Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Obama to students: "Would, say, a ten spot get you to go door-to-door for me, you think?"

When you’ve lost the Atlantic…:

Some opponents of excessive executive power may question whether an executive order can really even accomplish these ends. The president is ordering a policy change for loan consolidation and changing the implementation date for previously passed legislation. Either of these actions could make for a really interesting court challenge, as both appear to stretch the limits of what an executive order was designed to do — shouldn’t Congress order such changes?

In practice, however, the orders will probably go through without challenge. First, it isn’t clear that anyone who has standing to bring such a case to court would do so. The first measures may cost some private lenders some interest revenue, but they need to keep a conciliatory relationship with the government. The latter two measures would cost taxpayers. And even if such a challenge was brought, it could take the court a year or two to provide a final verdict. By then, unless a judge grants a temporary injunction, consolidation would already have occurred for most interested borrowers and the legislation’s stated implementation date would already be past for the latter two aspects of Obama’s effort.

By calling for these measures, President Obama seeks to respond directly to young Americans stressed about their student loans. Indeed, one of the vague objectives of the Occupy Wall Street movement is for student debt forgiveness. But from a practical standpoint, these executive orders won’t have much of an impact. To take on the student debt problem more aggressively, the president would need some actual legislation that would shake the fundamental framework of the student loan system.

Poor Daniel Indiviglio, associate editor of the Atlantic: he’s actually still willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt — suggesting that, though the President’s heart is in the right place, what he’s proposing doesn’t amount to much more than a promise that will go necessarily unfulfilled.

Bless his li’l naive heart.

— Whereas those of us not in thrall to the Big Cheese know that what he’s doing is trying to buy back some votes and energy from his base by promising the poor dumb kids relief they’ll never see — banking (ironically!) on deficiencies in their education and the power of leftwing indoctrination to keep them blinded to the fact until such time as it doesn’t really concern him any more.

On the glass half-full side, I guess it’s better to whore for your vote than just give it away — even if, by market standards, your just a few bucks above blowjobs from the homeless for a $2 Seagram’s mini and a stick of gum.

10 Replies to “Obama to students: "Would, say, a ten spot get you to go door-to-door for me, you think?"”

  1. DarthLevin says:

    …just a few bucks above blowjobs from the homeless for a $2 Seagram’s mini and a stick of gum.

    The sex tourism thread was last night.

  2. sdferr says:

    He will clear
    He will limit
    He will allow

    And when he is gone?

    Where did the self-rule go?

  3. Squid says:

    I’m just waiting for a few more people to confront these brats in front of the cameras. “I busted my ass to pay off my student debts, and now you’re telling me I have to bust my ass for another ten years to pay off yours? Go take a fucking bath, kid — the stench has rotted your brain.”

  4. Brett says:

    Much of our electorate need carry but one sign when they protest: “Vote for Sale!”

  5. sdferr says:

    Myron Magnet:

    There’s indeed a lot of petty tyranny going around. The question is, at what point do many little tyrannies add up to Tyranny? Likely voters suggested a troubling answer in an August Rasmussen poll: 69 percent of them said they didn’t think today’s U.S. government enjoys the consent of the governed. And in September, 49 percent of respondents, an unprecedented high, told Gallup pollsters that “the federal government poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.”

  6. Matt says:

    I keep hearing a clip of him saying this “won’t cost any Americans any money”. I am not sure how that is possible. Doesn’t everything in government cost money of some kind? I can’t tell for sure, obviously, but I think Obama may be being a bit … dishonest with us. I hate to use those kind of racist words but…

  7. Hadlowe says:

    The math in the article is a tad misleading. This change will have a disproportionately large effect on folks who have accumulated debt through graduate programs, i.e. professors, lawyers, and doctors. Wonder what those three groups have in common.

    Oh, right. They donate disproportionately to Democrats. Silly me.

  8. Darleen says:

    what’s a real hoot is that O!’s blatant pandering is so limited that very few student loans will be effected.

    Has to be a gov. loan, has to be no older that 2008 ONLY if you’re taking out a new one in 2012, otherwise will only cover loans made in 2011.

    BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  9. Squid says:

    That would be more of a hoot if I could more certain that the usual idiots could tell the difference. In the reporting, it’s going to be “Republicans Block Obama Plan To Reduce Student Debt Even Though It Hardly Costs Those Heartless Evil Bastards Anything!”

  10. Mikey NTH says:

    That’s a 12 pack of Milwaukee’s Best Light.

    I’m underwhelmed. From The Lightbringer to light beer in just a few years.

Comments are closed.