But your bashing of the Obama administration's projections is pretty weak; just where do you think the data has come from on which those projections are based? Who and what do you think has impacted and will continue to impact those numbers?

The thing about the people on CNBC is that they are capable of serving their corporate masters and their criminal friends while hiding behind their tepid and ineffectual disclaimers that do not protect them from their own fate.

At least the people in the administration have the fortitude to run for or accept office to serve the public; the folks on CNBC don't serve anyone ultimately but themselves.

And you seem to have forgotten that CNBC is the press — a collection of very challenged members of the press who managed to get it all wrong for years. Maybe the fact that viewers can so easily forget CNBC's role as the media is part of the underlying problem.

“Michael Steele is a conservative Republican who championed the potential of the Bush administration, publicly admitted that he voted for Bush, and railed against the Obama administration at every opportunity.

So now he's a retard, huh? Was he a retard because he was wrong THEN, or because he's wrong NOW? Was he a retard because he was wrong about his support of Bush in the first place? Or because he rethought his position?

Here. Here's a tissue. You just hit yourself in the face with your own poo.

Priceless!”

Oh, almost worked. The rethinking part is a challenge for most conservatives. What a pity.

It was supposed survive by serving the needs of the average American, just as it did in its previous boom cycles, when we made the cars they wanted, when we gave them the lumber they wanted, without a care for what the ultra-rich thought of us, through our sweat. Our bad for not realizing this sooner, that we shouldn't listen to Wall Street but to the public. We're punishing ourselves thoroughly. But we've been through bust-and-boom cycles before and have been dealing with this gritty challenge for years now since a certain so-called conservative decided our state should eat its seed corn, savaging a surplus and leaving a legacy of deficit behind in his wake. We're growing a nice callous and many new skills.

But you, on the other hand, cannot see the truth for your ill-informed braying schadenfreude. Conservatism has proven itself to be nothing more than a hollow and often criminal argument to support a small percentage of very wealthy people at the expense of the rest of the country, and it's failed miserably with its let-them-eat-cake attitude. How's that 401K and the rest of your investment portfolio looking these days? Do you really think Santelli or the rest of his market manipulating peeps could give a rat's whisker about the fact you have to work far longer to make up those losses?

By the way, I'm the one laughing, because you really have not the slightest clue about whom you are trash-talking.

they have based the nation's economic fortunes on the belief that the country will grow in the following years.

the whitehouse says we will shrink by 1.2% this year, the CBO says 2.2%.

2010? wh +3.2%. CBO 1.5%.
2011? +4.0% the CBO doesn't go this far…
2012?+4.6%.

Obama is planning his spending based on the belief that the nation will grow 11% over the next four years.

We will be lucky to get back to 2007 gdp in five years.

the thing about the people on cnbc is that they have a disclaimer before their shows.

when is the wh or the press going to start providing the disclaimers?

But your bashing of the Obama administration's projections is pretty weak; just where do you think the data has come from on which those projections are based? Who and what do you think has impacted and will continue to impact those numbers?

The thing about the people on CNBC is that they are capable of serving their corporate masters and their criminal friends while hiding behind their tepid and ineffectual disclaimers that do not protect them from their own fate.

At least the people in the administration have the fortitude to run for or accept office to serve the public; the folks on CNBC don't serve anyone ultimately but themselves.

And you seem to have forgotten that CNBC is the press — a collection of very challenged members of the press who managed to get it all wrong for years. Maybe the fact that viewers can so easily forget CNBC's role as the media is part of the underlying problem.

“Michael Steele is a conservative Republican who championed the potential of the Bush administration, publicly admitted that he voted for Bush, and railed against the Obama administration at every opportunity.

So now he's a retard, huh? Was he a retard because he was wrong THEN, or because he's wrong NOW? Was he a retard because he was wrong about his support of Bush in the first place? Or because he rethought his position?

Here. Here's a tissue. You just hit yourself in the face with your own poo.

Priceless!”

Oh, almost worked. The rethinking part is a challenge for most conservatives. What a pity.

It was supposed survive by serving the needs of the average American, just as it did in its previous boom cycles, when we made the cars they wanted, when we gave them the lumber they wanted, without a care for what the ultra-rich thought of us, through our sweat. Our bad for not realizing this sooner, that we shouldn't listen to Wall Street but to the public. We're punishing ourselves thoroughly. But we've been through bust-and-boom cycles before and have been dealing with this gritty challenge for years now since a certain so-called conservative decided our state should eat its seed corn, savaging a surplus and leaving a legacy of deficit behind in his wake. We're growing a nice callous and many new skills.

But you, on the other hand, cannot see the truth for your ill-informed braying schadenfreude. Conservatism has proven itself to be nothing more than a hollow and often criminal argument to support a small percentage of very wealthy people at the expense of the rest of the country, and it's failed miserably with its let-them-eat-cake attitude. How's that 401K and the rest of your investment portfolio looking these days? Do you really think Santelli or the rest of his market manipulating peeps could give a rat's whisker about the fact you have to work far longer to make up those losses?

By the way, I'm the one laughing, because you really have not the slightest clue about whom you are trash-talking.

But your bashing of the Obama administration's projections is pretty weak; just where do you think the data has come from on which those projections are based? Who and what do you think has impacted and will continue to impact those numbers?

The thing about the people on CNBC is that they are capable of serving their corporate masters and their criminal friends while hiding behind their tepid and ineffectual disclaimers that do not protect them from their own fate.

At least the people in the administration have the fortitude to run for or accept office to serve the public; the folks on CNBC don't serve anyone ultimately but themselves.

And you seem to have forgotten that CNBC is the press — a collection of very challenged members of the press who managed to get it all wrong for years. Maybe the fact that viewers can so easily forget CNBC's role as the media is part of the underlying problem.

“Michael Steele is a conservative Republican who championed the potential of the Bush administration, publicly admitted that he voted for Bush, and railed against the Obama administration at every opportunity.

So now he's a retard, huh? Was he a retard because he was wrong THEN, or because he's wrong NOW? Was he a retard because he was wrong about his support of Bush in the first place? Or because he rethought his position?

Here. Here's a tissue. You just hit yourself in the face with your own poo.

Priceless!”

Oh, almost worked. The rethinking part is a challenge for most conservatives. What a pity.

It was supposed survive by serving the needs of the average American, just as it did in its previous boom cycles, when we made the cars they wanted, when we gave them the lumber they wanted, without a care for what the ultra-rich thought of us, through our sweat. Our bad for not realizing this sooner, that we shouldn't listen to Wall Street but to the public. We're punishing ourselves thoroughly. But we've been through bust-and-boom cycles before and have been dealing with this gritty challenge for years now since a certain so-called conservative decided our state should eat its seed corn, savaging a surplus and leaving a legacy of deficit behind in his wake. We're growing a nice callous and many new skills.

But you, on the other hand, cannot see the truth for your ill-informed braying schadenfreude. Conservatism has proven itself to be nothing more than a hollow and often criminal argument to support a small percentage of very wealthy people at the expense of the rest of the country, and it's failed miserably with its let-them-eat-cake attitude. How's that 401K and the rest of your investment portfolio looking these days? Do you really thing Santelli or the rest of his market manipulating peeps could give a rat's whisker about the fact you have to work far longer to make up those losses?

By the way, I'm the one laughing, because you really have not the slightest clue about whom you are trash-talking.