• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House in damage control mode as potential scandals pile up [W:378]

Better tell that to Christina Romer who disagreed with you.
"Most obviously, it was too small. When we were designing it, most forecasters estimated that the United States would lose around six million jobs during the recession without fiscal stimulus. Compared with this baseline, creating three million jobs would have filled roughly half of the employment hole.

As it turned out, even with the stimulus, we lost almost nine million jobs. Indeed, because of horrific job losses in late 2008 and early 2009, we’d nearly passed the six-million mark before the Recovery Act was even signed. Adding in the estimated effect of the act, the correct no-stimulus baseline was a total employment fall of nearly 12 million. With a loss that big, creating three million jobs was helpful, but not nearly enough.
"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/b...stimulus-helped-and-could-have-done-more.html
 
Was there a point to posting that the admin knew the GOP would not let ANY new jobs/stimulus package pass?

Other than showing the Goebbels effect, what did you do?

You do realize that the stimulus program passed without Republican support and was what Obama requested. Why is it that people like you always believe that not enough money is ever being spent? Do you understand the private sector at all?
 
You do realize that the stimulus program passed without Republican support and was what Obama requested. Why is it that people like you always believe that not enough money is ever being spent? Do you understand the private sector at all?
You do realize that you just totally avoided, once again, accepting that you were COMPLETELY WRONG about Romer?

What is it about conservatism that makes them unable to face up to even their smallest errors?
 
"Most obviously, it was too small. When we were designing it,
most forecasters estimated that the United States would lose around six million jobs during the recession without fiscal stimulus. Compared with this baseline, creating three million jobs would have filled roughly half of the employment hole.

As it turned out, even with the stimulus, we lost almost nine million jobs. Indeed, because of horrific job losses in late 2008 and early 2009, we’d nearly passed the six-million mark before the Recovery Act was even signed. Adding in the estimated effect of the act, the correct no-stimulus baseline was a total employment fall of nearly 12 million. With a loss that big, creating three million jobs was helpful, but not nearly enough.
"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/b...stimulus-helped-and-could-have-done-more.html

Lol, she has wasted so much of her life adhering to a set of economic principles that only work in the vacuum of a University Classroom.

A economic theory that's only applicable in the corrupted minds of ideologues that sit around in small groups comparing their levels of Bush hate.

It's just another excuse from the likes of you Gimme. It's the one constant since you guys elected a Community Activist who's absolutely loaded with unworkable leftist ideas, like " Keynesian economics ".

Your constant excuses for one failure after another," if we only had more stimulus " , " if only the Republicans would work with us ", " We had no idea had bad things were", " the evil rich people aren't giving us enough of their money" etc.

Sh**, you elected a bunch of corrupt incompetent leftist, what did you think was going to happen ?

After 4 and a half years of massive spending, massive subsidies to the banks and almost 7 trillion in new structural debt, debt that was built paying off a increasing dependent class, you guys are still in the dark on how our economy works.

All of the stimulis in the world, all of the QE in the world, it just produces massive debt , a larger and more corrupt Government, more dependents and a shrinking middle class.

But you guys have excuses, useless pitiful excuses for a ridiculous economic agenda pushed by a empty suite Community Organizer.
 
the white house this morning:

"Let's start with Susan Rice," said Pfeiffer. "Ambassador Rice went out that day, and represented the administration and spoke to what happened with the best information we had, that everyone in the administration had, is what she looked at. And that was the consensus of the intelligence community. What we do is we want to go out and speak to the problems ... And what's important is that when problems happen is that the president takes responsibility for them and tries to fix them. And that's what we're talking about in Benghazi. You're right, that is an abosulute tragedy what happened. And the question isn't who edited what talking points. That is largely irrelevant. What is relevant is to make sure that never happens again which is why the president is calling on Congress to pass legislation to beef up embassy security around the world and protect our diplomats."

Obama Aide: 'Irrelevant' Who Edited Benghazi Talking Points | The Weekly Standard

the administration's muscular defense: incompetence and irrelevance

WHO edited the truth out of the talking points---the white house does NOT want you to know

what are they covering up?
 
Thanks, Prof but you are wasting your time here. Obviously you made up the article on the Stimulus posted in the NY Times. You need to stop making a fool out of liberals
You guys are such poor readers, that projection on unemployment was made prior to January of 2009, before anyone anticipated continuing layoffs and an economy that would be much slower in recovery. The point was, of course, that the ARRA did make a fair impact on unemployment no matter what total unemployment actually was.

And if you guys REALLY want to get into projections on economic performance....I can do that too...

"
Published: January 31, 2001
Even before the budget office disclosed the new surplus figures, administration officials said that President Bush's plan for a $1.6 trillion tax cut over the next decade and his calls for more spending on the military, health care and education could all be accommodated comfortably without any risk to the government's fiscal health.

''We are seeing a government that is awash in surplus money, even with an economy that is softening from where it used to be,'' Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said.

Speaking after a meeting with Republican leaders at the White House, Mr. Bush said, ''Taxes must fit into a budget, which they will.''

The budget office's projections suggested that the government would be able to pay off as much of the national debt held by the public as is possible to redeem easily -- all but about $800 billion of the total $3.4 trillion in debt held by the public -- within the next decade.
"

SURPLUS ESTIMATE HITS $5.6 TRILLION - NYTimes.com
 
wapo's watergate wonderboy, woodward, on mtp with david gregory:

“You look at the whole Benghazi thing. You look at those talking points and the initial draft by the CIA very explicitly said we know that activists who have ties to Al-Qaeda were involved in the attack. Then you see what comes out a couple of days later and there is no reference to this. This is a business where you have to tell the truth and that did not happen here.

Meet the Press

burn him
 
it's the word of the day!

Host Chris Wallace reminds Pfeiffer that Obama didn't really talk with Secretary Clinton, Secretary Panetta, or Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that night. "He was talking to his national security staff," Pfeiffer insists.

Asked about whether the president entered the Situation Room, Pfeiffer says, "I don't remember what room the president was in on that night, and that's a largely irrelevant fact."

Pfeiffer then argues that Wallace's questions about the president's handling of the Benghazi terror attack are "offensive."

Obama Aide: 'Irrelevant Fact' Where President Was During Benghazi Attacks | The Weekly Standard

why doesn't he just say the president is an idiot, that might work

White House Officials on Benghazi: We're the idiots - CBS News

ah, what difference does it make
 
Bump..
"Most obviously, it was too small. When we were designing it, most forecasters estimated that the United States would lose around six million jobs during the recession without fiscal stimulus. Compared with this baseline, creating three million jobs would have filled roughly half of the employment hole.

As it turned out, even with the stimulus, we lost almost nine million jobs. Indeed, because of horrific job losses in late 2008 and early 2009, we’d nearly passed the six-million mark before the Recovery Act was even signed. Adding in the estimated effect of the act, the correct no-stimulus baseline was a total employment fall of nearly 12 million. With a loss that big, creating three million jobs was helpful, but not nearly enough.
"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/b...stimulus-helped-and-could-have-done-more.html
 
pfeiffer: he read it in the paper

AP: White House insists Obama not involved

tigta: his deputy treasury secretary neal wolin was informed on june 4, 2012

nyt above

why can't obama deny knowledge of the irs scandal before april 22 of this year?

stay tuned
 
pfeiffer: he read it in the paper

AP: White House insists Obama not involved

tigta: his deputy treasury secretary neal wolin was informed on june 4, 2012

nyt above

why can't obama deny knowledge of the irs scandal before april 22 of this year?

stay tuned

The Libs are getting desperate. Obam's General Council knew of the IGs report 3 weeks before Obama supposedly learned about it from " the news".

I guess they think it's a rationale explanation that his Main Council kept very damaging information from him for 3 weeks.

We are seeing what happens to our Country when a the least of us elect a man with no character or qualifications.

From the economy which id now on life support to these scandals this should show the American electorate that the right to vote doesn not equate to the right to be a dumbass.

That their minimal grasp on reality can effect others in bad way.
 
Back
Top Bottom