About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Buchanan downplays GDP growth as "basically steroids"

October 30, 2009 7:59 am ET

From the October 30 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Conchobhar (October 30, 2009 8:43 am ET)
      3  
      Lame analogy, Pat. You're assuming all steroid use is abuse. There are also valid medical uses. It seems this medical use may be working.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (October 30, 2009 10:04 am ET)
        1  
        I know steroids are necessary to treat my eye disease. Without them, I'd be blind in my right eye.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (October 30, 2009 12:49 pm ET)
        1  
        "Lame analogy, Pat. You're assuming all steroid use is abuse."


        Yeah, but you can't really blame him: so many of his GOP heroes were/are noted drug users (Beck, Limpballs, Bush), its not surprising that he fell back on that analogy . . .

        Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (October 30, 2009 8:47 am ET)
      2  
      Hmm.....so now the economy is on sterioids (stimulus) and responsible for GDP growth but republicans said stimulus wasn't working.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by puppienrainbows (October 30, 2009 11:22 am ET)
          3
        Unenployment is STILL rising. The stimulus did NOT work.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by puppienrainbows (October 30, 2009 11:23 am ET)
            2
          Unemployment
          Report Abuse
          • Author by fishgirl26 (October 30, 2009 11:42 am ET)
            2  
            In case you haven't been listening OR you don't remember the 80's (like Glenn Beck) Unemployment is a lagging indicator. We won't see unemployment go down for at least another 6 months. Also, only about 40% of the stimulus has been released. As more money is appropriated the more jobs it will create. Did you honestly think that Obama would be able to fix George's mess in just 6 to 8 months??? Perhaps you didn't read about the great depression and how it took FDR and his administration years to pull out of the depression and in all reality, we were in a depression not just a recession.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by mjh (October 30, 2009 12:38 pm ET)
              1  
              Now, now -- don't go using logic to try and convince puppychasingitstail . . . his neoKKKon masters have told him the stimulus doesn't work -- after only six months -- and if they said it, then doggone it, it MUST be true!
              Report Abuse
          • Author by Pelosirulz (October 30, 2009 12:05 pm ET)
            1  
            Yes....because spelling is what's important...notice you didn't comment on the post just the spelling error. Thank you Mrs. Daisy (spelling teacher from grade school)
            Report Abuse
    • Author by rtwmd1230 (October 30, 2009 9:08 am ET)
      4  
      As opposed to the all-natural, 100% organic, good for you and your family, housing bubble and financial institution growth of the previous eight years.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DAWUSS (October 30, 2009 9:17 am ET)
      1  
      It is the World Series, so I suppose steroid references are acceptable...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by 1st Republic 14th Star (October 30, 2009 10:41 am ET)
      3  
      Republicans, including Buchanan, claimed that the stimulus plan wouldn't work -- it wouldn't increase productivity or add new jobs. In fact, it's a tenet of their politics that government intervention always eliminates jobs, and they claimed that would be an effect of the stimulus.

      Now that evidence of the stimulus program's success is starting to become visible, the best they can do is say that it works, but it doesn't REALLY work?

      A + for hypocrisy. F for consistency. F for refusing to acknowledge reality. As usual.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by goldmon3 (October 30, 2009 11:59 am ET)
        2  
        Well, as soon as the stimulus impact numbers are up, Republicans will then "own" it as a program initiated by the Bush administration. Bush intended it to produce more profit for the rich (relying on "trickle down" economics--give it to the rich and they might leave some crumbs after their feast), but Obama made a point of advising the public that he intended to "spread...around" stimulus funds for the good of the overall economy. That, of course, infuriated conservatives who already had plans for the stimulus packages Bush proposed after his record-level defense contract pilfering left the US economy in absolute ruins!!! Where were all those so-called "angry" people during the Bush administration? Well, the mothers of slain or wounded Iraq veterans who gathered in protest outside of Bush's Texas home were "removed" and banned from protesting anywhere near the Bush's.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Pelosirulz (October 30, 2009 12:08 pm ET)
      2  
      They really are the party of NO! Can't even have one bit of good / positive news. If Obama found a cure for cancer they'd all be "Oh yea! What about AIDS. He hasn't done anything for AIDS."
      Report Abuse
    • Author by platanoman3029 (October 30, 2009 1:13 pm ET)
      1  
      Pass Tort Reform because it saves 50 billion dollars in 10 years but don't pass any of these bills that save 100 billion dollars? I don't get Mr. Conservative argument here. And please stop talking about 1994
      Report Abuse