PLease explain who is forcing anyone to get their information from one network. Then explain how ONE NETWORK can "drown out" the OTHER SIX? People CHOOSE what they want to listen to; I know...it's that (*)(*)(*)(*)ed "Freedom" thing, again !! If only the Leftninnies could have maintained control over ALL of the media...right?
How pithy. When you don't have anything to say, maybe you should just not say anything. Everybody spins everything. Only the right-wing has an entire architecture in place the sole purpose of which is to produce information pre-slanted to right-wing points of view that it will then use in attempts to crowd independent and non-partisan views and reports into the background. You can deny that reality or admit to it...
1) I do give FDR credit for stopping the panic that had set in by late 1932. But FDR's shovel ready work projects could do only so much (but at least unlike with Obama, FDR's stimulus projects actually built roads, dams, jetties, bridges, buildings, etc) I also give FDR credit for building a great deal of the infrastructure in the South during that time (TVA, etc). but then he needed Southern Democrat votes to get anything accomplished. The decline in unemployment which occured after 1938 was almost entirely due to the revival of the economy as we geared up for WWII. The first large navy contracts came in in fiscal 1938. 2) I guess you intended these juvenile insults to be a thoughtful response - I don't know? maybe you meant to hit the delete key and just forgot? 3) the opinion polls show that this year American voters is wiser than the Obamabots give them credit. fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice - never!
AM radio - Rush etc, was invented long, long ago The internet was invented by Al Gore, right after he ghost wrote "Love Story" your next thought please!
yes, he means frivolous. Texas has lead the way in Tort Reform under both Gov Bush and Perry. That is another reason why there are now more Fortune 500 companies hq'd in Texas than any other state - including California. and yes, the parasite trial lawyers would just love to nail Perry's hide to their wall.
And even those stats may not tell the real story. Studies have suggested that peolpe working in temporary Govt jobs were not counted as employed, meaning that millions working in Govt temporary employment were still included int he unemployment numbers. A major conceptual error in the standard BLS and Lebergott unemployment estimates for 1933-1943 is reported. Emergency workers (employees of federal contracyclical programs such as WPA) were counted as unemployed on a normal-jobs-to-be-created instead of job-seekers unemployment definition. For 1934-1941, the corrected unemployment levels are reduced by two to three-and-a half million people and the rates by 4 to 7 percentage points. The corrected data show strong movement toward the natural unemployment rate after 1933 and are very well explained by an anticipations-search model using annual full-time earnings. http://www.nber.org/papers/w0088.pdf http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/very-short-reading-list-unemployment-in-the-1930s/
that is an interesting point, I would have assumed that the Bureau of Labor Statistics would count workers engaged in the vast federal projects of the time to be employed - and certainly they should have been counted as employed.
And early 1933, remembering that he wasn't inaugurated until March. Right. Pretty much limited to the dramatic increases in GDP and dramatic reductions in unemployment that we saw earlier. Here. Go type in your zip code and learn about the ones closest to you out of the 90,000 being funded. Well, sure. When you only get 472 and then 523 electoral votes, it's not like you have a mandate or anything. They weren't large enough to matter... Change in federal spending for national defense: CY1935: + 22.1% CY1936: + 19.1% CY1937: + 0.7% CY1938: + 4.4% CY1939: + 10.1% CY1940: + 74.9% CY1941: +440.8% CY1942: +265.3% No, just a sign of mild exasperation over people who complain about Uncertainty® while manufacturing the stuff by the boatload themselves. Republican strategy has become to create one legislative hostage-crisis after another. It's getting a little tiresome, and not just to S&P. Relevance to the Spring 2009 G-20 Round? Do you find that people in general are well-informed about things like that?
You're living in a fantasy world. The Democrats are just as slimy. They're the kind of people who blame their political opponents for a shooting two seconds after it happens with no evidence whatsoever. But I might as well be talking to a wall...
I don't want fat Christie in the race. Sorry, but when someone eats that much it shows a major flaw. Don't be partisan, there are a lot of democrats and independants that will vote for Perry too. There are quite a lot of people that vote for the man, not the party. They are sick and tired of being sick and tired!
Actually, no they aren't. Again, every politician spins reality, and you may need to remind yourself that everything you see and hear from them on TV is a scripted performance, even the stuff you see from the floor on C-SPAN. There is a difference in degree to be found there, but the larger one by far comes from the aforementioned Choir of Liars that ultra right-wing corporate money has assembled over the past 30 years. Their one and only purpose is to poison the political environment, flooding it with toxic untruth to the point where little else can survive. You are drenched in this stuff. There is no equivalent organization or activity existing on or emanating from the left. You mean like how the Oslo guy was a Muslim, I presume? And I bet you and a wall would get along just great...
Perry has a double digit lead.....NICE. Those that say Obama is doing well with his popularity.....Keep wishing and pokeing .
the comment about Christie's size interests me. I am not hearing that from anyone else. personally, I would trust Christie based upon his unaffected mannerisms and his lack of concern about his figure. His girth tells me two things: 1) he eats too much and exercises too little 2) he is a no nonsense kinda guy who prefers substance over style
