FW: Is Pelosi Insane, or Just Stupid

Subject: Is Pelosi Insane, or Just Stupid

Watching these two clips (among other observations) leads me to the conclusion that she is not stupid, so there is only one other conclusion that I can reach. I think we need regular testing of politicians! - Noel
Is Pelosi Insane, or Just Stupid – You Decide
By David Galland, Managing Director, Casey Research

Readers of any duration know that while I don’t hesitate in pointing out the follies of bureaucrats in general, Republican as well as Democrat, I only rarely stoop to personal invective and name calling.
Yet, after watching  a couple of recent video clips of the esteemed Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, I feel compelled to wonder aloud if Madam Speaker might have lost her proverbial marbles. If not, then the only possible explanation is that she’s just plain stupid. As the latter seems unlikely, at least one would hope so, given her rise to the very peak of power in the world’s most powerful nation, one has to conclude at least one of our leaders may be clinically insane.

But I’ll let you decide.

In this first clip, Pelosi suggests that members of her audience with artistic inclinations should feel free to now quit their jobs to pursue their inner muse because, hey, the rest of us have got you covered. Here’s the clip…http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65950

This second clip is even more startling, in that the Speaker goes to some lengths to explain why it is that providing extended unemployment benefits is actually a win-win for the economy. Here’s the clip. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65950

Now, I sincerely feel for the chronically unemployed in this economy. And I certainly don’t think that most are too lazy to look for work, or take work they consider beneath them. This is a tough economy and it’s going to get tougher, as the latest rise in unemployment announced today confirms.

But the idea that handing out government checks is a no-lose proposition all the way around is… well, it’s either insane or stupid. You can prove the point simply by accepting Pelosi’s thesis as true – in which case, why not just start writing checks to everyone! And not just small checks but large ones.

Seriously, it’s time to consider regular testing of politicians for the mid-term onset of mental illne


Anonymous said...

I'd put Pelosi up against Michael Steele any day of the week.

gruaud said...

"You can prove the point simply by accepting
Pelosi’s thesis as true – in which case, why not
just start writing checks to everyone! And not
just small checks but large ones."

Slippery slope is slippery.

Anonymous said...

Oops, they linked the same video twice.

And here I was eager to see how CNS could argue that extended unemployment benefits while 8 million jobs have vanished is a bad thing.

ferschitz said...

I like how the choices are: crazy or stupid. Great range of choices there; nothing loaded about that.

Anonymous said...

Question of the day....who said "Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program." ??

Answer ...Pelosi!! Is she speaking for the country or just the liberal socialist.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon

She's speaking for reality. Putting money in the hands of those who aren't yet able to find work means that there isn't a dip in aggregate demand. The type of dip which would discourage spending, hiring, and cause a further contraction of the economy. Its a pretty simple concept.

Hooray4US said...

It's a known fact that providing unemployment benefits is another way to stimulate the economy because it provides citizens with the means to be consumers, as well as surviving in a down economy.

But because this doesn't accord with Republican reality, which says only tax cuts "stimulate" the economy (a big fat lie and has never worked out that way), we get a bunch of useless whining here.

This is pretty simple folks: if less wealthy citizens have money, they're much more inclined to spend it on necessities (rather than save it), and so, that STIMULATES the economy.

Zeno said...

Unemployed people don't take their unemployment checks and use them to stuff their mattresses. They have to spend them for food, clothing, and shelter. That means the dollars go right back into the economy, helping to keep other people employed.

Sounds like some people's brains need unemployment checks because they haven't worked in years.

katz said...

Anonymous troll: Adding two question marks and an exclamation point doesn't make a simple, reasonable, probably true statement a horrifying outrage.

Anonymous said...

Since when does someone with an opposing view make you a troll??!!
If these unemployment benefits are used to buy NECESSITIES that they were buying before being laid off, how does that create more jobs? Are their benefits larger than they were when they were working? Or is this part of the creating jobs program that BO talks about?

Anonymous said...

@ Anon

It makes you a troll when you spout off right wing talking points which are divorced from reality.

Setting aside the obvious issues of fairness, where huge companies and their rich stockholders were granted security and bailouts while average workers are getting the shaft, it still makes economic sense to extend unemployment benefits given the state of the economy.

Unemployment insurance helps the economy by helping to sustain aggregate demand. Cutting out these benefits will cause a dip in demand. This in turn will cause companies to sell fewer goods, which results in more layoffs and/or less new hiring. This is econ 101.

Anonymous said...

Where does the creating MORE jobs come into play? You have not answered that question. Most small businesses are less than five employees. If these same unemployed people would create their own wealth by doing something creative and use their aptitudes and God-given capabilities they could make their view of themselves a better one. Oh wait a minute, that might make you a rich capitalistic person who in turn may someday employ thousands of other useful people. I am not saying unemployed people are useless but they need to assert themselves and not be Eioyre (sp). I was unemployed for 2weeks only because I took a job that was not to my liking but it does create a self-worth that extended unemployment benefits can't.

Anonymous said...

First of all, its Eeyore.

Second of all, you're buying this ridiculous Republican crap about how those collecting unemployment insurance are a bunch of lazy whiners who don't actually want to work.

The reality is that there are few jobs available. Its really quite simple. And as for "creating your own business", that's all well and good, provided you can find a niche in the marketplace to fill and sufficient financial backing to make it a reality.

Its so simple! All you need is customers with disposable income, a pool which is shrinking (and will shrink even more as unemployment benefits run out) and to somehow chip out some credit from the frozen financial markets. Assuming of course you aren't worried about having enough money for rent, food, children and other necessities and are able to put all those things on the back burner while you grow a business out of thin air.

Its amazing that so few of the millions and millions of long term unemployed have taken you up on this amazing opportunity, since apparently its so simple.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon troll

You're also missing a huge point: a lot of the unemployed were running or working for small businesses and doing "creative things". They put in the time and effort and took the risk, and then the economy imploded and they were left high and dry, usually due to no fault of their own. Too few customers. No more lines of credit available. Banks closing. Investments left half finished or underwater. Savings wiped out.

I know plenty of people who this happened to. Educated, creative, professional people who played by the rules and worked hard and got a big fat slap across the face for their troubles.

Anonymous said...

And Pelosis' statement still doesn't add up. Becoming unemployed and then collecting benefits don't create jobs. If that's the case, then small business owners should lay off their contract people and by your's and Pelosi's idea that in turn would create jobs faster than any other program. Yehhhhhhhh rightttttt!!!!!! Pure crap.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon

Paying unemployment keeps a stream of income going to people who otherwise wouldn't have any. They use this income to buy goods and services which they otherwise couldn't. These goods and services get translated into jobs at the companies which provide them. Without this demand, those companies would also shed jobs, and aggregate demand would shrink even more, which would cost more jobs. Instead, jobs get saved, which stabilizes economic activity, which creates new opportunities and certainty for investors, which helps the economy to add more jobs more quickly.

You know, its a lot like how Republicans are forever whining that what will stimulate the economy is more tax cuts, since that puts more money in the hands of consumers. Same concept. Except this money actually goes to people who are scraping by, as opposed to getting showered on those who are doing fantastic, often times as a result of screwing over the people who are scraping by.

Anonymous said...

What's the point of putting a bandage on a gunshot wound? Oh sure, it may stop the bleeding, but it won't automatically make any new blood. And really, who are we to stop that blood from leaving the body via the wound, the way God intended? Its called the free market people!

Anonymous said...

What Pelosi said was CORRECT... if it creates one job it HAS created more jobs than anyother gov't program (zero). Duh.

Anonymous said...

Oh wait, here's another one about welfare payments....
On his MSNBC show this evening, Ed Schultz warned that unless the US pays out more in welfare, we risk becoming a "Third-World country." Now that is deep.

Creative Commons License
MyRightWingDad.net is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.