Dude-in-Chief "lays an egg" on the Daily Show

**Mikeg** · October-28-10, 12:27 PM

The DOTUS made an appearance on Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" last night and he defended the "accomplishments" of his administration's soon-to-be-departed key economic decision-maker:

"Larry Summers did a heckuva job."

Just like Larry did on a smaller scale as President of Harvard University when he approved an investment of $1.1 billion dollars of Harvard's endowment in risky interest-rate swaps. According to Bloomberg News, so far it has cost Harvard half a billion dollars to exit those swaps.

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

"I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The party left me." - Ronald Reagan

**Jimaz** · October-28-10, 03:29 PM

TheDailyShow.com

The Washington Post needs to invest in a spell checker.

**Patrick** · October-28-10, 05:24 PM

"I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The party left me." - Ronald Reagan

Dude, you keep stressing the role of independent voters, yet you worship the Ronald. No one quotes the Gipper anymore man. It’s over. He’s dead.

**Mikeg** · October-28-10, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Patrick

Dude, you keep stressing the role of independent voters, yet you worship the Ronald. No one quotes the Gipper anymore man. It’s over. He’s dead.

I just put that there to remind you guys what is going through the minds of those independent voters who voted Democratic two years ago as they prepare to cast their votes next Tuesday!

**Patrick** · October-28-10, 06:41 PM

Well...all I know is that change is coming again...and again. Hopefull this time around promises can actually be kept and people will reacha cross the aisle. Is that asking too much for the big shots in DC?

Bearinabox · October-28-10, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

I just put that there to remind you guys what is going through the minds of those independent voters who voted Democratic two years ago as they prepare to cast their votes next Tuesday!

You think the Democratic platform has radically changed since 2008? If so, how?

gdogslim · October-28-10, 06:57 PM

The Gipper is dead, wow, I didn't know that, man you are up to date on current events.

I guess that is why Obama's positive ratings are at 37% and dropping and the Republicans will be taking over congress very soon. I like when Obama goes on TV uncensored, everyone can see what a dope he is.

**Patrick** · October-28-10, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by gdogslim

The Gipper is dead, wow, I didn't know that, man you are up to date on current events.

I guess that is why Obama's positive ratings are at 37% and dropping and the Republicans will be taking over congress very soon. I like when Obama goes on TV uncensored, everyone can see what a dope he is.

Lurk a lil longer...and lay of the coke for a few...

**Mikeg** · October-28-10, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by Bearinabox

You think the Democratic platform has radically changed since 2008? If so, how?

OMG, you're right, I Googled the 2008 Democrat Party Platform and found this in the "Fiscal Responsibility" section:

During the first 19 months of the new Obama administration, we the Democrats promise to find enough new federal spending to increase the total national public debt by 40% - from $6.3 trillion to $8.8 trillion.

Well, all I can say is that the Dems have certainly delivered on that promise.

Oh, wait a second, my browser must have messed up, here's what the 2008 Democrat Party Platform actually said on page 29 about "Fiscal Responsibility":

Fiscal Responsibility
Our agenda is ambitious–particularly in light of the current Administration’s policies that have run up the national debt to over $4 trillion. Just as America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits, so too can we not afford to short-change investments. The key is to make the tough choices, in particular enforcing pay-as-you-go budgeting rules.........In the name of our children, we reject the proposals of those who want to continue George Bush’s disastrous economic policies.

Democrats told us in 2008 that "America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits", and they were up to making the "Tough choices" for the sake of "our children."

Most reasonable people see no evidence of anything resembling this coming from the Dems since they were given total control in January of 2009, so I'd have to say that the Democrats HAVE radically departed from this important part of their platform.

**gibran** · October-28-10, 10:54 PM

I find it amazing how perception of a few become the rallying cry of the wrong ...Reagan [[God rest his soul) ...hurt the middle class and the tea party has only put forth the mad hatters... so Obama will demonstrate greatness when the Republicans love their children as much as the rest of us... Kidding... The democrats threw Obama under the bus and the Republicans gladdy ran him over while the tea party sneered and jeered... the result ,,, his accomplishment were muted by the obstructionists of the right ..and we all suffer.

Stosh · October-28-10, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

OMG, you're right, I Googled the 2008 Democrat Party Platform and found this in the "Fiscal Responsibility" section:

During the first 19 months of the new Obama administration, we the Democrats promise to find enough new federal spending to increase the total national public debt by 40% - from $6.3 trillion to $8.8 trillion.

Well, all I can say is that the Dems have certainly delivered on that promise.

Oh, wait a second, my browser must have messed up, here's what the 2008 Democrat Party Platform actually said on page 29 about "Fiscal Responsibility":

Fiscal Responsibility
Our agenda is ambitious–particularly in light of the current Administration’s policies that have run up the national debt to over $4 trillion. Just as America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits, so too can we not afford to short-change investments. The key is to make the tough choices, in particular enforcing pay-as-you-go budgeting rules.........In the name of our children, we reject the proposals of those who want to continue George Bush’s disastrous economic policies.

Democrats told us in 2008 that "America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits", and they were up to making the "Tough choices" for the sake of "our children."

Most reasonable people see no evidence of anything resembling this coming from the Dems since they were given total control in January of 2009, so I'd have to say that the Democrats HAVE radically departed from this important part of their platform.

Personally, you should stick to genealogy. Just my 2 cents. Maybe you can find some other French woman to help?

**Mikeg** · October-29-10, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Stosh

Personally, you should stick to genealogy. Just my 2 cents. Maybe you can find some other French woman to help?

Hey, the bearinabox asked for an example of how the Dems have walked away from their 2008 party platform and I was more than happy to oblige! Besides, I am more than capable of multi-tasking.

Blarf · October-29-10, 04:36 AM

All this bickering.

Come together folks. Democrats and Republicans are all the same old tired bullshit.

Supporters of each side can come out and explain how they aren't the same. At the same time, we all know they are the same.

Long story short, whoever is elected, is going to be a puppet. It's just a competition on which side gets to pull the most strings.

Excitement!

**East Detroit** · October-29-10, 06:09 AM

Nobody takes partisans seriously anymore.

**Papasito** · October-29-10, 06:57 AM

Remember when Obama said he'd go "line by line" through legislation to cut programs we don't need and to be fiscally responsible "unlike the current administration" [[Bush/Cheney)?
I'd put every penny I have plus my house on the bet he never read the entire Health Care bill.

OBAMA: Nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. Absolutely we need earmark reform. And when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely. But the fact is that eliminating earmarks alone is not a recipe for how we’re going to get the middle class back on track.

Source: 2008 first presidential debate, Obama vs. McCain Sep 26, 2008
http://www.ontheissues.org/Archive/2...ent_Reform.htm

hahaha!

oh, my. that was funny.

**oldredfordette** · October-29-10, 06:58 AM

Where will you live, papasito?

Stosh · October-29-10, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by oldredfordette

Where will you live, papasito?

My guess would be under the bridge, as usual.

**Johnlodge** · October-29-10, 11:56 AM

You guys invest a lot of energy in trying to convince the other 5 people who still read this part of the forum that your side is right. Wouldn't it be more effective to do this somewhere with a larger audience?

**johnsmith** · October-29-10, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

You guys invest a lot of energy in trying to convince the other 5 people who still read this part of the forum that your side is right. Wouldn't it be more effective to do this somewhere with a larger audience?

Hold it right there, there must be at least 7 or 8 people who read this side of the forum.

What's with John Stewart calling Obama "dude" like he's pounding beers with him in a frat house?

**Detroitej72** · October-29-10, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

"I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The party left me." - Ronald Reagan

The same Reagan who started the concept of spending like a drunken sailor, and leaving our grandchildren the bill?

**jt1** · October-29-10, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Hey, the bearinabox asked for an example of how the Dems have walked away from their 2008 party platform and I was more than happy to oblige! Besides, I am more than capable of multi-tasking.

Well then I'm asking you what the Repubs will do differently than they did from 2000-2008 which led to the nightmare this country's economic mess.

**Jimaz** · October-29-10, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by jt1

Well then I'm asking you what the Repubs will do differently than they did from 2000-2008 which led to the nightmare this country's economic mess.

Heh! Shhhhh! Don't mention the big elephant in the room. It's planning on being ignored by all the "ignorant" voters.

Yea! Vote for the big elephant in the room—again! LOL!

**Mikeg** · October-30-10, 07:42 AM

Apparently everyone else is also embarrassed by the Dude-in-Chief's Daily Show appearance and his record over the past 21 months - so much so that they would rather just change the subject than defend the dude:

Bearinabox challenges me to provide an example and then ignores it when I give one
Stosh reads my example and his only response is to suggest that I just go away and post about other topics
Blarf and East Detroit dismissively write this thread off as nothing more than ineffectual partisanship
Johnlodge says I'm just wasting my energy because this side of the forum is "so popular, nobody comes here anymore"
JT1 and Jimaz says it's all Bush's fault
Detroitej72 just wants to argue that because Reagan and his Democrat Congress increased the national public debt by $1.4788 trillion during the 9 fiscal years of his administration, it's perfectly all right for Obama and his Democrat Congress to increase the national public debt by $2.5260 trillion in only 19 months!

I don't know about you guys, but I'm "Fired Up!" and "Ready to Go!" to the polls on Tuesday.

Stosh · October-30-10, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Apparently everyone else is also embarrassed by the Dude-in-Chief's Daily Show appearance and his record over the past 21 months - so much so that they would rather just change the subject than defend the dude:

Bearinabox challenges me to provide an example and then ignores it when I give one
Stosh reads my example and his only response is to suggest that I just go away and post about other topics
Blarf and East Detroit dismissively write this thread off as nothing more than ineffectual partisanship
Johnlodge says I'm just wasting my energy because this side of the forum is "so popular, nobody comes here anymore"
JT1 and Jimaz says it's all Bush's fault
Detroitej72 just wants to argue that because Reagan and his Democrat Congress increased the national public debt by $1.4788 trillion during the 9 fiscal years of his administration, it's perfectly all right for Obama and his Democrat Congress to increase the national public debt by $2.5260 trillion in only 19 months!

I don't know about you guys, but I'm "Fired Up!" and "Ready to Go!" to the polls on Tuesday.

Ok then, since you seem to think that everything will be hunky-dory when the conservatives take office, what programs do YOU feel are acceptable to cut?

I'll give you the Department of Education for starters. and if it were up to me, a 2 year moratorium on foreign aid. For everyone. Then, the only beast I would starve would be the military budget.

You, on the other hand, speak in generalities.

**Mikeg** · October-30-10, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Stosh

Ok then, since you seem to think that everything will be hunky-dory when the conservatives take office, what programs do YOU feel are acceptable to cut?
I'll give you the Department of Education for starters. and if it were up to me, a 2 year moratorium on foreign aid. For everyone. Then, the only beast I would starve would be the military budget.
You, on the other hand, speak in generalities.

Generalities like "go back to posting about genealogy", "It's all Bush's fault", "Reagan ran up the public debt, too" ? Whatever......

I do not feel that "everything will be hunky-dory" once more conservatives are elected to the House and Senate on Tuesday, for the following reasons:

A) while the next Congress is certain to have a Republican majority in the House and possibly even one in the Senate, there is no chance of a 60-seat Republican majority in the Senate, so Obama can use his "sinsister" veto pen throughout the remainder of his term
B) it's still not clear whether the Republican Congressional leadership shares the same philosophies and priorities as the newly-elected crop of conservative Republicans

Q: What do you call a net pick up of 60 Republican seats in the House and 8 in the Senate?
A: A good start!

A good start for conservative Republicans which will be rewarded in the 2012 election cycle only if the new Republican leadership responds to the mood of the 2010 electorate. Their first order of business should be to belatedly develop and pass the 2011 Federal Budget that the current Democrat House Leadership refused to do. Once that is out of the way, the House Republicans can show some fiscal responsibility with their 2012 Federal Budget and dare Obama to veto it.

I think that with the right leadership [[and I'm not yet sure the Republicans have it), they ought to be able to show how to cut Federal spending by focusing on things like:

a) freezing all uncommitted ARRA spending immediately and rolling back 2012 spending to 2008 levels
b) ending "earmarks" [[they barely register in the overall budget but by reforming the budgeting process to prohibit them, it will show voters that they can be trusted to have the discipline necessary to tackle the big budget issues and entitlement reforms)
c) ending "corporate welfare" programs and subsidies
d) ending outdated and/or ineffective federal and military hardware programs
e) eliminating waste, fraud and abuse [[see item b)
f) consolidating overlapping federal programs and privatizing others
g) rolling back federal regulations and spending on things that should be the responsibility of state and local governments

Here and here are some specific recommendations based on the above that, if enacted, would yield nearly $1 trillion in reduced Federal spending by 2015.