Rob's House

I was thinking along the same lines. They want to punish conservative activism and this harmless little joke gave them an excuse to come down on her. I wish someone had advised her not to apologize. That's an absolute admission of guilt that precludes your ability to defend yourself in an attempt to beg for mercy, which you ain't gonna get. It's a shame because she has nothing to apologize for.

I didn't say I didn't care, I just haven't been following as closely of late. I'm genuinely scared of what's going to happen domestically. I know a lot of you guys believe the kind of government intervention into the economy Obama believes in will bolster the middle class at the expense of the rich, & I'd be fine with that, but I'm afraid the exact opposite is true if we go down that path. So while I do care about the situations in Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, etc., I just don't think any of it matters that much if our economy collapses around us. What I've watched internationally are the canaries in the mine like Greece and I'm trying really hard to understand why so many fail to realize we're walking deeper into that same mine.

Jesus, dude. His ego's big enough already. You don't have to validate him.

To be perfectly honest, I haven't followed most of the major foreign policy issues for the last 2 years to give too strong an opinion one way or the other. I wasn't too happy about his blame America apology tour, but I kind of checked out after that. As far as Iraq, however, it takes a lot of balls for Obama to absolve himself of the economy on his inheritance theory and then in the next breath take credit for Iraq after he opposed the surge that made it possible. That's all.

He took it easy on you guys. I'm waiting for Obamacare to kick in so I can have his foot surgically removed from my ass.

Outsourcing is a total bull **** issue that was manufactured in 2004 because John Kerry had nothing at all to run on other than not being Bush. It's rich that a guy whose been in office for 3 1/2 years and done nothing about the issue is trying to run on the issue against a challenger who has had absolutely no authority to take any governmental action on the issue. The dirty little secret is there's virtually nothing the government can do about outsourcing. These are merely talking points to give lemmings something to rally around.

Don't forget jobless recovery.

I hate when that happens.

I'm kind of surprised a guy who rides a bike would be concerned about something like this. You know we run a much higher risk of eating it on the pavement than having a maniac attack us with a gun. Edit: just reread your post and I see you're not worried about that; I still thought this was worth mentioning just to give the faint of heart some perspective. I stopped when I found out soap was made from oil. If I can boycott big soap, big oil, and big water all at the same time I feel like I'm killing three birds with one stone.

You're preaching to the choir. Some of my favorite examples are the RRs that the government gets credit for. I'm sure it's nothing you don't already know, at least in principle, but Burt Folsom's "The Myth of the Robber Barrons" is a great read. It was eye opening for me. This is why when I hear people pitching high speed rail I ask why, if it's such a good idea, why aren't businesses tripping over each other in a rush to cash in on it? I never get replies.

This chick is smokin hot too http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/greek-track-star-voula-papachristou-booted-from-2012-olympics?slide=blank-3#slide=50496676

I see. It all makes sense now.

Pump priming doesn't have a great track record, and making defecit payments to either create demand or pay the bills doesn't create growth. The only scenario I can see where it would be productive would be the rare situation where a government project is necessary to facilitate business (like building a canal) and for some reason those who would utilize it are too numerous and unable to work together to build it.

I don't put much stock in the multiplier theory, and I agree with you that borrowing money can be productive. My argument is not that borrowing for investment purposes is necessarily counterproductive, I'm saying that government spending to create demand is counter-productive.

You oughta just be able to phone it in like American Idol. Except then we'd be disenfranchising people without phones. !@#$ me, I give up.

You're looking too deeply into this. It's not intended to illustrate the economy at large, but rather a simple example that shows why supply, and not demand, is the key factor in growth. Coming from you I'll take that as a compliment.

It's actually quite obvious that it does not. People tend to bypass the fundamentals and let the sheer size of our society and economy confound their common sense. First off, if this were the case, all the countries drowning in debt would have booming economies. The reason it doesn't work is because it takes production out of the economy rather than putting it in. This is why supply is the key to growth. Here's an illustration even Park might be able to follow, although I doubt it. Let's say I have a chicken and you want eggs. My chicken only produces one egg per day regardless of how much money you throw at me (demand), if I get another chicken I can sell more eggs for a cheaper price because the marginal cost of maintaining another chicken is less than twice the cost of maintaining the first chicken and therefore my average cost of production per egg is less and I'm producing twice as many eggs (supply). So by increasing the supply there is now more wealth in the economy and those who demand eggs can get them more affordably.

I'm trying to think of a relevant angle here, because I have read Gibbons v. Ogden, and I'm still not sure what it does to support your theory.

What really burns me up is the callous nature with which the guy quoted declares that she needs to watch the Olympics on TV. He's happy to steal her life's dream with no more concern than that over what's by any measure a fairly petty offense at worst. I guess he never heard let the punishment fit the crime. Perhaps since he has now done something that others find offensive it would be appropriate to shoot off his knee caps.

2 things: 1. As someone who is also fiscally conservative and fairly socially liberal, the reason I currently lean GOP is because I see the fiscal issues as the most important at the moment, the ones most likely to be significantly affected, & given Obama's record on pot I don't expect much help from the left on social issues anyway. 2. This is less about suppressing the liberal vote & more about securing & legitimizing the process. If a few people are incidentally kept from voting that's their problem. And while I wouldn't support legislation to take away the voting rights of others (including felons) I'm not terribly concerned if an incidental & unintended consequence is that people who are too irresponsible to maintain an ID don't get to vote. But then, I also have a problem with the fact that people like me who go to work and pay the taxes that fund the government have no more say in how it's run than the career welfare cases whose bills I'm paying. It's like the adult child who never left home having an equal say in how the household finances are managed as the parents who pay the bills. Edit: corrected

Can liberals just be honest and admit the only reason you give a **** about this is because 90% of people who are too trifling, lazy, and pathetic to have an ID are going to vote Democrat?

And the hypersensitive insanity goes international http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/greece-expels-olympic-athlete-over-racist-tweets-133129950--oly.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US&_esi=1 A young girl gets kicked out of the Olympics for tweeting an innocuous joke about an African breed of mosquito getting to enjoy home food b/c of all the African athletes that will be there. Some days I really hate people.

As a black man in the US of KKKA Obama could get shot going to the gas station.

It was pretty juvenile to declare that everyone who doesn't agree with you is heartless when you know, or should know, that they simply believe your method does more harm than good. And you might be more convincing if you provided some evidence instead of just saying basic health care isn't available & expecting everyone to take your word for it. I've known countless uninsured who have gotten hurt or sick and none have ever been denied basic care. Ever. I know that in a country of 300 million people we can find a few worst case scenarios to use as rhetoric, but there will still be those stories when the government is in charge; we just won't hear about them.

In light of all that I can certainly see why you want to give him 4 more years. Do you think Dick Jauron should have gotten another extension?