McCain throws Gramm under the bus

[Popeye]

Notice I used good old Faux News as the source for this story, I even co-opted their title, I wouldn't want to be accused of using a media outlet with a liberal bias.

Looks like McCain senior economic adviser Phil Gramm doesn't think much of Americans currently experiencing hard times. Correct me if I'm wrong but, when speaking to a major newspaper, is not Gramm speaking for the McCain campaign? And if not, don't you think it might be a good idea for McCain to get himself a top economic adviser who does represent his views in such meetings?

The presumptive GOP nominee had stern words for one of his senior economic advisers and close friends Thursday after Gramm told the Washington Times that America is going through a “mental recession” and Americans are a “nation of whiners.”

“I don’t agree with Senator Gramm. I believe that the person here in Michigan that just lost his job isn’t suffering a ‘mental recession.’ I believe the mother here in Michigan and around America who is trying to get enough money to educate their children isn’t ‘whining,’” McCain told reporters today. “America is in great difficulty and we are experiencing enormous economic challenges as well as others. Phil Gramm does not speak for me. I speak for me. So, I strongly disagree.”

McCain has previously said that “no one is more qualified” on economic issues than Gramm, who serves a national campaign co-chair, but made clear today that he was unhappy with the former Texas senator when asked if Gramm would have a role in a future McCain administration.

Obama hammered McCain for the Gramm comments during a speech today in Virginia noting, “America already has one Dr. Phil. We don’t need another one when it comes to the economy - we need somebody to actually solve the economy. It’s not just a figment of your imagination, it’s not all in your head.”

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/07/10/mccain-throws-gramm-under-the-bus/

 

[Federal Farmer]

Oh lookey, Chicken Little is running around screaming about the sky falling again.

In this particular case, I think that McCain would have been better advised to keep his yap shut, because Senator Gramm is RIGHT! What so many people today are calling a "recession" not only is not a recession, it's not even close!

Anyone who's old enough to have lived, and worked, during the last real recession this nation endured from about '73 (thanks to a LIBTARD Congress) until '82 when Ronaldus Maximus finally yanked us out of it, will readily agree that until you've got DOUBLE DIGIT INFLATION, DOUBLE DIGIT INTEREST RATES, and DOUBLE DIGIT UNEMPLOYMENT, A FALLING GDP, and NEGATIVE ECONOMIC GROWTH, you're NOT in a recession.

Using Wiki, so that everyone doesn't get a screaming headache trying to grasp the concept, a recession is defined as "a decline in a country's gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters for a year." Since the GDP of the US has grown consistently since the 3rd quarter of 2001, and haven't had even ONE quarter of negative economic growth, ANY assertion of "recession" is specious in the extreme.

 

[Dr.Who]

Oh lookey, Chicken Little is running around screaming about the sky falling again.

In this particular case, I think that McCain would have been better advised to keep his yap shut, because Senator Gramm is RIGHT! What so many people today are calling a "recession" not only is not a recession, it's not even close!

Anyone who's old enough to have lived, and worked, during the last real recession this nation endured from about '73 (thanks to a LIBTARD Congress) until '82 when Ronaldus Maximus finally yanked us out of it, will readily agree that until you've got DOUBLE DIGIT INFLATION, DOUBLE DIGIT INTEREST RATES, and DOUBLE DIGIT UNEMPLOYMENT, A FALLING GDP, and NEGATIVE ECONOMIC GROWTH, you're NOT in a recession.

Using Wiki, so that everyone doesn't get a screaming headache trying to grasp the concept, a recession is defined as "a decline in a country's gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters for a year." Since the GDP of the US has grown consistently since the 3rd quarter of 2001, and haven't had even ONE quarter of negative economic growth, ANY assertion of "recession" is specious in the extreme.

Uumm...Right!

 

[Popeye]

Oh lookey, Chicken Little is running around screaming about the sky falling again.

In this particular case, I think that McCain would have been better advised to keep his yap shut, because Senator Gramm is RIGHT! What so many people today are calling a "recession" not only is not a recession, it's not even close!

Anyone who's old enough to have lived, and worked, during the last real recession this nation endured from about '73 (thanks to a LIBTARD Congress) until '82 when Ronaldus Maximus finally yanked us out of it, will readily agree that until you've got DOUBLE DIGIT INFLATION, DOUBLE DIGIT INTEREST RATES, and DOUBLE DIGIT UNEMPLOYMENT, A FALLING GDP, and NEGATIVE ECONOMIC GROWTH, you're NOT in a recession.

Using Wiki, so that everyone doesn't get a screaming headache trying to grasp the concept, a recession is defined as "a decline in a country's gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters for a year." Since the GDP of the US has grown consistently since the 3rd quarter of 2001, and haven't had even ONE quarter of negative economic growth, ANY assertion of "recession" is specious in the extreme.

Lets put aside the recession argument. McCain did the politically expedient, and the correct thing, in attempting to distance himself from Gramm's crude comments. However, doesn't Gramm, as his top economic adviser, speak for McCain?

Further food for thought...can you imagine the uproar if it had been an Obama top adviser making those remarks. It would have been a week long story. Further proof, that the media has been playing the part of McCain's lapdog throughout the early part of this campaign.

 

[Dr.Who]

Lets put aside the recession argument. McCain did the politically expedient, and the correct thing, in attempting to distance himself from Gramm's crude comments. However, doesn't Gramm, as his top economic adviser, speak for McCain?

For every candidate a sense emerges about what will and could be an issue for the presidency. For Former President Clinton we knew long before he was presidnet that sexual indiscretions would be a problem.

For Sen Obama we know that his tendency to associate with socialists, communists, bigots, and radicals is going to come and bite us in the tush.

For Sen McCain it will be his age.

Further food for thought...can you imagine the uproar if it had been an Obama top adviser making those remarks. It would have been a week long story. Further proof, that the media has been playing the part of McCain's lapdog throughout the early part of this campaign.

All PR is good PR.

So maybe the media would just as well ignore McCaine as much as possible.

 

[Popeye]

Watch this great response by Obama to McCain top economic adviser Phil Gramm referring to America as "a nation of whiners."

 

[GenSeneca]

Watch this great response by Obama to McCain top economic adviser Phil Gramm referring to America as "a nation of whiners."

"...we need somebody to actually solve the economy"

Tell me, how would any of his policies actually HELP the economy?

I know, I know, facts and stats relating to issues and policy is not of interest to you... You'd have to think rather than feel your way through the election process.

 

[Dr.Who]

Watch this great response by Obama to McCain top economic adviser Phil Gramm referring to America as "a nation of whiners."

I am not going to waste who know how many minutes watching a video. But assuming that this is what Sen Obama said:

"...America already has one Dr. Phil. We don't need another one when it comes to the economy...This economic downturn is not in your head. When people are out there losing their homes and property values are declining, that's not a figment of your imagination and it isn't whining to ask government to step in and give families some relief."

Then I would say that he is so wrong. While gramm was right. There is no recession! Whining about a pretend recession is BS.

Anectodal stories about people who lose their homes and pretending that it is statistically significant or that it indicates that we are in a recession is whining and fear mongering. Property values were overvalued before and this is a correction - we need it to stabilize the economy. What we do not need in any way is for government to step in and save people in forclosure (especially when the number of forclosures has gone from like a half a percent to one percent) who more often than not deserve it because they were speculating on investments (they are not even homesteaders) and then in reality just help out the banks. The last thing we need is for the gov to monkey around with the economics of home values.

But this is what Sen Obama beleives in - monkeying around with everything. I can't place my finger on the article of the constitution that gives the federal government the power to mess around with our lives to this extent which is in fact in direct contradiction to the intent of the constitution.

He would grow government more than the neocons and then when they are in power again they will hold the keys to an even larger weapon against us.

We need government to shrink no matter who is in office.