Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

Amen, Pez! (am I getting suck-up points to offset the Colts/Texans thing?) but in all seriousness, I really do agree. No one is blameless here.

Pez wrote:OEF, ONE, and OIF have cost a trillion and change, about the same amount as the stimulus.

Despite this, Bush subscribed to the supply side theory (shocking, I know) and cut taxes in order to grow the economy and create jobs. In a good economy where we don't have things like toxic assets and two wars, well it might have worked.

No one likes to pay taxes, but Bush's tax cuts were extremely irresponsible, and when he handed the reigns over, the economy was a shambles and unemployment was 7% or so, and our auto and financial industries were on the brink of catastrophic ruin. The expectation that Obama can correct all these issues within 17 months is pretty unreasonable.

Every administration makes mistakes, Bush 1 made a big mistake in Iraq, Clinton made big mistakes in health care and (in 20/20 hindsight) not going after bin Laden on the somewhat thin evidence he was responsible for the USS Cole, Bush 2 made big mistakes with the wars and irresponsibly cutting taxes, Obama has made mistakes in underestimating the direness of the economic situation he was on point to fix...

Logic has been run over by the rhetorical bus.

I certainly don't disagree that Bush made some mistakes, but your comparison is apples and oranges. Well, at least 2 of them are. I haven't figured out what ONE stands for. But the others were operations with a particular objective in mind. Although your brief summary of his tenure included a necessary war neglected and focusing on an unnecessary war, that seems like a huge blanket statement to me. There has been some good and some bad results of both wars. At any rate, the money spent on those operations was a known cost. We certainly weren't looking to make a profit on them. The stimulus was DESIGNED (or so we are told) to boost the economy. Comparing the two is like saying one guy spent $15,000 on a car because his old one took a dump, while a second guy invested $10,000 in something that had very little chance of getting a good return, and then saying the first guy overspent more than the second.

ONE = Operation Noble Eagle. Essentially the stateside mobilization of national guard and various other organizations to protect bridges, airports, etc etc in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks. ONE began on 9/14/2001.

Markwes wrote:
I certainly don't disagree that Bush made some mistakes, but your comparison is apples and oranges. Well, at least 2 of them are. I haven't figured out what ONE stands for. But the others were operations with a particular objective in mind. Although your brief summary of his tenure included a necessary war neglected and focusing on an unnecessary war, that seems like a huge blanket statement to me. There has been some good and some bad results of both wars. At any rate, the money spent on those operations was a known cost. We certainly weren't looking to make a profit on them. The stimulus was DESIGNED (or so we are told) to boost the economy. Comparing the two is like saying one guy spent $15,000 on a car because his old one took a dump, while a second guy invested $10,000 in something that had very little chance of getting a good return, and then saying the first guy overspent more than the second.

The proposed cost put forth by the Bush Administration for the Iraq war (via Rummy) was between 50 and 60 billion, and that cost at the time was going to be recouped by oil revenues. So I'm not sure I would say that it was a "known cost," considering it's cost 10 times that.

I think I understand your analogy, and if I do, I really meant to say that it's likely both of the car buyers have overspent. In the case of Iraq, there was a particular objective in mind of finding and eliminating the WMD. So if that like a guy borrowing $15,000 to buy a car and spending it instead on hookers and blow? Maybe that's not the right analogy either.

My point isn't to allay blame away from Bush or Obama or Clinton... my point is that these things are extremely difficult. I dont think anyone can legitimately argue that without the stimulus, the automaker thing, and TARP, we would be in a much faster handbasket than we are now. Maybe Boehner can argue that, but it's his job to argue that.

And I appreciate when people present a viewpoint (as you have), rather than come out swinging with a baseball bat with mindless drivel about how blaming the previous administration is just an excuse for poor job performance, when looking objectively at the facts it's quite easy to find enough blame to go around.

I have to wonder how a rant about the previous administration is looking at things objectively and nothing but a deflection of acceptance of the present situation all in while using the same ole leftist talking points as "mindless drivel" in said rant.

Pez wrote:
Uhh, you actually want to go there? I think you better ask Mr. Bill why didn't HE catch him.

OEF, ONE, and OIF have cost a trillion and change, about the same amount as the stimulus.

Despite this, Bush subscribed to the supply side theory (shocking, I know) and cut taxes in order to grow the economy and create jobs. In a good economy where we don't have things like toxic assets and two wars, well it might have worked.

No one likes to pay taxes, but Bush's tax cuts were extremely irresponsible, and when he handed the reigns over, the economy was a shambles and unemployment was 7% or so, and our auto and financial industries were on the brink of catastrophic ruin. The expectation that Obama can correct all these issues within 17 months is pretty unreasonable.

Every administration makes mistakes, Bush 1 made a big mistake in Iraq, Clinton made big mistakes in health care and (in 20/20 hindsight) not going after bin Laden on the somewhat thin evidence he was responsible for the USS Cole, Bush 2 made big mistakes with the wars and irresponsibly cutting taxes, Obama has made mistakes in underestimating the direness of the economic situation he was on point to fix...

Logic has been run over by the rhetorical bus. [/quote]


OEF, ONE, and OIF have cost a trillion and change, about the same amount as the stimulus. These 3 items here has provided more for jobs in America than all the Obama stimulus plans.

Whether you like it or not, the military industrial complex provides good paying jobs for Americans. Take the MRAP vehicle that troops now rely on created during this war. Started by a small company in NOLA, where initial production started out with the hiring of 700 people. The fact we got rid of a dictator that took pot shots at our pilots weekly ain't a bad thing. Without the military spending where would all those people work?

The tax cuts came about due to a possible double dip recession caused by the 9/11 attacks that we were just starting to come out of from the Clinton administration.

The housing crisis was caused in large part by freddie and fannie. 2 sacred programs of the democrats. That republicans tried to reform but couldn't get it done. With the latest reforms the republicans tried to have a 5% down for buying a house and it was rejected as being discriminatory by the dems.

Meanwhile the TARP program was set up to be paid back. Instead this has become a save everyone/everything program due to the expansion by the dems that will never be fully repaid thanks to the dems.

Bush made his mistakes. Not enough troops in Iraq. Not continuing the Afghan war at full tilt by going after them in Pakistan. Taking his eyes off the economy the last year of his administration.

Gov't estimates job numbers

For the latest reporting week, nine states didn’t file claims data to the Labor Department in Washington because of the federal holiday earlier this week, a Labor Department official told reporters. As a result, California and Virginia estimated their figures and the U.S. government estimated the other seven, the official said.

LOL, wingin it huh? These clowns get more comical by the day.

Anybody can blame anybody they want to blame. It's government people! All I can say is if you like that status quo then vote that way in November. If you don't like the status quo then vote that way in November. It's time this president starts taking accountability for his term instead of spending his 4 years trying to blame everything on the previous administration! He has zero credibility!

How's everybody's health insurance premiums looking next year???? Get ready to grab those ankles!!!

awbinfortwayne wrote:Anybody can blame anybody they want to blame. It's government people! All I can say is if you like that status quo then vote that way in November. If you don't like the status quo then vote that way in November. It's time this president starts taking accountability for his term instead of spending his 4 years trying to blame everything on the previous administration! He has zero credibility!

How's everybody's health insurance premiums looking next year???? Get ready to grab those ankles!!!

Take accountability? Ima not sure that word means whata you think it means. Responsibility maybe?

Personally I don't see this... he knows and communicates that the issues facing the nation are his problems to deal with. I'm not sure how it possible to deny that he was handed a mess by the previous administration. The lack of cohesive and dynamic leadership in congress is a pretty big problem for him as well.

And zero credibility is a slight exaggeration, yea?

Pez wrote:

awbinfortwayne wrote:Anybody can blame anybody they want to blame. It's government people! All I can say is if you like that status quo then vote that way in November. If you don't like the status quo then vote that way in November. It's time this president starts taking accountability for his term instead of spending his 4 years trying to blame everything on the previous administration! He has zero credibility!

How's everybody's health insurance premiums looking next year???? Get ready to grab those ankles!!!

Take accountability? Ima not sure that word means whata you think it means. Responsibility maybe?

Personally I don't see this... he knows and communicates that the issues facing the nation are his problems to deal with. I'm not sure how it possible to deny that he was handed a mess by the previous administration. The lack of cohesive and dynamic leadership in congress is a pretty big problem for him as well.

And zero credibility is a slight exaggeration, yea?

No! He can't continue to blame the past and look for scapegoats now with the problems that are CURRENTLY facing the country in the realm of economics. His plan to spend the country's way out of a recession and increase jobs and keep the unemployement rate at or below 8% has failed! Is that an exaggeration? Get your head out of the sand! This guy wants to borrow MORE MONEY and continue his failed economic plan of getting out of this rececession. You're not naive enough to buy that again are you?

Zero credibility. It is what it is.

Did you actually read my post?

I don't see him blaming the past administration, but rather I see him stating what problems he is up against and what he intends to do about them, hampered by the lack of cohesive leadership in Congress.

I'm sure you are in love with fake-tan (I think he would actually be a better leader than Pelosi, as much as it pains me). The republicans continue to sit on their collective asses and let the democrats try and figure it out. It's unfortunate, because if the republicans were actually wanting the country to succeed as much as they want to see Obama fail, they would likely have been a positive influence on spend happy democrats.

I'm not sure you understand my position... while I've been pretty flaming liberal in the past, I think I'm actually the last centrist on the planet now.

Pez wrote:Did you actually read my post?

I don't see him blaming the past administration, but rather I see him stating what problems he is up against and what he intends to do about them, hampered by the lack of cohesive leadership in Congress.

I'm sure you are in love with fake-tan (I think he would actually be a better leader than Pelosi, as much as it pains me). The republicans continue to sit on their collective asses and let the democrats try and figure it out. It's unfortunate, because if the republicans were actually wanting the country to succeed as much as they want to see Obama fail, they would likely have been a positive influence on spend happy democrats.

I'm not sure you understand my position... while I've been pretty flaming liberal in the past, I think I'm actually the last centrist on the planet now.

You have your opinion and that's great! I disagree and think they guys a joke and I'm wrong!! The central issue is government spending. The government cannot continue to borrow money to "stimulate" the economy and not expect long-term ramifications. We are 13 TRILLION dollars in debt! How much has the debt gone up since Obama has been president?

Obama has no clue, no answers, and continues to push his extreme liberal agenda through congress(which the democrats control by the way). You will see a backlash this November and why is that? Obama is clueless!!! That's not a "centrist" point of view. It's an objective point of view.

awbinfortwayne wrote:Obama has no clue, no answers, and continues to push his extreme liberal agenda through congress(which the democrats control by the way). You will see a backlash this November and why is that? Obama is clueless!!! That's not a "centrist" point of view. It's an objective point of view.

Hey, give Barry a break, he 'sounds' really good reading from the teleprompter...

ADDRESS THIS PEZ!

Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

.............forget it....we know the leftist response of 'give it time'

btw...

Foreclosures Rise; Repossessions Set Record

LTRT wrote:ADDRESS THIS PEZ!

Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

.............forget it....we know the leftist response of 'give it time'

btw...

Foreclosures Rise; Repossessions Set Record

Whatever jack...

Pez wrote:

LTRT wrote:ADDRESS THIS PEZ!

Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

.............forget it....we know the leftist response of 'give it time'

btw...

Foreclosures Rise; Repossessions Set Record

Whatever jack...

That's Mr. Jack sir.

LTRT wrote:

Pez wrote:

LTRT wrote:ADDRESS THIS PEZ!

Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

.............forget it....we know the leftist response of 'give it time'

btw...

Foreclosures Rise; Repossessions Set Record

Whatever jack...

That's Mr. Jack sir.

It's a lower case "j", so I don't think he's using jack as a proper noun. He could be calling you a device to lift a car?

Markwes wrote:

LTRT wrote:

Pez wrote:

LTRT wrote:ADDRESS THIS PEZ!

Where Are the Jobs, Mr. President?

.............forget it....we know the leftist response of 'give it time'

btw...

Foreclosures Rise; Repossessions Set Record

Whatever jack...

That's Mr. Jack sir.

It's a lower case "j", so I don't think he's using jack as a proper noun. He could be calling you a device to lift a car?

Looks like I wasted my money on that college English class huh?

Obama pledges economic focus during next 2 years

ONE YEAR AGO: 'Obama to focus hard on economy'...

TWO YEARS AGO: Obama to put renewed focus on job creation...


Its the same old story
Same old song and dance, my friend
Its the same old story
Same old story
Same old song and dance

2nd verse
some as the first
a little bit louder
and a whole lot worse!

yeah, but now he is really going to focus.

Strong signs of life for the job market

It's called "seasonal help" for a reason.

Meanwhile...

Unemployment up in two-thirds of metro areas
Sharp reversal from the previous month and the most since June

updated 1/4/2011 1:44:21 PM ET
WASHINGTON — Unemployment rates rose in more than two-thirds of the nation's largest metro areas in November, a sharp reversal from the previous month and the most since June.

The Labor Department says unemployment rates rose in 258 of the 372 largest cities, fell in 88 and remained the same in 26. That's worse than the previous month, when the rate fell in 200 areas and rose in 108.

The economy is strengthening, but employers have been reluctant to create jobs. Hiring will pick up in 2011, but not enough to significantly lower the unemployment rate, economists forecast.

Many laid-off workers are giving up. In states such as Michigan, unemployment rates are falling because more people have stopped looking for work. Once they do, the government no longer counts them as unemployed.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Most of the seasonal help was probably already hired before December. However, I will wait for the actual gov't estimate instead of some company.

GM to invest $540 million in Mexican engine plant

Well give 'em credit, he's creating jobs for the mexicans.

only create 36k jobs and the rate falls.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The unemployment rate dropped sharply last month to 9 percent, the lowest level in nearly two years. But the economy generated only 36,000 net new jobs, the fewest in four months.

Cooking the books