Roasts are funny.
What isn't funny are the people in this topic going "I really hope his kidneys fail." That's sick.
I was sickened by that to.I hope Rush Limbaugh's kidneys fail.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="fidosim"]I don't get the hate for Rush Limbaugh, I honestly don't. I've listened to him and i've never heard him make the kind of vulgar, personal insults that have been thrown at him. And people who bag on him for his narcotic addiction need to get off their high horse. He took them for back pain, developed an addiction, and got help. Obama did coke to get high, so by what authority can anyone point the finger?MoonMarvelClaiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. And where did he ever wish ill on someone? And that song was funny, lighten up. Stop making excuses for her, you never wish harm on someone. Even they if did it to you, two wrongs don't make a right. Then you are just as bad as them. :roll: I don't agree with Wanda that Rush's kidneys should fail. I agree with the fact that she is exercising her right to free hate speech just as much as he has. She is a comedian, she doesn't mean what she says. Rush is not a comedian, he means what he says. Like you said, it's funny. Lighten up.
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"][QUOTE="danwallacefan"] just examining the theories which provide the premises, upon which his policies are built, are damn-good indicators of how the rest of his presidency will be.
Well we examined Bush's theories, didn't we? We assumed that all would be well during his presidency. Look how that turned out... excuse me, who the hell is "we"? I'm not a monetarist like Greenspan or BernankeAnd I'm talking about his economic theories in particular, namely keynesianism. One has to stand and wonder if Obama is even remotely aware of the devastating Austrian critiques of Keyensian economics.
Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be.[QUOTE="fidosim"]I don't get the hate for Rush Limbaugh, I honestly don't. I've listened to him and i've never heard him make the kind of vulgar, personal insults that have been thrown at him. And people who bag on him for his narcotic addiction need to get off their high horse. He took them for back pain, developed an addiction, and got help. Obama did coke to get high, so by what authority can anyone point the finger?Maniacc1Claiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you.
[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] Claiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Maniacc1And where did he ever wish ill on someone? And that song was funny, lighten up. Stop making excuses for her, you never wish harm on someone. Even they if did it to you, two wrongs don't make a right. Then you are just as bad as them. :roll: I don't agree with Wanda that Rush's kidneys should fail. I agree with the fact that she is exercising her right to free hate speech just as much as he has. She is a comedian, she doesn't mean what she says. Rush is not a comedian, he means what he says. Like you said, it's funny. Lighten up. NO! As someone who has had a family member ACTUALLY have his kidney's fail I will not. There is nothing funny about it, it's tacky. Its just a joke is no excuse, she was out of line.
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="fidosim"]I don't get the hate for Rush Limbaugh, I honestly don't. I've listened to him and i've never heard him make the kind of vulgar, personal insults that have been thrown at him. And people who bag on him for his narcotic addiction need to get off their high horse. He took them for back pain, developed an addiction, and got help. Obama did coke to get high, so by what authority can anyone point the finger?fidosimClaiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you. When's the last time you could take a comedian seriously. If she was a political commentator, then we'd have a problem. Do you honestly believe she wants him to die?
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="fidosim"]I don't get the hate for Rush Limbaugh, I honestly don't. I've listened to him and i've never heard him make the kind of vulgar, personal insults that have been thrown at him. And people who bag on him for his narcotic addiction need to get off their high horse. He took them for back pain, developed an addiction, and got help. Obama did coke to get high, so by what authority can anyone point the finger?fidosimClaiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you. Well said indeed. She was way over the line.
Roasts are funny.
What isn't funny are the people in this topic going "I really hope his kidneys fail." That's sick.
I was sickened by that to. I don't know, I don't want his kidneys to fail, but if a flying ice cream truck were to drop from the sky and land on him, I wouldn't be too sad.[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] Claiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Maniacc1Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you. When's the last time you could take a comedian seriously. If she was a political commentator, then we'd have a problem. Do you honestly believe she wants him to die? Comedy like this is essentially commentary with a humorous twist on it. You can't discount what she said simply because she was just trying to be funny.
[QUOTE="fidosim"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] Claiming a man who has Parkinson's is lying and over hyping his disease, and then mocking him by flailing his arms about. Playing a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro." Oh wait, these were just taken out of "context" right? :roll: Give me a break. You dish out hate, you deserve it back. If Rush takes it personally, then honestly he needs to grow up. Maniacc1Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you. When's the last time you could take a comedian seriously. If she was a political commentator, then we'd have a problem. Do you honestly believe she wants him to die?Are you saying she doesn't put her own beliefs in her "jokes"? With how much the democrats attack Rush I doubt it.
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]And where did he ever wish ill on someone? And that song was funny, lighten up. Stop making excuses for her, you never wish harm on someone. Even they if did it to you, two wrongs don't make a right. Then you are just as bad as them. :roll:MoonMarvelI don't agree with Wanda that Rush's kidneys should fail. I agree with the fact that she is exercising her right to free hate speech just as much as he has. She is a comedian, she doesn't mean what she says. Rush is not a comedian, he means what he says. Like you said, it's funny. Lighten up. NO! As someone who has had a family member ACTUALLY have his kidney's fail I will not. There is nothing funny about it, it's tacky. Its just a joke is no excuse, she was out of line. I guess it boils down to personal opinion. As someone who knew a friend who's old family members were lynched in the south and suffered from Jim Crow laws and segregation, I don't find anything funny about Barack the Magic Negro, it's just tacky. But it's just opinion I guess, nothing can be debated about that.
Roasts are funny.
What isn't funny are the people in this topic going "I really hope his kidneys fail." That's sick.
I was sickened by that to. I don't know, I don't want his kidneys to fail, but if a flying ice cream truck were to drop from the sky and land on him, I wouldn't be too sad.And if an a rabid sea turtle attacked Obama I wouldn't be too sad. ;)Roasts are funny.
What isn't funny are the people in this topic going "I really hope his kidneys fail." That's sick.
I was sickened by that to. I don't know, I don't want his kidneys to fail, but if a flying ice cream truck were to drop from the sky and land on him, I wouldn't be too sad. Agreed.[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="fidosim"] Accusing Fox of exaggerating his disease and playing a controversial song are not equivalent to wishing death upon someone who disagrees with you. fidosimWhen's the last time you could take a comedian seriously. If she was a political commentator, then we'd have a problem. Do you honestly believe she wants him to die? Comedy like this is essentially commentary with a humorous twist on it. You can't discount what she said simply because she was just trying to be funny. I understand what she said, and I understand why some would consider it distasteful. I'm not justifying her words, just the fact that she is using the same rights as Rush is by making her commentary with humorous twist known. Is that not what Rush does?
[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] I don't agree with Wanda that Rush's kidneys should fail. I agree with the fact that she is exercising her right to free hate speech just as much as he has. She is a comedian, she doesn't mean what she says. Rush is not a comedian, he means what he says. Like you said, it's funny. Lighten up. Maniacc1NO! As someone who has had a family member ACTUALLY have his kidney's fail I will not. There is nothing funny about it, it's tacky. Its just a joke is no excuse, she was out of line. I guess it boils down to personal opinion. As someone who knew a friend who's old family members were lynched in the south and suffered from Jim Crow laws and segregation, I don't find anything funny about Barack the Magic Negro, it's just tacky. But it's just opinion I guess, nothing can be debated about that. Pardon me? You knew a friends family who had that happen, my family was enslaved. I am half black and my great grandmothers grandparents where slaves, she even remembered it and I don't find it tacky at all. I don't get bent on songs if they don't wish ill on people, it even made fun of people who mocked him being half white.
[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]excuse me, who the hell is "we"? I'm not a monetarist like Greenspan or Bernanke[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Well we examined Bush's theories, didn't we? We assumed that all would be well during his presidency. Look how that turned out...edisni_edistuo
And I'm talking about his economic theories in particular, namely keynesianism. One has to stand and wonder if Obama is even remotely aware of the devastating Austrian critiques of Keyensian economics.
Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]NO! As someone who has had a family member ACTUALLY have his kidney's fail I will not. There is nothing funny about it, it's tacky. Its just a joke is no excuse, she was out of line.MoonMarvelI guess it boils down to personal opinion. As someone who knew a friend who's old family members were lynched in the south and suffered from Jim Crow laws and segregation, I don't find anything funny about Barack the Magic Negro, it's just tacky. But it's just opinion I guess, nothing can be debated about that. Pardon me? You knew a friends family who had that happen, my family was enslaved. I am half black and my great grandmothers grandparents where slaves, she even remembered it and I don't find it tacky at all. I don't get bent on songs if they don't wish ill on people, it even made fun of people who mocked him being half white. I'm sorry members of your family were subjected to those harsh laws. But like I said, I still think the fact it was played is distasteful. There is no room in politics for things that subtract from what the main focus should be. That goes for Wanda as well, I don't believe what she said is right. But I don't think it's any different than the hate speak Rush has been operating on for years. Call it worse because it "wishes death" on someone, but I just think this is no worse than what we've already heard.
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"][QUOTE="danwallacefan"] excuse me, who the hell is "we"? I'm not a monetarist like Greenspan or Bernanke
And I'm talking about his economic theories in particular, namely keynesianism. One has to stand and wonder if Obama is even remotely aware of the devastating Austrian critiques of Keyensian economics.
Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject.[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. edisni_edistuo
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject. thank you :DWow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject. thank you :D I'm curious, which field would that be considered to be under? Is it just economics?[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"][QUOTE="danwallacefan"] I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
danwallacefan
[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]thank you :D I'm curious, which field would that be considered to be under? Is it just economics? macroeconomics to be specific.[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject.Maniacc1
[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] I guess it boils down to personal opinion. As someone who knew a friend who's old family members were lynched in the south and suffered from Jim Crow laws and segregation, I don't find anything funny about Barack the Magic Negro, it's just tacky. But it's just opinion I guess, nothing can be debated about that. Maniacc1Pardon me? You knew a friends family who had that happen, my family was enslaved. I am half black and my great grandmothers grandparents where slaves, she even remembered it and I don't find it tacky at all. I don't get bent on songs if they don't wish ill on people, it even made fun of people who mocked him being half white. I'm sorry members of your family were subjected to those harsh laws. But like I said, I still think the fact it was played is distasteful. There is no room in politics for things that subtract from what the main focus should be. That goes for Wanda as well, I don't believe what she said is right. But I don't think it's any different than the hate speak Rush has been operating on for years. Call it worse because it "wishes death" on someone, but I just think this is no worse than what we've already heard. I take what I hear with a grain of salt, I am learned not to be annoyed by what someone says until I know they said it. Meaning I won't say anything about Rush until I actually know what he said, as I never listen to his show.
Yet another lame attack on conservative radio.
[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="MoonMarvel"]Pardon me? You knew a friends family who had that happen, my family was enslaved. I am half black and my great grandmothers grandparents where slaves, she even remembered it and I don't find it tacky at all. I don't get bent on songs if they don't wish ill on people, it even made fun of people who mocked him being half white.MoonMarvelI'm sorry members of your family were subjected to those harsh laws. But like I said, I still think the fact it was played is distasteful. There is no room in politics for things that subtract from what the main focus should be. That goes for Wanda as well, I don't believe what she said is right. But I don't think it's any different than the hate speak Rush has been operating on for years. Call it worse because it "wishes death" on someone, but I just think this is no worse than what we've already heard. I take what I hear with a grain of salt, I am learned not to be annoyed by what someone says until I know they said it. Meaning I won't say anything about Rush until I actually know what he said, as I never listen to his show. Fair enough. I've listened to Rush several times, but I haven't been tuned in with some of his controversial stuff. Still, when you see video of him impersonating Michael J. Fox, it's not hard to imagine the true meaning.
Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"][QUOTE="danwallacefan"] excuse me, who the hell is "we"? I'm not a monetarist like Greenspan or Bernanke
And I'm talking about his economic theories in particular, namely keynesianism. One has to stand and wonder if Obama is even remotely aware of the devastating Austrian critiques of Keyensian economics.
danwallacefan
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
How are things going to once again reach full employment when American companies move jobs out of the country and aren't hiring American workers? Econmic theories are fine, but if American companines don't hire Americans, then who give a f@$* about theory.
Considering who the target was, I don't really think they were over the top.JML897agreed.. nothing is really over the top when it comes to limbaugh, o'relly, grace, or those other crazies.(not to forget the crazies on the left, but i don't really know any of their names)
[QUOTE="MoonMarvel"][QUOTE="Maniacc1"] I'm sorry members of your family were subjected to those harsh laws. But like I said, I still think the fact it was played is distasteful. There is no room in politics for things that subtract from what the main focus should be. That goes for Wanda as well, I don't believe what she said is right. But I don't think it's any different than the hate speak Rush has been operating on for years. Call it worse because it "wishes death" on someone, but I just think this is no worse than what we've already heard. Maniacc1I take what I hear with a grain of salt, I am learned not to be annoyed by what someone says until I know they said it. Meaning I won't say anything about Rush until I actually know what he said, as I never listen to his show. Fair enough. I've listened to Rush several times, but I haven't been tuned in with some of his controversial stuff. Still, when you see video of him impersonating Michael J. Fox, it's not hard to imagine the true meaning. He did make one excellent argument
I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. herbasher
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
How are things going to once again reach full employment when American companies move jobs out of the country and aren't hiring American workers? Econmic theories are fine, but if American companines don't hire Americans, then who give a f@$* about theory.
This problem you're talking about is EXACTLY why we need to allow the market forces to depress American wages. Public works projects will artificially inflate the price of American labor. Likewise, Monetary and fiscal "stimulus" will also inflate the cost of American labor. This, along with the fact that Hoover used wage controls to boost worker wages, is why real wages went up from 1929 to 1933, but unemployment skyrocketed.This problem you're talking about is EXACTLY why we need to allow the market forces to depress American wages. Public works projects will artificially inflate the price of American labor. Likewise, Monetary and fiscal "stimulus" will also inflate the cost of American labor. This, along with the fact that Hoover used wage controls to boost worker wages, is why real wages went up from 1929 to 1933, but unemployment skyrocketed.
danwallacefan
That sounds nice on paper, but what about the millions of people who will be left jobless?
[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Excuse me, "we" as in the public. Okay, one should also stand and wonder about OUR economics, not Austrian ones. Obama has his focus right where it needs to be. edisni_edistuo
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject.:lol: nah, you should see -Sun_Tzu- own dan in debates on Keynesian economics :lol:
[QUOTE="herbasher"]
[QUOTE="danwallacefan"] I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
danwallacefan
How are things going to once again reach full employment when American companies move jobs out of the country and aren't hiring American workers? Econmic theories are fine, but if American companines don't hire Americans, then who give a f@$* about theory.
This problem you're talking about is EXACTLY why we need to allow the market forces to depress American wages. Public works projects will artificially inflate the price of American labor. Likewise, Monetary and fiscal "stimulus" will also inflate the cost of American labor. This, along with the fact that Hoover used wage controls to boost worker wages, is why real wages went up from 1929 to 1933, but unemployment skyrocketed.The cost of American labor is being "depressed". You mentioned that things would right themselves in time if the cost of labor in America goes down. What companies are going to hire Americans though? Wages are going to down and have been for a while now. It is expensive to live in America. You can depress wages all you want, but where are these jobs going to come from in Ameica if the Market has righted itself? I'm not attempting to debate Obama's stimulus plan or economics with you. A big pat of the economy being poor now has to do with the fact that people aren't working and jobs have been moving out of the country in mass. If Americans are not buying products from American companies, then those companies aren't going to do as well. Foriegn consumers don't have the buying power, that Americans do. You seem like you know your stuff, and I am sure that there are points I am missing and don't understand. The thing is jobs have gone from this country and they are not coming back. That being the, case the middle class is gone and won't be back.
Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject.[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"][QUOTE="danwallacefan"] I really hope you didn't have any beliefs one way or another about the american recovery and reinvestment act of 2009 (the stimulus bill that passed 3 months ago), because you've demonstrated a basic ignorance of economics that could be easily cured with an incredibly cursory survey of the introductory literature. I'd recommend that you pick up a few books by Woods, Hayek, Murphy, or Rothbard.
Now, that being said, "Austrian economics" isn't the economics of Austria. It means "of or pertaining to the Austrian school of economics". The Austrian school was founded by Ludwig Von Mises and his student Friedrich Hayek, who later recieved a nobel prize in economics.
Now Barack Obama's plans are based upon the theory of John Maynard Keynes. However, as the Austrian economists pointed out, there are 2 major problems with Keynesian economics which severly undercut Keynesian economics, and Barack Obama's plans (of course its not limited to these 2, but I find these 2 austrian critiques to be the most devastating of the austrian critiques. The Monetarists have some novel critiques)
1: The myth of deflationary spiral
2: The fact that the economy needs to reset itself.
The Keynesian and Monetarist solutions to our current crisis are based upon the premise that Deflation is bad for the economy. Au Contraire, Deflation is a normal and healthy process which only helps the economy reset itself and start trade once again. Pumping more money into the economy (as Bernenke, Hoover, and Roosevelt tried to do with Wage controls and large public works projects) only delays this reset. Truth is unemployment must happen, so wage rates can go down and unprofitable firms and industries can go by the wayside, and so profitable industries can hire the excess. Once the economy has returned to high or full employment, wage rates will go up. This, unlike the inflationary booms that the Monetarists and Keynesians seek to create, is sustainable.
chessmaster1989
:lol: nah, you should see -Sun_Tzu- own dan in debates on Keynesian economics :lol:
I actually sent these points to Sun_Tzu about deflationary spiral and fiscal/monetary stimulus and he has yet to respond.Maybe I stumped him:?
who knows
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[QUOTE="edisni_edistuo"] Wow, I salute you (no sarcasm intended). You're well-researched on the subject.danwallacefan
:lol: nah, you should see -Sun_Tzu- own dan in debates on Keynesian economics :lol:
I actually sent these points to Sun_Tzu about deflationary spiral and fiscal/monetary stimulus and he has yet to respond.Maybe I stumped him:?
who knows
I don't know what -Sun_Tzu-'s habits for checking pms is.
I tracked him a while back, was hoping he'd track me so he'd be on my friends list. He didn't. :(
EDIT: Never mind, he did :D.
Btw, dan, I'm still waiting on your ultimate defense of Christianity. I'm particularly interested to see how you defend body-mind dualism.
I actually sent these points to Sun_Tzu about deflationary spiral and fiscal/monetary stimulus and he has yet to respond.[QUOTE="danwallacefan"]
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
:lol: nah, you should see -Sun_Tzu- own dan in debates on Keynesian economics :lol:
chessmaster1989
Maybe I stumped him:?
who knows
I don't know what -Sun_Tzu-'s habits for checking pms is.
I tracked him a while back, was hoping he'd track me so he'd be on my friends list. He didn't. :(
well we DID have a lengthy correspondance through PM, so I doubt its just that he never checks his PMs.perhaps you can take a crack at my points?
Sykes is a piece of garbage, regardless of the target. A good friend and colleague of mine passed away due to kidney failure, and a piece of **** like Sykes has probably never had a friend long enough to know what it feels like to lose one, and has probably never had a large enough thought go through that pea-sized brain of hers to comprehend how awful and lengthy a process it is to die from kidney failure.
Not to mention this ****ing idiot we elected laughing at it like a big buffoon. Serious question: Aren't liberals supposed to be enlightened, and progressive, and sensitive to the plights of others? This guy is laughing about kidney failure and he's supposed to be this awesome, swell guy? Seems like a ****ing moron to me, but whatever.
Why not laugh about leukemia on top of the Special Olympics and kidney failure, Mr. President?
[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"]
[QUOTE="danwallacefan"] I actually sent these points to Sun_Tzu about deflationary spiral and fiscal/monetary stimulus and he has yet to respond.
Maybe I stumped him:?
who knows
danwallacefan
I don't know what -Sun_Tzu-'s habits for checking pms is.
I tracked him a while back, was hoping he'd track me so he'd be on my friends list. He didn't. :(
well we DID have a lengthy correspondance through PM, so I doubt its just that he never checks his PMs.perhaps you can take a crack at my points?
Nah, at this point I don't know enough about econ to really argue with anyone :P. I'll get back to you in about 3 years, after I've gotten my B.S./B.A. (don't remember which it is :P) in Mathematics w/Specialization in Economics, or at least when I've taken econ beyond an intermediate-level microeconomics course :P.
Wow... that goes way beyond a personal problem. :lol: Open up a history book, you may be surprised what our "faithful" presidents have been doing behind our back.Sykes is a piece of garbage, regardless of the target. A good friend and colleague of mine passed away due to kidney failure, and a piece of **** like Sykes has probably never had a friend long enough to know what it feels like to lose one, and has probably never had a large enough thought go through that pea-sized brain of hers about how awful and lengthy it is to die from kidney failure.
Not to mention this ****ing idiot we elected laughing at it like a big buffoon. Serious question: Aren't liberals supposed to be enlightened, and progressive, and sensitive to the plights of others? This guy is laughing about kidney failure and he's supposed to be this awesome, swell guy? Seems like a ****ing moron to me, but whatever.
Why not laugh about leukemia on top of the Special Olympics and kidney failure, Mr. President?
Shame-usBlackley
[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]Wow... that goes way beyond a personal problem. :lol: Open up a history book, you may be surprised what our "faithful" presidents have been doing behind our back.Sykes is a piece of garbage, regardless of the target. A good friend and colleague of mine passed away due to kidney failure, and a piece of **** like Sykes has probably never had a friend long enough to know what it feels like to lose one, and has probably never had a large enough thought go through that pea-sized brain of hers about how awful and lengthy it is to die from kidney failure.
Not to mention this ****ing idiot we elected laughing at it like a big buffoon. Serious question: Aren't liberals supposed to be enlightened, and progressive, and sensitive to the plights of others? This guy is laughing about kidney failure and he's supposed to be this awesome, swell guy? Seems like a ****ing moron to me, but whatever.
Why not laugh about leukemia on top of the Special Olympics and kidney failure, Mr. President?
Maniacc1
I know all too well. And this one is doing it too, I'm sure. I just find the things this one does openly a notch higher on the disturb-o-meter. I know it's trendy and chic to prostrate yourself and attempt to fellate the guy, but he seems like a big stupid doof already. His plane is off doing strafing runs on New York causing panic, and a week later he's making jokes about it and laughing about kidney failure. What a ****ing dim bulb.
Its not often that I wish death upon a human being simply for speaking, but Rush has a huge influence on less-educated, passionate conservatives and some of the things he says are just plain awful.
So maybe I dont want him to die, but if his kidneys failed and he had to shut his trap for a few months while in recovery and possibly quit his job, then that is nothing short of karma and justice.
Ultimately though Wanda is a comedian, so lighten up guys lol :D
Wow... that goes way beyond a personal problem. :lol: Open up a history book, you may be surprised what our "faithful" presidents have been doing behind our back.[QUOTE="Maniacc1"][QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]
Sykes is a piece of garbage, regardless of the target. A good friend and colleague of mine passed away due to kidney failure, and a piece of **** like Sykes has probably never had a friend long enough to know what it feels like to lose one, and has probably never had a large enough thought go through that pea-sized brain of hers about how awful and lengthy it is to die from kidney failure.
Not to mention this ****ing idiot we elected laughing at it like a big buffoon. Serious question: Aren't liberals supposed to be enlightened, and progressive, and sensitive to the plights of others? This guy is laughing about kidney failure and he's supposed to be this awesome, swell guy? Seems like a ****ing moron to me, but whatever.
Why not laugh about leukemia on top of the Special Olympics and kidney failure, Mr. President?
Shame-usBlackley
I know all too well. And this one is doing it too, I'm sure. I just find the things this one does openly a notch higher on the disturb-o-meter. I know it's trendy and chic to prostrate yourself and attempt to fellate the guy, but he seems like a big stupid doof already. His plane is off doing strafing runs on New York causing panic, and a week later he's making jokes about it and laughing about kidney failure. What a ****ing dim bulb.
Do you really think Obama himself allowed the plane to fly over Manhattan? Try Louis Caldera. Did he make the joke about kidney failure, or was he unaware of what a comedian hired at the dinner would say? Can you prove he was laughing at the jokes? I like to judge my presidents off of foreign and domestic policy, maybe that's just me.
[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Are you denying that there are people on the left that act the same? No. I don't see why you would bring the left into this though. I hate virtually all political commentators, with only a few rare exceptions.Rush is a close-minded ignoramus. He defines himself as the pinnacle of conservatism, and if you disagree with him about anything you are no longer a conservative, and you no longer belong in the Republican party, because the Republican party must remain "pure".
MoonMarvel
Ultimately though Wanda is a comedian, so lighten up guys lol :D
mrbojangles25
Be that as it may, I still don't see how what Wanda Sykes said was funny. Unless I'm missing something here.
Do you really think Obama himself allowed the plane to fly over Manhattan? Try Louis Caldera. Did he make the joke about kidney failure, or was he unaware of what a comedian hired at the dinner would say? Can you prove he was laughing at the jokes? I like to judge my presidents off of foreign and domestic policy, maybe that's just me.
Maniacc1
So it's okay that the president doesn't know what his plane is doing? Most people I know would call that inept, no?
And it doesn't matter whether he was "unaware" of what she would say, that's what the term "character" means. Are you saying that if someone applauded at a KKK rally that that shouldn't be held against someone because they were unaware of what was going to be said? What a weak argument.
Obama's foreign policy blows too. And domestically, how are you liking the new and improved Patriot Act, chief?
So it's okay that the president doesn't know what his plane is doing? Most people I know would call that inept, no?>Shame-usBlackleyThe president doesn't sign off on every single decision - and he certainly isn't going to pay much attention to Airforce 1 PR. It is not wise to micro manage - simply because people don't respond well to micro management. If you are going to be an executive of any institution, you are going to have to put some faith in those below you on the chain of command.
Deserving for a man as incompetent and idiotic as Limbaugh. :Dedisni_edistuo
So, you do not agree with his views. Saying he deserves such? That's sick, man. I am a conservative. I never had such words for Clinton or Obama. Get a grip!
Forgive me that I'm liberal. There's no forgiving, however, that Limbaugh has definitely said some things that should not have been said. Last time I checked, there was a little known ordinance called the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. It's referred to as The freedom of speech and press.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment