More Bad News for Kerry: U.S. Economy Creates 144,000 New Jobs

[Epitome22]

Originally posted by: mavsman55

Reeds, you seem like you're in a bad mood today. What's the matter, did Mavdog not nail you hard enough in the butt last night?

Look. You are entitled to most any form of epiphet your dirty mind can think of. But you can keep that business to yourself. Things get heated and there's name calling but we're all adults here, keep your disgusting gay jokes and insinutations about other's sexuality back in the frathouse where they belong.

[reeds]

"Reeds, you seem like you're in a bad mood today. What's the matter, did Mavdog not nail you hard enough in the butt last night? "


mavsman55- you really are a class act.. Didnt high school start back up in Texas yet? Its way past your bed time..leave this business for the real men...mamma's calling son, time for dinner..or ya'll call it supper??

[Mavdog]

[quote]
Originally posted by: Epitome22

Look. You are entitled to most any form of epiphet your dirty mind can think of. But you can keep that business to yourself. Things get heated and there's name calling but we're all adults here, keep your disgusting gay jokes and insinutations about other's sexuality back in the frathouse where they belong.

You have made the error in that Mavsman55 is nowhere near the point in his life to be called an "adult", either in his physical age or his mental progress. To say that his juvenile comments could be found in the frathouse demeans the frats, even they wouldn't act so childish.

[mavsman55]

HAHA, you all are so easily offended. Reeds you've made plenty of jokes about me and Drbio dating, why is there crazy uprising about those?

[mavsman55]

mavsman55- you really are a class act.. Didnt high school start back up in Texas yet? Its way past your bed time..leave this business for the real men...mamma's calling son, time for dinner..or ya'll call it supper??

For a liberal, you're not too respectful of people who are different than you. Not talking about me, just talking about the redneck stereotype you just brought up. In no way am I offended by it but like we've said many times before: If you live in a glass house, don't throw stones.

Also, I don't think you'd want me pulling up all of the childish things you've said in the past and posting them here. Somebody calling me childish who would vote for Adolf Hitler over George Bush is pretty ironic, if not just plain intolerant.

Subliminal: Ain't it just kind of ironic how you wrote a 4-paragraph post on how stupid somebody <u>else</u> was, but misspelled a 3-letter word 4 times? Dodge it all you want, but I'm not stupid. Nobody misspelled 3-letter abbreviations on purpose.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: subliminal2k3

While keeping calling everyone who disagrees with him idiots, LBR shows us what a bright guy he is by composing the above brilliant paragraph. Pure brilliance!!! So deep, thoughtful and suble that nobody can understand his point......SUBLIMINABLE! I invite everyone to read the above paragraph to see how intelligent LBR is.

First of all, where did it say in the article you referenced to that the uninsured population is 15.3 million? I can only find this "the Census Bureau said the number of Americans without health insurance coverage rose to 45 million or 15.6 percent of the population". Hmm I must be either blind or too biased or simply like you said "liberal idiots" cuz I just can't find a simple number in a damn short article.

But no big problem, as long as my logic still works....oh wait.....it doesn't.....I can't quite understand the reasoning behind the "more than entire population of USA in 1990 so clearly this statement has to be wrong for at least 1 year" thing. Oh I am so STUPID! I am HELPLESS! GOD PLEASE HELP ME!

In all seriousness, come on LBR, instead of arguing whether it's $445 B or $500 B, show us some positive numbers reflecting the good works Bush has done. I mean, if one did such a great job, there's got to be some numbers showing it right?? Right LBR?? EDUCATE US.

I do not name anyone an idiot for simply disagreeing with me subliminal2k3. I called you and others in this thread idiots for arguing that opinions were facts and for argueing that hyperbole statements were facts.

And I'll admit that I was too hastey in composing my post and made at least one error. You're correct that the article said 45 million people were uninsured currently. So 294 million - 45 million = 249 million which is still more than the entire popoulation of the US in 1990. So I'm still correct in saying the knowitall's ficitious statement that "Every year the number of Americans without insurance has gone up." is nothing more that hyperbole at best. If you want to argue what good works Bush has done then start a thread and I'll do so, however in this thread I'm sticking to the current argument that Knowitall's post was fiction, halftruths, and opinion. You're welcome to concede that or continue on in idiotic denial.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog
so, the "fact" is that they estimate the deficit to be a record $445 B rather than the record $500 B mentioned? OK, a clarification of the facts stated. of course, the statement said "about $500 B": "He's turned a record surplus into a record deficit to about 500 billion" so it's accurate.
That passes the test.

Mavdog at times you can be an utter moron and now is one of those times. $445 billion is closer to $400 billion than $500 billion, and the only stretch that makes it about $500 billion is opinion. So it fails to pass the fact test. But this isn't what makes me call you an utter moron. What leads me to apply that label to you is the utter moron is where Knowitall applies the blame to Bush. That is clearly an opinion and in no way facts. You can substantiate your opinion with fact, how ever there are far too many variables in play to assign the blame to one man. Only an complete and utter moron would try and pass that off as fact.

As for the recent <u>monthly job report</u> yes, the estimate was 144,000 net job gain, the point was how many jobs were lost in the term, As it is estimated at 933,000, we need to clarify the statement which said "We have lost over a million jobs" to say "We have lost over 900,000 jobs", perhaps the most recent numbers weren't included.
That passes the test.

Another moronic statement. In no way is 993,000 over a million lost jobs. Sure if you change it to over 900,000 it works. But hell if I could change my lottery picks after the fact I would would win everytime. Knowitall's statement was not a fact. It was completely false. You're just too damn obtuse to admit it. But she didn't even clarify who the we was. It could be Texas or whereever she's living now, the world, Ireland or Europe which she claims to be from, or who knows what. She doesn't clarify the time frame. This statement is too ambigious to have any relevance as fact. It is completely nonsensical.

now the point "Every year the number of Americans living in poverty has gone up". The statement said nothing about "rates" so the link you provided doesn't apply. The statement you called "crap" is correct, the number of Americans in poverty has gone up" every year.
That passes the test.

No this is does not pass the test or even come close. 1st I show that the rates of poverty have gone gone down in the past in subsequent years. And while that may not be the same the numbers it strongly suggest that the numbers have gone down. However there is absolutely no proof whatsoever to suggest that the number of people living in poverty has gone up every year from 1776 until 2003, which is what Knowitall claims with her statement that: "Every year the number of Americans living in poverty has gone up. " To be a fact it has to be proven not just not able to be unproven.

Now the uninsured. What you are trying to do by referencing the population of 1990 only you can understand, but the fact is that the number of uninsured Americans has increased each year of the Bush presidency (2000-2003). that is, of course, the subject, the Bush term in office...the statement "Every year the number of Americans without insurance has gone up" is factual. no "opinion"
That passes the test.

Another moronic spin by Mavdog. Knowitall never mention the Bush presidency. You're doing the apples and oranges comparison. She said "Every year the number of Americans without insurance has gone up." She did not mention bush but made a hyperbole statement. One of my main criticisms of Knowitall is that she doesn't include crucial details like this and expects her audience to assume a lot such as you have. However assuming is not fact, it is opinion. It is your opinion of what she meant. So go crawl back under your rock of denial.

Dividends and capital gains. While you I believe agree that the first part is factual "He has eliminated or at least reduced taxes on dividends, interest and capitol gains." you dispute the later part of "Another blow to the middle class". You might have a point that this is opinion, although with the data that shows an increasing burden of the tax payments borne by the middle class, less by the higher incomes, the statement can be supported.
Passes the test, although ended in a grey area.

Whether you are just plain stupid or obtuse I've yet to decide, but one thing you should have been able to determine if you weren't one or both of those is that I did not agree that Bush was solely responsible for reduced taxes on capitol gains, dividends, and interest. While I might wish I could truthfully claim that this was true, I know that it is not a fact. These could not of been put into effect without the approval of congress. Bush has no vote whatsoever in congress. He can only try to persuade others to vote. He can and did sign these measures into law instead of vetoing them or refusing to sign. But they had to be approved by congress to get to Bush. I do give him big credit, or in your terms "blame", for getting this done, but certainly nowhere close to 100%.

Now as to the opinion that this has hurt the middle class, it is opinion. You may show some facts that support that opinion, but that is just one interpretation of those facts. Interpretation is just opinion. Only an idiot would argue that this was fact.

It's OK to have opinions. But please don't try and pass them off as facts. And more importantly don't try and pass completely false statements off as facts.

[Mavdog]

so, to sum it up:

You don't blame Bush (<u>the subject</u>, of course) for the record deficits. He submitted them, he signed them, but he's not responsible. They are record deficits of course. and this year it is close to $500 Million as was posted...

The figure of "over a million" who lost their jobs isn't right, but almost a million job losses during Bush's term (<u>the subject</u>, of course) does. or over 900,000 works. or between 900,000 and a million.

the statement "Every year the number of Americans living in poverty has gone up." doesn't work if one takes the time period of 1776 to today, but when looked at during the Bush term (<u>the subject</u>, of course) it is factual and accurate. (your discussion of 1776 was pretty funny tho...)

When you take the comment on uninsured to a different subject than Bush's term (<u>the subject</u>, of course), it doesn't work. Yet it does work when describing Bush's term (<u>the subject</u>, of course) of which it was written.

Bush was not responsible for the changes in taxes on capital gains, dividends and interest income, although they were his proposals...and he signed them into Law.

You have no facts to back up your position on affects of those cuts on the middle class, but without reason you dismiss mine (the middle class has paid a higher percent of taxes) and say your right.

admirable defense..:roll

[Drbio]

So to sum it up: Mavdookie refuses to read the opposing view and comprehend it. He only dismisses others posts as placeholders between his crapola.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Drbio
So to sum it up: Mavdookie refuses to read the opposing view and comprehend it. He only dismisses others posts as placeholders between his crapola.

Thanks Doc. I'll add one more point for Mavdog, he even refuses to comprehend what this whole discussion is about. It's not about Bush. It's about Knowitall. It's about Mavdog and a couple of other liberal idiots trying to pass inaccurate facts as accurate and pass opinions for fact. Admit it Mavdog, Knowit did not post all facts or even mostly facts. Concede this point and we can go on and talk about the merits of Bush. However I begin to believe if it's possible for you to concede any points in your obtuse and partisan mind.

[Mavdog]

It's not about Bush. It's about Knowitall.

no, it is what knowitall said about Bush, and your response of

Thank you for your opinion. Now my opinion is that you post is a onesided spin doctored load of crap

which it wasn't.

Knowitall's post is about the Bush record, and it is accurate, Yes the "over a million jobs" was off as the true figure is under a million....it remains a ton of jobs.

The number of uninsured has gone up every year during his term, the number of households in poverty has increased each year of his term, it's a fact jack.

The promise not to touch the social security funds was broken. You may see a reason, but the promise was broken.

The environemntal regulations on air emissions have loosened during the Bush term.

The part about al queda? like I said, opinion.

Our international standing? pretty much opinion. Polls do support the point tho.

Why can't you admit that her post was mostly accurate?

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog



Why can't you admit that her post was mostly accurate?

Because it wasn't accurate. But my complaint was that she stated it as fact when it's clearly not. Even you admit that some of it's inaccurate. You said "Yes the "over a million jobs" was off "

Why can't you admit that it's mostly opinion and the facts are either off or very ambigiously phrased at best? My guess it because you, like John Kerry, have a huge problem admitting that you're wrong.

[Mavdog]

I can't believe you continue to deny. what a joke.

the jobs figure was off a few percent so everything else "wasn't accurate"?

this has become absurd, you ignore all the supported facts.

[Drbio]

Mavdookie telling LRB that he is ignoring facts has to be one of the most sadly ironic posts in d-m.com history. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

[knowitall]

LRB, everything I stated came off the top of my head. I don't spend countless hours looking for articles to support my opinion. Fascinating how accurate my statement turned out to be. Yes, I was slightly wrong on a few figures. I was estimating. I knew I would be close. I've been observing Mr. Bush and his failures since he took office. Anyone can use unmatched military power. After that his bag is empty. Go ahead. Serve up your retort. We know what you will say already. Because you are the master of kidding yourself.

[knowitall]

BREAKING NEWS................The sudden disappearance of LRB.

[dude1394]

Petty...so I reciprocated.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog
I can't believe you continue to deny. what a joke.

the jobs figure was off a few percent so everything else "wasn't accurate"?

this has become absurd, you ignore all the supported facts.

This from the person who won't even admit that Kerry made his Vietnam service a major part of his campaign. Growup Mavdog. You can call opinions facts until you're blue in the fact, but it won't make it so. Opinion supported by fact, is still opinion. And many of your facts are circumspect at best.

[Epitome22]

Originally posted by: Drbio
Mavdookie telling LRB that he is ignoring facts has to be one of the most sadly ironic posts in d-m.com history. [img]i/expressions/anim_roller.gif[/img]

But not nearly as humerous as you ribbing someone else about 'facts' Please Drbio, things like debate, discussion, issues and knowledge and intelligence aren't exactly your strong points when it comes to political discussion. Now you be a good boy and come up with some more of those clever, libelous takes on names for the democrats. Those things are just side splitters.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: knowitall
LRB, everything I stated came off the top of my head. I don't spend countless hours looking for articles to support my opinion. Fascinating how accurate my statement turned out to be. Yes, I was slightly wrong on a few figures. I was estimating. I knew I would be close. I've been observing Mr. Bush and his failures since he took office. Anyone can use unmatched military power. After that his bag is empty. Go ahead. Serve up your retort. We know what you will say already. Because you are the master of kidding yourself.

And yet more inane nonsense surrounded by hatred. Maybe if you might learn to write in coherent paragraphs, you might get rid of the nonsense. Maybe if you would spend a few minutes researching facts and learn the difference between a fact and an opinion you might get rid of inaness. But you need serious help with you issues with hatred.

[FishForLunch]

I dont believe any president can do shit about creating jobs. It is all up to the market forces, dont fool yourself's into thinking those damn politicians are so smart that they can create jobs by just taking about it. Take for example Kerrys promise that he will create 10 million jobs if he is elected, we only have his word, no plan.

Based on what I hear from the MSM about Kerrys positions, I may be wrong but I am sure Mavdog will provide the corrections.

1. He will increase taxes for those earning more than 200K per year.
2. He will beg or bribe Germany and France to share the cost of Iraqi stabilzation.
3. He will call the companies that outsource names, butwill not actually forbid them from moving jobs overseas.
4. He will cancell some of the Tax rebates and incentives that the evil corporations enjoy at the present time.
5. He will ensure that the millions of Americans without insurance have insurance by giving tax incentives to companies that provide healthcare or will get the government to pay for part of the premium I am not sure which.
6. He has promised to increase the troop strength by two divisions but will not actually use then in Iraq, in that case he has suggested that within a year he will cut the troops in Iraq significantly.
7. He will cut down on waste? No specifics here
8. He will not remove the troops from Germany, so that they can be re-deployed to other strategic locations around the world.
9. He is against Gay marriages personally but not politically.
10. He does not believe in abortion personally, but believes in abortion politically.
11. He will help the Big 3 in increasing fuel economy, I guess they are not evil corporations anymore.
12. I dont know if he now supports the Kyoto Treaty, I guess he wishes the treaty good luck that all.
13. He will offer Iran nuclear technology for promising to not create nuclear bombs.
14. I guess the same for N. Korea their promise to behave for Oil and food shipments.
15. Be a honest broker in the Middle East, but not at this time while the election season is here, I guess he still wants to win Florida.
16. Last of all he served in Vietnam and is reporting for duty.

[Mavdog]

Originally posted by: LRB

This from the person who won't even admit that Kerry made his Vietnam service a major part of his campaign. Growup Mavdog.

The claim was "the centerpiece of his campaign", NOT "a major part". Another in a long line of inaccuracies in your posts. I know who needs to "growup" and it's not me.

You can call opinions facts until you're blue in the fact, but it won't make it so. Opinion supported by fact, is still opinion. And many of your facts are circumspect at best.

LMAO! This coming from the person who denies the statistical facts by trying to nuance the subject of the post away from Bush.

Explain again how the number of uninsured hasn't increased every year of the Bush term? How about explaining how the number of households living in poverty hasn't gone up during the Bush term? What about explaining how the record federal deficit isn't really a record federal deficit?

Tell me, why do you call statistics "opinion"?

too funny....

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: Epitome22

But not nearly as humerous as you ribbing someone else about 'facts' Please Drbio, things like debate, discussion, issues and knowledge and intelligence aren't exactly your strong points when it comes to political discussion. Now you be a good boy and come up with some more of those clever, libelous takes on names for the democrats. Those things are just side splitters.

Dear goodness.....did you actually type that without pissing in your diaper? I'll debate you on facts for any topic any day and watch you systematically dismantled and left crying sucking on your thumb wondering what the hell just happened.

[Epitome22]

Originally posted by: Drbio

Dear goodness.....did you actually type that without pissing in your diaper? I'll debate you on facts for any topic any day and watch you systematically dismantled and left crying sucking on your thumb wondering what the hell just happened.

Uh huh

[Drbio]

any time dipshatome....

[knowitall]

Good luck Doc. Your going to need it.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
Good luck Doc. Your going to need it.

You wouldn't understand intellect if it hit you in the face.

[LRB]

Originally posted by: Mavdog

The claim was "the centerpiece of his campaign", NOT "a major part". Another in a long line of inaccuracies in your posts. I know who needs to "growup" and it's not me.

LMAO! This coming from the person who denies the statistical facts by trying to nuance the subject of the post away from Bush.

Explain again how the number of uninsured hasn't increased every year of the Bush term? How about explaining how the number of households living in poverty hasn't gone up during the Bush term? What about explaining how the record federal deficit isn't really a record federal deficit?

Tell me, why do you call statistics "opinion"?

too funny....

Mavdog your are either the most obtuse or the most blind person I've have become acquainted with or possibly both.

How stupid are you to keep insisting that conclusions drawn from facts are indeed facts instead of opinions where many different and conflicting conclusions can be drawn from those same facts.

How inane to keep saying that you denied that Vietnam was the centerpiece of Kerry's campaign, when that is the generally accped perception. But even more inane when you deny that Kerry's Vietnam service was a key part of his campaign platform and then turn around and deny saying it. Sigh.

How dense are you to take a post by me criticizing a post by knowitall for not being all fact as she and other claimed and make it about arguing Bush's fitness as President and not even have the brains to see that you changed the subject totally.


How moronic is it to start talking about the level of poverty rising during the Bush presidency when this was not clarified at all in the original post.

If you want to argue about Bush, fine make some statements about him and we'll argue. But my post is talking about the ambigiousness of knowitlittle's posts in general and one in particular. I'm talking about how she posted opinions as facts. How supposed facts were either inaccurate to stated to ambigiously to determine with a reasonable certainty what she meant.

[knowitall]

LRB, I think your coming apart. Now hang on and brace yourself for impact.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
LRB, I think your coming apart. Now hang on and brace yourself for impact.

Wow. Another non-quality "contribution" from the forum moron.

[knowitall]

Don't misunderstand me Doc. I would very much dislike to have a physical encounter with you. Because, you know, you've got that "retard strength".

[knowitall]

I'm sorry Doc. That was mean.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
I'm sorry Doc. That was mean.

I can take it. It is unfortunate that you felt the need to used retardation as an insult though.


Seriously though...I have not seen you contribute to topical discussion in any thread. Only pot shots and posts like "Bush sucks at medicare" or some other topical statement with no additional information on why/how/what you think about those issues or how you came up with any conclusion.

[knowitall]

It's really simple. Problems like medicare need attention immediately, as do the other points I mentioned. I know you think I'm just a mindless "troll", but seriously, you need to consider American problems and stop ignoring them because they don't directly affect you.

[Drbio]

Originally posted by: knowitall
It's really simple. Problems like medicare need attention immediately, as do the other points I mentioned. I know you think I'm just a mindless "troll", but seriously, you need to consider American problems and stop ignoring them because they don't directly affect you.

Point One:
Again...you never post substance, but rather only post topic headings. Take this post for instance. You state that Medicare needs immediate attention but you neither indicate why nor espouse an understanding of medicare or related information.

Point Two
You've shown us nothing but a propensity to take a shot and run. That is troll-esque imho and therefore I would agree. At this point I acknowledge that you are likely a mindless troll until otherwise shown to be to the contrary.

Point Three
As far as politics and social awareness goes, I am pretty certain that I more aware and more involved in groups that discuss/work/research etc the issues and attempt to educate or improve those same issues than 98% of this board's members if not higher. It's not a boasting point, but rather an informational point. Even those issues that do not directly affect me per se such as child health and dental care, Head Start, and other similar issues are improtant to me civically. I spend a significant amount of my free hours working on committees and municipal and political groups working in those areas. It's part of my connection to the community in which I live. So, pardon me if I dismiss your last statement as a hearty crock of sensationalistic horsepoo.



Try again?

[knowitall]

I only mentioned medicare because of your last post. Supposedly where I said Bush sucks on medicare. I've never said sucks. Every point I made is valid, live with it.

Honestly, you and LRB use denial in the same way a child covers their ears to drown out a troublesome sound.

But don't fret! I have a plan that just might interest you!

Why don't you think for yourself! Just once! Here me out now.

You could escape from your pack and go it alone. I know it sounds scary, having to break away from your "Alpha Dog Leader" and jumping off his tail of denial. But there are advantages. You could make decisions on your own and refuse to continue your current role as LRB's Ed McMahon.

Just ask and I will show you the way................Just imagine, never having to say" YOU ARE RIGHT, SIR" again.

[Drbio]

Keep evading the issue knownothing. You continue to post vacuous rants with no substance that indicates that you have even the most trivial of comprehension on any topic.

Please...post something that indicates you even understand the most basic concept beyond the topic heading.

So far you have been weighed, measured and found tremendously wanton.

[Drbio]

And BTW...there was no denial in my three point post that undressed you intellectually. You continue to respond with tangential rants in a pathetic (but hopeless) attempt to divert the attention away from your obvious deficiencies.

Just once....show us something that will indicate a basic understanding of a menial or small concept. Don't try the major issues yet as that might be too much for you. Start small. Take a shot.

[knowitall]

I know the points I made have upset you. You've touched them as if you put your hand in a fire for the first time. Watch out, or you'll get burned. You have to stay away from the things that can hurt you. We can't be there to hold your hand for the rest of your life.

We are not that far from agreement when it comes to Bush. He is the perfect man to exploit an "unmatched military power" and he is the perfect man to........................oh, I guess that's it.

[Drbio]

Another vacuous deflective post. It is pathetic to watch you wallow in denial and avoidance. I'm sure everyone reading this thread is embarassed for you.


How about some substance? I'll not let you deflect this away. You have made no points whatsoever. Otherwise, you would be able to provide substance (which you cannot).