DescentBB

This was inspired by a few... posts... recently sprung about on this board.

Now, right of the bat, I am a liberal, and I more than likely side with the democrats. I think Obama is, so far, a wonderful president. Chances are I have chugged my share of kool-aid, blindly supporting some things he's said or done. However, I notice a few people that are just beyond ridiculous in their support for the Democratic Party or President Obama. I remember one thread in which the more democratic individual defended the heavy policing of protesters in the DNC convention by simply bringing up the republican treatment of them. That doesn't make it right.

On the other hand, and of who seem to be present on this board, are the types that will never be happy with President Obama no matter what he does. These people complain about Obama's fascism, but yet got defensive when we called President Bush fascist; it was uncalled for, blah blah blah.

To not be a total hypocrite:

• I used to think a FairTax like tax code was a wonderful idea, and in a way I still do. When Obama brought up his tax system, I took support for it instead. I could use my excuse that the recent economic problems warrants heavier taxation from those who could spare the cash, but in the end there is hypocrisy fluent in my change.
• I used to either think the government should get out of marriage, or that gay marriage should be made legal by the federal government, but recently I think passing gay marriage through the states is the greatest thing, especially after hearing Obama spew that idea. My defense: much sweeter victory, and states rights. No matter, Obama's belief in this idea instigated my change of thoughts, hence I am a hypocrite.
• I also used to repeat McCains \"Fundamentals of the economy are strong\" to paint John McCain as ignorant, even though I know what he truly meant, even then: he meant that the fundamentals, such as the people of the United States, were still strong, and that we could fix the economy.
• I wanted the defense budget to be lowered, not just reconfigured. Obama raised it by 4%, and although I was pissed, I wasn't nearly as angry as I should of been.
• I was so anti-McCain that I felt he was still guilty in the Keating scandal. For my own embarrasment, I bring back this thread in which I got defeated and never admitted it.

So, yes I am hypocritical at times, and issues of mine change, but some people can be incredible in the about-face they pull.

Please, everyone, watch this video! This explains my thoughts perfectly. It is truly sad that the president that was supposed to unite this country has bitterly polarized it

...this is more of a pointless discussion thread, no question or whatever asked

Dakatsu wrote:On the other hand, and of who seem to be present on this board, are the types that will never be happy with President Obama no matter what he does.

A notion that could only really be proved or disproved if President Obama pulled a few 180s...

You mean as long as it isn't an even number of 180's.

Dakatsu wrote:I notice a few people that are just beyond ridiculous in their support for the Democratic Party or President Obama.
...
On the other hand, ..., are the types that will never be happy with President Obama no matter what he does.

True on both accounts, in my opinion. At least as regards the general public. And reverse it during a republican administration.

Some people will blindly support the president they voted for no matter what, and blindly hate the opponents president no matter what.

Funny you should bring this up…just today I was talking to some Obama supporters, and the idea that people need a reality check, is a major understatement.

Two things people around here believe…Obama has already closed Gitmo & he is responsible for the price of gas.

When I try to explain that gas prices have come down because of the lack of demand due to the recession, they look at me like I’m from Mars. Then I try to point out the irony of how Bush is blamed for the recession, so he should get the credit for falling gas prices, they start to gather the lynch mob.

Get that boy!

Spidey wrote:Then I try to point out the irony of how Bush is blamed for the recession, so he should get the credit for falling gas prices, they start to gather the lynch mob.

Get that boy!

Haha!

Is \"kool-aid\" frequently used in some sort of common expression?

What makes me sad is people who only understand that they might be drinking kool-aid on a mere intellectual level. Worse than that... is the people who think kool-aid is the elixir of the gods And it is, but in a different sense...

Spidey wrote:When I try to explain that gas prices have come down because of the lack of demand due to the recession, they look at me like I’m from Mars.

That would be because you're wrong. Because gas is a commodity, they are far more sensitive to price fluctuations in futures than they are to demand levels. And this country is pretty much 100% price-elastic for gasoline anyway (or else we wouldn't have increased gasoline consumption even though prices have increased at twice the rate of inflation over the past twenty years). So your explanation, as well as that of those claiming Obama is responsible for lowering gas prices, is debunked.

The true reason is that the credit market dried up, and speculators were unable to find the liquidity to trade on the ridiculously thin-margined commodities market.

DCrazy wrote:...
The true reason is that the credit market dried up, and speculators were unable to find the liquidity to trade on the ridiculously thin-margined commodities market.

Doesn't pointing at "the recession" sort of encompass credit markets drying up and the results of that drop in liquidity? After all, what is this current recession if it doesn't include those symptoms?

“Because gas is a commodity” WoW whoda thunkit

Will Robinson wrote:Doesn't pointing at "the recession" sort of encompass credit markets drying up and the results of that drop in liquidity? After all, what is this current recession if it doesn't include those symptoms?

You're missing the point.

Spidey claims "Recession happened" -> "Lower demand for gasoline" -> "Lower gasoline prices." This is untrue because our demand for gasoline is all kinds of screwy.

I claim "No credit available" -> "Traders cannot fund risky activities" -> "Futures go way back down from artificial highs" -> "Gas prices go down." Also relatedly, but not causally, "No credit available" -> "Recession happened." The two are different outcomes of the same cause.

DCrazy wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Doesn't pointing at "the recession" sort of encompass credit markets drying up and the results of that drop in liquidity? After all, what is this current recession if it doesn't include those symptoms?

You're missing the point.

Spidey claims "Recession happened" -> "Lower demand for gasoline" -> "Lower gasoline prices." This is untrue because our demand for gasoline is all kinds of screwy.

I claim "No credit available" -> "Traders cannot fund risky activities" -> "Futures go way back down from artificial highs" -> "Gas prices go down." Also relatedly, but not causally, "No credit available" -> "Recession happened." The two are different outcomes of the same cause.

OK, point taken but I think you broke out the semantic stick to beat him unfairly since he is also right in the context in which he offered the notion that lack of demand drove prices down.
At least that's my theory because it wasn't just the lack of liquidity that would keep a trader from playing in the gasoline market it is also their realizing that demand is going to drop due to worsening economic conditions [clouds of recession swirling around] and therefore they don't want to be buying gasoline futures....

It just seemed like a correction not worthy of dishing out so I did one of my own

Thanks Will…

There is an old saying:

“Ask ten economists the same question, and you will get twelve different answers”

Will Robinson wrote:OK, point taken but I think you broke out the semantic stick to beat him unfairly since he is also right in the context in which he offered the notion that lack of demand drove prices down.

I don't think it was unfair; it seemed pretty clear to me that Spidey was referring to consumer demand for gasoline, not trader demand for future shares. He's right that Obama isn't responsible for lowering gas prices, but as they say even a broken clock is right twice a day

Nevermind

Spidey, now that gas is almost a dollar higher per gallon from it's low this year, ask those friends of yours if Obama is still responsible. Then ask them again when it is up two dollars a gal. I'd be curious as to their answers.

Back when crude oil was selling for 150.00 a barrel I said it was simple market manipulation driving up the cost. a lot of you didn't believe it for a variety of reasons. Perhaps when the price crashed to 40.00 a barrel, a light bulb finally came on in some of those non-believing gourds. In short Bush was not at fault nor was Obama. I just hope Obama doesn't try something like taking over the oil company's as he did GM to control market prices.

Sorry, I can’t run as fast as I used to…

Coward