Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Inane? It was pretty darned funny and, within the constraints of parody, seemed perfectly on-point.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Brucds said, inter alia:

Just a correction. I think you meant "net jobs" here.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

There are two Jim Pinkertons on Bloggingheads. One is a first-rate intellect with often fascinating big government Libertarian Hamiltonian ideas. That Pinkerton is also charitable, civil and reasonable in debating. The Pinkercorns where that one appears are my hands down favorite in the absence of Bob-Mickeys.

Unfortunately, there's another Pinkerton who appears on Fox and plays GOP flak. In this mask, Pinkerton is outrageously shameless, irritating, and even painful.

The two faces of Pinkerton are a bummer. When his flak face is on, you can't trust anything he says. It's excrutiating.

Pinkerton one knows that a big majority of economists are joined with the CBO in observing that the stimulus improved our economy and created jobs. That Pinkerton also know without any doubt at all that the president never suggested that Israel return to 67 lines. His words and spirit wisely said that the 1967 lines should be used as a starting point for negotiations.

It's become like having an addict or disturbed personality in our home. Which Pinkerton is going to come home. The reasonable fun one or the gin soaked, fallen down dissembling ranter.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Link?

LOL I didn't know that it was the place of mediators to judge the starting point of negotiations.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

And now there is a tool to fight back against lying attacks on the President.

Maybe it's time Pinkerton was reported.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

LOL Can't wait until that website is available in the original German.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Good thing you didn't provide any links to those "respectable" economists because that is my job. I have written literally thousands of posts which have responded to incredibly substantive arguments with only links from right wing sources so I'm a link expert. Kindly step aside.

You may add to the list but I hope you'll be so kind as to run it by me first. :)

John Taylor


Greg Mankiw
"I should note, as an aside, that Robert [Barro] is the second most cited living economist."

Tyler Cowen

Russ Roberts
"noting that the CBO had found that the stimulus created 3 million jobs. Actually, the CBO has never estimated the job effects of the stimulus other than to assume a particular relationship between government spending and job creation. That is simply assuming the results that you are trying to discover. By the way, I was careful to say that there is no evidence that the stimulus worked. We don’t have very good evidence that it didn’t work. But we have no evidence that it did."

Veronique de Rugy

Arnold Kling
"I know that they think this is for a good cause. They really believe that the stimulus and TARP were good policies that got a bad rap. But in my view that does not justify this unseemly exercise in propaganda dressed up as research."

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

These kinds of cracks work better when one is not part of the pro-warrantless wiretapping, pro-indefinite no-charge detention, and pro-torture party.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

What is economics good for?

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Link to your common sense. Do you truly believe that the sheer amount of economic activity created just by introducing that amount of money would result in no change in the economy, and if there is a change then does your common sense tell you that it wouldn't be an improvement in GDP, even if too small and accompanied by long term deficit trouble? It may have been too small and the cost to the deficit may haunt us, but sensible people will agree that the stimulus has had some positive impact and created some jobs.

And for more expert thinking then go here although there's no small number of reliable, nonpartisan expert analysis that says the same thing. But I fear that you might know this as much as Jim does.

And well, um, yes, they do. And if the President was a mediator then he, and the US, might do that. But we're just very interested, and very vested, friends.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Don't worry Brucds, all those tax cuts are SURE to generate a bunch of jobs any moment now. You just have to be patient.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Answer: BHTV is a liberal website with liberal connections and a liberal audience.

Jim does 2 things liberals love. First, he's personable, non-threatening, and "reasonable". Secondly, he's kinda kooky and does a terrible job of presenting the conservative side. You get the feeling he's more interested in talking about colonizing the moon then in say discussing illegal immigration.

So, he does for BHTV what David Brooks does for PBS. And both PBS and BHTV can say they present both sides (without really presenting both sides) and make liberals feel good.

If BHTV had a real conservative on, say Anne Coulter**, Bob Wright would be in trouble with his sponsors, his audience, and his fellow liberals. We don't watch BHTV to get "right-wing racist, bigoted, homophobic, hate-speech" they would scream, and loudly demand that Bob commit suicide or grovel on his knees & pledge never to have another real conservative on, before they would ever, ever, watch BHTV again.

cf: Look at the screams of pain when Kaus or Althouse come on . And both voted for Obama!

So, that's why we occasionaly get Jim (usually paired with a liberal).

** = leaving aside Bob's hatred for Coulter.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

You can't quantify the counterfactual case where there wasn't a stimulus. The assertion that it didn't create jobs isn't any more provable than one stating that it did. What is clear from the data is that the labor market's bleeding slowed down considerably close to September '08.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

I can't wait until the "enemies List" is published. I hope I'm on it.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

It's part of their strategy to make the party more progressive. Gotta weed out the fakes!

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Love it. When Kerry was smeared and didn't fight back, well, he deserved to be smeared if he didn't have the guts to fight back. When Obama fights back, well, it's fascist.

And, of course:

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.c...k-dog-a-t.html

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

First, I don't see many objections to Kaus.

Second, there was nothing even about Althouse that approached the nuttiness in response to Savage, let alone Amanda Marcotte.

Third, are you really claiming that Ann Althouse is a member of "the party"?

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

I think this is referred to in the business as IOKIYAR.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Mentioning Obama and Kerry in the same post smacks of defeatism. I'm giving you one warning. Next time I'm going to #AttackWatch this thread.

Now, put on your armband and get back to the front comrade!

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

I don't understand Corn's point about Obama's position on Israel. In his 19 May 2011 speech, Obama said

The NY Times reported this development the same day in a story with the headline "Obama Sees ’67 Borders as Starting Point for Peace Deal". They also wrote about Israel's reaction in a story entitled "Netanyahu Responds Icily to Obama Remarks". In that story the Times reported

Corn seems to be angry that people are upset about the Obama policy shift, and the basis of Corn's objection seems to be (a) we're not forcing anyone to do anything, and (b) the 1967 borders are just the "baseline" and not the "endpoint" of negotiations. He seems oblivious to the fact that (i) the US position is indeed very influential, and (ii) Obama has shifted, to the detriment of our ally, a US position that has been more or less uniform (and deliberately obscure at times) since the 1967 war, and has thereby inflamed relations with one of our staunchest allies. If Corn really thinks that what Obama did was inconsequential, then he really is a fool.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

David Corn is given over to hysteria on this stimulus business. His position seems to be that if the stimulus created 1,000 jobs with $750 billion, it is an outrageous lie to say that the "stimulus created no new jobs".

I described earlier in this thread how poorly designed the stimulus was. It not only created no new net jobs (Apparently you need to specify that or Democrats get confused), it created many fewer jobs than the Democrats claimed it would.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Twice in this thread you've compared simple free speech - a website created as part of a political campaign to combat smears from political opposition - to Nazism.

How is this comparison, even if made lightheartedly, something other than abject stupidity? What problem do you have, in principle, with the Obama campaign creating a website to combat what it considers to be false claims?

Is Rick Perry a Nazi (or 'analogous to' Nazis, or 'doing the same things' Nazis do, or practicing Nazi 'tactics', or any other reformulation that renders the point no less specious) when his campaign does the same thing?

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

bbbeard said:

Why have you not specified what the consistent US position since the 1967 war and prior to Obama was? First, you have not specified what Obama has done. Is it the contiguity provision of his statement to which you most object?

Second, let us suppose that relations with one of our staunchest allies are inflamed. So what? Why should a rational person be worried about this, where "rational person" means someone who is primarily concerned about US strategic interests in the world? Is the "special" American relationship with Israel helping or hindering the primary US interest in the Middle East, which is reliable access to energy? Is it helping or hindering the US interest in arresting the spread of Islamic fundamentalism?

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

And successful cancer treatments don't create new net life, because people die eventually.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

He's been called a closet right winger before.

You didn't see the drawing that somebody did of Althouse passed out drunk on wine?

No, but she's said she mostly votes Democratic. Considering that she is a mostly left leaning swing voter and Kaus identifies as a liberal, don't you think this board is/was especially hostile to centrists/independents?

When I talk to my real life progressive friends about politics, I rarely get into heated arguments with them. I've wondered if the BHTV liberals are a special, far left subset or if it's just the context that makes discussion so intemperate at times.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

But some sensible people would say that just because a change occurred temporarily, the increased deficit makes the upside inconsequential. Isn't the whole point of stimulus to get the economy moving so robustly that there won't be a downside? What's the use of temporary gain?

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Brilliant! Thanks Don Zeko. (and do be careful, they've found that for every year you spend in S. Jersey you lose 1 point from your IQ. There clearly isn't any damage yet but be careful)

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Considering that I'm here for law school, that's a troubling thought.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

hence, my "i don't seemany complaints about Kaus. Also, "been"? most of the regular diavloggers here "have been" called something negative.

no. When was this?

She has said she's voted democratic. She voted for Obama in 08 and Bush in 04.

I don't think there is much hostility to Kaus. Kaus could be construed as a centrist. But like I said, not much hostility.

I don't agree that Althouse is "mostly left leaning." The most left-leaning thing about her is her reported voting record, and that includes Bush 04, which is pretty rare among "left-leaning" people. Similarly, most "left-leaning" people aren't spending a lot of time with the gnashing of teeth about how unfairly the tea party is treated.

There are many centrist and even right leaning people who get pretty respectful treatment. Drezner is pretty much in the center from what I can tell. Eli Lake, as much as some people disagree with him, is pretty well spoken of in the comments. (unless you are going to construe disagreement as hostility). And, again, there are examples of generally left people who get treated badly on the forums too. I named two, and I don't think either of them have been treated better than Althouse has.

Meh. Has it occurred to you that many of us to the left of you, also have more positive real life conversations with conservatives and libertarians than they do on this board? You also seem to be ignoring the intemperance coming in the other direction.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

He hasn't been on in a long time.

Can't remember. It's in one of the forum threads where she was a guest.

Your memory may be better than mine, but I thought she said that she votes mostly Democratic. Perhaps in an early diavlog when she lost her temper.

This is true, but it's also problematic. I think Althouse is right to be worried.

I have no problems with ideological viewpoints that differ from mine.


Yes, but for a centrist? I understand the hostility towards Richard Land. I think that's your equivalent comparison to Marcotte or Savage.

Absolutely. That's why I was wondering out loud. Perhaps it's just a handful of leftwingers that give off that impression and it unfairly rubs off on the rest. Most of my friends are liberal, a handful of conservatives and zero libertarians. I wonder if they get so irrationally angry when commenting on things around the internet, but I'm inclined to think not.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

I was just making a silly joke to point out how if you replace "stimulus" with "tax cuts" the burden of proof for job creation seems to change substantially in the minds of conservatives.

On a more anecdotal tangent, the idea that the stimulus created "no" jobs seems very dubious at best. I work in solar energy, and have a whole stack of commercial contracts that only got signed because of the ARRA 1603 Treasury Grant. We had to hire extra manpower to get these jobs installed. I will let other people make arguments for whether those are "net" jobs, but I can say that I know about 6-10 previously unemployed individuals who are currently receiving paychecks that would not have been otherwise, were it not for this government measure.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

I agree with you. Kaus gets some flack for some of his views, but seems to me that Kaus/Wright diavlogs are favorites and he rarely appears otherwise. Personally, I've always enjoyed him.

I don't either, but primarily I think she isn't all that political -- she's seems to me interested in provoking reaction to herself and getting under people's skins. But in any case, the dislike of her (which I somewhat share) doesn't seem to me to have much to do with politics on the part of most.

Michael Dougherty also, and there are others, including many who are liked and disliked by different people (for example, some who don't care for Matt Lewis like Conn Carroll and vice versa).

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

But that's because of a family issue, Bob said. I don't think it was the overwhelming hostility he faced.

Well, I have often tuned her out, but she said she voted Gore, Bush, Obama.

That may be, but whether she's right to be worried, she isn't "mainly left-leaning" to be worried.


We disagree as to whether Althouse is a centrist. I haven't seen nearly the level of hostility toward Kaus who we agree is a centrist.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Fair enough. I was mainly interested in whether it was fair to characterize her as a centrist or left-leaning. I think those aren't labels for people who voluntarily listen to Rush Limbaugh and enjoy doing so.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

If you're curious about liberal hostility towards Ann, this clip is pretty instructive.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

This doesn't count as left leaning? I suppose we're disagreeing about facts.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

No. I am saying that no one could be fairly called left leaning who:

1. Believes the tea party are treated unfairly and their criticisms of Obama are accurate
2. Rush Limbaugh provides useful information and is enjoyable to listen to.

I would add that I don't know of anyone I consider left-leaning who voted for Bush in 04, unless they became dramatically less conservative since then, and although the vote for Obama in 08 could be considered an example of such things, 1 and 2 above are even more recent and stronger evidence.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Well in the first place, the second comparison was to the Soviets. Secondly, mocking the Obama administration's paranoid website isn't "stupid" if you don't belong to the cult of personality surrounding the guy.

I think it is hilarious:

"Report an Attack!"

"Email Address"

"Content of attack or link"

Then get this: Type of attack........rumor!

All jokes aside, the President's political apparatus isn't much like the Nazis, or the Soviets. Its more like the Italian Fascists, or the Vichy. This kind of bumbling, over the top, ham fisted tough talk backed by petty action.

I don't think so, because Rick Perry isn't Il Duce, he's running for the job. And I doubt his website looks like this one. Like I said, it is leftists who simper about their fear of fascism. I think the President's website is amusing. He takes the normal slings and arrows of politics and created a website to whine about them with fellows like you. Here is an example:

“President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus."

http://www.attackwatch.com/attack-fi...y/obama-israel

Here we see that criticism is the equivalent of unfounded attacks and smears. Thinking that someone has thrown someone else "under the bus" is actually a matter of opinion, not objective fact. That means that it is an arguable proposition and not something you can stamp "false". It is inarguable to any serious person that the President is less sympathetic to Israel than the previous one. Thus it is fair game for someone who feels the previous level support should be standard to criticize Obama.

Of course, the Cult of Personality cannot be slighted by mere citizens. If you love Him, you will Fight the Smears.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

LOL A Doctor tells you that you have a year to live if you don't start the cancer treatment, and that if you do start it you will live a minimum of five years. You quickly agree to begin the treatments, and die five months later.

Miceelf and the liberal contingent of Bloggingheads are mystified why the family might be upset with the doctor, and why they don't want to send their uncle to him. After all, cancer is tough. He meant that you might have a year to live, and that you might live five years. But it feels so good being "Kind of like God" that qualifiers get in the way of a fun diagnosis.

Re: Starting a Panic (David Corn & James Pinkerton)
 

Why does there have to be purity? People vote the way they do for all kinds of reasons. Maybe Althouse didn't like McCain. Maybe she wanted there to be the first black president. Who knows?