Glenn Beck - Common Sense

[InyaAzz]

Where were all you slackers when I was taking ECON years ago?

[Disclaimer]

I'm familiar with Krugman, don't agree with his school of economics very often, but he makes some valid points.

See, but that's the thing... that's what he does for a living. Why do you think you have a better grasp on economics than he does?

But I don't understand where you're going with this. I made the point that economic policies take years to come to fruition (typically in the next presidency), but that was disputed. So I made the point that if our economy worked faster, then the stimulus should have had a faster effect.

No, you thought Reagan should get credit for Clinton's economic successes and his balanced budget. That's just plain wrong. No one disputed it does take years for certain effects on the economy, but other things have immediate or near-term effects. Saying "it takes around 11 years" is an unfounded blanket statement you pulled out of thin air.

And as far as "if our economy worked faster" stuff... sure, but it doesn't. It's the reality of it. That's like saying water is wet.

I'm not saying it didn't work, but the first round was passed by G.W before he left office. We should be seeing something more than stagnate unemployment, and a limping economy. Not much of a stimulus, nor much of a recovery. This is all dependent on the theory that our economy moves and reacts much faster.

If you read the finance article, you'd see how the GOP painted their campaign. Slow, steady, and stable wins the race, not some instant band-aid fix that would cause the economy to continue to 'rubber-band' back and forth between feast and famine. And if you still believe your 11 year malarkey, we're going to be in this dip a LONG time no matter what Obama or anyone does, so you're still not going to be happy. It's a lose-lose no matter how YOU want to paint it because it suits your agenda like that.

[dorifto240]

See, but that's the thing... that's what he does for a living. Why do you think you have a better grasp on economics than he does?

No, you thought Reagan should get credit for Clinton's economic successes and his balanced budget. That's just plain wrong. No one disputed it does take years for certain effects on the economy, but other things have immediate or near-term effects. Saying "it takes around 11 years" is an unfounded blanket statement you pulled out of thin air.

And as far as "if our economy worked faster" stuff... sure, but it doesn't. It's the reality of it. That's like saying water is wet.

If you read the finance article, you'd see how the GOP painted their campaign. Slow, steady, and stable wins the race, not some instant band-aid fix that would cause the economy to continue to 'rubber-band' back and forth between feast and famine. And if you still believe your 11 year malarkey, we're going to be in this dip a LONG time no matter what Obama or anyone does, so you're still not going to be happy. It's a lose-lose no matter how YOU want to paint it because it suits your agenda like that.

So any economy takes years to move and shift, but a former presidents economic policies have no factor whatsoever on the next president? I wish I could have my cake and eat it too. Or is that only when it involves a president whose politics you disagree with?

I'll stand by my time estimate, and back it with the fact that most economic predictions on a full recover have all involved the word "years."

Now would be a good time for you to insert a "hurr durr shark" or "LOLCat"...

Edited October 27, 2010 by dorifto240

[Disclaimer]

Prominent Conservative Radio Hosts Planted Scripted Actors Among Callers

Well, looky here! From the Columbia Journalism Review:

Well, here’s a shocker: Some of the people who phone in to talk radio shows (that caller with the pitch-perfect rant, provocative comment or burning question)

may actually be hired actors reading from scripts

.

I’m not an angry listener, but I play one on radio!

Via

Tablet Magazine:

If [the actor] passed the audition, he would be invited periodically to call in to various talk shows and recite various scenarios that made for interesting radio.

He would never be identified as an actor, and his scenarios would never be identified as fabricated—which they always were.

“I was surprised that it seemed so open,” the actor told me in an interview. “There was really no pretense of covering it up.”

enlarge

Curious, the actor did some snooping and learned that Premiere On Call was a service offered by

Premiere Radio Networks

, the largest syndication company in the United States and

a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, the entertainment and advertising giant.

Premiere syndicates some of the more sterling names in radio, including

Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity.

But a great radio show depends as much on great callers as it does on great hosts: Enter Premiere On Call.

enlarge

“Premiere On Call is our new custom caller service,” read the service’s website, which disappeared as this story was being reported (for a cached version of the site click

here

). “We supply voice talent to take/make your on-air calls, improvise your scenes or deliver your scripts. Using our simple online booking tool, specify the kind of voice you need, and we’ll get your the right person fast. Unless you request it, you won’t hear that same voice again for at least two months, ensuring the authenticity of your programming for avid listeners.”

Ensuring the authenticity of your programming… with paid, planted callers.