« Back to story "Myths and falsehoods surrounding the economic recovery plan"

Story Comments

Posted by: Radiofreeeuropa 11 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

93%
Radiofreeeuropa11 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

This is important! I have not been able to find an actual factual site that posts the stimulus bill. I asked if anyone had a link and there were no responses. Yet many are claiming to be privy to it's inner wordings (through opinion sites and news blips). A member had copied and pasted a National Review opinion as his own in which claims that the New York Times editors declared the stimulus package "12% stimulus and the rest pork" - except this was an op-ed from republican Peggy Noonan - not the New York Times editors. There are few facts and no shortage of "opinions" yet until we actually know what's in this bill how can there be any reasonable discussion of it's merits? Most of the Senators pay someone else to read these bills and give them the scoop, so many of their opinions are questionable as well. Again I have heard all kinds of claims, yet when I do the research none of them seems to be supported by anything more than error or 4th person hearsay.
This article lists a few of the bogus claims being made and where they originated.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
9 Replies

loading ...
- 84%
  Goppy11 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  RFE - this is a very good article. Thanks for posting it.
  
  I hope I don't discourage your efforts to provide a rational voice for this effort ... however ... the Right Wing screamers on Propeller will continue to drown out reasoned debate on this issue.
  
  The Right does not care about facts. They are managed by the leader of their party ... Rush Limbaugh.
  
  If you've never noticed, the Right on Propeller invariably repeat Rush's 'Talking Points' immediately after he dispenses his "Dis-Information".
  
  Look, this is what the Right Stands for in America today ... Obfuscation. And their is no one better at Obfuscation than Rush Limbaugh.
  
  That is why the Right Idolizes Rush. That is why Rush Limbaugh has emerged as the 'defacto' leader of the Right.
  
  It's a kind of sick, cynicism toward all things Federal Government.
  .
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  3 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - 100%
    memestryker10 months, 4 weeks ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    Goppy, I agree the right-wing screamers are shrill about this, but I haven't seen anything much good come from the left, either. They've been turning it into a Christmas tree with things I agree with, but that don't fit here.
    
    I think congress is the problem, though, and not Obama. And obfuscation is a tool used on both sides of the aisle--just on different issues. I think we need to be a lot more diligent about watching both "sides" and not fool ourselves into thinking politicians have our best interests at heart, whether we voted for them or not.
    
    That's not cynicism--that's rational, based on history.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
  - libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
    - 100%
      PapaWolf10 months, 4 weeks ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      >>On the one hand, MediMatters says ....
      
      >>> "During Fox News' coverage of Obama's January 20 inauguration, anchor Chris Wallace falsely claimed that "unemployment in 1937, 1938 was higher than it was in 1933."
      
      >> Then, MediaMatters defends its assertion with...
      
      >>> "... according to several prominent economists, the unemployment rate rose in 1938..."
      
      Didn't you read the rest of it - the part that said:
      
      FTA: In fact, UNEMPLOYMENT FELL EVERY YEAR FROM 1933 UNTIL 1938, and according to several prominent economists, the unemployment rate rose in 1938 not because New Deal stimulus spending failed but, rather, because Roosevelt did not go far enough in pursuing those policies and because his attempts to balance the budget hindered recovery. In advancing the claim, some, including Washington Post columnist George Will and syndicated columnist Mona Charen, have cherry-picked data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) -- WHICH, AT THE TIME, COUNTED THOSE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW DEAL'S EMERGENCY WORK PROGRAMS AS UNEMPLOYED -- to assert that the New Deal failed to reduce unemployment. After World War II, the BLS ceased counting those in work-relief programs as unemployed. BUT EVEN WITHOUT INCLUDING "EMERGENCY" PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT UNDER THE NEW DEAL, THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN 1937 AND 1938 DID NOT SURPASS THE 1933 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE, AS WALLACE CLAIMED.
      
      So, what's your point? NO WHERE in that piece of the article did MediaMatters contradict itself, like you try to imply.
      
      Are you trying to show us your lack of comprehension or just your ability to "cherry pick" like those on Fixed News?
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
- 89%
  mesodude10 months, 4 weeks ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  Radio, sadly I fear we're going to see a continuation of the same thoroughly disgusting behavior we saw from certain right leaning posters throughout Obama's entire campaign. It's one thing to be poorly informed and quite another for someone to post something they know to be false, simply to get the lie out there in cyberspace. Thanks for posting this. I would have but I don't have your clout. Had I posted it and not simply referenced it in that other thread, it likely would have been kicked off the front page immediately by some foreclosure come on.;-P
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  1 Reply
  
  loading ...

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (20)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (1)

libsRfunny

Submit a Story

Advertisement