The system worked?

[Lurker]

For Lurker to spit that out, he has to be pissed. It's so out of his character.

Not pissed exactly. I just wanted to give him one more chance to stop focusing on trivial bullshit. So, the call for him to grow up.

Judging by his latest through the looking glass posts he's simply incapable. We've all witnessed the last couple weeks the most honest, rapid, and public self assessement of a security failure I've ever seen, in stark contrast to the stonewalling of the last Administration. We've also witnessed a shameless and disgusting politcal party, with far too few exceptions, eager to exploit a terrorist incident for politcal gain.

Regardless, I'm done trying to have a discussion with the poo-flinging monkey.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

We've all witnessed the last couple weeks the most honest, rapid, and public self assessement of a security failure I've ever seen

Honest? Rapid?... Yeah, you're wearing blinders. I was paying less attention to the news than the WH was and I still heard about it before Obama did.

This was an adminstration playing catch-up and damage control. And they continue to do so.

Should we expect anything less from a Democratic administration? Spending goes through the roof while Intelligence and Security go out the window.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

Should we expect anything less from a Democratic administration? Spending goes through the roof while Intelligence and Security go out the window.

Irony/10.

[Partha]

Should we expect anything less from a Democratic administration? Spending goes through the roof while Intelligence and Security go out the window.

Irony/10.

No, no, no. If it goes towards killing shifty brown people, it's not bad spending in GOPLand. Unless it's a Democrat doing the spending - then it's bad because they're not letting the GOP put it's half-century of experience terrorizing dusky folks to use with full effect.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Show me that spending isn't more now than it was under Bush.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Obama upped spending by 100% over Bush. Even including all the expenses from the Iraq war. He's quadrupled the deficit. All in a just a few months.

[Harlowe]

This sort of utter irrational bullshit just sucks any interest a person might have in a topic.

I seriously don't know why you bother Lurker, I just don't see how this can be fun or interesting anymore. It's the same thing over and over, you aren't going to get anywhere with it or hear a view you couldn't link directly back to Fox, Drudge or Breitbart.

It's the same tired formula over and over starting (typically) with some sort of wildly irrational claim.

[Taxious]

I've been kind of curious about that as well Harlowe, but from both sides. It seems like everything in here is just SSDPolitician.

[Lurker]

It's the same tired formula over and over starting (typically) with some sort of wildly irrational claim.

Exactly. Take the latest wildly irrational claim that "[Obama] quadrupled the deficit. All in a just a few months."

Nevermind that Obama inherited a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit from Bush, or that the current deficits have little to nothing to do with Obama's Agenda (see here and here), or that we'd be in much worse shape if we had followed the Republican Party's insane policy suggestions and implemented a spending freeze.

They are clearly pathological, having created a pleasing alternate reality for themselves. So, I don't know why I bother either.

[Embar Angylwrath]

It's the same tired formula over and over starting (typically) with some sort of wildly irrational claim.

Exactly. Take the latest wildly irrational claim that "[Obama] quadrupled the deficit. All in a just a few months."

Nevermind that Obama inherited a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit from Bush, or that the current deficits have little to nothing to do with Obama's Agenda (see here and here), or that we'd be in much worse shape if we had followed the Republican Party's insane policy suggestions and implemented a spending freeze.

They are clearly pathological, having created a pleasing alternate reality for themselves. So, I don't know why I bother either.

Do you REALLY want to get into a discussion on fiscal responsibility? Bring it on. I'm no fan of Bush II's spending, and I'm on record as saying he spent like a Democrat, but apparently I was wrong. Obama has allocated an enormous amount of spending, twice that of Bush II.

Harlowe... do you even fact check anymore? I hate to say this... but you seem to have no idea on what you're posting. I really hope you havent become a partisan hack like Lurker.

[Partha]

Perhaps she's been repelled by your complete lack of honesty and refusal to embrace reality? Just a thought.

Obama has had to make the steps he's made in regards to the budget. To prevent the Great Recession from turning into another Depression, he had to use the government to do the things the private sector would not and could not do. We have rock solid evidence from the Great Depression that it was government deficit spending to promote growth that shortened the length and severity of the depression, and he's used that to guide his economic polices - which includes deficit spending. Plus, he's actually put the cost of Bush's wars on the books, rather than keeping them hidden off budget to make himself look like a fiscal hawk.

Your problems with Obama have become so incoherent and disconnected from reality that you come off like a buffoon.

[Lurker]

And back on Planet Earth...

3.6 trillion isn't twice as much as 3.1 trillion.

1.8 trillion isn't four times as much as 1.2 trillion.

[Select]

[Fallakin Kuvari]

How's that Jobless Recovery working out for you guys?

[Lurker]

Well, the recovery is going better than it would have if we'd followed the insane spending freeze the Republicans wanted, but it is still a jobless one. Not sure why you find that amusing since it means Americans are out of work and suffering. You stay classy, wingnut.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Oh gee, I dunno... Maybe because its nearly impossible to have a true recovery without job creation.

Again, How's that Jobless Recovery working out for you guys?

[Partha]

Didn't know you renounced your citizenship, Fall. But tell us who's tree house is currently hosting the New Confederacy?

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Why would I go and do something like that? Besides, I was never a fan of the south and there isn't anyone stepping up to form a New Union.

Why don't you inform us how Progressivism is working out for the country?

[Embar Angylwrath]

Well, the recovery is going better than it would have if we'd followed the insane spending freeze the Republicans wanted, but it is still a jobless one. Not sure why you find that amusing since it means Americans are out of work and suffering. You stay classy, wingnut.

Currently over 10% unemployment, and if you count the people who have given up looking for work, that rises to over 17%. And that doesn't count the people that never entered the workforce over the last couple of years.

I don't think the stimulus has done much, or prevented much. It went to the wrong places (both Bush and Obama share he blame here). Direct lending to small business would have done much much more for the economy, and keeping people in homes would have helped too. As it stands, the only real result has been to bail out large firms, and shovel capital into banks so their balaqnce sheets look stronger. But that hasn't helped the guy on the street keep his job.

Its not banks and AIG that vote... its the guy on the street. This jobless recovery, and it is just that, will have negative effects in the elections for Democrats. A policy that "saves or creates jobs" rings hollow for people that have lost theirs.

[Lurker]

Why don't you save everyone the bother and just re-read this exact same topic from two months ago.

You can use the time saved to figure out why what you think you know about Obama's spending and deficits doesn't square with reality.