All that stuff I’ve been saying about deficient reality-checking by the Red team? Rachel Maddow says it about 100 times as well:
|
All that stuff I’ve been saying about deficient reality-checking by the Red team? Rachel Maddow says it about 100 times as well:
Yeah, but she’s, you know, biased. And she’s not attractive either.
Poe’s Law seems relevant.
Sorry, snark too dry. Should’ve tagged
You see that, Olbermann? That’s how you do a Special Comment.
Mark- Rachel Maddow seems to say all that stuff about 100 times as well as everybody. And she’s funny too. And attractive.
Best. Rant. Evah.
If a lecture on epistemic closure falls into a conservative forest does anybody hear it?
I think we know the answer to that. The war for control of America’s reality continues apace:
Grover Norquist is already calling Mr. Obama a lame duck and assuring everyone all the Bush tax cuts will be extended:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/09/phony-fiscal-cliff-congress-cuts-grover-norquist
Recent remarks by Mr. Boehner indicate that he (along with 70% of Americans) now accept that the planet is heating up, but that he hopes to stall solutions since the warming might well not be caused by humans:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/boehner-still-threatens-future-of-humanity.html
Sean Hannity suggest that his party needs to do something about Immigration. His suggestion is not to open the doors on epistemic closure. It is a calculated move to win just enough of the Hispanic vote to get back into power while maintaining closure on all other fronts in the war for America’s reality:
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/republican-immigration-reform-is-a-thing-now.html
Anybody who thinks the argument of where Obama was born is finally settled…
And that we really landed a man on the moon in 1969…
Needs a refresher course in the Biology of Zombies 101.
Ebenezer…
I didn’t mean to post this under your subthread.
This wasn’t a response to your comment.
No need to apologize. Indeed, any association of your excellent post with mine reflects well on me. Maybe should should apologize for apologizing.
{ for the Suggestion Box: how about putting the [Reply] link next to the person’s name? Might eliminate this rather frequent source of confusion. }
Can someone explain the “deficit is actually going down” part to me, did she mean to say “the rate of expansion of the deficit is decreasing.”?
“The federal deficit fell to $1.1 trillion in the 2012 fiscal year, down from about $1.3 trillion a year earlier, the Obama administration said on Friday.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/13/business/federal-deficit-for-2012-fiscal-year-falls-to-1-1-trillion.html
The national debt is still going up. But the deficit, an annual figure, is going down.
Just to clarify what Bloix says, the deficit is the total expenditures minus the total revenue for a given period, usually a fiscal year.
The debt is the total amount owed. The debt will increase every year there is a deficit. The deficit is smaller this year than last, but it is still positive. Therefore the debt is increasing.