Go Home

yea

3 documents found in 0.001 seconds.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (1620)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (16567)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

There's no shortage of wingnuts out there, so why would George Stephanopoulos invite on someone too crazy for even Bill O'Reilly? Only people with a Malkin brain would believe and push across the notion that Americans would rather collect three hundred dollars a week on unemployment insurance rather than get a job that supplies benefits and pays a salary.

Yea, because there are so many jobs available, people will just wait until the insurance ends and then immediately get hired. I'm sorry, where are all these jobs again? On ABC's THIS WEEK Malkin made this bogus claim. A quick Google search uncovers that when Michelle claims Larry Katz once said that the benefits could discourage people from seeking employment, Katz actually said just the opposite during our current financial mess:

Traditionally, many economists have been leery of prolonged unemployment benefits because they can reduce the incentive to seek work. But that should not be a concern now because jobs remain so scarce, said Lawrence Katz, a labor economist at Harvard.

For every job that becomes available, about six people are looking, Dr. Katz said. “Unemployment insurance gives income to families who are really suffering and can’t find work even if they are hustling to look,” he said. With the economy still listing, he added, a temporary extension can provide a quick fiscal stimulus. And, Dr. Katz said, when people exhaust unemployment and health insurance, many end up applying for disability benefits, which become a large, unending drain on the Treasury.

It does help to fact check what conservatives say.

Malkin: If you put enough government cheese in front of people they are just going to keep eating it and you're just kicking the can down the road and just to hammer this point about the unemployment benefits extension again it was Larry Katz, who's a chief labor economist under the Clinton labor department who came out with a study and there are a lot of these economists who say this that if you keep extending these "temporary" unemployment benefits you're just going to extend joblessness even more.

Stephanopoulos: I don't know if I follow that though

Malkin: That was a Clinton economist who said it George...

Stephanopoulos: Choosing to take the unemployment benefits when a job is available?

Malkin: Seventy nine weeks already and then they're going to extend it by another thirteen weeks and what happens is according to these economist who have seen it including this Clinton economist is that people will just delay getting a job until the three weeks before the benefits run out.

Tucker: Well, that might be true when there are jobs out there that are available, but there are very few jobs available at the moment so I don't think people are using that unemployment benefit to be lazy instead of going out and searching for jobs...

Malkin: I'm not making a moral judgment, it's an incentive problem.

Tucker: But when businesses advertise the few job openings they have, they'll advertise twenty openings, they have six thousand applicants so I don't think that's the problem...

Hunt: If Starbucks were hiring, suddenly you'll see lines around the block. Anecdotally George, I have a kid who has some friends from college and many of them don't have jobs and boy, they are looking.

Stephanopoulos: And there are other states especially that are hard hit.

I know she probably worked on her government cheese talking point for a while, but it makes no sense except if we've all turned into little mouses now. With unemployment so high, where are the jobs that people are not bothering to take that bears any of this out? There's good money to be made in wingnutland, so she can attack Americans just trying to stay afloat by receiving unemployment compensation. I never realized how wonderful not having a job is.

Continue reading »



Paul Rieckhoff from IAVA gave me a heads up on this yesterday. Ralph Peters is one of those wacko military hawks that FOX News uses to ramp up the Rambo style militia movement they hold so dear to their hearts. He was prattling on (almost spitting up as he spoke) about how this soldier might be a deserter and if that was the case--he should be executed by the Taliban. Yea, real sane analysis by Peters.

Peters: Now look, Julie, I want to be clear. If, when the facts are in, we find out that through some convoluted chain of events, he really was captured by the Taliban, I'm with him. But, if he walked away from his post and his buddies at wartime... I don't care how hard it sounds, as far as I'm concerned, the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills.

Antman11 has more:

I couldn't believe my ears, but just minutes ago on "America's News HQ," guest pundit Ralph Peters suggested something to the effect that the Taliban should "save us the headache" and execute captured 23 year-old American soldier Bowe Bergdahl, because "it looks like" Bergdahl deserted his unit. While prefacing his comments by stressing that a military decision should not be made until all of the facts surrounding Bergdahl's capture are determined, Peters then ignored his own advice and encouraged the Taliban to kill this young man. Fox News' Julie Banderas was visibly shocked at the words coming out of Peters' mouth, but did not challenge any of his statements before awkwardly ending the segment.

You might have forgotten that Ralphie boy also thinks the media should be murdered by our troops too. He's a real psycho. Just the kind of pundits FOX loves.

Peters: Rejecting the god of their fathers, the neo-pagans who dominate the media serve as lackeys at the terrorists’ bloody altar.

Pretending to be impartial, the self-segregating personalities drawn to media careers overwhelmingly take a side, and that side is rarely ours. Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media.


Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (2676)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (6364)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

CNN's Rick Sanchez played a portion of Arlen Specter's press conference to South Carolina's Jim DeMint and asked him if Republicans are weeding out the moderates from the party -- and isn't that a bad thing?

Sanchez: Republicans are making it very difficult for other Republicans because, and he said this on several times, you tell me what you think of it. You're shrinking the electorate to an extreme, to a point that a regular republican can't win. What do you make of that argument?

DeMint: Oh, that's quite the opposite. We're seeing across the country right now, the biggest tent of all is freedom and what we need to do as Republicans is convince Americans that freedom can work in all areas of their life, for all Americans, whether it's education or health care or creating jobs...

Sanchez: What the hell does that mean? The biggest tent is freedom. FREEDOM, I mean, you gotta do better than that.

DeMint: No, what it means is what has worked in America, free people, free markets for years.

Conservatives always say that there problems aren't really problems at all. It's Freedom baby, Freedom is our Big Tent party! That freaked out Sanchez -- understandably, because DeMint's answer made no sense. See, Specter leaving the Republicans is a good thing because he's free to do what he wants. His defection is just an application of their Freedom principle. I'm surprised DeMint didn't paint his face blue and don a kilt for this performance.

And DeMint actually says that Club For Growth's Pat Toomey is a mainstream American. Yeah, a Grover Norquist mainliner, he means. CFG is very upset that they are being attacked. He also blames Democrats for the auto companies falling apart.

Piece. Of. Work.