I find Senator Shelby not the brightest lightbulb out of Alabama.

/Don't blame me; I didn't vote for him.

AirForceVet: I find Senator Shelby not the brightest lightbulb out of Alabama.

And that is a pretty dim chandelier to begin with.

In all fairness, nobody has ever accused a Republican from Alabama of being a genius.

ecmoRandomNumbers: In all fairness, nobody has ever accused anyone Republican from Alabama of being a genius.

FTFY

He's not the first to make these kinds of accusations, either.

elchip: He's not the first to make these kinds of accusations, either.

And won't be the last.

It is always the other guy's fault.

BritneysSpeculum: AirForceVet: I find Senator Shelby not the brightest lightbulb out of Alabama.

And that is a pretty dim chandelier to begin with.

You know how Thomas Edison had to make hundreds of failed bulbs before he made one that worked? Shelby's not the one that worked.

No, it was clearly the Community Reinvestment Act. Duh!

Mentat: You know how Thomas Edison had to make hundreds of failed bulbs before he made one that worked? Shelby's not the one that worked.

Edison would have given up on him in the conceptual design stage.

NewportBarGuy: No, it was clearly the Community Reinvestment Act. Duh!

And ACORN, somehow.

elchip: He's not the first to make these kinds of accusations, either.

The Republicans really really really want to pin this all on Obama. I don't get it either - they could step up and pin it all on Bush and nobody would have a problem with it.

AirForceVet: Don't blame me; I didn't vote for him.

Yeah, but would Kodos really have been that much better?

ecmoRandomNumbers: In all fairness, nobody has ever accused a Republican from Alabama of being a genius.

This.

/Yes, I know
//Flame away

revisionist history. he knows exactly what he's doing. the only ones left voting for these people are the die hard regressives.
they can lie to them with impunity. they care not.
As long as their side wins.

Hobodeluxe: revisionist history. he knows exactly what he's doing. the only ones left voting for these people are the die hard regressives.
they can lie to them with impunity. they care not.
As long as their side wins.

so what happens when their side loses? Because i'm not seeing anything that leads me to believe that the Republicans will gain ground during the midterm congressional elections of 2010. In fact, i'm expecting to see the Democrats solidify their hold on Congress and further lock the Republicans out of power.

what will the radicals do then, I wonder?

Hobodeluxe: revisionist history. he knows exactly what he's doing. the only ones left voting for these people are the die hard regressives.
they can lie to them with impunity. they care not.
As long as their side wins.

I think I've found the flaw in their logic.

Weaver95: Hobodeluxe: revisionist history. he knows exactly what he's doing. the only ones left voting for these people are the die hard regressives.
they can lie to them with impunity. they care not.
As long as their side wins.

so what happens when their side loses? Because i'm not seeing anything that leads me to believe that the Republicans will gain ground during the midterm congressional elections of 2010. In fact, i'm expecting to see the Democrats solidify their hold on Congress and further lock the Republicans out of power.

what will the radicals do then, I wonder?

gonna need more teabags

Hobodeluxe: gonna need more teabags

that was the most pointless protest i've ever seen. If they'd smashed iPods and played illegally downloaded music on loudspeakers without getting a permit first, THAT would have been a protest. throwing some lipton tea into the local stream was just pointless.

Hobodeluxe: he knows exactly what he's doing

He might have some idea of what he is doing, but I wouldn't give him that much credit.

Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

I didn't make that up, someone told me that, probably my dad.

Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

There's no doubt that by September, Bush was just counting the days until he could dump all of this crap on Obama. I don't think that translates to, "Bush was following Obama's orders", but he sure as hell wasn't providing any leadership.

To paraphrase Barney Frank, "They say we can only have one President at a time. I think that's overestimating how many Presidents we actually have."

make me some tea: Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

I didn't make that up, someone told me that, probably my dad.

Indeed. This isn't a minority view among the the right. The thought process is that Obama has such a cult of personality, that he was running things from behind the scenes and orchestrated all of the bailout plans.

I've heard this more than once from the many deluded members of my family.

Pastor of Muppets: make me some tea: Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

I didn't make that up, someone told me that, probably my dad.

Indeed. This isn't a minority view among the the right. The thought process is that Obama has such a cult of personality, that he was running things from behind the scenes and orchestrated all of the bailout plans.

I've heard this more than once from the many deluded members of my family.

Yup, me too.

This is nothing new. Fark Independents, as well as the crazy republicans I work with have been blaming Obama for our current economic predicament since the day after he won the election.

To be fair - I don't blame Bush a whole lot for this mess either. Pissing away a bunch of money (not to mention human lives) on the Iraq war was certainly not helpful; and the geopolitical uncertainty it caused helped create high oil prices, which was one of the ingredients in our current debacle. But beyond that, I don't know that he did a whole lot more direct damage.

This is a systemic problem that a large group of people are responsible for - from greedy bastards on wall street to hapless idiots buying homes they had no chance of affording.

I don't really agree with some of the things Obama has done with regards to this economic situation, but he certainly didn't cause it, and I've yet to see any evidence he's making it worse. Frankly, I don't think it matters a damn who is president at this point (with regards to the economy), I don't think McCain would be doing any better or worse at this point.

SingletonFactory: To be fair - I don't blame Bush a whole lot for this mess either. Pissing away a bunch of money (not to mention human lives) on the Iraq war was certainly not helpful; and the geopolitical uncertainty it caused helped create high oil prices, which was one of the ingredients in our current debacle. But beyond that, I don't know that he did a whole lot more direct damage.

This is a systemic problem that a large group of people are responsible for - from greedy bastards on wall street to hapless idiots buying homes they had no chance of affording.

I don't really agree with some of the things Obama has done with regards to this economic situation, but he certainly didn't cause it, and I've yet to see any evidence he's making it worse. Frankly, I don't think it matters a damn who is president at this point (with regards to the economy), I don't think McCain would be doing any better or worse at this point.

I completely agree. We can mostly blame the greedy CEOs and corrupt politicians whom they paid off to do whatever they wanted. This, of course, also goes down to the indiviual mortgage brokers and real estate agents who were also cashing in willy-nilly.

The president doesn't have really any direct control over the economy, as much as people would like to think so.

I also am of the opinion that the Obama Bailout is a huge risk to our future prosperity, but it's the less bitter pill to take than doing nothing and letting everything collapse.

Pastor of Muppets: make me some tea: Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

I didn't make that up, someone told me that, probably my dad.

Indeed. This isn't a minority view among the the right. The thought process is that Obama has such a cult of personality, that he was running things from behind the scenes and orchestrated all of the bailout plans.

I've heard this more than once from the many deluded members of my family.

only for the bad decisions though, the good stuff was all Bush.

econjosh: ecmoRandomNumbers: In all fairness, nobody has ever accused a Republican from Alabama of being a genius.

This.

/Yes, I know
//Flame away

It's like going into the Varied Exceptionalities (what used to be called the Retarded Class) classroom and yelling "You're a bunch of retards!"

Well, duh. That's why they're there. And that's why Alabama exists. We have to send our retards somewhere. Although Texas is doing a fine job in the competition for federal retard funds.

make me some tea: I also am of the opinion that the Obama Bailout is a huge risk to our future prosperity, but it's the less bitter pill to take than doing nothing and letting everything collapse.

I'm not entirely convinced the bailouts will save us. they've slowed the collapse, but unemployment WILL go double digits this summer. And with GM about to lay off a bunch of people we're going to see more of a strain on an already stressed unemployment system.

We need to get people back into the work force and we have to do it fast. I'm just not sure exactly how to go about doing that.

make me some tea: The president doesn't have really any direct control over the economy, as much as people would like to think so.

I also am of the opinion that the Obama Bailout is a huge risk to our future prosperity, but it's the less bitter pill to take than doing nothing and letting everything collapse.

these 3 statements contradict each other
are you a republican?

1) president doesnt have direct control over economy (obvious)
2) bailout is a risk to economy (wait see point 1)
3) but it is better than doing nothing (then point 2 is a minor risk or no risk?)

/sigh
/PANICK

It's OK. Goolsby one-upped him by blaming the GM bankruptcy on Bush this morning. Goes both ways.

Sybilll: It's OK. Goolsby one-upped him by blaming the GM bankruptcy on Bush this morning. Goes both ways.

sure, but if there were a GM bailout earlier, then maybe GM wouldnt have gone bankrupt?
nah ....

Weaver95: make me some tea: I also am of the opinion that the Obama Bailout is a huge risk to our future prosperity, but it's the less bitter pill to take than doing nothing and letting everything collapse.

I'm not entirely convinced the bailouts will save us. they've slowed the collapse, but unemployment WILL go double digits this summer. And with GM about to lay off a bunch of people we're going to see more of a strain on an already stressed unemployment system.

We need to get people back into the work force and we have to do it fast. I'm just not sure exactly how to go about doing that.

There's that other article about cheap BJs...

MiddleyMcCentrist: There's that other article about cheap BJs...

ok, well that should keep the MBA/stock broker crowd employed, but what about everyone else?

I think it's more interesting that the supposed flag ship of FOX news is even wargarbling about Socialism right along with their bug eyed cable network. *shrugs*

Weaver95: MiddleyMcCentrist: There's that other article about cheap BJs...

ok, well that should keep the MBA/stock broker crowd employed, but what about everyone else?

Who cares?? It'd be like the WPA but with street hooking.

Alabama


Republican

That's all you really need to know.

I do not understand the problem. The President approved the bank bailouts, and Obama is the President....

AirForceVet: I find Senator Shelby not the brightest lightbulb out of Alabama.

/Don't blame me; I didn't vote for him.

I voted for Konos

Weaver95: We need to get people back into the work force and we have to do it fast. I'm just not sure exactly how to go about doing that.

Yeah well you wouldn't wanna do anything foolish like look at how they did that in the past.

Bob16: Weaver95: We need to get people back into the work force and we have to do it fast. I'm just not sure exactly how to go about doing that.

Yeah well you wouldn't wanna do anything foolish like look at how they did that in the past.

we're not in an identical situation, so those same solutions wouldn't necessarily work today.

Sybilll: It's OK. Goolsby one-upped him by blaming the GM bankruptcy on Bush this morning. Goes both ways.

Gee i wonder if that might have anything to do with the fact that Bush was actually president when they were going down the tubes.

Weaver95: we're not in an identical situation, so those same solutions wouldn't necessarily work today.

Sez you.

History repeats itself.

Mordant: Pastor of Muppets: make me some tea: Weaver95: make me some tea: Well, everyone knows that Obama was the de facto president by around August of last year. Bush was such a lame duck, he just did whatever Obama told him to by then.

The sad part is that there are people would would believe that nonsense.

I didn't make that up, someone told me that, probably my dad.

Indeed. This isn't a minority view among the the right. The thought process is that Obama has such a cult of personality, that he was running things from behind the scenes and orchestrated all of the bailout plans.

I've heard this more than once from the many deluded members of my family.

only for the bad decisions though, the good stuff was all Bush.

Wait. There was good stuff? When did that happen?

Tackboard: I do not understand the problem. The President approved the bank bailouts, and Obama is the President....

The key words in the headline are "last fall"... Bailouts that occurred "last fall." Obama wasn't the president then.

/Try to keep up.

Mentat: You know how Thomas Edison had to make hundreds of failed bulbs before he made one that worked? Shelby's not the one that worked.

then he's not a lightbulb

The GOP Marquee has more than a few bulbs in need of changing out for higher wattage.

Weaver95: elchip: He's not the first to make these kinds of accusations, either.

The Republicans really really really want to pin this all on Obama. I don't get it either - they could step up and pin it all on Bush and nobody would have a problem with it.

If they pinned it on Bush they'd then have to actively distance themselves from him. And right now, it seems all they want to do is anoint defenders of Bush-era policies (Gingrich, the Cheneys, the far right incendiaries like Coulter and Limbaugh and Hannity, et al) as their leaders.

That's the only explanation I can think of. Eventually, like the Democrats, the Republicans are going to have to take their lumps and reinvent their positions and strategy a bit. For the time being, however, they're too leery of change. They know they will need to look ahead eventually, but for now they cling to past strats.

Also, there is little reason to change just yet, in their minds. It's pretty clear Obama's going to have an 8-year presidency, and perhaps they think a contrarian strategy will help them win Congress seats in the various midterms.

Bob16: Weaver95: we're not in an identical situation, so those same solutions wouldn't necessarily work today.

Sez you.

History repeats itself.

But never identically.

That said, if history is any guide at all, then we're either on the prelude to the french revolution or the Roman Republic shifting to the Roman Empire.