Two articles from Karen

Karen, the Lonely Conservative, has two articles up on the economy that your Editor sees as related.

Is it Any Wonder Nobody’s Hiring?

June 4, 2012

The AP had an interesting piece on employers and hiring over the weekend. Basically, employers aren’t hiring because there’s so much uncertainty out there. What will Obamacare cost? What will tax obligations be when the Bush tax cuts expire? So many questions, so few answers.

Jason Speer is nervously watching Congress and possible tax changes as Bush-era income tax cuts near expiration at year’s end. He’s a vice president of Quality Float Works of Schaumberg, Ill., which makes devices to monitor fluid levels in tanks.

Speer says he’d feel a lot better about hiring later this year if it weren’t for the uncertainty about federal taxes. Unable to anticipate his company’s costs, Speer says he can’t make decisions about growth and hiring.

“We don’t know if there’s something around the corner that’s going to hurt our business,” Speer says.

Who is trying to stop the tax hikes from going into effect? Not President Obama, he’s too busy campaigning.

Sen. [John] Cornyn [R-TX] says the impending tax hikes will do far more harm than good:

“Raising taxes is the last thing we should do amid the weakest economic recovery since World War II. Unfortunately, even if we avoid the full ‘Taxmageddon’ scenario, President Obama’s health care law also contains a new surtax on investment that will take effect in 2013. This new surtax will hamper small business investment, which is the lifeblood of private-sector job creation.”

But, in the president’s opposition, there’s a bipartisan movement growing to stop them, Conryn said:

“The good news is that we now have an emerging bipartisan consensus on tax reform. The bad news is that President Obama is missing in action. (Read More)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV] hasn’t been very helpful either. President Obama loves blaming everything on Congress, specifically Republicans, but it’s Reid that keeps any bills from passing.

[Republicans] didn’t have time to filibuster anything, it was over so quickly. Moreover, their ability to take meaningful action was effectively nullified by four specific parliamentary maneuvers taken by Mr. Reid.

Why does the majority go to all this trouble? The simple answer is to protect its members from tough votes.

More at the link. The Democrats tried the tactic of protecting their members from having to cast tough votes in the second session of the eleventy-first Congress. Despite having huge majorities in both Houses of Congress, the Democrats never even tried to pass an overall budget resolution, attempting to spare their weaker members from having to defend their votes during the 2010 campaign, and only two of the twelve annual appropriations bills were passed by the House of Representatives, and none by the Senate. Somehow, that absolutely brilliant strategy didn’t seem to do them all that much good. Your Editor suspects that Democratic voters would like to see some actual fight from their congressmen, just as much as do Republican voters. If you get into a fight, you just might lose, but nobody ever won a fight he ran away from.

Then there was a second article:

Another Day of Gloomy Economic News

June 4, 2012

This morning we found out that US factory orders failed to meet expectations in April. How often do we hear that these days?

New orders for U.S. factory goods fell in April for the third time in four months as demand slipped for everything from cars and machinery to computers, the latest worrisome sign for the economic recovery.

The Commerce Department said on Monday orders for manufactured goods dropped 0.6 percent during the month. The government also revised its estimate for new orders in March to show a steeper decline.

Economists had forecast orders rising 0.2 percent in April.

The Dow struggled all day, and ended down about 17 points, marking a four day losing streak.

So, what did President Obama do today? Not much, except for flying off to New York City to snarl traffic and attend a few celebrity-studded fundraisers.

Update: Bill Quick on the media reaction to bad economic news: “All boo the horrible, dying Worst Ever Bush Economy!”

It’s one thing for businessmen to say that they are very cautious about hiring because they are so uncertain about the upcoming taxation and regulatory environment, which must be true for at least some of them, but it’s also true that if the orders for their products are falling, there is no need to hire new people in the first place. Your Editor suspects that some of the former affects the latter: purchasing manufactured goods, especially if the purchases are made by other manufacturers rather than consumers, is something that must be very conservatively considered if you are uncertain that you will be able to sell your products down the line.

Barack Obama has been President of the United States for three years, four months and fifteen days. If businessmen don’t know what to expect from this Administration by now, they never will . . . and that is because the Obama Administration has yet to demonstrate a coherent, well-thought-out plan. Our friends on the left will naturally blame the evil Republicans for this, but the simple fact is that the Administration had huge majorities in both Houses of Congress, including a filibuster-proof majority for a while in the Senate, and didn’t really develop any coherent plan even then. The Democrats got a lot of (bad) legislation passed, and then the Administration kept issuing waivers for all sorts of companies and even states. How much support could the Administration have had for its own legislation if it kept issuing waivers of the provisions of the Affordable care Act?

The Democrats will complain that most businessmen will be supporting former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) in the general election, but they’ll never really understand why. Businessmen have political positions all over the place on the issue which don’t closely relate to their businesses; they may not care about abortion or same-sex “marriage” or illegal immigration or National Public Radio or increasing obesity. Indeed, many businessmen might just support the Democratic Party positions on abortion (pregnancies cost businesses money) or immigration (illegal immigration might enable them to hire workers for less money) or Michelle Obama’s campaign against obesity (their workforce will be more productive if it is healthier), for reasons they consider to be solidly grounded in their business principles. But the most important consideration of any businessman is making a profit, and businesses have not seen much business-friendliness or concern for their profitability from the Obama Administration. Businessmen are primarily conservative on economic issues because they have to be: they need a solid, stable economic environment to be able to plan ahead on a rational basis, and they will support the party which seems more likely to support and provide that kind of business environment.

And Mitt Romney is a businessman. He understands economics in a way that the Administration’s stable of pet economists do not and never will, because for all of their research, all of their development of theory, they’ve never actually run a business or met a payroll. Perhaps some businessmen might not care for Mr Romney personally, and some might have serious misgivings about some of his changed positions, but they can still recognize a fellow businessman when they see one.

65 Comments

  1. Pingback: Is it Any Wonder Nobody’s Hiring? | The Lonely Conservative

  2. “And Mitt Romney is a businessman.”

    Mitt Romney is not running to be a businessman, he is running to be the President, which requires quite a different skill set to be effective, a demonstrated skill set which President Obama has. I’m not so sure about Mr Romney, because his core is so difficult to pin down with any significant degree of accuracy, and his record is questionable. In contrast, what would you like me to describe about President Obama’s core values and record to date?

    To run for President, Mr Romney should be running on his record as the Governor of Massachusetts. Odd that at least so far he seems to be ignoring this record.

    As a matter of fact, the most critical aspect of our economy which still needs improvement and upgrading, is the creation of jobs. The more jobs created, the greater the demand for goods and services, you know, that good old demand side Keynesian approach which has been proven to work so well over the years.

    What is Mr Romney’s record on jobs with Bain? Out of every hundred jobs involved, he managed to save only 20; the rest were lost, and the job loser-in-chief profited handsomely. This record is not appealing to American citizens worried about jobs being created.

    Under extremely trying conditions, and with serious headwinds pushing back, President Obama has a remarkable record of job creation, even though, granted, it still has not been as robust as we needed for a stronger recovery. Mr Romney himself did not do very well on job creation as Governor, averaging 47th of the 50 states during his term of office.

    Interestingly enough, on his poor job record in MA, Mr Romney claims he inherited a poor record from his predecessor, and that he improved his performance over his term of office. Isn’t that defense interesting? Isn’t this what President Obama has claimed he inherited, and has improved. So let’s give Romney credit for his improvement, but continue to not recognize President Obama for his. That is exactly what you people do, and I am sure you will do just that, Mr Editor, because this is who you are.

    And speaking of Mr Romney’s record as Governor, should not we praise him for RomneyCare, the forerunner to ObamaCare? Of course we should, but not you, Mr Editor, because this is who you are, a partisan ideologue whose thinking sometimes has been clouded depending on whether we are talking about the record of a Democrat or a Republican. But let us ask Massachusetts residents; I understand they are pretty happy with it, though the cost has been going up. But health care costs have been going up precipitously for decades. ObamaCare should slow this escalation of cost growth, once it kicks in with all its efficiencies, streamlining of record keeping, preventative care measures, and cost controls.

    So I’m not so sure that Mr Romney’s record stands up so well against President Obama’s record, given the latter’s severe headwinds, including the price of gasoline rising, including the severity of the downturn, including now the euro crisis, and including the unwillingness of his opposition party whose main goal has been to limit him to one term, even if it requires the undermining of the efforts to bring us out of the recession, which is exactly what the Republicans have done.

    The only gain should Mr Romney be elected, is that he will have an opposition party who will cooperate with him for the sake of our country. However, that will not be nearly enough, because we need a President who is committed to our middle and poor Americans. Given Mr Romney’s proclivities to favor the wealthy, his belief in trickle down economics even though it has never worked, and based on his record as Governor of Massachusetts, based on his job record at Bain capital, and based on his lack of core principles such that his positions shift in the political wind, I simply do not think he meets the requirements for the top job, whereas President Obama has proven by his record that he does more than meet the requirements during extremely difficult times, in my view. Once election day comes in November, I think the American people will agree and reelect President Obama.

    End of a long rant!

  3. Keynes was dead wrong.
    Hayek was right.

    It’s interesting, isn’t it, that all those Keynesian experts are constantly surprised by economic news. “Unexpected” is a very major keyword that is being constantly used by all those Keynesian experts as Baraka Obama, putting the Keynes principle on steroids, continues to turn everything he touches to rust, the economy included.

    As the UCLA economists said, we would never face another Great Depression if our government didn’t commit the same grievous errors FDR did his entire term and which Baraka Obama is repeating 70 years later.

  4. And, by the by, Keynes wasn’t “demand side” but rather “command side”. There is a huge difference.

    And business cannot be properly successful, people cannot properly lift themselves up and become more than their birth, if government is always in the way as today’s Democrat Party desires.

  5. John, re Keynesian demand side, you simply cannot rewrite history at will or on a whim.

    It didn’t work in the 1930′s, and it’s not working now.

  6. What is Mr Romney’s record on jobs with Bain? Out of every hundred jobs involved, he managed to save only 20; the rest were lost, and the job loser-in-chief profited handsomely.

    You got the numbers backward. He created 80 jobs for every 20 lost. That’s a pretty good record, and MUCH better than Obama.

  7. Under extremely trying conditions, and with serious headwinds pushing back, President Obama has a remarkable record of job creation

    Could you spare us the tiresome “Headwind” metaphor? Obama has had 3 1/2 years to fix this problem, and he has FAILED. The voters want someone else, someone with a proven record with jobs, and that would be Romney.

    Finally, we’re tired of Obama’s Chicago crew. Axelrod looks like a low level Mafia loan shark. Could we just get rid of these bums once and for all?

  8. WW wrote:

    “And Mitt Romney is a businessman.”

    Mitt Romney is not running to be a businessman, he is running to be the President, which requires quite a different skill set to be effective, a demonstrated skill set which President Obama has.

    No, Governor Romney is not running to be a businessman, but it will certainly be helpful that he understands business and understands the needs of business and businessmen. Five out of every six Americans who have jobs work for private enterprise, work for businesses, and for Americans to prosper, private businesses must prosper.

    As for “a demonstrated skill set which President Obama has,” were this true, the President’s re-election would not be in any doubt at all.

    Of course, you recognized, implicitly, that American businesses have to prosper for Americans to prosper:

    As a matter of fact, the most critical aspect of our economy which still needs improvement and upgrading, is the creation of jobs. The more jobs created, the greater the demand for goods and services, you know, that good old demand side Keynesian approach which has been proven to work so well over the years.

    Yes, the “most critical aspect of our economy which still needs improvement and upgrading, is the creation of jobs.” That is exactly what we have been saying. However, the record of job creation under President Obama is very poor: the seasonally-adjusted employment level when President Obama took office was 142,187,000, while for May of 2012, it was 142,287,000, a net gain of a whopping 100,000 jobs in three years and four months. President Obama would doubtlessly claim that all of the job losses during his Administration, down to their nadir of 137,968 in December of 2009, were the responsibility of his predecessor, but the Congress passed President Obama’s stimulus plan — the one which was going to hold unemployment to a maximum of 8% as you will recall — in February of 2009; it was President Obama’s policies which were in effect, not President Bush’s.

    But, you ought to read the first article I cited: it indicates that employers are still leery about hiring today, in significant part because they are very uncertain about what the Administration’s policies will be economically. Businessmen try to take decisions on spending and investment based upon their best estimates of what the future will bring, but without a sense of stability from the government in what the government will be doing for, and to, businesses, they have less confidence in their own guesstimates.

    It’s pretty simple: most businessmen will support Governor Romney, because they believe a Romney Administration will be better for business. Since the vast majority of Americans who have jobs work for private businesses, that’s what the vast majority of Americans ought to want as well.

  9. WW predicted:

    The only gain should Mr Romney be elected, is that he will have an opposition party who will cooperate with him for the sake of our country.

    Oh, you had better believe that I’ve saved that one! :)

  10. Perhaps Wagonwheel believes that if we recreate the conditions which got us out of the Depression, things would improve. All that we need to do to do that is to:

    • Become the world’s number one oil exporter;
    • Become the world’s number one steel producer;
    • Eliminate all industry in every non European country:
    • Ask the Japanese and Germans to kindly attack everybody else in the world, and see to it that they blow up most of Europe’s industries; and
    • Start selling bullets and guns and bombs and planes to countries which will rapidly expend them and come calling for more.

    That is the “plan” which worked so well before. Anybody here think we can duplicate those conditions?

  11. Oh, you had better believe that I’ve saved that one!

    Indeed! It’ll be like Obama’s “promises” to close Gitmo, end rendition, stop “torture,” bring unemployment under 8%, lower the debt, etc. …

    Of course, please make to bookmark the link, too, for the inevitable PAP “I don’t recall stating that … provide me a cite, please.”

  12. Koolo requested:

    please make to bookmark the link, too, for the inevitable PAP “I don’t recall stating that … provide me a cite, please.”

    Already done.

  13. “Oh, you had better believe that I’ve saved that one! :)

    You wingers have no concept of cooperation with the other side, whereas the Dems of a long history of doing so, putting the needs of Americans at higher priority than moves motivated your grabs power.

    Otoh, all you people desire is power, because you believe on faith that your [extremist] ideology is the only way to “rescue” us from our fiscal problems and from the attacks of terrorists. Moreover, you have not yet realized that the terrorists are you too, as you are currently terrorizing our poor and middle class citizens by trying to deprive them of the basics of living, accusing them of being too lazy to work, based on nothing more than your assumptions about them.

    The absolute truth is that your ideology has created our fiscal problems, with your spending on wars while cutting taxes on the wealthy. Therefore, if the American people, duped by the likes of FoxNews and Limbaugh & Co., were to turn power over to you again, you will procede to exacerbate said fiscal problems by repeating the same old ideology which has caused them to begin with. You folks have also succeeded in moving the people’s wealth into the hands of a powerful elite few, who now think they can tell us for whom to vote. I hardly think this behavior is what our founders had in mind.

    Writes koolo:

    “Indeed! It’ll be like Obama’s “promises” to close Gitmo, end rendition, stop “torture,” bring unemployment under 8%, lower the debt, etc. …”

    These practices were initiated by you radicals, therefore have not been difficult to readily terminate. And then you radicals, like you koolo, have the nerve to criticize President Obama for that. Your thinking is so irrational, and your hatred for our President is so strong, that even when he is doing what your party started and like, you still cannot bring it upon yourselves to praise him.

    But that is beside the point. Our behavior under the Cheney/Bush administration motivated and activated our terrorist enemies, with our own version of terrorism then implemented against them. I am critical of both Cheney/Bush and President Obama for these war/terrorist policies. When bombs and rockets are Thus, both sides have been wrong! Now we also have our terroristic drone strikes to add to our list of atrocities. So yes, I do fault President Obama for continuing to implement the policies mostly initiated by you people. And strangely enough, you warhawks do not even credit President Obama for carrying out your militaristic policies, for which you clowns should be praising and supporting him.

    Now it is true that I am guilty of some hyperbole here, but there is truth in the gist of what I have just written.

    What is wrong with you people? Here is what is wrong: You folks are so consumed by racism and hatred, you cannot even bring yourselves to praise our President when he does things you support.

    As I have said before on here many times, if we put our resources into detection and rapid response at our borders and in the air over our borders, we will then be able to defend ourselves without having to fight our battles on other peoples’ lands and in the process destroying their families and infrastructure, as we have done ever since WWII ended, in the name of a peace which neither we, nor our enemies, have bothered to promote.

    You people are dragging this nation into the pits of moral distress and ethical vacuum. You need to be soundly defeated, along with the warhawk Dems who are in the pit right along side you folks. Somebody has to start behaving with a concern for the welfare of all people.

  14. Wagonwheel says:
    June 5, 2012 at 10:42 (Edit)

    “Oh, you had better believe that I’ve saved that one! ”

    You wingers have no concept of cooperation with the other side, whereas the Dems of a long history of doing so, putting the needs of Americans at higher priority than moves motivated your grabs power.

    Sunday I happen to come upon “Face the Nation” on SeeBS. At that point, with a table full of Dems, the consensus was for the Repubs to compromise, or the way they discussed it, just give in to the Dems point of view.

  15. I did not see the show, Yorkshire, but I would guess that you saw compromisers asking the other side to compromise as well. The only other way to govern is to have the most powerful dictating to the lesser powerful. Isn’t this exactly what the Repubs want, in which they are the most powerfulside? If we want our system preserved and surviving, we must have factions seeking compromises, in my view.

    Certainly no credible person could characterize today’s Republican leaders as compromisers. On the contrary, compromising is considered a weakness by these people. Ask our Editor, why he exhibits an anti-compromising attitude.

  16. Did you miss anything Wagonwheel? We’re racist, hate mongering, morally challenged, ethically challenged, power mad, family destroying, infrastructure destroying war hawks!!!

    Was there no way for you to work into your rant: homophobic, women hating, vote suppressing, greedy and corrupt? You’re slippin’.

    Perhaps if Walker and Romney both loose you lefties can begin the re-education camps and gulags. After all, apparently there is no room for a two party system. One cannot honestly disagree with you leftists, there must be some underlying nefarious, self-serving reason we differ! Life would be so much better under one party, Democratic Socialist States of America.

  17. You wingers have no concept of cooperation with the other side, whereas the Dems of a long history of doing so, putting the needs of Americans at higher priority than moves motivated your grabs power.

    Citation please!

    These practices were initiated by you radicals, therefore have not been difficult to readily terminate. And then you radicals, like you koolo, have the nerve to criticize President Obama for that.

    Then why did Obama promise to do just all that, then, hmm? I believe you are racist for saying this — that a black man cannot be legitimately expected to do what he said he would do!

    What is wrong with you people? Here is what is wrong: You folks are so consumed by racism and hatred, you cannot even bring yourselves to praise our President when he does things you support.

    Citation please!

    You people are dragging this nation into the pits of moral distress and ethical vacuum. You need to be soundly defeated, along with the warhawk Dems who are in the pit right along side you folks. Somebody has to start behaving with a concern for the welfare of all people.

    Says the “man” who routinely sides with Palestinian terrorist murderers over Israelis who simply want to live in peace and be left alone. “Moral distress” and “ethical vacuum” indeed. What a joke.

  18. WW wrote:

    You wingers have no concept of cooperation with the other side, whereas the Dems of a long history of doing so, putting the needs of Americans at higher priority than moves motivated your grabs power.

    OK, just where would you have had us compromise? Republicans thought that the stimulus plan was a bad idea, which spent, wasted really, too much money. If we had compromised with the Democrats, the stimulus plan would have been smaller, yet you have complained, many times, that the reason that the stimulus plan didn’t work was that it was too small. Why should you have wanted us to compromise with you?

    What about ObumbleCare? Most Republicans thought that the government should not be guaranteeing health care coverage in the first place; I’m not certain where the middle ground is between providing universal coverage and not guaranteeing coverage is, but if we assume that it is guaranteeing coverage, just not as much coverage, you’d have complained that we sabotaged your goals.

    The result would have been just what you wanted, of course: the TEA Party folks wouldn’t support the Republicans, while the Democrats would have campaigned on the issue that their plans would have succeeded if only there were enough Democrats that they could ignore the wicked Republicans completely. By compromising, the Republicans would have been as responsible as the Democrats for the Democrats’ failed policies. And the elections wouldn’t be between Democrats and Republicans, but Democrats and Democrats Lite.

    By not compromising, by fighting for what they believe, the Republicans are offering the voters a clear choice this November, and real choice is a good thing. Who knows, it is always possible that the voters will decide, you know what, we just don’t like what the Republicans plan to do, so we’ll stick with President Obama and the Democrats. In a free and fair election, such a result is certainly possible.

    Isn’t that really a better choice than between Democrats and Democrats Lite?

  19. “Says the “man” who routinely sides with Palestinian terrorist murderers over Israelis who simply want to live in peace and be left alone. “Moral distress” and “ethical vacuum” indeed. What a joke.”

    And that is an outright lie, koolo, though fully expected from you and produced every other word. Nonetheless, how is expanding the West Bank settlements and taking over West Jerusalem “living in peace”, koolo. Criticizing an ally is not permitted in your play book, is it? You are the spitting image of the radical I described.

    Regarding your request for citations, reread my rant, paying special attention to the context. The answers are all right there.

    Moreover, show me one word of praise you have uttered for President Obama, on any issue. You haven’t, because you are so overwhelmed by your hatred, not only for the President, but for those who support him as well.

  20. So, Perry claims that accurate criticism of Obama’s failed policies is rooted in nothing but personal hatred for the President and his supporters, and he offers what as proof?

    Why absolutely nothing but a lack of praise for Teh Messiah. Are you convinced, I’m not convinced, I’m ROTHFLMAO.

    Hey, Koolo, didn’t you get the memo. You can’t criticise the man running our economy into the ground because you didn’t praise him enough first. Does that sense to anyone, anyone at all?

  21. Moreover, show me one word of praise you have uttered for President Obama, on any issue. You haven’t, because you are so overwhelmed by your hatred, not only for the President, but for those who support him as well.

    I’ll just repeat what I stated previously, then: His OK’ing the taking out of bin Laden. Fair enough?

    And that is an outright lie, koolo

    No, it’s not, as I know all full well from my readings of CSPT and CoR. You remain beyond radical in your very morally questionable attitudes towards Israel and Israelis.

    Regarding your request for citations, reread my rant, paying special attention to the context. The answers are all right there.

    Still no citations, huh? Which makes your last comments totally and irrevocably meaningless!

  22. Mr Editor, on compromising:

    Regarding the ACA, the Dems wanted single payer, or at least a public option. They settled for having neither. Where was the Republican compromise? Nowhere! In fact, Republicans have vowed to kill the bill if they take over, leaving 50 million poor and middle Americans without health insurance and costs continuing to escalate astronomically. This is not governing, which Republicans are committed to do once taking the oath of office. There was no compromising on this issue on your side, Mr Editor, it was all obfuscating and obstruction. Therefore, we will never know what a compromise package would have looked like.

    Regarding the stimulus, even though 40% of it was tax cuts, which you folks love, there were only 3 Repubs in the Senate, and none in the House to vote for the final bill. No compromising by the Repubs, and no support either, otherwise one would have expected more of them to support the final bill. And the stimulus worked, so you folks were even wrong about that. A compromise, allocating more spending, would probably have produced a more effective bill. But no, anything which would help the country, and as a corollary, given the President some credit, was nixed by your totally uncooperative party.

    In this campaign, I would expect that voters will be reminded of the inappropriate and unpatriotic behavior of your party.

    “Isn’t that really a better choice than between Democrats and Democrats Lite?”

    Don’t you understand, Mr Editor, this is not only about an election and a choice, over which four years have been wasted; when elected, one must govern? We did not get the best governing with the continued lock-step, uncompromising, obstructionist maneuvering of the Republicans during these four years, not even close. This is an outrage perpetrated by the current version of the Republican Party. It was not this way for Reagan or GHW Bush, or even GW Bush. Your brand of radical politics is new in these modern times, and I don’t like it one bit!

    With you people, it has turned out to be an act of disrespect to your Republican Party to work with, talk to, eat lunch with, vote with any member of the Democratic Party, this is how bad this divide and conquer approach. It is as if you folks were at war with your own fellow countrymen. It certainly feels that way on this blog!

  23. “No, it’s not, as I know all full well from my readings of CSPT and CoR. You remain beyond radical in your very morally questionable attitudes towards Israel and Israelis.”

    That’s one more of your outright lies, koolo. I have absolutely nothing personally against the Israelis, but I do question some of their policies. Apparently to a Conservative Republican like Hube and yourself, that alone makes me what you two call an anti-semite; moreover, you two do not even use that term’s meaning accurately.

  24. That’s one more of your outright lies, koolo. I have absolutely nothing personally against the Israelis, but I do question some of their policies. Apparently to a Conservative Republican like Hube and yourself, that alone makes me what you two call an anti-semite; moreover, you two do not even use that term’s meaning accurately.

    I’m just using your own standard, Passive-Aggressive Perry! If we are to be dubbed “racists” for opposing the Obama agenda, then certainly, based on your past comments, you’re definitely a hater of Jews.

    I know you despise your own tactics turned against you; ain’t that just too damn bad?

  25. Wagonwheel says:
    June 5, 2012 at 11:39

    I did not see the show, Yorkshire, but I would guess that you saw compromisers asking the other side to compromise as well. The only other way to govern is to have the most powerful dictating to the lesser powerful. Isn’t this exactly what the Repubs want, in which they are the most powerfulside? If we want our system preserved and surviving, we must have factions seeking compromises, in my view.

    Certainly no credible person could characterize today’s Republican leaders as compromisers. On the contrary, compromising is considered a weakness by these people. Ask our Editor, why he exhibits an anti-compromising attitude.

    One thing I have observed is the Dems are very happy with a guy like McCain when he “crosses the aisle” to compromise with the Dems, but where are the stories of the Dems “crossing the aisle” to work with the Reps and compromise. If I remember that during Obamascare negotiations, the Dems went behind closed doors and it was no Reps were allowed in.

  26. Perry writes

    ” … all you people desire is power, because you believe on faith that your [extremist] ideology is the only way to “rescue” us from our fiscal problems and from the attacks of terrorists. Moreover, you have not yet realized that the terrorists are you too, …”

    Good lord, gentlemen. You can still put up with that crap?

  27. “I’m just using your own standard, Passive-Aggressive Perry! If we are to be dubbed “racists” for opposing the Obama agenda, then certainly, based on your past comments, you’re definitely a hater of Jews.”

    What past comments are those, koolo? Without an example, you throw out an allegation. But that is who you are, and what you do, all the time, like the weakling that you are. Flat out, I do not hate Jewish people. But you hate President Obama, as per your all encompassing condemnation of the man and his polities, across the board. And btw, show me where you praised our President for taking care of bin Laden? I didn’t see it. I suspect that’s another lie, which you have done continuously since you’ve been on this blog, with the sole purpose of attacking me personally from day one. Attack and lie, attack and lie – That’s your mantra, koolo, face the truth.

    “Good lord, gentlemen. You can still put up with that crap?”

    The crap, DNW, comes from your extremist party, which I take you don’t think is extreme, which brings the same epithet your way, as a devoted supporter of same. I’ve not seen you have a good word for President Obama either, not even once, so you are just as polarizing and hateful as the worst of them. Koolo’s mantra is lying and hatred, yours is the arrogant smear.

    If it were otherwise about you two, you would have a word about others of your stripe who go beyond the limits of civility. You two never do! It’s either black or white with you, and President Obama is the black. No nuance, no reasoning, no civility, no compromising, no nothing except for attacks based on right wing ideological assumptions.

    It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism, by Thomas Mann and Norm Orenstein. Read it DNW and koolo, and learn what is going wrong in our country!

  28. “Perry thinks it’s a terrorist act to kill terrorists.”

    No, Eric, but I do think it is a terrorist attack to invade a sovereign country preemptively, one who has not attacked us. How would you react to a similar attack on our own soil which killed your wife and children. It is necessary to think in these terms in order to make a moral judgment on this behavior. Give it a try, Eric.

  29. And by the way, Eric, how long do you think it will be before we have attacks right here from undetectable stealth drones? We need to work harder on peaceful means to resolve conflicts.

    And we always have the possibility of attack from within as well, analogous to what Dictator Walker did to public service employee unions without even a hint of such in his campaign! == Stealth!

    If we are unwilling to negotiate to “yes”, we are doomed to suffer the consequences.

  30. So far early election returns from Wisconsin show the voters support Governor Walker and his policies in about the same proportions they supported his candidacy in 2010. He’s up by about 5%.

    Expect variations on the following headline tomorrow morning:

    Democrats allege unfair campaign activities, women and children hardest hit!

  31. WW wrote:

    Regarding the ACA, the Dems wanted single payer, or at least a public option. They settled for having neither. Where was the Republican compromise? Nowhere! In fact, Republicans have vowed to kill the bill if they take over, leaving 50 million poor and middle Americans without health insurance and costs continuing to escalate astronomically. This is not governing, which Republicans are committed to do once taking the oath of office. There was no compromising on this issue on your side, Mr Editor, it was all obfuscating and obstruction. Therefore, we will never know what a compromise package would have looked like.

    Let’s see now, you are blaming the Republicans for internal Democratic Party compromises? You are complaining that neither single-payer nor the public option was included, and thus the bill is too conservative for you; are you suggesting that adding Republicans to the bill would have made it more liberal? Your logic is . . . interesting. :)

    The oath of office taken by all Members of Congress is:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

    In trying to stop the Democrats’ plans, the Republicans were defending the Constitution of the United States!

    Regarding the stimulus, even though 40% of it was tax cuts, which you folks love, there were only 3 Repubs in the Senate, and none in the House to vote for the final bill. No compromising by the Repubs, and no support either, otherwise one would have expected more of them to support the final bill. And the stimulus worked, so you folks were even wrong about that.

    The stimulus worked? President Obama told us that if we passed the stimulus bill, unemployment would be held to 8%, and it has not gotten that low since the day the infernal thing was passed.

    This chart is from The Washington Post, not exactly a hotbed of conservative thought. While the more famous numbers are the 8% maximum unemployment if we pass it, and 9% if we don’t, keep following the chart: according to the chart, provided by the President’s own people, we should have started 2012 with an unemployment rate of around 5.8%; the actual rate was the reverse, 8.5%.

    If that is your definition of the stimulus having worked, I wonder how you’d define failure.

    A compromise, allocating more spending, would probably have produced a more effective bill. But no, anything which would help the country, and as a corollary, given the President some credit, was nixed by your totally uncooperative party.

    Uhhh, given that the Republicans were opposed to the whole idea of the stimulus plan, how would a compromise with the Republicans have “allocat(ed) more spending?” Had the Republicans agreed to join in and forge a compromise, wouldn’t it have resulted in less spending?

    But, in the end, y’all forced the thing through, and it was thoroughly, 100% Democratic. Y’all get all of the credit . . . and all of the blame.

    “Isn’t that really a better choice than between Democrats and Democrats Lite?”

    Don’t you understand, Mr Editor, this is not only about an election and a choice, over which four years have been wasted; when elected, one must govern? We did not get the best governing with the continued lock-step, uncompromising, obstructionist maneuvering of the Republicans during these four years, not even close. This is an outrage perpetrated by the current version of the Republican Party. It was not this way for Reagan or GHW Bush, or even GW Bush. Your brand of radical politics is new in these modern times, and I don’t like it one bit!

    WW, the Republicans certainly tried to obstruct the Obama program, because we recognized how wasteful and harmful it would be, but, in the end, we failed, because y’all had the votes to push through what you wanted. The Democrats governed, with complete power, and when the voters saw what the Democrats did with that power, they threw them out at the first opportunity. It was the voters of Massachusetts, of all places, which ended your filibuster-proof majority, by electing Republican Scott Brown to the Senate. Then, a few months later, the rest of the country had an opportunity, and the voters took control of the House of Representatives away from you.

    Well, in five months and one day, the voters will have their say again. If your position is shared by a majority of the voters, President Obama will be re-elected and the Republican majority in the House will be kicked out. We’re seeing a very early test of that today (sort of), and the polls close in Wisconsin at 9:00 PM EDT. In the end, the voters will decide.

  32. What past comments are those, koolo? Without an example, you throw out an allegation. But that is who you are, and what you do, all the time, like the weakling that you are.

    No, it is who you are to continually demand citations time and time again for that which has already been shown — time and time again. The FACT is, you hate Jews. Period. You know it, I know it, and everyone here knows it. This conclusion is reached simply by applying the standard which you use against anyone with whom you disagree. Disagree with Pres. Obama? Racist. Don’t like his policies? Terrorist. Thus, when you chide Israel or the Israelis, this makes you a Jew-hating anti-Semite. End of story. Don’t like it? Stop applying your childish labels yourself. If you refuse, then you’re going to keep getting what you youself serve up. Deal with it.

    If it were otherwise about you two, you would have a word about others of your stripe who go beyond the limits of civility.

    Spare us the bullshit, Passive-Aggressive Perry. You don’t CARE about civility. If you did, you would not throw out the terms “racist,” “terrorist” and whatever else as casually as you breathe. But you cannot help it. It’s ingrained in you as much as your apparent schizophrenia is. I really don’t see what other malady could account for your constant delusional state you demonstrate around here. I mean, just take a look:

    And by the way, Eric, how long do you think it will be before we have attacks right here from undetectable stealth drones? We need to work harder on peaceful means to resolve conflicts.

    And we always have the possibility of attack from within as well, analogous to what Dictator Walker did to public service employee unions without even a hint of such in his campaign! == Stealth!

    You refer, again, to “Dictator” Walker in reference to “stealth” attacks, but it is your “greatest president in our generation,” Obama, who has upped the ante on any GW Bush policy to the Nth degree with regards to drone attacks …. yet you refuse to use any of your schizophrenic moronic labels towards him.

    Civility? Are you for real? Is it schizophrenia or bipolar, Passive-Aggressive Perry? Whatever the case, please call the doctor, ASAP!

    LMAO!!!!!

  33. Wagonwheel says:

    June 5, 2012 at 17:45

    “Good lord, gentlemen. You can still put up with that crap?”

    The crap, DNW, comes from your extremist party, which I take you don’t think is extreme, which brings the same epithet your way, as a devoted supporter of same. I’ve not seen you have a good word for President Obama either, not even once, so you are just as polarizing and hateful as the worst of them. Koolo’s mantra is lying and hatred, yours is the arrogant smear.

    If it were otherwise about you two, you would have a word about others of your stripe who go beyond the limits of civility. You two never do! It’s either black or white with you, and President Obama is the black. No nuance, no reasoning, no civility, no compromising, no nothing except for attacks based on right wing ideological assumptions.

    It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism, by Thomas Mann and Norm Orenstein. Read it DNW and koolo, and learn what is going wrong in our country!”

    Since you are so visibly impressed with them you just tell me what Mann and Orenstein have said instead.

    Jonathan Haidt (a liberal author respectfully referenced by Hitchcock ) mentioned them approvingly recently. He later admitted that he had gotten the political allegiance of one of them wrong – having assumed that one was a conservative.

    But you go ahead and lay out how the preservation of our “Constitutional System” is endangered by extremists who do things like: insisting that the fundamental law is meant literally and not figuratively; that law in order to function as law must be capable of being known, and not be subject to the constant refashioning whims of jurists who wish to conveniently reshape it without legislation or amendment; that compromising on political rape still leaves you being raped; and that when we find that we do have a system which now recognizes no absolute limits on what some citizens may use the law to do when it comes to appropriating the wealth and life energies of others, that such a system is not worth laboring to preserve, no matter how much noise certain members of the left make as they stew in their own juices …

    But go ahead and lecture me on Constitutional theory and history and law. I’ll enjoy comparing your insights with those of the dozen or so professors of Constitutional History and Philosophy of Law, under whom I studied in college.

    Freedom of association for a progressive represents his freedom to sleep in your bed and shit on your rug.

  34. If we are unwilling to negotiate to “yes”, we are doomed to suffer the consequences.

    You don’t negotiate with evil, you moral relativist.

  35. Eric wrote:

    If we are unwilling to negotiate to “yes”, we are doomed to suffer the consequences.

    You don’t negotiate with evil, you moral relativist.

    There have been other people who managed to negotiate to “yes.” Sometimes their reputation suffers somewhat for having done so.

  36. And we always have the possibility of attack from within as well, analogous to what Dictator Walker did to public service employee unions without even a hint of such in his campaign! == Stealth!

    Statements like this show why you are an extremist. You have no sense of reason or proportionality at all.

  37. Since I dragged Haidt’s name into this I might as well quote him. I don’t agree with him by and large – with significant exceptions regarding his actual “moral taste” research findings which I have no reason to challenge – but perhaps Perry would like to take a look at what a liberal who claims he is striving for actual understanding is doing and saying.

    Social Psychologist and morals researcher Jonathan Haidt on his own attitude. I have tried to limit the quoting to fair comment length without misrepresenting the gist of it.

    “I recently wrote a blog post titled “Conservatives good, Republican party bad.” There was quite a lot of reader push back, from left, center, and especially right. These readers have convinced me that my argument in the post was wrong, … I seem to have gotten “carried away” by my liberal inclinations …

    … The day before my talk with Smiley was taped (April 29) I read the Edsall column … That same day I read the Mann and Ornstein essay in the Washington Post. I assumed (erroneously) that Ornstein was a conservative because he was at AEI, which gave the seemingly bipartisan team of Mann and Ornstein far more credibility in my eyes. …

    …reader reaction [to Haidt's essay on bad Republicans] was swift, constructive, and (with the exception of one repeat-commenter) civil. …

    One can make a case that the Democrats are the problem, or at least that the two sides are equally at fault for the dysfunction.

    I’m not saying that both sides are necessarily equal; centrism doesn’t commit me to splitting the difference, or saying that both sides are always partially right in any dispute. But centrism does commit me to listening carefully to arguments from both sides, and taking my own biases into account, before trying to render any verdict. I didn’t do that. …”

  38. I’m still trying to figure out how a Governor who has to propose legislation and get it passed through the state legislature qualifies as a dictator, but I guess that’s just me.

  39. And by the way, Eric, how long do you think it will be before we have attacks right here from undetectable stealth drones?

    Most likely, never. Especially if we kill our enemies first.

    Besides, no one has “Stealth drone” technology, and they’re not likely to get it anytime soon.

    We need to work harder on peaceful means to resolve conflicts.

    See photo above on how well that works.

  40. I’m still trying to figure out how a Governor who has to propose legislation and get it passed through the state legislature qualifies as a dictator, but I guess that’s just me.

    It’s because Perry is an extremist whose extremism taints everything he sees.

  41. Eric says:
    June 5, 2012 at 21:05

    If we are unwilling to negotiate to “yes”, we are doomed to suffer the consequences.

    You don’t negotiate with evil, you moral relativist.”

    Imagine the kind of “consequences” that might ensue after being liberated from the current expectations of the morally insane left: i.e., that they have an infinite ability to push and demand while always retaining your commitment to experiencing a “shared social fate” … come what may.

    Like land springing up after the retreat of the glaciers …

  42. I’m still trying to figure out how a Governor who has to propose legislation and get it passed through the state legislature qualifies as a dictator, but I guess that’s just me.

    It ain’t just you, Editor. I’m trying to figure out how someone always demands civility, and then constantly uses monikers such as “dictator” all the time.

  43. Sour grapes, Rachael Maddow and Ed Schultz on msnbc are reporting that NBC is projecting a Scott Walker victory. Now, they’re hoping to win a seat in the Wisconsin Senate and take the majority. Schultz is looking forward to a legal challenge and the prospect of an indictment of Governor Walker.

    FOX NEWS just made the call for Walker with 27% reporting. Kleefisch also projected a winner.

  44. rope: Passive-Aggressive Perry will be in here shortly telling us all how “brainwashed” the Walker supporters are, how they’re all acolytes of Fox News and Limbaugh and Hannity, and how they’re too stupid to know what’s in their best interests. Etc.

    And he’ll still be calling Scott Walker “dictator.” Because his mental malady doesn’t allow him to do otherwise.

  45. FOX asked Sarah Palin if Walker’s win in Wisconsin had implications for Obama’s chances for reelection. Yes, she said, he has us on the wrong track, and the only plan he’s got doesn’t work. Obama’s goose is cooked.

  46. Assuming that the current trend continues, and Governor Walker wins the election, wouldn’t that indicate that a majority of Wisconsin’s voters approved of the job he has done?

    All that the left can see is that, horrors! Governor Walker and the state legislature reduced the power of labor unions, but the fact is that, facing a large state budget deficit, the Republicans didn’t raise taxes, but cut spending, and balanced the budget. That just might have impressed a voter or three.

  47. ropelight wrote:

    FOX asked Sarah Palin if Walker’s win in Wisconsin had implications for Obama’s chances for reelection. Yes, she said, he has us on the wrong track, and the only plan he’s got doesn’t work. Obama’s goose is cooked.

    Maybe not cooked, but possibly singed a touch. :)

    Governor Walker and the Republican-controlled state legislature said that they were going to hold the line on taxes, cut spending and balance the state budget . . . and that’s exactly what they did. It seems that even “progressive” Wisconsin voters are somewhat impressed by that feat. If that message and that performance can win in Wisconsin, then it ought to be able to make huge inroads into even the bluest of states; if he campaigns well, Mitt Romney could very well upset President Obama in states where he isn’t given much of a chance, states like Maine and Connecticut and New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

  48. If the percentages continue to hold, anywhere near a 60/40 win is more than a landslide, it’s a bipartisan avalanche. Democrats turned their backs on Union thuggery and voted to keep Walker in office.

    Which means Governor Walker has a mandate from the people of Wisconsin, both Republican and Democrat, to continue his policies and even to accelerate the process of reducing spending, eliminating regulation, cutting taxes, and curtailing the greed and arrogance of public sector labor unions.

    This is a great win for Wisconsin, but it’s also a shining example for the nation.

  49. One of my old political science professors at the University of Kentucky defined a landslide margin as 10% or above. Right now, Governor Walker is cruising at around a 17% margin, but half of the precincts remain to be counted.

  50. There were over 900,000 verified signatures on the recall petitions; Tom Barrett might not get even that many votes! With 62.1% of precincts reporting, Mr Barrett has 559,259 total votes. The numbers say that, if he retains the same percentage of the vote, he’ll finish with 900,578 votes, or fewer votes than signatures. :)

  51. 80% reporting and it’s still 55/44 . Which means the single most important result, other than Walker’s victory, is that significant numbers of Democrats, as well as large majorities of both Moderates and Independents voted for Walker. We’ll have to wait till tomorrow for detailed breakdowns.

    National Democrat Party leaders in Chicago, NY, and DC aren’t available for comment. However, reports indicate business is brisk at local watering holes, taxi cab drivers and hookers are only taking calls for cash.

  52. Just a minor correction, Editor.

    Wisconsin residents have been faced with lower property taxes while simultaneously being faced with a State Budget surplus after being hit with a State Budget deficit from the Democrat Governor. At the same time, school districts that didn’t lock in contracts prior to the major fix went from deficit spending to budget surplus, and went from likely employment reduction to actually hiring more teachers and staff. But the school districts (such as Milwaukee) who locked in new contracts before the collective bargaining law took effect have been forced to reduce their number of teachers as they continued their budget deficits.

Comments are closed.