Obama to Chamber of Commerce: Learn to share

posted at 2:15 pm on February 7, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama spoke to the Chamber of Commerce today, part of his push to repair ties with the business community after two years of rapid regulatory expansion and hostility from the White House. How did he do? It depends on whether the Chamber expected conciliation from Obama, or more haughty dictates on how they should spend and invest their money. If they came for the latter, well, they weren’t disappointed. The first clip from the Associated Press hits a couple of money quotes from Obama’s speech (full text here):

But as we work with you to make America a better place to do business, ask yourselves what you can do for America. Ask yourselves what you can do to hire American workers, to support the American economy, and to invest in this nation. That’s what I want to talk about today – the responsibilities we all have to secure the future we all share. …

The last barriers we’re trying to remove are outdated and unnecessary regulations. I’ve ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them. Already we’re dramatically cutting down on the paperwork that saddles businesses with huge administrative costs. We’re improving the way FDA evaluates things like medical devices, to get innovative and life-saving treatments to market faster. And the EPA, based on the need for further scientific analysis, delayed the greenhouse gas permitting rules for biomass. I’ve also ordered agencies to find ways to make regulations more flexible for small businesses. And we’ve turned a tangle of fuel economy regulations and pending lawsuits into a single standard that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, save consumers money at the pump, and give car companies the certainty they need.

Obama got a little more direct in this clip from Real Clear Politics:

Of course, your responsibility goes beyond recognizing the need for certain standards and safeguards. If we’re fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports to help you compete, the benefits can’t just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They should be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line. We cannot go back to the kind of economy – and culture – we saw in the years leading up to the recession, where growth and gains in productivity just didn’t translate into rising incomes and opportunity for the middle class.

Wasn’t that the economy that created 5% unemployment?  The one that created jobs in a deluge after the relatively mild post-9/11 recession?  Speaking of gains in productivity, it has “unexpectedly increased” in Obama’s own recovery,  according to Bloomberg, thanks to pressures from unemployment.  On one hand, that’s good news for the jobless, as it may mean that US businesses are on the cusp of a new hiring effort — or it just might mean that high unemployment allows businesses to demand more productivity for the salaries paid.

The “must be shared” line misses the point.  First, many businesses have profit-sharing and stock-purchase plans in place, and the defined-contribution retirement plans that most private-sector workers have rely on company contributions, which also rely on profitability.  But even more so, the purpose of business is to make money for its investors, not to act as full-employment laboratories to make politicians look good.  If government makes the cost to hire too high through regulatory expansion, the private sector will respond with fewer jobs and tighter productivity.  That’s not a moral failure but simply the consequence of free markets and investor choice.

The problem in America isn’t a lack of desire to create jobs, or greedy misers hoarding gold coins in a home vault.  Obama’s Scrooge McDuck assumptions are flat-out wrong.  Investors make money when they can invest and take risks with at least some hope of reward; they want to invest and create new enterprises, products, revenue, and as a consequence jobs.  Overregulation reduces the chances of success and therefore lowers the appetite for risk — at least in the American market.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

O/T: Since Judge Vinson in effect ruled O’Care unconstitutional, are there provisions implemented from it in the 2010 federal tax reporting that can be disregarded? (I haven’t seen the instructions and forms for 2010 yet).

ya2daup on February 7, 2011 at 3:08 PM

In a sane world this poser would have been laughed out of the room. Hell, he never would have been elected in the first place.

Mord on February 7, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Badger40 on February 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM

That sounds about right. And the article nailed it- EPA politburo- European car manufacturers so weary of the EPA that they just write the US off.

1/2 of the new cars sold in Europe are diesel. Less than 5% in the US.

journeyintothewhirlwind on February 7, 2011 at 3:15 PM

Obozo Kenyan economics …

It’s not about sharing Obozo, it’s about earning, the self esteem from standing on your own two feet, shouldering responsibilities, providing for those you care for, and giving to charity for others. In other words, be a man.

After hiring 1000s of people the best welfare is a job well done, and being rewarded for it. Something Obozo doesn’t seem to get, does he.

tarpon on February 7, 2011 at 3:16 PM

Hi all you 9 to fiver suckas, ya’ll got some werky problems here, well uh, I have no experience werkin, haha, but ahhhhh, take my advise, give your werkers more money, m-kay?

Aight, that’s a wrap, I’m off to play golf. Peace out.

Alden Pyle on February 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Obama: “If you like your business, you can keep your business.”

BuckeyeSam on February 7, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Two more years in OBamaland living in Obamavilles. Yay.

Key West Reader on February 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM

They do share…its called a paycheck

Bevan on February 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM

‘Must be shared’ is the new wealth redistribution in a stronger tone. He will leave no dollar untouched.

Kissmygrits on February 7, 2011 at 3:24 PM

Same schtick from his radio address: Obama Preaches the False Religion of Corporate Social Responsibility

“Businesses have a responsibility, too,” said Obama in his weekly address on Saturday. “If we make America the best place to do business, businesses should make their mark in America. They should set up shop here, and hire our workers, and pay decent wages, and invest in the future of this nation. That’s their obligation.”

Wrong. The social obligation of business is to sustainably maximize long-term profits for shareholders. Nothing more. Nothing less.

slickwillie2001 on February 7, 2011 at 3:30 PM

If you just read the transcript, you could almost believe he believes this stuff. Experience tells us differently.

lilredhen on February 7, 2011 at 3:35 PM

The business of America is crony capitalism.

Both corporations and the government are in bed together while everyone else is sucking lemons.

Until the regulated are separated from the regulators and CEO’s face hard time in prison for illegal or irresponsible decision making that effects millions, nothing will change.

Both parties are knee deep in the mud.

rickyricardo on February 7, 2011 at 3:35 PM

I see he has reprised his “WTF” plagiarism from Newt. Maybe he should change it to “Losing the Present”.

Hey Barry: When do AFSCME and state workers begin to “share” their earnings with the private sector? I could use the dough. Thanks in advance!

Buy Danish on February 7, 2011 at 3:45 PM

Palin has already called out the corporatism of this administration.

the arrogance of O is unmatched…I heard a snippet on AP radio, he said

We’re in this together, but many of your own economists and salespeople are now forecasting a healthy increase in demand. So I just want to encourage you to get in the game.

So natch, in his world view no one is in the game until he tells them to be in the same, the CEOs are out of touch with the economy….they need to get in the game

barf..barf…barf

the Media loves this man because they are all left wing and believe in national industrial planning…they saw nothing wrong at all about the thousands of people chanting Obama Obama Obama

Even tho November was a happy time…we are still on the cusp of “fundamentally transforming America”

r keller on February 7, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Communist moron…let his unions and communist pals invest their money for jobs.

Karmi on February 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM

And the EPA, based on the need for further scientific analysis, delayed the greenhouse gas permitting rules for biomass.

Uhmmmm shouldn’t they have done the scientific analysis before making the rules?

The current adminsitration’s motto: rule first, analyze later, (sigh)

Ann on February 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM

So, we need a new debt ceiling?

How about a new Obama IQ ceiling?

Triple digits, even.

nico on February 7, 2011 at 3:55 PM

SPREAD THE WEALTH, MR. JOE TEH PLUMBER!!!

Um, did I do say that?

——-Urkel

hillbillyjim on February 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Uhmmmm shouldn’t they have done the scientific analysis before making the rules?

Ann on February 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM

I’m reminded of a certain Star Trek TNG episode where Geordi was kidnapped by group of warp-speed morons who couldn’t fix their own ship.

“We like Ann…she can make it go”

BobMbx on February 7, 2011 at 4:03 PM

As of April 1, 2011, my income will be reduced by approximately 75% as a result of the new Dodd-Frank financial regulations bill. All in the name of consumer protection. They actually spew that this will benefit the consumer and promote transparency, when in reality it will result in higher mortgage interest rates and substantially larger profits for the banks.

More wealth stripping, higher interest rates, fewer home sales…

singer on February 7, 2011 at 4:04 PM

Both parties are knee deep in the mud.

rickyricardo on February 7, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Have you looked down lately?

(Hint: It only looks like mud.)

hillbillyjim on February 7, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Learn to share
Together we thrive

WTF is next?

ted c on February 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Just wondering out loud: Does anyone else here on HA have their income determined by the government via a “regulation”?

singer on February 7, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Our Communicator in Chief’s only experience with job creation is to hire ACORN to register voters. Or, to apply for a grant. We’re screwed.

rgeaste on February 7, 2011 at 4:07 PM

FDR would have been so proud of him.

ButterflyDragon on February 7, 2011 at 4:09 PM

ted c on February 7, 2011 at 4:06 PM

“That’s an awful big savings account you’ve got there…”

kingsjester on February 7, 2011 at 4:13 PM

We cannot go back to the kind of economy – and culture – we saw in the years leading up to the recession

What about the 47% who pay ZERO in taxes? What is their responsibility to help America’s economy?? Why should small business be the only ones who carry the tax burden?

TN Mom on February 7, 2011 at 4:15 PM

LOL! I just realized where I’ve seen Obama’s speaking style before. Go watch any Denzel Washington movie, and you’ll see that our Prez has very deliberately chosen to mimic his emoting style. This POTUS of ours is a crafty media creation.

EasyEight on February 7, 2011 at 4:27 PM

And the EPA, based on the need for further scientific analysis, delayed the greenhouse gas permitting rules for biomass.

Uhmmmm shouldn’t they have done the scientific analysis before making the rules?

The current adminsitration’s motto: rule first, analyze later, (sigh)

Ann on February 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM

This style of administration is called “Fire…Ready…Aim” in the management books.

landlines on February 7, 2011 at 4:27 PM

If government makes the cost to hire too high through regulatory expansion, the private sector will respond with fewer jobs and tighter productivity. That’s not a moral failure but simply the consequence of free markets and investor choice.

Companies have a moral obligation to make a return on the investors’ investment. Or to paraphrase Jesus, the servants that doubled their master’s bags of talents were bless and given greater responsiblities. The cowardly who buried the talent and returned 0% gains was cursed.

However, trust the Book of Barack to equate those who sit on their capital due to uncertainties and bureaucratic over-regulations as the wicked servant even as they squeeze gains with what’s left.

Thanks a lot, you putzes — the 52% that voted PBHO as the 2nd coming of jesus.

AH_C on February 7, 2011 at 4:31 PM

gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…gimme…

right2bright on February 7, 2011 at 4:40 PM

gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme.. gimme..

right2bright on February 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Isn’t it cute when communists try to instruct capitalists on how businesses operate. That’s what comes from never having a real job in his life and living off the government dole the entire time.

flytier on February 7, 2011 at 4:46 PM

The cowardly who buried the talent and returned 0% gains was cursed.
AH_C on February 7, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Not only was he cursed, the money was taken away from him and given to the servant who got the most return on his money. Maybe that’s not in Obama’s version of the Bible. Oh, I forgot, that would be the Little Red Book.

flytier on February 7, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Wrong. The social obligation of business is to sustainably maximize long-term profits for shareholders. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[slickwillie2001 on February 7, 2011 at 3:30 PM]

I agree with you on this. It’s a pretty standard rule. The problem, as I see it, is that it is a too narrow rebuttal of Obama’s strategy of coousing on businesses and their actions, or inactions as Obama sees it. It’s why I’m still fuming that they didn’t just up and walk out on him for appearing so clueless about how, not only businesses operate, but the the more fundamental issue: how economies function.

If Obama revises tax codes, etc, to reduce the burden on businesses, profits may increase, but the degree depends on the degree of market competition.

In fiercely competitive markets, profits will only increase to the extent that volume increases, not the degree that regulatory burden decreases. The vast majority of “profits” (theoretical $$$ estimated by some federal bureaucrat) in that market will be “returned” to the consumer via lower prices. Maybe less so as one considers more oligopolistic or monopolistic markets but there are other avenues in which this is addressed and again, prices will come down and consumers, including the workers of those companies, will benefit.

The function of government is to not interfere, in the leasts ways possible, with that and to promote, with the lightest hand possible, markets to be as competitive as possible. That means it needs to be the Government of No, when it comes to businesses who come to Washington to “redress their grievances” about having to compete with others or that there is a too easy an entry into their market by new businesses.

Obama is just as clueless about business operation as he is clueless about the function of markets and the economy, and was/still is clueless about his car insurance policy in the 1970′s/early 80′s because he never read his policy before he paid (if he paid with his money) for it.

Ignorant.

Stupid.

Uneducated.

Credentialed by acclamation of his brown-nosed peers.

Dusty on February 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM

TN Mom on February 7, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Yeah, that and the approximately $50 billion we spend on tax welfare known as Earned Income Tax Credit.

brtex on February 7, 2011 at 4:51 PM

I’ve ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them.

Talk about your inmates running the prison — the regulators are going to review the regulations upon which their employment is justified, to determine if they are necessary.

American Elephant on February 7, 2011 at 4:54 PM

[Dusty on February 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM]

Coousing? WTF. I’m not going to top Palin’s refudiate with that in 2011. I can’t even think now what I wanted to type there I’m still fuming so much.

Dusty on February 7, 2011 at 4:57 PM

If government makes the cost to hire too high through regulatory expansion, the private sector will respond with fewer jobs and tighter productivity.

Well, Obama can fix that with some new regulations! Make it harder to fire people like Europe has done.

That’s not a moral failure but simply the consequence of free markets and investor choice.

Oh, but there’s the rub, Ed. Obama isn’t INTERESTED in free markets or investor choice. He is interested in forcing redistribution.

American Elephant on February 7, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Talk about your inmates running the prison — the regulators are going to review the regulations upon which their employment is justified, to determine if they are necessary.

[American Elephant on February 7, 2011 at 4:54 PM]

Worst of all, the message was sent by the Regulator in Chief.

Where’s the off-shore drilling permits, Champ?

Dusty on February 7, 2011 at 5:01 PM

2 years into his presidency and he STILL can’t say anything worth listening to…

What a disappointment…

Khun Joe on February 7, 2011 at 5:16 PM

LOL! I just realized where I’ve seen Obama’s speaking style before. Go watch any Denzel Washington movie, and you’ll see that our Prez has very deliberately chosen to mimic his emoting style. This POTUS of ours is a crafty media creation.

EasyEight on February 7, 2011 at 4:27 PM

He said in one of ‘his’ books that he watched videos and listened to tapes of black preachers in order to develop his speaking skills. Too bad we don’t have old tapes of Bammie so we can see the ‘before’.

“Harry, I have a gift.”

slickwillie2001 on February 7, 2011 at 5:38 PM

Share-Newspeak for redistribute.

Blue Collar Todd on February 7, 2011 at 5:57 PM

Meet the new Mr. Obama; same as the old Mr. Obama, he’s just wearing a different suit: this one is designed by Bill Daley. It’s from his How To Win Votes collection!

TN Mom on February 7, 2011 at 6:00 PM

And there goes the stupidest President of all time continuing to poison the private sector. What a clueless, socialist reject!

Earth to to ODopey; You’re making unemployment worse with every word out of your mouth. Please shut up!

When employers hear you say thing like that their >wallets< pucker shut. Do you need that explained in CRAYON?

dogsoldier on February 7, 2011 at 6:01 PM

Yeah, that and the approximately $50 billion we spend on tax welfare known as Earned Income Tax Credit.

brtex on February 7, 2011 at 4:51 PM

They get back triple what they pay in; it is like a ponzi scheme!

TN Mom on February 7, 2011 at 6:39 PM

Fred Barnes is really slamming Obummer’s speech right now on FoxNews. “Doesn’t amount to much”. He is pointing out the hypocrisy of the “reduce regulations” portion of the bill by listing all of the new regulations obummer has imposed over the past 2 years. Calls the whole thing a “fake”. He said Obummer’s audience knows better and Obummer used this as a performance for appearance sake’s only.

karenhasfreedom on February 7, 2011 at 6:45 PM

Kraut called it all for show and just a regurgitation of the SOTU speech and pointed out that 100K pages of new regulations are coming from the health care bill. He is also pointing out how the EPA has stopped all new drilling. Kraut is making fun of the WTF slogan for the new campaign. “Yes we can win the future”. Barnes is saying, what about winning the present?

karenhasfreedom on February 7, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Excerpted from the Politico report of the speech: “Obama himself acknowledged early on that he doesn’t have the best relationship with the Chamber. (“Maybe if we had brought over a fruit cake when we first moved in, we would have got off to a better start,” he joked.”)

The only “fruitcake” present was ObaMao making his inane talking points in front of the Chamber of Commerce group. Isn’t that another example of O’s snide putdowns, BTW?

onlineanalyst on February 7, 2011 at 6:56 PM

says the tightwad who gave 1% of his earnings to charity from 2000-2004

wryteacher on February 7, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Obama is evil. Inarguable. Nothing else necessary. Anybody who disagrees is also evil. Simple.

proconstitution on February 7, 2011 at 8:00 PM

…the benefits can’t just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They should be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line.

Poor clueless Obama. His understanding of business is so bad that he can’t see the connection between improved business conditions – which he has the power to affect by easing regulations – and increased employment. It’s automatic, if he’d make truly meaningful changes.

And he confuses the the office of ‘President’ – servant of the people – with the position of ‘King’ – he who decrees that management must pay higher wages.

Send him out to write his third autobiography on January 20, 2013.

Insufficiently Sensitive on February 7, 2011 at 10:21 PM

We learned today after this speech that we have nothing to worry about. He actually, in an attempt toward befriending business, actually said…… regulations are good!!! He is his own worst enemy. He has no sense, he has NO speechwriter worth a twit and he is dumb. Yes, he sometimes seems as though he has a brain cell but in actuality to say to the world of business we need MORE REGulation…. the guy is as stupid as I have ever thought. Will this be enough to defeat him????? Hope so… He is a freakin moron and I can’t believe it is the same guy that interviewd by O’Reilly. O’Reilly had his lunch but didn’t eat it. He was way too gentle. THis guy is a complete unthinking, dope. Help.

highninside on February 7, 2011 at 11:42 PM

SHARE??? SHARE???? ARE you serious you total foolbasket…. SHARE….. ever hear of the fair trade crap laws that exist that prevent exchanging or SHARING…. you are an idiot….. You have NO , NO, NONE, concept of free enterprise or capitalism or build your own business and make it happen. What a total jerk… That is what you get when you elect a stinking community organizer. O’reilly was right…. Hey moron,,,,, half the country or more HATES you…. what part of that don’t you understand you fool!!!!!

highninside on February 7, 2011 at 11:46 PM

“Echoing John F. Kennedy, President Barack Obama prodded business leaders Monday to “ask yourselves what you can do for America,” not just for company bottom lines, even as he sought to smooth his uneasy relations with the nation’s corporate executives.”

He is all past presidents, just not himself. There is nothing there there.

Schadenfreude on February 7, 2011 at 11:58 PM

I heard the “I get it…” soundbite earlier.

What a condescending comment from someone who fundamentally does *not* get it, has no background or education that would help him get it, etc.

Crass f@#$wit.

Midas on February 8, 2011 at 12:18 AM

“Fighting to reform the tax code”

Who are you fighting there, Yer Highness?

We cannot go back to the kind of economy – and culture – we saw in the years leading up to the recession, where growth and gains in productivity just didn’t translate into rising incomes and oppgortunity for the middle class.

Does anybody remember the term Barack used for 4 years to describe the economic culture of the Bush years? “The failed economic policies of George W Bush.”

Mr President, once again you are lying. When you started using that phrase from the DNC platform in 2004, you astonished the more experienced politicians because you clearly believed every word of your criticism in spite of widely known facts that contradicted you. You were the only guy in the room who didn’t know the middle class did extremely well under Bush. It was the poor–primarily the 4% who were unemployed, you know, the ones ACORN represented to you–who were being left behind in the economic rising tide.

So tell us, Champ–how are those poor folks doing now?
Have your lies benefitted them at all? And if not, then why did you become President?

Or have they become someone else’s concern?

rwenger43 on February 8, 2011 at 1:27 AM

President Obama,

I am middle class, and until shortly after you took office, I was doing well. Those GM stockholders you stole from were not all rich — only a small percentage were — and the rest of us were hoping to retire using some of that stock. You took it away and gave it to the UAW.

The rich are entitled to whatever they can earn, as are the middle class, as are the poor. Your redistributionism is what killed our economy — if you pretend you don’t understand where the housing bubble came from, you are being disingenuous. Wherever the Government meddles, be it housing, education, or even healthcare, benefits go down and prices go up. Just stop it. Now.

unclesmrgol on February 8, 2011 at 2:01 AM

Politico:Obama: Corporate Profits “Have To Be Shared By American Workers”……..does the statement suggest anything
other than unions! This guy is a Fascist on his way to Communism.
Decisions that have no impact on him, but most everybody else.

lilium on February 8, 2011 at 6:30 AM

That sounds about right. And the article nailed it- EPA politburo- European car manufacturers so weary of the EPA that they just write the US off.

1/2 of the new cars sold in Europe are diesel. Less than 5% in the US.

journeyintothewhirlwind on February 7, 2011 at 3:15 PM

And diesel engines fuel industry.
We need power in our businesses-ranching & trucking.
With all of these regulations lorded down from above, diesel engines in trucks & pick ups have become next to worthless.
Taking the sulfur out of diesel fuel is a death blow to the diesel engine buyers bcs now we cannot get the effers to run worth a damn.
Many many ranchers & farmers I know have thrown their hands up in frustration & bought gas engine pickups.
What to do with tractors now that CAFE standards count for ag vehicles?
I’m really tired of the govt $hitting on us working people.
It’s getting really old.
I’m at war with them everyday of my life over something.

Badger40 on February 8, 2011 at 8:35 AM

The President continues to try to appeal to those listening, to due their civic Duty and give $$$$$ they do not have.

If the public continues to allow this extortion they are basically doomed.

MSGTAS on February 8, 2011 at 8:54 AM

An oldie, but goodie:

An economics professor gives his students a stark lesson in socialism:
An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class.
The students insisted that socialism worked since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.”
“All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade.”
After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had studied very little were happy.
But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since they couldn’t make an A, they also studied less. The second Test average was a D.
No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.
To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

stenwin77 on February 8, 2011 at 9:19 AM

stenwin77 on February 8, 2011 at 9:19 AM

If I taught US Govt classes, I would so do this.
Too bad I’m just the science teacher.
No way I could get this to fly.

Badger40 on February 8, 2011 at 11:21 AM

I can’t see him being the bomb when, the sooner the better, his lecture, ugh, .. Circuit starts

who the hell would pay to listen to quisling

Sonosam on February 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

who the hell would pay to listen to quisling

Sonosam on February 8, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Well I always wondered Who in the he!! would pay to listen to Al Gore & clearly they exist.
Who would pay to listen to the Black Eyed Peas sing at the Suprbowl?
Clearly there are such people.
That is why the world is like it is.

Badger40 on February 8, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Obama is a hypocrite, a liar and a fraud. Expecting him to tell the truth is like expecting a snake to turn into a pigeon.

woodNfish on February 8, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2