Us Media Lies On Jobs

[righturnonred]

Bushmustgo,

You can continue on with your nonsensical tripe if you wish, but the rest of us live within the confines of reality. The lost jobs have not resulted from Bush's single handed mismanagement of the economy, and it would be absurd for you to claim so.

Nor was Clinton singlehandedly responsible for the economic expansion of the 1990's. If fact, the economy flourished despite Clinton economic policies, IMO.

You must have slept through economics in college, that is if you're even college educated. But there is still hope for. You can research this on your own using a marvelous invention called the internet and teach yourself all about the business cycle and how it effects job and wealth creation on a national and global scale.

Economic growth, and thus employment, does not proceed along an inclined plain but rather along a course of peaks and valleys over time. So... Get real! All economists agree that the US is currently in the midst of an economic recovery.

You're being ridiculous and unless you want to offer proof, which would be much more persuasive that your typical one liner jabs, I suggest you just save it.

But you're obviously such a blind ideologue that I'm sure you'd never actually consider trying to prove me wrong.

Talk about desperate, all you can offer are pathetic democratic talking points: 3 million lost! Herbert Hoover! Biggest deficit in history! [incredibly shrill, high pitched noise!]

[Derek]

craig lets not get hysterical about this.

if there is this giant conspiracy by the "Media" which i guess you mean to be all non conservative TV, newspaper, and radio across america, why wouldnt bush use his massive power as president to go onto a national conservative media outlet and do the math as you propse.

Simply stated he would be bombarded by the Press with their polls.

after all, he certainly had enough of a platform to give WMDs as a reason for war.

WMDs or not the bastard was still a threat to America.

so it seems the premise needed to support your assertion is unlikely and unreasonable. the repubs DO in fact have the power to say whatever they want, and there is no media wall.

You kiddin me?

Peter Jennings isn't Conservative, He is liberal. Trust me i see it in the media all the time.

The Republicans can say what they want, that doesn't change the fact they are going to be pounded on it, if it is just a smigen contreversial.

Rush Limbaugh Makes a "racist" comment ITS FRONTPAGE NEWS

But when a Certain Democrat from New York (give ya a hint last name ends with linton) gives a racial comment, nobody in the media even takes a look at it.

This is the biasness in the media today. The only balanced show is fox.

Its a joke when you say this riff.

[Bushmustgo]

Funny to see you guys scramble to find information to help make Bush not to seem as incompetent as he is...must be hard being a Republican this last year~

Again, 100,000 new jobs but, an overall net loss last year and you give the guy praise???

Derek,

You know who is a bigger threat to the U.S. than Saddam?

Bush. Under Bush, 500+ Americans and $180 Billion dollars gone because of him....it was unecessary and now you're scrambling to justify, this is not leadership. That's why we need our own "regime" change!

[righturnonred]

Bushmustgo,

You're a lunatic with no argument, just Democratic talking points clap trap.

I'm no longer responding to your posts. Leave.

[Bushmustgo]

Righturned,

Well at least you're consistent with Bush. He never wants to respond until forced by the party, i.e., Meet The Press, and that didn't go well for him either.

I'll say this, I wish McCain was in there instead of both Bush and Gore but, he's not. Now you have a guy in there that really has lost your party's credibility and credibility is everything!

you're obviously such a blind ideologue

That's funny coming from a Bush supporter, hahahhaaa!

[Greg]

Bushmustgo, I've read over your last couple of posts and I am wondering when you're going to start actually discussing the issue, rather than distracting and interrupting the thread.

Your last four posts in this thread have contributed very little to the discussion other than, "Bush is evil," "Bush is a failure", blah blah blah.

Perhaps it would be prudent if you could provide/contribute more than just piss and vinegar and start to engage the other posters with something more valuable than, "DO NOT EAT PRETZELS!!!"

[daniel]

I've searched the last five posting from Bushmustgo on this thread and couldn't find anything that supports your claim. Except for the pretzel statement, everything else reads reasonably well.

But you don't find anything wrong that personal attack just prior BMG's last?

Righturn, I'd like to introduce to you Derek who gives credit to Bush for bringing America out of the recession - even though Bush also brought us into it. You can teach him your argument about the business cycle and therefore all that hoopla about tax cuts has no relation to job creation.

[righturnonred]

Well as I've said before, Bush was not responsible for the recession and for the most part he's not responsible for getting us out of it, however I believe the tax cuts are helping to reduce the severity of the recession caused by many external, internal, and cyclical factors outside the control of government in general including but not limited to 9\11, the war on terror, corporate scandals, the internet stock market bubble, and the natural business cycle.

The deficits are of concern in the long term, but they have absolutely no effect on job creation or economic growth in the short term.

BMG would have you blame Bush on everything from world hunger to the Africa AIDS epidemic.

Unlike other leftist on this forum who gather data and facts to debate ideas, Bushmustgo contributes absolutely nothing to any discussion.

Perhaps it would be prudent if you could provide/contribute more than just piss and vinegar and start to engage the other posters with something more valuable than, "DO NOT EAT PRETZELS!!!"

Here, Here!

I have challenged BMG pointedly to describe how Bush is responsible for the recession. I'm still waiting to hear his response. Surly he has an impressive justification for something he feels so strongly about.

[Bushmustgo]

Righturned,

Just a reminder coming from your previous thread.

I'm no longer responding to your posts. Leave.

Greg,

You're evidently biased.

I'm engaging in "political" discussion concerning a "political" figure, GWB. I represent a percentage of the country right now that feels he must go for the good of the country...this is "political" and believe your notion that I contribute nothing to this Political Form is perhaps based on your own "political" bias. However, I will not continue with the "pretzel" epigrams and go on with, "politics" as usual!

[Greg]

Righturned,

Just a reminder coming from your previous thread.

I'm no longer responding to your posts. Leave.

Another example of your insightful posts, Bushmustgo.

You're evidently biased.

I'm engaging in "political" discussion concerning a "political" figure, GWB.  I represent a percentage of the country right now that feels he must go for the good of the country...this is "political" and believe your notion that I contribute nothing to this Political Form is perhaps based on your own "political" bias.  However, I will not continue with the "pretzel" epigrams and go on with, "politics" as usual!

Bushmustgo, you can accuse me of "bias" all you want, but I think almost everyone else in the forum would disagree. I have no personal agenda when is comes to moderating this forum and I find your petty accusation insulting. I suggest you read over the rule and guidelines and pay close attention to the following section,

Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all. 

Some messages are not so much offensive as simply nuisance value. An example would be a person who persistently creates conflict without contributing anything useful. In newsgroup circles, such a person is known as a "troll". We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments. We define "annoying" as any message that results in a complaint from a registered user -- we will then decide whether to take action.

[Bushmustgo]

Greg,

I know where you are going with this and I understand, however, Righturnonred posted this,

Bushmustgo,

You're a lunatic

then you come and jump on my case. It just struck me as being bias but, I'm happy to be wrong in such a case, if I am. And let's be honest with ourselves, there's a fine line between politics and biasses and it is hard to distinguish sometimes, especially when you didn't tell Righturned anything...and this is a "political" fourm.

[Greg]

Ok, this was fault - I apoligize. I publicly singled out Bushmustgo for using an insult and didn't do the same when righturnonred committed the same act. However, that isn't to say I didn't privately warn righturnonred for using insults - I did, and I'm fairly certain he understand that what he did was wrong. As I assume you do Bushmustgo.

It is important that if you see misconduct in these forums that you report that post to me immediately. That way I can intervene as soon as possible. As I've said repeatedly before, I don't have time to read every single post in these forums, so it's everyone's responsibility to report any problems to me. If you fail to report abuse and it continues to the point where you begin to use insults in response, there is a good chance I'll end up reprimanding both of you.

I've never been big on the idea of using moderators to patrol these forums. There is too great of a chance that they will inadvertently impose their own biases on the forum. I've said this many times before, I would much rather the participants monitor the forums and each others behaviour.

Understanding that we all get worked up about the things we feel passionate about, we must all try our best to debate in a manner that is civilized and respectable. It is fine to diagree with what someone says (it would be a boring place if everyone agreed on everything), but lets make sure that we do it in a manner that would make our mothers proud.

[KrustyKidd]

Actually Greg, I felt somewhat complimented by the 'Clown' comment. It does take more intelligence to play the fool.

Krusty.

[daniel]

Greg, you might have privately warned righturn and that would be fine. But your warning to Bushmustgo was public so the image you portray is biased - especially when I cannot find those four postings you state.

[jacee]

[Cum Laude]

On ‎2‎/‎14‎/‎2004 at 9:42 PM, daniel said:

Greg, you might have privately warned righturn and that would be fine. But your warning to Bushmustgo was public so the image you portray is biased - especially when I cannot find those four postings you state.

As Trudeau legalizes marijuana. let's look at the United States of America and New Jersey.

Americans shouldn't worry as the answer to their problems has already been introduced and soon will save the day for us all. New Jersey State Senator Cory Booker has introduced legislation that will not only make marijuana legal in New Jersey, but encourages the entire nation to do the same. I was already aware that the state had sent task forces on two occasions to Colorado last year whose assignment was to gather details to facilitate the legal sale of weed next year once the wealthy democrat governor takes office, which has already been assured. Local PD’s have already been briefed on this fact as well.

It is not the effects of a general population being able to get stoned any time they want to that bothers me. What bothers me about this plan is that in a nation that is already too distracted, too drunk, too doped up to care a rat’s ass about anything at all right now, how can getting even more people toasted help the problem? Will Americans, with a good buzz on, participate more in their own government? Will they care more or make more intelligent decisions?

And anyone that thinks that giving the political scum even more money to play with will make anything any better is probably already high as a kite. Think Transportation Trust Fund, NJ State Pension System, Social Security, and on and on. We should not be throwing cash at politicians but rotted cabbages and bad tomatoes. Oh well, perhaps the inevitable will be put off for another year or three….

[dialamah]

People who don't want to drink, don't.  People who don't want to use drugs, don't.  People who do want to use substances use them whether legal or not so legalizing pot will make veey little difference.

[hot enough]

58 minutes ago, dialamah said:

People who do want to use substances use them whether legal or not so legalizing pot will make veey little difference.

I don't believe that is a very realistic assessment at all, dialamah. My guess is that the new ready "soda pop" style alcoholic beverages have increased alcohol consumption. I can easily see marijawanny made into easy to consume forms and it becoming quite popular.

Edited August 12, 2017 by hot enough