OK, I’ll admit it. At times I’m quite amused by Breitbart sticking it to the lefties, sort of like a modern day Lee Atwater. My amusement notwithstanding, this doesn’t make him any less of an asshole, he just happens to be our asshole, if you know what I mean.
This time he’s gone too far, and it really isn’t amusing at all. By now most of you have heard the tale of one Shirley Sherrod, who up until yesterday was USDA’s Georgia Director of Rural Development. Breitbart did a little hatchet job on Ms. Sherrod earlier in the week, which resulted in her forced resignation of yesterday. Breitbart posted a highly edited video clip in which Sherrod is giving a speech at an NAACP banquet and relates a story where she recounts an instance where she may have discriminated against a white farmer. Basically, it’s (well deserved) hit piece on the NAACP (more on the well deserved part later). Here’s the language that caused the uproar:
“The first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm. He took a long time talking but he was trying to show me he was superior to me — I knew what he was doing. But he had to come to me for help. What he didn’t know, while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me, was I was trying to decide just how much I was going to give him. I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland, and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land. So, I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough so that when he — I assumed that the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me; either that or the Georgia Department of Agriculture — and he needed to go back and report that I did try to help him. So I took him to a white lawyer that we had — that had attended some of the training that we had provided ’cause Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farmer, so I figured if I’d take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”
So, after seeing this, everyone starts screaming RACISTRACISTRACIST™ at the top of their lungs, Ben Jealous (who, incidentally, had the entire unedited footage) of the NAACP condemns her, and Vilsak has her fired. But wait, there’s more (not that Breitbart is going to show you this). She concludes her speech as follows:
“I couldn’t say 45 years ago, I couldn’t stand here and say what I’m saying — what I will say to you tonight. Like I told, God helped me to see that its not just about black people, it’s about poor people. And I’ve come a long way. I knew that I couldn’t live with hate, you know. As my mother has said to so many, if we had tried to live with hate in our hearts, we’d probably be dead now. But I’ve come to realize that we have to work together and — you know, it’s sad that we don’t have a room full of white and blacks here tonight ’cause we have to overcome the divisions that we have. We have to get to the point as Tony Morrison said race exists but it doesn’t matter. We have to work just as hard — I know it’s — you know, that division is still here, but our communities are not going to thrive — you know, our children won’t have the communities that they need to be able to stay in and live in and have a good life if we can’t figure this out, you all. White people, black people, Hispanic people, we all have to do our part to make our communities a safe place, a healthy place, a good environment.”
Got all that? Basically, the woman was admitting her own prejudices and describing a life-changing experience where she discovered that it’s not all about skin color. She was admitting an error. In essence she said “I was wrong.” How often do we hear that?
The quick reaction from the NAACP was, I think, quite instructive in the sense that it demonstrates that they’re far less about protecting African American interests and far more about being tools of the Democrat machine as the administration had already decided to throw the woman under the bus. Plus, Ben had the entire tape so if he’d just bothered to watch it he’d have seen a lady with the huevos to stand in front of a crowd, confess to bigotry and admit she was wrong. Also, never mind the fact that she saved that farm and the farmer and his wife consider her a “friend for life.”
Assholes abound in this story, starting with Breitbart. Ben Jealous says he got “snookered.” Gee Ben, ya think? In fact, you got snookered twice, once by Breitbart and once by the administration. You had the entire tape, but never bothered to look at it since you already had your marching orders from the West Wing. That makes you an even bigger asshole than Breitbart, and I didn’t consider that possible…
Embedded is the unedited version of the video.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.tooconservative.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
Jul 21st by Cato the Elder
I had heard that Breitbart didn’t have the full video when he went to press with this. Have we seen confirmation that he did have it and edited it himself?
Hilarious Cato!
Can we please avoid using foul language in blogs, and especially in blog titles?
Good post Cato.
.
Let’s not neglect Fox’s role in this either.
.
Ric, you did see that Breitbart has indicated he thinks the old white farmer that was interviewed on CNN could have been a plant. The guy is nuts.
.
Calling out idiots on both sides of the political circus is the Lord’s work.
I agree 100% Cato.
Watch out, Cato, Willie and the Ferris robots will be coming down hard on you!
I’d like to see both Breitbart’s career ended and Vilsack fired. I can’t believe such a touching story was twisted into this!
.
Oh, and also, what the plots of famous movies and books would be after editing by Andrew Breitbart: http://twitter.com/search?q=%23ifandrewbreitbarteditedit
.
Have fun. My favorite is the one for “Mad Max”.
Breitmart may or may not have had the full tape. Here is an interesting account:
http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2010/07/21/breitbart-goes-fishing-for-minnows-and-brilliantly-bags-the-big-fish/
More to the point, it shows just how much the Democrats and the left take the black vote for granted. Imagine if a Republican administration had fired a black woman like that. No amount of apologizing would be sufficient!
I agree that this is the kind of incident in which everyone gets hurt, and certainly Ms. Sherrod did not deserve to have any of this happen to her. But this is also an instructive story: How do you know when to forgive?
Maybe you all should do a little more digging into Ms. Sherrod and her husband. I think you all have gone a little soft in the head – keep looking and you’ll know what I mean…..
I keep hearing rumors that there’s more to come on this. I’m not sure, but it seems like that is going around.
Anyway on face value I agree there’s lots of blame to go around here. However, the biggest issue to me is the fact that the NAACP and the media on the laft started this whole thing with the calls of “racism” against the Tea Party. The First Lady even got into the act a bit last week. That’s what generated this story and while Brietbart at least did a poor job of investigating before he posted, he underscores the fact in doing it that the NAACP and the Liberal media have done far worse on more flimsy evidence than what Brietbart did.
Finally, while the NAACP and the Obama regime seem intent on declaring sainthood on this woman and begging her to come back, I still have some concerns. I’m happy to hear that she had a heartfelt change in her onetime racist attitudes, and I’m all for redemption, however it’s still a fact that in the speech earlier this year, as a federal official, she said the following:
“Well, working with him made me see that it’s really about those who have versus those who don’t, you know… …And it made me realize then that I needed to work to help poor people — those who don’t have access the way others have.”
Helping poor people is a noble calling, but as a federal official she needs to treat all citizens the same. Here she is clearly stating publicly her belief that there’s a patent unfairness in our country and that as a federal official she believes “it’s really about”, you got it… class warfare, the haves vs. the have-nots. That’s not a way to encourage harmony in a free society.
also…
“And you’ve heard of a lot of layoffs. Have you heard of anybody in the federal government losing their job? That’s all that I need to say, okay? ”
Perfect example of the kind of attitude we DO NOT need in our federal officials!
Most certainly they all owe this woman an apology, but does she deserve her job back? They may have fired her for the wrong reasons, but I would not be comfortable in her keeping her federal job when she’s publicly espousing these kinds of views.
http://www.allamericanblogger.com/2010/07/21/pardon-me-if-i-dont-tuck-my-tail-and-apologize/
RTWNG, you’re copying, word-for-word, what every right wing talker said on radio today. You’ve barely changed a word.
.
Now tell us what a bunch of rugged individualists you are on the right again!
.
As annoying as the intercine warfare on the American left can be at times, I much prefer it to the Bolshevik-like hive-mindedness of the American right.
Oh, and the NAACP resolution was about “some elements” of the teabaggers, mostly about the signs with Obama as a withchdoctor with a bone through his nose, dressed up as a monkey, and so on. The teabaggers in their deranged minds interpreted this as “they’re calling us all, personally, racists”. Which wasn’t true at all.
.
It would be like if back in 2003 the RNC or, I don’t know, FreedomWorks, passed a resolution condemning anarchist elements at anti-Iraq war rallies (and there were some). It wouldn’t mean they’re calling everybody who opposes the war anarchists.
Loudon Lady: How can it possibly be relevant that you and others are aware of some secret negative facts about this woman? This incident appears pretty clear. A bunch of people with access to national media perpetrated a false story that cost a woman her job. Some may have known it was false, some didn’t bother to check whether it was true or false. Isn’t that the totality of what decent people need to know about this incident? What does it matter that Sharrod and/or her husband may have some skeletons in their closet unless they relate directly to this story and would vindicate the apparent wrong-doers here? What kind of mentality would float that sort of counter-story? Especially without specifics?
Keep your pants on NovaScout, I disagree with your premise and think this woman is misguided at best with her cries of “FOX NEWS cost me my job!”
Well, the administration forced her resignation (and has since apologized and given her job back), so ultimately, I suppose you could lay the blame on their skittishness.
.
What do you think cost her her job, LL?
.
I’ve actually written your response out and want to see if you are as predictable as I think you are.
Cato, I don’t think your substitution is going to satisfy Willie!
Willie just needs to free himself /rimshot
Burkenator, please back up your statement about Fox News driving this story. Although I’m not necessarily a Fox defender, I do not think this is entirely true. In fact, some of the mainstream rags were the first ones to run with this story, perhaps in an effort to beat Fox at their own game.
The funny part is that Glenn Beck on Fox News Channel actually defended Ms. Sherrod before all the rest of the video came to light.
.
Now here’s an interesting question: If Ms. Sherrod gave such an inspiring message about bias and forgiveness, why was it not memorable to the NAACP officials who heard it? Maybe their political agenda is more important?
Good link, Joe B.
eb, correct that the administration is the one who canned her. Neither Fox nor Breitbart can do that.
Maybe if the Dem strategy was not so wedded to trying to leverage racism six ways from Sunday for the midterms, they wouldn’t have jumped the gun on Ms. Sherrod–can’t have a woman of color on film saying what appears to be racist things if the script calls for the OTHER side to be all racist, all the time.
Amazing no one stopped to look into this before they attacked her on half the story.
Guess it says something about how they fear Breitbart?
Not Paul:
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/politics/22sherrod.html?_r=1&ref=us
.
It the NYT, so be forewarned. Right wingers will want to clear their browser caches after reading.
.
From the article: “Fox News began its pursuit of Ms. Sherrod in prime time on Monday night on three successive opinion shows that reached at least three million people. Leading off, Mr. O’Reilly asked on his top-rated program, “Is there racism in the Department of Agriculture?” He discussed the tape, plugged Mr. Breitbart’s Web site and demanded that Ms. Sherrod resign immediately.
.
By the time Mr. O’Reilly’s remarks, which were taped in the afternoon, were broadcast, Ms. Sherrod had indeed resigned, a development that Fox’s next host, Mr. Hannity, treated as breaking news at the beginning of his show. He played a short part of what he called the “shocking” video from Mr. Breitbart, and later discussed the development with a panel of guests, mentioning the N.A.A.C.P.’s recent accusations of racism within the conservative Tea Party movement.
.
“It is interesting they just lectured the Tea Party movement last week,” Mr. Hannity said, telegraphing a talking point that would come up repeatedly on other shows.
.
Fox’s 10 p.m. show also covered the resignation as breaking news. Ms. Sherrod later said Fox had not tried to contact her before running the video clip repeatedly on Monday.
.
(A Fox spokeswoman said the O’Reilly program had contacted the Agriculture Department for comment. On Wednesday, Mr. O’Reilly said he owed Ms. Sherrod an apology “for not doing my homework.”)
.
The administration owed her an apology too – and got one.
.
She will likely not get an apology from Breitbart.
RichDem,
I can’t help it if conservative talk show hosts have rational minds. All I can say is when I heard her comments, the racial aspects certainly stood out and that was an issue to me. That part has been clarified and apparently she has had a change of heart. However, the other comments about have’s vs. have-nots and the idea that the federal gov’t should somehow be a job welfare system where you can never get fired (ironic though she said it) were both statements that bothered me tremendously before I ever heard a word about it from anyone else.
Here’s another example:
“There is no difference between us. The only difference is that the folks with money want to stay in power and whether it’s health care or whatever it is, they’ll do what they need to do to keep that power, you know. It’s always about money, y’all.”
Typical Liberal view that we’re all just grabbing for the biggest part of the limited pie, not even an inkling in her mind that economic growth means progress and prosperity for everyone, there is no capped size of the wealth pie…
and… “You know, I haven’t seen such a mean-spirited people as I’ve seen lately over this issue of health care. Some of the racism we thought was buried. Didn’t it surface? Now, we endured eight years of the Bush’s and we didn’t do the stuff these Republicans are doing because you have a black President.”
First off, she needs to check her recent history to see plenty of examples of the horrible accusations the Left made about President Bush. Second, she once again is bringing up the issue of race, here without any evidence of her own. She’s just laying it out there as if it were fact. I don’t deny that there is racism still in America and it goes across all races and political perspectives, but to make the assumption that opposition to Obamacare is strictly about race is just intellectually dishonest and insulting!
Finally I have been looking more and more at the full transcript of her speech and while she makes impassioned claims about getting beyond the issue of race and states her own change of heart, she still continues to make references to race that certainly seem to reflect that she may still have prejudiced views. Above is one example, also note this comment about lawyers:
“But we kept working at it. And we found some honest lawyers — they were white — I wish I could say that about all lawyers, especially black lawyers, but they will nickel and dime you to death.”
Am I to believe she thinks there is something more slimy about black lawyers than white lawyers, or even that she would rather have black lawyers be honest rather than white? She seems at best to be very conflicted about the issue of race, she also clearly views struggle in America through the Marxist/Leninist prism, and she believes federal employment should be permanent and not subject to performance. All these beliefs confirm to me that she’s the last person I would want to be a federal official.
Also RichDem, why this fixation on the sexual proclivities of certain people? I thought this thread was about race and politics, not sex. If you want to talk about “teabaggers” and race issues I suggest you start a new thread on racist sentiments of people with certain sexual proclivities.
Brietbart told a lie. He’s done it before. And yes, there is a difference between “spinning” and telling a lie, leaving out the entire context of the remarks to make them mean the opposite of what they actually did crosses that line. Apparently some folks at Fox were taken in by the lie. Others, including to my surprise Glenn Beck, were not. It remains to be seen if this causes Brietbart to lose credibility at Fox. If they are, as they claim, a legitimate news operation, you’d think it would.
Even the Washington Post doesn’t think Fox News is responsible for what the drivebys and Obama did:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106708.html
Feel free to comment here:
http://virginiavirtucon.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/fox-news-and-shirley-sherrod/
Oh the humanity……….Obama paniced and fired someone because of big bad meany old fox news and breitbart…………is that good eddie?
Burkenator, what do you do when the liberal rags can’t even agree with each other? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106708.html
Sorry, but I think the home team nailed this story, rather than those know-nothings in NYC.
Frankly, I agree with Cato on Breitbart. He is Lee Atwater incarnate. There are lots of people who did this woman dirty and owe her an apology, including Breitbart, Secretary Breitbart and the NAACP, but I don’t think the “Fox News” bogeyman is among them. They actually (by and large) showed restraint this time.
Secretary Vilsack, not Breitbart. That would indeed be scary.
Good Lord, how can Fox News be blamed when they didn’t report on the Ms Sherrod’s “situation” till AFTER she was fired?
*
This story is like a bad joke or urban legend that people repeat and won’t admit they did it. I expect Brian to be crying over the injustice bestowed by the EVIL Breitbart, but Cato? Maybe this is Cato’s idea of a joke….
*
If you think this story is about Ms Sherrod, you are crazy. Absolutely “snookered” as the NAACP likes to say. Have at it Eddie – this is your banner story.
LL, I think I made it pretty clear that a big part of the blame falls on the one party in this whole mess that could have exonerated Sherrod had their heads so far up the ass of the administration they couldn’t be bothered to view footage they owned to verify whether or not the claims were correct.
*
And sorry, but I think Breitbart is guilty of douchebaggery in this case.
Breitbart’s part was small. He held this video footage for 3 months and put it up for maximum coverage, and he never claimed there wasn’t a larger story. Woe be it for anyone to actually investigate a blog post whether it be an entire administration, the NAACP or other so called joournalists.
*
Again, the story is not Breitbart or Sherrod – pretty much everyone on here is missing the point, even you Cato.
I’ll continue to call them “teabaggers” so long as they are unable to say “Democratic Party”.
.
Besides, *they* talked about how they were “teabagging” until they found it its more embarrassing meaning. That’s why it’s so funny. Remember the photo old lady with teabags hanging off her hat, smiling like an idiot? Apparently, conservatives never heard of the Urban Dictionary.
Oh, and Vilsack fired Sherrod. If you think the President even knows who the Undersecretary for Rural Development in the Department of freaking *Agriculture* is, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. It’s not like she was the Secretary of Defense here.
Pretty darn close to the whole truth:
http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archives/2010/07/new_column_thro_1.html
*
RD – I can’t take an Obama supporter seriously, so your use of “teabaggers” is right up there with listening to Rachel Maddow and Olbermann. It’s pretty sad to be paired in with them.
I can give you a litany of things I disagree with Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on. I wonder if you can do the same with Rush Limbaugh?
Regardless of Breitbart’s complicity, Fox News had nothing to do with it, and they’re got a lot of unnecessary blame.
.
The really funny thing is that this is the second time Obama has stepped in it on a racial issue by not getting both sides of the story before saying or, in this case, his staffing doing something stupid.
.
When’s the Vilsack, Sherrod, Obama, White Farmer beer summit?
“The funny part is that Glenn Beck on Fox News Channel actually defended Ms. Sherrod before all the rest of the video came to light.
.”
Glenn Beck is a two-faced liar. I listen to right wing talk radio, and the morning the story broke he was all over it, talking about how this is “1956 in reverse, they want revenge” etc. L-i-a-r: http://mediamatters.org/research/201007210055
.
Brian–
You’re right to connect the two, though I’d say it’s more his whole political operation than him personally. I think the people around Obama have PTSD from the Rev. Wright episode. They need to get a grip and realize this isn’t 2008.
Gee, I am still waiting for their “asshole” to come forward with an admission regarding the “context” of the “maccaca moment” in its full entirety. Not to say Allen should not be held accountable, but these so called journalists crying foul are the same ones who on air only showed the comment and not the full video as well and went on the attack for days seeing an opportunity to bring down Allen (which most belive cost Allen the election)…..I will pass the kleenex to the crying liberals in the media who had their own tactics cast right back at them with a smile. Their are certainly assholes on both sides, but to orchestrate a defense by going on offense against Fox News is rather amusing. In fact, networks like MSNBC you would think have lost enough ratings and viewers already that they would learned by now.
WTF? The full context of macaca made it *worse* for Allen!
If only the Department of Agriculture, Secretary Vilsack and Ms. Sherrod were focused on the President’s agenda of jobs, jobs, jobs by producing exports, exports, exports. If only the President was promoting trade, breaking down trade barriers and reaching out to potential importers of American wheat, soybeans, corn, and beef. That is to say the adminstration should focus on the mundane and necessary stuff of life instead of pulling out this teachable moment treacly spin every time the President and his minions wander off to wallow in self pity.
Wow.
.
We just can’t be all right. Can we? I mean each of us thinks we are reasonable, and convinced that our view is correct, but yet we disagree?
.
How can this be?
.
LL, yeah, I pretty much got it right (the eddie part was easy)!
.
Not Paul, you WAPO LOVER! Turn in your name to the nearest Republican Party Headquarters. You are really not a WAPO lover, but a Howie Kurtz lover it seems, which is ok if you like numskull TV/media critics. At least my NYT link had several reporters on the story and then links to other stuff).
.
Such an odd thing to read… defense of a cable news network. Almost like some folks have a personal connection to the content or something… almost like the defense of a political position or party membership.
OK, LL, what’s the dirty secret about Mr. and Mrs. Sherrod? Did I miss that somewhere?
Peggy Noonan has lost her mind:
http://www.peggynoonan.com/
*
NovaScout, They are leftists of the purist form. Have you been listening to interviews with this woman? Good Lord, click around.
What does a leftist of the purist form even mean?
Oh noes, LL! We have liberals!!! In a Democratic Administration!!!!11!111 Truly a huge scandal!!! Call Drudge!
.
Just give it up. Watching you react to this non-scandal is like watching a kid who thought he was getting a Nintendo for Christmas get socks instead.
Oh look, LL called someone else a leftist. There’s a shock. This reminds me of simple supply and demand. When the supply outweighs the demand, the value of the product being supplied drops. LL, your supply of jumping up and calling people leftists greatly outweighs the demand. Of course I’m just another leftist so I assume that will be your only response.
“What does a leftist of the purist form even mean?”
.
In LL’s world? Anyone to the left of Francisco Franco.
Oh I think I get what LL is saying. This lady was fired for revealing that she is liberal in interviews given after she was fired for being liberal. That makes perfect sense!
Breitbart saw a chance to make some waves, he took it, it blew up in his face. Plain and simple. Ever hear of Mr. Occam and his razor?
On a new note, seems NLS no longer believes TC is worthy of mention on his blog roll. It’s been moved from one of the highest status’s he rates to completely off the roll. Does this say something about TC or rather NLS???
Rtwng, Ben has lost his mind since Hillary didn’t even win the nomination, and then really lost it when Leslie Byrne lost (again). That combined with one particularly persistent troll in his comments section has ruined his blog. It’s all been downhill since March, 2008 or so. I swear he took that election year even harder than most Republicans!
.
I have an unprovable theory the troll is actually Ben trolling his own blog for his amusement. I wouldn’t be surprised.
The “evil” Big Government lays it out on what Sherrod and the left would like to accomplish with Sherrod-gate:
http://bigjournalism.com/mdake/2010/07/23/shut-down-free-speech-the-left-responds-to-losing-its-most-powerful-weapon-the-race-card/
*
Please, all – go into a tissy over what this is all about – because it ain’t Andrew Breitbart.
RD, Again – from an avowed Obama supporter I don’t care what you think. Because, quite frankly – I am not sure you CAN if you support this administration.
Shorter LL: I wanted socks for Christmas, anyway! Socks are awesome!
*
*
*
LL, do you own a mirror? Use it to take a look at yourself sometime. You are a wing-nut mirror image of everything you accuse edmundburkenator & Liberals, et al. of being: A doctrinaire, hypocritical, thoughtless puppet wholly controlled and commanded by the nut-job echo chamber. Why, edmundburkenator and RichmondDem are blogosphere Daniel Websters’ compared to you!
*
Simply put, you are the worst kind of craven political hack. Thankfully, you’re not an elected official (not that you ever could be).
I bleed, that may be categorized as child abuse.
Just for the record, I don’t think LL has ever accused me of being a doctrinaire, hypocritical, thoughtless puppet wholly controlled and commanded by the nut-job echo chamber.
.
I’ve always appreciated that.
Honestly, as much of a douchebag that Brietbart probably is I appreciate the fact that he goes up to the plate and swings. An active movement on the left is working very hard to make these midterm electons about progressive and fair-minded Democrats against evil, racist, tea party Republicans. Though he was wide off the mark with this, Brietbart is one of the very few conservatives willing to go after the left’s hypocrisy day after day. We certainly don’t get it from our party’s political leaders who’s doubletalk on every issue they use to give them cover should they actually get elected to the majority.
Brietbart will take his lumps, deservidly so, but I want him around for the next 20 years because for as many as he might miss, he’ll nail ‘em on others.
*
*
*
“…these midterm electons [are] about progressive and fair-minded Democrats against evil, racist, tea party Republicans.”
*
Yes, that about sums it up. Thanks, Chris!
Chris, it’s one thing to take on hypocrisy with facts. It’s another to take hypocrisy on with hypocrisy.
.
I believe we are in some twilight area with media right now. It’s never been more important to have good media and it’s been been a long time since the media has been this void of ethics or judgment.
.
So echo chambers are out there — in good number.
Brietbart generally isn’t the echo chamber, he is the original echo.
Ed is not a left wing nut case weirdo goon, he is merely confused and I am confused as to why he is suddenly taking such an interest in media “twilight” problems when it has been going on for years – well, actually DECADES.
*
IBOB, Again – having an avowed Obama supporter rant about me is probably the BEST thing that could happen to me today. Truly, thank you. You and your fellow leftists may be in hog heaven with this administration but the truth is leaking out. To be considered your enemy is a real blessing.
*
And yes, I own a mirror – not as well used as yours I am sure.
Hilarious article of the day:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100723/ts_alt_afp/uspoliticsobamadaughtersmoney
*
“Obama, who has the headache of stewarding the slowly mending US economy, said in a television interview that he was also teaching his daughters Malia, 12, and Sasha, nine, about savings, interest and money management.
*
“What I’m doing now with Malia and Sasha is they’re getting an allowance,” Obama told ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
*
“They’re starting to get old enough where they may be able earn some money babysitting. They’ve got their own savings accounts.”
*
*
AHAHAHAHHHHAHAHAHAHAH, cough, cough, hiccup, ahahahhahhahahahahahah, omg goodness, now THAT is funny……savings account? money management? Poor kids……
Ummm, I think teaching kids about money via savings accounts is a non-partisan issue.
.
Loudoun Lady did you know that Obama crosses his left shoe lace over his right before he ties them. An obvious leftist. As everyone knows you should ALWAY cross the right shoe lace over the left before tying shoes. It’s true I saw it on FOX.
.
Then again you probably stick to slip ons.
In other news, Malia wanted to spend a bunch of money going to war with classmate and borrow the money from her rich Chinese friend instead of asking her dad for the money. Now dad is stuck paying the debt that that whole family owes.
.
Kids…
edmund still thinks his HOA has stricter rules than the not yet adopted or known specifics of the CBPO, so you can take whatever he says with a grain of salt.
.
Tell us Ed, how are your HOA rules more strict than our proposed CBPO?
Do you make people do one foot grading plans? do your homeowners have to study aquatic life in “streams” nearby before installing a patio?
Please tell us how strict and onerous your rules are. Do you have a link to prove what you have said about your HOA docs being stricter than the proposed CBPO?
Random thought: if we had added basic money management to the elementary school curriculum we probably wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in today.
Black Out – If Obama knew how to save, or manage money OR even – say, manage the country – you’d have a point. Poor Malia and Sasha will get a quick lesson on deficit spending and the benefits of a welfare state. It’s really a shame. I’m sick of your personal insults btw, so on this hot day – go suck an egg.
*
Eddie – Back to “it’s Bush’s FAULT – waaaaaaaa” – when does it end? So very beneath you, it’s almost – Obamaesque. This too is a shame.
*
Please, please, please – both of you – can you give me your assessment of the Obama administration and why American’s should trust them? Eddie, It’s been about 3 months. I am getting tired of waiting. “Bush’s Fault” is not allowed as a defense either.
sally, give it a rest!!! It’s to damn hot out to deal with more hot air on this issue.
.
Loudoun Lady, I am still so very upset about you calling me names like a “leftist”. I can’t sleep at nights thinking about it. BTW, there is a great article coming out on Tuesday in the WaPo. It’s about the dumbing down of America and the attack on intelligent thinking. I can’t wait to show it to you, it reminds me of you. It’s by Ms. Jacoby.
.
My assessment of Obama. I’LL ANSWER YOU AGAIN! Given the choice of sell-out McCain and the pathetic Palin I’d make the Obama choice every time. There was no alternative!!
i think LL needs a lesson in supply and demand. when the supply (LL calling everyone a leftist that doesn’t fall in lock-step with her) outweighs the demand (the actual number of leftists commenting), the value of said supply (LL’s insults and accusations) drops.
.
.
of course LL has said multiple times that she don’t like that fancy book learnin’ so i’m sure i’ll just be called a leftist, again….
Sally, don’t bet me. I know my bylaws.
Agree with Cato. But macro economics is a lot different from micro economics.
.
I know LL, it just sucks that we can’t start at zero on the balance sheet when the new president comes in. It is Obama’s responsibility to fix the mess — that is why I voted for him. And I don’t put the total blame on your friend Bush. He had a lot of help from Rs and Ds.
.
Ahhh, I just read the rest of Sally’s rant. Sally, we DO NOT ALLOW building or expanding in one of my HOA’s and the other one has Architectural and Environmental Guidelines that make the CBPO blush — right down to the grass seed you are allowed to sow and removing invasive species on your property.
.
I would offer a trade: my documents for your apology and donation of $1,000 to a charity of my choice, but you would argue about every word in our bylaws and not have to pay until I was dead.
LL, do you think Breitbart should apologize (my attempt to rerail the thread)?
NO, Ed, you are all smoke, and no facts. Give me one thing that is MORE strict in your bylaws than the CBPO.
-
No links, no facts, no positions, just questions and criticism…
_
It is IMPOSSIBLE for your Bylaws to be more strict than the CBPO. Do your Bylaws even deal with “perennial water bodies?” You are a fraud and a joke!
eb, is the HOA you help run that regulates grass seed located in Loudoun? Just curious.
One of our board members serves on his condo board at his vacation home in NC too.
———————————————————–
I don’t think Breitbart should apologize. great cartoon in today’s WaPo “drawing board” section on the editorial page from a PA paper–don’t remember which city, that had a man with a video monitor for a head, and “Right Wing” on his shirt, with a cluster of men and women at his feet marked “media”, etc.
First iteration, the man says “Blogger says, SIT!” and they are are slammed on the ground butt-down.
next, “Blogger says, ROLL OVER!” and all the little feet fly into the air as they flop to their backs.
Third, “JUMP TO CONCUSIONS!”, and as the group leaps into the air, one says “but he didn’t say Blogger Says!”
The White house was right to apologize to Ms. Sherrod, and I hope it included an apology for putting pressure on Ag to do it.
I don’t think Breitbart needs to apologize for that overreaction.
Shirley Sherrod was wronged by Andrew Breitbart and the Obama Administration. They both owe her an apology.
*
But it turns out Shirley Sherrod is a nutjob herself.
*
In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Sherrod says that Andrew Breitbart wants blacks to be slaves again. Start watching 1:55 into the segment.
*
Whatever Andrew Breitbart may be, you’re a loon if you think that he or any other conservative want to send blacks back to slavery.
*
I guess they can apologize to each other.
Gosh Sally. How about a little comity? I’m not inclined to share any information with you after you call me names.
.
Have a lemonade and cool off.
Local, Fess up and join your real party, or go back to Brian’s blog where you have more gravitas. Sounds to me like you are endorsing leftists and Obama. Sadly, you can’t call a leftist a leftist anymore – you just call them Democrats – and you more or less agree with them. Go away.
BO – Boo frickin hoo.
Ed, Breitbart can apoligize to Shirley when she apologizes to all the Americans she calls racist because they don’t agree with Obamacare. If I were Breitbart I’d tell her to kiss my Ass.
BTW BO, it’s your Progressive friends that are dumbing down america and it sounds like you are another victim. Sorry.
So eb, is the HOA that regulates grass seed in Loudoun?
in Virginia?
BO, did you ever check out this map?
…. Ashburn. Lots of RPA and Possible RPA for many neighbors….
Is your neighborhood like Ed’s where they don’t allow anyone to built anything, anywhere??? no playsets/patios?? and the County dictates what private homeowners have to plant???
=
http://gisinter1.loudoun.gov/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?name=webdefaultlogis&app=GIS&Print.x=5&app=GIS&cm=cm_ZoomOut&zm=zm_2x&click.x=226&click.y=196&Left=11764798.7138064&Bottom=7057864.9020226&Right=11767515.4498064&Top=7061061.6700226&MapGroups=environ&IdFeature=&weblogisIP=gisinter1&leftLayer=&LayerGroups=environ&f_bparcels=true&f_bmajroads=true&f_btowns=true&f_bcbpab=true&rightPins=&pin1=118481573&pincount=1&MeasureTool=&zoomdegree=0°reetype=&DDX=&DMX=&DSX=&DDY=&DMY=&DSY=&DX=&DY=&
So, LL, the info about Sherrod that makes this all OK is that she and her husband are liberals (comment #8 in this thread)? If we had known that in advance, would it have been a good thing to adumbrate a video in a manner that gave it the opposite meaning of its contextual reality and have her fired? What exactly is the point of that comment?
Yes I did Sally, months ago. Thank you for the assistance. I have family and friends in Fairfax that are in the same type of classification and they have never had issues with any permits with the county. I am not concerned. Sorry I just happen to agree with the rational analysis than the political analysis to be all in a huff over it.
My, my, my…what it means to be a “leftist” in Loudoun today. Ahead of schedule here is the promised article from Susan Jacoby about how conservatives dumb down America. Ms. Jacoby must have studied Loudoun Lady for this masterpiece.
.
Here’s a few fabulous teasers to Ms. Jacoby’s comments:
.
“…fundamentalism is one of the three major components–an Unholy Trinity–of the right-wing rage that Palin clearly thinks could make her the Republican presidential nominee in 2012. The two other elements are anti-intellectualism and class resentment that serve as an accompaniment to and a mask for racism.”
.
“The better educated Americans are, the more likely they are to be affiliated with religions that have made room for secular knowledge…”
.
“In the Alice-in-Wonderland universe inhabited by the queen of the Tea Party and her subjects, people who can’t make the grade at top universities are not only better Americans but are morally superior to those who can.”
.
“Whenever I hear liberal-to-centrist pundits saying that even if Sarah gets the Republican nomination, she will only ensure Obama’s re-election, I shudder. That this representative of pure ignorance, retrograde religion, and class envy is being taken seriously at all speaks volumes about the dumbing down of America…”
.
Please enjoy, http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/spirited_atheist/2010/07/bristol_and_levi_poster_children_for_the_dumbing_down_of_america.html
“anti-intellectualism and class resentment that serve as an accompaniment to and a mask for racism”
*
Both sides benefit from stoking class resentment, although I’d argue that the Democrats stand to gain more from their eat the rich rhetoric than Republicans do from demonizing Ivy Leaguers.
*
On the so-called “anti-intellectualism,” I obviously can’t speak for everyone but I can offer some color to my own thinking on the matter. It’s not that I’m anti-intellectual, it’s that I’m anti-pseudo intellectual. I’m just amazed that our society considers the likes of David Brooks, EJ Dionne, and Susan Jacoby “intellectuals.” I mean, seriously, these are people who chose journalism, sociology, history or similar Mickey Mouse course of study so they could spend their nights sitting in Busboys and Poets drinking lattes and snapping their fingers. I’m not calling these people stupid; they’re not. In my mind, however, there is a distinction between a smart person with a word processor and an “intellectual” or a thought leader. Much the same can be said of our elected officials. Can you remember the last time we had a President that had been previously successful in anything other than politics and winning elections? I can’t.
*
I can say the same thing about pretty much everyone on talk radio as well. The difference is that in the talk radio arena hosts aren’t widely considered to be intellectuals, while columnists for the NYT and WP are (and wrongly so).
There’s a lot of truth in what you say Cato. As the article depicts, I think very effectively, Palin (the only clear leader of the conservative movement) IS the queen bee of pseudo intellectualism. Who by the way majored in Journalism just like Brooks, Dionne, and Jacoby. (I am assuming that was their degree) I think Jacoby’s point is more illustrated by comparing Palin’s educational journey through 4 community colleges and state universities before ending up with something called a degree, to someone who receives a more robust education. Palin looks down on those who took the more substantial route to higher education, and she’s getting away with it.
p.s. Teddy Roosevelt was a pretty successful at wild game hunting. Eisenhower was a very effective professional soldier. Jimmy Carter was a not so successful Naval Officer but he was a successful peanut farmer. And if Palin makes it she was a successful TV weather person on a small local station. (come to think of it she’s pretty good at pointing at a blue screen that has nothing on it)
Right, I was definitely *not* making an argument that Palin is some kind of intellectual though… but I do find it more or less amusing that she’s being attacked on that basis by a person who earned a journalism degree from some shitty state university, just like Palin herself.
BlackOut, I seem to remember reading that you were not in favor, until Scott York voted against it, because you and Scott York are in the same boat…
=
Also, what Fairfax has done is far less of a regulatory burden — and a far less burden on many fewer people — than Loudoun.. Also, Ffx, mapped the RPA in advance.
_
Would you support doing what Fairfax County did?
Cato, I look at Jacoby more as the observer and the messenger. As far as what she is saying I think she is spot on. I also think that a lot of people agree with her sentiment. I am not that interested in attack the messenger types of defense. Not that you are, I am just saying, that’s what I expect from some. With that said, I do find it ironic.
oh look, LL, the self-proclaimed real republican, called me a leftist, again….
OK – if the shoe fits so well Local – LEFTIST.
*
Probaby makes you feel at home, which is where you are.
Nova – “So, LL, the info about Sherrod that makes this all OK is that she and her husband are liberals (comment #8 in this thread)?”
*
Umm, no – Sherrod portrays herself as a reformed racist. She is not reformed. Notice her absence from Sunday talk shows, care to guess why?
I love it when Black Out blathers on about me – it shows the depth of weenyism.
*
BTW, Teddy Roosesvelt had Progressive leanings himself – so much for his “intellectualism”. Its probably why you are attracted to him BO.
What are you saying? I know you can read but can you comprehend? The Teddy reference was associated with Cato’s question. He was looking for President’s that had shown success in other fields other than politics. Good question by the way. I never said I was a Teddy fan
.
I can’t imagine what’s in your head when you watch FOX and try to comprehend what they are promoting.
Nova: Here is a bit on Mr Sherrod, enjoy:
http://www.floppingaces.net/2010/07/26/sometimes-its-not-good-when-husbands-wives-have-things-in-common/
BO, Keep your shirt on, your mammary glands are showing. Nice to overlook Reagan’s success BTW.
*
Considering Clinton and Obama, our 2 most recent Democrat Presidents never held anything resembling real jobs, it is fine to go back to Carter. As a matter of fact I’d say it’s fitting, given the race to the bottom that Obama is giving him.
*
*
*
Reagan’s success, LL?
*
Do you mean the enormous Reagan recession (second-worst recession since the Great Depression, Bush’s of course being the worst) exacerbated by the utterly failed Reagan “Voodoo Economics”? Reagan doubled the national debt, caused the S&L crisis, and nearly wrecked the financial system. Reaganomics failed in less than a year, creating nearly double-digit unemployment, and it took an entire second year for the economy to recover from the failure.
*
Do you mean the Reagan cut taxes that led to a great expansion? Here’s the truth: the total federal tax burden increased during the Reagan years, and most Americans paid more in taxes after Reagan than before. The “Reagan Recovery” was unremarkable. It looks great only contrasted against the dismal Reagan Recession — but it had nothing to do with Supply Side voodoo.
*
With a red ink explosion — $300 BILLION deficits looming as far as the eye could see — GOP Senators, notably including Bob Dole, led the way on tax hikes. The economy enjoyed its recovery only after total tax increases larger than the total tax cuts were implemented. Most importantly, average annual GDP growth during the Reagan 80s was lower than during the Clinton 90s or the JFK-LBJ 60s!
*
Do you mean how Ronald Reagan won the “Cold War”? Sorry, but that’s a lie. Reagan did nothing to bring down the Soviet Union. His reckless overspending on defense increased the possibility of a nuclear war because he was — frankly, and sadly — senile. The truth is we’d already won the Cold War before Reagan took office. All Reagan needed to do was continue the tried-and-true containment policies Harry S. Truman began and all subsequent presidents employed. The Soviet Union was collapsing from within. The CIA actually told this to Reagan as he took office. We didn’t have to increase weapons spending, but Reagan didn’t care. He ran away from summits with the dying old-guard Soviets, and the new-style “glasnost” leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev baffled the witless Reagan and his closed-minded extremist advisors. We’re all fortunate things happened as they did — but once again, Reagan did nothing to make this fluke more likely.
*
All this is vintage Reagan. Reagan took credit for others’ hard word and hard choices, and blamed them for his failures. Reagan even blamed Jimmy Carter for Reagan’s foolish, fatal, and reckless decision to leave 243 Marines stationed in Beirut, helpless and unguarded.
*
Reagan hired over 100 crooks to run our government, and broke several laws himself (Iran-Contra, anyone?). His policies were almost uniformly self-defeating, wrong-headed, immoral and unfair.
*
Reagan was an actor playing the part of the president. He was style over substance; lucky, not good.
*
And once the myths are stripped from the “legacy”, the truth becomes obvious: Reagan was by far the most overrated man in American history.
Being an actor or a failed oil company executive is more of a real job than teaching college? Really?
As a business man, George W. Bush was an abject failure:
http://alaric3rh.home.sprynet.com/science/bceo.html
I’ll gladly run a Reagan Republican vs. an Obama, Pelosi, Reid Democrat any day of the week.
*
As a President, Barry Obama is horrific failure.
If IBOB was a Republican he would be a birther…
If I were a Republican, Cato, I would commit hari kari.
“Here’s the truth: the total federal tax burden increased during the Reagan years, and most Americans paid more in taxes after Reagan than before…”
*
Could that be because of the prosperity this country enjoyed after Reagen cleaned up the mess Carter made? Prosperity = higher incomes = more tax revenue.
*
Who will be the next great Republican president to clean up the mess Carter 2.0 will leave behind?
*
*
*
“Here’s the truth: the total federal tax burden increased during the Reagan years, and most Americans paid more in taxes after Reagan than before…”
*
Fed said; “Could that be because of the prosperity this country enjoyed after Reagan cleaned up the mess Carter made?”
*
Ummm…No.
*
1) The average annual growth rate in real income-tax receipts per working-age person was only 0.2% from 1981 to 1990, hardly stellar.
*
2) Comparing the recovery from the 1981-82 recession (1983–1990) with the years between 1971 (end of a recession) and 1980, the rate of growth of real GDP per capita averaged 2.77% under Reagan and 2.50% under Nixon, Ford and Carter. The unemployment rate averaged higher under Reagan (6.75% vs. 6.35%), while the average productivity growth was slower under Reagan (1.38% vs. 1.92%), and private investment as a percentage of GDP also averaged lower under Reagan (16.08% vs. 16.86%).
*
I know how fond of revising history you wing-nuts are, but in actuality Reagan’s economic performance was middling at best.
An impressive array of stats, IBOB, but there’s one I remember that pretty much sums it up – the misery index, which was the highest ever under the Carter 1.0 administration. 12.72 when entered office to 19.72 when he left. Ron had it down to 9.72 when he left office.
Hmmm…The Misery Index? What the heck is that?
*
Oh, the inflation rate times the unemployment rate (btw, no one even mentions this “economic indicator” anymore. How old are you, anyway?).
*
Well, the unemployment rate was higher all of Reagan’s eight years than it was under any of Carter’s four, so…score one for Reagan: Inflation went down during his administration.
*
Still, we’re not talking economic miricles with Reagan
I don’t know where you get your data from but real GDP grew an average of 3.5% under Reagan.
*
http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=354&page=2&count=100
*
Slick Willie clocks in at 3.8%.
like I said, LL, supply outweighs demand….
The Bizarro world of IBOB. Now we understand why he bleeds that way…
I am not really that into looking at Reagan’s numbers. There is little doubt he lead this country out of a funk, and re-energized national pride. There are intangibles that he had that caused a whole lotta good to happen in most sectors of our society.
So all this nilly by the liberal media has down nothing but elevate Brietbart even more as well as the big government site…when will they ever learn that the more that cry foul the more they direct people to the very source they despise. In fact, IMHO when you have the so-called professional media looking to the blogoshere for breaking news it should telling you that the reality is the print media is dieing and along with it some cable news networks it would seem. What you have is a bunch of elitist entrenched in the past. Their self imposed self importance is vanishing before their very eyes and in fact they risk damaging their legacy as well. Watch as you will see the media feel it is their duty not to report but to chose just who it is that will represent the GOP in 2012. I think it starts right after November. Through this whole episode with Brietbart I have seen the liberal media take shots (along race lines it seems) at the supposed major contenders in the GOP already. I give credit to Romney for being smarter than Palin, Newt, and others for being baited by the media for comment on this whole thing.
“The Soviet Union was collapsing from within. The CIA actually told this to Reagan as he took office. We didn’t have to increase weapons spending, but Reagan didn’t care. He ran away from summits with the dying old-guard Soviets…”
*
The level of ignorance here is astounding. So many untruths in the whole thing I’ve only time to address some of it. The liberal line that the Soviet Union was going to collapse anyway is fundamentally false. In fact, the Soviets were on a roll and gained strength during the Carter years. They had economic problems, but so did we (remember stagflation?).
*
The U.S. military buildup was quite necessary given the damage that Carter did (we’ll have to do the same once Obama is gone in two years). Reagan’s arms buildup achieved several things. One, it helped stop Soviet expansion, especially in the Third World. Two, it bankrupted the Soviets. Three, it allowed us to negotiate from a position of strength, instead of the position of weakness that liberals prefer.
*
Oh and let’s not forget Central America. Democrats wanted to hand the region over to the communists, but Reagan stood tall. He made hard decisions, and in the end we have countries that at least are headed in the right direction and are not communist totalitarian states.
*
Reagan didn’t meet with Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko for the very good reason that it would have done no good to do so. Unlike liberals, who like to talk just to talk and negotiate to make themselves feel good, Reagan knew from his days as head of the Screen Actors Guild that you only negotiate when there is something to be gained. Meeting with fossils is pointless. He did meet with Gorby, and ran circles around him at Reykjavik. Gorby desperately needed to kill SDI, but Reagan wouldn’t let him do it. The Soviets knew they couldn’t compete with us in high technology and this demoralized them greatly.
Great point, BlackOut. I remember the Carter years when this country was pretty beat down – a lot like what’s going on now with Carter 2.0! Reagan turned it all around. Intangibles count. Clinton had good numbers, but it was only because of a Republican Congress that held his spending in check and that he was lucky enough to be president during the technology boom, but I’ll always remember him as the one who defiled the presidency.
The idea of Reagan standing tall (by invading Grenada) is awfully hard to swallow. Nor did he stand tall by (to give him the benefit of the doubt) being complaisant while his appointees broke US laws to make deals with terrorists. Anyone who treated classified docs the way Col. North allegedly did should still be in Leavenworth. Shall we remember it was Iran those good Republicans were making deals with. Our own military/CIA overinflated estimates of Soviet strength for decades, and anyone who spent any time in Russia well knew that the whole system was hollow inside, and the Afghan war crippled them once and for all (hint, hint). They had no consumer economy at all. Russians were still using mustard plasters as a cold remedy, and it wasn’t because they liked the smell. Reagan was in the right place at the right time to get credit when it all fell apart, but not a lot more.
Breitbart is an unprincipled political mercenary, nothing more. He set out to step on media coverage of Obama’s financial regulation package and the extension of unemployment benefits, and he did it by knowingly trashing the reputation of a dedicated civil servant who was undeserving of being thrown under the bus. Fox then jumped in and blasted the story and its biased opinionating all over its “news” shows.
Even if you say Breitbart was only doing what a typical dirty tricks operative usually does (lie and cheat and steal or worse so long as it accomplishes the goal of getting media coverage)I have to fault Fox who should never have aired that clearly edited tape before obtaining and verifying the original. In journalism this is called checking your sources. You don’t go out commenting all over a story until you verify you there is a story to begin with. If you follow the process that Fox does (create a false story by propagating unverified or known to be false trash, then endlessly extend it by massively editorializing about that same trash and its aftermath), you’re not a journalist you’re a propagandist. Fox has done that very thing so often that there is no question as to what they are.
One more thing for LL, If you’re talking about presidents and deficit and debt, there better be an asterisk next to it that stands for Republican. It hasn’t been Democratic presidents who’ve spiked the national debt, it has been Republicans, namely Reagan and Bush II.
elderberry, I see that some in the media are finally noticing that at the recent NAACP meeting where Ms. Sherrod’s speech occurred, there was cheering and approval for the remarks shown in the truncated video.
Perhaps one of the takeaways is that maybe the NAACP (and others!) should not be so quick to call other groups racist?
I agree on checking sources, and that should have been the first thing the White House should have done before jumping to conclusions and demanding Ms. Sherrod’s head.
EB – Obama’s reckless spending is a clear and present danger to the fiscal solvency of the United States of America.
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/debt-and-deficits
We will continue to muddle through and never reach our true potential as a Republic if we continue to spend more time debating the past versus focusing on our future. Why we spend so much time arguing over Reagan is beyond me. Its like everything else divided amongst partisan lines. The bounty of Reagan has long been lost. The bounty of the bubbles of the Clinton era have long been lost. We are an ever evolving economy now tied to globalization (unforntately)contributing to our lost manufacturing base of our past. It really matters not where you come down on Reagan in truth given back then in the 80’s we were are producing economy and now lets face it folks we are more of a consuming economy. Economics are not the only issue appearing to be thrust upon revisionist history. Apparently in an effort to prop up Obama now you have some media outlets attemtping to attack Reagans results by addressing this economy as the worst ever in history as a means of praising Obama for any light at the end of the tunnel….well just so they do not get to far ahead of themselves I recall having to park the car at the gas station line over night as a kid and walking home with my dad and I also recall what had to have been a 20% unemployment rate then something we are not even close to so excuse me for not bying into the notion that these are the worst times of my life.
*
*
*
Remember also the recent abortive attempt of Breitbart’s protégé James McKeefe to install wiretapping devices in the office of La. Sen. Mary Landrieu (a la the 1972 Watergate burglary of Democratic Party headquarters by Nixon’s “dirty tricks” squad).
*
Breitbart and his ilk are scum.
*
*
*
Alter –
*
“Apparently in an effort to prop up Obama now you have some media outlets attempting to attack Reagan’s results by addressing this economy as the worst ever in history as a means of praising Obama for any light at the end of the tunnel….”
*
To what “media outlest do your refer?
*
“…I recall having to park the car at the gas station line over night as a kid and walking home with my dad…”
*
That would have been in 1973 or 1974, during the oil embargo.
*
“I also recall what had to have been a 20% unemployment rate then…”
*
Sorry, but no. Unemployment has not been that high since the 1930s. According to the BOLS, the highest unemployment rates since World War II, occurred under Reagan in 1982-83 (9.7% and 9.6% and Gerald Ford in 1975-76 (8.5% and 7.7%). The highest unemployment under Jimmy Carter was in 1980 (7.1%).
“Slick Willie clocks in at 3.8%.”
*
Clinton was Pretty damn lucky he followed Reagan, not Carter – in office.
Clinton followed Bush I (the good Bush), LL. Unless you are suggesting EVERYONE after Reagan followed Reagan. Which, in a sense, is right.
.
I know he probably makes your teeth itch, but he was a decent, smart guy, and a good president. The last realist Republican in the White House.
I didn’t think much of Bush Sr when he was President, and nothing has changed. He was a good Commander in Chief in the Gulf War.
*
What I meant to say was given the economic outlook after Reagan, the drastic tax cuts and an economy that was fully functioning again – it was a stark difference to when Reagan came into office. I don’t care to argue with you about how effective Reagan’s tax cuts were, because you are an advocate of “taxing the rich” and rates that are probably more in line with Carter’s era – which is where we are headed now.
*
We had 20 years of economic growth thanks to Reagan, and Clinton benefitted from it enormously.
Reagan raised taxes too, LL.
*
*
*
And gave amnesty to undocumented workers and spent like a drunken sailor and virtually created Muslim extremism.
*
It is truly ironic how the current generation of wingnuts worship St. Ronnie when, considering his record as Governor and President, they’d never actually vote of him today.
What do you think cost her her job, LL?
Her boss(s) are knee jerk nitwits.