FDR? Never heard of him...

This is a political post.

I'm all for crazy. Crazy can be fun.

Suddenly the appeal of Netflix is crystal clear.

Rush Limbaugh believes that Obama tanked the economy on purpose.

Never mind that the economy stalled, then stopped under the previous administration and its economic policies, months before Obama was even elected, much less the half a year until he was sworn in. So how a person who wasn't even assured a victory was somehow in control when Lehman Bros and Merrill collapsed is beyond me. But the secret time traveling communist socialist Kenyan agent of the Secret Liberal Cult that runs the world, Obama might also be responsible for impotence, the sinking of the Titanic and the black plague in the Middle Ages. I'd really like just five minutes of Rush's time so that he can lay out the time line for me that makes this Obama's fault, because I is confused.

Micheal Steele believes that Obama invaded Afghanistan.

It's Obama's war NOW. Okay, maybe the president really is a time traveling socialist Kenyan agent, because if I'm not mistaken, we invaded Afghanistan BEFORE we invaded Iraq. I mean, this is the war everybody was for. The September thing was still fresh and the guys who did it weren't ashamed to say they did it and were literally spoiling for a fight to prove America was a shadow of its former self. So with the backing of pretty much the Western world, and the quiet understanding of everybody else, President Bush sent the troops in. So exactly how did Obama, then ...well, I don't even think he was the junior Senator then geez, so what math is Micheal Steele using? Or is this more of Micheal the mole? And when the GOP stop liking war?

There is nothing wrong with a little creative re-envisioning of events to justify a position.

There is however a problem with an influential person lying outright for financial, political, or personal gain.

What's happening in the current political landscape isn't a reimagining, or a reinterpretation of things that happened in a better light, i.e., the "I'm glad I got sick because it means I got to take a few days off and sleep". This is more like selling people a janky used car or the Brooklyn Bridge. In a normal bit of parlance, this would be called fraud.

Some of the current logic escapes me. Extending tax breaks are okay, but extending unemployment insurance is not? The former merely allows those who already have to increase their wealth, pay less into the system already in dire need. The latter is a nearly direct injection of capital into the economy. Which is more needed?

My new irk is the idea you can't buy yourself out of an economic malaise. The only economic model we have to work from - the period after the Great Depression - says that pretty much only the Government can save the country. Republicans hate this for some reason, even when they're in charge.

It was World War II television pundit Republicans cry, not the useless Government that brought America out of its economic mire after the Great Depression.

So, the war was hiring? The war created jobs?

Saying the War transformed the economy is like saying "Cow go moo" A cow does much more than just go moo. That thinking is piecemeal logic. The economy had suffered a decade long spiral until the war. The government had tried multiple programs with little effect. Then war occurred. Powered by factories producing planes, ships, and other items for our soldiers and allies, the economy righted itself. So, who do you think paid for all those planes and ships? Did industry build them out of the goodness of their hearts? No, these were all built on government contracts. The War gave the government the ability, the carte blanche, to borrow enough money to get the economy jump started. The US government finally injected enough capital into the system to get it working again. The previous measures simple weren't enough, more was needed. Plain and simple.

Unfortunately, because the Bush Administration used the war card - twice - to pump money to their industrial military complex cronies in the past decade, and because of the change in the makeup of the American economy - from a production economy to a service one, throwing money at industry isn't going to do it. Creative minds need to find new ways to pump money directly into the hands of the people. But that's a different post.

In my limited opinion, the Republican establishment seems bound and determined to take their country back. Back from who I'm still trying to figure out - I mean, we're all Americans - but the means they're undertaking to do it, the lies, the ridiculous and insulting revisionist versions of history, the outright misrepresentations, indicate to me, that maybe we may have made the right choice in kicking them out in the first place.