He really cares about what the teabaggers think of him, doesn't he?

My taxes went up a lot this year, both state and federal.

Just more evidence that this man-child of a PotUS is either self-delusional, or a bigger sack of lying crap than Clinton ever was. He can only be talking about his stupid, piddling little $250 stimulus rebate check. This is typical Obama.

Like, "All the economists I talk to say my health care program will save you money..." Uh yeah - except the CBO, and about a dozen others that put his plan in the red. Who were these 'economists'? When did he talk to them? What did they actually say? What is their education, experience, and credentials? Sadly - Obama is the type of slimy snake in the grass you have to ask these questions to whenever he opens his mouth. As like as not these so-called 'economists' are leftist think-tank pinkos he chatted in passing during his college years.

WP, you do realize that "man-child" is code for "boy", don't you?

So? He is a boy. An immature, petulent, unqualified boy/child. If you're trying to turn this into something racist, then for shame. Calling him a man-child isn't about race. It is about his dangerous level of naivte. He's ignorant, and yet when he talks to people he is condescending, arrogant, smarmy, and dismissive of anything that challenges his opinion. If you don't agree with everything he says then he treats you like something he scraped off his shoe. He doesn't try to understand, or even listen. To put it in basic parleyance - he's a childish douche.

I deal with Obama's exact retarded personality type where I work sometimes. These are people who are barely qualified for their jobs, but have risen to positions because of chance or knowing the right people. Things get handed to them on a silver platter, and they aren't used to having to argue a position. To such people, they simply make a decision on gut based on thier whimsy and that automatically makes their decision 'right'. When they are challenged, they lash out because they aren't mentally equipped to justify or explain their positions or (God forbid) admit they might have been wrong. Instead they use their job-rank, lies, stories, exaggeration, or anything else they can come up with to steamroll opposition, and force-feed what they want on everyone else. They are petty, childish, simplistic, attention-hungry, prideful, insecure, and highly intolerant of opposing people or views.

I have a phrase I use to describe such persons... "He mistakes being opinionated for being correct." This is Obama. The man-child douche (you elected).

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:< br />
Like, "All the economists I talk to say my health care program will save you money..." Uh yeah - except the CBO, and about a dozen others that put his plan in the red. Who were these 'economists'? When did he talk to them? What did they actually say? What is their education, experience, and credentials?


First, you're not actually challenging the facts of what Obama said in this clip. Second, you're going to have to cite your "quote", since I bet you're overstating what he said.

Third, the CBO said it would reduce the deficit, and reduce the final cost to all Americans relative to the status quo.

Fourth, provide the answer to all of the questions you pose about Obama's economists about your own dozen or so unnamed economists you cite.

But I suppose I should take your word for it, since your seething personal dislike for the man makes you a completely objective judge of these sorts of things...

I'd be kind of pissed too, if a bunch of yahoos for whom I'd lowered taxes, started mass protests against taxes.

>> ^shuac:

He really cares about what the teabaggers think of him, doesn't he?

You keep telling yourself that very subjective, biased prattle. I thought it was just racial, but now I see a little inferiority complex in there. It's not Obama's fault you can't play the political game at work.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

So? He is a boy. An immature, petulent, unqualified boy/child. If you're trying to turn this into something racist, then for shame. Calling him a man-child isn't about race. It is about his dangerous level of naivte. He's ignorant, and yet when he talks to people he is condescending, arrogant, smarmy, and dismissive of anything that challenges his opinion. If you don't agree with everything he says then he treats you like something he scraped off his shoe. He doesn't try to understand, or even listen. To put it in basic parleyance - he's a childish douche.
I deal with Obama's exact retarded personality type where I work sometimes. These are people who are barely qualified for their jobs, but have risen to positions because of chance or knowing the right people. Things get handed to them on a silver platter, and they aren't used to having to argue a position. To such people, they simply make a decision on gut based on thier whimsy and that automatically makes their decision 'right'. When they are challenged, they lash out because they aren't mentally equipped to justify or explain their positions or (God forbid) admit they might have been wrong. Instead they use their job-rank, lies, stories, exaggeration, or anything else they can come up with to steamroll opposition, and force-feed what they want on everyone else. They are petty, childish, simplistic, attention-hungry, prideful, insecure, and highly intolerant of opposing people or views.
I have a phrase I use to describe such persons... "He mistakes being opinionated for being correct." This is Obama. The man-child douche (you elected).

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

So? He is a boy. An immature, petulent, unqualified boy/child.


Right, and some sociopathological ramblings on some random video website makes you a better person than he is.

In the words of one Jon Stewart: "Go fuck yourself"

>> ^blankfist:

My taxes went up a lot this year, both state and federal.


So either you're a liar or are quite rich. When you figure it out, let us know. Or actually, I don't give a shit so whatever.

I owe taxes, so thanks.

He's funny for a politician, but he's not that funny. People are fawning over him and his antics way too much.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I owe taxes, so thanks.


Ah kickass!

So either we have another liar, someone who's rich, or someone who "owes" because of his own inability to keep 1099's etc in order. Enjoy that.

Personally, I got about 2x more back than I did last year, and I make a very handsome salary (still under $250k, with deductions since I run a small business, am part of a union and have a lot of other deductions that I keep close track of.)

Must suck to live in your world (which I don't actually think exists anyway, but oh well...)

*promote for the liars and super rich people

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Friday, April 16th, 2010 1:15pm PDT - promote requested by volumptuous.

First, you're not actually challenging the facts of what Obama said in this clip. Second, you're going to have to cite your "quote", since I bet you're overstating what he said.

You are hard pressed to find a speech where Obama DOESN’T pull this rhetorical stunt. But specifically, the example I was thinking was at the Republican retreat in January. I mis-remembered it being about health care, when it was about job creation & stimulus spending. There was some other health care event where he did the same thing, but I can’t remember which one it was. I think it was the summit in March, but I’ll have to research that. Anyway, here’s an Obama-isms like what I'm talking about from the retreat…

OBAMA: “The notion that I would somehow resist doing something that cost half as much but would produce twice as many jobs -- why would I resist that? … The problem is I couldn't find credible economists who would back up the claims that you just made.”

OBAMA: “Those job losses took place before any stimulus…could have ever taken into effect. Now, that's just the fact, Mike, and I don't think anybody would dispute that. You could not find an economist who would dispute that…”

What were their names? What are their credentials? When did he talk to them? What did they say? Obama just waves rhetorical magic wands and conjures phantom armies of ‘economists’ who all agree with him when he wants to justify some stream of BS that sluices out of his piehole. Health care, foreign policy, cap & tax, NASA, you name it - he does it. Bank on it. When ANYONE challenges him - Joe the Plumber, a reporter, a politician, a climatalogist, an industry expert - whoever... Obama will pull this trick as his response and just bat them aside. Why? Because he's a childish douche who can't handle it when reasonable people disagree with his baloney.

Third, the CBO said it would reduce the deficit, and reduce the final cost to all Americans relative to the status quo.

During the whole debate process - Obama was claiming it would save money. The CBO disagreed as far back as July of 09, and through February of 2010.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071602242.html?hpid=topnews
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/23/plan-sweetened-for-gop-baffles-cbo/

I find it very interesting now that the bill has passed that the CBO can magically rush a favorably report in a couple weeks - even though many of the plan's details are not yet final. Good enough for places like HuffPo I guess, but they conveniently ignore a lot of the bad stuff.

http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/1524-five-reasons-the-cbo-figures-are-phony

Regardles, Obama’s claims were that it would cost less than 900 billion. It doesn’t. And the point was that Obama goes around bragging about how “every economist” says his plan is great. But that’s untrue. Even economists that are in his back pocket are (at best) saying HCR is kind of a wash, and it takes 20 years to accomplish it - and you can only do it by counting 10 years of taxation for 6 years of benefits. Move out of the realm of Obama administration puppets and there are TONS of 'economists' who stridently disagree with his plans.

Political game at work

I don’t really need to play the political game as I’m in a research position. I’m not trying to manage. However, I am put in a position where I supply data to business leaders, and all too often see the data ignored by “Obama” types who prefer to act on guts, instincts, and opinions – often resulting in millions of dollars in losses because they wouldn't listen to basics. It’s no skin off my nose at work, as I can shrug and move on to the next project. It's dissappointing to see bad decisions made in the headwind of facts at work. In the government it is alarming.

I <3 this about Videosift:
WP:
"[show the body of this ignored comment]

Closed ears - closed mind Volumpt. You consider it a virtue. I consider it the sad behavior of an intellectually defeated man.

As for anecdotal evidence, I make a decent amount of money, and got a few hundred back this year.

Has volumptuous always been such a bitter troll or is that new? I didn't have to do a 1099 ( i don't know what that even is offhand), but thanks for caring. If you had read any back comments you would know that I am currently poor and unemployed ( and don't qualify for unemployment of which I also pay taxes to).

I don’t really need to play the political game as I’m in a research position. I’m not trying to manage.

I think that's a very naive statement. I have a doctorate in engineering, and have been in the individual contributor positions where I have had to present data to executives. I have also worked for civilian and defense labs where the decision makers and stakeholders were engineers. You can't escape politics; even in academia I couldn't escape it.

However, I am put in a position where I supply data to business leaders, and all too often see the data ignored by “Obama” types who prefer to act on guts, instincts, and opinions – often resulting in millions of dollars in losses because they wouldn't listen to basics. It’s no skin off my nose at work, as I can shrug and move on to the next project. It's dissappointing to see bad decisions made in the headwind of facts at work. In the government it is alarming.

It surprises me that you are too lazy to develop yourself so that you are in a position to get your ideas across. You seem to be a person that values hard work in the face of adversity.

Your point of view is interesting. I think I used to be alot like you, in thinking that data told the whole story. The reason that is not the case is because there is never enough time or resources to collect enough data to eliminate uncertainty. In the face of uncertainty, 'gut feel' and the intuition derived from experience often does trump a fancy stochastic model.

I rather have Obama as President then Bush. How many times did Bush screw up words, sentences, and concepts, trying to make a point? If he couldn't get his own stuff straight, why should anyone take him serious on concepts that effect the nation?

Yes, 47%, due to tax cuts, provisions, and other legel code, allowed Americans to NOT have to pay a single dollar to the IRS. In fact, GE (General Electric) announced, after over 7000 local, county, state and federal filings, it will not be paying a penny in taxes. This is, the same company that filed $10.8 billion in profits for 2009. So, how is this possible? GE knows how to file taxes, and those earnings were made OUTSIDE the USA (to which it did make the proper accounting and taxes).

Someone like WP, you will simply have to understand, doesn't get it. This person has contradicted themselves in the past. Said things both not correct, nor justified with facts one could look up (from a neutral source). WP has waged wars of disinformation, taking things out of context, and 'liberally' glossing over details that would have infact, destroyed his arguements. Its kind of like beating a dead horse. To WP, he/she/it gets tons of fun out of it, while the rest of us go off to play a game of chess or something...

You can argue with him/her/it if you wish, but this person will NEVER conscede defeat, NOR, admit that you make valid and justified arguements. He insults and threatens at an alarming rate. He rails others, that they have to be held absolutely accountable, while keeping himself/herself/itself from any degree of accountability.

In essence, he/she/it, is Republican.

For example, ask WP to publish a list of CREDIBLE, economists, who disagree with how the economy has shown signs of turning around. Have him explain which factors are both leading and trailing indicators of the economy status and health. While doing this, have him state WHERE the deficit has grown from. Have him provide the full accounting of events, from a neutral source (read: non-right wing site). Yes, he will not provide this information, because his arguements really dont have much concrete ground to stand on.

>> ^volumptuous:

>> ^blankfist:
My taxes went up a lot this year, both state and federal.

So either you're a liar or are quite rich. When you figure it out, let us know. Or actually, I don't give a shit so whatever.


Not a liar and certainly not rich. Why is everything a battle with you guys? The Republicans cut taxes, too; did you mock the Dems who complained they had to pay more? Come on. This is petty. You live in California, so I know your state went way up, volumpy-pumpy.

My taxes did go up. Period.

>> <ahref='http://videosift.com/video/Obama-on-Protesters-They-Should-Thank-Me-For-Cutting-Taxes#comment-978221'>^Nithern:

Someone like WP, you will simply have to understand, doesn't get it. This person has contradicted themselves in the past. Said things both not correct, nor justified with facts one could look up (from a neutral source). WP has waged wars of disinformation, taking things out of context, and 'liberally' glossing over details that would have infact, destroyed his arguements. Its kind of like beating a dead horse. To WP, he/she/it gets tons of fun out of it, while the rest of us go off to play a game of chess or something..

Just take Obama's example. Take the piss out of them (Australasian for "make fun of them") and move on. Fudgepacker and the teabaggers are trolls, pure and simple. They do what they do to get a reaction. They don't have a fact to rest their hat on and they don't have an idea unless Glenn Beck put his weeping dick in their ear and fucked it in to them.

Do not feed the trolls.

No Asmo, facts are unavailable to those whose search ends with an exhausted emotional response.
Indoctrination and Propaganda uses One-sided arguments, just like those they deride. Different or opposing views are either ignored, misrepresented, under-represented, or denigrated. Use of generalizations...."allness" statements, and lack of specific references and data. Card Stacking: Data carefully selected - even distorted - to present only the best or worse possible case. Language used to conceal.

The alternative to the kind of Propaganda machine NetRunner promulgates here on the Videosift, is Education
Many sided: Issues examined from many points of view with opposition fairly represented.
Use of qualifiers-Statements supported with specific references and data.
Balanced: Presenting samples from a wide range of available data on the subject. Language used to reveal, not to support, editorialize, or heaven forbid, ostracize on the simplistic premise of "for" or "against"

Shall we go on??
Labeling-
Use of labels and derogatory language to describe proponents of an opposing viewpoint.
Promoting attitudes of attack and/or defense with the aim of selling a position or product.
Statistics always presented to show maximum damage from problem and minimum damage from solution....

and on and on, all are time-honored propaganda techniques, having little to do with self-conscious awareness, societal evolution, or humanity.

These posts do nothing to educate the masses NR....they simply lend credence to your personal brand of delusion while satisfying your unquenchable desire to make rhyme or reason of the bullshit you have been fed to date regarding the true nature and inner-workings of a government bound for an iceberg.

Fuck Obama. Fuck the office of the president. The US and the planet need a brain douche. The biggest problem on the planet today is as old as dirt. A few people on the globe want all the resources for themselves by any means necessary. You wanna do the planet a favor folks? Boycott large corporate entities as much as you can-Rock the vote by boycotting the entire process next go-around. Learn to live with what you were born with....the ability to survive in a hostile environment.

I am a poor student, and I got back all of my federal income tax and a $400 de facto welfare check from Obama. From a purely self-interested perspective, that might seem great. But when considered more holistically, it is unjust. Not only am I allowing the wealthy to shoulder my part of the tax burden, but I am accepting nothing short of a wealth transfer from those whose efforts contribute to the GDP and buttress the value of the dollar and the national account from which Obama is drawing. In short, Obama (and Bush, with his tax credits at the end of his second term) is very generous in giving what is not his to give.

"[A democracy] can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury." - Alexander Tyler

Yeah, he "cut" taxes...with money from the scamulus. He (and Bush) robbed the city bank where your money is kept and handed it back to you. Impressive, if you don't count his raising tobacco taxes. And his new socialized medicine garbage no one wanted (how many taxes are hidden in that turd, I wonder)? Bottom line: Barack Hussein Obama is a train wreck, comrade. November 2010 HIS bill comes due.

Obama is no marxist. His policies are centrist liberal. Yes, he cut some taxes but they are not enough.

Furthermore, let's not forget the policies of Reagan were an antidote to the high inflation caused by the military Keynesianism/supposed golden era of Liberalism of the post war boom period (1945-67). Unions were too strong and corrupt, durable and nondurable good consumption started falling in the late 60's, the emergence of OPEC, the expansion of the communist menace leading us into Vietnam, various conflicts to combat Marxist-Leninist-Maonist armed resistence groups taking power under political party fronts and an arms race with the Soviets and off the gold standard...While Europe had their social welfare experiment, we were busy policing the globe.

After the Volcker shock of 1979 (boosted IR to 20%) this lead to the financialization of the economy and the move away from manufacturing. All of this happened under the Carter Administration. Realizing the golden era of liberalism was untenable it brought the inevitable Reagan to prominence whose new regime (following the prescription of Milton Freidman and others was to allow consumers and the market to decide and to decrease the centralized control of government) - as denationalization of the public sector was the only way to create more opportunities and jobs. Cheap credit was not only championed by Wall Street as an antitode to problems, but was also championed by Democrats.

Democrats were almost completely unelectable in the White House until Bill Clinton and his administration (was Republican lite in essence as enacting Welfare Reform and setting the infrastructure for the War in Iraq and following the financial privitization schemes of the Chicago School, the FED fueled dotcom and mortgage bubble which created the much ballyhooed and fictitiuous Clinton surplus) is the reason for the financial deregulation in the late 90's (Clinton is now distancing himself from Rubin and Summers regading derivatives). The Neoconservatives and Democrats have much in common - as they both believe in crazy spending. Neocons through military (some of which does create nascent industries of the future), and Democrats who spend on any frivoulous social programs that work to break states and keep their politicos electable. Where is the incentive to become a producer in this country? If you are not paying high taxes you are competing against government subsidized monopolies (stop whining for more jobs when you overregulate ad penalize big corporations for doing what they need to do to make profits). The Democrats kill the ability to start a small to medium sized business thus making it more attractive to join big firms - that everyone continues to attack - sending them racing abroad.

And last time I checked the "real left" - which Obama distances himself from for good reason - is too busy scratching their heads ain petty sectarianism about how all of their wonderfully utopian ideas caused over 70 years of dreary totalitarianism. Seems the working class in the US now wants nothing to do with them. They want Palin. While you upper middle class liberals eat organic, sip latte's, do your hipster environmental thing and make fun of these people - they are forming the next grassroots that will be a vital contituency to covet.

These people may not be smart - but know that Obama is untrustworthy if he thinks the Federal Government can spend its way out of this mess, not understanding that for every 1/2 cent we have saved we still owe 2 dollars and that if we start increasing our deficits to create new jobs, the Chinese will sell off their currency reserves which are in dollars and then...

>> ^choggie:

No Asmo, facts are unavailable to those whose search ends with an exhausted emotional response.


Which is why WP's post doesn't really deserve a response and is, in fact, trolling...

For example...

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Just more evidence that this man-child of a PotUS is either self-delusional, or a bigger sack of lying crap than Clinton ever was. He can only be talking about his stupid, piddling little $250 stimulus rebate check. This is typical Obama.


How very perceptive of you. Don't feed the trolls. ; )

Downvote this as well starboy, enjoy gently. X D

No need to call the man anything but what he is: Another in a long line of charlatans posing as leadership.

So what if a convenient label exists for those with urgent language regarding the nature of posts like these? I like pennypacker....he rides alone, no herd, no taking sides....

Fan-Magnets with linear programs are essential to the propaganda, hype, spin, and most importantly, mamking people feel like their uninfrmed decisions collide with the predictable final showdown choices of A or B. This president only has the support and fervor behind him because miiiiiilions of dollars were spent to barrage the viewing public with hours of repetitive rhetoric, parties, and non-stop talkng head dribble about how literate and well-spoken the latest lackey is. Oh...did I mention he is the first African-Hawaiian-American president? This gives the added ummmph to the votors's conscience, knowing that they did theor part to add this historical milestone to their list of accomplishments.

Shining srmor is not what the United States needs after Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Reagan/Bush, Reagan/Bush now is it?? Any moron should be able to see a pattern, a private club, and the systematic dumbing-down of the population to go with it. One can witness the latter from the comments on every other thread here on the Videosift.

Look again...I'm on a Black Horse....and in my hand, a balance.

You can't escape politics; even in academia I couldn't escape it.

‘Escape’? I encounter it, but am fortunate enough to be in a position where it does not impact my day to day job function.

It surprises me that you are too lazy to develop yourself so that you are in a position to get your ideas across. You seem to be a person that values hard work in the face of adversity.

I’m in a top-heavy organization, and the last thing it needs is another manager. With only about 1,200 employees we have 7 people at the “EO” level, 50+ VPs, 125+ directors. Believe me, we are no-where near short of ‘chiefs’. We need more ‘indians’ – more highly qualified & skilled professionals. It’s a good company; I see no need to try to ‘manage’. To do so would turn the nature of my work away from in-depth analysis towards a more simple, business-decision oriented truncated approach. I’d move from data, to budgets. From study to meetings. I prefer to tear a topic down to its roots rather than skim above it at 50,000 feet.

In the face of uncertainty, 'gut feel' and the intuition derived from experience often does trump a fancy stochastic model.

I don’t have a beef with QUALIFIED people who make a decision against data. I have great respect for business guys who are skilled, intelligent, thoughtful, and have the ability to make a ‘gut’ business decision after weighing the options. Such people can take my detailed analysis – put it in the hopper – and make a decision that isn’t totally data-driven, but accounts for other things. The reason my company does well is because most of the business guys are of this sort. I respect them, and don't feel the need to add myself to their number when there are more than enough of them to take care of things. I'm best off where I am - doing the detail research they don't have time for.

Obama is he is NOT that kind of person. He is the ‘other’ kind that you meet in a business meeting... They have made a decision before they walk in the door, or have heard a single fact. They do not try to learn, or educate themselves, or respectfully consider other experts when making decisions. They only seek to justify decisions that they already made in everyone’s absence. Such persons are more than happy to use data - but only as long as it agrees with what they want. The second the data disagrees with them then the tiniest, most illogical of excuses will suffice to bat it aside as faulty. Thankfully there aren't too many of them where I work. But they're there sometimes.

When Obama encounters someone who presents facts, research, opinions, or approaches contrary to his own – he manifests himself as the small, petty, vapid man that typifies this sort of ‘bad’ business decision maker. The good ones are precious. The ‘bad’ ones like Obama are a blight on any organization they darken with their odious presence.

How many times did Bush screw up words, sentences, and concepts, trying to make a point

Did you see the thread, “Why do Republicans believe lies about Obama”? In it, people say that news-driven talking points are sucked up by intellectual sponges and parroted back unthinkingly. Your opinion about Bush is based on the very same practice, but sponsored by the left. It was grossly exaggerated. Bush did a lot of dumb things, but he proved himself more competent and intelligent than Obama in many respects. Obama can't handle himself with diplomacy (case in point with Isreal), but Bush did it easily and naturally.

You say I ‘don’t get it’. I can only shrug and say you are the victim of groupthink, and have no logical grounds for your specious position. For example – you say I supply no list of economists. I can easily do so.

http://www.adsavvy.org/consensus-war-300-top-economists-disagree-with-obamas-no-disagreement-remark/

But – as is usual – folk of your stripe will ignore fact and try to weasel away from the reality that I've proven you completely, totally, and irrevocably wrong. I am the one here that provides links, data, and information to justify my arguments. People such as yourself only climb up on rhetorical soap-boxes and fling poo.

Obama is no marxist. His policies are centrist liberal.

How is an administration ‘centrist liberal’ when it moves to take over the financial industry, the automotive industry, the medical industry, the insurance industry, and energy – while at the same time feeding billions in stimulus money to big unions & trial lawyers? All of Obama’s positions are RADICALLY far-left. Isreal, education, taxes, role of government, deficit spending, Supreme court nominee, you name the issue and Obama has proven he is way out left. This is why independent and moderate voters (who voted for him) have abandoned him in droves to the point where his approval rating is cratering to George W. Bush levels.

To clarify a point - I'm not trying to say ALL economists disagree with Obama. What I'm saying is that Obama is the kind of sleazeball who in his speeches tries to tell everyone that ALL economists agree with HIM. Most issues have a gamut of opinions. If Obama was truthful he'd say, "The economists !THAT I AGREE WITH! say that I should do things this way..." He should admit there are many many many people who disagree with him, and that they are at least as qualified as the experts that he uses to try and sell his policies. Then I'd be more inclined to forgive his idiotic rhetoric.

But he just can't bring himself to do that because it would be admitting that he is talking out one side of his mouth on an issue. He's one of those pathological types who has to make it sound like disagreement with his decisions is relegated to the fringe kookery. That's why "all economists" agree with him, or you can't find a "credible economist" who supports his opponents. What a douche.

Winston, I really have to ask, what is your true goal on videosift?

In the past two years, you've voted up Three things, All of the comments you've written that are able to be seen are either of you bashing Obama, or Praising fox news..

Really, do you honestly -just- come on this website to argue and troll?

Yeah, your opinion is your own.. but you've never tried to even sift a video. Ever. All you truly ever seem to do is stir up a commotion..

Maybe you're a sock puppet so your main account doesn't get a bad rep.. or maybe you are just a troll, but I truly want to ask.. If you're not here for the videos, then why not just go to a forum somewhere?

lefties agree the government has grown quite a bit
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/04/why-im-passing-on-tea.html

The article points out that tea parties policies are all over the place.
As a progressive I will point out progressive policies are all over the place.

anyhow, on a different point, Rahm Emmanuel, chief of staff for the administration is a good example of the reason I hate the current administration. Willing to sacrifice policy and anything for political points.

I probably should leave this thread well enough alone, but I'm a glutton for punishment.

@Winstonfield_Pennypacker, you need to do better research when it comes to finding data to support your argument. For one, your quotes of Obama would not accurately be paraphrased as "All economists agree with me", they would be paraphrased as "No credible economist would agree with what you just said", with the "what you just said" conveniently left out of the quote.

Also, both quotes were part of a dialogue about health care, and you keep citing articles about the stimulus, plus a single article about what the CBO said about an exceptionally early draft of HCR from last summer.

Now, a statement that I couldn't really contest, would be this quote, from this article you linked:

During a time of controversy, the best way to win over public opinion is to convince the public that there is no controversy. Sometimes, when an issue is too complicated for the general public to make an informed decision on their own, they rely on the opinions of experts, and politicians stop debating the points of the issue, and start debating the consensus. That’s a consensus war. It’s happening with the global warming issue, and it’s happening with the economy.

Recently, Obama attempted to shut down the controversy surrounding his so-called “stimulus” package by saying “there is no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy.”

To improve the economy, policy makers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.