How’s that Republican obstructionism working out for ya?

Friday, September 9th, 2011 @ 7:15 pm | Crazy Tea Party People, Economy

Funny how Republicans never seem to listen to Wall Street anymore.

Stocks dropped Friday, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 303.68 points, or 2.7 percent, to 10992.13. Analysts blamed Europe’s debt woes for the fall, along with the resignation of European Central Bank board member Juergen Stark. Stark is resigning because of a conflict over the bank’s bond-buying program. Analysts also attributed the drop to skepticism that President Obama can get his $447-billion jobs package through Congress. (emphasis added) Finance chiefs from the G-7 countries meet Friday to discuss the global economic situation.

Wall Street didn’t like the debt ceiling threat either.

Oh, do we need reminding that in Obama’s first two years with a Democratic Congress Wall Street saw its losses recovered and corporate America sits on a big pile of cash? According to Republican boilerplate of the past 30 years, if you save the rich then everybody else profits. To say that Reagan Christ’s beloved trickle-down economics has been discredited is to be too kind. And yet Republicans talk about is how high corporate taxes are.

Wall Street knows Obama’s jobs bill can do a lot of good.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, is frequently the go-to guy for both parties when it comes to analysis of various jobs proposals. So, what did he think of President Obama’s speech last night? Here’s the report: “The plan would add 2 percentage points to GDP growth next year, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut the unemployment rate by a percentage point.”

But there’s a higher principle at work here for Republicans. Why help the economy and add jobs when doing so helps Obama keep his? Economic sabotage is all they have. When Obama’s foreign policy is nearly unassailable (from the right) and supply-side economics has failed, what else do they have but to hurt the economy and hope people point the finger at Obama?

Fortunately, with just 26 sane Republicans in the House, Obama could pull this jobs plan off. That leads one to the next question: Are there 26 sane Republicans in the House?

-hw

29 Responses to “How’s that Republican obstructionism working out for ya?”

  1. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    These same so-called experts failed to predict our economic downfall, and you think they’re accurate in forecasting what Obama policy will do?

  2. Henry Whistler Says:

    Okay. Paul Krugman saw it coming and he approves.

    I should be clear though, that much like Krugman, I think that this jobs bill could be a lot better, but like much of everything else Obama does, it’s beginning with a compromise. It’s not $450 billion spent on hiring people, it’s over half tax cuts.

    If you need any further proof that it will help the economy, Republicans oppose it. Case closed.

  3. Henry Whistler Says:

    Btw try to pick a handle and stick to it, there’s no reason to confuse your name for a subject heading.

  4. Henry Whistler Says:

    Also try to stick to the topic. I deleted your comment because it had no content other than a really personal attack. If you know me and have something to say to me that is personal, you can email me at nitrate21@gmail.com.

  5. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    You can’t take money out of your left pocket, stick it in your right pocket and pretend you’re better off. That’s what Krugman proposes we do and that’s why Republicans thankfully, oppose this kind of thing.

  6. Henry Whistler Says:

    I see you don’t believe in things like loans then.

    Always lovely to see the things you guys say you believe when there’s a Democrat in the WH.

  7. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    I see you’re not interested in debate then.

  8. Henry Whistler Says:

    Actually I hunger for debate, which is why your little one liners and personal attacks suggesting you know me are so disappointing. I made an appropriate analogy, can you not figure out a reply?

  9. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    Pot, kettle, black.

    Keynesian economics was summed up with the left pocket to right pocket analogy, very appropriately, can you not figure out a reply?

    Most Republicans object to Keynesian based policies, that’s the reason for the objection, not because they want the economy to be bad for political purposes. The objection is rooted in being against making matters worse.

  10. Henry Whistler Says:

    So you just parrot my words without thinking? Schoolyard bullshit, as usual from you guys.

    My point was that if you take out a loan, you do it to buy something that will create greater returns in the long run. Eventually you have to pay even more later, but you’re better able to pay at that time. Certain kinds of spending can goose an economy and get money moving in channels where it’s drying up, especially if it’s increasing demand in our high-supply low-demand economy. So yes, the government can borrow to create prosperity. Watch our infrastructure crumble and see how that money you thought you saved comes right out of Main Street’s wallets.

    And if you want to see a Republican become a Keynesian, talk about shutting down a military base in their state.

    As for being against making matters worse, where were you when the Teapublicans threatened to force a default, literally making things worse?

  11. mike g Says:

    Most Republicans object to Keynesian based policies, that’s the reason for the objection, not because they want the economy to be bad for political purposes. The objection is rooted in being against making matters worse.

    Most Republicans are full-throated supporters of Keynesianism when it’s directed towards sectors of the economy that they approve of. Namely, defense contractors and the like. You must have missed the recent outcry raised by your free-market loving brethren when it was suggested that the same austerity measures being prescribed to others be applied to their own pet projects. Their rationale? Defense cuts would kill jobs, of course!

  12. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    When Obama said he believed in PAYGO, he was just kidding.

    “I believe in PAYGO. If I start a new program I will pay for it. If I intend to cut taxes for the middle class, then we’re going to close some of the tax loopholes for corporations and the wealthy that are not working for shared prosperity. So we’re going to have fiscal discipline.” – Barack Obama, March 27, 2008.

    Fiscal discipline from Obama, now THAT’s funny!

  13. Henry Whistler Says:

    So you just change the subject?

    The goal is to keep flinging shit to make something stick, right? You talk of debate but in the end we’re just listening to you regurgitate stuff you’ve heard in the rightwing media.

    I have a response, but won’t you just switch the subject again?

    Because you’re guided by hatred?

  14. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    C’mon, you like to say how smart you are, now actually USE your brain for once.

    Obama likes Keynesian based policies. You yourself have supported that line of thinking by writing things like, “I see you don’t believe in things like loans then.”

    Keynesian economics was summed up with the left pocket to right pocket analogy, a point you ignored.

    And in 2008, this is what Obama wanted people to believe: That he was a firm believer in PAYGO.

    Obvious hypocrisy and double speak, but you don’t want to acknowlege it. Why, because you seem to be a fool.

    Give progressives enough time and they always destroy themselves.

    ***Insert cheesy, snarky, avoid the issue response here***

  15. Henry Whistler Says:

    I just wonder sometimes how this brand of so-stupid-they-can’t-understand-how-stupid-they-are thinking has become the signature of the Republican Party.

    Perhaps worshiping Rush Limbaugh for over twenty years might have had something to do with it.

    There wasn’t really anything in there for me to respond to. Do I have to break down how stupid this is?

    Keynesian economics was summed up with the left pocket to right pocket analogy, a point you ignored.

    No shit you summed it up that way. And I responded directly to it, by pointing out that one can incur debt today to prosper tomorrow.

    And your response has been throwing in some word salad about PAYGO, highlighting a method that Obama wanted to use to pay for programs that…yep, Republicans stopped from happening. We continue sinking into debt because Republicans value tax cuts for the rich over all other things.

    You can go ahead and keep calling me stupid all you want, but if you can’t provide anything better than that incoherent jumbled mess of words, you just prove that one of us certainly is stupid, and it isn’t me.

    Except that I actually engage with idiots like you. I am kind of stupid for doing that, but I can’t help myself. I have this persistent, unfounded belief that if I directly and honestly combat stupidity and dishonesty that one day it will go away.

  16. Henry Whistler Says:

    BTW, it seems like you’re using a proxy. I’m just wondering if this isn’t Mike Thayer once again? You know, the serially dishonest plagiarizer and comment editor over at Coralville Courier. He keeps trying to change his name to pretend that we have more than one crazy asshole pestering us.

    If not, you share his writing style precisely, so go make friends…

  17. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    Fishing?

    Bzzzzt, wrong answer, please try again.

    And here you like to pretend you stay on topic, and shame on others who don’t.

    Hypocrite. That’s kind of like calling people trolls, while you change posting names on your blog and attribute comments to people who didn’t make them.

  18. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    13.Henry Whistler Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 8:03 am
    So you just change the subject?

    The goal is to keep flinging shit to make something stick, right? You talk of debate but in the end we’re just listening to you regurgitate stuff you’ve heard in the rightwing media.

    I have a response, but won’t you just switch the subject again?

    Because you’re guided by hatred?

    (end)

    Henry, you mean change the subject like you keep doing?

    Henry, you mean to say that your goal is to keep flinging shit to make something stick, right? You talk of debate but in the end we’re just listening to you regurgitate stuff you’ve heard in the liberal media.

    Henry, I have responded, but you just switch the subject again.

    Henry, isn’t it because you’re guided by hatred?

    Hypocrite.

  19. Henry Whistler Says:

    Well, like I said, you should go make friends with him, because you talk, write and think (I use the term charitably) like him. He may be your long lost twin.

    Do you know what trolling is? You seem to be using the term much like others you don’t understand.

    See, you’re not here for debate. You’re here to be an asshole. You have no interest in going in a back-and-forth that stays on one subject and gets to a higher truth. You want to come here and say lots of stupid things, pretend you’re multiple people, and if you’re proven wrong on one thing, you’ll switch subjects or disappear again.

    It’s because Republicans really have no more ground to stand on anymore, so bullshit tactics are all you have left to keep the GOP corpse alive.

    Again, if you believe I’ve attributed one of the comments that comes from your IP address to you falsely, please let me know. I’m aware you’re using a proxy, but a string of comments over the past couple days from the same IP written in the same style leads me to the obvious conclusion. As long as comments keep coming from that IP, I will expect them to at least have the same handle.

    Now you have a choice: You could stop acting like a scumbag, act like an honest American, and have a real debate of ideas where you subject yourself to possibly being proven wrong. It’s easy, I do it every day. Make concessions. See other points of view. Have a few ideas that don’t come pre-packaged from the FoxLimbaugh conglomerate. Be liberal on at least one issue (I have no problems with the 2nd Amendment).

  20. Henry Whistler Says:

    Zindi Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 11:22 am e
    13.Henry Whistler Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 8:03 am
    So you just change the subject?

    The goal is to keep flinging shit to make something stick, right? You talk of debate but in the end we’re just listening to you regurgitate stuff you’ve heard in the rightwing media.

    I have a response, but won’t you just switch the subject again?

    Because you’re guided by hatred?

    (end)

    Henry, you mean change the subject like you keep doing?

    Henry, you mean to say that your goal is to keep flinging shit to make something stick, right? You talk of debate but in the end we’re just listening to you regurgitate stuff you’ve heard in the liberal media.

    Henry, I have responded, but you just switch the subject again.

    Henry, isn’t it because you’re guided by hatred?

    Hypocrite.

    The last substantive comment was made by me in comment 15, which was dealing with you stalling again.

    And now you’re doing the parroting again. That’s not making a point, that’s acting like a tenth grader.

  21. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    Henry Whistler Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 9:33 am
    “And your response has been throwing in some word salad about PAYGO, highlighting a method that Obama wanted to use to pay for programs that…yep, Republicans stopped from happening.”

    (end)

    Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, “The federal government will pay as it goes.”

    It’s like saying, “Al Gore will live a green lifestyle.” But of course he doesn’t, it’s comedy gold!

    Unfortunately, the joke is on us. The Democrat Majority House of Representatives avoided their own PAYGO rule during the 110th Congress.

    Republican didn’t stop PAYGO, the Democrats in the majority didn’t need a single GOP vote to pass items like the Auto Bailout (HR 7321, passed Dec., 2008) Non-Offset Amount – $3.9 billion. Or items like the Economic Stimulus II (HR 7110, passed Sep., 2008) Non-Offset Amount – $23.9 billion. Or items like the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HR 3221, passed Jul., 2008) Non-Offset Amount – $24.9 billion. The total damage of the Democrats ignoring their own PAYGO rules: $400 billion.

    Hypocrisy. Obama is guily of it, Pelosi is guilty of it, Henry Whistler is guilty of it. Progressives, all.

  22. Henry Whistler Says:

    $400 billion easily covered by letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the wealthiest people. But no, they continue, because of Republicans.

    You might also note that the Affordable Care Act and the American Jobs Bill make more effort to pay for themselves than anything Bush ever passed.

    Are you for PAYGO? I’d like to see a coalition of right and left support it and keep Congress honest. All spending increases should be accompanied by an appropriate tax increase. America should pay when it wants something.

    That’s what I think, and I don’t support Democratic politicians pandering on taxes and going against it. How is that hypocritical?

  23. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    Henry Whistler Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 11:28 am

    “Now you have a choice: You could stop acting like a scumbag, act like an honest American, and have a real debate of ideas where you subject yourself to possibly being proven wrong. It’s easy, I do it every day. Make concessions. See other points of view. Have a few ideas that don’t come pre-packaged from the FoxLimbaugh conglomerate. Be liberal on at least one issue.”

    More comedy gold! Parroting your hypocrisy isn’t tenth grader stuff. Because you really don’t know how to react to it is though. It’s demonstrating the absurd by being absurd. Here, another example:

    Henry, you have a choice: You could stop acting like a scumbag, act like an honest American, and have a real debate of ideas where you subject yourself to possibly being proven wrong. It’s easy, I do it every day. Make concessions. See other points of view. Have a few ideas that don’t come pre-packaged from the Krugman/Liberal conglomerate. Be non-progressive on at least one issue.”

    I have yet to see you participate in real debate. Just because you say you do doesn’t make it so. I have yet to see you make concessions. I have yet to see you acknowledge another point of view. I have yet to see you have a few ideas that don’t come pre-packaged from Media Matters, DailyKos, or some other liberal source.

    And you have a gun(s)? So what? So does Rosie O’Donnell and she’s a hypocrite just like your are.

  24. Henry Whistler Says:

    Henry, you have a choice: You could stop acting like a scumbag, act like an honest American, and have a real debate of ideas where you subject yourself to possibly being proven wrong. It’s easy, I do it every day. Make concessions. See other points of view. Have a few ideas that don’t come pre-packaged from the Krugman/Liberal conglomerate. Be non-progressive on at least one issue.”

    This is, again, tenth grade bullshit. Grade school, really, but I award points for complete sentences.

    Here’s a quote of your own for you: “Just because you say you do doesn’t make it so.”

    Exactly. You are right about one thing, you are being absurd.

    See my previous comment for a concession. It’s amazing what you’ll discover if you actually stand still and focus on completing a dialogue thread with me.

  25. The Zindi Asshole Collective Says:

    22.Henry Whistler Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 11:47 am
    $400 billion easily covered by letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the wealthiest people. But no, they continue, because of Republicans.

    You might also note that the Affordable Care Act and the American Jobs Bill make more effort to pay for themselves than anything Bush ever passed.

    Are you for PAYGO? I’d like to see a coalition of right and left support it and keep Congress honest. All spending increases should be accompanied by an appropriate tax increase. America should pay when it wants something.

    That’s what I think, and I don’t support Democratic politicians pandering on taxes and going against it. How is that hypocritical?

    (end)

    Oh boy, more lies and hypocrisy from Henry. Gosh, where to start.

    Could’a, should’a, would’a., Bush tax cuts, yada, yada, yada. Your response is so tenth grader Henry. I’m disappointed. You said you like to debate. Well, liking it and being good at it are two different things little boy. The 110th Congress didn’t need a single Republican vote to abide by their own PAYGO rules, but chose to ignore those rules. Here’s another example, which you’ll probably ignore: When Congress passed a major expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) costing $33 billion, they got past PAYGO rules with a really cool math trick: They counted the next ten years of tax increases as revenue, but they counted only five years of spending.

    You see, you’re not here for debate Henry. You’re only here to push a progressive agenda. You’re not interested to use your own words, in making concessions, see other points of view, nor are you interested in ideas coming from other than progressive sources.

    You’re a hypocrite.

  26. mike g Says:

    Keynesian economics was summed up with the left pocket to right pocket analogy, a point you ignored.

    And you ignored my point focusing on Republicans who favor Keynesianism when it works in their favor.

    So, are you going to argue your point like the honest debater you claim to be or are you going to sit there hoping that if I ignore your blunder it will go away?

  27. Henry Whistler Says:

    Okay, apparently you are so deeply stupid/shameless that you’re just going to keep playing I’M RUBBER YOU’RE GLUE without any substantive support for doing so.

    I’ll leave it to any outside observer possessing rational faculties to sort that out. As, too, you will, I’m sure.

    Combing through that pile of stupidity, though, let’s see if you tried to say anything:

    1. “The 110th Congress didn’t need a single Republican vote to abide by their own PAYGO rules.”

    You’ve repeated this twice now, so apparently you think I didn’t respond already. But I conceded that this is actually a decent point, that I wish Democrats would have included solid methods of paying for the spending they plan (Let’s also remember that this is something the Republican Congress of the 00’s never did. But Democrats do need Republican votes, or at least the lack of Republican obstruction, to pass revenue increases. You say the unpaid bill is $400 billion, I pointed out that Democrats are in favor of raising a lot more than that through increased reveneue. Who’s stopping them? Republicans.

    You see, when you guys held the economy hostage and threatened default, President Obama proposed a $4 trillion deficit reduction package. Did you accept? Of course not, because it was balanced between spending reduction and revenue increases (actually, still tipped in favor of spending reduction).

    So do you have grounds to stand on to lecture about paying our bills? No. No Republican does, at least none still in the good graces of the cult.

    Shall we band together to keep the government honest? Apparently not. You’d rather try to score political points and then sneak in a plan to end SS or Medicare.

    2. See how I took what you said and responded to it, incorporating parts of it into my answer, whereas you just repeated yourself? That’s what shows I’m actually here for debate, and you’re here to regurgitate. You’ve got to show, not just tell.

  28. Thomas Tallis Says:

    Hank and Mike you do realize this guy is too stupid to actually argue with, right? He is incapable of the kind of discussion you want to have; it is above his pay grade. Just a reminder y’all.

  29. Henry Whistler Says:

    Fully understood, but I like to demonstrate rather than just say that. I was off work with no kid that day anyway…