ROFL!!!! That was the best laugh this Long islander has had in several days!

Hayward beat you to it... but it is still a good clip.

In the Hayward post Craig offered an average defense.

"The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.”

-John Maynard Keynes.

I think the correct answer is that Obama doesn't have to be Keynesian. Keynes despite having suffered the long run fate that inflicts humanity has considerable influence almost as a matter of statutory law. The Legal mission of the Federal Reserve is Keynesian, they must ballance fighting inflation and securing full employment. NAIRU is arguably Friedman, but it seems that only the Kansas City Fed Chairman is Friedmanian. Of course states like Kansas and others agricultural states in the region such as Iowa have robust economies. Bernake seems Keynesian, Robert Reich is Keynesian.

On a related note Obama could be said to be from Kansas and depending on how you want to pronouce Kansian...

On a related point a Obama policy explanation might be Keynesian via Robert Reich.

Immagine the follow up poster:

Obama=Reichian?
(foreseable false assumption analogy: Hitler=Third Reich)

On a related note, you can assume that some folks have heard of Robert Reich (he is on television all the time) Academically speaking you can assume that an educated person might not know who Robert Reich is but should know something about Keynes.

Worth Considering: How certain dead people become adjectives.

What Clinton could have said: "My relationship with that woman is platonic."

Sign at the Daily Show Rally: "Neither Bush nor Boehner were as bad as Hitler"(R/NC-17 artwork, bluring the lines between obscenity and political speech.)

Damn, that'll teach me to go out of town for a few days.

Rush Limbaugh won the election on Tuesday. Obama failed. Rush got his wish: "I hope he fails".

Let's be honest, it's a pretty small percentage of the public - left, right, or center - that would even know that word comes from a man's name, let alone which man or what economic ideas he's known for.

The false premise in the right-wing interpretation to this video is that the attendees were there to shout "We are smarter than you" and stick their noses in the air. It was more about "If rejecting the lies of 'death panels' and 'Obama's a Muslim who pals around with terrorists' and the shrill shrieking that goes with it makes me an elitist, then I guess I'm an elitist - but mostly, I'd just like the tone to be more civil." Frankly, the message struck me as embarrassingly modest, and really I have to agree with Olbermann, who said that Stewart jumped the shark with this thing (but not Colbert, who probably really DID jump over a shark at the event, but I've not watched all the footage yet).

The ignorance displayed by these Stewart/Colbert apostles was only one level deep, though, and based on an all-too-familiar falsehood spouted by some Tea Partiers - the "Obama's a Kenyan" (so he can't be POTUS, send him back, etc.). People should read more carefully.

Even though there now is some advance online warning of this Leno-like game, if we brought the sign out to the next Tea Party event (let me guess, this afternoon?), it's a very safe bet that we'd get ignorance TWO levels deep. First, the misreading or ignorance part (Keynesian mistaken for or assumed to be Kenyan), then the answer itself: "Of course he is, and he's a MOZZlem, too!"

Note to Uncle John: the wonder of the internet is that it works worldwide (barring the use of basic equipment in remote locations), so you can check - or even post to! - NLT when you're out of town for a few days.

Plus, we can't be certain how many basically correct answers -- including "I don't know" or "I'm not sure" -- were edited out.

I understand the point of the video. But I'm not much a fan of that style of "man on the street" interview ... even when Jay Leno does it. Like Stewart and Colbert's form of comedy, it encourages the viewer to be contemptuous.

Two of my lefty friends off-handedly dismissed it saying Keynsian economics is not something about which a layman could/should be informed. HOWEVER, the ironic comedy of it is in the way the Left excuses the hapless interviewees as being asked a question they shouldn't be expected to know; when the trick is pulled on a Tea Partier or a Republican Congressman they consider it comedic genius.

I agree with Don in AZ, this sort of comedy "encourages the viewer to be contemptuous". It reminds me of a quote from (of all things) Atlas Shrugged: "But Francisco seemed to laugh at things because he saw something much greater. |im laughed as if he wanted to let nothing remain great." Such is the genius of Mr. Stewart.

I'd guess that a lot of things remind you of Atlas Shrugged.