Clip of Tim Russert - Paul Krugman vs O'reilly

Its funny how O-Reilly claims that the tax cuts didn't lead to job destruction, and that Krugman was wrong, but I guess history supported him in the long run.

Obama wishes he had Bush's job numbers.

Krudman is a idiot.

Obama wishes he had inherited the economy Bush did.

Obama's job numbers were caused by Bush's terrible economic choices and policy. And Krugman has a Nobel Prize in science for economics. They don't just hand those out to troglodytes like you.

Yes, a bipartisan bill, on account of the blue-dog Democrats who are basically Republicans anyway, and the rest of the Democrats who are forced to adopt some Republican regressive meaures to get bills passed.

So essentially you are in favour of socialism for stock traders but not for low-income children who need medical care?

@1980

Let me start out by saying that according to what you say in your comments, there is a LOT you don't understand.

Firstly, the bailout bill, EESA, was sponsored by Democrats and voted for largely by Democrats. The majority of votes in the House came from Blue state district representatives. The Senate met the same trend.

John McCain suspended his entire campaign to return to Washington to actually convince GOP senators to vote for the bailout; in the end, many of them refused.

@1980

Furthermore, this was before the 2008 election cycle. Therefore, the blue-dog Democrats weren't yet a problem for the Democrats. The blue-dogs came in after the elections. Ironic, isn't it? All this while you say the Democrats scored a major victory while in reality all that happened is that moderate and even liberal GOP Congressmen were replaced with conservative Democrats.

@1980

As for the bill itself, there was little GOP pork barrel as compared to the Democrats. As I stated before, only a handful of GOP Congressmen voted for EESA. Chris Dodd offered incentives but they were all shrugged away. Even McCain's pleas fell on deaf ears.

You seem to be confusing EESA with HR3200. This speaks volumes with regards to your internal political efficacy.

Lastly, it appears you cannot even read.

I clearly stated I'm against BOTH corporate and social welfare. Every bailout in history has either failed (as in the case of CITI Group) or simply delayed the problem (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac). Social welfare, on the other hand, has crippled the minorities in this country by fostering an extreme dependence on the gov't.

Lastly, stock traders don't get bailouts. They deal with financial derivatives, not the financial institutions.

Seriously, you need to lay off Fox News and MSNBC for a while. All these pundits have gotten to your head. You try to talk as though you know what you're talking about but it is amusing to see you mix up such basic jargon.

Face it, you judge people based on the little knowledge and perspective you have.