Print
is ... Pete Wehner! I know -- you never saw it coming. Here is Wehner's Popular
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
March 18, 2010 | 6:32 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 5:57 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 4:26 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 2:15 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 1:17 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 10:11 am -
March 19, 2010 | 4:58 am -
March 18, 2010 | 3:54 pm -
March 17, 2010 | 3:55 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 6:19 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 5:22 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 4:27 pm -
March 18, 2010 | 10:52 am -
'Reconciliation': Isn't it a Beautiful Word?
get the magazine
Intellectual rigor. Honest reporting. Influential analysis. Don't miss another issue of the magazine considered "required reading" by the world's top decision-makers. Subscribe today.
COMMENTS (6)
wow, Obama violated his own biography? Neat trick. And wait, he violated the capacity for change? How, by not changing anything, or not having the capacity to change anything, and if he didn't change anything, then what the hell is the problem? I always thought with Republicans is they didn't like the change he was trying to capicitate, or whatever.
Imagine, if you will, being Peter Wehner for a day. What a world view he must have, everything is assertion being true because he is the one asserting it. He must be one miserable man, having a very small...his name.
wow, Obama violated his own biography? Neat trick. And wait, he violated the capacity for change? How, by not changing anything, or not having the capacity to change anything, and if he didn't change anything, then what the hell is the problem? I always thought with Republicans is they didn't like the change he was trying to capicitate, or whatever.
Imagine, if you will, being Peter Wehner for a day. What a world view he must have, everything is assertion being true because he is the one asserting it. He must be one miserable man, having a very small...his name.
Clearly Obama doing great. Every poll points to his continued progress. Keep it up Big O.
How could anyone believe that Obama isn't doing perfectly, fantastically, great? Shame on Wehner and anyone would read such driven.
Clearly Obama doing great. Every poll points to his continued progress. Keep it up Big O.
How could anyone believe that Obama isn't doing perfectly, fantastically, great? Shame on Wehner and anyone would read such driven.
I love Obama's math skills as well...
"The latest GDP numbers show that our economy is growing by almost 6 percent. That’s the most since 2003. To put that in perspective, this time last year, we weren’t seeing positive job growth, we were seeing the economy shrink by about 6 percent. So you’ve seen a 12 percent reversal during the course of this year." - math wiz Big O
I love Obama's math skills as well...
"The latest GDP numbers show that our economy is growing by almost 6 percent. That’s the most since 2003. To put that in perspective, this time last year, we weren’t seeing positive job growth, we were seeing the economy shrink by about 6 percent. So you’ve seen a 12 percent reversal during the course of this year." - math wiz Big O
Mr. "Rationale",
The difference between 0.96 and 1.06 is indeed 0.12.
If you can't understand why that is, ask an 8th grader.
Now, Obama's statement does have a logical flaw, but it is implied, and a bit more nuanced.
Mr. "Rationale",
The difference between 0.96 and 1.06 is indeed 0.12.
If you can't understand why that is, ask an 8th grader.
Now, Obama's statement does have a logical flaw, but it is implied, and a bit more nuanced.
bcbaird:
You obviously didn't make it past 3rd grade in math. Obama's conclusion of a 12% reversal is stupidly wrong.
Example: if GDP = 100 and decrease by 6%, then GDP = 94
if GDP then increases by 6%, then GDP = 99.64
So instead of a 12% reversal of fortune per Big O speech, in reality you have are 0.36 behind where you started.
ARE THERE ANY LIBERALS WITH BASIC REASONING/MATH SKILLS? Certainly Big O is lacking
bcbaird:
You obviously didn't make it past 3rd grade in math. Obama's conclusion of a 12% reversal is stupidly wrong.
Example: if GDP = 100 and decrease by 6%, then GDP = 94
if GDP then increases by 6%, then GDP = 99.64
So instead of a 12% reversal of fortune per Big O speech, in reality you have are 0.36 behind where you started.
ARE THERE ANY LIBERALS WITH BASIC REASONING/MATH SKILLS? Certainly Big O is lacking
Wow, you are denser than most conservatives.*
Obama isn't talking the AMOUNT the economy has grown (as part of whole), rather he's talking about the difference in the RATE of CHANGE in the economy. That's why in my counter to you I used the multipliers for a 6% decrease and 6% increase, respectively (with the exception of a typo .96 instead of .94). Nowhere in Obama's remark or in my reply was the idea: Economy Today = Economy of Jan 2009*1.12.
You correctly show that a 6% loss and a 6% gain over the same time period is indeed less than 100%. But that was never the matter being discussed. Let's use this example: "Last year, the economy was growing at 6%, but now we're growing at a rate 2% ... view full comment
Wow, you are denser than most conservatives.*
Obama isn't talking the AMOUNT the economy has grown (as part of whole), rather he's talking about the difference in the RATE of CHANGE in the economy. That's why in my counter to you I used the multipliers for a 6% decrease and 6% increase, respectively (with the exception of a typo .96 instead of .94). Nowhere in Obama's remark or in my reply was the idea: Economy Today = Economy of Jan 2009*1.12.
You correctly show that a 6% loss and a 6% gain over the same time period is indeed less than 100%. But that was never the matter being discussed. Let's use this example: "Last year, the economy was growing at 6%, but now we're growing at a rate 2% faster!" Do we assume the speaker meant to say the economy was growing at rate of 8.12% (6*1.02%), or merely 8% (1.06%+.02%)?
Granted, it's a misuse of figures that imply continuous change - everyone does it. But you're also guilty of assuming the economy shrunk at a constant 6%, or that the time frame of economic contraction/expansion is/was equal. Worse, if Reagan said this, you'd take it as God's Honest Truth.
*Density of a Conservative = The disconnect from reality plus the assumption of liberalism upon disagreement, divided by an unshakeable belief in markets.