Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Obamateurism of the Day

posted at 8:05 am on September 16, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

We have seen an ongoing theme from Barack Obama of general cluelessness on private industry, and especially on profit. For Obama, profit is part of “overhead”, or “taken off the top.” Profits are not taken off the top but are what’s left at the bottom, after expenses get paid — and expenses are the “overhead,” which includes items like salaries, supplies, rent, and so on.  By the way, that’s why it’s called “the bottom line,” because that’s where people find the profits in a ledger.  Profits come last.

Cuffy Meigs noticed the same problem and put together this “greatest hits” loop reel of Obama, the non-prophet of profit, or the prophet of non-profit, or more simply, a total amateur on the private sector:

Got an Obamateurism of the Day? If you see a foul-up by Barack Obama, e-mail it to me at obamaisms@edmorrissey.com with the quote and the link to the Obamateurism. I’ll post the best Obamateurisms on a daily basis, depending on how many I receive. Include a link to your blog, and I’ll give some link love as well. And unlike Slate, I promise to end the feature when Barack Obama leaves office.

Illustrations by Chris Muir of Day by Day. Be sure to read the adventures of Sam, Zed, Damon, and Jan every day!


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Gee, Dear Leader has absolutely no clue about economics?

Who knew? Aside, that is, from everyone who was paying attention.

rbj on September 16, 2009 at 8:07 AM

Even the Powerline guys, who routinely give Obama every possible benefit of the doubt, admit he knows nothing about economics.

BigD on September 16, 2009 at 8:09 AM

Econ 101 must have been one of those classes he slept through at 4 AM.

ladyingray on September 16, 2009 at 8:10 AM

um, what did Obama do with the “profits” from his book sales?

ctmom on September 16, 2009 at 8:10 AM

I wish I was smart like the President. All I’ve got is this crummy high school education, while he’s attended one of the best universities in the country. I now understand, thanks to his explanation, how are economy works.

(Sorry, I forgot what the sarcasm sign is again.)

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:11 AM

If you never owned or worked for a for-profit enterprise, you won’t recognize a profit if it bit you in the ass.

In other words, expenses are the pesky little things other people have to pay.

TXUS on September 16, 2009 at 8:11 AM

He is a “constitutional scholar,” too.

DrStock on September 16, 2009 at 8:12 AM

spit…spit

Why isnt he concerned about the profits of celebrities…the tech firms…sports figures…or his from his lame books?

becki51758 on September 16, 2009 at 8:12 AM

I don’t believe that he’s clueless about economic issues since most of these mistakes(?) are ones even a 12-year-old wouldn’t make (amputating feet and removing tonsils). What he does know is class warfare. It’s his specialty. He knows how to pit one group against another.

texabama on September 16, 2009 at 8:13 AM

One has to wonder if our Dear Leader understands that profits can go towards creating jobs—-(that’s a four letter word Joe)…….

Rovin on September 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM

There are several reasons why Obama was not well versed in the terminology of business, but there is no reason that after a year on the campaign trail and eight months in the White House that Obama has not picked up some of the lingo.

He has advisors, right? He is the most intelligent and professorial man to ever be president, right?

myrenovations on September 16, 2009 at 8:16 AM

“Non-prophet of profit…”

Awesome

SouthernGent on September 16, 2009 at 8:16 AM

spit…spit

Why isnt he concerned about the profits of celebrities…the tech firms…sports figures…or his from his lame books?

becki51758 on September 16, 2009 at 8:12 AM

nice point!

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Profits come last.

Not in a leftist’s world.

Bonus-es (pay-off’s) are determined before the game began.

Look at the millions and millions bonus money from ’stimulus’ to the union bosses. Hey, if they are so into the ’spread the wealth’ thing, why not spread the money to their workers, uh?

Sir Napsalot on September 16, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Profit is TAXED. You know Mr. President, taxes, the stuff you Democrats love.

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:11 AM

/s

cmsinaz on September 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM

/s

cmsinaz on September 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM

thanx

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:20 AM

In the Economic System Obama envisions, all profits will go to the Bureaucrats. Then the Proletariat will get to spread around what’s left of the “wealth”.

kingsjester on September 16, 2009 at 8:20 AM

total amateur on the private sector

more like a total amateur on both the public and private sectors

cmsinaz on September 16, 2009 at 8:21 AM

would profit be a racist term now?
hmmmmmmmm

cmsinaz on September 16, 2009 at 8:22 AM

Democrat economy lesson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmqKz70Sdes&feature=related

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:22 AM

total amateur on the private sector

Ed, while I’ll give you that he is an amateur, this profit issue can’t be credited to incompetence.

IT’S IDEOLOGY

therightscoop on September 16, 2009 at 8:23 AM

would profit be a racist term now?
hmmmmmmmm

cmsinaz on September 16, 2009 at 8:22 AM

Yes! Now wash your mouth out with soap!

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:23 AM

Got an Obamateurism of the Day?

careful ed, you could be the next target of jimmehh car tehhs acusations of racism.

SHARPTOOTH on September 16, 2009 at 8:23 AM

Obama and his fellow radical leftists seem to have the bizarre conception that profits are arbitrarily determined by a company’s CEO, hence are changeable at will with all other variables remaining static.

jwolf on September 16, 2009 at 8:24 AM

Saddest part of all of this is, the mindless people sitting in the room with him and listening to him on tv believe him.

milwife88 on September 16, 2009 at 8:25 AM

Has Obama ever had a job in a private for profit business?

Loxodonta on September 16, 2009 at 8:26 AM

Profit is TAXED. You know Mr. President, taxes, the stuff you Democrats love.

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM

But it would more efficient in BHO’s mind to remove the middle man, to have everyone work for the gov’t.

jgapinoy on September 16, 2009 at 8:26 AM

For Obama, profit is part of “overhead”, or “taken off the top.”

That’s because Obama and those of his ilk don’t see the world like a capitalist would. It all belongs to the state who decides how much “profit” a company gets to keep and how much is ceded to the state for redistribution according to the mandates of those in power. In short, the state does indeed skim profit off the top.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:26 AM

Obama only cares about one prophet.

LibTired on September 16, 2009 at 8:28 AM

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:17 AM

Thanks…I think the answer to that is those folks donate to him. Its always about HIM!

becki51758 on September 16, 2009 at 8:28 AM

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:26 AM

there’s a word for that…facism.

SHARPTOOTH on September 16, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Good post/video.

One thing that could be added is Obama’s habit of using the words “risk” and “recklessness” interchangeably and generally demonizing the concept of risk. Related is his inability to tell the difference between investors and speculators (see Chrysler bond holders who he robbed and publicly smeared).

Risk is central to capitalism. Investors and entrepreneurs take risk, and they are either rewarded with profit, or they suffer the consequences of losses. The act of taking the risk is central to free market capitalism, and those who take the risks deserve the rewards if they succeed.

forest on September 16, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Then the Proletariat will get to spread around what’s left of the “wealth”.

kingsjester on September 16, 2009 at 8:20 AM

That’s why that Utube clip resonates so well in this age. We need more of those collectives where nobody pays rent and everybody shares the bounty from the vegetable trees.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:30 AM

Nice video.

BadgerHawk on September 16, 2009 at 8:30 AM

Sorry to go OT but has anyone heard about this?

ORLANDO, Fla. (Sept. 15) – An investigation by Florida authorities has found that there were no credible threats to a teenager who ran away from her Ohio home because she says she feared for her life after converting to Christianity from Islam.
A summary of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation into Rifqa Bary’s allegations was unsealed Monday. The probe found no reports of threats against Bary in Florida or Ohio.

warren on September 16, 2009 at 8:33 AM

Hey, Obama, listen up.

PROFIT = INCOME (the money others pay you for things you make or do)
minus EXPENSES (the money you pay to others
to enable you to generate income)
minusTAXES (the money that is stolen from you by
government to mostly give away to other people who didn’t
work for it.

Any questions?

TXUS on September 16, 2009 at 8:35 AM

For Obama, profit is part of “overhead”, or “taken off the top.”

Too bad The Genius didn’t employ his business acumen when deciding to help GM and Chrysler with the bailouts. He could have saved the American taxpayers billions, just by advising them to take their profits “off the top”.

Dusty on September 16, 2009 at 8:37 AM

Jeff from WI on September 16, 2009 at 8:22 AM

LOL

becki51758 on September 16, 2009 at 8:37 AM

When Ogabe was a community organizer, money appeared from a benefactor or the government and then he doled it out; the leftovers were used as personal “administrative costs”.

It must work that way for private business too; money just appears.

Bishop on September 16, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Risk is central to capitalism. Investors and entrepreneurs take risk, and they are either rewarded with profit, or they suffer the consequences of losses. The act of taking the risk is central to free market capitalism, and those who take the risks deserve the rewards if they succeed.

forest on September 16, 2009 at 8:29 AM

Which is the opposite of the filthy liar’s agenda which advocates citizens cede their rewards from risk to a system where the state provides all and is involved in every aspect of one’s life.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:39 AM

The Mob is used to taking it off the top. They have to get theirs first. LOTUS’s experience is based on this fact.

Any other questions?

Yoop on September 16, 2009 at 8:39 AM

“…Obama, the non-prophet of profit, or the prophet of non-profit, or more simply, a total amateur on the private sector.”

Why don’t we just call him a THIEF?

Barb Dwyer on September 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM

Sure makes you wonder why some successful businessmen who actually KNOW economics actually support this buffoon. Got to be a money corruptocrat connection somewhere. I get it with GE, pinning their hopes on cap&tax but why would any CEO want to support socialism? Hoping to become one of the elite I guess.

Christian Conservative on September 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM

He needs more consultation from ACORN

bluegrass on September 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM

Hey, is a business that doesn’t take their “profits off the top” engaging in income tax evasion?

Call the IRS!

Dusty on September 16, 2009 at 8:41 AM

Hey, Obama, listen up.

PROFIT = INCOME (the money others pay you for things you make or do)
minus EXPENSES (the money you pay to others
to enable you to generate income)
minusTAXES (the money that is stolen from you by
government to mostly give away to other people who didn’t
work for it.

Any questions?

TXUS on September 16, 2009 at 8:35 AM
__________________________________________________

Obanomics dictates that a “fairness dividend” be factored into all commonly accepted business formulas. Change you can believe in./

ICBM on September 16, 2009 at 8:42 AM

“…Obama, the non-prophet of profit, or the prophet of non-profit, or more simply, a total amateur on the private sector.”

Why don’t we just call him a THIEF?

Barb Dwyer on September 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM

The Sultan of Swipe.

ICBM on September 16, 2009 at 8:43 AM

Is everyone NOW convinced that affirmative action does NOT work. Talk about dumbing down. He didn’t get econ 101, or math 101…but rubber stamp him along to the next class.

Sad.

jbh45 on September 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Obama, the non-prophet of profit, or the prophet of non-profit, or more simply, a total amateur illiterate on the private sector

petefrt on September 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM

Hey, is a business that doesn’t take their “profits off the top” engaging in income tax evasion?

Call the IRS!

Dusty on September 16, 2009 at 8:41 AM

- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
Per the Charlie Rangel rule the answer is NO

bluegrass on September 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM

He is sooooooo smart! And that voice, it’s just so soothing.

I’m sorry, what were we talking about?

ncborn on September 16, 2009 at 8:45 AM

Aside from the rampant stupidity, Obama never seems to understand that the profit motive is the best way to ensure low administrative costs, because of exactly Ed’s point that higher administrative costs eat into profitability, all things being equal. By equating administrative costs and profits, Obama shows his ignorance at how the two really interact.

Saddest part of all of this is, the mindless people sitting in the room with him and listening to him on tv believe him.

milwife88 on September 16, 2009 at 8:25 AM

It is sad. The problem is that for people, their job is just something they do and they’re pretty far removed from all the numbers and accounting and decision-making, so it seems very arbitrary to them. Financial illiteracy is rampant, unfortunately.

venividivici on September 16, 2009 at 8:45 AM

He’s about the same age as me. Crap, he took my spot at Columbia? Piss me off….

jbh45 on September 16, 2009 at 8:47 AM

To Obama, “profit” is defined as what he received from Tony Rezko, the brown envelopes he finds stuffed with cash that magically appear in his desk drawer and the $300K a year “job” his wife got at a Chicago hospital.

That’s great Barry, but we can’t run the entire US economy on bribes and kickbacks. At some point, someone somewhere actually has to honestly produce a product that someone else is willing to pay for.

Barry needs a two by four upside his head, to knock a little sense into it.

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 8:49 AM

venividivici on September 16, 2009 at 8:45 AM

Were you really expecting economic brilliance from the idiot who has decided to launch a trade war with China in the midst of a recession?

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:51 AM

Do American children even get taught how capitalism works anymore?

Loxodonta on September 16, 2009 at 8:51 AM

College professors should not become POTUS. Why? Because they don’t live in the real world. Obama has no idea what he is talking about.

texasconserv on September 16, 2009 at 8:52 AM

Sure makes you wonder why some successful businessmen who actually KNOW economics actually support this buffoon.

Conservative on September 16, 2009 at 8:40 AM

Some of them, like GE and Goldman Sachs, stand to directly benefit.

Others support him defensively, in hopes of minimizing the damage Obama could do to their businesses.

Still others, those with excessive debt load, actually want the inflation they know he’s creating, so they can pay it off in lower valued dollars.

Then there are those do gooder elitist types who could care less about their own shareholders so long as they get some really meaningful face time and photo ops with the first black president.

TXUS on September 16, 2009 at 8:53 AM

Actually, Obama’s phrasing makes a lot of sense, considering that he has only ever worked in the non-profit/public sector.

In the past, Obama has gotten a bunch of money from either the govt, a foundation, etc, which he and his cronies divide up (salaries, profit, who gets what), and then what is left over goes to the people the money was supposed to help in the first place.

thgrant on September 16, 2009 at 8:54 AM

Is everyone NOW convinced that affirmative action does NOT work.
jbh45 on September 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM

I would suggest it depends on your point of view. Affirmative action has worked quite well for the filthy liar in the White House. He’s managed to reach the highest political office in America while still relatively young, without any discernable skills aside from reading a teleprompter, without any sort of educational or moral grounding that gives vision, and without any pretense of being more than the affirmative action benificiary since college.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM

To Obama, “profit” is defined as what he received from Tony Rezko, the brown envelopes he finds stuffed with cash that magically appear in his desk drawer and the $300K a year “job” his wife got at a Chicago hospital.

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 8:49 AM

Perhaps that is how somebody should explain profit to him, showing what happens before that money gets in the plain brown envelope.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:58 AM

I guarantee, without reservation, Obama could not read, or understand, the computer read-out of a McDonald’s Hamburger stand.

I would be surprised, if he doesn’t need help balancing his own checkbook.

franksalterego on September 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM

LOL, Obama on profit and overhead.

Obama claims to be funding ObamaCare via slashing corruption from Medicare/Medicaid.

Y’all really must visit RedState because Erick Erickson has the goods on Obama’s new tool.

Nancy-Ann DeParle’s corporate scandal taint.

In touting DeParle’s accomplishments when he appointed her in March, Obama didn’t mention the lucrative private-sector career she built since September 2000, when she left her government job running Medicare for the Clinton administration. Records show she earned more than $6.6 million since early 2001, according to a tally by the Investigative Reporting Workshop.

And the public wasn’t told that much of that corporate career was built at companies that have frequently had to defend themselves against federal investigations. After leaving government, DeParle accepted director positions at half a dozen companies suspected of violating the very laws and regulations she had enforced for Medicare. Those companies got into further trouble on her watch as a director. Now she’s back in government as a leading voice in deciding the shape of health care reform. As director of the White House Office of Health Reform, DeParle is the point person in pushing for the administration’s plans for changing health care and the ways Americans pay for it — changes in which her former companies have a great deal at stake.

Pot. Meet Kettle.

That’s right folks. The White House is attacking Rick Scott for his leadership at Columbia/HCA while at the same time naming Nancy-Ann DeParle as health policy czar. And DeParle left government to go work for companies committing the waste, fraud, and abuse of the Medicare system DeParle never did anything about.

What’s worse is that the companies DeParle worked for got into more trouble once she started working for them.

Five of the corporations whose boards DeParle served on have paid a total of $566 million since 2003 to settle fraud or product liability cases, often involving tax dollars paid by Medicare.

Four signed “corporate integrity agreements” in which they promised to tighten oversight of their billing practices in exchange for the government agreeing not to take legal action to kick them out of the Medicare program.

If the President is going to really pay for most of his health care plan by eliminating the waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare system, why would he appoint DeParle to oversee it? One could argue it is like hiring a burglar to burglar proof a house, except DeParle was on the inside turning a blind eye before leaving government and signing up with the burglars.

maverick muse on September 16, 2009 at 9:01 AM

In Obama’s Clueless World …….

Overhead = Where his halo resides
5 Year Plan = Amount of time allotted to formulating a plan
Inventory = A big laboratory where things are invented
Ledger = Actor made famous for role playing me
Accounts Receivable = Money you receive from people
Accounts Payable = Money you are paid from people
Gross Profit = Kind of profit made by Big Oil
Net Profit = Kind of profit made by fishermen
Bottom Line = End of speech, last line of teleprompter text

fogw on September 16, 2009 at 9:02 AM

Perhaps that is how somebody should explain profit to him, showing what happens before that money gets in the plain brown envelope.

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:58 AM

In what passes for the brain of Obama, that’s where the unicorns come in.

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 9:03 AM

“Off the top.” Isn’t that what the Mafia called “the skim?”

allstonian on September 16, 2009 at 9:07 AM

We’ve elected Chance the Gardener.

Ampleforth on September 16, 2009 at 9:10 AM

No executive experience,never ran anything, radical friends and associates,once again I say good job independant voters.

LennyV on September 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

We’ve elected Chance the Gardener.

Ampleforth on September 16, 2009 at 9:10 AM

Exactly. And there are so many parallels with the movie, Being There.

As for me I’m damn tired of being there.

TXUS on September 16, 2009 at 9:22 AM

Were you really expecting economic brilliance from the idiot who has decided to launch a trade war with China in the midst of a recession?

highhopes on September 16, 2009 at 8:51 AM

Heck no, but his lack of understand of even the most basic building blocks of freshman year accounting is proof of the stupidity of himself and those who elected him and, certainly someone advising him on economic matters would have informed him, after the first time making this mistake, that it was just plain wrong.

venividivici on September 16, 2009 at 9:22 AM

The sad thing is that he things most Americans really are so clueless that they won’t hear the obvious clangers.

I don’t know who he thinks he’s fooling, other than the kool-aid drinkers.

mr.blacksheep on September 16, 2009 at 9:24 AM

he things = he thinks

Dumb Alzheimers.

mr.blacksheep on September 16, 2009 at 9:24 AM

“Off the top.” Isn’t that what the Mafia called “the skim?”

allstonian on September 16, 2009 at 9:07 AM

Yeah, I wonder why he knows more about gangster economics than he does about capitalism? Only organized criminals and the State take money “off the top”.

On a related note, my taxes just went up.

forest on September 16, 2009 at 9:27 AM

The Won must think the people he is speaking to are stupid enough to believe what comes out of his mouth, regardless of how far off the mark it is. He is speaking to the idiots who voted for him, so I’m sure he knows his audience well.

Kissmygrits on September 16, 2009 at 9:28 AM

combine carter and Obama and you get a low moron in economics.

seven on September 16, 2009 at 9:29 AM

fogw on September 16, 2009 at 9:02 AM

hahaha

becki51758 on September 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM

So maybe all US businesses should manage to create no profit this year and therefore pay no tax. That might just teach a valuable lesson. I know that I am managing my income and capital gains to create no tax liability this year so I do not have to pay any tax. Actually with last year’s losses and being retired it isn’t hard to do.

Gandalf on September 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Sheesh. It’s like that scene from Tommy Boy–over and over and over:

Tommy: “R.T., I think I figured out the problem. This order is going to Columbus. That’s a one-day delivery, but you’ve got it marked down for two.”

R.T.: “That’s because it’s going to Columbus, Georgia, not Columbus, Ohio. You see these letters by the city? That’s called a state. What else you got, Wonder Boy?”

schafkopf on September 16, 2009 at 9:34 AM

Clueless, incompetent, unprepared…
Dangerous.

n0doz on September 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM

Even when we try not to, most of us get a little smarter with age by virtue of our experiences and the hard knocks we receive stumbling through life.
This jug-eared moron keeps getting dumber. How does he do that?

SKYFOX on September 16, 2009 at 9:40 AM

Before I only wondered…Now I’m absolutely certain he never took an economics class in college. There were too many Organizing credits to rack up. Do you think he took a History class? He certainly didn’t take a class on Hoover and The Great Depression.

MainelyRight on September 16, 2009 at 9:46 AM

Even when we try not to, most of us get a little smarter with age by virtue of our experiences and the hard knocks we receive stumbling through life.
This jug-eared moron keeps getting dumber. How does he do that?

SKYFOX on September 16, 2009 at 9:40 AM

Because he hasn’t lived a real life.

After being doted on during childhood, he scooted right up the affirmative action slide to the top, never having to exert himself and never having to do anything a reasonable person would define as “work”.

He’s as close to a monarch as we’ve ever had. A perfumed prince who thinks he can do no wrong and opposition to him is treason/racism/blue meanies.

Anyone who voted for this guy is a complete idiot who should be eternally ashamed of themselves.

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 9:49 AM

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 9:49 AM

Being a dope-dealing crackhead and affirmative action ivy-leaguer isn’t living a real life?

SKYFOX on September 16, 2009 at 10:00 AM

combine carter and Obama and you get a low moron in economics.

seven on September 16, 2009 at 9:29 AM

Several years ago,I worked with some retarded adults; two of whom were brothers.

They had no idea of the value of things. The two brothers once tried to sell me a working lawn mower engine for five dollrs. That apparently was what everything was worth.

One day one of them showed me the check he had earned at the workshop where they worked. They would maybe earn 20-30 dollars.

I said, “Hey, that’s great. How much is your check?”

He said, “Five dollars.”

“What are you going to do with it?”

“Put it in the bank.”

“How much you got in the bank?”

“Five dollars.”

“How much will have then?”

And, expecting to hear “Five dollars” , he said, “All of it.”

He seems to have had in his own limited understanding a better grasp of economics than PrecedentMackDaddy.

davidk on September 16, 2009 at 10:06 AM

Clueless, incompetent, unprepared…
Dangerous.

n0doz on September 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM

IOW, an unguided “dumb” bomb.

Yoop on September 16, 2009 at 10:06 AM

This jug-eared moron keeps getting dumber. How does he do that?

SKYFOX on September 16, 2009 at 9:40 AM

Ok, I’ll play.

Somebody keeps picking him up by those ears, thinking he’s a crock?

Yoop on September 16, 2009 at 10:09 AM

They obviously don’t teach economics at Harvard, only community activism.

Common Sense on September 16, 2009 at 10:12 AM

The obscene profits by sport athletes should be looked into immediately by Obama…
Oprah made how much the last few years 30-50 Mill? Obscene, time to investigate, and time to remove some of those profits.
All entertainers, and athletes, cap at 3 million per year.

right2bright on September 16, 2009 at 10:14 AM

Being a dope-dealing crackhead and affirmative action ivy-leaguer isn’t living a real life?

SKYFOX on September 16, 2009 at 10:00 AM

Only if your “career” consists of being on MTV and you die young.

We should expect a little more for the highest office-holder in the nation.

NoDonkey on September 16, 2009 at 10:20 AM

So… I suppose the only “profits” that aren’t evil are the ones earned(?) from the sale of books written by other people.

And, the only high-dollar salaries that are okay are the ones handed out after a hospital has some loot redirected their way….

jana on September 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM

I guess that Barack and Michelle just assume that since their success was achieved via ill-gotten means, that’s how *everyone else* earned their money, too.

And, in their eyes, it’s okay for them, but for everyone else… it’s immoral and wrong.

jana on September 16, 2009 at 10:38 AM

OT: Wanted to pass on what’s going on in OK. Hope he succeeds:

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) – An Owasso Republican running for governor wants to reimburse Oklahoma taxpayers up to $2.6 billion in federal stimulus money that Oklahoma is scheduled to receive. State Sen. Randy Brogdon announced his plan yesterday, saying he plans to introduce legislation calling for tax rebates.

Under his plan, the amount of any federal stimulus money spent in Oklahoma would be returned to state taxpayers through sales tax rebates, beginning with $400 per person. He says his plan ultimately could amount to an income tax rebate of up to 40 percent for the average Oklahoma taxpayer. Brogdon previously has called on Oklahoma leaders to return all of the federal stimulus money to President Obama and Congress, saying it threatens the country’s long-term financial health.

State Sen Brogdon has been to almost all our tea parties and is a vigorous supporter of the movement. He’s got my vote for governor. Hope this catches on to other states.

Christian Conservative on September 16, 2009 at 10:56 AM

Hope this catches on to other states.

Christian Conservative on September 16, 2009 at 10:56 AM

That sounds great. Unfortunately for me, I live in Illinois. I’m sure those corrupt, greedy clowns couldn’t wait to get their paws on that federa money.

Taxpayers won’t see a dime of relief from the mafia controlled state of Illinois. As a matter of fact, they’re trying to figure out a way to raise our taxes again.

jana on September 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM

Remember that a huge number of his supporters work for the public sector and for nonprofits. The rest are on the dole in some fashion or another. They have been trained like Pavlovian dogs to growl at the word profit.

onlineanalyst on September 16, 2009 at 11:07 AM

Socialism 101 does not cover economics. They cover “take from the rich, give to the poor”. It works until you run out of “rich” people.

GarandFan on September 16, 2009 at 11:40 AM

He’s an idiot.

Alana on September 16, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Who needs the bottom line when your the Parasite in Chief. Attach the gov’t tick to the productive and give to the non-productive ie. gov’t so they can dole out to their constituencies!

chickasaw42 on September 16, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 2


You must be logged in to post a comment.