Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

OBAMA: The Facebook president

Letter by Matthew Philichi, Gig Harbor on May 29, 2012 at 4:53 pm with 109 Comments »
May 29, 2012 4:53 pm

One week ago, with a surplus of hype and a scarcity of fundamentals, Facebook became a publicly traded company. The price of the IPO came out very high. Its price immediately collapsed. Many were fooled by the excitement and overpaid for the investment. Investors are mad.

About four years ago, Barack Obama came to us with a surplus of hype (hope and change) and a scarcity of fundamentals. His ideas, like Facebook, were dreamed up in a dorm. Like the head of Facebook, Obama had never led or produced anything. Like the hype of Facebook, he was surrounded in hype. He spoke in front of Greek columns to adoring fans who would occasionally faint.

Obama’s outcome has also been a disaster. His health care plan has slowed down hiring. His stimulus plan has put our nation further in debt and achieved nothing. His non-energy policy has driven up the price of fuel and held up construction on pipelines.

Obama is the “Facebook president.” Business schools will teach the story of Facebook for decades to come. They will talk about how, a company with no assets and no experience could come public and be valued at three times the value of Disney.

History teachers will also talk about President Obama and how a man with no experience at anything could win and be the leader of the free world. Hopefully this experience has taught both investors and voters a lesson. Experience and fundamentals really do matter.

Tags:
,
Leave a comment Comments → 109
  1. People that make their money off the stock market should be thrilled with what has taken place since Obama took over in January 2009.

    As to “Facebook” and what took place last week…..PT Barnum said it best….

    Kinda humorous how the market geniuses are going to try to attach Obama’s name to their getting fleeced.

  2. Obama has been similarly thrilled banking millions from the scandalous missing billions “misplaced” by his friend and co-fundraiser John Corzine. Its now been discovered that much of the missing MF Global billions has been “bundled” and redirected to the Obama campaign. But Obama allies are blocking the appointment of a Special Prosecuter on the matter. Surprised ?

    And Obama hates Wall St ? I don’t think so. Only when others who dont contribute to the campaign make money, does he enact “regulation”.

    Obama is a closet one per center.

  3. sandblower says:

    Oh my! We get to read yet another letter from Matt that is full of lies. Why is it that those on the extreme right can only tell their story by lying?
    Mat lies and Lyle lies. Concerned and took1 lie along with all the others whose ideology blinds them to the truth. Romney lies, Bush lied and so did Rummy and what’s-his-name with the heart thing. The Catholic Church lies through some of its representatives, Paul Ryan lies about how his budget will reduce the deficit.
    It seems to be somewhat like an illness and it favors those on the extreme right. Lying is a reaction to the truth. Maybe that is why conservatives are labeled as reactionary. Works for me.

  4. Unfortunately for SOME people… we were losing 750,000 jobs per month when Obama took office, and now? Improving job numbers for 26 straight months.

    Lets see, oil production is higher now than it has been in a decade; while at the same time domestic oil consumption has dropped.

    Maybe you havent noticed that Bin Ladin is dead, ghadaffi, mubarek… oh and ALL of the top 30 al qaeda members are dead. and we left iraq and are on the way out of afghanistan (which we are paying for now, Bush refused to put them into the budget). expanded drone strikes. kept gitmo open.

    Most robust EVER nuclear treaty with Russia.

    GM is #1 after almost being put to sleep.

    End of DADT, stopped defending DOMA in federal courts.

    Reigned in federal spending (1-3% annual federal spending growth, LEAST in 60 years) and shrunk government (600,000 less gov’t jobs than feb ’09).

    Took the CONSERVATIVE (heritage foundation & newt; romneycare) approach of personal RESPONSIBILITY to reign in exploding healthcare costs and provide universal coverage.

    Obama has cut EVERYONE’S taxes while freezing White House staff salary.

    What more could a small gov’t, neo-conservative want in a candidate? Obama is like Reagan incarnate…

  5. oh and under obama we’re doing both more drug raids, and less pardons, than under bush.

  6. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Jellee, you make life under BHO sound great! The economy must be booming, debt down, illegals deported, America loved, America unified, education improving!

    Oh wait, we are divided and broke. GM got billions from the taxpayer, much never to be returned (like the $50 bil in tax free profits).

  7. concerned – we are divided because of the foolishness of “Obama can’t do anything right” thinking on the part of people like you.

    If we are broke it’s because we are trying to pay the unpaid debts left by you know who.

    If GM “got billions” it saved jobs. What did the $9 billion in cash on the streets of Iraq do for us?

    One of these days you are going to run out of BS and your flowers won’t bloom.

  8. bobcat1a says:

    Obama only did two things wrong: He’s black and he’s a democrat. That’s enough to make the crazy wing of the Republicans howl at the moon and the sane wing tremble in fear at the howling.

  9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP5vQl9eFMk

    Start watching at the 2:00 mark. No truer words have been said.

  10. i make obama sound great? u mean with facts? i know. that was the point of listing the facts of obamas extremely moderate record. obama is not some “radically leftist, european-socialist, kenyan/nazi/muslim/facist/afro-liberation-theorist, elitist/community-organizer, harvard-snob/food-stamp president”. Their obama is an imaginary caricature of a bogey-man. What he truly is, seems to be even more frightening within the republican party these days; he’s a (gasp) moderate! shreik!

  11. concernedtacoma7 says:

    BC1 had to pull the race card. Guess blaming Bush did not fit so he went for option #2. Forget actually holding people responsible.

    Jellee- still wondering how we are better off. Save the OBL killing, I do not give him any credit.

  12. averageJoseph says:

    Great analogy Matt.

  13. Facebook took 5 hours to tank, Obama took almost 3 years.

  14. aislander says:

    There are fewer people employed in the United States now than when Obama took office.

    What improvement?

  15. u people are extremely thick. we were losing 750,000 jobs a month when obama took office. now? 26 consecutive months of job growth. tell me again how the job numbers are so horrible under obama?

  16. take away obama’s first three months of bush’s recession (which obama had nothing to do with, since he had just took office)? net job gain under obama. even if u include those initial “bush recession” months, obama will still have a net jobs gain as of the election. there was a net jobs loss under the eight years of bush. this is not complicated.

  17. harleyrider1 says:

    What did he say yesterday on Good Morning America or The view? Should we or should we not like people that are successful? I was raised different and its a little hard to change. We’re not supposed to like some people, but I can’t remember which Americans those are. The nice thing is for us older people, you can count on him telling us something daily.

    I lost my TV guide. Anyone know what channel he is on tonight and will he be singing or telling us which Americans are bad? We like the singing and hearing stories about his Hollywood trips. So exciting.

  18. averageJoseph says:

    LOL Harley.

  19. Good letter, Obama invented Facebook! What a president we have, amazing!

  20. “still wondering how we are better off”

    Stock market – just about double its low point.

    GDP – up for eleven consecutive quarters.

    Unemployment – down about 20% from its peak and dropping at a faster rate than after the last recession. More jobs now than when Obama was sworn in. more than 3 million new jobs in the last 26 months.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing bloviation every time.

  21. Let’s compare this recession to the last one.

    The last recession began in March 2001 (so much for the oft-repeated wrong-wing fallacy that Bush inherited it). It lasted 8 months, ending officially in November 01. The GDP dropped a barely-noticeable three-tenths of one percent. Unemployment rose from 4.2% to 5.5%. But, like the recession before it, it kept on rising after the recession was officially over, peaking at 6.3% in June 03. It didn’t drop back down to where it started (4.4%) until December 2006, five years after the end of the recession. And that was despite not one, but two rounds of Bush tax cuts. And no significant opposition.

    It took five years from the end of the recession to get unemployment to drop 1.9%.

    This recession began in December 2007 (unlike Bush, Obama really did inherit it), and officially ended 18 months later, in June 2009. The fact is that this recession was twice as long as the last one.

    In this recession, the GDP dropped 4.1%. That’s twelve times as much as the last one. The fact is that this recession was much more severe than the last one.

    In this recession, unemployment rose from 5% to 9.5%, but, like the preceding two recessions, it kept on rising, peaking out at 10% in October 09. That’s a much larger jump in unemployment than the last one.

    So far, unemployment has dropped to 8.1%, a drop of 1.9% from its peak. It’s dropped 1.9% in 30 months from the end of the recession. That’s twice s fast as the drop in the previous recession.

    Facts. They trump empty wrong-wing hyperbole every time.

  22. “Obama’s outcome has also been a disaster. His health care plan has slowed down hiring. His stimulus plan has put our nation further in debt and achieved nothing. His non-energy policy has driven up the price of fuel and held up construction on pipelines.”

    So many right wing lies….so little time.

  23. “Jellee, you make life under BHO sound great! The economy must be booming, debt down, illegals deported, America loved, America unified, education improving!”

    Nothing like an irrational, foolish republican to bring extremism into a discussion…

  24. harley….instead of your alleged comedy routine, why don’t you quote the President verbatim?

    Oh yeah, you can’t misrepresent what he said when you do that.

  25. SwordofPerseus says:

    Conc7 says-“Jellee- still wondering how we are better off. Save the OBL killing, I do not give him any credit.”

    She listed several reasons we are better off, why don’t you acknowledge them? Oh yes I forgot, it’s because you are a clueless, racist, moron.

    You don’t give him any credit for OBL’s demise, I see, well then I must conclude it is for the same reasons I stated above, care to dispute this. I know you cannot so don’t even bother trying.

  26. ehill — why u r lying. stock market is up over 60% with obama. stop lying.

    also, u r hilarious for saying that the recession ended in june ’09. that means that obama ended the Bush Recession. the same bush recession that u seem to be blaming job losses up until june 2009. well then if thats the case? bush has well over a 1,000,000 net job loss; and obama has presided over net job gains. thanks for that.

  27. scooter6139 says:

    This entire line of commentary is absolutely fascinating! Besides some info from IQ that I haven’t found support for yet and the regular hyperbolic nonsense from concerned and the cherry picking by aislander, most information posted has been a rebuttal to the unsubstantiated right wing spew of the letter. It is fascinating to watch the two different ideologies continue to drive their own narratives off their own opinions and sometimes off their own facts. The Obama I’ve seen portrayed as of late doesn’t exist in the historical record. This hard left socialist ideologue who hates America is a cartoon character. The historical President Obama would fit in quite well with right leaning moderate republicans from the late 1980’s quite well. In fact, he and Reagan would agree on many policies followed by both. That in itself is very scary for both current right and left extremists. How will history just him? We will have to wait and see, just like we are still waiting on Bush.

  28. “The historical President Obama would fit in quite well with right leaning moderate republicans from the late 1980′s quite well. In fact, he and Reagan would agree on many policies followed by both.”

    Perfect, Scooter!

    Of course there is no “fear” in “moderate republicans” unless the Right Wing Extremists are calling them “RINO”.

  29. “we were losing 750,000 jobs a month when obama took office. now? 26 consecutive months of job growth”

    Had a republican done that or less, imagine how great they would be!

  30. What I find fascinating is that the right still worships ronnie raygun and vilifies President Obama when the facts are raygun raised taxes, Obama has cut them, raygun spent like a drunken sailor, Obama has held spending at the failure bush rate, raygun took 6 years to almost turn around the economy and President Obama has turned the economy around in less than 3.

    Amazing how the right twists reality so much they worship failure and vilify success.

  31. “why u r lying. stock market is up over 60% with obama. stop lying.

    Isn’t satire great? LOL

  32. aislander says:

    Pointing out that there are fewer jobs now than when Obama was immaculated is “cherry picking?”

    Do tell…

  33. averageJoseph says:

    LOL… yes, do.

  34. averageJoseph says:

    Stock market – just about double its low point.

    Value of a dollar… just about half.

  35. islander – could the fact that US Corporations are still outsourceing jobs have anything to do with the lose of jobs here? Or is it all Obama’s fault?

    Hay wing nuts – care to share your sources for you talking points?

  36. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Sooo… according to the geniuses on the left, here and elsewhere, 0bama gets full credit for the recession ending, stock market recovery, employment numbers improvement (however laughably limited), etc (insert any positive here), since January 20, 2009… just not the spending in FY 2009.

    LOLZ, okey-dokey.

  37. scooter6139 says:

    average – Are you going to contribute to the discussion or just nod like a ignorant yes-man to your buddies?

    aislander – I find offense in your “immaculated” description, which to me just shows you have no real desire to debate this topic but would rather throw colorful grammar around. This is sad because you and I have debated before without umbrage. To keep it on topic, please post where you got your employment numbers so I may verify and possibly counter them.

  38. Funny thing about “Hope and Change”….That is exactly what is going to put Obama on the unemployed list.

  39. scooter6139 says:

    Vox – Would I give all the credit you describe to Obama? No, just some. Would I give all the blame for everything that right wingers insist that has gone wrong? No, just some. Is the FY Budget for 2009 created by the President? No. When was the FY Budget created? I believe that would be in 2008. Should we blame Bush for FY 2009 spending? Partially. Should we blame Obama for FY 2009 spending? Partially.

    Is Vox being a bit hyperbolic today? Yes.

  40. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    The historical President Obama would fit in quite well with right leaning moderate republicans from the late 1980′s quite well.

    Who? There were RINO’s in the late 80’s too, but I’d be interested in which ones you have in mind.

    In fact, he and Reagan would agree on many policies followed by both.

    “Many policies”? Again, could ‘ya cite a few?

    Who said “”The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.”?

    (Hint: Not 0bama.)

    Somehow I doubt Reagan and 0bama would even have 20% in common, never mind “policies”.

  41. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Is Vox being a bit hyperbolic today?

    Is scooter long on rhetoric and short on details? Yes.

    hy·per·bo·le   [hahy-pur-buh-lee]
    noun
    1.
    obvious and intentional exaggeration.
    2.
    an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

    Kindly find an applicable statement in any of my previous posts in this thread.

  42. “Value of a dollar… just about half

    Bovine byproduct value of this claim: 100%.

  43. “Pointing out that there are fewer jobs now than when Obama was [inaugurated] is “cherry picking?”

    No, it’s a flat-out lie.

    Number of jobs 2/1/2009: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs 4/1/2112: 132,989,000

    http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?data_tool=XGtable

    Let’s compare the job-creation record of the previous President:

    Number of jobs 2/1/2001: 132,529,000
    Number of jobs 4/1/2004: 131,051,000

    That’s right: despite dealing with a much more severe recession, and despite all the obstruction by the GOP, this recovery is actually better than the last one.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing lies every time.

  44. scooter6139 says:

    Vox – Before I answer your questions can you answer some for me? (I’m trying to nail down your particular ideology so I can best respond.)

    In your opinion, what is a RINO? What constitutes a RINO? How many “moderate” republicans are left in the party? Is there even a “progressive” republican today? Now lets switch. How many “conservative” democrats are there today? How many “moderates”? How many “progressives”? What party, both according to the answers give and your opinion, has a more rounded base?

  45. averageJoseph says:

    Don’t worry yourself about me, scooter. ;)
    .
    LMAO@Jr.

  46. scooter6139 says:

    ehill – Thanks! I was just looking at that site compiling numbers. Saved me some time!

  47. scooter6139 says:

    No problem average. I was hoping you had something interesting to post so I had someone else to debate with! Maybe next discussion! :)

  48. averageJoseph says:

    Is the FY Budget for 2009 created by the President? No. When was the FY Budget created? I believe that would be in 2008.

    Google it, scooter. The democrats had a majority in both houses and the FY ’09 budget was signed by Barry, March of ’09. kooky

  49. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Let’s be honest, a recovery after a serious downturn is natural. The credit crunch that caused this recession was solved by TARP (thanks Pres Bush!).

    Giving credit for this slow, painful recovery (stalled by failed Dem policies) to BHO is like giving the weatherman credit for a sunny day.

  50. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    scooter, counter questions are commonly used as a device to avoid answering questions.

    You’ve been throwing out vague rhetoric all morning on this thread, I’m simply asking for specifics. If you’re not willing to provide them, fine. We’ll just have to accept the fact that you’re sympathetic to the far lefties here, and draw our own conclusions aas to the accuracy of your claims.

  51. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Scooter, thanks to BHOs left field claim that he is thrifty (driven from the market watch article), FY09 was a big topic last week. Catch up.

    FY09 include TARP, which was paid back. Pelosi and Harry unleashed the real spending in FY09 after BHO came on board.

    And no one here, or any right leaning political pundit, has called Bush the model for fiscal conservatives. Quite the opposite, he is bashed for overspending. But no where near as bad as BHO.

  52. My lord the lies from the right never seem to end do they?
    They get worse and worse all the time. How do they get so far out considering the history they are re-writting is only a couple of years old!

  53. concernedtacoma7 says:

    So prove it. Come on big guy, you can do it! Be better then your rhetoric.

  54. philichi says:

    bobcat1a: “Obama only did two things wrong: He’s black and he’s a democrat. That’s enough to make the crazy wing of the Republicans howl at the moon and the sane wing tremble in fear at the howling”

    Bobcatia, you are wrong. Just think if he would have been a good president? He would have recommended ways to take advantage of our nation’s historic low cost of natural Gas,he would have thought of ways to make businesses want to expand and hire people, he would have initiated a policy to actually lower the cost of health care.

    Who better could there have been to fix Americas entitlement problems but a black Democrat? He could have been so good. What a waste of 4 years. He blew it. I can’t wait to see him go.

  55. sevanup says:

    “Bobcatia, you are wrong. Just think if he would have been a good president?”

    You’re right as usual philchi. With all the “help” Obama got from day one from McConnell, Boehner, and clan, he should have gotten more done. His inability to control the weather really makes me angry and he’s had plenty of time to find a cure for cancer as well.

  56. “LMAO”

    Ooh, what a splendid rebuttal of the facts presented. You truly are an intellectual giant. Maybe CT7 should have told you to be “better than your rhetoric.”

  57. “So prove it.”

    Here’s just one example: aiSlander falsely claimed that “there are fewer jobs now than when Obama was [inaugurated]“. The fact is that there are more jobs now than when Obama was inaugurated.

  58. concernedtacoma7 says:

    The workforce participation is the smallest since before the Reagan recovery.

    Your jobs number is basically flat. Not something to be proud of. And up or down seems like a rounding error.

    Good job answering for Klu. Just supporting the team of forget to log out?

  59. “Your jobs number is basically flat. Not something to be proud of.”

    It’s up, which proves that aiSlander’s claim was a moronic falsehood.

    And despite the fact that this recession is MUCH worse than the last one, this recovery is much stronger than that one.

  60. One more thing. Those aren’t my jobs numbers. They came from the Us Dept of Labor.

  61. concernedtacoma7 says:

    You are playing word games. Flat is flat. Rounding error.

    Bottom line is BHO stalled the recovery, a naturally occurring event. Dodd-Frank, Obamacare, the impending tax nightmare, etc.

  62. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Of course elmer loves to spew statistics – especially the skewed variety.

    Hey elmer, what made you decide to compare Bush/ 0bama job creation using only numbers, without factoring in the size of the labor force in 2001 versus 2009?

    Oh yeah, because the labor force in 2001 was about 15 million smaller than it was in 2009. So… that extra 11% in the workforce in 2009 shows your 1.5% difference in jobs between 2004 and 2012 means… what?

    And before you go off, the Bureau of Labor Statistics defines “labor force” as “all civilians classified as employed and unemployed.”

    Then there’s the little matter of your benchmarks. Remind me again; didn’t 0bama take office on January 20, 2009? So why do you use the month of February as your baseline month?

    Oh yeah, cuz’ using January would not only make aislander’s statement true, but it would show a net job loss for the useless 0ne from the date he took office until February of this year – or January, for that matter.

    And again, save your phony protestations; BLS Situation Reports are released on the first day of the month following. Therefore, the employment total for the month of January, 2009 was 133,561,000 – nearly 600k more than April 2012.

    aislander is correct.

    “Lies, damned lies, and statistics… ” You managed to corner all three this time, congratulations.

  63. aislander says:

    Sorry, scooter, I’m afraid “immaculated” was a slip caused by styrofoam Greek columns.

    If they were real, rather than foam, I might have said “descended from on high,” but if they never existed, I would have chosen “inaugurated…”

    HE’S the one who raised expectations none of which he has approached, let alone met.

    Don’t blame me for indulging in overwrought language: the President set the precedent!

  64. alindasue says:

    In response to “Stock market – just about double its low point,” averageJoseph said, “Value of a dollar… just about half.”

    Inflation has started to increase again, but not by nearly that much. That $2 box of cereal I used to buy is still only $2.50.

    When it comes to exchange rate, I’m regularly dealing with yen to dollar exchange. (Google my website if you are curious why.) When I visited Japan in 2004, 100 yen cost me about 97 cents. When the recession hit at the end of President Bush’s term, it jumped to about $1.30. I just looked up today’s current exchange rate. Right now, 100 yen costs $1.13.

    That’s hardly a sign that the value of the dollar is “just about half”.

  65. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Using your cereal analogy, that would 25% in a couple years with wages flat.

    Rather then comparing the dollar to the yen, the dollar/gold is probably a better representation.

  66. averageJoseph says:

    OMG LMAO! Greek Columns

    I got a belly laugh outta that one!
    .
    btw (a little trivia), which “progressive” participant of this blog made the following statement not so long ago (January 4, 2011 at 8:56 am).

    “rr – are you suggesting that the US Dept of Labor is somehow pure and not subject to manipulating statistics for political gain?

    =hint= he teaches in the “arts” and has an odd rendition of what the Govenor’s name of Idaho reminds him of.

  67. scooter6139 says:

    Vox – I think I’ll take #2 on your 11:48am post “Sooo… according to the geniuses on the left, here and elsewhere….”

    That was hyperbolic, unless you actually believe that I and ehill, bobcat1a, xring, kluwer, SwordofPerseus, jellee, and most of all LarryH are all geniuses.

  68. “You are playing word games. Flat is flat. Rounding error.”

    To use you own words, “So prove it. Come on big guy, you can do it! Be better then your rhetoric.”

    Got facts?

  69. “Hey elmer”

    Hey, Daffy! Say hi to Bugs for me. And put on some pants!

    “what made you decide to compare Bush/ 0bama job creation using only numbers, without factoring in the size of the labor force in 2001 versus 2009?”

    I’ll spell it out for you. And I’ll be sure to use real small words so you’ll be sure to understand. The size of the workforce has nothing to do with the number of jobs going down. The simple fact is that this recovery is faster than the last one. Was that simpleenoughfor you, or shall I look for a crayon font?

    “Remind me again; didn’t 0bama take office on January 20, 2009? So why do you use the month of February as your baseline month?

    Daffy, that’s because neither President was sworn in until close to the end of January, and the 1st ofFebruary is closer to the inauguration day than is the first of January.

    Once again, facts trump wrong-wing hatemongering. Every time.

  70. How does one demonstrate obsessive behavior? Like this: “which “progressive” participant of this blog made the following statement not so long ago (January 4, 2011 at 8:56 am).”

  71. alindasue says:

    concernedtacoma7 said, “Rather then comparing the dollar to the yen, the dollar/gold is probably a better representation.”

    The value of the dollar does come from what you can buy with it. Otherwise, it’s just a piece of fancy paper. I do not deny that inflation has caused the dollar value – what I can buy with it – to drop, but it is still worth considerably more than the “half” that averageJoseph was claiming.

    I used yen rather than gold as a comparison, one, because I am more familiar with its exchange rate to compare over the years and, two, because inflation is pretty much within all countries these days but it is how our inflation affected dollar value compares with another powerful country’s inflation affected monetary value that makes the difference. Besides, the dollar has been off the gold standard since the 1960s and gold is not nearly the high demand metal that it once was.

  72. aislander says:

    alindasue: A hundred years ago a man could buy a good suit with a $20 gold piece. He can do that today, as well. THAT shows what has happened to the dollar and to the value of gold.

    ONE of them hasn’t changed…

  73. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    … unless you actually believe that I and ehill, bobcat1a, xring, kluwer, SwordofPerseus, jellee, and most of all LarryH are all geniuses.

    LOL, I do appreciate self-depricating humor. But I believe you’re confusing sarcasm with hyperbole – big difference.

  74. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And I’ll be sure to use real small words so you’ll be sure to understand.

    Yet another gratuitous insult from our favorite resident hypocrite; noted… and ignored.

    The size of the workforce has nothing to do with the number of jobs going down.

    ROTFLMFAO, okey-dokey.

    The simple fact is that this recovery is faster than the last one.

    Average GDP 2001 – 2003 +2.03%
    Average GDP 2009 – 2011 +1.9%

    Whatever you say, elmer.

    Was that simpleenoughfor you…

    Calm yourself now, elmer.

    … or shall I look for a crayon font?

    Gratuitous insult #2 from our favorite resident hypocrite; noted… and ignored.

    … neither President was sworn in until close to the end of January, and the 1st ofFebruary is closer to the inauguration day than is the first of January.

    And the 1st of February is what makes your little lie work too, doesn’t it elmer. The “fact” is that aislander’s 5/ 29 @ 10:14 PM statement read as follows:

    There are fewer people employed in the United States now than when Obama took office.

    Obama took office in January. Spin it any way you like, elmer, the facts are aislander is right and you’re cherry picking – as usual.

    Once again, facts trump wrong-wing hatemongering. Every time.

    LMAOLZ, did you think of that pithy little ditty all by yourself elmer? Never mind. It’s empirically clear you care little for facts or the truth. Hate? Yeah, you’d be an experienced expert on that.

  75. “Average GDP 2001 – 2003 +2.03%”

    And yet the number of jobs in April 2004 was more than a million below where it was when Bush took office. So much for those “job creating tax cuts.”

    “Obama took office in January”

    Obama took office January 20th. And you want to blame him for the job losses that happened in the three weeks before he was inaugurated?

    Now THAT’S Daffy.

    “Hate? Yeah, you’d be an experienced expert on that.”

    LOL – go look up “projection”, Daffy. I think you’ll find your picture.

  76. Number of jobs 2/1/2009: 132,837,000
    Number of jobs 4/1/2112: 132,989,000

    A net gain of 152,000 jobs for Obama.

    Number of jobs 2/1/2001: 132,529,000
    Number of jobs 4/1/2004: 131,051,000

    A net loss of about 1.5 million jobs for Bush.

    If you want to use the January numbers instead:

    Obama
    133,561,000 jobs in January 2009
    132,989,000 jobs in April 2012
    A net loss of 600,000 jobs

    Bush
    132,466,000 jobs in January 2001
    131,051,000 jobs in April 2004
    A net loss of 1.4 million jobs

    Which President did better at getting people back to work?

    Facts. They still trump infantile wrong-wing bloviation.

  77. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    aislander 5/ 29 @ 10:14 PM:

    There are fewer people employed in the United States now than when Obama took office.

    That’s a fact, elmer, look it up. I know it doesn’t sit well with your fragile ego and all, but spare us the spin, deflection, and cherry-picking. It’s really comical. You don’t get to make all the rules and break them here.

    0bama took office January 20, 2009, aislander is right, period – end of story.

    Which President did better at getting people back to work?

    Gee, I must have missed that in aislander’s post. Did he ask that?

    Facts. They still trump infantile wrong-wing bloviation

    Yet another gratuitous insult from our favorite resident hypocrite; noted… and ignored.

    And hypocrisy trumps all in your narrow little nano-world. Keep it up, validation is cool.

  78. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Trying to make this about Bush yet again. Who here has stated his fiscal policies are the model for the future? What republican pol has stated Bush policies are a model for the future?

    And lets see, $800bil and a 800k difference in employment losses. 1mil per job! Great job dems. And we know the real cost of jobs from the stimulus is closer to $4mil per.

  79. concernedtacoma7 says:

    A nice look at this ‘recovery’ vs previous ones.

    http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/30/is-the-obama-recovery-over-or-has-it-not

  80. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    ct7, elmer has learned well from his daddy, Larry. Lie, deflect, spin, cherry-pick… and, most importantly, wallpaper with it.

    I have to laugh at his ignorance of an 11% increase in the labor force from 2001 to 2009 – over 15,000,000 workers. I’d like to see him take those same cherry-picked numbers and at least do a comparison between those years on the basis of percentage of people in the labor force who were employed. That would be a bit more accurate. That’s why a comparison of GDP is a far better gauge of the economy in 2003 vs 2012.

    But the fact is it’s all just another distraction. aislander’s comment is 100% correct. To deny that fact requires some serious self-deluding.

    As usual, elmer’s up to the task.

  81. concernedtacoma7 says:

    You can only polish a turd so much.

    Housing market, terrible
    Cost of living, up
    Wages flat
    Unemployment stuck over 8%, real unemployment approx 15%, teen unemployment absolutely scary
    Gas up
    Dollar devalued
    Debt out of control
    Obamacare nightmare
    Pending tax disaster
    Country divided.

  82. “TThat’s a fact, elmer, look it up”

    Only if you’re falsely trying to blame Obama for job losses that happened before he took office, Daffy.

  83. “Trying to make this about Bush yet again”

    Given what a colossal cluster **** the Bush administration was, I don’t blame you for getting all riled up every time his name is mentioned.

    “Who here has stated his fiscal policies are the model for the future?”

    Tax cuts! Tax cuts! Tax cuts!

    “And lets see, $800bil and a 800k difference in employment losses.

    Let’s see. How big were those “job creating” Bush tax cuts? And they were followed by 1.5 million job LOSSES.

    Facts. They trump wrong-wing myths every time.

  84. “ct7, elmer has learned well from his daddy, Larry. Lie, deflect, spin, cherry-pick… and, most importantly, wallpaper with it.

    Gratuitous insults from the guy who whines about … wait for it … gratuitous insults! Thanks for living down to expectations.

  85. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Gratuitous insults from the guy who whines about… gratuitous insults!

    Says the hypocrite who mocks others for using insults (we won’t mention “message/ messenger” hypocrisy… this time).

    LMAO, your insults are hypocritical, humorous, and juvenile, but I’ve been more annoyed by fruit flies.

    Only if you’re falsely trying to blame Obama for job losses that happened before he took office, Daffy.

    Once again for thick and slow types, aislanders point:

    There are fewer people employed in the United States now than when Obama took office.

    0bama takes office January 20, 2009.

    2 + 2 = 4.

  86. “Housing market, terrible” — As it has been since it crashed in 2007. Obama had nothing to do with that. This is nothing more than meaningless hyperbole.

    “Cost of living, up” — As it has been for the last 100 years or so. Meaningless hyperbole.

    “Wages flat” — As they always are early in a recovery. More meaningless hyperbole. But it’s nice to know you’re concerned about peoples’ wages, though. I’ll remember that next time you start foaming at the mouth about greedy unions and the minimum wage being too high. Meaningless hyperbole.

    “Unemployment stuck over 8%” — Unemployment down about 20% from its peak two and a half years ago. A drop in unemployment that’s much more dramatic than the drop in unemployment from the last (much milder and much shorter) recession. Meaningless hyperbole.

    “real unemployment approx 15%” — U-6 unemployment down to 14.8% from it peak of 17% just 25 months ago. Another drop that’s much more dramatic than the drop in unemployment from the last (much milder and much shorter) recession. Meaningless hyperbole.

    “teen unemployment absolutely scary” — LOL – like you’re concerned about teen unemployment. Great example of meaningless hyperbole.

    “Gas up” — Gas prices dropping nationally, and they won’t approach their national high point. Set during the (wait for it) Bush administration. It sure paid to have an oil man in the White House, didn’t it? LOL – more meaningless hyperbole.

    “Dollar devalued” — Dollar up against most foreign currencies. Inflation very low. If you’re comparing it to gold, the price has dropped ten percent in the last 6 months, which means the dollar is getting stronger. More meaningless hyperbole.

    “Debt out of control” — I wonder if you said such a thing when Reagan tripled it? Or when Bush II doubled it? I doubt it. Yet more meaningless hyperbole.

    “Obamacare nightmare” — It’s so funny to watch the conservatives jump up and down and scream about a health care plan that’s remarkably similar to one proposed in the past – by Republican Richard Nixon. Wow! Yet more meaningless hyperbole. And a great example of just how far to the extreme right the GOP has moved.

    “Pending tax disaster” — Translation: no actual “tax disaster”. Yet more meaningless hyperbole.

    “Country divided” — ROFL – funny how that’s never your fault. When the GOP helped the White House, the division was caused by unpatriotic people who wanted the country to fail. But now that the GOP is out of power, and their leaders admit to wanting failure, the division is caused by the White House. Do you folks get dizzy from all that spinning?

    “You can only polish a turd so much.” — And yet you keep trying, don’t you?

  87. “0bama takes office January 20, 2009.”

    And was not responsible for job losses from January 1 through January 19. Yet the sockpuppet and the hand continue to try to falsely blame him for those. Obsequiousness is a great attribute for a sockpuppet.

  88. Considering Obama took office on January 20, 2009, that would mean he is responsible for nothing through September 11, 2009 –

    “We were using the previous administration’s terrorist policies” –
    …………………………….Condoleesa Rice, September 2001

  89. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And was not responsible for job losses from January 1 through January 19.

    Ohh, but he was responsible for all job losses after 1/19/09.

    Okey-dokey.

    I’m certain the Romney election committee will be happy to second you on that one.

    Hey… wasn’t it just you who was trying to convince us that (that nut) Rex Nutter’s Market Watch piece claiming 0bama is not the biggest spender in history was accurate… even though he excluded all the spending for FY 2009.

    Hypocrisy, or selective data use (aka, “cherry-picking”), which is it, elmer?

    LMAO, You’re doing so well at arguing nonsense that I’m sure the 0bama re-election campaign has a spot just for you, genius.

    Face it, elmer, you simply cannot spin your way out of the fact that job numbers are down from the day 0bama took office, as has been stated and re-stated here, ad-nauseum. Nor is it accurate to compare total job numbers in two markets separated by 15,000,000 in the labor force, without. And you can’t cherry-pick certain things that 0bama gets credit for in 2009, without assigning all blame to him for that year as well… that is you can’t if you want to maintain what little credibility you have left.

    Now, since you insist on spinning, and deflecting from, the original comment, just wondering what you think of today’s BLS jobs report.

  90. “he was responsible for all job losses after 1/19/09.

    Pop quiz, Daffy:

    Which date is closer to January 20?
    a) January 1
    b) February 1
    c) Whichever makes the Democrats look worse

  91. Fact: The last Congressional Budget Office last spending projection for the Bush League was issued January 8, 2009. It contained nothing from Obama. And it predicted the federal budget to rise to 24.9% of GDP, which is exactly where it ended up. Obama added nothing to the Bush League spending. http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9958/01-08-outlook_testimony.pdf

    Fact: That same document shows that the deficit is as much the result of lower taxes as higher spending. Federal revenues fell from 17.5 percent of GDP in fiscal year 2008 to 14.9 percent in 2009 and 2010, rising to just 15.4 percent in 2011 and 15.8 percent this year. Had revenues stayed at their 2008 level, combined federal deficits would have been $1.3 trillion smaller since 2008. Thanks, Dubya.

    Bush’s policies destroyed the government’s revenue-raising capacity. In the postwar era, federal revenues averaged about 18.5 percent of GDP. They averaged 18.2 percent during the Reagan years and 19 percent during the Clinton administration, but fell to 17.6 percent during the Bush League and just 15.2 percent for Obama’s term. So much for the wrong-wing claim that we’re overtaxed.

  92. “Nor is it accurate to compare total job numbers in two markets separated by 15,000,000 in the labor force”

    I was comparing this recovery with the last one. Sorry you didn’t understand that.

  93. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Pop quiz, elmer:
    Per the original statement, on what date did 0bama take office:
    a) January 20
    b) February 1
    c) Whichever makes elmer’s argument work for him

  94. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    I was comparing this recovery with the last one.

    So you’re comparing a shear numbers in a labor force that’s 15,000,000 larger in this recovery. But I don’t expect you to get the whole “taken as a percentage” thing – especially since it doesn’t fit your narrative and won’t help you with your cherry-picking.

  95. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    ehill
    JUNE 1, 2012 AT 9:51 AM

    deflect [dɪˈflɛkt]
    vb
    to turn or cause to turn aside from a course; swerve

    Definition of entire post.

  96. “But I don’t expect you to get the whole “taken as a percentage” thing”

    Oh, good lord. I wasn’t comparing workforce participation rates, where the size of the labor force would actually be relevant. I was comparing actual jobs created vs actual jobs lost, where the size of the workforce isn’t relevant.

  97. philichi says:

    Lets face, the President has learned a lot in the last few years. He has learned that what business owners think matters, what professors at ivy league schools think doesn’t. He has also learned that trying to emulate the economic strategies of Castro, Stalin, and FDR will give the same failed results.

    Congratulations Mr. President, you are now qualified to be a fine city councilmen somewhere.

  98. “you still cannot disprove aislander’s statement.”

    I already did, Daffy. It should be obvious to anyone whose IQ is larger than their shoe size.

  99. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Hmmm. previous post disappears, elmer appears in its place.

    Okay, edited for less frankness:

    isn’t relevant

    What in your argument is?

    Look, if you either wish to ignore, or simply cannot grasp the fact that comparing net job numbers when factored for the labor force size of a two given economies might just make a pretty big difference, I can’t help you.

    But never mind – as you say, “it’s irrelevant”. That would be true because no matter how hard you stamp your feet and cry, and no matter how much wallpaper you put up, you still cannot disprove aislander’s statement.

    Period, end of story.

  100. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Again, since we know how much you have to have the last word, why not end this thread with a coherent explanation of what happened to the market today following the release of economic numbers for May. You know… the one that showed an increase in the unemployment rate and a downward revision in the jobs total for April.

  101. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Just for you, elmer:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

    You should be so proud.

    The rats are abandoning ship!

  102. I know you WANT the economy to tank, that you LUST after bad jobs reports, and that you DESIRE bad things to happen to the country. Maybe you can get the GOP leadership to promote some more anti-abortion bills as a means of improving the economy and creating more jobs.

  103. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Nice fall-back. Yeah, I’m praying for this crappy economy to continue so that my business can continue to suck – and all for political reasons.

    I’m obviously no 0bama fan, but I never root against my team because I don’y like the coach.

    Maybe you should have gotten 0bama and the democrat-controlled 111th Congress of the ridiculous, too expensive, and probably unconstitutional 0bamacare as a means of improving the economy and creating more jobs.

    Ooops… too late.

  104. “Yeah, I’m praying for this crappy economy”

    Thanks for the admission. You need bad news for the country to advance your political agenda.

  105. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    LMAO, nice edit DS. Unfortunately for mister “must have last word” anyone else who read my post @ 4:51 would easily understand; that’s not even close to what I said or meant.

    So, elmer, keep spinnin’ them baldies!

  106. If you get to cherry-pick, so do I.

  107. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    BTDT

  108. Yes, you have done that.

  109. took14theteam says:

    Match!

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0