Watching the debate tonight, I kept listening for some hint of the discussion of the “climate crisis”.
Why? Because the League of Conservation Voters put out a broad petition campaign to influence moderator Jim Lehrer:
But it didn’t work, not a single mention was made of, as they put it, “…the greatest challenge of our generation — climate change.”
The closest it got was when when Romney talked about the need for energy for a strong economy:
“I LIKE COAL.”
He also talked about making the XL pipeline a reality. But the real zinger was when he talked about Obama’s choices on backing green energy companies like Solyndra:
“You put $90 billion – like 50 years worth of breaks to Solyndra … I have a friend who said, ‘you don’t just the pick the winners and losers – you pick the losers,’”Romney said.
As Sheldon Cooper would say. Bazinga !
I went in with an open mind. I was not sure about Romney, but was really impressed by him tonight. America needs someone who can get their house in order. Enough waffling.
They aren’t going to talk about it because its not a matter of pressing financial importance. We have a tumorous debt weighing us down, a potential world war in the works, and the disconnection of an entire culture from relevant matters. Climate change is the last priority on a list created by the oil industry.
I have a great pic that shows all the losers Obama has “picked” versus those that Romney has invested in. Very interesting. If I knew how to post it I would put it up but I am HTML illiterate.
Not enough time to talk about this issue in this debate. Romney did say “I like clean coal!” but left it there. This is a huge economic issue and deserves a 30 minute discussion about priorities for the US economy and so the essential misinformation about global warming caused by CO2 and be developed. Someone needs to say CO2 is increasing because of the warming, not the other way around.
Good. The whole climate change issue is so incredibly unimportant compared to the problems we face, I’m glad it didn’t come up.
When conservationists and environmentalists start campaigning STRONGLY againt wind turbines, I will accept that they MIGHT be serious about the environment….. until then……. HYPOCRISY !!!!
The Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans are the borrow and spend party. This is clearly borne out by the facts since the Ronald Reagan Administration. If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.
As far as the climate change debate, there is none. It is a talking point to be trotted out when President Obama meets with his more radical constituents, nothing more.
Wayne, a simple way is to Google Imageshack. upload the pic and copy paste the url to a post here.
There are of course many other ways..which others will tell you about.
“Climate goes off the presidential radar”
Again this is good news, the polls are obviously telling both sides unambiguously that the AGW meme has lost traction, people aren’t buying it nowadays,…it stinks to high heaven!
Abe was right….You can fool all of the people some of the time,….etc., etc..
On the one hand, I can understand not discussing it. The topic was to be domestic economics. OTOH, there is nothing that will do more to destroy our domestic economy than the stupid “Cap and Tax” and carbon fees. California is now implementing our own version. In related news, ongoing job losses continue in California… Tax increases on the ballot for November – like raising taxes will convince business to locate here – and dire statements that if we don’t raise some of the highest taxes in the nation even higher, we run out of money…. How you “tax yourself rich” is beyond me, but seems to have something to do with government “decision makers” drinking at tropical resorts… like Rio…
Romney was right to avoid it (and dodge being painted as “Oil Lacky”) while Obama was wise ot avoid it (and dodge having people laugh at him again like they did during the SOTU Address last time he mentioned it…)
The League of WHO???
“…Especially since the debate will be hosted in Colorado, where the community has suffered so much from the terrible wildfires…”
Best tomatoes I’ve raised in 20 years.
Misguided green policies (over many years, but especially) in the last three years have already resulted in billions added to the Obama deficit This is already a legacy of his administration, whether we re-elect him or not. Yes, weather is constantly changing, and it will take money to deal with those changes, but, as John Christy said recently before Congress, we can adapt to weather anomalies, no matter how fearsome they seem. It is fruitless to try to ward them off with policy.
Imo, what “conservation voters” need to fear, is a “tipping point” of wasted dollars that can never be recalled, and which weaken our ability to adapt. Such spending may yet send the economy careening into another recessions, or so undermine it that we meander along for generations in Japanese-style stagflation.
Torgeir Hansson says:
“If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat.”
You are a clueless lunatic. Obama, Pelosi and Reid have indebted the country far more than any other administration in history. Get a clue, tool.
What callous provincialism!
At first, I thought it said “League of Conservative Voters”. LOL
To Bill Parson regarding the tomatoes. I have NEVER been able to grow tomatoes — like to know what your secret is.
Just remember that “Cap and Trade” did not make it.
However, the EPA with an “Endangerment Finding on CO2” made it happen.
In his own words………….
I have NEVER been able to grow tomatoes — like to know what your secret is.
David Axelrod knows: Lots of BS.
I bet the markets shot up!
Here ya go folks……………
Vote!
If you don’t, you did!
Torgeir Hansson says (October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm): “If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.”
Hint: Clinton isn’t running. Obama is.
Oops.
D Böehm says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:51 pm
—————————————–
Ouch, that’s a little harsh on poor Torgeir. As I see it, the American people have never voted for leadership on deficit restraint, and therefore have never gotten much of it from a president of either party. Slick Willie was the best of the bunch, using political capital provided by the Democrat-devoted MSM, Reagan’s peace dividend and Volker’s defeat of inflation.
League of Conservation Voters board of directors:
http://www.lcv.org/about/board/
Steve R says: “Good. The whole climate change issue is so incredibly unimportant compared to the problems we face, I’m glad it didn’t come up.”
If 0bama is re-elected, it will in January.
Bill Parsons says: “…what “conservation voters” need to fear, is a “tipping point” of wasted dollars that can never be recalled, and which weaken our ability to adapt. Such spending may yet send the economy careening into another recessions, or so undermine it that we meander along for generations in Japanese-style stagflation.”
Not to worry. 0bama has a long list of people named Bush to blame. If that doesn’t fool anybody, he’ll claim that he didn’t install enough Socialism.
The next president of the united states will be president Ryan or some guy called Barack Obama. who didn’t even stay over night in Ireland, such a fake!
Ben D says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:43 pm
“Climate goes off the presidential radar”
Again this is good news, the polls are obviously telling both sides unambiguously that the AGW meme has lost traction, people aren’t buying it nowadays,…it stinks to high heaven!
Abe was right….You can fool all of the people some of the time,….etc., etc..
==========================================================================
True, it’s good that it’s a slippery slope for a politician today to endorse CAGW because people are seeing it for what it is, a load of (fill in the blank). But it’s bad because the hockey stick is still the lever that is driving the economy into ruin. The Obama EPA is regulating CO2 as a pollutant to prevent CAGW and so shut down coal plants. (Perhaps giving Hansen yet another excuse to explain why his predictions are so far off. “But we reduced CO2!”)
The fallacies the fantasy of CAGW need to brought front and center in the public’s view so that the removal of the policy-driven (rather than science based) regulations is clearly justified.
Moderator, please use you judgement.
This song just stuck applicably in my head > 🙂
[ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkLTwX0duY4 ]
I thought the Romney comment about 90 billion for green jobs compared to the much smaller amount for tax breaks for oil companies was a mention of climate issues and if I am not mistaken President Obama really didn’t respond, either to the tax issue or why it is necessary to spend so much on climate issues.
Gary Hladik says:
October 3, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Torgeir Hansson says (October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm): “If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.”
Hint: Clinton isn’t running. Obama is.
Oops.
=======================================================
Funny how Obamanites will blame Bush for the Obama economy yet won’t credit Reagan for the Clinton economy.
(PS I never thought I’d ever say I would vote for Clinton. But if he was the one running against Obama…..)
Torgeir Hansson, Clinton had one balanced budget because the NASDAQ gained 99% in 1999 & the US Treasury enjoyed windfall capital gains taxes, combined with spending controlled by Newt Gingrich’s Congress elected in 1994 specifically to counter Clinton’s liberal policies, rammed through contrary to his own campaign promises in 1992. It is delusional to imagine that Democrats are more fiscally responsible than Republicans, since every year in which they controlled Congress from the Eisenhower to Bush the Elder Administrations, the US ran deficits & raided the Social Security trust fund.
What we need is someone to accept the will of the people, but with enough wisdom to make them work for it.
“You put $90 billion into — into green jobs. And I — look, I’m all in favor of green energy,” Romney said. “$90 billion, that would have — that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion.”
“And these businesses, many of them have gone out of business, I think about half of them, of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business,” Romney added. “A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.”
I was almost shouting, “Call it what it is, a SLUSH FUND!”
But that definitely would have provoked a response so it’s better he didn’t.
SpaghettiO’s silence on the charge was a BIG take away for viewers, I would think.
Mitt showed up to this debate determined to make it to the finish line in front. He wanted it most and I agree with the talking heads that he took the checkered flag.
Politics is a lot like stock car racing I guess. If you bump too hard and turn somebody hard into the wall then teammates likely will return the favor at a later race.
Why do the have Province and Postal Code on the form for a petition about the USA election?
I think this combination is part of a Canadian address and I’m pretty sure Canadians can not vote in the USA.
Did the USA change its rules on foreign participation and influence in the election process?
League of Conservation Voters take note: Mexico has States not Provinces.
Mitt Romney will make a very nice president.
but not off the MSM radar:
4 Oct: Australian: AFP: Man-made gases emitted ‘centuries before industrialisation’
HUMANS were big emitters of greenhouse gases long before the Industrial Revolution, a finding that raises worrying questions about the benchmark for measuring global warming, a newly-published study says.
For 1800 years before industrialisation took off in the 19th century, emissions of methane rose in line with expanding populations, human conquest and agricultural techniques, it said.
Celia Sapart at Utrecht University in the Netherlands and colleagues analysed 56 ice core samples drilled in north and central Greenland for levels of carbon 13, a telltale isotope of methane…
The major contributors are likely to have been deforestation, biomass burning and rice paddies, rather than geological sources such as mud volcanoes, according to the study published in the journal Nature…
The study was neither designed to calculate the additional warming from the methane emissions, nor probe whether any warming affected weather patterns, but it has clear implications for work on climate change, said Ms Sapart.
“This study shows the urgency of controlling greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, because it shows that the disequilibrium in the climate system caused by humans existed for much longer than we expected,” she said in an email exchange with AFP…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/man-made-gases-emitted-centuries-before-industrialisation/story-e6frg8y6-1226487884225
Atmospheric Physics and Chemistry Group
Dr Celia Julia Sapart
Master in “Climate Change”, University of East Anglia, Norwich (UEA), UK, 2006-2007
http://www.projects.science.uu.nl/atmosphereclimate/celia.php
[snip]
@Torgeir Hansson says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm
The Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans are the borrow and spend party. This is clearly borne out by the facts since the Ronald Reagan Administration. If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.
As far as the climate change debate, there is none. It is a talking point to be trotted out when President Obama meets with his more radical constituents, nothing more.”
Lets look at this…”If you want responsible fiscal policies, vote Democrat”
Responsible fiscal policies like “Yet, during the last year, the national debt increased $1.2 trillion and has increased $5.3 trillion since Obama took office, bringing the total national debt to more than $16 trillion.” That is a 33% increase over 4 years or an average of 1.35 trillion in new debt per year.
Or perhaps the trillions in new money that has been printed over the last 4 years to “Bail out” failing businesses.
Or the 5+ trillion in economic stimulus to increase job growth. Claiming to have created almost 5mil new jobs (where??? I don’t know) that is over $1 million per job (seems costly)
Then there is the Green Energy policies like Grants to Solyndra.
Green will be viable when it can produce Cheap clean energy 100% of the time instead of Solar that produces 3 times as costly electricity about 27% of the time or Wind that produces 6 times as costly electricity about 22% of the time and do so at the same or lower cost per KWH as Natural Gas or Clean Coal without subsidies.
If these are Responsible Fiscal Policies then the Fox is in charge of the Hen House
[snip – a bit over the top sorry, -mod]
Next debate Obama will bring up climate and the need to prevent the bacon and diaper shortage that will disable impact women disproportionately. Both caused because he did not get cap and tax.
It will be a hard hitting point.
I think we should address the climate crisis “boldly” and “head on.” We should not shy away.
As soon as we see a real fixable problem with our climate and a real solution that would fix that real problem, we should get right on it. So far, I haven’t seen much of either.
cn
Torgeir Hansson says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm
—–
Would just like to point out that all of Clinton’s financial policies came from a Republican congress.
The point you are clumsily trying to make just couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s more like The Democrats are the tax, borrow and spend party. Honestly, you really couldn’t be more clueless if you tried. But have a look here at this chart …
Deficits-Surplus by Congressional Control 1995-2009
… and pay attention to the colors of the data points. Now imagine extending through the DingleBarry administration. The Democratic-Socialist party is exactly what it is and has been for the better part of a century. All the big ticket timebombs, Social Security, Medicare, Socialized Medicine, were planted by these terrorists and will blow up in a future generation’s face, and still they demand more. Yes I said it. Just like a terrorist setting a bomb and escaping the scene, they have done the same knowing full well the country will collapse after they are dead and buried. So do NOT vote Democrat if you care at all about your country, your kids, grand-kids, and future descendants. It is really simple math.
So what’s the deal with you anyway Torgeir? Are you a Norwegian butting his nose into our internal affairs? Are you a transplant trying to drag EuroSocialism to the states? Are you the Torgeir Hansson in San Francisco? Are you a USA citizen? If you’re not a citizen, then why don’t you STFU about our elections and we’ll do the same about your homeland ( wherever that may be ). Deal?
No it wasn’t. Poor Torgeir is a dyed in the wool socialist who comes out from time to time to astroturf for the enemy. Check out examples of his thread-bombing in this thread. about Canada leaving Kyoto. I squished together about 18 of his 20 something comments into a single paragraph of clichés and leftist talking points.
Torgeir Hansson says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm
The Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans are the borrow and spend party. This is clearly borne out by the facts since the Ronald Reagan Administration. If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.
Torgeir,
Think Newt Gingrich, The Contract With America, and Neo-Conservative control of Congress during the Clinton administration. As every school child in the US of A should have learned, Congress controls spending, not the President. Guess you missed that, eh? The Neo-Cons forced the Clinton administration to be financially responsible, by laying out a path to a balanced budget and passing legislation that made it happen. Fact.
MtK
Wrong question–there IS no “climate crisis”.
That’s like the judge asking the plaintif “When did you stop beating your wife”?, yet the guy never has (beaten his wife, that is). So it’s no wonder Leher ignored a question like that.
(Who is running the store over there at the League of Conservative Voters–didn’t any of them graduate university?)
Bryan A says:
My gosh, Bryan, get a clue–it was Gingrich and a Republican House (ever hear of the Contract with America?) that forced responsible financial policies (along with a number of other things) on Clinton. Look it up and get the true picture of what happened–Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming to a sound fiscal position; it wasn’t his bright idea at all.
Having watched it and chewed it over I think I saw a defeated man in Obama, out of guts, out of time, out of everything.
Of course he has two more chances to fight back but from his sorry performance but I think he neither cares nor can be bothered:. it is just a ritual humiliation he must endure on his way down the tubes.
his own internal polling must have told him, not to be confused with overhyped published polls, he has lost the race already. By between 60 and 90 electoral college votes is my estimation.
And short of a white rabbit out a top hat, and I suspect he is out of rabbits, I don’t think there is anything he can now do to make up that lost ground.
But if you deliberately fracture your own electoral base, as he has so successfully done, think the coal states, think the lower middle class, think of any of a dozen other electorally important groups: and up against a challenger who has cemented his diverse base into a electorally solid force then it’s game over. And he knows it.
Still time will tell.
Kindest Regards
OssQss says:
October 3, 2012 at 8:59 pm
You are close to the truth here.
The reason that ‘Global Warming’ ‘Climate change’ etc etc is not mentioned is that in political terms that battle has already been won by the warmists. The EPA regulations are in place, power generation facilities ARE being closed down, the talk in board rooms is of reducing CO2 footprints and sustainability (nice little Agenda21 and Rio memes) – many sectors like aviation are facing ruinous worldwide taxation etc etc.
It is the realists that should be continually raising the failures of the AGW forecasts and insist on having all the ‘green’ regulations and taxes repealed as industries in the US and Europe are continuing to die or move to the far East and India; and, children are still being taught that ‘carbon’ is dangerous to the world.
Winning the factual argument now is too late – the victors have already left the battlefield.
Torgeir Hansson
oct 3 8:37pm
It is really sad that you can’t seem to remember that all the policies and changes in laws and regualtions that brought on the housing crisis and tanked our current economy were instititued under Clinton. He left office before the shit he shat hit the fan.
Six times President Bush went before Congress and warned that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were going bankrupt. You can find vidios of his speeches on YouTube. Deomocrats controlled Contgress and they ignored him. The ever so lovable Barney Frank was touting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as a great investment almost up to the day that they both went bankrupt.
The ecomomic boon that occurred under Clinton was fueled by the high tech revolution which he had nothing to do with but which he took credit for. He instituted all the policies that created the recession that we are now in and which he publically, time and time again has blamed Bush for.
There are lovely videos on YouTube showing Democrats taking credit for the housing boom and after the bubble burst those same Deomocrats blaming Bush.
As far as Reagan goes — He wanted a moderate increase in defense spending. What the Democrats who controlled Congress demanded as their price for that was a huge increase in social spending. To look at the budget from that time it appears that the social budget and defense spending increased equally but that is not true. What the Democrats did was shift items that had previously always been in the social budget into the defense budget (the prime example was miliitary pensions — they had always been in the social budget) thus creating room in the social budget while raising the defense budget. Then the democratic congress added a little more defense spending and added a huge increase to the social budget. The result was that the social budget increased by 3 real dollars for every 1 dollar the defense budget increased. But the appearance was that the social budget and defense budget recieved equal increases.
You tout Democrats as fiscally responsible? Man, i feel sorry for you, you poor dupe.
Eugene WR Gallun
This is the US National Debt Clock.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Your great country is rapidly heading towards Greek style financial status. You do not have money to spend on expensive Green measures that can never work. Your debt at 650,000Us$ per family has the potential to wreck the world economy in the next decade.
Who is going to do anything about it? Who is going to say to the US public that the country and private indviduals have to stop spending borrowed money if they want to maintain the status of a great nation. Will Obama do this? Will Romney have the guts to do it? Will the US public accept the necessary measures?
Was this talked about in the debate last night? Romney got surprisingly good reaction from the BBC here in Britain who normally promote Obama,.
tonyb
tonyb
Is ther really a climate crisis? I think not at least in reality so why discuss a non crisis. The US needs to get a grip on its $14T debt crisis and ignoring the feared but nonexistent climate crisis would help save billions of dollars and increase employment so increasing the tax take. Obama has been blinded by the green lobby who talk a load of BS.
Torgeir Hansson must feel like Barack Hussein Obama did last night.
Facts are a b!tch.
“…the greatest challenge of our generation — climate change.“
The scream of bloody murder they keep using is what is turning people like me away from them. They are just background noise I hope will be gone when I turn around to see if it’s still there some day.
Obama looked like he needed to sit down. Somebody should have brought him a chair.
Blade (and others):
Torgeir Hansson [October 3, 2012 at 8:37 pm] says:
“The Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans are the borrow and spend party. This is clearly borne out by the facts since the Ronald Reagan Administration. If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.”
The point you are clumsily trying to make just couldn’t be further from the truth.
===========================================
Torgeir’s piece reads like it is supposed to be a quote. It probably was meant to say:
“[Who said] The Democrats are the tax and spend party, the Republicans are the borrow and spend party. This is clearly borne out by the facts since the Ronald Reagan Administration. If you want responsible financial policies, vote Democrat. Period. Hint: Clinton.”
Election, is an auction on gods about to be stolen in the comming years. The thief is well known but beyond accountability.
Do anyone trust any of these guys ? Their promises is for the voters to pay, un-fortunately people who don’t vote get the bill anyway.
Socialists is more likely to steal from others as they they think it’s part of their justified cause.
If government employs 47%, the other 53% in reality have the burden of feeding all the country.
Living in Sweden where government takes 67% from small businesses makes one realize what’s the real danger with democracy.
Romeny gave Obama a huge beatdown with the 91 Billion dollar Green Cronyism. *BAM*!
Romney is math illiterate and incompetent when it comes to bringing balance to the American budget !! People here pride themselves on being skeptical, being able to do complex math is required, I don’t understand how you can drop such a fundamental for Republican ideology ?? Using Romney’s free spending, tax break, uber pro-corporate spirit America will be another Greece in four years !!
It’s funny to see people defend their team. The seemingly endless nonsense of the argument that goes something like, “our guy inherited this mess” or “their guy got out right before his failed policies tanked the economy”. It’s all bull and supporting either side is supporting a totally corrupt system. Neither care about you at all. Neither care about the “country”. They care about fostering their own egos and setting themselves up for multi-million dollar speaking tours in retirement.
The plain fact is that both parties have been content to shred the Constitution while racking up huge deficits. BOTH PARTIES. Or I should say, the only two parties people seem to think exist. If you vote for either of these corrupt morasses of demagoguery yet again, and expect something different, you are demonstrating the definition of stupidity.
John Marshall says:
October 4, 2012 at 2:38 am
Q: Is there really a climate crisis?
A: No, there isn’t. However, there WILL be a climate “science” FUNDING crisis as soon as Mr. Romney becomes president. Expect the squealing to begin in earnest from our manic CAGW friends at that time…
P.S.
To our CAGW climate scientist friends – in 2013, please find a rich billionaire to fund your “research” and give us taxpayers a break (there are many like-minded billionaires out there to choose from).
tonyb says:
October 4, 2012 at 1:38 am
“This is the US National Debt Clock.
Your great country is rapidly heading towards Greek style financial status.”
Not exactly; Greece has no own currency anymore it can devalue.
I had not seen Mitt Romney talk more than a sound bite on TV so the debate was eye opening. It showed that Mitt is not the demon that the entire media (except for Fox News) make him out to be. In fact he seems extremely intelligent and visionary – kind of what you would expect of a Baker scholar from Harvard. He is rich and successful and has a tough time connecting with the poor but it is not yet a crime in America to be successful (although it might become a crime if Obama gets in again). Meanwhile the US President did not appear Presidential at all and came across as incompetent and bumbling.
@Educated Chimp:They aren’t going to talk about it because its not a matter of pressing financial importance. We have a tumorous debt weighing us down, a potential world war in the works, ….
Yes, we are deeply in debt. Under great financial pressure. At risk of war in the mid east. Energy, environmental, permitting, and other regulatory policies need to be front and center. There is ultimately only one way to reduce the debt —- make money by creating wealth through productive labor.
You cannot reduct the debt and ease financial pressures:
1) shutting down coal mines.
2) shutting down perfectly good coal fired powerplants.
3) by suffering blackouts from strained electrical grids missing reliable base generation.
4) by waiting in gas lines because the Strait of Hormuz is closed and we can get Canadian oil only be rail car.
5) by spending more time in the court room than on the factory floor.
Dear Educated Chimp
“Climate change is the last priority on a list created by the oil industry.” ?????
The oil industry has not created anything other than a supply line for our own insatiable demand for energy. You might as well blame the water industry for salt water intrusion into coastal aquifers as a result of fresh water withdrawal to satisfy our demand for massive volumes of water in our shore communities. Or blame the logging industry for the loss of our forests.
Are the players in those industries blameless? No, but are you?
Passing the buck is nothing more than blaming everyone and everything except yourself for being one of the consumers, without whom all of those bad old insutries would go out of business.
PBS gets money from Koch and the Natural Gas Alliance, and Lehrer, who is timid anyway, got the message. Global warming has become a pornographic term in the corporate media.
Nice going, Anthony and friends. You are screwing up the whole world.
REPLY: Mike, as I’ve said to you before, please seek help from a mental health professional. For readers that don’t know, Mike Roddy is one of the people responsible for stating that I have sex with farm animals when I asked for a factual correction to an article. – Anthony
lol
Bill Clinton looked good because he presided over a dot.com, tele.com bubble. It was Obama’s desire to look good seeing robust growth driven by a carbon bubble. Bubbles burst. Fortunately this one never took off much other than it did hurt coal and drilling on federal lands.
I see zero comments on this at Center for American Progress on the debate. They they miss the debate? (Factory orders drop by 5.2% factories produce less CO2 when they are idle.)
Looks to me like their petition was more a membership builder and a email list generator.
doSun Spot says:
Do you know how Romney turned the SLC Olympics around? The first thing he did was call all his corporate buddies and twisted their arms into investing in the Olympics. There was a lot of skepticism at first, but Romney just kept at it–he “sold” these resources on the idea, and it took off.
We’ve been “sold” on the idea of a failed America for four years under Obama. Some say he’s inept; I believe he’s got a plan to reduce the US to a 3rd world country. But either way, he can’t paint a bright future because he’s a known quantity (no more Hope and Change) and that makes him vulnerable and defeatable.
Your take on the future is to leave this election in the hands of a bumbling, uber Left idealogue. If you want the US to fail, stay there. My take on the future is one of positive expansion, led by a man who has done it before.
(If you want to see a perfect example of an unbalanced budget, that would be Obama’s: His budget proposal last time got zero votes–not even one Democrat would support it. THAT’s what you’re referring to, I’m sure.)
Continue putting your head up your team’s rear.
“Without question, we simply could not host Games in Salt Lake if it were not for the enormous spending and services of the federal government,” – Mitt Romney
According to Romney at the time, former President George W. Bush specifically included Olympic items in the budget he submitted to Congress.
2002 Olympics received $342 million in direct federal funding and an additional $1.1 billion in indirect financing from Washington because of Romney’s “leadership” and “fiscal conservatism”.
Seriously people. Wake up.
REPLY: Gosh, we financed the Olympics, how terrible. Next time we’ll tell the Olympic commission that if they want the Olympics in the USA, they need to pay for the whole thing. Meanwhile the deficit soars to soar to unprecedented heights. Maybe Obama can’t see it due to hypoxia setting in. – Anthony
Mike, you and your friends are FAILING to save the world. How can you live with this personal failure? Pounding on the Koch Brothers is a good start, but you need to get even MORE hysterical if you really want to persuade people. Run some bigger computer simpulations, on bigger supercomputers, and then draw a bigger graph and make sure it points up and to the right!
And be sure to wear one of those Guy Fawlkes masks, too. That always helps any argument.
Blade says:
October 3, 2012 at 11:31 pm
========================================
Good points and a good reminder that tax bills and spending bills have to originate in the House of Representatives. The President can propose a budget but it has to be introduced by a congressman in the House. Why? Because, as originally written in the Constitution, the House was to represent the people of the nation, the ones who would be paying the bills. (I might be wrong on this but I think originally only taxpayers could vote.)
The Senate was to represent not so much the people of the states but the governments of the states. That’s why treaties need to approved by the Senate and not the House. The state governments would need to abide by them. It was originally up to the state how it’s senators were selected. Now it’s a popular vote and now we have unfunded mandates.
@ Torgeir Hansson,
Bill Clinton did not truly support financial restraint. It was forced on him by a Republican controlled Congress. Although I will admit, the Republicans completely forgot about fiscal responsibility / restraint when they had control of both Congress and the White House under GW Bush.
If you really want fiscal discipline vote for divided government. Gridlock is the best defense against the growth of government.
tonyb says:
Your great country is rapidly heading towards Greek style financial status. You do not have money to spend on expensive Green measures that can never work. Your debt at 650,000Us$ per family has the potential to wreck the world economy in the next decade.
And nobody cares.
Who is going to do anything about it?
Nobody
Who is going to say to the US public that the country and private indviduals have to stop spending borrowed money if they want to maintain the status of a great nation.
I think a guy named Ron tried.
Will Obama do this?
No.
Will Romney have the guts to do it?
No
Will the US public accept the necessary measures?
Certainly not.
Was this talked about in the debate last night?
No.
Therein lies the problem.
The absence of the climate topic in the presidential debate is not a retreat by the US from the alarming climate science position created by activist leadership of the IPCC.
As long as scientific societies, academies, government science institutes and bureaucracies presume, as they currently do, that the science of the IPCC ARs is authoritative they will support the implementations of climate mitigation actions based on the IPCC ARs.
Skeptic focus and vigilance is needed now more than before.
John
To: Barack Obama
Subject: WARN Notice
Mr. Obama, due to the abject failure of your tenure as President of the United States, we are pleased to notify you that your services will no longer be required after 12/31/2012.
Kindly prepare yourself and your staff accordingly.
Sincerely,
The Management
TonyG
Thanks for your excellent reply to my comment. With the US debt clock ticking so fast I fear time is running out for your Govt to do something of their own free will before the markets step in.
Tonyb
tonyb says:
TonyG
Thanks for your excellent reply to my comment. With the US debt clock ticking so fast I fear time is running out for your Govt to do something of their own free will before the markets step in.
Tonyb
The problem is, I fear the will does not exist in this country to do anything about it. The people don’t seem interested – in fact, like Greece and Spain, they seem more interested in not only keeping but increasing spending. The borrowing part doesn’t seem to matter. And the politicians certainly have no will to do anything.
I have come to the conclusion that I am likely to see the end of the United States in my life. I only hope it happens soon enough that I still have the strength to try to rebuild something so my kids can live in a decent place.
“If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace” – Thomas Paine
REPLY: Gosh, we financed the Olympics, how terrible. Next time we’ll tell the Olympic commission that if they want the Olympics in the USA… – Anthony
I don’t know what is the public’s at large attitude towards Olympics in the USA, but Olympics did do a miracle for London, not so much for the economy, but for the ‘feel good’ factor if there is such a thing.
London August 2011: riots, looting, high street shops on fires, murders … fear for the family and property …
London August 2012: Olympics, crowds of friendly people cheering their sporting heroes, flag waving, garden parties etc. My family and I attended number of events and didn’t witness a single incident of street mugging, violence or disorder of any kind.
I don’t know what Olympics did or didn’t do for other host cities, but for London it was an event which returned hope and optimism for the city’s future…not measurable in the monetary terms.
REPLY: Gosh, we financed the Olympics, how terrible. Next time we’ll tell the Olympic commission that if they want the Olympics in the USA, they need to pay for the whole thing. Meanwhile the deficit soars to soar to unprecedented heights. Maybe Obama can’t see it due to hypoxia setting in. – Anthony
You totally missed the point. Some nitwit above was claiming that Romney turned around the SLC Olympics because he forced his corporate buddies to pony up their own money. I was exposing a falsehood that was being put forth in an effort to paint Romney as some sort of Libertarian knight in shining armor. He’s not. He’s just like every other politician. Claims to want to reduce government while he is simultaneously belly up to the bar feeding from its trough. I love the Olympics regardless of how very little economic sense it makes and how corrupt its management is.
Stevie Welles,
Romney is the fixer. That is how he became so successful. He has a real talent for understanding the problem and seeing the remedy.
This country has major problems. If they are not fixed we will go over a fiscal cliff and everyone’s standard of living will take a major hit. If we remain on the present course of money printing and indebting the population to provide loot for favored special interests, it won’t be long before the hard-bitten middle class runs out of money. Then what? Print more? Borrow more? How long can that go on without destroying the economy??
This country desperately needs an adult in charge to fix things. Obama is a total incompetent who has never accomplished anything worthwhile in his life. He never worked for anything; everything has been given to him. The Empty Chair has failed upward into the presidency. Now we must terminate his employment.
This country needs a fixer who knows how to put the economy back on the track of economic growth, high employment., and low gasoline prices. With pro-growth policies those goals can easily be accomplished. It is clear that Obama cannot do it. He has had four years, and he has totally failed. Time for a change, no?
Absolutely it’s time for a change. I just find it funny that people still think the Republican party represents a real change or that Romney’s business experience means jack when it comes to being the freaking president. If you think Romney is going to stop printing and borrowing, you must be in the infant stage of understanding the way presidential politics works in this country.
Also, your ridiculous gas price argument is pure nincompoopery. Gas prices were $1.40 when Bush took office and they tripled while he was in office. The only reason they were so low when Obama took office was a little something called the greatest economic collapse in world history since the 30’s. I suppose if you think the president has some magical sway over the price of oil, you’ll believe anything Rmoney tells you.
Both of these guys are crooks and liars. Until the American people start realizing that, get ready for more of the same.
TonyG said
“I have come to the conclusion that I am likely to see the end of the United States in my life. I only hope it happens soon enough that I still have the strength to try to rebuild something so my kids can live in a decent place.”
There seems a certain inevitability about the decline of the US to a middle ranking nation unless they rapidly get to grips with a debt crisis of staggering proportions. I do hope politicians and the public are more aware of the dangers-and are more willing to do something about it- than you seem to imply.
I suspect that finding a cheap and renewable source of energy would be a game changer-fracking fills the former requirement but not the latter.
tonyb
Stevie Welles says:
October 5, 2012 at 5:58 am
Absolutely it’s time for a change. [ . . . ]
– – – – – – –
Stevie Welles,
I disagree temporally with you but not ultimately over longer times. Business prosperity depends on some level of confidence in predictability. We need to stop Obama-like advances in authoritarian intervention in economic arena. But, for a few years with him removed/neutered I recommend we first just do nothing in the legislative arena; for a while no drastic change to regain a certain degree of business confidence in some level of predictability. Then slowly reverse Obama-like policies while reintroducing the policies that created the original wealth of the great free societies . . . . non-authoritative economics . . . . private market dominated with very very trivial government intervention . . . . zero authoritarian intervention being the long term target.
John
I suspect your right, his performance in the second debate and the near term response to this debate should confirm that if correct.
Your quote above reminded me of a webpage known as Eject Eject Eject.
Under that title it had:
Out of airspeed, out of altitude, out of ideas! — Eject Eject Eject
Two possibilities here, one is that you are correct and his internal polling is telling him it is a very long shot that he will win, and he is worn down by the pressures of the President.
Or a face saving maneuver, they figure so much damage has been done to the countries economy and so many economic booby traps set, that the next President is likely to be in a no win situation, and the country will go into a flat spin and crash regardless of who is at the helm.
If true, than the best strategic move for the Democrats is to bail out and let the other party take the fall for the failures to come. I hope we have not reached that point of no return and are still inside the performance envelope of our economy, but we might be in a fragile enough state that one or two outside inputs beyond our control could make the wings come off.
Larry
The topic did not come up because neither of them would have addressed it, just run out the clock instead. It is a lose-lose proposition because they will alienate some voter group no matter where they come down, so it is a waste of time to ask them.