In 1930, the economy shed 4.8% of the labor force. In 1931, 6.5%. And then in 1932, another 7.1%. Jobs were being lost at double or triple the rate of 2008-09 or 1981-82.

The Opinion Journal Widget

 

Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.

 

This was reflected in unemployment rates. The latest survey pegs U.S. unemployment at 7.6%. That's more than three percentage points below the 1982 peak (10.8%) and not even a third of the peak in 1932 (25.2%). You simply can't equate 7.6% unemployment with the Great Depression.

 

Other economic statistics also dispel any analogy between today's economic woes and the Great Depression. Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose in 2008, despite a bad fourth quarter. The Congressional Budget Office projects a GDP decline of 2% in 2009. That's comparable to 1982, when GDP contracted by 1.9%. It is nothing like 1930, when GDP fell by 9%, or 1931, when GDP contracted by another 8%, or 1932, when it fell yet another 13%.

 

Auto production last year declined by roughly 25%. That looks good compared to 1932, when production shriveled by 90%. The failure of a couple of dozen banks in 2008 just doesn't compare to over 10,000 bank failures in 1933, or even the 3,000-plus bank (Savings & Loan) failures in 1987-88. Stockholders can take some solace from the fact that the recent stock market debacle doesn't come close to the 90% devaluation of the early 1930s.

 

Mr. Obama's analogies to the Great Depression are not only historically inaccurate, they're also dangerous. Repeated warnings from the White House about a coming economic apocalypse aren't likely to raise consumer and investor expectations for the future. In fact, they have contributed to the continuing decline in consumer confidence that is restraining a spending pickup. Beyond that, fearmongering can trigger a political stampede to embrace a "recovery" package that delivers a lot less than it promises. A more cool-headed assessment of the economy's woes might produce better policies.

 

Mr. Schiller, an economics professor at the University of Nevada, Reno, is the author of "The Economy Today" (McGraw-Hill, 2007).

[Balta1701]

Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites. In the last year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs. That's a grim statistic for sure, but represents just 2.2% of the labor force. From November 1981 to October 1982, 2.4 million jobs were lost -- fewer in number than today, but the labor force was smaller. So 1981-82 job losses totaled 2.2% of the labor force, the same as now.

So basically, this article is saying that since we'll have job growth starting in Feb., the President's claim that this is the worst economic event since the 30's is inaccurate? Yay, testable predictions.

[mr_genius]

testable predictions.

 

kind of like

 

"The stimulus will save or create 4 million jobs". Even if there is a million jobs lost Obama can, of course, claim there would have been 5 million lost without his plan. Therefore he saved 4 million. Impossible to guage it, but he'll claim a win no matter what.

[Balta1701]

kind of like

 

"The stimulus will save or create 4 million jobs". Even if there is a million jobs lost Obama can, of course, claim there would have been 5 million lost without his plan. Therefore he saved 4 million. Impossible to guage it, but he'll claim a win no matter what.

Basically a win on the stimulus plan IMO means we avoid a deflationary spiral.

[mr_genius]

Basically a win on the stimulus plan IMO means we avoid a deflationary spiral.

 

what about an inflantionary spiral with high unemployment, a weakened US dollar, and run away deficts?

[Balta1701]

what about an inflantionary spiral with high unemployment, a weakened US dollar, and run away deficts?

There's a way out of that using the Federal Reserve. There is no way out of a deflationary spiral through monetary policy once you get to the point we're currently at. It's not pleasant, but it's better than 1930. If you're lost in the woods and you find a trail, you don't necessarily care how rough the trail is if it gets you out of being lost.

 

On another note, a weakened U.S. dollar is almost a necessity at this point. It's been propped up through the system that was at the heart of all this...money flowing back in to the U.S. so that the U.S. could buy stuff on credit. The trade deficit, not the national deficit. A drop in the dollar will strengthen U.S. manufacturing relative to the rest of the world. That's simply something that needs to happen. The dollar has to weaken.

[mr_genius]

There's a way out of that using the Federal Reserve.

 

i don't know about that. if you can stop rampant inflantion and unemployment with a quick fed reserve move why didn't Jimmy Carter wave that magic wand?

 

On another note, a weakened U.S. dollar is almost a necessity at this point. It's been propped up through the system that was at the heart of all this...money flowing back in to the U.S. so that the U.S. could buy stuff on credit. The trade deficit, not the national deficit. A drop in the dollar will strengthen U.S. manufacturing relative to the rest of the world. That's simply something that needs to happen. The dollar has to weaken.

 

well if you want a weaker dollar i believe you shall recieve your wish; a weaker dollar does lower the cost of US goods. but our currency could take a nose dive, which would offset any potential gains.

Edited February 17, 2009 by mr_genius

[Rex Kickass]

There's a way out of that using the Federal Reserve. There is no way out of a deflationary spiral through monetary policy once you get to the point we're currently at. It's not pleasant, but it's better than 1930. If you're lost in the woods and you find a trail, you don't necessarily care how rough the trail is if it gets you out of being lost.

 

On another note, a weakened U.S. dollar is almost a necessity at this point. It's been propped up through the system that was at the heart of all this...money flowing back in to the U.S. so that the U.S. could buy stuff on credit. The trade deficit, not the national deficit. A drop in the dollar will strengthen U.S. manufacturing relative to the rest of the world. That's simply something that needs to happen. The dollar has to weaken.

 

The dollar is still weak, relative to the Euro and extremely weak relative to the Yen. It's not 1.60 to the Euro anymore, but its still worth less than when Euro trading was introduced in the 90s. With the EU facing much of the same crisis we are, its a wonder the dollar isn't stronger. The Dollar is down nearly 20% from its 52 week high against the Yen as well.

[southsider2k5]

The dollar is still weak, relative to the Euro and extremely weak relative to the Yen. It's not 1.60 to the Euro anymore, but its still worth less than when Euro trading was introduced in the 90s. With the EU facing much of the same crisis we are, its a wonder the dollar isn't stronger. The Dollar is down nearly 20% from its 52 week high against the Yen as well.

 

The Yen has stayed very strong because of the carry trade. Its not a very good currency to compare the dollar to, if you want to see its relative strength.