or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows. - Page 10

post #361 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
My God, here we go again. Get it out of your system: Disagreeing with Bush DOES NOT equal hating him.I think that's being a bit extremist. By the way, I don't think anyone was "attacking" SDW. Stop jumping to extremes. I also think he's old enough to "defend" himself.
You were doing so well up to this point but you had to go back to labeling people with differing opinions "liberals"(a word you love to use in an uncomplimentary and demeaning manner) and "extremists". Pot, meet the kettle.Completely unrelated. You and SDW both sound the same. I know you just said that Bush isn't perfect, but the way you defend him and his admin. at all costs proves otherwise. About the neocon label....if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...So are you gonna answer the question? If you're neither a Dem or Rep, what are you? I have the dramamine ready.

Oh, wait...you mean the way my opinions are labeled "extremist" because I disagree with a group of people who are unquestionably LEFT of the mainstream. You mean the constant notion on this board that anyone who supports Bush is "in denial" and "lacks critical thinking skills" or is just plain "stupid"? Is that the kind of thing you mean.

What Naples is saying, I think, is that there are many here who are not even self-aware enough to realize their opinions are in the vast MINORITY of this country. Worse, even when said opinions approach "even split" status (or majority), some posters openly dismiss and personally insult the holder of the minority opinion. Meanwhile, the Right is called a bunch of Neocons and fascists. The Left is always about freedom of speech, as long as it's liberal speech. Anyone who suggests a conservative opinion on almost any issue (war, taxes, social issues, etc.) is immediately labeled a war monger, person who hates the poor, etc.

The difference between us is that I (and I think Naples too) simply DISAGREE with most liberal positions. I even think some of those positions are downright dangerous ones, not to mention ineffective. I don't fault the person who has a particular opinion, but I will argue on the facts to support my side. The problem in AO, however, exists in that opinions contrary to the liberal political climate board are NOT argued, they are insulted and countered with rhetorical nonsense.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #362 of 654
And here's the jobs number we discussed, as requested by Shawn.

From BLS:

Total Employment, February 2004: 138,301,000

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm


Total Employment, February 2001 135,815,000

text file: http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#2001


Thank you and have a nice day.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #363 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Both these points are nothing more than your personal opinion and cannot be substantiated by any facts whatsoever.

Yeah. I just made a bunch of stuff up.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #364 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Thank you and have a nice day.

What is 3*1.8 M (the number of jobs a normally growing economy should produce given the growth in the job pool)?
5.4 M

How many jobs were created in this three year time span?
2.486 M

So if our economy was really doing ok we would have somewhere close to 5.4 M new jobs over those three years, but we don't in fact we are down 2.9 M from that. If you think this is good news for GW, that is fine, but honestly the numbers just don't look that way... Sorry SDW, this is a very weak point for Bush...
post #365 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
If you actually beleave what you say here, then let's get of Bush's back, he is doing what he can to help. Let's drop it as a talking point. I agree with you that it is just normal cyclic movement of the economy. So let's move on.

What I am saying is that the dubious nature of the tax cuts is still dubious. Nobody is listening to the independent economist anymore....

I think that any claim on either side of doing things that are good for the economy is always questionable, we just don't know how it works.... but will this stop it from being a talking point? no, people think that the system is well understood...
post #366 of 654
Here we go with the job numbers spin again. Funny how the Dems change their standards when it suits them. Guess that pretty much goes along with Flip Flop Kerry tactics though.

Used to be that the UNEMPLOYMENT RATE was what used to be important. Well now, since Bush administrations tax cuts, guess what? It's gone down! From 6.3 percent to 5.6 now. This is apparently one of the fastest declines in unemployment in decades.

Thats why you hear all this crap about how "Bush's policies aren't creating enough jobs to keep up". Because the usual statndard just doesn't work very well for slamming him (whether you believe the rate down from tax cuts or not).

Here's an article that explains these points better than I can:

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_b...0403050905.asp
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #367 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant

Here's an article that explains these points better than I can:

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_b...0403050905.asp [/B]


Hmmm, an article in the National Review ("slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun" in the words of one of my conservative friends who reads it), written by someone who has a book for sale titled The Bush Boom: How a Misunderestimated President Fixed a Broken Economy

Sounds fair and balanced to me!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #368 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
Here we go with the job numbers spin again. Funny how the Reps change their standards when it suits them.

altered your statement to reflect another truth. \
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #369 of 654
Actually, not to push your opinions of me aside, but ever since I have known the problems with unemployment (inclusive of the fact that people not seeking jobs aren't counted, and oppositely that it takes into consideration people on the unemployment roster that have part time jobs), I have never really used it to argue a point. And mind you I discovered this my senior year in high school so its been a while...
I am not doing a numbers spin. Numbers are numbers are numbers. Yes, jobs have been created under the Bush administration, but how many should have been created? It is a legitimate question and one which gives significance to the bland statement that jobs have been created. If we gained 1M jobs in 4 years, do you think we are doing ok? It is decisive to ask how many people are actually known to be entering the job market?
post #370 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
altered your statement to reflect another truth. \

In what way is showing Unemployment Rates declining changing a standard exactly? Clever quip though.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #371 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
In what way is showing Unemployment Rates declining changing a standard exactly? Clever quip though.

you made a generalization about dems changing standards to suit their needs. I pointed out that reps are equally guilty. It wouldn't be politics otherwise

actually, that's kind of sad that such attitudes are so prevalent in modern politics
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #372 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Hmmm, an article in the National Review ("slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun" in the words of one of my conservative friends who reads it), written by someone who has a book for sale titled The Bush Boom: How a Misunderestimated President Fixed a Broken Economy

Sounds fair and balanced to me!

You said nothing to the content of the article, in fact, you seem to dismiss it based on the periodical itself. Apparently you cannot refute the info in the article.

It does make a point.
post #373 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
you made a generalization about dems changing standards to suit their needs. I pointed out that reps are equally guilty. It wouldn't be politics otherwise

actually, that's kind of sad that such attitudes are so prevalent in modern politics

Everyone with a brain can see what the dems are doing now. They see it when the reps do it too. Why do you deny the truth that is tapping on your shoulder?
post #374 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
If we gained 1M jobs in 4 years, do you think we are doing ok? It is decisive to ask how many people are actually known to be entering the job market?

If unemployment rates are declining how exactly is that not doing OK? "Fastest decline in decades" (sure that could be spin too I don't know) not fast enough for you? This is especially good considering the effects of the recession and 9/11. Oh wait, its not a Democrat in office, that'd make it OK right? Liberals are practically frothing at the mouth to bash Bush here and in the media, it's pitiful and frankly seems like (unfounded) desparation.

So tell me what exactly is Kerry planning on doing to create all these jobs should he twirl his way into office? I always see a lot of finger pointing from you guys but not nearly as many solutions.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #375 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
actually, that's kind of sad that such attitudes are so prevalent in modern politics

There's something I agree with you on. ALL POLITICIANS SUCK!!
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #376 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Everyone with a brain can see what the dems are doing now. They see it when the reps do it too. Why do you deny the truth that is tapping on your shoulder?

I did what?

for criticizing people's reading comprehension so often in this thread, you would be well-off to practice yourself.

I didn't intentionally slant either way, I never tried to defend dems or defame reps, merely pointed out that to say "how the Dems change their standards when it suits them" and not acknowledge that Reps are equally guilty of that(note the use of equally guilty, establishing that I make no claim that dems are not guilty) is one of the many things that makes these discussions so...pointless.

If you want to read into my statements as 'denying the truth' that's your prerogative, but doing so is not endorsed by me.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #377 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Hmmm, an article in the National Review ("slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun" in the words of one of my conservative friends who reads it), written by someone who has a book for sale titled The Bush Boom: How a Misunderestimated President Fixed a Broken Economy

Sounds fair and balanced to me!

Oh please and how many articles do I get thrown in my face from the NYT, Salon and other left-handshaking sites? Give me a break. All the liberalcrats here bitch about the conservative folks dismissing their sites without reading them. Well I read them, and I make my judgement on the article content. I would hope you guys practice what you preach (though not surprised you don't).

It seemed to me that the NR article was pretty fair minded. But thats ok, go ahead and stay on your side of the fence, I don't want you in my yard trampling my grass anyway.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #378 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
There's something I agree with you on. ALL POLITICIANS SUCK!!

and how.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #379 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
I did what?

for criticizing people's reading comprehension so often in this thread, you would be well-off to practice yourself.

I didn't intentionally slant either way, I never tried to defend dems or defame reps, merely pointed out that to say "how the Dems change their standards when it suits them" and not acknowledge that Reps are equally guilty of that(note the use of equally guilty, establishing that I make no claim that dems are not guilty) is one of the many things that makes these discussions so...pointless.

If you want to read into my statements as 'denying the truth' that's your prerogative, but doing so is not endorsed by me.

Defending bad behavior with other bad behavior is intellectually lazy and wrong. You are merely arguing to argue.

The dems ARE and have been looking for whatever tidbit of info to hurt GWB regardless of context, truth or what is just. Spin (which is a nice way of saying lies) is the rule not the exception. It is a mindless feeding frenzy. Step back from it a bit and you could see that.
post #380 of 654
from the Moonie Conservative UPI

Keep talking about the great economy...

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=...5-050436-1180r

"The optimism before Friday's report was truly startling -- many commentators explained carefully to their readers that actually the consensus estimate for job gains (128,000, according to Thomson FirstCall) was far too conservative, and the real figure would be well over 200,000, signaling the reality of an economy roaring back to life. As Larry Kudlow, chief economist of Bear Stearns wrote in National Review on Thursday: "Before the December and January jobs reports, I took the 'over' in the pre-announcement betting. ... Fearlessly, I'll take the "over" again."

Gee, Larry, let me know where I can get some of this action. For the 40 months that I have been writing this column, Kudlow has consistently taken the "over" on every economic statistic. On employment, he's been right maybe 3 times.

February's employment report was truly dreadful. Instead of the 128,000 job gains predicted by the Wall Street consensus, according to Thomson FirstCall, there were only 21,000 job gains, fewer than the downward 23,000 revision to January's gains. It's clear that we're not going to get the 3.8 million new jobs in 2004 absurdly promised by Bush in January's Economic Report of the President, far from it. But the interesting question (intellectually, if you're not hoping to be one of the 3.8 million) is: why not?

Employment patterns are not following those of a normal economic recovery (even the "jobless recovery" of 1991-93 had created millions of jobs two years after the low point) for one very simple reason: this is far from a normal recovery."
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #381 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Defending bad behavior with other bad behavior is intellectually lazy and wrong. You are merely arguing to argue.

The dems ARE and have been looking for whatever tidbit of info to hurt GWB regardless of context, truth or what is just. Spin (which is a nice way of saying lies) is the rule not the exception. It is a mindless feeding frenzy. Step back from it a bit and you could see that.


the problem here is that you think I was defending dems. I wasn't.


(at least I didn't intend to)
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #382 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
and how.

The trick for me is trying to decide which party/candidate sucks LESS. :P I don't have any illusions that "my" side doesn't spin as well, just seems that the Dems have really taken it to a new level lately and it's really starting to get annoying. Especially with the Reps seemingly standing by quietly taking it. Reminds me too much of how Bush Sr. responded to the Clinton campaign... and lost.
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #383 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by billybobsky
What is 3*1.8 M (the number of jobs a normally growing economy should produce given the growth in the job pool)?
5.4 M

How many jobs were created in this three year time span?
2.486 M

So if our economy was really doing ok we would have somewhere close to 5.4 M new jobs over those three years, but we don't in fact we are down 2.9 M from that. If you think this is good news for GW, that is fine, but honestly the numbers just don't look that way... Sorry SDW, this is a very weak point for Bush...

That's a valid point, but a different one. When John Kerry gets on the stump and talks about 2,000,000 "lost" jobs, it's TOTAL LIE. It's patently false garbage, and people believe it. My numbers cannot, I repeat CANNOT be refuted. That number is rock solid. But, whenever this pointed out, the Left comes out and says "yeah, but you can't feed your family on a job from Mcdonald's". Hello? That's a totally different issue.

To continue, Kerry (or any other Democrat) has STILL not said what he'll do to "create" jobs. Balancing the budget will not do it. Fixing the defict will not do it. The only thing that will do it is ECONOMIC GROWTH....which is projected to be an extremely healthy 4.7% this year.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #384 of 654
Keep towing the line and pointing fingers Chewy. Don't bother reading/responding to my article or anything. Thats OK, I know you like your side of the fence its pretty darn apparent. And the big Democratic solution to your huge problem (despite declining unemployment rates) is what?
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #385 of 654
Quote:
originally posted by dviant
The trick for me is trying to decide which party/candidate sucks LESS. :P I don't have any illusions that "my" side doesn't spin as well, just seems that the Dems have really taken it to a new level lately and it's really starting to get annoying. Especially with the Reps seemingly standing by quietly taking it. Reminds me too much of how Bush Sr. responded to the Clinton campaign... and lost.


Yeah, I agree, I don't like the ABB attitude, or the seemingly desperate nature of those who don't like bush, to do anything to defame him.

Personally, my mind is set against the man simply for his stance on the environment, He is not helping the earth barely at all, whatever support or funds he has partitioned have been meager at best, and will likely be ill distributed, I have not seen any evidence to the contrary, so I am inclined to think this, and for me, that issue is far more important than employment, or the war on terror, or the economy.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #386 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
Oh please and how many articles do I get thrown in my face from the NYT, Salon and other left-handshaking sites? Give me a break. All the liberalcrats here bitch about the conservative folks dismissing their sites without reading them. Well I read them, and I make my judgement on the article content. I would hope you guys practice what you preach (though not surprised you don't).

It seemed to me that the NR article was pretty fair minded. But thats ok, go ahead and stay on your side of the fence, I don't want you in my yard trampling my grass anyway.


It's pretty clear from your comments here what side of the fence you like.........


Well I read your article and took a tour of the site while I was there.

Pretty conservative leaning.

I suppose you want us to believe that was a neutral unbiased source and their conclusions aren't conservative leaning at all?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #387 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
Keep towing the line and pointing fingers Chewy. Don't bother reading/responding to my article or anything. Thats OK, I know you like your side of the fence its pretty darn apparent. And the big Democratic solution to your huge problem (despite declining unemployment rates) is what?

It is very difficult to make any headway in these type of discussions, as they seem to be a democratic back-patting party.

I have told these people many time that I don't really care that they hate bush, or disagree with his policies, I just want to see intellectually honest discussion.

I know I am jumping into the piranha pool, but I have to insist on it.
post #388 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
It's pretty clear from your comments here what side of the fence you like.........

uh, duh...14 words of wisdom from jim.

He'll be here all week, try the veal.
post #389 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I just want to see intellectually honest discussion.

Quote:
uh, duh...14 words of wisdom from jim.

He'll be here all week, try the veal.

Quote:
Spin, spin, spin... spin, spin, spin... shake your booty.


you're not helping
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #390 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by dviant
If unemployment rates are declining how exactly is that not doing OK? "Fastest decline in decades" (sure that could be spin too I don't know) not fast enough for you? This is especially good considering the effects of the recession and 9/11. Oh wait, its not a Democrat in office, that'd make it OK right? Liberals are practically frothing at the mouth to bash Bush here and in the media, it's pitiful and frankly seems like (unfounded) desparation.

So tell me what exactly is Kerry planning on doing to create all these jobs should he twirl his way into office? I always see a lot of finger pointing from you guys but not nearly as many solutions.

Unemployment is based upon people actually taking the time to wait in line and declare it.... it is a bad measure and it always has been, and I believe most people will agree with that. The better measure is actual job creation. You will note explicitly I did not blame anyone for the way the economy is going. I simply stated that it is clear that the tax cuts haven't helped, and it is clear that they haven't. As far as I am concerned 9/11 didn't even show up as a blip on the economic radar screen, shopping was down, yes, but no more so than the usual recession associated decrease in shopping... The event had profound political ramifications but didn't affect the economy one bit it seems.
The president isn't responsible for making jobs. He is responsible for making sure the business cycle doesn't take too many people out with it. All I want to hear is some sort of acceptance that Bush hasn't done a damn thing to help the economy. Pass it off to normal business cycle movements, but any claims that the pres has led us through dark economic times is BS.
post #391 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
uh, duh...14 words of wisdom from jim.

He'll be here all week, try the veal.

Pass the " manufactered " hamburger.


Wow! You beat me! 16 words of wisdom.......
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #392 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I know I am jumping into the piranha pool, but I have to insist on it.

And here I left my piranha repellant at home! Dammit!
bah!
Reply
bah!
Reply
post #393 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Yeah, I agree, I don't like the ABB attitude, or the seemingly desperate nature of those who don't like bush, to do anything to defame him.

Personally, my mind is set against the man simply for his stance on the environment, He is not helping the earth barely at all, whatever support or funds he has partitioned have been meager at best, and will likely be ill distributed, I have not seen any evidence to the contrary, so I am inclined to think this, and for me, that issue is far more important than employment, or the war on terror, or the economy.

That whole post was very refreshing because you stated your opinion and why. Nice.

Where I disagree with you is this, if islamic extremists take over the world, do you think they care about the environment? You would be beheaded for bringing up their disparities. So I would think that you would care about that.
post #394 of 654
you used a chart from the national review that's trying to say... don't look at Job Creation numbers... but at unemployment percentage...

it's dropped what? .6 percent?

And the article is saying that the unemployment rate is MORE important than all other job statistics... and that's just wrong. You have to look at all the data.

The unemployment number can go down because people stop looking for work... that's why people ALSO look at the monthly jobs numbers.


PLUS! I posted a peice from UPI which is certainly not "libralcrat" as you so uneloquently put it... did you bother to read that?
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #395 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
To continue, Kerry (or any other Democrat) has STILL not said what he'll do to "create" jobs. Balancing the budget will not do it. Fixing the defict will not do it. The only thing that will do it is ECONOMIC GROWTH....which is projected to be an extremely healthy 4.7% this year.

The projections are of course questionable, but I will let you have that point. I agree that "creating" jobs is not something that any president can be expected to do. They are not responsible for the way the economy shifts; the best they can do is change who benefits most from a growing economy and who benefits the least (while there is some argument that economic confidence can arise from the white house, this is more than voodoo-esque). All this leads to the conclusion that any claims coming from either side about how they fixed the economy or plan to fix the economy is entirely BS. It isn't in their control...
post #396 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
It is very difficult to make any headway in these type of discussions, as they seem to be a democratic back-patting party.

I have told these people many time that I don't really care that they hate bush, or disagree with his policies, I just want to see intellectually honest discussion.

I know I am jumping into the piranha pool, but I have to insist on it.

Back patting party? What do you think that site dviant linked to was?

I felt like I'd bought a ticket to Conservoland while I was there.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #397 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
Fact: There are more people employed in the US today than in January 2001. We have NOT lost 2,000,000 jobs. Go look up the number at the BLS. 2,000,000 jobs? Well yes....it's about 2,000,000 GAINED.

Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I still don't see where that number comes from. It is my understanding that the President has presided over the first net jobs loss since Hoover. Perhaps a certain number of jobs were created during the President's tenure, but enough to counteract the unemployment rate rise?
post #398 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
That whole post was very refreshing because you stated your opinion and why. Nice.

Where I disagree with you is this, if islamic extremists take over the world, do you think they care about the environment? You would be beheaded for bringing up their disparities. So I would think that you would care about that.

A little paranoid, are we? Is extremist islam the new communism?
post #399 of 654
It's a job loss because alot more than 2 million people have entered the workforce and have been laid off in the past 3 years.

About 3 million more.
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
A Fair and Balanced Liberal

John Kerry for President
Reply
post #400 of 654
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Maybe I'm being obtuse, but I still don't see where that number comes from. It is my understanding that the President has presided over the first net jobs loss since Hoover. Perhaps a certain number of jobs were created during the President's tenure, but enough to counteract the unemployment rate rise?

Even if you accept SDW's numbers there are still the problems I pointed out...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Everyone, it's going to be OK: George Knows.