i'm fairly sure there are some pretty stark differences between the federal response to katrina and the federal response to these new louisiana floods tho

i'm inclined to mostly agree with the content of the rest of your post tho. medicaid part D was something that really rustled the conservatives iirc

I've read quite a bit about the 2008 subprime crisis and I've never come across a serious commentary that argued for allowing all the banks to fail.

Wrong. Most economist think we'd be in Great Depression II if we hadn't bailed out the banks. And of course the little guy would have gotten the worst of it. Like literally companies like McDonalds couldn't make payroll.

Do you have any serious non-yootoobe economists who think we shouldn't have bailed out the banks?

True high-info conservatives yes. But as Trump has unequivocally proven, that's about 5-10% of the party base. I got my cousin, seattlelou, domer, a guy on a mailing list I'm on, and a guy named donger on chiefsplanet that I put in that category. Grizy I consider more an an independent.

I agree medicare part D is a good litmus test. Most of the slappies on chiefsplanet just put it in the "liberal spewing white noise" category.

Now if I can just meet a conservative who admits Voter ID is a bunch of bull****. He shall be declared the most high-info, open-minded conservative in all the land.

You need to bone up on your Peter Schiff.

The scary thing is Trump might be the one guy who refuses to listen to the Fed chair or treasury head in a huge crisis. Trump might have let the banks fail because dammit no one bailed out his casinos. **** those guys.

It was obviously more complicated than let them all fail which
Is why is didn't want to start a derail. The version they choose

Bail out
Let them keep thier personal value
Pump in low cost money with few strings
Essentially no regulation change
Promote people directly involved in the subprime crisis
Not one person under indictment

was the perfect storm of wrong way to handle it. It was perfectly designed to tell the market "do anything you want, break any laws, push all limits, gamble as much as possible, care only about short term return, ignore risk. The government will be here to bail you out and you will suffer no consequences."

yea i think grizy is reasonable and pretty articulate from most of what i've seen him post so i'd be shocked if he was a true republican

can we really call domer "high info" for a conservative, given the climate change stuff? (ugh, just the disclaimer of "for a conservative" is like an automatic qualifier)

seattlelou i just peg as some rich old white guy who cares about little beyond his own personal tax burden

lol articulate

domer is high-info on climate change. His info is wrong, but he has a lot of it

I will take a rich white guy who only cares about their own tax burden more than they care about blind partisan ship any day. My cousin is in that category. Those types jumping ship is a vital safety valve for if Republicans get too bat**** crazy.

? i've seen grizy make some reasonable posts that were complete sentences and coherent logical thoughts lately! they were articulate! (this isn't like a jab on him for any previous posts or anything, idk much about him either way)

I know. I mean it's like being impressed when a black person is "articulate". It's a backhanded slam against the group as a whole.

Just FYI, 'moral hazard' means the opposite of what you appear to think it means.

from the party of heckuva job brownie of course

REPUBLICANS

not if the access is ****ing restricted

domer is high-info in much the same way that Deuces is highly informed about 9/11.

Well he's not a scientist. It's pretty easy to think you can be an amateur scientist and learn a bunch of facts w/o really understanding the significance of them enough to separate the meaningful from the noise. Also he's quite articulate

Deuces is just a moran.

This should be made into a Hilary ad and played during NFL games.

To me domer just seems disingenuous most of the time. He's all about appeals to emotion and baffling with bull****, but in a very calculated way.

Ya, he's been caught flat-out lying multiple times in the climate change thread.

Sure, but....people on the LEFT cared. Which is the actual relevant point right? No one on the left would get enraged if Obama was reading some dumbass goat children story during the Boston marathon bombing either. You hold those on the right to a higher hypocrite standard than you hold yourself?

I know y'all are tired of me harping on this ****, but the way even the "good conservatives" lie is because they don't feel shame in lying like most people would. It's like how a lawyer doesn't feel shame in arguing for a client he knows is guilty, when domer approaches global warming he doesn't see it as a Civil Reasoned Debate about Science and Policy, he sees it as an argument with two sides, and the goddamn hippies already staked out the side with all the facts on it. So what else is he supposed to do?

Admit the longhairs are right? No no no, **** them, domer will show them. He might be handicapped by being wrong about an important thing, wrong in such a way that meaningful and irreversible damage has been done by him and his allies, but he'll get some shots in.

Right wing media is both a relatively recent development but also an all-consuming one, the last 20 years have produced people who

1) Learn about the world from a very carefully curated diet of agitprop and talking points

2) Literally do not give a **** about the facts, to the extent that they conceptually do not agree that there is such a thing as "the facts".

3) Experience no shame whatsoever. Again, like a lawyer who loses a case, well, dang, ya got me that time. But did you hear about Obama golfing, though? Hoo boy even the liberal Washington Post said it was bad optics!


It's a ****ing game to them, Fox News and AM radio literally turns off normal humanity.

Yeah, I know what it means.

Clovis8 seems to think that 'moral hazard' refers to a principle cautioning against or outright preventing (actual) moral hazard. Reading is hard, I guess.

If Bush hadn't ****ed up the world in response to 9/11 I would certainly forgive his deer in the headlights reaction to the news.

You might but "the left" wouldnt. The same as non-idiot right wingers dont actually give a **** about Obama golfing. And even your forgiveness might wax and wane a bit depending on if there was an election brewing

The Reagan stayed vacationing at Augusta National Golf Club after the Beirut bombing false Facebook thing still pops up occasionally. He had vacation controversies during his stay in office. I don't doubt that it more prevalent on the right but dumb arguments are not exclusively the domain of conservatives.

Then I think you misread it. How can you square this interpretation with the comment that "without it the wrong people get hurt?' Thats exactly 100% backward.