The Dust Bowl

By Lloyd the Idiot

Ken Burns’  The Dust Bowl aired over the last two nights on PBS (yes, I watch PBS, but I still don’t want my taxes paying for it).  It was, not surprising, a compelling documentary as Burns’ films usually are.  Burns portrayed FDR literally as a savior of the downtrodden Dust Bowl farmers and their families, which, again, is not particularly surprising given Burns’ strong Democratic ties.  I have to admit it, though, it did give me a greater appreciation for the safety net we now have –  particularly when you hear the stories of those who otherwise would have starved to death without the New Deal programs. 

As a granchild of one of them, the film also gave me a great apprecation for the ”Okies” who migrated to California.  Although my grandfather often referred to himself as one, I never knew that it was such a perjorative term nor did I know of the mistreatment they received from their fellow Americans.  Californians were not a particularly welcoming bunch in the ’30s and ’40s.


Comments

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Defer to Barbara. I type too fast…

  • Ed Myers says:

    Heads exploding … So much fun to watch.

  • Eric the half a troll says:

    “The only difference is that they will be crowding YOUR doctor’s offices instead of the emergency room”

    Even that would be an improvement from a cost of services perspective.p

  • Eric the half a troll says:

    TDB, do you intend on collecting social security and Medicare benefits when you retire?

  • Elder Berry says:

    If we can come back to the reality-based universe, one important point. The debt did not come from PBS or from Social Security. Social Security still pays for itself, and PBS is a flea on an elephant.

    The debt we have now largely came from two simultaneous wars and from the Bush tax cuts.

    Reform Social Security? Sure: put the payroll tax on all income. (Stop giving billionaires a break from the payroll tax.)

    Fix the debt? Put income tax rates back to where they were under Ronald Reagan.

    And get back to requiring a declaration of war before US troops are used overseas.

    As for “Obamacare”? The CBO keeps insisting it will save us money, and the Congressional Republicans and Fox keep trying to bury that news. Yes, there may be some relalignment of health care costs. Barbara Munsey I’d bet that I pay more right now for my individual insurance than you will pay for your whole family even if your costs rise. I

    See I pay more right now as a small business employee than I paid formerly as a large business employee. Yet I am the same person with the same health conditions. So what sense does that make? The exchanges should help fix that problem. It is that problem as well as the problem of uninsurability and preexisting conditions that Obamacare is a partial solution to (the only solution that has managed to pass our lobbyist-owned Congress so far). It does not help our economy long-term to have people not get medical care, or to use an emergency room for primary care.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    eb, glad to hear you don’t take even yourself too seriously.

    However, when failing to call out excess on the side you tend to agree with, and using excess to argue with those you don’t, it makes me tend to lump you in with the less temperate of your anonymous brethren and sistren.

    Look at bend’s characterization of TDP’s overall health: basic redneck beer guzzling porkrind chompin heart attack and a stroke to boot headed any minute now to an emergency room near your checkbook.

    In reality (as opposed to elderberry’s tired sniff “reality based”, which exists primarily in the yearnings for control of most dissatisfied perpetual adolescents), TDP may be as lean and mean as bend himself, in great condition with all of his own costs and risks prepared for and under control.

    It makes the better projectional rant though, like the pronouncement from aff that since I think PBS merchandizing is probably successful enough to cut the empire away from the government spigot, I am therefore indubitably someone who only watches violence on pay per view.

    One dimensional, peevish, and…stupid.

    elderberry hon, of course BY THEMSELVES things like PBS don’t break the bank, but, as with any government program, once they become entrenched they are their own continuous drain on the (dwindling) resources of public revenue. They get funded initially because they are “good”, like public art. Who doesn’t like enrichment for children, or beauty (aside from beerguzzlin porkrind swillin cage match watchin mouthbreathin neanderthal thugs, of course. Rilly, in “reality”)?

    And then, like everything else government touches, it becomes an entry in the lobbying bureaucracy of continuing growth in the feelgood.

    They continue in perpetuity, and expand, because if one group’s art or enrichment is publicly subsidized, then, to be fair, EVERY group’s must be, right? That’s how we got so much crap in public education that kids are no longer really learning much of anything but the politics of the moment.

    SS et al are unsustainable in their present form, as are most government entitlements–the Ponzi scheme they have become break down sooner or later, for the same reasons: it is a “good” to start with, it grows, it falters, it becomes part of the merrygoround of funding swapped hither and yon from that same dwindling pot of public resource, and one day it will crash as the “reality based” continue to blame everything but the kitchen sink for it not working right, and demanding more programs to “fix” it.

    Big or small, I think we really need to evaluate RATIONALLY what government should and should not be doing. And a lot of wishful thinking about what “everybody needs” has to go on the block along with an overhaul of the major programs.

    Again, the people who hate big box in everything but government are not living in reality, but in coulda/shoulda/woulda land. And, as with the other big crusade many of the same pontificators preach, “sustainability”, their model for government funded everything is itself truly unsustainable.

  • David says:

    This seems as good a place as any to ask: What, if anything, do those self-identifying as conservatives here get out of the following article?

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/revenge-of-the-reality-based-community/

  • Cato the Elder says:

    “This seems as good a place as any to ask: What, if anything, do those self-identifying as conservatives here get out of the following article?”

    I get a very lengthy article by an author attempting to pimp his latest book. Pretty standard inside the beltway stuff, actually.

    Any serious discussion of how we got ourselves into such a sorry economic state that doesn’t include the damaging effects of irresponsible monetary policy is fundamentally dishonest at worst, or stupid at best. If it makes you feel better, you can blame Bush. Or Reagan. Or Clinton. Or all of the above, but the truth is that this has been going on for the better part of the past 50 years.

    And so we continue to slouch toward Armageddon.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “Big or small, I think we really need to evaluate RATIONALLY what government should and should not be doing. And a lot of wishful thinking about what “everybody needs” has to go on the block along with an overhaul of the major programs.”

    Ultimately, when all of the vitriol gets boiled out of the argument, you have to deal with several different — and very rational — approaches to sustaining a society (if we all agree society is a good thing).

    The tension between the common good and individualism will always be present in how we govern ourselves because it’s a tension that was present at our founding. The tension is written into our founding documents.

    It’s not “solvable”. There is no state of completion to our society. It’s about creating a more perfect union — not a finished perfect union.

    Our system moves slowly (Barbara, your grandmother was probably not allowed to vote when she was young), but it does adjust to changing conditions. It’s principled, but not rigid.

    It’s conservative.

    The challenge for those in leadership is to rise above the salesmanship and extreme voices. Embrace, acknowledge and understand that this tension is healthy and a key part of shaping any good policy. Ideologues have their place in the discussion, the vitriolic ones too. But those charged with policy-making will only see our society shaped — for our present and for our future — in a more perfect way if they hold in regard the tension between our general welfare and the blessings of individual liberty.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “This seems as good a place as any to ask: What, if anything, do those self-identifying as conservatives here get out of the following article?”

    If the right shuts down its dissenters, it’s a less healthy intellectual place, which makes our county a less healthy intellectual place.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “Look at bend’s characterization of TDP’s overall health: basic redneck beer guzzling porkrind chompin heart attack and a stroke to boot headed any minute now to an emergency room near your checkbook.”

    I think Ben was going hypothetical there, no?

  • EB, I apologize for mistaking you for Mr. Dover when he characterized me as some type of Fairfield County red neck with no insurance.

    Eric, even if I intended to collect SS and MC benefits I have never planned on it because I always knew that due to the trajectory we have been on the past thirty years those benefits would either not exist at all by the time I “retired” or I would not qualify for them no matter how much I paid into them over my lifetime because I have been too successful in the eyes of the masterminds and therefore I need to be punished.

    Between the consequences of Unaffordable Care Act and the merchants of envy pressing for means testing of SS and other benefits as we deal with the bankruptcy of America over the next decade, any benefits I would be qualified to receive would be an insult. Therefore the answer to your question is, “no”, I will not be collecting either.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    re the article, I see better discussion in the commentary, particularly those who note that in the reality of one’s personal life (as opposed to the overused and hence probably headed for an overdue and unmourned grave “reality based” world of government writ large through central planning–”reality based” has become a buzzword for onanists, it seems) financing a good life through ever-increasing debt doesn’t work, for long.

    eb, I understand things move slowly as the wheel turns, and any spot on the rim rises and falls with the turning. If that spot wears through via pressure from an overloaded wagon bed, or brakes left, eventually the wheel breaks, doesn’t it?

    As cato notes, we have a few generations of adding in what seems like a good idea to a majority at the time, and very little of it ever sunsets in terms of spending–it takes on a life and a growing bureaucracy of its own, each little little thing that is just a drop in the bucket (or one more straw on the camel).

    Do you deny we have a spending problem? As Ed pointed out earlier (in snark, but true) none of us individually gets to pick and choose how our contribution to the common pot is spent.

    But when a household goes on financial triage (which is where the government needs to consider itself heading at a run, whether they want to consider it or not), does it begin with “our rent/mortgage is X per month, can we afford that on Y per year?”, or does it begin with “I love going to the gym, it makes me feel so good and it’s healthy, so I’m definitely keeping that, and the organic fruit of the month club is something I just wouldn’t feel the same without!”

    It seems (to me, IMO) that we’re coming to the end of the ability to continue doing things backwards: where a group in power designs the world by committee, makes it law, and then somehow has to make it HAPPEN.

    With more laws to address unintended (with the BEST of intentions) consequences, and more people to administer, monitor, police etc (look ma, JOBS! GOVERMENT jobs!), all of whom are designed into the system backwards as well–what are their benefits and pensions, which we will supply in perpetuity, etc etc.

    The current model is unsustainable–and that’s a buzzword that is rapidly reverting to its original meaning, as opposed to its starring role in yet more central planning.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    p.s.–bend may very well have been going hypothetical. But given the lack of tone inherent in blogging (unless, like elderberry, one drips with it), the hyperbole is remarkably similar to what closed minds on the left crank out as if it were gospel.

    belated ps to said berry: another expense in our household will be my husband’s prescription, for a condition he inherited from his parents–lovely people, although Democrat–which will, as with many such conditions, perhaps worsen with age. Glad that doesn’t affect you–age, that is–and your health is and is expected to be static. Under the old plan, three months of medication was under $100. That will now be $500.

  • Ben Dover says:

    Hey all – I went totally hypothetical.

    I thought you all would have gotten that by virtue of the procedures I referenced (you would never do carotid stenting at the same time you were doing by-pass surgery. And, as much as some people here could clearly benefit from an enema, it isn’t something that you would do gratuitously in a legitimate healthcare operation).

    TDP, in all seriousness, I hope that you are the picture of health in every respect – I was merely asking who would pick up the tab IF YOU WERE a corpulent, chain-smoking, schlep, who didn’t possess health coverage, or the means to pay for health coverage.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Barbara, as we both know, everything big is centrally planned. It’s just who is doing the planning and how accountable they are that is under discussion.

    Now, I’m off for a high colonic!

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    eb, where we may disagree is that I don’t think everything should be “big”.

    Is a monthly pedicure on a par with the electric bill?

    Not in a real household budget, one that is “sustainable”.

    Granted, to the pedicure lobby it’s the biggest thing evah! Should the pedicure lobby be on an equal footing with utilities and a roof? Maybe in the “reality based” world of “fairness”.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “Should the pedicure lobby be on an equal footing with utilities and a roof? Maybe in the “reality based” world of “fairness”.”

    I doubt if their “real world” lobbyist counterparts are equal — whatever they are.

    Does a lobbyist for Metro = lobbyist for a Blackhawk?

    By the way, this notion of equating a government budget (county, state, or Fed) with a household budget makes for really terrible thinking on important matters.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    it’s metaphorical eb. You know, that thing that’s okay when couched in terms of obese redneck beerguzzling tobacco chewing porkrind swilling cagematch pay per viewing RethugliKKKan party hacks. :D

    Actually, the question probably is “should Big Bird’s lobbyist = funding NORAD?”

    And the resounding answer from some of the “reality based” is that Big Bird > NORAD. Very yes! <———This! (H8R! !1111!!!)

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Barbara, there is certainly a distinction between metaphor and hypothetical.

    But you know that.

    When you go off the rails like this, it’s usually the “uncle” sign, so I’ll let you go now.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    yes, I AM crazy too eb. (you forgot to say “blahblahblah”, but the continuing attitude is almost as good)

    What makes you think I’ll let YOU go? :D

  • FedUp says:

    “The debt we have now largely came from… the Bush tax cuts.”

    Man, that George Bush has really run up the national debt and wrecked the economy. Now I hear he wants to extend about 75% of his original tax cuts when they expire at the end of the year… What’s that you say? It’s Obama who wants to do that and not George Bush? Sorry, my bad.

    Well, anyhow, Bush and the Republican Congress already extended his cuts back in 2010… What’s that you say? That was Obama and the Democrat majority Congress? I apologize, again. You see, every time the trillion dollar deficits and the sad state of the economy is mentioned, George Bush’s name pops up. Sometimes I forget he left office 4 years ago!

  • Elder Berry says:

    Barbara Munsey you just can’t help indulging in nasty personal attack language, can you? You ignored and failed to seriously respond to every one of the points I made.

    I haven’t been an adolescent for many years and I’ve owned and operated businesses and worked in big ones and small ones. I resented Mitt Romney telling me about business as if he’d made all his money himself, because he started out on third base and what I have I made myself. Yes, I built that, with the help of others, and I never forget the others,

    I am for a government that does what the US Constitution said it should. I think the arts and public education are important. I think that our military industrial complex is out of control just as Eisenhower said and I think that lack of strict corporate governance and regulation, and the growing wealth gap are threatening our nation from within. I believe in science, I believe religion belongs in church not on the courthouse lawn. I believe that being a nation of immigrants served us for 250 years and I see no reason to stop it now.

    I think that many valuable things can’t be measured in money. I don’t think that a Judeo-Christian orientation always has the only answers to the problems humans face on earth. I think the color of someone’s skin is a silly measure by which to appraise them.

    Social Security has done better than almost any other government program or corporation I can think of at doing what it was designed to do for half a century. If all income was subject to the payroll tax, instead of just the income of mid and lower income folks, then with that alone the program would be good for another 75 years. Tell me why the income of billionaires should escape taxation, and then tell me now exactly how you are going to fund the DoD for another 75 years.

    I used to be a moderate Republican but the party has no moderates left. It has lost its mind and this last election proved it.
    Some of you people know how to think but those of you who have decided not to but to use rhetorical tricks and propaganda methods instead, I feel sorry for you.

  • Elder Berry says:

    Fedup, it’s sad but true and Bush can be gone for another 10 years and it will still be true. He saddled us with this deficit.

    But tell me, how many times has the Republican party accused Obama of raising taxes when it is not true?

    They’re still doing it. Obama wants to preserve current tax rates for the middle class in order to promote economic recovery. (The middle class and the poor spend the money they have. ) The rich have profited significantly during the downturn and therefore can better afford to contribute more to national needs. If the wealth gap had not widened so much in the last 20 years Obama might have looked at it differently. The Republicans seem to be ignoring everything that has happened to the middle class and are holding them ransom.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    elderberry, it would appear that I did respond to your points, or you wouldn’t be defending them.

    As for nasty personal attack, you may have a bit of mote and beam going on there, but that can be understandable if you are convinced that your personal “reality” is universal.

    (Still wondering, 14 or 84?)

  • Elder, you say “I am for a government that does what the US Constitution said it should.”

    Could you please show me where in the US Constitution it says we should be funding “arts and public education”?

    Next, you claim, “Fedup, it’s sad but true and Bush can be gone for another 10 years and it will still be true. He saddled us with this deficit.”

    Last time I checked it was Obama who added the last 6 trillion to the deficit by spending 1.5 trillion per year we did not have. Bush’s last deficit was less than a third that. Even King Obama had raised taxes to the Clinton rates the moment he assumed office and the economy did NOT completely tank for good, at best it would have reduced his deficit spending to “only” 1.4 trillion per year for a total of 5.6 trillion. That you can somehow make the claim that this is still Bush’s fault is truly laughable, but that’s the nice thing about being on the left… you never take responsibility for anything and it is always somebody else’s fault.

    Over the next four years you will see the taxes on the hated productive sector increased by 100 billion per year and the increases in spending will continue unabated, rising by at least double that per year, meaning after another four years with Obama and Reid in charge the deficit will increase by another 6.4 trillion… yet you will still be out there blaming it all on Bush.

    You claim you “haven’t been an adolescent for many years”, but if that is not the viewpoint of an adolescent, always blaming others for your own actions, I don’t know what could be.

  • Elder Berry says:

    Age-ist too, BM?

    Sad. You’re just sad.

    TBP, Harry Reid may well go ahead and get rid of the Republicans’ secret weapon the silent filibuster and if he does there may actually be some legislating done that the Republicans will have to answer to. How does saying I haven’t been an adolescent in a long time blame anyone else for anything. You make no sense. None.

    Do you read The American Conservative, BM or TBP? Do you know Bruce Bartlett at all? Prominent early conservative with Goldwater, Reagan, Cato, etc.

    ************
    From Bartlett’s article in TAC:

    “I’m at ground zero in the saga of Republicans closing their eyes to any facts or evidence that conflict with their dogma. Rather than listen to me, they threw me under a bus.

    “For more than 30 years, I was very comfortable within the conservative wing of the Republican Party. [I worked for or with: Goldwater, Nixon, Young Republicans (during Vietnam), Ron Paul in 1976, Jack Kemp, supply-side economists, Jude Wanniski, Heritage Fdn, Reagan's White House, Gary Bauer, James Baker, Nick Brady, Glenn Hubbard, Cato Institute and NCPA; and wrote conservative editorials for: WSJ, Washington (Moonie) Times, Investor's Business Daily, NY Sun, etc.]

    “In November 2003, I had an intellectual crisis… The [2004] article is best remembered for his quote from an anonymous White House official dismissing critics like me for being “the reality-based community.” … I was banned from Fox News… extended throughout Rupert Murdoch’s empire. After careful research [in 2007-08], I came to the annoying conclusion that Keynes had been 100% right in the 1930s. Previously, I had thought the opposite. … I had previously viewed Krugman as an intellectual enemy and attacked him… For the record, no one has been more correct in his analysis and prescriptions for the economy’s problems than Paul Krugman. The blind hatred for him on the right simply pushed me further away from my old allies and comrades.

    “The final line for me to cross in complete alienation from the right was my recognition that Obama is not a leftist. In fact, he’s barely a liberal—and only because the political spectrum has moved so far to the right that moderate Republicans from the past are now considered hardcore leftists by right-wing standards today.”
    ********

    Me, BM,TDP, I’m with Bruce and Paul Krugman. Obama is barely a liberal and the middle class seems to have gotten tired of Republican mudslinging.

  • Elder,

    Talk about not making any sense:

    “Harry Reid may well go ahead and get rid of the Republicans’ secret weapon the silent filibuster and if he does there may actually be some legislating done that the Republicans will have to answer to.”

    If Mr. Reid eliminates the filibuster and the Democrats get everything they want with a simple majority vote… higher taxes, more spending, unmanageable debt and a sustained and unrecoverable economic depression, why would the Republicans have to answer for the bad policies they voted against?

    Right now the Democrats in the Senate blame Republicans if they don’t get their sixty votes and claim that if they had only been able to get the bills through without Republican input, support or amendment all their legislation would have solved all our problems, thus with a simple majority they would have no more excuses. I think Reid should just go ahead and do it so he and Obama can take ownership of the entire disaster. After all, that’s how he got the Unaffordable Care Act rammed through, so if lawlessness was justified in that case I would think even more lawlessness would be acceptable here as well.

    Now, regarding your remark, “How does saying I haven’t been an adolescent in a long time blame anyone else for anything. You make no sense. None.”

    It is obvious that you cannot comprehend what you were reading, and since you are probably the only person who did not get it, why don’t you try again:

    “You claim you ‘haven’t been an adolescent for many years’, but if that is not the viewpoint of an adolescent, always blaming others for your own actions, I don’t know what could be.”

    Translation – You are still an adolescent.

  • Smith says:

    How about that Dust Bowl!!!!

    I swear I could write the posts for most of you right wing loons before you even do.

    Its all a bunch of paranoid boilerplate about King Obama and other BS.

    Nothing to see from 2000-2008. Tax cuts fix everything. Tax cuts actually create a ton of debt. You guys need a life.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    I guess tax cuts DO “create a ton of debt” if you not only keep spending on things that you probably shouldn’t be, but add new ones by the day.

    or, in the “nothing-to-see-here/the-science-is-settled” non-hypothetically unacceptable metaphor model, if your hours are cut and your salary goes down, it DOES mean you have to resubscribe to the organic Fruit of the Month club by credit, and default to the spa, and take out a new card to charge the time share before they find out how deep in debt you already are.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    elderberry, I would venture we’re about the same age, so no ageist card to play, but nice try on the continued attack pigeonholing.

    Gosh, there’s a one-word solution for everything! (if only we’re all smart enough to learn how to chant them with our eyes closed in the rapture of the smug!) :D

  • edmundburkenator says:

    “I guess tax cuts DO “create a ton of debt” if you not only keep spending on things that you probably shouldn’t be, but add new ones by the day…”

    Let’s start a list!

    Iraq War
    Afghanistan War
    Drug War
    Prescription Drug Benefit

    Here’s a chart on the debt:
    http://www.offthechartsblog.org/what%E2%80%99s-driving-projected-debt/

    There’s probably one for the deficit too…

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    That’s a good idea, eb.

    Let’s add:

    Green energy speculation to campaign bundlers
    Auto bailout to unions
    Money for life to federal legislators
    Ethanol subsidies
    Pigford

    Others should contribute too! This could get very interesting.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    TARP
    Highways funding
    Metro
    Infrastructure (bridges and other stuff that should be private)
    VA hospitals (let’s privatize!)
    Sesame Street
    The guy that ushers in the President at the SOTU address
    Smithsonian crap
    ABORTIONS!

    I’m forgetting a big one here… what is it…?

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    “Eric, even if I intended to collect SS and MC benefits I have never planned on it because I always knew…”

    All well and good but you did not answer the question. When handed a check of benefits by the federal government will you endorse it or send it back?

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    Evil public schools, EB! Come on get with the program. I am sure Barb agrees with that one!!

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    BTW, TDP, were you or your parents the recipient of a “free” public school education? Just curious.

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    Oil and gas subsidies

    Housing development subsidies

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    “Smithsonian crap”

    Think of the MUD that could go up on THAT prime real estate, eh? Must have Barb’s friends drooling at the thought.

  • FedUp says:

    “Tax cuts actually create a ton of debt.”

    So does a bad economy and policies that have actually hindered a real recovery. Much lower than normal tax receipts in this Obama economy, with unemployment at 8%, is the real reason the deficit is over a trillion dollars, not the Bush tax cuts. Not sure if you really understand that, Smith. Do take a look at the graph Edmund provided and you will see that the debt was at manageable levels during the Bush years, with the 2 wars and the tax cuts.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    FedUp, Bush lit the fuse to a slowly exploding bomb.

    Yeah, Obama (using that clearly nutty Keynesian approach to that Great Recession thing) added stimulus to get us to positive growth, which is now actually reducing some of the debt.

    Over the next months we’ll get a debt deal. Then we’ll get tax reform.

  • NateDogg614 says:

    “Over the next months we’ll get a debt deal. Then we’ll get tax reform.”

    And then everything will be hunky dory and unicorns will be s***ting rainbow sherbert. Right? ;)

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Eric, you’re projecting straw women again.

    Go sniff your wine glass.

  • Ben Dover says:

    “or, in the “nothing-to-see-here/the-science-is-settled” non-hypothetically unacceptable metaphor model, if your hours are cut and your salary goes down, it DOES mean you have to resubscribe to the organic Fruit of the Month club by credit, and default to the spa, and take out a new card to charge the time share before they find out how deep in debt you already are.”

    Barbara, I took a sniff of the above prose. Then, I farted.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Nate, we all know that unicorns are the domain of the right.

    Just check the polling.

    By the way, you have some sherbert on your shirt from November 5.

  • FedUp says:

    “added stimulus to get us to positive growth…”

    Yeah, that stimulus package sure did the trick and there is overwhelming proof, right? I think everyone would agree that it was well worth it at $160k per job supposedly created!

    “…is actually reducing some of the debt.”

    Don’t you mean reducing the deficit? Getting it down to $1.1 trillion in 4 years was a real accomplishment. First we have to turn the deficit into a surplus before we can even think about reducing the national debt. I do like your optimism that a deal will be cut on the debt and tax reform.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Yeah, that stimulus package sure did the trick and there is overwhelming proof, right?

    Well, there is the math.

  • FedUp says:

    “Well, there is the math.”

    Yes, and the Dems sure are good at using creative math and cherry-picking stats!

  • NateDogg614 says:

    “By the way, you have some sherbert on your shirt from November 5.”

    Why, what happened on Monday November 5th, the day before the election?

    If you’re going to toss around insults, at least get the date right!

  • Eric the 1/2 Troll says:

    No straw person, Barb, just playing your game. Should we continue to subsidize the Smithsonian or privatize it and make it pay for itself? The “Shell Oil Museum of Natural History”. The possibilities are ENDLESS!!

Leave Comment