A President who understands economics? That would be real change you can believe in.

He waiting until he was that old to get stupid?

When is the last time we had a president that did redman? Looks to me it was in 1961 during the Kennedy administration. That was the last year that the change in the debt had a minus sign in front of it.

Sniper, WTF are you talking about?

I hope Dobbs runs. His views aren't as popular as he thinks they are, and journalists have a likability rating right up there with lawyers.

He's from NJ and the governor just went to the repubs.

Running 3rd party for US Senate is a difficult climb.

And running on one issue usually will not make a successful candidate.

I hope he runs. Just for the joy of watching him lose. He is an arrogant airbag who has no clue just how many moderate Americans hold him in disdain.

Sniper, WTF are you talking about?

#4 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income. I know that concept is foreign to you libs.

I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income. I know that concept is foreign to you libs.
Posted by Sniper

Without advocating one position or another, I can see how a well utilized load can lead you out of debt in the long term. But it can't just be any loan, it's got to be used properly.

Just in case all of you people were wondering, I also have not ruled out a run for the White House.

Let's just say I'm leaving my options open. Everything is on the table. Haven't said no, haven't said yes. I told Mrs. CBOB just the other day, honey, you know me, I had always planned to coach here the rest of my life. I mean gosh, there's a lot of tradition on this campus. I love it here. But hey, never say never. Would love to be president. Would love like hell to win one for the Gipper. I don't want to look back and say, 'I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum.' Would love to say, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." Would love to say, "Ich bin ein Berliner." Would love to say, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

But alas. There she blows! There she blows! A hump like a snow-hill! It is Moby Dick!

SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

(Collapses and is helped to a chair. Later withdraws from race, citing "exhaustion.")

Imagine what it says about our current political environment that yet another demagogic TV personality thinks he compares favorably with the political competition out there..... problem is, he may be right.

I can see how a well utilized load can lead you out of debt in the long term. But it can't just be any loan, it's got to be used properly.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

And it has to be short term, not a way of life. We have made no effort to reduce our debt.

China is the bank and we are the poor dirt farmer during the dust bowl. I guess we all know what happend to all that land. For you libs, the bank took the land, the drought got over and then the banks sold the land for huge profits.

"I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income. I know that concept is foreign to you libs.
#8 | Posted by Sniper"

So....

When is the last time we had a president that did redman? Looks to me it was in 1961 during the Kennedy administration. That was the last year that the change in the debt had a minus sign in front of it.
#3 | Posted by Sniper

...translates as "the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income"?

Hmmmm...but what's that "When is the last time we had a president that did redman" nonsense about? It sounded like you're saying JFK chewed Red Man tobacco.

"I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income."

You direct that comment towards a liberal who opposed Bush and his tax cuts during two wars???

...the bank took the land, the drought got over and then the banks sold the land for huge profits.
#12 | Posted by Sniper

During the Dust Bowl? As you've said already, got a link? The banks were selling land -- when they could even sell it -- for cheap. (And farmers were often turning up at auctions with pitchforks and scythes and shotguns to intimidate the banks from selling the land -- hence part of the fear that the Great Depression would lead to revolution and FDR's ability to save the capitalist system from itself.) You really do need to get out and about more. For starters, try a library.

problem is, he may be right.
Posted by Corky

That's more a statement about the field than about this particular candidate.

What's the joke about two people talking about running from a bear? Oh yeah, one says to the other, "I don't have to be fast, I just have to be faster than you."

For starters, try a library.
#15 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Cultivating another bibble?

"When is the last time we had a president that did redman?"

I'd say Bill Clinton definitely did and his predecessor George H.W. Bush did and correctly called Reaganomics Voo Doo economics. He also raised taxes in spite of his promise not to because he wasn't the irresponsible douch bag his son was.

HAGBARD -

Workin' on it.

"And it has to be short term, not a way of life."

I think that W may have made that an impossibility.

"We have made no effort to reduce our debt."

Tax cuts have a way of precluding such an effort.

"China is the bank and we are the poor dirt farmer during the dust bowl."

China does hold some of our debt but no where near the largest portion of it. The largest portion of our debt is owned by Americans.

Workin' on it.
#19 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

*hands doc some miracle grow.

SNOOPS -

"We have made no effort to reduce our debt."

Tax cuts have a way of precluding such an effort."

It's a policy known as "starve the beast."

Our Treasury has been intentionally bankrupted by Republicans trying to prevent things like health care reform.

'I certainly wouldn't expect you to understand the simple principal that we cannot exist very long if our expendutures exceed our income. I know that concept is foreign to you libs.'

#8 | Posted by Sniper

Who can ever figure out what the hell he is talking about?

I can understand Eubonics but I CAN'T TALK TEABAG!

Wait a minute let me try.

Let's see if out expenditure exceed out income...

SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM SOCIALISM!

But if the Trade imbalance was offset by currency valuations...

NAZI, NAZI NAZI!

It's a policy known as "starve the beast."

How does one explain that it throws the baby out with the bathwater?

I'm not calling Lou Dobbs Hitler or a Nazi or anything of the kind but it should be remembered that during times of high unemployment and severe economic turmoil demagogues can sometimes become popular by demonizing a minority and blaming the problems on that group. I recognize the problem of illegal immigration but I would hate to see Dodd or anyone else focus the anger of a desperate middle and working class on poor Mexican immigrants.

"How does one explain that it throws the baby out with the bathwater?"

To tell you the truth, I understand what Grover Norquist meant when he coined the phrase but I never understood the logic used in creating it.

I hope Dobbs runs. His views aren't as popular as he thinks they are, and journalists have a likability rating right up there with lawyers.

#5 | Posted by rcade

I generally agree with you, but in this case, i disagree. I suspect the main view you are refering to is his view on immigration. Even though I don't agree with his view, it makes more sense than what we have now, which is nothing. As far as illegal immigration is concerned, everyone (except businesses) agree that something has to be done, but the government does not want to do anything about it because they make so much free money off of it.

As far as dobbs running for office. I'll wait till I see what kind of lou dobbs emerges from the candidate make-over process. If he takes a tea-bag angle, he will loose. I think he is only a few small issues away from being a full-fledged populist. which means he could win an election. I may even vote for him.

I recognize the problem of illegal immigration but I would hate to see Dodd or anyone else focus the anger of a desperate middle and working class on poor Mexican immigrants.
#27 | Posted by danni

Amnesty is the only economically viable option, as much as I may hate to say. Amnesty coupled with an upgrade to border patrol.

"Amnesty coupled with an upgrade to border patrol."

I agree with you but if unemployment continues to grow it will eventually reach a level that enough people will want a scapegoat and elect a demagogue.
If FDR only accomplished on thing during the depression he was able to prevent any of the extreme groups like the Nazis or the Communists from gaining a foothold of power in the US. Hell, Bush's grandfather Prescott was even part of a coup attempt which would have resulted in a Fascist government being installed here. Hard economic times are the fertile soil for revolution, coups, dictators. Just the other night I hear Bill O'Rieley saying he expects a tax revolt. Palin was part of a secessionist movement in Alaska. Perrry of Texas was hinting at it. If the wealthy in this country were really smart they would support higher taxes and some protections for the jobs of Americans before teh people become desperate.
Let unemployment run out for 1,000,000 people and what do you expect them to do??? Just quietly starve???

Let unemployment run out for 1,000,000 people and what do you expect them to do??? Just quietly starve???
#31 | Posted by danni

Ear plugs cost less than extending unemployment benefits. That way you don't have to hear their stomachs rumbling.

"That way you don't have to hear their stomachs rumbling."

You also can't hear them sneaking up behind you to grab your sandwich.

When is the last time we had a president that did redman?

Just to clarify, I have never been "done" by a president.

"Amnesty is the only economically viable option, as much as I may hate to say. Amnesty coupled with an upgrade to border patrol."

The only alternative to amnesty is mass deportation, which would require a police state. No doubt the rtards, who blather on endlessly about "big government", would love it.

You also can't hear them sneaking up behind you to grab your sandwich.

#33 | Posted by danni

LOL. Fair point. Watch private security jobs become a growth industry.

Just to clarify, I have never been "done" by a president.

#34 | Posted by Redman at 2009-11-20 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Strictly a Top

The only alternative to amnesty is mass deportation, which would require a police state. No doubt the rtards, who blather on endlessly about "big government", would love it.
#35 | Posted by nullifidian

Yeah another unwinnable war is great for law enforcement jobs.

I suspect the main view you are refering to is his view on immigration.

Yup. I think stronger anti-illegal immigration laws are a big loser, politically. They will push Hispanics so far into the Democrats' camp that Republicans will be in the wilderness for decades.

"Watch private security jobs become a growth industry."

They already are along with gated communities. I'm expecting bullet proof Chevies any day now.

They will push Hispanics so far into the Democrats' camp that Republicans will be in the wilderness for decades.
#39 | Posted by rcade

I just wish people would be more honest and admit that they believe that the US has no right to secure their border whatsoever. They never come out and say that though.

The U.S. right to secure its border is cast into doubt by the U.S. job market to hire illegal immigrants. Clearly the cheap labor is more important than border security to many people in this country.

"The U.S. right to secure its border is cast into doubt by the U.S. job market to hire illegal immigrants."

Their desire may be, but not their right.

"Clearly the cheap labor is more important than border security to many people in this country."

But you were talking about losing the Latino vote over this? There is more going on here than the desire to hire people on the cheap.

"We have made no effort to reduce our debt."

Tax cuts have a way of precluding such an effort."

#24 | Posted by danni

Tax revenues have gone up when taxes were cut. The real problem is congress can't stop spending.

You cannot show me one year in the last 50 years where spending by the feds has gone down. Do keep in mind that congress controls the purse strings, not the president.

But you were talking about losing the Latino vote over this?

That was about the political reality. Latinos feel unfairly demonized by the Republicans whenever illegal immigration reform is pushed hard, and they remember it on election day.

"Tax revenues have gone up when taxes were cut."

This has been debunked many times. When recession end tax revenues rise, when inflation kicks in tax revenues rise. Lowering tax rates though, by itself, does not cause more taxes to be collected.
It is a simplistic talking point that fools many people but if you look slightly deeper it is not a fact.

You cannot show me one year in the last 50 years where spending by the feds has gone down.
#44 | Posted by Sniper

I'd like to see data that shows that federal spending, adjusted for inflation, has outpaced our population growth.

"Do keep in mind that congress controls the purse strings, not the president."
#44 | Posted by Sniper

I'd like to see data showing all the budget bills that have been vetoed by presidents and how many of those vetoes were over-ridden by the legislature.

Danni,

The problem with economic theory and debates over optimal tax rates are that we can't run controlled experiments isolating one variable and then measure the results. The best we can do is analyze the data we have and make educated guesses.

"That was about the political reality. Latinos feel unfairly demonized by the Republicans whenever illegal immigration reform is pushed hard, and they remember it on election day."

I'd love to hear what immigration controls they are in support of rather than them merely attacking proposals put forth by politicians.

It's like getting the GOP to be clear about what their alternative to Dem HC reform is.

Latinos feel unfairly demonized by the Republicans whenever illegal immigration reform is pushed hard, and they remember it on election day.

Where do you get that info, rcade? I'm not saying it's untrue, but it certainly doesn't reflect the attitudes of the middle class (and presumably upper class) Hispanics of San Antonio. I live in a neighborhood that is easily half Hispanic and without exception, the ones I've talked to, and others around town, are for a clampdown in illegal immigration. They are tired of getting confused for wetbacks.

Maybe San Antonio is an exception, but why would Hispanics oppose illegal immigration in other areas of the country?

"The best we can do is analyze the data we have and make educated guesses."

I completely agree so we ought to review the past century and look at tax rates and prosperity. I think you will see prosperity came with higher tax rates on the wealthy and decreased as we lowered taxes on the wealthy. Low tax rates on the wealthy for the past 30 years has created bubble economies and lots of debt, stagnant wages and unemployment.

dan, there arn't enough 'rich' people to carry the 40%+ that don't pay any taxes at all.

How many times do I have to say that the problem is spending by governments, not income. They spend way too much with their credit cards just like many people do.

You keep saying that the governments can spend as much as they want to and all they have to do is raise taxes to cover their BAD habits. Does that work in your house? Do you keep getting raises to cover your lavish spending you would love to do? Is that hope working for you?

"... there arn't enough 'rich' people to carry the 40%+ that don't pay any taxes at all."

Anybody want to take this one?

#5 rcade
I hope Dobbs runs. His views aren't as popular as he thinks they are, and journalists have a likability rating right up there with lawyers.

Debatable for sure, rcade. He is an Independent. I don't agree with him 100%, but that could is true of any candidate. Beyond that, tlhe bigger point is he is not a controlled fake, like 99% in the media and both sides of politics.

Now that he has announced the possibility of running, he is now open game for vicious partisan attack [even more than before].

Where do you get that info, rcade?

The 2006 mid-term and 2008 presidential election. Hispanics voted 66%-31% for Obama, the best ever result for a Democrat.

Goat..."low" taxes on the wealthy? What's the right tax rate for somebody making...say...$1M/yr? Gimme a number. I'm curious. (keeping in mind, I"m talking only of federal income tax...not mentioning state/city/local rates) 50%?

The only answer (though not a perfect one) is some sort of flat tax system where everyone has some skin in the game ($$$). We're getting to the point where we have too many non-contributers voting for handouts they know they'll never have to pay for.

Danni:
"This has been debunked many times." Uhh..the Laffer Curve is a generally accepted (though often misrepresented) economic concept.

Can increasing tax rates contribute to an increase in tax revenue?..yes...

Likewise, lowering tax rates can, and has contributed to increased tax revenue as well.

The 2006 mid-term and 2008 presidential election. Hispanics voted 66%-31% for Obama, the best ever result for a Democrat.

But all demographic groups had higher than usual votes for Obama. It's like if a single stock goes up when the entire DJIA is up 200 points, it's not necessarily because that company did something extraordainary.

Goat..."low" taxes on the wealthy? What's the right tax rate for somebody making...say...$1M/yr? Gimme a number. I'm curious. (keeping in mind, I"m talking only of federal income tax...not mentioning state/city/local rates) 50%?

I don't know, but why are you asking me?

This is the Thread where the WingDings confuse a gullible but lucrative revenue stream with the plurality of America.

In other words, they will claim he can win with less than 1% of the vote because 4 million people watched his show (cause in wingdingdong world MSM ratings equates to being right and "loved")!

Looks to me it was in 1961 during the Kennedy administration. That was the last year that the change in the debt had a minus sign in front of it.

#3 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-11-20 11:21 AM | Reply | Flag:Never heard of Bill Clinton

At least we know 'ol Lou'll try to do something about the problema mojado.

Beyond that, tlhe bigger point is he is not a controlled fake, like 99% in the media and both sides of politics.

#54 | Posted by L_RContrarian at 2009-11-20 02:07 PM | Reply |

Just because hes currently sitting in the draft pool doesn't mean he isn't going to be signed up to a team.

"controlled fake"? Thats just sliming that ignores what is inherent to the process. Unless he becomes a one man show, none of the major parties are going to let him ride to the top without first drinking the koolaid. You don't get to call the shots until your party needs you more than you need them.

His long held questions about Obama's citizenship at least proves to me, he is not up to the task of running the one man campaign (Ross Perot style). Not even sorta, kinda close. And he sure as hell isn't driving the middle lane.

I completely agree so we ought to review the past century and look at tax rates and prosperity. I think you will see prosperity came with higher tax rates on the wealthy and decreased as we lowered taxes on the wealthy. Low tax rates on the wealthy for the past 30 years has created bubble economies and lots of debt, stagnant wages and unemployment.

#51 | Posted by danni at 2009-11-20 01:38 PM | Reply |

I'd say that in reality taxes have had very little to do with the rise and drop in wealth in this country. One way or the other. There is simply more going on here.

If anything the rise and drop in wealth in this country is the one affecting the tax rate.

I don't know, but why are you asking me?

#58 | Posted by goatman at 2009-11-20 04:26 PM | Reply |

I'm just taking guess, but I'm guessing you've stated somewhere that you think a given tax rate is too high. So conversly there must be a lower limit, and a number somehwere in the middle.

That being said I wouldn't of asked you either.

I'm just taking guess, but I'm guessing you've stated somewhere that you think a given tax rate is too high.

Bad guess

I'm just taking guess, but I'm guessing you've stated somewhere that you think a given tax rate is too high.

Bad guess

#65 | Posted by goatman at 2009-11-20 07:49 PM | Reply |

Cmon its friday, cut me some slack man!

Cmon its friday, cut me some slack man!

It's not Friday for me until next Friday. I still have another week on the rig. No mercy! *grin*

L.D.N. - Lou Dobbs Network!!!

Why waste valuable time in Congressional Pissing Contests - Lou Dobbs should just start his own Television Network!!!

#62 knight
I would certainly agree that he could fit into the two-party corrupt system either. Perhaps by then the mini-trend to third-party candidates will gain major momentum as more of America realizes what has been coming out recently - - the vast corruption in high places.

#62 knight
You don't get to call the shots until your party needs you more than you need them.

His long held questions about Obama's citizenship at least proves to me, he is not up to the task of running the one man campaign (Ross Perot style).

Would you not concede your arguments of his viability are based solely on today's "reality" on these issues?

Doesn't Lou a.k.a. Luis Miguel Salvador Aguila Dominguez know the first rule of running for office is to deny you want to run for office?

Pallin/Dobbs 012!

For you libs, the bank took the land, the drought got over and then the banks sold the land for huge profits.

#12 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-11-20 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

For all you cons, Bush borrowed us into dirt farmer status from the Chinese to finance his wars. Not that it makes any difference to you lock step sheeple.

Lou "The Independent" Dobbs is mulling a run fer office?

Didn't we know this already?

Wasn't his whole swan song thingy last week pretty much a strong indicator as to where he was going with this?

He sez he's not ruling out a run at the WH?

Spud'd be surprised to find him in double digits in any serious poll on that subject but dare to dream, Lou.

At any national or state level campaign Lou running as an Independent would draw more votes away from the Republican candidate than the Dem one.

Woo Hoo. Another Ross Perot.

Go, Lou, Go!

Be Well.

The 2012 primary is going to be very crowded with these johnny-come-lately hopefuls.

But I haven't seen a winner yet.

Maybe tomorrow, eh?

Maybe tomorrow, eh?

HowEVER do you come up with this stuff, SPUD?

You are a marvel to behold.

HowEVER do you come up with this stuff, SPUD?

Coming up with the stuff aint the problem it's turning it off that's the biatch.

Basically, Spud goes swinging on a vine over his own stream of conciousness and then plunges in.

Afterwords Spud pops outta the water and shakes hisself dry like a dog.

The drops form patterns which become werds which Spud then replicates in blogworld.

You are a marvel to behold.

TYVM fer them kind werds.

Spud considers it a marvel to be held in such high esteem!

^_^

Be Well.

/Speaking of high... * DB *

"I'd say that in reality taxes have had very little to do with the rise and drop in wealth in this country. One way or the other."

When reality isn't helpful to your position then call it coincidence.

Dobbs didn't quit CNN the PC police had him removed.

The other day on his radio show a caller asked him what we would have to do if the health care bill passed. Dobbs said we'd physically have to take to the streets.

Pelosi will want to lock Dobbs (and any other freedom loving people) up.

China does hold some of our debt but no where near the largest portion of it. The largest portion of our debt is owned by Americans.

#21 | Posted by danni at 2009-11-20 12:10 PM

Now that's some funny stuff. I don't give a shit who you are if you don't think that's funny you need to get out of here.

You've out done yourself with that one Danni. I don't think I've seen a dumber post out of you.

"Dobbs said we'd physically have to take to the streets.

Pelosi will want to lock Dobbs (and any other freedom loving people) up.

#80 | Posted by Washboard"

I don't feel too free when there are mobs running the streets. Most of them are there to burn and pillage. Maybe Grandpa Dobbs thinks they will listen to him because he had 4 million viewers once.