Obamateurism of the Day

posted at 8:01 am on April 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Apparently, the “fairness” argument by itself wasn’t selling the Buffett Rule for Barack Obama. With the election approaching and his approval numbers on the economy tanking, Obama decided to add another argument — that the Buffett Rule was a means to stimulate economic growth:

“As many Americans rush to file their taxes this weekend, it’s worth pointing out that we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said in the address posted online Saturday.

“This is not just about fairness, this is also about growth,” he added.  “It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs.  And it’s about whether we as a country are willing to pay for those investments.["]

First, in order to believe that, you have to buy the notion that economic growth in the private sector occurs when government seizes capital from the private sector. Obama’s stimulus plan should have killed that notion dead, and all that did was seize future capital through massive borrowing.  Seizure of capital only retards economic growth by taking capital out of the marketplace, or at best reducing it significantly through bureaucratic overhead and transferring it to inefficient uses.  After all, no one has a problem investing in efficient and productive organizations, so government intervention isn’t necessary.

But the truly laughable part of this argument is the scale.  Estimates of the annual revenue from the Buffett Rule range between $3.1 billion and $4.7 billion.  The American economy is around $15 trillion dollars.  Even taking the best case and assuming $4.7 billion in revenue that would have not been put to any productive use in the hands of those from whom it was taken, it would amount to a whopping 0.0313% of the American economy. (For that matter, it’s only 0.5% of Obama’s proposed FY2013 deficit, and 0.12% of his overall budget.)   Even under the theoretical 100% improvement in the use of that capital, the impact wouldn’t be big enough to change the reported annual GDP growth rate at the first decimal point.  It’s also worth remembering that Obama spent $3 billion in three weeks on Cash for Clunkers in 2009, and it had no impact at all on auto sales; it just moved demand up by a month.

This is Obamanomics in a nutshell; hyperventilating over 0.0313% of the problem while ignoring the other 99.9687% of it.

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!

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

Way above his pay grade. Economics, that is.

Cleombrotus on April 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM

“As many Americans rush to file their taxes this weekend, it’s worth pointing out that we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said in the address posted online Saturday.

47% pay no income tax, some of whom get a tax paid check they didn’t earn. Duh. But that’s not what he meant, is it?

Pablo on April 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM

“This is not just about fairness, this is also about growth,” he added. “It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs. And it’s about whether we as a country are willing to pay for those investments.["]

Tell you what sport. How about tapping the half of the “taxpayers” who pay nothing in income taxes. You did say this was about fairness. How is it fair that so many contribute nothing to the public coffers?

Happy Nomad on April 19, 2012 at 8:09 AM

“There can never be too much gold.”

– King Midas

TimBuk3 on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

I guarantee the people who get a kickback from Uncle Sugar have filed their taxes by early January – gotta get their fair share of the “stimulus”.

VibrioCocci on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

Cut the guy a break. He was a professor of Constitutional law not economics.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

Someone needs to produce a dictionary of lib-speak so we can keep up.

Fair share = Confiscating wealth
Investment = Wealth redistribution to unions and cronies
Women’s Healthcare = Abortion
Doing your doing your part = Forking over your income

Trafalgar on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

Yeah, look at the “boom” going on in California, which is the future of the other 56 states if Emperor Barry Hussein Soetoro isn’t deposed in November.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

This is Obamanomics in a nutshell; hyperventilating over 0.0313% of the problem while ignoring the other 99.9687% of it.

Which explains why this crew and the OWS nutbars go on and on and on and on and on and on about “TEH 1%!!!!!!!!”

crazy_legs on April 19, 2012 at 8:16 AM

hair of the dog economics????….

ted c on April 19, 2012 at 8:16 AM

Cut the guy a break. He was a professor of Constitutional law not economics.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

Except he studied the Soviet constitution, not ours. Ours is too full of “negative liberties” as he puts it, because it tells government, and thus Barry WHAT HE CANT DO TO US.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:17 AM

uhhhhhhhm…Obama eats dogs

DHChron on April 19, 2012 at 8:19 AM

So, Obama’s big idea is to take $4.7 billion a year (about a half day of US government spending) from actual competent private investors (by definition if they’re making over a million a year in investment income) and give it to the government, who has blown essentially every investment they have made under Obama-Solyndra, etc.

Great idea.

That’ll jump start the economy for sure.

talkingpoints on April 19, 2012 at 8:20 AM

As many Americans rush to file their taxes this weekend, it’s worth pointing out that we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said in the address posted online Saturday.

Do those who did not rush out to file their federal taxes realize what he is saying?

Fallon on April 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM

DHChron
There should be a good post in the BO eats dog meat…….

angrymike on April 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM

“As many Americans rush to file their taxes this weekend, it’s worth pointing out that we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said in the address posted online Saturday.

Ed, what’s worse is that the President has a left wing notion that only through the tax code does everyone do their part. Bill and Melinda Gates “do their part” far more effectively and efficiently through their charitable contributions than through the check they cut to the IRS.

radjah shelduck on April 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Yeah, look at the “boom” going on in California, which is the future of the other 56 states if Emperor Barry Hussein Soetoro isn’t deposed in November.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

They knew full well that Governor “Moonbeam” was SCOAMF, Jr. and they elected him anyway. I have many family members living there and if they choose to stay I can’t do anything for them. Like having a family member on drugs who won’t accept help. You love them but gotta let them go.

swinia sutki on April 19, 2012 at 8:23 AM

He’s not a capitalist.

forest on April 19, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Trafalgar on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

Your screen name backward is Rag la Fart.

jaime on April 19, 2012 at 8:25 AM

First, in order to believe that, you have to buy the notion that economic growth in the private sector occurs when government seizes capital from the private sector.

Thirty-five Colombian prostitutes believe in this notion.

Rovin on April 19, 2012 at 8:25 AM

Cut the guy a break. He was a professor of Constitutional law not economics.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

…at the U of Chicago, where parents are suckered out of $45,000 per year, to employ Illinois Democrat politicians.

MNHawk on April 19, 2012 at 8:25 AM

47% pay no income tax, some of whom get a tax paid check they didn’t earn. Duh. But that’s not what he meant, is it?

Pablo on April 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Whenever people I encounter who are on the public dole talk excitedly about their income tax ‘refund’, I ask them several questions, like, is this $$ you are getting back from overpayment to the Feds?
The answer being no, I then go on to explain, Then why are you getting a refund?
They have no answer & stammer & stutter, to which I reply, it’s WELFARE MONEY.
But of course, it doesn’t bother them.
They feel it’s owed to them somehow.

Badger40 on April 19, 2012 at 8:27 AM

To Serve Dogs

OMG it’s a cookbook!!!!!!!!!!

50sGuy on April 19, 2012 at 8:27 AM

How does he not choke on the word ‘fair‘ when he says it?

VietVet_Dave on April 19, 2012 at 8:29 AM

Notice: The final exam for 2012 for Econ 101 will be the first week of November.

It will be an open book test. Extra points if the numbers do not add up.

Yoop on April 19, 2012 at 8:30 AM

Someone needs to produce a dictionary of lib-speak so we can keep up.

Fair share = Confiscating wealth
Investment = Wealth redistribution to unions and cronies
Women’s Healthcare = Abortion
Doing your doing your part = Forking over your income

Trafalgar on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

A contribution to your project:

Raising revenue = raising taxes

gepaza on April 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

I sent out a nice check this weekend to help support Jug Ears army of bottom feeders . I wrote Romney2012 on the check. Not a fan of Mittens but he is George Washington compared to this clown .

DeweyWins on April 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

To Serve Dogs

OMG it’s a cookbook!!!!!!!!!!

50sGuy on April 19, 2012 at 8:27 AM

From Rod Serlings’ Twilight Zone, circa 1962

Rovin on April 19, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Your screen name backward is Rag la Fart.

jaime on April 19, 2012 at 8:25 AM

Well, thanks for sharing Emiaj. I’m a better person for knowing that!

Trafalgar on April 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM

“…we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part…”

Really? That is the founding principle of taxes? Everybody doing their part?

I never knew.

When nearly half of the citizens are already the recipients of the earnings of the other half?

Sounds a lot like socialism to me.

Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen!*“…isn’t that what some other failed “economist” said once.

And thousands of followers have destroyed millions in property, capital and lives trying to force this concept on yet another gullible segment of the global population?

Marx never “got it.”

Obama and apparently a lot of others still do not get it. [If only the “right” folks were in charge, then Communism would really have a chance to work….” Ummm huh. Yeah. Right.]

The purpose of the federal tax[tariff] system is to fund necessary obligations of governance, as provided for under our Constitution. Period.

It is not nor should it ever have been allowed to become some sort of trough of free money so politicians can pay off supporters, or to make one segment or another of the population entirely dependent on the largesse of government.

* “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Obama…that wannabe economic genius. Still a Putz.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 8:35 AM

A contribution to your project:

Raising revenue = raising taxes

gepaza on April 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

one more:
Tax Cut = Stealing $$ from the people. Something we cannot afford.

Badger40 on April 19, 2012 at 8:35 AM

How does he not choke on the word ‘fair‘ when he says it?

VietVet_Dave on April 19, 2012 at 8:29 AM

Hey if the teleprompter says “fair” then Obama is gonna say it. It isn’t like he pays attention to what he says as he says it.

Happy Nomad on April 19, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Maybe if this guy would stop eating dogs and open an economics book, he wouldn’t sound so uninformed.

teacherman on April 19, 2012 at 8:37 AM

It is not nor should it ever have been allowed to become some sort of trough of free money so politicians can pay off supporters, or to make one segment or another of the population entirely dependent on the largesse of government.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 8:35 AM

This is FDR’s supreme legacy.
May that man rot in hell for what he’s done to destroy our Republic.

Badger40 on April 19, 2012 at 8:37 AM

Invest We Much

forest on April 19, 2012 at 8:38 AM

50sguy
You gave me a good chuckle, To serve dog………
I love old Twilight zone’s ………..

angrymike on April 19, 2012 at 8:38 AM

we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part

Because we’ve got a tax system with tens of thousands of loopholes, deductions, & exceptions designed to benefit special interests, usually campaign donors.

Unfortunately, the President opposes every plan to remedy this & make the system fairer.

itsnotaboutme on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

DHChron on April 19, 2012 at 8:19 AM

WINNER!!!

Thats funny!

Now if ‘ol Bumma can just get those employees of his to pay up their back taxes…oh, nevermind…

OldWeaselKeeper on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

I would love to see a study of what % of government spending the 47% of those who have zero skin in the game are consuming.

My guess is it’s well north of 50%.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

hyperventilating over 0.0313% of the problem while ignoring the other 99.9687% of it.

Reminds me of what the Lord Jesus told the religious leaders of his day:

You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel!

itsnotaboutme on April 19, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Because we’ve got a tax system with tens of thousands of loopholes, deductions, & exceptions designed to benefit special interests, usually campaign donors.

Unfortunately, the President opposes every plan to remedy this & make the system fairer.

itsnotaboutme on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

Democrats, and to some extent Republicans will NEVER go for creating a truly simple tax system of rates that amount to what you see is what you pay. Congressmen and Senators sell those loopholes like whores in exchange for cash and favors.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Fairness,he has beaten that horse to death.Maybe the American people will show him what is fair,soon.

docflash on April 19, 2012 at 8:45 AM

angrymike on April 19, 2012 at 8:38

Thanks am – I love the old tv series too. I never get tired of watching them.

50sGuy on April 19, 2012 at 8:45 AM

…we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said

And you had complete control of the White House and Congress for all of 2009 and 2010 and didn’t do a thing about it. Instead you wasted time, resources, and what little credibility you had on your poorly conceived effort to take over the health insurance industry. Cry me a river.

Dee2008 on April 19, 2012 at 8:47 AM

50sGuy
New years marathon, never miss it…….;-)

angrymike on April 19, 2012 at 8:47 AM

The dog ate my tax return!

Finbar on April 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

I would love to see a study of what % of government spending the 47% of those who have zero skin in the game are consuming.

My guess is it’s well north of 50%.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

The use of the term “government spending” is now forbidden. It will henceforth be known as “investment”. Violators will be referred to the Ministry of Love.

forest on April 19, 2012 at 8:49 AM

we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part,” Obama said…

That’s a bit rich, coming from a gangly radar dished failure that paid taxes at a lower rate than his secretary.

what a fine example of “everyone doing their part” it was for Earflaps McFailure to take every possible deduction so that his effective tax rate dropped from 35% to 20.5%.

And also- which of his multiple social security numbers did the scoamfy loser file under?

Fail, fail, fail. Nothing but 4 years of fail from this dunce.

GrassMudHorsey on April 19, 2012 at 8:50 AM

Finbar on April 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Then I ate the dog.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 8:50 AM

it’s worth pointing out that we’ve got a tax system that doesn’t always uphold the principle of everyone doing their part

You got that right, Barack. 47% pay nothing at all. Oh wait, you weren’t talking about them, were you?

Odysseus on April 19, 2012 at 8:50 AM

I read the other day that the Executive Branch employees owe hundreds of million of dollars in taxes and that the Federal Govt employees is $3B+. Don’t hear Obama going after these people who work for him to pay up and do their FAIR SHARE!

CoffeeLover on April 19, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Fairness,he has beaten that horse to death.

docflash on April 19, 2012 at 8:45 AM

And it would not be a waste. As a citizen of the world with the broadest of cultural exposure and culinary tastes, if cooked to his specifications he would probably eat that as well.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Obamanomics for the math challenged… All you need to do to get a bigger blanket is cut 6″ off the top and sew it onto the bottom.

WestTexasBirdDog on April 19, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Really? That is the founding principle of taxes? Everybody doing their part?

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 8:35 AM

Remember, the founding fathers specified uniform taxes for everyone. It was the sixteenth amendment that introduced non-uniform taxes. These are called progressive taxes in that they attempt to used government to meet some goal, in this case fairness.

In this narrow definition, Øbama is correct that wealthier people paying more is “doing their part.” My problem is that 47% pay nothing. Just like inactivity is not commerce, how can doing nothing also be “doing your part?”

Odysseus on April 19, 2012 at 8:57 AM

Fezzik Obama: “…investments…”

Inigo Morrissey: “You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means…”

Kraken on April 19, 2012 at 8:57 AM

I would love to see a study of what % of government spending the 47% of those who have zero skin in the game are consuming.

wildcat72 on April 19, 2012 at 8:39 AM

Nooooooo! That wouldn’t be fair. /

VietVet_Dave on April 19, 2012 at 8:59 AM

The “Buffet Rule”: Government by Gimmick.

petefrt on April 19, 2012 at 9:01 AM

DHChron
There should be a good post in the BO eats dog meat…….

angrymike on April 19, 2012 at 8:22 AM

…I had Beagles and cream cheese this morning for breakfast!

KOOLAID2 on April 19, 2012 at 9:10 AM

OT: Today is Yom HaShoah(Holocaust Remembrance Day).
Never Forget http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll3uBeAdOck&feature=related
NEVER AGAIN!

annoyinglittletwerp on April 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM

More class warfare from the classless one……….

crosshugger on April 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM

KOOLAID2 on April 19, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Had a Yorkie Peppermint Patty last night.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Beagles and cream cheese…now that one is funny….thanks koolaid2

crosshugger on April 19, 2012 at 9:14 AM

Trafalgar

How about “Green Jobs”
Oh i forgot- That would come under Investment- Wealth redistribution to unions and cronies.It certainly applies here in California.

jeffinsjvca on April 19, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Does the Buffet Rule remove stains, thicken hair, and filter impurities from water, too? ‘Cause then I might be interested.

It’s like the new Sham-Wow of legislation apparently.

AnonymousDrivel on April 19, 2012 at 9:18 AM

EM:

This is Obamanomics in a nutshell; hyperventilating over 0.0313% of the problem while ignoring the other 99.9687% of it.

Might I suggest “distracting with” as opposed to “hyperventilating over”?

AnonymousDrivel on April 19, 2012 at 9:22 AM

uhhhhhhhhhm…Obama eats dogs

DHChron on April 19, 2012 at 9:24 AM

Headline: “Obama attacks Blue Dog democrats!!” Folks this could get nasty!! Are cannibals still around in the Kenyan Muslim’s home country? Was he steeped in that by his father? It’s a slippery slope, dogs, snakes, grasshoppers, Blue Dog Democrats… next..evil Republicans!! Watch your backs!! Accept no dinner invitations from the Obamas!!

Marco on April 19, 2012 at 9:28 AM

It is not the job of the government to “invest” in anything. They are to maintain our infrastructure and military. How did we come so far as to allow elected officials to think they could “invest” (read: spend wildly) better than we, the taxpayers, could ourselves? End this centralized miasma.

allstonian on April 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM

Marco on April 19, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Blue Dog Democrats — the other White meat.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 9:31 AM

You must remember when he talks about making investments to create jobs, he’s talking about creating more bureaucracy to staff with government workers. Thus expanding the dems perma voting block. He’s not talking about real jobs.

Maxlugar on April 19, 2012 at 9:45 AM

Soetoro was never a professor of anything. He was a ‘guest lecturer’. A dog eating guest lecturer. Class dismissed.

BHO Jonestown on April 19, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Rumor has it, after giving this speech baraka sat down to a dinner of rack of spaniel, and for dessert had a nice slice of hound cake.

GrassMudHorsey on April 19, 2012 at 9:55 AM

The only thing this is going to stimulate is my resolve to see this contemptibly inadequate president removed from his office.

lynncgb on April 19, 2012 at 10:07 AM

“It’s about being able to make the investments we need to strengthen our economy and create jobs….

The most ironic part of this insanity is that the intent of the lower capital gains rate is to encourage investments! Maddening!!!

KS Rex on April 19, 2012 at 10:12 AM

Cut the guy a break. He was a professor of Constitutional law not economics.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer
Adjunct lecturer

Learn it.

Nutstuyu on April 19, 2012 at 10:15 AM

It is not the job of the government to “invest” in anything. They are to maintain our infrastructure and military. How did we come so far as to allow elected officials to think they could “invest” (read: spend wildly) better than we, the taxpayers, could ourselves? End this centralized miasma.

allstonian on April 19, 2012 at 9:30 AM

For someone supposedly so tuned into sports, you’d think Obama would understand government’s proper role is that umpire/referee, or even groundskeeper, but not player. You never see the refs grab the ball and start shooting, or an umpire step up to the plate. Yet somehow Demowacks think government can both regulate/control and participate.

Nutstuyu on April 19, 2012 at 10:18 AM

“This is not just about fairness, this is also about growth,” he added.

Growth of the US Government and its arm to reach even further.

katablog.com on April 19, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Blue Dog Democrats — the other White meat.

coldwarrior on April 19, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Dog gone it, stop these funny spots.

katablog.com on April 19, 2012 at 10:57 AM

The dog ate my tax return!

Finbar on April 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

then Owe ate my dog so it’s Bush’s fault.

katablog.com on April 19, 2012 at 11:01 AM

You all do realize that if the Buffet Rule had passed 0bama could fund 8 Solyandras a year. Jobs baby, J-O-B-S!!!!!!!!

See How that works when you have sucked of the government teat your whole life?

jukin3 on April 19, 2012 at 11:01 AM

0′s economic policies are for the dogs.

Bmore on April 19, 2012 at 11:08 AM

If 5 Trillion dollars of spending in 3.5 years doesn’t produce growth, I think maybe we should try another idea. Like maybe the opposite.

Schwalbe Me-262 on April 19, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Seizure of capital only retards economic growth by taking capital out of the marketplace, or at best reducing it significantly through bureaucratic overhead and transferring it to inefficient uses

Maybe if we put this in a coloring book, we could could get obumbles to understand it.?

Tim_CA on April 19, 2012 at 11:16 AM

The dog ate my tax return!

Finbar on April 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

So that’s why Obama ate the dog. He was looking for Timmy’s tax return.

Gladtobehere on April 19, 2012 at 11:25 AM

I’m late to the party, I know…

Someone needs to produce a dictionary of lib-speak so we can keep up.

Fair share = Confiscating wealth
Investment = Wealth redistribution to unions and cronies
Women’s Healthcare = Abortion
Doing your doing your part = Forking over your income

Trafalgar on April 19, 2012 at 8:15 AM

A contribution to your project:

Raising revenue = raising taxes

gepaza on April 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Access = free stuff

sandspur on April 19, 2012 at 11:27 AM

Oh, and Obama’s iPod has Duran Duran’s ‘Hungry Like For the Wolf’

Schwalbe Me-262 on April 19, 2012 at 11:32 AM

Best dog photoshop (?) — Pic D’Jour

slickwillie2001 on April 19, 2012 at 11:43 AM

To Serve Dogs

OMG it’s a cookbook!!!!!!!!!!

50sGuy on April 19, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Heh.

Tim_CA on April 19, 2012 at 11:56 AM

…I had Beagles and cream cheese this morning for breakfast!

KOOLAID2 on April 19, 2012 at 9:10 AM

ROFLMAO Oh my God, I spilled my coffee I laughed so hard.

jqc1970 on April 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

These are nice articles. But…..who ever reads them? Only us faithful. None of the unwashed out in America land has ANY idea about the concepts of articles like this cause they never hear or read about them.
Why do none of the conservative organizations or the Republican National Committee not make commercials on the MSM explaining these principles so more people will see the core values of conservatism. Many organizations like Heritage, Tea Parties and many of the others could make commercials, without all the dramatic music and flash, to talk directly to the American people. They don’t have to support a specific candidate, just present conservative ideals and lay out how Democrats are destroying the United States of America.

boogieboy on April 19, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Way above his pay grade. Economics, that is.

Cleombrotus on April 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM

Would I be out of line to point out what you overlooked?

Way over his pay grade. In everything, that is.

manyears on April 19, 2012 at 1:00 PM

We are the 99.9687% !

Oh wait..some bunch of unwashed stoners have that one already…..

Not that there is anything wrong with stoners, as long as they aren’t voting….

ProfShadow on April 19, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Cut the guy a break. He was a professor of Constitutional law not economics.

DaveDief on April 19, 2012 at 8:14 AM

No…he was not even that, apparently.

MooCowBang on April 19, 2012 at 2:25 PM

One of the remaining tenured law faculty from the time says they never considered Obama for the position because he hadn’t published. In fact, many of them doubted he had really been President of Law Review because that position typically required publishing as well, and he didn’t.

Then they got the call from the UC Law Dean saying, “You are going to hire Obama,” and so they did. It’s the Chicago Way!

And now he’s grown up to be the biggest spender in the history of the world! Better eat your Wheatons!

Adjoran on April 19, 2012 at 3:14 PM

I sent out a nice check this weekend to help support Jug Ears army of bottom feeders . I wrote Romney2012 on the check. Not a fan of Mittens but he is George Washington compared to this clown .

DeweyWins on April 19, 2012 at 8:31 AM

Man, I wish I had thought of that. I will certainly do when we have to send another one in next quarter.

I don’t know how those who also pay state income taxes are making it. The federal taxes are eating us up.

jazzuscounty on April 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM

We are the 0.0313%!

UnrepentantCurmudgeon on April 19, 2012 at 7:44 PM