Speak Out: Growth of the economy

Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 10:11 AM:

"Economy grew 2.5 pct. in Q3 as consumers rebound"

http://home.myhughesnet.com/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9QKL40O0%40news.ap.org%3E&p...

I do wish that headline-writers would understand that economic growth at an annualized rate of 2 1/2 percent is not the same as the economy growing 2 1/2 percent in one quarter.

Replies (58)

  • I can't seem to put much faith in these reports.

    I heard ABC reporting that those in the white house were celebrating this news.

    Now Obama uses this as another excuse to pass his tax bill as insurance against the economy slipping back into recession.

    -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 11:16 AM
  • It's a good, sustainable growth rate. There are signs the economy is clawing its way back. I'm fearful that more 'stimulating' by the government might derail that progress.

    I pointed out a while back that hiring is likely to lag due to a number of factors, a 40% increase in the minimum wage since the beginning of the downturn being one of them. Hiring will eventually rebound, but I don't think it can be forced by any kind of 'jobs bill' the Democrats are proposing.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 11:23 AM
  • It's illusory growth through counterfeit. Get prepped for $5/gal gas and $10 value meals.

    -- Posted by uberfan20 on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 1:12 PM
  • It is good to see some growth in the economy. Especially since that growth is expected to continue. It is sustained growth that will create jobs, increase revenues, and help to lower the budget deficit. That would inspire confidence and help to break this downward cycle the country has been experiencing the past several years.

    If I would ask anything of the government it would be that the government discontinue these temporary 'stimulus' programs and develop long term economic policies/legislation which would allow businesses to accurately calculate their labor costs. This would help to eliminate much of the fear and uncertainty which has kept companies from expanding and hiring new employees.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 1:32 PM
  • This is the first round estimate. It will be revised, up or down at the end of November and then revised with the final figure at the end of December. This will result from additional data coming in over the next few weeks.

    I expect this figure to be revised upward in November.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 2:18 PM
  • Election year is typically a year of economic growth. It benefits all officeholders that they be seen as the cause of good economic times. Even Republicans in the House or Senate will have more support for their re-election if voters in their districts are content.

    I also expect that these figures will be revised; hopefully upwards. This country needs some good news and a reason to hope for better. Our children and grandchildren need the improved self-image acquired through profitable work. And wars are less likely in a time of prosperity.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 2:34 PM
  • If we are in a period of solid economic growth why do we need a 'stimulus'?

    -- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 8:47 PM
  • "If we are in a period of solid economic growth why do we need a 'stimulus'?"

    As I understand Harry Reid, it's because the private sector is now growing faster than government...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 9:09 PM
  • And that is the problem. Notice how they always say cops and teachers are losing jobs but never anything about bureaucrats that were goldbricks.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 9:39 PM
  • The cops thing is only short term as so is the teachers back in the classroom talk. What teachers are these that need to go back into the classroom?

    Without these extra cops, you are bound to be murdered, robbed or raped according to Joe.

    -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Oct 27, 2011, at 9:48 PM
  • Old John wrote:

    "Without these extra cops, you are bound to be murdered, robbed or raped according to Joe."

    You just have to set up a 'security committee' inside your little occupied enclave, and 'twill all be well.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Oct 28, 2011, at 7:48 AM
  • OJ,

    The cops in my neighborhood must be in dereliction of their duty. They do not come out until after I report someone has been robbed, murdered, or raped.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Oct 28, 2011, at 7:55 AM
  • With this period of growth in the economy and predicted to continue into next year; this is the opportunity for Mr. Obama to claim credit and ride the economy to better poll numbers, possibly a win in November.

    To do this, he must first quietly end all 'stimulus' programs; they have the potential to wreck the improving economy.

    Second, he needs to end the class envy rhetoric and begin to look and act more presidential.

    Third, an executive order to all agencies to back off on actions on new regulations.

    He does not have to convince liberals; their votes are already in his pocket. He will not get the conservative vote; there is no need to campaign for it. If the economy is improving he will get all the credit. People are tired of all the rhetoric from Washington. If he puts the emphasis on appearing presidential and gags Joe Biden, the majority of voters will forget about his comments. He will have a good chance of taking a majority of the independent vote.

    But, I do not think he will do this. He is too much of an idealogue; he will never admit that the economy will cure itself if he quits tampering with it. The urge to 'tax the rich' and punish the productive elements of society is too strong in him and his supporters. He will never be willing to relax regulations on energy producers, and he truly believes that capitalism is our nation's biggest problem.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Oct 28, 2011, at 10:14 PM
  • -- Posted by Old John on Fri, Oct 28, 2011, at 11:23 PM
  • Oh yes, raise the minimum wage and all millionaire business owners will go bankrupt.

    -- Posted by Dexterite1 on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 7:49 AM
  • Dexterite seems to suggest that all business owners are millionaires. If so, many of the local businessmen seem to be hiding it very well. Perhaps Dexterite was stretching things a mite? Or does he/she really believe the accuracy of the comment that was made?

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 8:27 AM
  • "He is too much of an ideologue; he will never admit that the economy will cure itself if he quits tampering with it. The urge to 'tax the rich' and punish the productive elements of society is too strong in him and his supporters. He will never be willing to relax regulations on energy producers, and he truly believes that capitalism is our nation's biggest problem."

    ---------------

    How some individuals are able to draw these outlandish conclusions is completely illogical.

    President Obama is aware that the economy does move toward self correction, but it does it in its own time. Were he to follow that course, political criticism from the right would follow as naturally as darkness follows daylight. Steps he is taken to encourage job creation, such as spurring demand for products, are going the right direction.

    This "tax the rich" accusation is also bizarre. The rich have always been taxed, and the vast majority do pay their fair share. For that matter, he is one of the "rich." What he has stated is that those that derive their income from the work of their money and pay a 15% tax, are not paying their fair share. Why should income from work be taxed more that income from dividends?

    Another contradictory and inconsistent assertion is that he supposedly wants to "punish the productive elements of society." What possible rationale could the President have for that? It would be entirely to his and the country's advantage for production to flourish. It is in fact only his opposition that would prefer the economy to remain stagnant for the next twelve months.

    He has in fact already "relaxed" on energy production. The realistic long range goals of diversifying the country's energy sources is going in the right direction. Republicans have this imaginary solution that claims that reduction of environmental and financial regulations will magically cause the economy to rebound instantaneously. Of course that's not true. The recovery is underway and the Republicans could join in efforts to accelerate its progress by cooperating on job creation and tax reform.

    The strangest claim is that President Obama "truly believes that capitalism is our nation's biggest problem." The American economic system is firmly established and rooted in capitalism. The government has long placed common sense controls on unfettered private enterprise to ensure that industries do not illegitimately trespass on the rights of individuals, but that is not some manner of creeping socialism.

    And the silliest contention from Republicans is that somehow the President is going against the wishes of the majority of Americans. As he obviously is running for re-election, why in the world would he be sabotaging his chances by unpopular courses of action. It would naturally be advantageous to anyone opposing him to attempt to paint him in those colors. So Republican claims should simply be ignored, which is what most Americans will eventually do.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 9:13 AM
  • Common,

    The following is not new. It came out in MAY OF 2009, just about 4 months after Obama took office. But it appears at least this American who is a self made man is not fooled by Obama and it did not take him long to catch on.

    Your ongoing 'Fairy Tale' on the life of President B. Hussein Obama doesn't sound like you are talking about the same man as Lou Pritchett is.....

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.ASP

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:12 AM
  • And the silliest contention from Republicans is that somehow the President is going against the wishes of the majority of Americans. As he obviously is running for re-election, why in the world would he be sabotaging his chances by unpopular courses of action. It would naturally be advantageous to anyone opposing him to attempt to paint him in those colors. So Republican claims should simply be ignored, which is what most Americans will eventually do.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 9:13 AM

    And that is why President Obama was so careful to write a concise, easily understood bill and was careful not to put pressure on any representatives? The 'cornhusker kickback' did not happen? The Congressional phone system was not overwhelmed by phone calls from constituents in opposition to this legislation? And that is why Nancy Pelosi so infamously stated that we must pass this bill in order to find out what was in it?

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 12:00 PM
  • Numbers can be manipulated to show any result you desire depending on the numbers used. The numbers are only as good as their source. As said about math, economics and statistics...figures don't lie but liars figure. Keep that in mind when you consider statistics offered by government offices to the media. Seek the truth that Democrats don't want you to know.

    -- Posted by jadip4me on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 12:01 PM
  • I am aware that numbers can be manipulated. However, if these figures have been manipulated that will be revealed in future quarters. Until they are revised downward I am willing to accept the possibility that the economy is beginning to right itself.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 1:26 PM
  • Sounds to me like someone thinks every dollar should be taxed when earned, when loaned, when spent and when given away, and if not loaned or given, it should be taxed for being hoarded.

    --------------------------------------------

    "Any Government has no need to be in the Stock Market."

    Stuff, get ready for a lecture on republicans wanting to privatize social security via a government program that allows investment in the stock market. :)

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:16 PM
  • I can't understand why people think a new president, bill, piece of legislation, or some other executive order will fix our country. The staus quo of consumption without regard to health, sustainability, or local economy has to be addressed. Don't over tax the rich, tax the goods and habits that are killing us. Don't let the welfare money go to buy the the processed junk that is causing the obesity and diabetic endemics. Get rid of the notion the government is a charitable entity that has authority to redistribute tax dollars. Those in need should get nutritious necessities not a free for all with unhealthy items produced in china. Tax what we consume, dont penalize what we earn. We know Americans consume too much and many Americans produce way too little. Our country has the ability to produce, but when the cost of living in a third world country is pennies on the dollar and that country has little to no tax, production exists there. Why not tax imports to reflect the "real cost" of sending those dollars overseas? Our government should protect the right to make a living, not punish you for it or enable you not to.

    -- Posted by bebacksoon on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:26 PM
  • "Why should income from work be taxed more that income from dividends?"

    You're right, we need to cut the income from work to 15%, also.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:53 PM
  • "What possible rationale could the President have for that?"

    No one said it was logical, but that has never stopped Washington from doing things.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:54 PM
  • "The recovery is underway and the Republicans could join in efforts to accelerate its progress by cooperating on job creation and tax reform."

    The Republicans are happy to cooperate on those things. However, Mr. Obama wants to focus on public-sector job creation (teachers, firefighters, and police officers), and reform taxes in upward instead of downward. He's the one who's not cooperating.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:56 PM
  • you are talking about the same man as Lou Pritchett is.....

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/y...

    This was a response to Mr. Pritchett several years ago...

    ----------------------

    Like Lou Pritchett, a most frightened man, I have lived under the last 13 presidents. None have "scared" me, although "W" came closest with his unnecessary war. As a former military officer, I recognize security threats; Iraq was not one.

    President Obama, with you in office, I am reassured because:

    ~ You speak confidently and sincerely on subjects critical to our future. Your books clearly articulate thoughts and goals.

    ~ You worked successfully to attend Harvard, demonstrating to all that an Ivy League education is not reserved for the wealthy but for those who are intelligent and diligent. You and you wife have worked hard to improve your family's lifestyle.

    ~ You spent some "formative" years overseas. Exposure to other cultures does not make one "less American". My family has lived overseas. We are "culturally" American.

    ~ You successfully mounted a political campaign to reach the office of President; clearly more than equal to meeting a payroll and running a company.

    ~ You recognize the need for civilian control of the military. Lack of military experience would have disqualified Lincoln, FDR and Reagan. George W. Bush was in the Texas National Guard, not the US military.

    ~ You accept and are mindful of reality. Admitting fault and accepting blame, as in the Crowly-Gates issue, then setting things right, shows strength and maturity. Having a president who does not "misunderestimate" is clearly beneficial.

    ~ You have experienced a range of American thoughts and opinions. Recognition of faults does not equate to "hating America". Neither does expressing an opinion equate to "wanting America to fail." Vilification of individuals is redundant when denouncement of extremist positions was made.

    ~ You are not afraid to acknowledge that our society is imperfect. That our flaws may pale beside those of others is totally obvious. Recognizing and fixing faults sends a strong message. Ignoring issues is hypocritical, and other nations are well aware of this. Blaming America is a fabricated "conservative construct".

    ~ You recognize that we have no a monopoly on ideas. The private sector appreciates government services. Besides highways, air traffic control, police/fire protection, a significant contribution is government stability, which permits legal/financial transactions to be safely conducted.

    ~ You are addressing flaws in health care. Health insurance companies appear to be their own major beneficiary. Exceptions are socialized medicine in the Military and Medicare programs. Citizens have a right to government provided security, police/fire protection; also a right to health protection.

    ~You have embraced energy independence, not just wind, solar, but also nuclear, gas, oil, clean coal and shale. Independence from foreign energy will come when all avenues are being pursued.

    ~ You understand that the "capitalist goose" , if unconstrained, lays "golden eggs" only for the "capitalists" in charge. We provide "the highest standard of living" if and only if, capitalism is controlled by reason. Capitalists must turn "square corners" when dealing with people and government.

    ~ You have insisted that "certain banks and corporations" provide payback when asking for bailouts to protect private assets. Expecting banks to return what they borrowed in their self generated "emergency" is not "extortion."

    ~ You solicit input from across the aisle, when individuals show the courage and wisdom to speak their minds. Current spending proposals, while expensive, are necessary to counteract the inherited recession.

    ~ You display an willingness to consider "opposing points of view from intelligent people." Refusal to continue "yes-man" precedents is refreshing. Intelligent, opposing points of view are valuable. A "just say no" mentality does nothing for America.

    ~ You have the ability to ignore insults like "messiah," or "anointed one." False implications of "omnipotence" or "omniscience" serve only degrade the instigators and are accepted only by an extremist fringe.

    ~ Your are willing to face the media, nation, and the world openly, honestly and deliver a position in clear, complete sentences. The belief of a "free pass on everything" is another construct of closed minded individuals.

    ~ You are able to ignore hectoring of "conservative" detractors who pass off personal opinions as "news." They "demonize" themselves by their inability to consider any point of view other than their own. They are "entertainers", entitled to opinions, but not to represent these as truths. These commentators cater to individuals described by the phrase, "Don't confuse me with the facts, I've already made up my mind."

    ~ You know that governing is like steering a "super tanker." Immediate "controlling" is virtually impossible. Your job requires thinking miles or months ahead in order to keep on course.

    After your second term skeptics will come around, confidence in government will be re-established and freedom of expression will remain, even for the very frightened Lou Pritchett.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:58 PM
  • "As he obviously is running for re-election, why in the world would he be sabotaging his chances by unpopular courses of action."

    He panders to a chosen constituency, which does not necessarily represent the majority of Americans. The Republicans do the same. The 'swing voters' make up the difference. Whether those swing voters will swing one way or the other has yet to be determined. I do not make political predictions, but just because he is running for election does not mean he is fulfilling the wishes of the majority.

    The election will boil down to two major candidates, as they usually do. Each will think his position is consitent with the majority of voting Americans. Obviously, at least one of them will be wrong. Sometimes both are wrong, but one still manages to win because one of the also-rans manages to steal more votes from the other than from him, giving a larger minority than the other.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 11:03 PM
  • -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 10:58 PM

    Common,

    Who authored that Fairy Tale. Your link doesn't work you know.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Oct 29, 2011, at 11:36 PM
  • I haven't seen anything the republicans have put up on the table but no votes and a 9% percent approval rating now that is something to be real proud of. You can not blame this whole mess on one man, I didn't hear all of this for eight years the last administration was in spending like drunken sailors, financing two wars by ourselfs by borrowing all that money reaching over two trillion dollars, major tax breaks for the upper elite during war time, a costly prescription drug plan I can go on and on with the excessive spending that took place in the last decade which congress was controlled by the republicans and had control of the white house.

    -- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Oct 30, 2011, at 12:42 PM
  • Posted by commonsense, on Sat, Oct 29, at 10:58 pm:

    I made an attempt to reply to the first couple of points someone made in this posting. Obviously we are not in total agreement on this:

    * He speaks well with the use of a teleprompter and with a familiar, rehearsed subject matter and a friendly crowd. This was obvious on the campaign trail. Speaking before the camera with an interviewer who asks probing questions his delivery becomes more halting. (speaks much like his official spokesman) Perhaps this is why he avoids this type of interview?

    * "worked successfully to attend Harvard"

    Obviously he did not work to pay his way through Harvard so you must mean he 'worked the system to attend Harvard'. Since he chooses not to reveal much about this part of his life I cannot comment in detail on this point.

    *Being raised overseas as part of a family native to that country is much different than being raised overseas by American parents. It is arguable how "culturally" American he is.

    * Mounting a successful campaign to become President requires skills but these are not the same skills required to meet a payroll and run a company. You ran on promises, crowd appeal,and donor money . A business operates on products, services, and the bottom line.

    I do not have the time or inclination to answer each item point by point but it can be done. I do not find this author as informed or well-spoken as Lou Pritchett.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 5:07 AM
  • Since I lack the time to reply point by point to commonsense, I will pass on another letter, this one written by a 95 year old retired Navy veteran which was certified to be authentic. I believe it speaks thoughts similar to what my father (a veteran of Iwo Jima) would have expressed if he were alive to do so.

    http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/harold_estes.htm

    Fwd: "Old Salt" Hits Home Run

    WW II Battleship sailor tells Obama to shape up or ship out!

    This venerable & much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii for his 70-plus years of service to patriotic organizations & causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a gov't official -- until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president.

    -----------

    Dear President Obama,

    My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

    I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

    One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.. So here goes.

    I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

    I can't figure out what country you are the president of. You fly around the world telling our friends & enemies despicable lies like: " We're no longer a Christian nation." "America is arrogant" (Your wife even announced to the world," America is mean- spirited. "Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.)

    I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

    After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

    Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.

    I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

    Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.

    Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

    And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts , who was putting up a fight? You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

    One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander- in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of.

    You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president. You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That's not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now. And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

    Sincerely,

    Harold B. Estes

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 5:22 AM
  • Theorist,

    Sometimes, perhaps always, a politician's prepared remarks are meant for public consumption and also to allow himself to make statements which can be denied later. Mr. Obama, like many politicians, is a lawyer and trained to parse words. He and his speechwriters are well able to phrase his remarks in such a way as express an opinion which one group recognizes while allowing that remark to be denied or explained away at another time.

    I hear his remarks and temper them with his actions. I am of the opinion that 'actions speak louder than words'. And many of his actions reinforce the opinions of Mr. Estes and myself. You are entitled to disagree with us.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM
  • Only one person on the video seemed to understand that the sigh referred to Obama's thoughts on economic theory, not his nation of origin?

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 7:32 AM
  • stuff wrote:

    "McDonald's Hamburges whose Headquarters are based in Rep.Nancy Pelosi (D) Calif. District ."

    McDonald's Corporate Offices are in Oak Brook, IL.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 7:42 AM
  • Here are a few details on issues that Mr. Estes referred to.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    With respect to being a Christian nation, here's what was really said.....

    "we are no longer a Christian nation -- at least, not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers."

    Obviously what the President said is true, we are not just a Christian nation. What Mr. Estes thought he said was not correct.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    That "America is arrogant." was never said. The complete text in context is....

    "...there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.

    But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad.

    On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise."

    And there is nothing wrong with that statement

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "America hasn't lived up to her ideals." This statement was also completely out of context. This is what really was said...

    "And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals."

    And again, there is nothing wrong with that statement.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Mr. Estes also said about President Obama...

    "You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president."

    So he obviously recognizes the situation that President Obama was placed in. It is only sad that someone gave him erroneous advice about those "despicable lies."

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 9:18 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    ""...there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive."

    "And there is nothing wrong with that statement"

    Yes, there is. America has not shown arrogance. Americans may have shown arrogance. American policy may have, at times, appeared arrogant, but America has not show arrogance. Nor has America been dismissive or derisive, these are the actions of individuals, not of a nation.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 9:23 AM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "So he obviously recognizes the situation that President Obama was placed in."

    To say he was 'placed in' that position appears to dismiss the fact that he helped create the condition, that he campaigned for the position, and that he should have been fully aware of the situation. If he did not think himself up to the task, then he should not have thrown his hat in the ring.

    He has been in office for over two and a half years now. Warren Harding, dismissed as one of our 'worst' presidents, had completely changed the tone of the nation by this point in his career (he died after only two-and-a-half years). Meanwhile, Mr. Obama, with no significant accomplishments under his belt, is still being shielded by his defenders because of the situation he 'inherited'.

    You might want to look at the situations other presidents have been handed, and what they did to qualify themselves as 'leaders'.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 9:30 AM
  • Here are the people who will elect your next president http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/ar...

    -- Posted by BCStoned on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM

    And a Happy Halloween to you also. Nothing going to scare me worse than that!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 10:40 AM
  • mr. estes might have escaped from the old folks war veterans home.

    -- Posted by cadillacman on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 9:24 AM

    Not very nice Cadi. Most of those guys have a spine unlike liberals. They proved it with THEIR actions.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 11:10 AM
  • Theorist,

    I don't think Willy was referring to conservative vs. liberal. His reference seems to be to veterans having enough spine to serve their country and stand up for their beliefs.

    Not every statement has political connotations.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 12:24 PM
  • He made it political with that statement!

    -- Posted by Theorist on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 1:09 PM

    Good thing there hasn't been anything political on this thread until Regrets spoke up........... Hmmmmmm!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 1:18 PM
  • I didn't start it out as political. I was actually commenting on the fact that the people who write headlines for economic news don't seem know the difference between 2 1/2% growth in a quarter and a 2 1/2 percent annual growth rate.

    I did say it was good news, and that I actually think the rate will be revised upwards in the monthly report. Nothing political about that...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 1:58 PM
  • Those *old* guys ARE political and they are mostly educated and still in their right (pun intended) minds. Why shouldn't they be? They're the ones who built factories, provided jobs, and paid taxes.

    What gets me most is that someone like cadillacman who would scream the loudest if color were brought into the picture feels it is okay to make slurs based on age.

    -- Posted by InReply on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 2:04 PM
  • Not sure when I would say this thread turned political... but it didn't take long.

    Most threads on here do not turn political until somewhere around the 1st to the 3rd response. ;-)

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 2:05 PM
  • "...America has not show arrogance. Nor has America been dismissive or derisive, these are the actions of individuals, not of a nation."

    As you know, the use of the name "America" in this context means the government or possibly the President. You probably remember "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists."

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 6:40 PM
  • 30 years ago I heard an old timer say he didn't mind taxes, just look around and see what we've got. He was reffering to the paved roads and such that he remembers not having.

    I wonder if he would still say that today if he was here.

    As far as growth of the economy, I'll believe it when I can see it in other than government say so.

    -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Oct 31, 2011, at 11:32 PM
  • commonsensematters wrote:

    "You probably remember "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists"."

    Are you saying that is arrogant, dismissive, or derisive? It strikes me as a call for unity of purpose.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 1, 2011, at 8:10 AM
  • Based on the following definitions, I'd say it is some of all three, and certainly not calling for cooperative action and unity of purpose.

    someone who is arrogant thinks they are better or more important than other people and behaves in a way that is rude and too confident...

    reacting to something in a way that shows you do not think it is worth paying attention to...

    showing that you think someone or something is stupid, unimportant, or useless...

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Tue, Nov 1, 2011, at 9:32 AM
  • "someone who is arrogant thinks they are better or more important than other people and behaves in a way that is rude and too confident...

    "reacting to something in a way that shows you do not think it is worth paying attention to...

    "showing that you think someone or something is stupid, unimportant, or useless..."

    I see nothing in that statement that reflect any of that. Your claim that it does appears a bit... dare I say it?...arrogant. It would seem to me that saying that America has been arrogant reflects a thinking that the person making that accusation is above such things and reflects rudeness and overconfidence in your own humility...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 1, 2011, at 10:38 AM
  • "...saying that America has been arrogant..."

    Again, no one said America is arrogant. The correct quote was (in reference to America as in our political leadership) "...there have been times where America has shown arrogance..." There is a distinct difference in meaning.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Tue, Nov 1, 2011, at 11:02 AM
  • http://home.myhughesnet.com/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9R5QNJG1%40news.ap.org%3E&p...

    Economic Growth Rate revised downward to 2% for Third Quarter.

    I had expected it to be revised upwards. But, there's still another revision due in December, as more data comes in.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 22, 2011, at 9:05 AM
  • An Obama fanactic saying Bush was arrogant, shouldn't that be on the Funny Friday thread somewhere?

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Nov 22, 2011, at 10:54 AM
  • A lot of people have been convinced that wealth creation is a myth. The teach that in schools, apparently.

    As a result, a lot of American's aren't trying to create any, they're just clamouring for their share of what others have.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 22, 2011, at 12:27 PM
  • Rick** wrote:

    "What will happen then?"

    Methinks in about 2008...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 22, 2011, at 12:33 PM
  • This guy is making a statement about how he sees the economy and gets to meet the Secret Service.

    http://www.11alive.com/news/article/214228/3/Company-Policy-We-are-not-hiring-un...

    -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 23, 2011, at 3:56 PM
  • A lot of people have been convinced that wealth creation is a myth. The teach that in schools, apparently.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Nov 22, 2011, at 12:27 PM

    They are taught that at home also. Many parents tell them they cannot achieve wealth and to hate the wealthy.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Nov 23, 2011, at 8:26 PM
  • I don't remember the subject of wealth brought up at the house growing up.

    Mom told about how the neighbors thought they were doing really well when she had only one pair of worn out shoes.

    I heard the term of people with little means and never figured it applied to us.

    You don't need to be wealthy to be rich.

    -- Posted by Old John on Wed, Nov 23, 2011, at 9:30 PM

Respond to this thread