Thread: Michele Bachmann = Intellectual Lightweight

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

Why play that game? It suggests that you aren't accepting the fact that when GW Bush left office, 800,000 jobs a month were being flushed down the toilet.

Let me guess, you believed B. Hussein's shovel ready job nonsense.

Originally Posted by LJ2

Let me guess, you believed B. Hussein's shovel ready job nonsense.

Let me guess... you believe losing 800,000 jobs a month is the only and best way to save America (so long as one of those lost jobs isn't yours).

Originally Posted by jpn

This should be no surprise to anyone who has watched the antics of Michele Bachmann over the years. But yesterday she made one of her typically absurd claims, which, of you're familiar with the facts, demonstrate exactly the opposite of what she claimed.

The “lesson in economic recovery,” Bachmann tweeted yesterday, is to follow Canada’s example — even without any “stimulus,” it has lower unemployment than the U.S.

Facts regarding Canada's stimulus:


But it gets even better. Canada was largely shielded from the worst of the global crisis because it has strict banking regulations that prevented reckless and irresponsible policies.


Ideologues say what they know is true, even though it has no basis in reality whatsoever.

Michele Bachmann dummer then a boot. Most of Obama's stimulus was a waste.

I think Canada's banking regulations helped a lot, but trade deficit is key to a run up on overvaluing assets. The better your balance of trade, the better you are protected from a bubble.

Policy and Economy: The housing bubble and the trade deficit

home-prices-current-account.png

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

Let's. This may come a shock to you but sometimes companies lay people off becasue of what they fear the future will bring. The 800,000 jobs lost in a month were after Obama was elected.

This is the favorite meme of the Republican Party in 2011; it's no surprise to hear Jarvis aping it.

Is there any truth to it?

Yes. But the fear is due to the recession, not to Obama's policies.

As the chart below demonstrates, the claim that Obama's policies (as opposed to, say, the recession), have "discouraged business investment" is wrong--nonresidential business investment has grown under Obama much more strongly than other components of GDP (see chart at bottom)--but the claim that business investment is lower than we would expect it to be at this stage of the recovery is also simply wrong: it is higher.



And, the collapse of private investment came largely in 2008. Who was president then? I forget...


Nonresidential investment is recovering pretty nicely, despite Republican efforts to sabotage it at every turn.

Originally Posted by LJ2

Let me guess, you believed B. Hussein's shovel ready job nonsense.

This answer doesn't make sense. If the expectation of Obama's presidency was the cause of losing 800,000 jobs at the end of GW's presidency then please explain why the turn around in in the jobs created graph was instantaneous ( see the bikini graph for corroboration of that.)

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

This answer doesn't make sense. If the expectation of Obama's presidency was the cause of losing 800,000 jobs at the end of GW's presidency then please explain why the turn around in in the jobs created graph was instantaneous ( see the bikini graph for corroboration of that.)

you keep posting graphs that show the biggest losses of jobs were right after people in business found out Obama was going ot be the next president.. why?

Indeed, the mere anticipation of Obama destroyed the ecomony. I suspect a vague premonition of the B. Huessein presidency was responsible for the Great Depression, the rise of Adolf Hitler, the loss of the Vietnam war, and 9/11 as well. Kenyan Bastard!!!

Had McCain been projected to win, there never would have been a recession in the first place. Why can't the liberals get these facts through their thick sculls?

Originally Posted by CSA

you keep posting graphs that show the biggest losses of jobs were right after people in business found out Obama was going ot be the next president.. why?

.... and then quickly rebounded once he became president and everyone realized he's not actually the business-world anti-christ?

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

I think alot of internet fuck-wads are simply jealous because they know that Bachmann is much more intelligent than them.

Commie/pinkos are fucking lame.

Really? We're not even sure she has a law degree. The school where she claimed to get one is not accredited if I recall correctly.

She really is not an intelligent person, but I'm just an "internet fuck-wad" [sic].

Originally Posted by goober

Depends on what the meaning of is is is.....

Originally Posted by jpn

This is the favorite meme of the Republican Party in 2011; it's no surprise to hear Jarvis aping it.

I'd be f'n surprised, I'm not a Republican. Nice try there, get a few facts right will you?

Yes. But the fear is due to the recession, not to Obama's policies.

Or fear of a recession with Obama's policies.

I know those millions of unemployed are reaping the rewards of non-residential investment...:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by CSA

you keep posting graphs that show the biggest losses of jobs were right after people in business found out Obama was going ot be the next president.. why?

Why? Because I keep hoping that facts will make a difference. I also keep hoping that the gorgeous redhead from down the street will knock on my door and ask if she can do my laundry.

Shows what an idiot I am, eh?

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

Why? Because I keep hoping that facts will make a difference. I also keep hoping that the gorgeous redhead from down the street will knock on my door and ask if she can do my laundry.

Shows what an idiot I am, eh?

But a lovable idiot, nonetheless.

Ever notice how much more prevalent humor is on the left political side than the right side? It's noticable here, and it's noticable nationally. Where's the right-wing counterpart to John Stewart, for instance? This may be in idea for a separate thread...