Who said this

Obama 2006

The puppedent!

I have to agree. Unknowns like Obama don't just happen. The Democratic leadership sought him out and brought him on board.

Incompetents like W don't just happen. Palin? Obviously organically successful, no help from the Republican party at all.

Oh, and the Republicans have already recanted their purportedly ironclad position that they would cut $100 billion in spending.

So, let's just cut, cut, cut spending. And see what happens. Good times. I'm all for it if we start with the military. Nothing saying we can't increase military spending in the future if we need to do so, but no need to continue to spend just to keep that portion of pie sacred, and a very large portion of the pie it is, given the returns.

and actually, obama was right, at the time. going forward do you really think you can overcome a train wreck like the debt and lack of revenue that he took on during a time of 10% unemployment and nearly 20% including underemployment by choking off spending?

it's all pretty grim. but just earlier today, RS, you noted that the stock market is only looking up due to prospects for US growth. so which is it? has growth returned? is the economy OK? will real estate in Manhattan flourish? if so, will revenues aid the fed gov't? should interest rates rise, helping those on fixed incomes survive but dooming the resale of new development condos that are seeing increasing taxes? your contradictions have contradictions.

ar, riverblatherer's product is so plentiful, random and inconsistent; it's as though one is dealing with way more people (all of varying opinions)even than the many names he posts under.

Yes,
Obama was right, and now he's a hypocrite.

You are. Hfscomm1

No, RS, he's not. he was absolutely correct. and as a result of the f'd up economy he had no choice but to extend unemployment benefits, etc.

i don't agree with many things he's done, cash for clunkers, home tax credit, the extent of QE (although you should be happy, RS, that helped the value of your home), but there was absolutely no room for austerity when he took office, and there's really no room now. efficiencies, yes, health care reform (which he attempted, but the results were congressional, not presidential), and actually we need infrastructure investment desperately if we are not going to recede into near third-world status.

but your partisanship is appalling, RS, and your positions hugely inconsistent. you define sybil economics. wbottom is correct, your economic positions are totally inconsistent. maybe that's because your thinking is so "complex."

Obama 2.0 will be interesting. Is he planning on following the path of Bill Clinton. I think Obama is a really smart politician. The question for me is if he's community organizer or an updated Bill Clinton. The story is he's been reading books on Ronald Reagan. I don't count Obama. He may be inexperienced, but he's a smart and a quick learner.

reading books on Reagan? yes, his style and persuasion.

but obama is very much a child of the chicago school (although a bit chicago lite). what you likely might like about him if you were to view him honestly is what i dislike.

I admire his political skill, I think his heart is in many of the right places, but don't agree with man of his prescriptions.

Riversider: A comment posted by a person who may have never even have been to/lived in/know anybody who lives in Chicago?! Not worth the effort to respond to such.

very cogent response, truth. the chicago school is a reference to the chicago school of economics. perhaps you were not aware. you have no need to visit chicago (although i have indeed been there) to understand the reference, you need merely to be aware, or perhaps to read.

here's your wall street/republican nexus, RS. happy imploding.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40913123/ns/politics/from/toolbar

What's with all of the parentheticals in your posts?

why would you care? really?

what's with your nonsensical postings that have no apparent meaning?

ignore.

Which post(s) was nonsensical? Which having no "apparent" meaning?

hunter: You are now, after only a short time commenting on SE; in the cross-hairs of ar's target.
Welcome to SE.

"The Chicago Shool of Economics"?!

That may be why Chicago is in such a bad economic state.
There is no 'lite' in Chicago.

you fool-- to connect chicago school econ theory to the current fiscal woes faced by chicago and many states and municipalities belies that you know shlt of what you speak

the only truth you produth is that you are a duth!!

youre in my crosshairs, moron

Keynsians create inflation by spending money
Monetarists by Q.E.2

Japan tried both and neither worked.

Hey rent stabilizer.

Who did you steal that from?

Let's add plagiarism to your list of infractions.

Obama doesn't follow Chicago economics. He is a Keynesian through and through. Huge government spending and borrowing.

This idea that he had to increase government spending because of the recession is a myth. The stimulus did not help. It was a payoff to state and local unions that delayed the necessary budget reforms that are needed.

Obama may not be monetarist, but the Federal Reserve,Larry Summers & Bob Rubin clearly understand it

And you're a plagiarist.