The latest passenger in the Republican Presidential Clown Car is Wisconsin’s union-busting governor, Scott Walker. His announcement address today was rife with the routine braggadocio required by all aspirants to high office.
Among his laundry list of campaign pledges was the promise to “fight and win” for the “born and unborn.” And apparently what Walker thinks born and unborn Americans need most is to have their health insurance repealed, because that’s what he swore to do to ObamaCare. Although he did express support for healthcare for veterans, which is fortunate because he practically declared war on Russia and China, so they’re gonna need it.
Walker spoke at length about his record in Wisconsin but, not surprisingly, left out his numerous failures that place Wisconsin near the bottom on job creation, education, economic growth, etc. But perhaps the most intriguing pronouncement he made was his promise that…
“The good news – it’s not too late, we can turn things around.”
Well, that’s a relief. Because if America had to proceed any further in the positive direction it has been going for the last six years, who knows how long we would endure. Thankfully, Walker has arrived just in time to turn things around, back in the direction that George W. Bush had taken us.
And if anyone can turn things around from the course of sustained prosperity that we’ve been on, it’s a Koch brothers puppet like Scott Walker. He was famously fooled by a blogger who called him pretending to be David Koch (YouTube audio below). They spoke for about ten minutes with Walker pandering shamelessly to who he thought was the billionaire who has been a reliable donor to his Wisconsin campaigns. At one point “David” suggested that Walker should plant troublemakers among the protesters who were packing the capital office. Walker answered saying “we thought about that.”
Of course, it would have been illegal for Walker to dispatch provocateurs to disrupt people who were exercising their free speech rights, but Walker is no stranger to unlawful activities. He is currently being investigated for election irregularities that have already seen six of his associates convicted.
News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.
Here is a transcript of the Walker phone call with the fake Koch.
You’re very selective with your data – so here are a few more numbers you left off I assume because they don’t fit the message you’re trying to convey:
Labor Rate Participation 2009 65% 2015 62.6 % (critical in the unemployment numbers)
Food Stamp recipients 2009 34 million +/- 2015 45 million +
I’m one who thinks presidents (all presidents) get far too much credit and blame for things like you note in your table. What is most telling about your table is how you only show the good news – but even the data you note doesn’t actually provide the real picture. The unemployment rate is totally false and misleading given the labor participation rate provided above from the Bureau of labor statistics. The Dow level is totally artificial due to ridiculous amounts of currency pumped into the system by a central bank – which created inflated stock prices – when that bubble pops, will you hang that responsibility on him? He deserves credit for lowering the deficit as a percentage of GDP – on that particular data point, the republican party has been really, really bad.
By the way – My post is NOT an endorsement of any candidate.
And to put the labor participation number in perspective – it’s the lowest since the 2nd half of the 1970s – yes Jimmy Carter time period. A full picture of current economic data is important.
About that labor rate thingy? It’s mostly due to the aging of the baby boomer population. They are leaving the workforce due to reaching retirement age.
This also coincides with something else you put up. The Carter Presidency era was around the time the baby boomer generation were entering the workforce. That explains why the numbers are “the lowest since the second half of the Carter Presidency”, the boosted labor rates were due to a boom population entering the labor force en masse.
You’re not too bad in terms of having selective data yourself, or in this case, selective omission of circumstances behind said data.
That’s exactly what I was gonna say. And furthermore, the data above represents the most referenced criteria for assessing the state of the economy. The same data has been used for decades to judge every administration. But for some reason when it is applied to this one, all bets are off and the data is flawed and should not be regarded as indicative of anything. Hmmm.
Whether they like it or not, wingnuts have to accept that the nation has progressed enormously since the Bush debacle. Obviously not every economic or societal problem has been resolved (or ever will be), but the promise to “turn things around” can only be read as reversing all of that progress. That was my point which, as usual, Steve didn’t get.
Of course only some data should matter – This is about making your favorite people look good.
Your rationale is of course nonsense – you don’t qualify anything in your numbers so neither do I.
What – no comment on the “progress” in the food stamp numbers? Now I know you’re not that dumb, so it must be about your selective data approach to achieve support for your hope that people are better off today. I get it much more than you know – I’m just understand propaganda better than most here…if you were truly honest, you wouldn’t ignore numbers you don’t like. BHO started, admittedly, at the bottom with an economy in the tank – so things are better, but as I stated clearly in my post – assigning all that to him is not realistic in the same way assigning all negative things to him isn’t either. You’re a biased fool and aren’t even honest enough to see it or admit it. Let me pull out another number so you know it’s not just this small number:
Home ownership – 2009 – 68% 2015 – under 64%
median household income – last 3 years $52,000.00 which is lower that in 2009, which is closer to $55,000.00 (has been a negative trend since 1999) – but that wouldn’t matter in your world
How about reversing that progress? I can keep looking if you like and I’m sure I can find plenty of negative data to counter your contention we’re sooo much better off.
I can get more if you like – just let me know and I’ll put them up for you too. Maybe cost of living numbers would help you get it – probably not since that isn’t your game.
What right wing liars don’t tell you about labor force participation rate – we had lower participation rate in our best economies.
Its selective spin, to fool lazy conservatives.
And you are one of its victims.
http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/515ec6526bb3f73375000008-1503-1127-620-/labor-force-participation-rate-march.png
That’s not the point dummy – it’s the selective positive data he’s trying to use to make his point – all while he purposely ignores any negative numbers that could possibly undermine the argument he is trying to make. I even cut the president slack in my initial post noting I don’t hold him or any president responsible for all that goes on – try reading it. I provided some additional numbers to show we can all play that game if he wants to.
Wouldn’t it be no different to point out how you are simply selecting negative values and dismissing the stats put up with no other reason than “they are selective”?
Mark at least did point out that those figures are the ones commonly used when measuring level of economic viability. The stats you decided to run with? No justification as to why we should be looking at those or ONLY at those as you seem to imply (your post seems to disagree that America has improved economically since 2009).
How is this selective look at negative data with no justification as to why your set of data is the more valid one as you deem to assert that it is, any different an act from what you just accused Mark of? Rather than argue how your data is more representative of the situation than Mark’s you simply disregard his and produce your own selective data and demand others should regard your figures over his with no justification?
The labor figures to which you had no answer to btw are inaccurate in another way as they also count people who are either pursuing higher education or courses or in the middle of a job change.
As for food stamp numbers? While don’t know the exact answer to this I can hazard a guess that it has something to do with the crash of 2008 which pushed quite a number into poverty.
More people in poverty, more food stamp use.
The real problem with Steve digging up metrics that have not improved is that by implication he is saying that there is no positive progress unless EVERY metric is improved. That’s an idiotic scenario that will only occur in Utopia. The fact is that this economy has improved in most (but not all) of the ways that are measured by economists. And the presence of some metrics that aren’t good doesn’t negate that fact. Steve is engaging in the argument of distraction. If he actually believes that the country isn’t better off now than it was in 2009 he’s beyond a fool and beyond salvation.
Mark, what salvation are you looking to share with me? I’m doing fine financially and will continue to do fine because I don’t subscribe to your world view or the view of today’s consuming citizen and the banking elite who want it that way. Don’t worry about me – I’m sure you don’t. And I’ll continue to be fine because I pay attention to more than just the positive talking points propagandists like you push on people. You have an incredibly narrow view of the world – and it centers around your societal goal to destroy any individualism you can and get us all to finally join the collective and just be happy. Sorry – you called it right in the past – I really do subscribe to Randian philosophy and I piss on forced altruism.
As regards food stamps, a lot of jobs were lost in the Bush Recession. Many people eventually got new jobs at lower pay. There has also been wage stagflation. Even though corporations are posting record profits, they aren’t passing that on to their employees who have earned by being more productive than ever. Consequently, more people with lower earnings are no longer able to make ends meet and they turn to food stamps for assistance.
If employers were to pay people more fairly, and the minimum wage were to rise, there would be a decline in food stamp recipients, taking the burden off of the government and reducing the deficit, which is something you would think that conservatives would support. And they would except that they support letting corporations be as greedy as they want even more. Even if it means putting the burden on taxpayers, workers, and the poor.
I’m surprised it took so long to bring Bush into this – Barack Obama has been president since January 2009 – you can’t have it both ways. Either Barack Obama is president and gets all credit – BOTH GOOD AND BAD or he doesn’t You can’t pick and choose which conditions today he get’s to claim as his. All those data points you show in the article are no different – if get’s to claim those without qualification, he MUST claim the bad ones too. Your response is proof again you are a fraud and no less biased than Fox News is when they push their own brand of propaganda.
As far as putting more burden on the taxpayer – that is 100% you – not me. If it was up to me, we wouldn’t be paying taxes the way they are collected today. If it was up to me – no INDIVIDUAL – rich or poor – would have any of their income stolen from them the way it’s done today (ie involuntarily). So keep you ridiculous accusations straight. HERE IS AN EXAMPLE (so you get it) – roads and bridges – funded through a federal gas tax that only went to infrastructure – not into the general fund to pay for other government boondoggles.. Those who use the most gas pay the most and I can guarantee it would be corporate america paying most of that. That would put the maximum burden directly on those who use the infrastructure the most and are most responsible for the need for upkeep.
No – the “real problem” is steve in york is applying other, equally justifiable, metrics to show how it’s just not quite all unicorns and rainbows as Mark would have you believe. I’m, of course, more even handed in that I actually cut the guy (the president) a break in my post suggesting he can’t and shouldn’t be held responsible for every thing that goes wrong or right. But reasonable approaches like that don’t fit the “goals” of this website, which clearly includes ridiculous propaganda similar to that of Fox News, who of course gets abused for the same behavior (rightly so).
Somebody at Wonkette pronounced Ted Cruz to have the “most punchable face” in Uh’merica. Well, that is surely true, but Scott Walker has, by far, the most “roundhouse-kickable face” I’ve ever seen.
Libs are so violent
Ha! I can’t speak for “libs” but when push comes to shove, the biggest, most offensive asses are likely gonna get kicked. Just sayin’…
It was just a silly comment – nothing meant to be taken too seriously.
I totally agree about Cruz — so much smug-smarm in that stupid grin, it just begs to hit the floor. As for Walker, I don’t see the appeal at all. Someone on Fox said he was sexy, which is just gross. The lies that flow from his mouth don’t help much either.
Steve in York said it best: Libs are so violent.
Scott, your comments on this board are the definition of “disingenuous.”
Examples?
Your comment about Scott Walker. Duh.
Jokes are not violence. Duh.
There are different kinds of violence. Conservative policies commit economic violence against 99 percent of us every single day. People like you who bend over for corporations are just too stoopid to realize it.
Walker is a piece of garbage. He wrecked his state and has NO place in the White House.
Can you expand on how he wrecked his state? i haven’t heard Wisconsin is in some kind of dire condition?
I found this (site below) – which is federal government data – looks like the data supports a solid performance – if you think he or any politician actually deserves the credit – using Mark’s approach to judging candidates.
http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.wi.htm
Walker is the Richard Nixon of the 21st century without the grace, wit, warmth, charm, intelligence and sex appeal of Nixon. Also many forget that it was Nixon who first proposed both national heaith insurance and a guaranteed annual income (See Nixon Family Assistance Plan)
The Koch tape proves-the dark side of Richard Nixon without the humanity
Just sayin’…………
Walker is an elected lobbyist for the rich & deranged.
http://onewisconsinnow.org/scottwalker/