Just mentioning the Mid Terms send Libs into spasms...... the like to pretend that the Mid Terms ddint happen, and that Obama is an athlete..Obama has game like Kobe
All talk, no proof. On top of admittedly being proud of ignoring proof. This is getting old.
On the contrary, what you and your friends do not like is having your opponent take your own logic and use it against you. Clearly, you and them were never schooled in rhetoric. This is a standard first year debate tactic. Take your opponent's logic to the conclusion to show it is entirely absurd.
And you knew full well I was discussing the auto industry. Blatantly lying about what I said doesn't help your already very low credibility.
Did Obvious Child say "we have standards here"?
Obvious Child?
There might be standards, but nothing so low as the lying, deceiving, putting words in other mouths standard that is Obvious Child's.
You ignore, cut & paste... ignore, cut & paste. Look at you praying that the numbers had negatives in front of them ala the Bush years. Bush isn't in the election this year much to your chagrin I'm sure.
| Moderator's Warning: |
It's not my fault you don't have any debate skills. The concept of utilizing your opponent's logic against them is a standard first year tactic. There's nothing special about it. It is merely that you were never taught it. That is in no way my fault. Stop blaming me for your shortcomings. Furthermore, needling people who have a tendency to get angry, such as you generally causes them to slip up. It again is not my fault that you get angry. I just happen to see an opportunity. This is essentially judo. I take your traits, anger and hatred and use them against you. It's not my fault you have those traits and as a good debater, I'd be foolish not to use them.
FYI, you did melt down twice and got suspended twice over it. Please create your own meltdown thread. Preferably in the basement.
Your debate sklils are non existant.. your arrogance though is not logical..much like Obama amazingly..
Your brother may not have been "willing to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name", but Americans as a whole have been. Your brother is just on data point.
Even if he has been unwilling "to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name" that certainly doesn't mean that other Americans have been as reluctant as he has.
Seasonal I am heartened to see that people are now willing to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name check.
I did not assume those things about him.You assume a lot of things such as there was a job available for which he qualified or or that he has not tried to find a job or that he is receiving an extended unemployment check.
I am saying this does not indicate any change in conditions. People have been willing to take those sorts of jobs for years now. It's not new.Back to the original point though, that people are willing to take part-time jobs instead of continuing to receive extended unemployment is a sign that things are improving because we will create a lot more part-time jobs than full-time jobs at first because two 20 hour a week employees are cheaper to carry than 1 40 hour per week employee at the moment.
| Moderator's Warning: |
I am saying this does not indicate any change in conditions. People have been willing to take those sorts of jobs for years now. It's not new.
Sorry to hear that.In my area the availability of even part-time jobs would be a positive change of conditions. On any given day, the help wanted ads might total 5-6 with about half being garbage listings for a local paper with a circulation around 80K. On Sundays, it might jump up to 20 on a good week, but again most of which require very specific degrees/experience. Our local economy was destroyed by NAFTA/GATT long before this great recession hit.
They do when you have leadership.
Reagan provided leadership and brought us out of a worse recession than this one in two years. Obama has had four years and has failed. He showed that failure on Wednesday night and with all the results Romney stated. Results matter except to Obama supporters who always buy what the teleprompter tells them.
Romney may not have a magic wand but Obama has failed and doesn't deserve four more years. If Romney doesn't deliver he too will be a one term President. How anyone can vote for Obama with the results generated is beyond comprehension. What makes you think the next four years under Obama will be any better than the last four? What has he offered that you believe will generate better results?
His name is Obama. He's in way over his head. Time for him to go. The guy thought he'd spend a trillion dollars and the economy would come roaring back. On to healthcare he thought.
tererun;1060997076]Wrong. The wars we had going on do not just end because we get a new president. the money we borrowed to fight those wars does not just get forgiven because we got a new president. The recession and economic bubble bursting at the end of bush's term doesn't just go away. There is no one we could have elected that would have made those problems dissapear, but Obama has gotten us out of one of those wars, and has put our economy back into improving within 4 years.
Your idea that the problems we have magically will go away if we do not have obama is just plain fantasy. We will have a deficit next year even under Romney. We will still have unemployment above 7 percent when Romney takes office and for months after. We will still owe all that money we owed before if we elect romney. We will sti,ll have a war in afganistan if we elect Romney. We will still have iran going for nuclear weaponsif we elect romney. We will still have unrest in the middle east if we elect romney. We will still have illegal immigrants in the US if we elect romney. We will still have crime if we elect romney. e will still have a broken health care system if we elect romney. Romney seems to think if we elect him everything will magically get better, and this is why he has made no plans to improve things. All we have to do is take the magic pill and vote for him and things get better in fantasy land. Too ad this is reality and voting for romney won't solve anything. You actually have to do something romney has never had to do in his entire life, and that is work hard to fix the problem and make sacrifices.
You mean the reagan recession that lasted until clinton? That was still going on when Bush Sr. was president. Take from a person old enough to live through it.
Yes, Romney has promised to change everything the day he takes office. unfortunately that is not possible, and I am not going to vote for him in hopes that faith can overcome reality. There may be better ways that obama which cdould improve things faster than he has, but it certainly is not to pray and wish for recovery like Romney thinks will work. Save that fantasy for church because the rest of us have work to do.
You're leaving out the option that you (or where ever you got your info from) are simply wrong about this being the biggest jump in 29 years.The largest one month jump in total employment in the last 29 years. And it just happens to occur 4 weeks before a tightly contested presidential election.
Either Obama is incredibly lucky or some numbers got fudged. (either option is a possibility.....)
Ah Sir, burrying your head in the sand is not an effective way to argue. Perhaps an analogy would help. For example, let's say you have a really bad case of the flu. When you first start getting sick you may have a 100 degree temperature, but it's on its way to a life-threatening 104 degrees. But you persevere, and with appropriate treatment the fever breaks and starts falling. On its way down it once again passes through 100 degrees. Yes, 100 degrees = 100 degrees, but on the way down it is a hopeful sign and you feel relieved even if you aren't yet fully well.
That's what's going on here. When Obama took over the reins the economy was in freefall. Four years later it is recovering.
Perhaps sir you should have followed the entire back and forth..... what started the entire thing was this line she posted ..
It is terrible news for Romney because in the final month of the campaigning Obama has great employment news.
I simply said that it wasn't a great number ... and that we were just back where we started from. I "NEVER" said things weren't improving or even debated that. In fact in one post I even pointed out that I wasn't referring to trends .... simply stating a fact .. that Unemployment was at 7.8% when Obama took over ... and this latest "decrease" in unemployment has gotten it down to what it was when he took over .. 7.8%
So I'll ask you the same question, is the new unemployment rate of 7.8% the same number as when Obama took office .. yes or no ??
On the contrary, what you and your friends do not like is having your opponent take your own logic and use it against you. Clearly, you and them were never schooled in rhetoric. This is a standard first year debate tactic. Take your opponent's logic to the conclusion to show it is entirely absurd.
And you knew full well I was discussing the auto industry. Blatantly lying about what I said doesn't help your already very low credibility.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?