Althouse: "Actually, I heard from a close friend of Harry Reid’s that Obama flunked Econ 101 three times at Columbia."

August 17, 2012

"Actually, I heard from a close friend of Harry Reid’s that Obama flunked Econ 101 three times at Columbia."

"With such significant rumors out there, the burden should be on Obama to release his transcripts and disprove this serious charge."

238 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 238 of 238

Carnifex said...: Ahhh!! Smell that? You know what that is? It's the smell of vindication. It's the smell of Zero and the leftist all praising how great the "Arab Spring" was/is for democracy, and the middle east. It is also the smell of the victims of crucufiction by the Muslim Brohterhood of people who want to practice their own religion, or protest about the ditatorship that the Arab Spring fostedrs.

Zero and the left. Nazi's, Romans, or just enablers.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/arab-spring-run-amok-brotherhood-starts-crucifixions/; 8/17/12, 10:46 PM
Cedarford said...: Penny - I let most mud cast at me slide, but feel it is helpful to sometimes point out a miscast missile, that should be directed at others.

I will go in the mud, but I rarely if ever start the personal ad hominems - (Freder was one big exception when he said precious terrorist rights mattered more than thousands or even millions of dead Americans); 8/17/12, 10:54 PM
DADvocate said...: I assume he never passed.; 8/17/12, 10:56 PM
Carnifex said...: Labor Deprtment released today that unemployment rates rose in 44 states in July. In fell in 2 states, and remained static in 4. The other 7 were not mentioned. More "Hope and Change" please. It's so good for the economy.; 8/17/12, 10:57 PM
Carnifex said...: This just in, the Zero campaign is vowing to release new and damning video of Paul Ryan, and Mitt Romney, in a turkish ba... SQUIRREL!!!; 8/17/12, 11:02 PM
Eric said...: Current unemployment rate according to the Obama administration: 8.2%

Hah! I like the way you put that.; 8/17/12, 11:14 PM
Penny said...: Used to be that "old people" put their money in bonds or CD's.

Low returns, but just enough to keep their noses above the water line.

Now?

It just isn't going to go down that way.

Geezers who saved a dime or two are being forced into the stock market or deeper into their mattress cache.

It's clearly "unspoken" public policy, driven by demographics, meaning the sheer HUGE number of baby boomers.

Boomers without guaranteed public pensions are being FORCED into the stock market to gamble their life savings in hopes of keeping their noses above the waterline.

And on the other hand ...

Teachers, firemen, cops, and a thousand and one other government workers, state and federal, are somehow able to add up EXACTLY how much money they will get when they retire.; 8/17/12, 11:15 PM
Penny said...: Some say, "Tax the rich!"

What if we started extra-taxing the "secure"!; 8/17/12, 11:33 PM
Penny said...: Hey.

Just a thought.; 8/17/12, 11:36 PM
Penny said...: C4?

"Miscast missile"?

Haha

Giving me way too much penis power there, honey.

Or are you suggesting I am somehow miscast as a woman?; 8/17/12, 11:54 PM
Penny said...: Need I remind you bout our favorite ice scream man, Mr.Softee?; 8/17/12, 11:56 PM
Gary Rosen said...: " I rarely if ever start the personal ad hominems "

Except for the overwhelming majority of your posts that include gratuitous off-topic cheap shots at Jews.

[from C-fudd blogger profile] "Happy 2nd gen E. European. 2 Grad degrees, Phi Beta Kappa. IQ between feral dogs level and 150 depending on day. Ex-military officer. Physicist and energy consultant. Married, two pain in ass daughters."

Rest assured every statement in here is a lie. It is extremely unlikely this repulsive misogynist ever had a date with a woman he didn't pay for (hence his defense of the SS guys caught with hookers). And he once clamied he had a 15-year-old *son*. This compulsive liar just makes up whatever shit he thinks is convenient to him at the moment.; 8/17/12, 11:59 PM
Penny said...: Look.

I don't ad hom.

But once in a while... I feel obliged to do a hearty homina homina!; 8/18/12, 12:04 AM
Gary Rosen said...: Penny, here is one of C-fudd's greatest shits (scroll down to #51):

http://minx.cc/?post=66320; 8/18/12, 12:04 AM
Penny said...: So did I spell that right?

I know about hominy grits, but homina homina?

Not so much.; 8/18/12, 12:06 AM
Penny said...: Gary, thanks for the snapshot.

Not the best pic of C4...for sure!; 8/18/12, 12:09 AM
Penny said...: Here's the thing.

Sometimes he is BRILLIANT, and I am personally willing to use my time to separate his wheat from his chaff.

To each their own however.; 8/18/12, 12:15 AM
Gary Rosen said...: "Not the best pic of C4...for sure!"

It's a hell of a lot more realistic than that crap in his "profile".; 8/18/12, 12:15 AM
Synova said...: Lets create a decision tree of hypotheticals, why don't we?

Lets suppose, hypothetically, that the ideas that Reagan had about "trickle down" are entirely without any merit at all.

Lets suppose, hypothetically, that the reason things seemed to get better was simply that Reagan made us believe it.

So lets suppose that a tax break on capital (even though I'm pretty sure the nobel economist someone linked to earlier insisted this was necessary, but whatev, I was skimming) suppose that a tax break on capital does nothing at all.

Okay, that's one branch of the decision tree.

Now lets suppose another branch where we make sure that the "rich" don't get a break on capital.

Does it solve our economic problems? Does it even help our economic problems if it doesn't solve them? Does even Obama claim it will solve our problems?

Or is it just class warfare? Is it about making people believe that something "fair" has happened, so that the rich can be miserable with the rest of us?

I figure that everyone should have "skin in the game" and it's profoundly troubling that so many working people pay no income tax at all. There should at least be a token, a *buy in*, for anyone who works in order to make them conceptually equal owner/citizens. And the tax code should be as simple as possible instead of geared toward those who can afford professionals to make sure they don't get screwed. And sure, rich people should pay more. Sure they should.

But common sense says that, at some point, a person has enough money... and if they're punished for having more than that, they'll be *comfortable* with enough money and they will *rest*.

And we really don't want them to.

If taxing the rich in order to make us feel better does not have a substantive and verifiable real world economic benefit, then I'd rather take a chance, a gamble, that a friendly business and investment environment will encourage both business and investment and that some of that will "trickle down" to me.

Because the other branch of the decision tree gives me nothing other than spiteful revenge. Because of *fairness*.

On the one hand... nothing, and more people share the misery.

On the other hand... maybe nothing, maybe something, but I don't get to hate rich people.; 8/18/12, 12:17 AM
Gary Rosen said...: "Sometimes he is BRILLIANT"

Not really. He is somewhat skilled at projecting a "know-it-all" attitude, which is punctured every time someone comes along who actually knows something about the subject Fudd is yammering about. Think of the old saw "Everything in the newspaper you read is true except for those things you have personal knowledge of". IOW C-fudd sounds very knowledgable unless you have *actual* knowledge of the topic, in which case he is usually revealed as a lying fraud.; 8/18/12, 12:19 AM
Penny said...: Gary, here's how I see it.

If his profile is bogus? That must matter to him a helluva lot more than it does to me.

He has his "reasons, and I am just gonna go with that.

We "talk" here.

And when C4 talks, I listen.

Sometimes it's shit.

But sometimes it's like BINGO and BULLSEYE all in one.; 8/18/12, 12:27 AM
Penny said...: Course, I've always been partial to dogs and cows and bulls and ... stuff.

So?

What can I say?

Farm girl at heart.; 8/18/12, 12:39 AM
Penny said...: That said, this milk maiden is out for tonight.

Pleasant dreams all.; 8/18/12, 12:41 AM
Revenant said...: Averages are funny things.

It serves to illustrate that Reagan's Presidency wasn't particularly a time of economic bliss. We had three terrible years followed by five good ones. What people liked about Reagan was that he turned things around, not that he presided over nothing but good times.

Now Clinton, on the other hand, had nothing but good economic times... and still upped the debt by over a trillion bucks.

The other thing people forget about Reagan is that he DID raise taxes to try to balance the budget. Specifically, he negotiated a deal -- tax increases for spending cuts. Unsurprisingly, the spending cuts never materialized. They never do. :); 8/18/12, 1:12 AM
Revenant said...: The other thing that makes the whole "Obama HAS to run huge deficits, times are tough" is that his deficits are over eight percent of GDP.

During the Great Depression, under FDR, government deficits maxed out at around five and a half percent of GDP. Oh, and at its very largest the government FDR's Depression-era government was still a lot smaller than ours is today. In fact, to get our government DOWN to where FDR's was, we'd have to slash our spending by well over half.

You know... "austerity". :); 8/18/12, 1:17 AM
Carnifex said...: @Revenant

Until someone in DC actually has the balls to point out democrats are liars for saying reductions in spending rates are cuts, that will never happen. I'm looking at you specifically Snitch McConnel(my senior senator I'm embaressed to admit), John Weepy Boehner, John Maverick*snort* McCain, et al.; 8/18/12, 1:46 AM
bagoh20 said...: I don't know about all the rest of them , but this job creator would definitely have hired more people last year if the state and federal government didn't take 43 cents of every dollar my company makes in profit, and my employees would have made more money. So, yes, lower taxes do create more jobs, and yes, it trickles down. It may not in all cases, but most small business owners - where most people are employed - act similarly.

In fact, the size of my tax bill was the only reason, I didn't invest in more equipment and pay the bigger bonuses that I had planned this year, and I was not going to go in debt to do it. There simply was not enough cash to go around after the 4 biggest checks my company wrote last year were all to cover quarterly taxes.

That money was sent to people who then used it very poorly (Solyndra), and took it out of the hands of a business that would have used it to create long term, skill training, tax paying jobs as it has a long record of doing.

You can find whatever case you want proven by some study or statistic, but it seems illogical, and contrary to my experience that trickle down and job creation is helped by higher taxes.; 8/18/12, 1:52 AM
Toad Trend said...: The U6 number that takes into account those unemployed BUT NO LONGER COUNTED OR LOOKING BECAUSE THEY ARE BEYOND 99 WEEKS is much, much higher than the joke figure cited here and elsewhere by lying liberals.

The real unemployment number is approaching 20%...and it is clear that liberals are unserious about jobs. Why else would they tout and promote the douchebaggery of those that say a $3000 or $5000 'tax credit' is justification to hire an employee regardless of whether or not there is real work to be completed???

Flunking Econ 101 is a resume' enhancer for leftists.; 8/18/12, 7:19 AM
Aridog said...: @furious__a said:

In fairness, the House has voted out budgets each year since Republicans resumed the majority ...

As courteously as I can say it; if appropriations are not passed by both houses, there is no budget.

No one has answered my question yet: What if Congress refused to pass Continuing Resolutions?

Another question: Why is it that Congress can pass CR's, but not budgets?

We know they haven't passed a budget for 4 years and do not intend to for the 5th. Budgets are for accountability, CR's are the opposite. I am pretty confident of that as I have been an expenditure "Authorizing Official" as a "Fed."

Who would blink first if, this time, for 2013, the House refused to pass CR's?

I find this all the more amusing to me because the debate is entirely over money that is not there, and will not be there, in either case.; 8/18/12, 8:38 AM
Brian Brown said...: 1. Disproven by Clinton jacking up rates on the rich (or in right wing republican language - Our Beloved Jobs Creators (TM) )Yet creating 24.5 million jobs during his Presidency.

Except that isn't what happened at all.

Clinton cut capital gains taxes.

Clinton scaled back government spending.

Carry on with the meme.; 8/18/12, 11:13 AM
Brian Brown said...: Cedarford said...

2. Disproven by Dubya and Obama cutting taxes on the rich. 12 years of tax cuts, trillions in new deficits, growing concentration of wealth in the hands of the 1%, shrinking middle class...and ZERO private sector jobs created in those 12 years.

Except for the fact that taxes went down on the middle class more than "the rich"

And you screaming ZERO PRIVATE SECTOR JOBs doesn't make it an actual fact.

Nor does what you posted "disprove" what happened under Reagan.; 8/18/12, 11:15 AM
Brian Brown said...: Revenant said...

I realize Jay vs. Cedarford has all the intellectual rigor of a pro wrestling feud,

Nobody is sitting here thinking your comments are "intellectual" pal.; 8/18/12, 11:17 AM
Eric said...: What if Congress refused to pass Continuing Resolutions?

Then no money can be collected or spent. No federal taxes. Social Security checks don't get paid, Medicare bills don't get paid, government employees (including military) go home. Etc.

Of course it's an impossible thing, politically.; 8/18/12, 1:32 PM
Aridog said...: Eric said...

Quoting me..."What if Congress refused to pass Continuing Resolutions?"

Then no money can be collected or spent. No federal taxes. Social Security checks don't get paid, Medicare bills don't get paid, government employees (including military) go home. Etc.

Thank you very much for the response. It is scenario I doubt many people consider, but it has happened before for short periods.

However, federal taxes are still collected and social security still gets paid ...e.g., it is a technically pre-funded entitlement that the Treasury IOU's come due for bi-weekly IIRC...taken from current tax revenues as they come in.

Other "entitlements" such as SNAP/EBT cards, and the like, would be suspended....the various "Farm Bills" as spot appropriations do NOT have any emergency or pre-paid precedence ... e.g., adios EBT's for a while.

However, where you are correct is that the POTUS/Executive Branch could opt to ignore it's obligations under emergencies and shut everything down, literally everything. So you're prediction is worst case possible.

To my knowledge that has never happened (yet)and agencies and positions determined to be "emergency essential" continue to work, with regular pay only. As "Emergency Essential" you can be deployed anywhere at any time if the powers that be decide it. It is not a category that is determined in an emergency...it is a designation written in to a position description upon hire or enlistment.

Technically, military employees, active duty or civilian, can be directed to work with out pay if necessary, and without overtime pay as well, ... that is in the small print of the documents you sign to gain that employment.

The last time we had a Congressional CR refusal, under Clinton I believe, my job was designated "emergency essential" as were FBI, Secret Service, ATF, etc. and we worked as if nothing had happened.

What irked me was that after some three weeks of unpaid leave for those not working, the stay-at-homes got paid in full retroactively. Hell of a deal, whot? :-); 8/18/12, 2:46 PM
Unknown said...: I heard that Glenn Reynolds has a little pecker.; 8/18/12, 4:06 PM
XRay said...: Little it may be, Jared. But no matter how small it is, it is still considerably larger than yours.; 8/18/12, 10:39 PM
XRay said...: Oh my goodness, I forgot your name.

Sorry Jake.; 8/18/12, 10:42 PM
PianoLessons said...: My only concern is that he never even went to college at all and that these academic institutions are hanging onto to falsified records of his attendance to save their academic souls (which we all know are in great jeopardy just by definition); 8/20/12, 2:39 AM