April 27, 2013

"He can be a serious presidential candidate because he represents a segment of Republicanism that hasn’t had a voice."

"But he can’t just be a neater package of his dad — that won’t work. He needs to convey his own domestic and foreign vision, and continue to overcome the kook factor, which he inherited."

301 comments:

1 – 200 of 301   Newer›   Newest»
campy said...

The intersection of "Republicans" and "Serious Presidential Candidates" is the null set.

Carol said...

No longer interested. He lost me on immigration...just another libertarian hell-bent on population replacement.

edutcher said...

The beginning of the Politico hit pieces.

Rand Paul very easily comes across as sane (considering his father, that's not all that hard).

And he's certainly winning the hearts of many Conservatives.

Immigration, gun control, ObamaTax...

PS and mostly OT: Do the Tsarneys know anybody that isn't in trouble with the law?

sinz52 said...

I am increasingly impressed with Rand Paul.

He seems to represent a refreshing alternative to the policies of the Bush years.

Mitchell the Bat said...

There's nothing wrong with this country that can't be fixed by privatizing sidewalks.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Lol. How about that whole segment that prefers: Peace, diplomatic maturity, shared prosperity, better opportunities, a clean environment, respect for science over demagogic dogmatism, etc., etc., etc.? Lololol. I guess I'm supposed to believe the Republic Party is just missing a well-deserved place for them as well! Ha.

Thanks to Carol and the rest for bringing out the true "colors" of ugly nativism. I suppose the backlash from the dirty environment-promoting, science-bashing, planet-hating, shoot-'em-up mass homicide-celebrating, war-mongering, personal liberty denying, immigrant-disrespecting, gay rights-slashing "regular" Republican crowd will arrive shortly.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Yes, Mitchell. And stopping the tyranny of traffic lights is an obvious next item on the glibertarian agenda.

Yes, government control over our lives has gotten that out-of-hand. Telling you when (regulating when) you can and can't go is the first infringement on our freedoms, and it must be stopped.

RichardS said...

Didn't follow the link. Is that about Jeb or Rand? :)

AReasonableMan said...

Ron and Rand Paul represent the sane face of the Republican party on foreign policy. They are also better than the mainstream Dems in this area. If they could fuse their foreign policy with a more libertarian/liberal domestic policy Rand would be a very strong contender in a presidential election. I doubt this is possible however, which is unfortunate for the country, since such a candidate would force the Dems to deal their own miserable mish-mash of foreign policies. Unfortunately, with his current domestic policies, the Dems would be able to succesfully paint him as too extreme for the country.

CEO-MMP said...


Thanks to Carol and the rest for bringing out the true "colors" of ugly nativism. I suppose the backlash from the dirty environment-promoting, science-bashing, planet-hating, shoot-'em-up mass homicide-celebrating, war-mongering, personal liberty denying, immigrant-disrespecting, gay rights-slashing "regular" Republican crowd will arrive shortly.



Really, Ritmo?

You're beginning to lose me.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Hopefully not as much as the Republic Party has lost the American people, CEO. The fact that they would have even lost the House of Representatives (a half-million less votes for their candidates than for Democrats) had it not been for extreme gerry-mandering should tell you something.

If you think the Republic Party isn't seeming as extreme to everyone else as my rhetoric would have it, then I'm afraid you're just not paying attention.

Terry said...

Hopefully not as much as the Republic Party has lost the American people, CEO. The fact that they would have even lost the House of Representatives (a half-million less votes for their candidates than for Democrats) had it not been for extreme gerry-mandering should tell you something.
So this is what the dems are telling themselves?
"Extreme gerrymandering"? Really? As opposed to the run-of-the-mill gerrymandering done by the dems?
The senate is the least democratic of our two houses of congress.
Obama barely achieved a plurality in the popular vote in 2012 (51%)

Coketown said...

If his kookiness abates, the intensity of his support diminishes.

Call this Christ's Law of Discipleship.

Coketown said...

Didn't follow the link. Is that about Jeb or Rand? :)

Just do what I do: Hover your cursor over the link and read the hyperlink at the bottom of your browser. That will give you enough information to comment.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"Extreme gerrymandering"? Really? As opposed to the run-of-the-mill gerrymandering done by the dems?

As opposed to non-partisan judicially appointed or other commissions. Do Republicans support those? States that have them show districts that are extraordinarily less grotesquely misshapen or artificial than the current set-up in many states. Computer programs can now measure "compactness" of the proposed district. Users can test these out for themselves.

Or better yet, just go to direct, proportional representation and be done with the damn thing. You'd get more parties, too.

The senate is the least democratic of our two houses of congress.

As it should be. Balancing the needs of states and the people at large is not an issue. Giving one voice to the actual people themselves in a proportionately accurate way is.

Obama barely achieved a plurality in the popular vote in 2012 (51%)

Given the tens of millions of voters in this country, and the 5 million more votes he got, that's good. Especially compared with national elections historically. Presidential systems always promote two parties and closer elections for head-of-state. Read some poli sci.

cubanbob said...

I'm an immigrant. My family are immigrants. My wife and mother-in-law are immigrants. We all had to go through the hoops to become legal immigrants. None of us are or ever have been on welfare. This country doesn't have a shortage of poor people requiring us to import more poor people. And we resent those who don't play by the rules being given preference over those that do. Carol is right.

traditionalguy said...

Good traffic control and umpires that call, balls and strikes correctly are wonderful peace makers encouraging honest men to attempt to live productive lives.

But what that has to do with re-distributionists autocrats. They make up narratives of entitlement nirvana as a distraction for crony theft. They calls balls strikes, red lights green lights, and cooling warming turning beneficial CO2 trace gas into a fantasy pollutant to better dig their fangs into the American middle class's stolen wealth.

Terry said...

So you've got nothing, Ritmo?
You did call the Democrats an out-of-touch, doomed party in 2002, 2004, and 2010, I assume?
Maybe you should study a little poli-sci.

Jay said...

Oh look, ritty the retard his here pretending Obama isn't the only candidate to win re-election who received fewer votes upon doing so in modern memory.

Ritty the retard is also here pretending the GOP doesn't fully control 26 state legislatures and have 30 Governorship.

Ritty the retard, is, well, stupid.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...
Lol. How about that whole segment that prefers: Peace, diplomatic maturity, shared prosperity, better opportunities, a clean environment, respect for science over demagogic dogmatism, etc., etc., etc.?


LOL how funny is it that you, supporter of a President who has a "kill list" presides over an economy which has fewer people working than 20 years ago, has fewer people going to college, and an all time high in food stamps, student loan defaults, is somehow for "better opportunities" "peace" and "shared prosperity"

You're a fucking moron who goes on the Internet to say fucking moron things.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Such stellar attempts at rebuttals from the Party of Nixon at 11:48 and 11:52 (including repetitive cries of "RETARD" - always a convincing) are hardly as persuasive as this guy.

Terry - I'm a bit more let down by you, though. You seem marginally more literate than Jay - at least asking the right questions presupposes that you are capable of understanding answers. Or, it seems, sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending you didn't hear them.

Just don't stick those fingers in too far. When you start to hit that white mushy stuff, it's time to see a doctor.

Jay said...

For his next trick, Ritty the retard will assure us the Republicans are going extinct while ignoring the fact that the dipshit President she voted for can't get enough Senators from his own party to vote for gun show background checks.

Ritty isn't predictable and stupid or anything.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I'm always impressed by Jay's intelligence and civility. The repetitive cat-calls of non-responsive insults are a trick that is tried and true and has withstood the test of time for respectable statesmen the world over. He is definitely a model for his party.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...
He is definitely a model for his party.



Says the person who's vision of "shared prosperity" is a 60% increase in food stamp spending.

Why don't you post some more meme's for us, troll?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

...the fact that the dipshit President she voted for...

Is calling me a woman a way to appeal to all those female voters whom you tried in 2012 to convince of being insufficiently appreciative of the life-giving powers of rape and the self-responsibility promoting potential of denied access to contraception?

Is it dark in the underground den into which you scurry at night?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Lol. Jay, who has been identified by the scientists who have actually experienced first-hand, eye-witness accounts of his appearance in the wild to look like this, uses the word "troll" as an accusation to throw at others. That's hilarious!

In any event, the man who takes up the cause of an insufficiently gerrymandered House of Representatives believes that Obama is apparently implementing policies achieved by having filibustered himself!

That shows you the intellectual acumen of Jay. But of course, he has not evolved for intelligence. Instead, he was designed to have the verbal equivalent of fangs, claws, talons, and menacingly ugly scowls. And to excessively salivate.

AprilApple said...

The Democrat party is the party of ILLEGAL immigration. How kooky is that?

Terry said...

Hey Ritmo-
How popular do you think the dems will be once they run out of other peoples' money?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Hey Terry!

Probably more popular than Republicans will be after running out of ways to change the subject.

Freder Frederson said...

We all had to go through the hoops to become legal immigrants.

Not if you are really Cuban you didn't. All you had to do was set foot on U.S. soil and the green card is yours.

Terry said...

Ritmo, when their party gains power, its backers like to think it's because the voters saw the wisdom and truth of their stated positions (or the wickedness of the other party's positions).
Sometimes the truth is simpler. They get 51% of the people afraid that the gravy train will stop if they don't vote for the engineer.
Obama's deficits are a trillion dollars a year. How popular do you think that he would be if he actually raised taxes enough to pay for that? Or cut that trillion dollar deficit and balanced the budget?

CEO-MMP said...

extreme gerrymandering?

Oh Ritmo.

Terry said...

Even if its true that somehow the GOP engaged in 'extreme gerrymandering', they could only have done so if they . . . dominated state legislatures and governorships.
States, of course, can't print their own currency and they have hard limits on their ability to deficit spend.

cubanbob said...

Freder it would actually an interesting conversation if your brain was engaged. Cubans like me had to go outside the US and apply at the US embassy for the green card and there was and still is no guarantee that you would get a reentry permit in which case you would be stuck in a country you didn't have a legally right to residency and couldn't reenter the US. My wife and mother-in-law who aren't Cuban also had to go through the same process but unlike us they at least would have been able to return to their country of origin. Also in both cases one had to demonstrate that you would not be a ward of the state.

rcocean said...

Another kooky Libertarian who supports open borders and wants to cut Social security, medicare, and the capital gains tax.

Just a Kentucky fried Mitt Romney.

traditionalguy said...

"Rand is so 1950s." That is Obama's latest mind control that goes with his war on women one and next to the Rich refusing to pay any taxes.

I guess the 1950s were specially threatening to Obama. The WWII generation was in no mood for myths and crap so obviously insane. That started again in JFKs Camelot true believers.

The 1960s Dems trope was that Eisenhower did nothing. No Progress. Just peace and prosperity.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

They get 51% of the people afraid that the gravy train will stop if they don't vote for the engineer.

How is this different from tricking people into believing that trickle-down is a gravy train that won't stop unless they vote for those who get the gravy train larded down with tax cuts? What's your point? It's exactly the same thing, just less direct and more philosophically convoluted.

Obama's deficits are a trillion dollars a year. How popular do you think that he would be if he actually raised taxes enough to pay for that? Or cut that trillion dollar deficit and balanced the budget?

Again, total misdirection and topic-jumping goalpost shifting, but I can get you to be marginally more honest that "Jay" and his ilk, so I'll bite and say: The Democrats' refusal to deny Keynesian economic principles impels them to spend in a crisis and cut when times are good -- The opposite of what the Republicans did all the time and for which so many of you are so unabashedly ashamed that you can't face your just desserts for doing so. The budget-balancing surpluses of Clinton and the MUCH leaner deficits run by every Democrat prior to Reagan attest to this.

But you have a political point to make and a disastrous fiscal record to run from so I can see why denial, misdirection and goalpost-shifting are more your game.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The 1960s Dems trope was that Eisenhower did nothing. No Progress. Just peace and prosperity.

And don't forget a well-maintained welfare state, too. Until Reagan came along, did the unthinkable, and convinced a generation of conservatives to come after him that we needed to be dealt with as if we were a third-world economy, instead of as a stable, advanced, industrialized country where infrastructure matters and incentives made less (unnecessarily) drastic.

traditionalguy said...

The welfare State came in with JFK/LBJ. It was a beautiful idea that destroyed the Black family and many red neck families too.

And for the fun of it Eisenhower's peace and prosperity was killed in Viet Nam. Now that was progress...backwards

Terry said...

How is this different from tricking people into believing that trickle-down is a gravy train that won't stop unless they vote for those who get the gravy train larded down with tax cuts?

Ritmo, There is no such thing as 'trickle-down' economics.
Do you consider yourself an educated person?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Ritmo, There is no such thing as 'trickle-down' economics.
Do you consider yourself an educated person?


You're arguing for a side that staked its claim, philosophical underpinnings and political fortunes on exactly just such an idea (and still does) so you tell me.

Unless Terry has gone all GHW Bush 1980 on us and declared that "voodoo economics" is no longer the coin of that party's realm.

Convenient that we retain the Keynesianism denial but at least get that reversion to common sense. Perhaps a strangely hopeful if spottily piecemeal progress, of sorts.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The welfare State came in with JFK/LBJ.

Bullshit. Ann Coulter claimed at the height of conservative hysteria and hubris that she would go back to being FDR if she could in order to stop the New Deal.

But if you're saying now that the Republicans aren't opposed to ALL progress and safety nets then let's get on with quibbling over the size and scope. A much better place for your guys. And much better progress for them than where they stood in 1936 - which was exactly where Coulter wanted to return to.

Freder Frederson said...

Cubans like me

Unless you arrived before 1959, you are either lying or had really bad advice.

edutcher said...

Rand must be a serious contender.

Look who crawled out to spread the usual FUD.

traditionalguy said...

The welfare State came in with JFK/LBJ. It was a beautiful idea that destroyed the Black family and many red neck families too

Welfare was here from FDR on.

tg's idea, that it was institutionalized during LBJ's administration, is also valid.

What stopped the New Deal from that level of institutionalization was the deal with the devil Roosevelt made with the segregationists. The Huogo Blacks of the country would never have stood for the preferred status blacks had from the late 60s on.

CEO-MMP said...

Hey Ritmo, it was LBJ who said he'd have those niggers voting democrat for the next 200 years.

That's where the destruction of the black family started.

Synova said...

Because Steve Schmidt is a good judge of what will work?

Terry said...

Unless Terry has gone all GHW Bush 1980 on us and declared that "voodoo economics" is no longer the coin of that party's realm.

"Trickle down"? "Voodoo economics"?
Seriously, Ritmo, I want to know if you consider yourself an educated person.
Because reliance on cliches is usually a sign that a person is out of their intellectual depth.

Baron Zemo said...

What's the difference?

We all know that Governor Walker is going to run and win.

Just ask Garage.

Synova said...

"LOL how funny is it that you, supporter of a President who has a "kill list" presides over an economy which has fewer people working than 20 years ago, has fewer people going to college, and an all time high in food stamps, student loan defaults, is somehow for "better opportunities" "peace" and "shared prosperity""

This is "responsive" but I'm not surprised that Ritmo will not defend the irrationality of insisting that Obama is "for" better opportunities and peace and shared prosperity, when he has a kill list, continues drone warfare, and fewer people are in the workforce than before and the new normal for unemployment is about 8%.

cubanbob said...

Cubans like me

Unless you arrived before 1959, you are either lying or had really bad advice.


No Freder that was the law in effect when we had to go abroad for the green card. 1964. As for my wife that was the law in 1989. As far as I know it still is.

Maybe if every natural born citizen at some point had to go outside of the US and apply to be let back in, to justify why they should be let back in perhaps there wouldn't be so many living off the taxpayers. Would you qualify for reentry?

Synova said...

"impels them to spend in a crisis and cut when times are good -- "

At what time ever in the History of the World has the government reduced it's size or scope because times were good?

Never?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

It's not a cliche, Misdirector-in-Chief. These are serious economic ideas more likely to be endorsed by Greg Mankiw, Milton Friedman and (at one point) Alan Greenspan than by a lot of other economists. If you think that economic philosophies are not intellectually "deep" enough for a meaningful discussion on American politics in 2013 then you're not worth taking seriously.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

...fewer people are in the workforce than before and the new normal for unemployment is about 8%.

6% had the Republicans not colluded with state officials to lay off all their public sector employees. Talk about a new normal for preventing recovery conditions.

And if you want to claim credit for November 2008's unemployment numbers (which were >6%) then I'll guess you'll have to take credit for a whole lot of other fun stuff that occurred right about that time. Go on, get on Johnny McCain's plane and fly into town to save that "cratering" economy! Yee-Haw!!!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Because reliance on cliches is usually a sign that a person is out of their intellectual depth.

Well, perhaps when it comes to Republican cliches that's true. (Do they think in other terms?) But then again, these are ideas that Republicans promoted, made into policy and institutionalized into the political discourse over the last 30 years. One cannot be ashamed of them without being ashamed of the Republican policies they stood for and continue to stand for.

somefeller said...

If the GOP wants to make a symbolic, if not actual (I'll leave that determination to others) with the Bush years, Rand Paul would be a great choice. He also would be well-positioned in 2016 to take advantage of the eight-year fatigue that every eight-year Presidential administration faces. Plus, libertarianism is not unpopular among the sort of educated urban and suburban voters that sent for Obama, the way strident social conservatism is. Rand Paul is a man to watch.

cubanbob said...

How is this different from tricking people into believing that trickle-down is a gravy train that won't stop unless they vote for those who get the gravy train larded down with tax cuts? What's your point? It's exactly the same thing, just less direct and more philosophically convoluted.

In order to get a tax cut you first have to pay taxes in excess of whatever cut you get. The money first belongs to the taxpayer unless you are one of those who believes the money belongs to the State and the State is being mind and generous in allowing to keep in what's left over after paying taxes. By the way I haven't noticed it but has anyone ever seen a poor person meeting a payroll?

Freder Frederson said...

No Freder that was the law in effect when we had to go abroad for the green card. 1964.

The Cuban Refugee Adjustment was passed in 1966 and applied to all Cubans who arrived in the country after January 1, 1959. So if you applied for your green card in 1964 you couldn't avail yourself of the law. After the law passed, Cubans simply had to make it to the U.S. soil to take advantage of the Act. So it is the height of hypocrisy for former Cuban nationals to complain about illegal immigration since they have a huge exception to immigration requirements. Heck, they don't even have to prove they won't become a ward of the state.

garage mahal said...

We all know that Governor Walker is going to run and win.

Speaking of economic theories that don't work in the real world. Turns out crushing unions and kicking the poor doesn't create jobs or economic activity. He'll need all the Koch Bucks to put a happy face on the shit taco he served up.

Terry said...

What 'serious economic ideas' are you talking about, Ritmo? "Voodoo economics"? "Trickle-down"?
You don't seem to be able to discuss economics beyond reciting canned responses, yet you seem to think that you have something worthwhile to say on the topic.
Do you know anything about keynesian economics? Like what Keynes said about the effect of taxes on economic growth?

cubanbob said...

6% had the Republicans not colluded with state officials to lay off all their public sector employees. Talk about a new normal for preventing recovery conditions.

If the those public service employees were providing essential services you might have a point. However from the perspective of a net taxpayer the cost of having non-essential public sector employees drawing unemployment is far cheaper than paying their salaries, benefits and pension obligations. Besides those employees can enter the private sector and in real economic terms pay taxes instead of living off other people's taxes.

somefeller said...

Also, every politician has a kook factor among his or her base. Anyone who's spent 10 minutes on a political campaign can tell you that. It's just a question of managing them (get them to stuff envelopes, not make speeches). Unless he lets the kooks get the microphone, which is something his father allowed, that isn't something that will damage Rand Paul that much.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Terry - thanks for proving that you have nothing worthwhile to say and no interest in a serious conversation. And that Keynes' ideas are worth discussing but that Milton Friedman's somehow aren't.

Enjoy your day. And be sure to let me know whether Krugman's ideas are cliches in your estimation, also.

ed said...

@ O Ritmo Segundo

"As opposed to non-partisan judicially appointed or other commissions. ..."

**LAUGH**

You mean the gerrymandering engineered by partisan Democrat judges? Or the gerrymandering done by partisan Democrat commissions?

Because when the gerrymandering is in favor of Republicans you dweebs certainly are shrill. It's only when the gerrymandering is positive for Democrats that they suddenly get this supposed veneer of acceptability.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

If the those public service employees were providing essential services you might have a point. However from the perspective of a net taxpayer the cost of having non-essential public sector employees drawing unemployment is far cheaper than paying their salaries, benefits and pension obligations. Besides those employees can enter the private sector and in real economic terms pay taxes instead of living off other people's taxes.

You are a dope. "Essential" is an infinitely politically arguable point. They weren't "unessential" before, why now? And the point here of employment is that it reinforces itself. Those goods and services they could have bought intensify the demand and growth that's been lacking. But feel free to endlessly politicize completely clear and uncontroversial economic points as you wish. I'd expect nothing less. And neither does Terry.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"ed": I brought up compactness for a reason. The manipulation of district boundaries is objectively measurable. Look up Illinois' 4th, for instance. Just because Republicans have used it more for their gain doesn't mean I favor it. But it might mean, with your inapplicable tu quoque, that you do.

cubanbob said...

The Cuban Refugee Adjustment was passed in 1966 and applied to all Cubans who arrived in the country after January 1, 1959. So if you applied for your green card in 1964 you couldn't avail yourself of the law. After the law passed, Cubans simply had to make it to the U.S. soil to take advantage of the Act. So it is the height of hypocrisy for former Cuban nationals to complain about illegal immigration since they have a huge exception to immigration requirements. Heck, they don't even have to prove they won't become a ward of the state.


Now Freder what again is your point? That there are jobs beneath American citizens- citizens whose honor demands that they be given welfare so therefore they deserve welfare and not made to work at jobs beneath them. Thus requiring the US to import those who are willing to do that work?

The bulk of the Cubans that came here came before 1966. And those Cubans would not have immigrated if Eisenhower ( thanks to the NYT cheer leading for Castro) had not imposed an arms embargo on Batista.

Freder believe it or not Cuba wasn't that backwards a Latin Country in 1958. It was second to Argentina ( and higher than Italy's or Spain) in per capita income at a time when being as rich as an Argentine wasn't a joke but really meant something. We were political refugees not bilingual-illiterate farm unemployed farm workers.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

6% had the Republicans not colluded with state officials to lay off all their public sector employees


Hilarious.

Now "republicans" control layoffs.

Again, you're a fucking moron who posts fucking moron things on the Internet.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...


In any event, the man who takes up the cause of an insufficiently gerrymandered House of Representatives believes that Obama is apparently implementing policies achieved by having filibustered himself!


Hey stupid shit:

I was talking about the Senate.

I said Senate.

Want to guess why you responded with a silly screed about the House?

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
Speaking of economic theories that don't work in the real world. Turns out crushing unions and kicking the poor doesn't create jobs or economic activity


Right, dumbshit.

It only produces budget surpluses so tuition increases can be held down. Neither of which of course you can acknowledge.

Rusty said...

, There is no such thing as 'trickle-down' economics.

Yes there is. You participate in it.

Jay said...

The budget-balancing surpluses of Clinton and the MUCH leaner deficits run by every Democrat prior to Reagan attest to this.

Stupid shit:

There were no "surpluses"

There was a 1 year "suplus" during a Republican controlled congress which cut the growth of Medicare spending, and cut capital gains taxes.

Ideas you wholly reject.

You fucking moron.

cubanbob said...

You are a dope. "Essential" is an infinitely politically arguable point. They weren't "unessential" before, why now? And the point here of employment is that it reinforces itself. Those goods and services they could have bought intensify the demand and growth that's been lacking. But feel free to endlessly politicize completely clear and uncontroversial economic points as you wish. I'd expect nothing less. And neither does Terry.

Ritmo before you call anyone a dope you should reconsider your arguments. Since you are stating that in essence all government and employment is essential can you justify the economic value of all government spending? That these public sector employees would not contribute more to the economy and economic growth if they were employed in the private sector? That taxpayers would take the tax savings and stash it under the mattress never to spend or invest the money? Your argument about uncontroversial economic points are entirely arguable for those who don't hold Marxist economic views.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

The thread has been Jay'd!

Quick everyone, let's see if we can communicate with this rare specimen in his native language. Now repeat after me:

Stupid shit.

fucking moron.


Stupid shit.

fucking moron.


Stupid shit.

fucking moron.


Stupid shit.

fucking moron.


It's a higher form of communication that his fellow Republican'ts haven't yet attained. Notice their silence as Jay fills in the gaps with more high-level vulgarities than they can pull off.

Jay said...

Terry said...

Seriously, Ritmo, I want to know if you consider yourself an educated person.
Because reliance on cliches is usually a sign that a person is out of their intellectual depth.


Think of ritty this way:

Democrats are good
Republicans are bad
Me Democrat
Me good

That's the whole pathetic act

edutcher said...

The only surpluses in Willie's budgets were in the bookkeepers' second set of books.

The debt rose every one of those years.

cubanbob said...

garage mahal said...
Speaking of economic theories that don't work in the real world. Turns out crushing unions and kicking the poor doesn't create jobs or economic activity.

Really? Coercive union membership dues, good. Voluntary membership and dues paying, bad. Is that what you are arguing?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Ritmo before you call anyone a dope you should reconsider your arguments.

Alternatively, I could get just you to even consider them in the first place.

Since you are stating that in essence all government and employment is essential can you justify the economic value of all government spending?

I am saying that all your talk of "essential" is a distraction from the fact that employment, period, is a good thing when it comes to a nation's economy. As it was in previous recoveries. None of which Republican'ts tried to sabotage with this feudalistic talk of "bad" government employment.

That these public sector employees would not contribute more to the economy and economic growth if they were employed in the private sector?

This is definitely dope talk. The good of employment has to do with the availability of the employed to participate in something called "demand" and growth. The supposed virtue of their nature of employment has nothing to do with it.

That taxpayers would take the tax savings and stash it under the mattress never to spend or invest the money?

Which tax savings? Do Republicant's believe that the source of debt makes for "good debt" versus "bad debt"? It's all debt, dingleberry.

Your argument about uncontroversial economic points are entirely arguable for those who don't hold Marxist economic views.

This statement must carry some weight in places that turned into the hellholes that you allowed your former country to turn into and then had to escape from.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay attempts a comment without copious profanity, and this is what happens:

Think of ritty this way:

Democrats are good
Republicans are bad
Me Democrat
Me good

That's the whole pathetic act.


See, it's like his fellow Klingons can't get the full-on emotional impact of his speech anymore.

Terry said...

Ritmo, do you realize that you are spouting nonsense?
Any boost in aggregate demand from government spending must come from borrowed money (or government funds that have been inactive and saved in a vault somewhere).
If the governor of a state increases taxes by a billion dollars to save public employee jobs, he (or she) reduces saving and spending by the people whose taxes he (or she) has raised.
This is elementary.
You really need a good, undergraduate course in economics, Ritmo. Don't read Krugman's columns, though. You might end up believing that you can draw a trend line from a single data point: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/europes-gap/

El Pollo Real said...

Who gives a crap about 2016 POTUS contenders?

Really. The big political story is what what happens next in the midterms. Focus people. GW Bush is right, it's way too early.

Hopefully, the Tea Party can wrest away some of the imperial presidency powers the Republicans helped put in place and which Obama now exploits. A return to a real Constitutional balance of power is the best thing that could happen to US. Rand Paul can help that happen, but at this point I could give a rat's ass about his Presidential ambitions.

El Pollo Real said...

A couple more republican governors from the "New Confederacy" elected in 2014 will help send a message to WashingTumor DC as well.

garage mahal said...

It only produces budget surpluses so tuition increases can be held down. Neither of which of course you can acknowledge.

Walker cut 1.5 billion from education and borrowed or bonded 1.5 billion dollars. Now he wants to borrow 1 billion more.

Borrow to get a surplus. That's your hero.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Terry,

I sincerely appreciate your willingness to post multiple comments to illustrate the lengths to which you'll take your unseriousness ("don't take Republican ideas seriously!" They're just slogans! lol)

O Ritmo Segundo said...

In case no one else is listening, Terry is basically flat-out admitting that Republicans are liars ("You can't take their ideas seriously, they're just cliches!") while trying to make the Republican case for their supposedly superior approach to economic policy.

Pretty stunning, eh? No wonder the field has opened to such Civil Rights-hating goofs as Rand Paul. Or perhaps, "narrowed" is more like it.

Freder Frederson said...

Freder believe it or not Cuba wasn't that backwards a Latin Country in 1958. It was second to Argentina ( and higher than Italy's or Spain) in per capita income at a time when being as rich as an Argentine wasn't a joke but really meant something.

Prior to the revolution, Cuba was owned and operated by and for the Mafia. Batista was bought and paid for by Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano.

Terry said...

What makes you think I am a Republican, Ritmo?
More importantly, what makes you think that 'Republican' is a synonym for 'free market economics'?
You're in a government union of some kind, aren't you, Ritmo? I recognize the talking points.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Terry, your obsessive slipperiness speaks for itself. Whatever you "are" (or "aren't"), it's not worth bothering with. Go be a distracting glibertarian shill (or whatever you are - don't think your own talking points weren't just as transparent) someplace where that counts as productive and effective.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...


Walker cut 1.5 billion from education and borrowed or bonded 1.5 billion dollars. Now he wants to borrow 1 billion more.


That's worth 4 Pinocchio's

El Pollo Real said...

Prior to the revolution, Cuba was owned and operated by and for the Mafia. Batista was bought and paid for by Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano.

What interest did the Mob have outside of Havana? Cuba was poor for the same reasons other Latin American countries were poor where the Mob wasn't.

Havana was a haven for American Mob activities. The juxtaposition of corrupt American wealth in that city helped fueled the countrywide resentment, but the main reason for the revolution involved Cuba's landowners.

And Freder, your heartfelt sympathy puts you in bed with Che Guevara. Ugh.

cubanbob said...

This is definitely dope talk. The good of employment has to do with the availability of the employed to participate in something called "demand" and growth. The supposed virtue of their nature of employment has nothing to do with it.

Yeah, right. Yes demand for more income redistribution and employing more to administer the redistribution of aid income is just the ticket for economic growth. And lets borrow even more now so other can pay ever higher taxes in the future to support today's non-productive consumption.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Che Guevara had a rugged handsomeness to him that made him quite a bit better-looking than Chickie's bed buddies, David and Charles Koch.

But the upshot is that Chickie's more wild by having a threesome with those decidedly unsexy (to anyone of the female persuasion) septuagenarians. But still, ugh.

O Ritmo Segundo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
O Ritmo Segundo said...

Yeah, right. Yes demand for more income redistribution and employing more to administer the redistribution of aid income is just the ticket for economic growth.

"Demand" is an economic term that you are misusing now by politically applying it to the "bad" place where you NORMATIVELY think it shouldn't come from. Very un-economical, unobjective, and unlearned. Just ask Foil for the Republican'ts Terry. He hates that sort of thing.

And lets borrow even more now so other can pay ever higher taxes in the future to support today's non-productive consumption.

No, we'll borrow more because rates are low and the payoff is better (with improved economic growth) than it is when Republican'ts borrow to pad the tax refunds of fat cats who don't intend on using it to employ, spend or otherwise grow the economy.

cubanbob said...

Freder Frederson said...
Freder believe it or not Cuba wasn't that backwards a Latin Country in 1958. It was second to Argentina ( and higher than Italy's or Spain) in per capita income at a time when being as rich as an Argentine wasn't a joke but really meant something.

Prior to the revolution, Cuba was owned and operated by and for the Mafia. Batista was bought and paid for by Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano.

4/27/13, 3:20 PM

You seem to forget that Lansky and Luciano also pretty much owned the AFL-CIO which controlled the democrat party. And just exactly how is the current regime here any less corrupt than Batista? As poor as Cuba was in the fifties there were large parts of America that were equally pretty much as poor as Cuba at the time. And by any measure Cuba was far better off then that it is now under the guiding light of socialism.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Terry,

I remember reading somewhere that snails secrete a film of mucous so thick that they can even slither over the blade of a sharp knife unscathed, without getting a cut or even so much as a scratch.

Republican'ts must have found this quality admirable in you when deciding that glibs like you would be their perfect foil for pretending to a claim of nearly half the electorate or more.

El Pollo Real said...

Ritmo and Titus are the only commenters here who weigh a criminal's looks into the criminal's intrinsic value. I shudder to think what kind of masturbatory fantasy material they store on their hard drives.

El Pollo Real said...

And notice that Ritmo never seems to notice the female side of the population...

Terry said...

'fat cats'. 'Trickle-down'. 'Voodoo economics'.
Definitely a member of a public employee union.
Public employees' union publications use pejorative terms when they try to describe free market economics.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Definitely a member of a public employee union.

Definitely the above emanates from the mouth of someone who thinks in cliches.

Public employees' union publications use pejorative terms when they try to describe free market economics.

Definitely the above uses "public employee union" as a pejorative, and the kind of code that Romney did when referring to the "51%".

So a glibertarian, cliche-thinking, foil for Republican'ts political parasite, who says, "The Republican'ts I need to support because no one will vote for my clique did it. I, myself, on the other hand, admit rather vaingloriously and fatuously that I had NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM!"

Hilariously pathetic.

garage mahal said...

Making the tough choices!~

Long Term Debt for Governmental Activities as calculated by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau has grown from $9,938,655,000 in 2010 to $10,593,140,000 in 2011 and $11,046,487,000 as of June 30, 2012.

In addition the governor has not paid debt payments coming due in 2011 and 2012. These payments were refinanced not to capture a lower interest rate but to avoid making payments and, in some cases, to raise additional cash through the sale of bonds “at a premium” meaning sold at a higher interest rate than market to capture a cash up-front payment. The total amount is over $560 million in debt payments coming due and not paid. This bad business practice will catch up to the governor in the next budget at the percent of debt payments as a percent of all general spending will increase well above the financial managers’ recommended threshold.


Send the debt to the next governor.

cubanbob said...

No, we'll borrow more because rates are low and the payoff is better (with improved economic growth) than it is when Republican'ts borrow to pad the tax refunds of fat cats who don't intend on using it to employ, spend or otherwise grow the economy.

No we are able to borrow more because the Fed's artificial low interest rate policy is what enables the government to borrow and spend at the ruinous cost to savers such as the retired. But that will also come to end since what can't go on eventually won't and then the real cuts begin. And since when are you such an expert on 'fat cats' and their spending and investment intentions? Gee without fat cats and their investment where would California jobs be? In Hollywood and orange groves? But for high tech thats is pretty much what is left since the left pretty much drove out of state aerospace manufacturing and manufacturing in general. Hollywood, real estate, hamburger flipping and waitressing and public sector jobs, a real dynamo of economic growth. And NYC, without the artificial boost to Wall Street as savers with nowhere else to go put their money in equities with the hopes of beating inflation, with its essentially non-existing economy but for Wall Street, where would it be? You really believe Manhattan can survive without Wall Street fat cats? And you call people dopes, now thats funny.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Definitely people who use the word "definitely" to describe the indefinite are a bit like Rain Man in their thinking and immature outlook on social matters.

Definitely.

What do you think of K-Mart, Terry? Does dad let you drive slowly around the block on weekends? How are things at Walbrook?

These are the people who believe they have the social skills to aspire to responsible leadership in a democracy. Definitely.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Gee without fat cats and their investment where would California jobs be? In Hollywood and orange groves? But for high tech thats is pretty much what is left since the left pretty much drove out of state aerospace manufacturing and manufacturing in general. Hollywood, real estate, hamburger flipping and waitressing and public sector jobs, a real dynamo of economic growth. And NYC, without the artificial boost to Wall Street as savers with nowhere else to go put their money in equities with the hopes of beating inflation, with its essentially non-existing economy but for Wall Street, where would it be? You really believe Manhattan can survive without Wall Street fat cats?

Oh gee! Looks like someone just spat up a whole dish of cliches! No more "voodoo" or "trickle-down" economics (terms not invented or used by Democrats to promote their own policies, mind you, but by Republican'ts). Terry should be aghast.

Anyway, the whole point of any reference to the super-wealthy (whatever term you want to use - pejorative suggestions notwithstanding) is that they AREN'T hiring. Meantime, tech is the only engine of innovation in the entire economy. A bright spot on the U.S. and in the world. Cubanbob should have more love for California and the "socially responsible" investors out there who initiated this entire phenomenon we live with now that culminated in garage-based start-ups and companies like GOOGLE that can swallow blue chips.

Go back to Cuba. Take your glibertarian friend with you.

cubanbob said...

"Demand" is an economic term that you are misusing now by politically applying it to the "bad" place where you NORMATIVELY think it shouldn't come from. Very un-economical, unobjective, and unlearned. Just ask Foil for the Republican'ts Terry. He hates that sort of thing.

You seem to confuse demand as defined by the markets with demand as defined by the power of the state to take and redistribute. There is your political application of demand. As for Terry, I haven't read his comments so I don't know what you are referring to. So far your observations aren't very learned or grounded in actual reality.

Terry said...

I am less than dazzled by your the power of your arguments, Ritmo.
I have nothing against public employee unions.
Can you tell me where you learned about this wacky 'theory of trickle-down economics'? Was it a union newsletter? Maybe you heard it mentioned on MSNBC?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

You seem to confuse demand as defined by the markets with demand as defined by the power of the state to take and redistribute.

No I don't. You do.

cubanbob said...

Oh gee! Looks like someone just spat up a whole dish of cliches! No more "voodoo" or "trickle-down" economics (terms not invented or used by Democrats to promote their own policies, mind you, but by Republican'ts). Terry should be aghast.

Apparently your inability to discern between truths and cliches doesn't make truths untrue. Now tell us how trickle up wealth via the welfare state has really brought prosperity and real economic growth. It like being on a breathing machine. You are able to breath while on the machine but there is no recovery if you can't get off the machine. Go on fifty years since LBJ's War On Poverty and the country has nothing to show for it. If all of that money had been spent in private sector investment a large part of the country wouldn't be still relying on that economic breathing machine.

Anyway who died and made you king giving you the right to demand my immediate departure from the country? Since your blog name implies being Brazilian perhaps you should take your own advice and depart tomorrow. Their is a lovely favela with an ocean view out side of Rio waiting for the return of it's prodigal son.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I am less than dazzled by your the power of your arguments, Ritmo.

I am equally undazzled by your obfuscation and fear of standing for anything.

I have nothing against public employee unions.

Especially your ability to make pejorative, (cliched?) reference to them when attempting to debate me.

Can you tell me where you learned about this wacky 'theory of trickle-down economics'?

Hmmm... Arthur Laffer, perhaps. I think he called it "supply side economics" before his critics found a more accurate description. Can't blame the critics for inventing the innovation that those they criticized invented.

And we certainly can't blame this guy.

Read the content of that speech he's giving. Blame it on his detractors for criticizing it. Or pretend it only exists when detractors say it does.

This is stupid.

Was it a union newsletter?

Maybe you heard it mentioned on MSNBC?

Ok. So instead of using "public employee unions as a pejorative cliche you use MSNBC. Very clever transition, there.

cubanbob said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...
You seem to confuse demand as defined by the markets with demand as defined by the power of the state to take and redistribute.

No I don't. You do.

4/27/13, 4:12 PM

Really? I didn't know I could tick off what part of my taxes go to which spending I prefer.

Terry said...

Look, I've heard a lot of people -- usually ignorant pundits and newscasters -- blather about consumer spending and how important it is to the US economy. None of them ever seem to say why it is important.
It is important because it has a multiplier > 1. It has a multiplier > 1 because people voluntarily exchange money for some product or service (or vice versa). The guy who voluntarily spends a dollar for an ice cream cone and the guy who voluntarily sells it to him both do it in the belief that they are getting value for there money.

Rusty said...

Ritmo's off his meds again.
Although his attempts to argue economics is at the same time both sad and amusing.

Jay said...

Meantime, tech is the only engine of innovation in the entire economy.

How in the fuck would you know?

Jay said...

Cubanbob should have more love for California and the "socially responsible" investors out there who initiated this entire phenomenon we live with now that culminated in garage-based start-ups and companies like GOOGLE that can swallow blue chips.

Remember, the "super wealthy" aren't "hiring" they are merely investing capital in these "garage-based start-ups"!!

Really, they are.

A fucking brain dead government worker who posts silly cliches on the Internet would know all about it.

Totally.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...

Making the tough choices!~


Isn't it convenient you didn't post a link to that screed.

Want to guess why you did that?

Rusty said...


Meantime, tech is the only engine of innovation in the entire economy.

Technology of all sorts has always been an economic driver.

Terry said...

Technology of all sorts has always been an economic driver.
That's because it moves the curve of the production possibilities frontier outwards.
So, in theory, does immigration. Unfortunately for Paul, the immigrants he favors will tend to vote for redistributionist politicians, because the immigrants perceive that doing so will serve their own economic interests.
Quoting Ayn Rand to them won't change their minds about that.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

So, Jay - surely someone as astute as you can't be content with merely declaring me to be employed by the very government that was made incompetent by the corrupted Republican'ts who ask to be elected so that they can maintain that declaration of incompetence. Go the full monty! Which department do I work for? And don't forget my pay grade.

Please go on, seeing as how you (and Terry) seem to think you know so much about me. Please, declare your expertise on everything about me. Do I harbor WMDs and terrrrrrrists, also? Illegal aliens? Do I teach people to speak languages other than English? Maybe I colluded with the Russkies before I was born.

Jay said...

employed by the very government that was made incompetent by the corrupted Republican'ts

Again, think of ritty this way:

Democrats are good
Republicans are bad
Me (ritty) Democrat
Me (ritty) good

Jay said...

Remember, the Obama government is like super-duper competent.

When one thinks of cash-4-clunkers, Fast & Furious, Benghazi, Boston Bombing, 3 million + leaving the labor force, ObamaCare, and $6 Trillion in new debt, "competent" totally comes to mind.

Really. It does.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Unfortunately for Paul, the immigrants he favors will tend to vote for redistributionist politicians, because the immigrants perceive that doing so will serve their own economic interests.

Translation: Northern Europeans are so superior that they don't need yer stinking social welfare state! Whoops!

You really are enamored with this Somali style of third-world deregulation, aren't you, Terry? Obviously the problem with America is that it isn't unequal enough and has too much infrastructure for its own good. The Democrats and independents are wrong in thinking that we've created enough wealth. We need to create more wealth at the top and stratify society even more. The problem with America is that it doesn't do a good enough job of this.

Also: Capitalism is an economic system that has never been tried before!1!11!!!! eleventy plus.

Yawn.

You crank out the glibertarian talking points more uncannily than anyone else, but that's hardly saying much.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

When one thinks of cash-4-clunkers, Fast & Furious, Benghazi, Boston Bombing, 3 million + leaving the labor force, ObamaCare, and $6 Trillion in new debt, "competent" totally comes to mind.

Really. It does.


Roger Ailes should have fired you along with Dick Morris.

Jay said...

the very government that was made incompetent by the corrupted Republican'ts

What type of moron takes to the Internet to type such silly projection?

I mean, prior to Harry & Nancy taking over Congress, the U/E rate was 4.6%, the deficit was $248 Billion, and had declined for the 3rd straight year, while the GDP growth for the previous quarter was 3.4%

But this fucking idiot takes to the Internet to type silly cliche after silly cliche.

And she knows all about tech startups too!

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...


Roger Ailes should have fired you along with Dick Morris.


Remember retard, it isn't a lie, if you believe it.

O Ritmo Segundo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jay said...

he Democrats and independents are wrong in thinking that we've created enough wealth. We need to create more wealth at the top and stratify society even more.

Right on cue:

Income Inequality Worse Under Obama Than George W. Bush

You're so fucking dumb, it really can't be articulated.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay is a total shit-for-brains bred by the mating of two shit-for-brains so neurologically corrupted that they required the assistance of the top labs in the nation to successfully complete the act. The evil scientist performing this breeding experiment realized that if he cloaked the little junior turd in a T-Shirt that said "Kiss me, I'm a Republican", then his chances of making it through life would be improved.

garage mahal said...

Want to guess why you did that?

Want to guess why you can't take issue with any of it? Because you can't, and don't care anyway. You don't care about any deficits, or surpluses, or job growth. Just as long as a Republican is in power kicking some people around that you don't like you're happy.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Yep, that's right Lil Jay. You go ahead and take up that great Republican cause of outcome equality. That'll learn 'em!

Jay said...

The Democrats are all for income equality!!!

Why? Because a silly, ignorant dipshit on the internet says so!

Meanwhile:

Income inequality has soared to the highest levels since the Great Depression, and the recession has done little to reverse the trend, with the top 1 percent of earners taking 93 percent of the income gains in the first full year of the recovery.

Don't worry, dipshit, you blame the Tea Party. Because you're like so smart.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...



Want to guess why you can't take issue with any of it?


It's all false, you lying idiot.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Don't worry, dipshit, you blame the Tea Party. Because you're like so smart.

And you have no blame for the Tea Party because you're like a total non-partisan genius who believes that Congress isn't a co-equal branch of government with any check and balance function over the UNITARY EXECUTIVE (a concept advanced by Bush).

You really are too stupid to respond to.

Jay said...

ou go ahead and take up that great Republican cause of outcome equality.

Note the response when silly, cliched talking points are demonstrated to be false.

Who would ever guess you'd engage in straw men, little girl?

Hey, remember all those posts ritty has made criticizing Obama for rising income inequality?

Me too!

El Pollo Real said...

A rising tide lifts all boats ~JFK

This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal. ~BHO

JFK updated for the modern Obama economy:

An ebbing tide strands the yachts first

Jay said...

ith any check and balance function over the UNITARY EXECUTIVE (a concept advanced by Bush).


Now ritty knows all about "unitary executive!"

Really, she does. And she typed it in all caps because she knows all about it.

OH, and by the way, the supporter of a President who has asserted that while the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process applied, it could be satisfied by internal deliberations in the executive branch is super-duper credible when ignorantly screeching about unitary executives.

Really. She is.

El Pollo Real said...

An ebbing tide strands the yachts first

Except it doesn't because they just float further offshore.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Using human forms of communication with "Jay" is like teaching calculus to crackheads.

A lot of Republicans are stupid (or at least illogical), but none are so unashamed of their crudity as Jay is. Most have the decency of acknowledging when they have nothing more to say.

Not so, with their newest representative. He scares the rest of his kind away like lions at a watering hole.

Jay said...

Remember, ritty and her silly, ignorant ilk are totally concerned with claims of excessive Presidential power and due process.

Except when the President she proudly voted for twice says "Hey we had a meeting about this, and I got that due process from here"

Then ritty, well, lays back and thinks of Chicago...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay is an insult to anyone carrying 46 chromosomes.

Were all three of his parents crack-whores or just one, I wonder?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

When Jay confuses genders and calls me "she" it reminds me of Special Ed from Crank Yankers, who would do the same thing.

cubanbob said...

Cubanbob should have more love for California and the "socially responsible" investors out there who initiated this entire phenomenon we live with now that culminated in garage-based start-ups and companies like GOOGLE that can swallow blue chips.

Jay I send my contribution to the California Franchise Board even though I don't vote there. It's the cost of doing business. So I get to pay but don't have a say.

Terry after being prodded by Ritmo I read some of your comments. Suffice to say investment creates jobs and consumer spending is what encourages investment. Before the consumer buys the ice cream a lot of people have to invest in everything need to make the ice cream. Jobs are the byproduct of the investment. No one hires people just to hire them ( other than government). Hiring is done to fill the needs of the enterprise. Apparently Ritmo doesn't seem to understand that.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay is a new innovation in the field of genetic modification. He was the first of his kind to be born of bukkake and the last to walk on four limbs.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

There goes Pollo, confusing the economy of 1960 with the economy of 2008.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jobs are the byproduct of the investment. No one hires people just to hire them ( other than government). Hiring is done to fill the needs of the enterprise. Apparently Ritmo doesn't seem to understand that.

Record profits/stashed corporate cash, abysmal hiring and I'm the one who doesn't understand the theory or reality of investment and hiring?

If you looked at the facts that would make you less like "Jay" but I guess mindless, herd-like solidarity is more important to you.

cubanbob said...

An ebbing tide strands the yachts first.

Not only that but it causes the crews, maintainers and ship chandlers to be out of work.

garage mahal said...

It's all false, you lying idiot

If it were you could articulate how.

Again, you and Republicans don't care about deficits or debt. You care about exploiting it to dismantle social programs that help people. Tea Party policies like Walker's aren't supposed to "work". They're supposed to destroy, permanently.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay, does the home-mortgage interest deduction apply to your parents' trailer? Because if not, that would be a great Republican policy to implement.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Hahahah!! Garage referred to "Jay" and used the word "articulate" in the same sentence! Too funny.

cubanbob said...

Record profits/stashed corporate cash, abysmal hiring and I'm the one who doesn't understand the theory or reality of investment and hiring?

Absolute correct Sir! You haven't got a clue as to why businesses are sitting on piles of money instead of re-investing in their own business where they would be maximizing the return for their owners. And since the owners aren't complaining maybe they know something you don't.

Terry said...

Please go on, seeing as how you (and Terry) seem to think you know so much about me. Please, declare your expertise on everything about me. Do I harbor WMDs and terrrrrrrists, also? Illegal aliens? Do I teach people to speak languages other than English? Maybe I colluded with the Russkies before I was born.

Ritmo, I merely noted that you spoke in the cliche'd, pejorative terms regarding market economics that are most frequently expressed in union newsletters. I guessed at the public employee union part because you seem obsessed with the poor fortunes of public employees in WI since walker passed his reforms.
If I'm wrong -- and you are neither a public employee union member nor a public school teacher, just say so.
Criminy.

Jay said...

garage mahal said...



If it were you could articulate how.


If it were true, you'd provide a link.

ou care about exploiting it to dismantle social programs that help people.

Uh, Social Security and Medicare are well on their way to being dismantled.

Idiot.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Record profits/stashed corporate cash, abysmal hiring and I'm the one who doesn't understand the theory or reality of investment and hiring?


She says this while a Democrat is President, no less.

If ritty didn't exist, the right would have to make her up.

This is an epic beclownment for her.

cubanbob said...

Again, you and Republicans don't care about deficits or debt. You care about exploiting it to dismantle social programs that help people. Tea Party policies like Walker's aren't supposed to "work". They're supposed to destroy, permanently.

Perhaps the able bodied should try working. In the private sector. And not living off other people's hard work.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Absolute correct Sir! You haven't got a clue as to why businesses are sitting on piles of money instead of re-investing in their own business where they would be maximizing the return for their owners. And since the owners aren't complaining maybe they know something you don't.

Um, because they're greedy pussies who've been coddled and conditioned by 30 years of Republican, sweet-talking incompetence to think that goosing demand with tax cuts as the answer for everything until the nation's banks were broken would go on indefinitely -- global financial crisis be damned?

Again, 6% unemployment had you not chopped the states' coffers. Not bad, considering the aftermath of another Republican 1929 redux.

Jay said...

ritty takes to the Internet to screech that businesses hire when they have demand while simultaneously screeching they are sitting on a ton of cash and not hiring.

ritty knows very, very little about economics, and doesn't see a contradiction, so hilarity ensues.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Again, 6% unemployment had you not chopped the states' coffers.


How says such silly, absurd shit like this one month after 500,000 people left the US workforce?

What a fucking moron.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Ritmo, I merely noted that you spoke in the cliche'd, pejorative terms regarding market economics that are most frequently expressed in union newsletters.

Apparently George HW Bush spoke in cliched, pejorative terms regarding market economics that are most frequently expressed in union newspapers.

Why is it so hard for you to get that neoliberal economics was not a Republican, let alone American norm prior to 1980? You are hanging on for dear life to keep this as a partisan issue because, without the Republican party, your ideological goose is cooked. That's not my problem.

I guessed at the public employee union part because you seem obsessed with the poor fortunes of public employees in WI since walker passed his reforms.

My concern is with overall U.S. unemployment but I'm glad you are willing to articulate your empirical methods. "Guessing" is as good as you've got and I don't mind pointing that out.

If I'm wrong -- and you are neither a public employee union member nor a public school teacher, just say so.
Criminy.


How arrogant you are. This must be for effect. You use terms that you know you and your ilk find to be insulting, purposely, deliberately, as a "guess" and then tell me it's my job to declare you wrong in your "guess".

Please just go fuck off right now. Criminy.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

ritty takes to the Internet to screech that businesses hire when they have demand while simultaneously screeching they are sitting on a ton of cash and not hiring.

ritty knows very, very little about economics, and doesn't see a contradiction, so hilarity ensues.


What's hilarious is that the quoted bozo believes those record profits are resulting from high demand. Fascinating.

garage mahal said...

Uh, Social Security and Medicare are well on their way to being dismantled.

Because that's what the big money boyz and elites in both parties want. They're on the same team. At least I can tell when I'm being played.

Jay said...


How arrogant you are. This must be for effect.


Ritty takes to the Internet to pretend she isn't a public sector employee.

Hilarity ensues.

Jay said...

Because that's what the big money boyz and elites in both parties want

Right.

So keep voting Democrat.

Its worked swell so far.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"Again, you and Republicans don't care about deficits or debt. You care about exploiting it to dismantle social programs that help people. Tea Party policies like Walker's aren't supposed to "work". They're supposed to destroy, permanently."

Perhaps the able bodied should try working. In the private sector. And not living off other people's hard work.


LOLOLOL!!!

Garage, quick! They are not choosing to employ themselves fast enough!

Cubanbob is like a version of "Jay" who simply takes more time and words to say something nonsensical.

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't see Rand Paul getting the nomination any more than I did his father. Yes, they speak to a portion of the Republican Party, but his stand on national defense would likely cost him the nomination, and esp. when you throw in immigration. And, even if he did get the nomination, I doubt that he could win, with the Dem candidate being able to run inside him on national defense.

cubanbob said...

Ritmo it's telling that you can't actually rebut but rather spew regurgitated left wing talking points. It's a strange day and strange thread when Somfeller, A Man Of The Left is far more sensible and reasonable in his comments up thread than you. Come to think of it so is ARM and Garage. It must very lonely on your perch today. At least Garage who I believe is a public sector employee is looking after Number One from his perspective. What's your excuse? Is your job and income derived from public sector spending? That would explain a lot.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Hilarity ensues.

As with most things you do, you're laughing alone.

Go on and tell me where you work and in what capacity and I'll make something hilarious happen, you retarded, cowardly shit-for-brains, good-for-nothing, crude cretin.

Jay said...

What's hilarious is that the quoted bozo believes those record profits are resulting from high demand.

Of course I said no such thing.

This is all very, very confusing for you.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

What's your excuse?

The Clinton economy and what FDR and Truman left Eisenhower with as opposed to what Bush left his successor with.

What's your excuse for being too stupid to get that?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

"What's hilarious is that the quoted bozo believes those record profits are resulting from high demand."

Of course I said no such thing.


Then where's the "contradiction" between those two things, O Wise and Unconfused One?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Well, Jay doesn't really ever say anything, of course. But I meant that literally this time - not just in regard to his lack of any substance.

Jay said...

It is kind of sad people like garage will need Social Security so badly and yet Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget."

Too bad garage thinks the best way to address this is to vote for Democrats.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Jay is still searching his data ba-- I mean his memory and faculties on that last one.

Jay said...

The Clinton economy and what FDR and Truman left Eisenhower with as opposed to what Bush left his successor with.

Clinton left Bush a recession, you fucking idiot. The recession began in March of 2001, two months after Clinton left office.

You're a fucking meme machine.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Come on, Jay. Low demand, record profits, and the supposed contradiction there. Let us have it.

Do you need an extra outlet to plug yourself into?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Clinton left Bush a recession, you fucking idiot. The recession began in March of 2001, two months after Clinton left office.

And what a hell of a fucking memorable recession THAT was! Today's recession PINES for that recession! I mean, Bush is calling Clinton right now, asking, "Can I trade you parting gifts? The present you left me PALES in comparison to the TOTAL GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS I left Obama!"

Hahahahah you are such a fucking retard. Have you ever worked a day in your life, ever? Tell the truth, you never leave the underground cavern underneath your parents' trailer, ever, don't you?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Any day now Jay will tell us about the startling contradiction he found between low demand and record profits. Any day now.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...

And what a hell of a fucking memorable recession THAT was!


Notice how you've gone from saying that Clinton left Bush a good economy to "well, that recession wasn't so bad"

Of course you can't see how idiotic you look.

Because, well, you're pretty fucking dumb.

El Pollo Real said...

The Clinton economy and what FDR and Truman left Eisenhower with as opposed to what Bush left his successor with.

You mean Ben Bukkake? Clinton had Greenspan and Bush II did too. Face it: overly generous dollops of dollars have made a mess of saving and investing.

Prediction: the economy will heal when Ben goes.

Jay said...

She takes to the Internet to brag about "The Clinton economy" which was a recession.

You can't make that level of stupid up, folks.

Oh, and if what Bush left Obama was so bad, why are fewer people working today than when Obama was sworn in?

Oh, and if what Bush left Obama is so bad, why did Reagan inherit the same U/E rate and have 18 million + jobs created during his presidency?

Don't worry, meme girl, this is all too hard for you.

Keep screeching.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Any help from the libertarian "I have no partisan agenda" Terry and Bob "I hate Castro" from Cuba for Jay on that last one? Come on: Record profits, low demand, and a contradiction.

You guys aren't going to seriously let your ideological soulmate twist and whither like that, are you? I mean, the little pig-face has taken to saying that Clinton left the economy in worse shape or anything approximating how badly the shape of the economy that Bush left Obama. It would be cruel to leave him hanging like that.

It's almost like when he was born and his momma was too stupid to bite off the umbilical cord attaching him to her like the rest of his species does. He was hanging out of her vagina and being dragged everywhere she went for like SEVEN WEEKS before she figured out what to do. Shameless.

Jay said...

It is too bad that bastard LBJ moved Social Security into the "unified budget" because he didn't want to raise taxes to pay for the war JFK started.

Now uneducated Democratic voters like garage will have to work until they are 75.

Jay said...

I mean, the little pig-face has taken to saying that Clinton left the economy in worse shape or anything approximating how badly the shape of the economy that Bush left Obama.

Of course when your idiocy hits you in the face, you begin arguing against things that were never said.

Don't worry, meme girl, this is all hard and confusing for you.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

She takes to the Internet to brag about "The Clinton economy" which was a recession.

Yep. One big eight-year long recession. It really sucked.

Come on, you're making stupid people look like Chess Grandmasters here. Are you eight years old and too young to have witnessed the nineties? That would explain a lot.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Of course when your idiocy hits you in the face...

My idiocy goes by the name "Jay".

Terry said...

Ritmo, I do technical work for a non-profit that does scientific research. We are funded by a consortium of universities with some NSF money for certain projects.
I am an exempt, non-union employee.

I was just curious about where you got the idea that there is this thing called 'trickle-down' economics, or 'voodoo economics', that is supposedly favored by GOP politicians.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Come on, Jay. Don't lose momentum now! Record profits, low demand, contradiction... Record profits, low demand, contradiction... And then...? Come on, man! Do it!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I was just curious about where you got the idea that there is this thing called 'trickle-down' economics, or 'voodoo economics', that is supposedly favored by GOP politicians.

Arthur Laffer, his neoliberal cronies (they call it "supply side economics", Jack Kemp, and George Bush when debating Reagan in 1980. Look all that up.

Anyway, are you too young to remember the 1980s? As with Jay's inability to understand the 1990s, that might explain a lot.

Jay said...

O Ritmo Segundo said...


Yep. One big eight-year long recession. It really sucked.


What is funny is that when it has already been pointed out to you that your response when your stupidity is shoved in your face is to pose straw men, you do it again.

What do you think that says about you?

El Pollo Real said...

Anyway, are you too young to remember the 1980s? As with Jay's inability to understand the 1990s, that might explain a lot.

I recall that you, by your own admission, were too young to remember the 1980s.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

What do you think that says about you?

I think it says that I am smarter than you and that you are a puerile and immature little douche.

Anyway, that Clinton Recession, right? Horrible. Took forever to recover from. Just a complete mess. Left the economy in horrible shambles.

Also, I haven't forgotten: Low demand, record profits, and the Jay-Tardian Contradiction. Please explain this contradiction of which you speak, Great, Powerful and Wise Reteller of the Horrible and Disastrous Clinton Recession.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I recall that you, by your own admission, were too young to remember the 1980s.

I recall that whenever you rely on your memory of what I said, your recollection ends up sucking ass.

Jay said...

Jay's inability to understand the 1990s

ritty takes to the Internet to pretend GW Bush was President in the 90's.

Oh wait, ritty takes to the Internet to pretend because something happened in "the 90's" a tech bubble popping and recession didn't happen post- "the 90's"

Ritty dumb.

Jay said...

Anyway, that Clinton Recession, right? Horrible. Took forever to recover from. Just a complete mess. Left the economy in horrible shambles.

Straw
Straw
Straw, straw, straw.

What do you think that says about you?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

It's no strawman, douche-lite. You used the current/recent Bush recession to compare it to the early 2000s as a way to besmirch Clinton's reputation, and I called you out on it.

Now face up to it, Douche-ina.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

And ALSO, don't FORGET:

Record profits contradict low demand. Jay will explain it.

Terry said...

I suspect that I am older than you are, Ritmo. I voted for the first time in the 1980 election.
GHW Bush had no expertise, in 1980, to define or describe any school of economics. Reagan did -- he was an econ major in college.
I believe that the context of the 'voodoo economics' remark by GHW Bush in 1980 was his skepticism towards the idea that, by virtue of increasing GDP growth, reducing federal income taxes and capital gains taxes would increase federal government revenue.
Didn't GHW Bush run on Reagan's record in '88? And win?
I keep trying to find some POV where what you say makes sense, Ritmo.
No luck so far.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Or maybe he won't.

What do you think this says about him?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I keep trying to find some POV where what you say makes sense, Ritmo.
No luck so far.


It probably makes sense in the fact that I knew Bush had originated the term "voodoo economics" while you spent an entire day trying to convince anyone here that what he criticized, and later embraced as Republican economic dogma, was never a Republican idea or policy to begin with.

Your age apparently didn't bring with it much wisdom in the way of just settling on some basic, easily discovered facts.

Terry said...

Ritmo -- Do you understand that there are things called 'necessary causes' and other things called 'sufficient causes'?
Because if you don't, trying to explain how profits in the market economy can be high while there is little employment growth is useless.

cubanbob said...

The Clinton economy and what FDR and Truman left Eisenhower with as opposed to what Bush left his successor with.

Ritmo: Lets see Truman took government spending from 24% of GDP and slashed it to 8%. Overnight. If in 2016 the democrat candidate were to promise to do just that and not much more not only would I vote for the candidate and give them money. Clinton? He raised taxes and tried to pass what is now Obamacare. Lost the house and control of the Congress and thanks to Newt governed in large part as a republican. Smartest move he ever made. You mentioned earlier that Hoover was a republican. True but you forgot to mention he was a strange kind of republican, a progressive one. FDR ran to the right of Hoover in 1932. Like a fiscally conservative republican. Then after elected he quadrupled on progressive stupidity using Hoover's RFC as his base. That really turned out well. Sorry to burst your fable.

Then you comment that I and others are are economic illiterates compared to you. Yet the sum of your arguments is that fat cats are greedy and big business doesn't want to invest their cash hoards because they are greedy. Because greedy people just love getting next to nothing on cash instead of grossing 40% by investing in their business. Of course negative government incentives have nothing at all to do with it. You're smarter and wiser when it comes to investment than the people who actually have the money. Lets make you president instead of that rank progressive amateur who currently has the gig.

You call me a Castro hater. True, all intelligent and sensible people hate communist murderers and thieves. What's your excuse?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Because if you don't, trying to explain how profits in the market economy can be high while there is little employment growth is useless.

Well, glad to see you finally gained enough sense to transition from the previous fixation on Bush's description of Republican economic dogma, but you can ("try to") explain as much as you want. I'm not sure what you'd be trying to get at though. How this occurs doesn't matter, politically, as much as the fact that Republicans still think those record profits need to be still higher. Democrats rightly call them on it and say that it's just being used as an excuse against using that revenue to cut debt, instead of the much more problematic source of slashed benefits as a revenue stream.

Terry said...

"later embraced as Republican economic dogma"
How can anyone attack or defend a thing that has no definition? How can something be a dogma if no one knows what it is?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 301   Newer› Newest»