flacaltenn
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #61
What I posted was facts, figures, and reason.
Really? All you did was bitch about other people who are bitching, and then completely misrepresented what they're bitching about.
What you produced is a tirade.
No it wasn't. It was an explanation as to how your misrepresentations are false.
I guess it just all went right over your head. Maybe you should just sit down and let the grown ups handle this.
That's not what I said at all. You should really pay attention before you're going to criticize what someone's saying.
Well get in line then... Because when you strip the Class War plumage from all the protesting and bitchin' --- MOST of us agree on the bailouts.
You should really stick to points that are relevant to the topic, instead of misrepresenting what people are saying so that you can make points be relevant.
But in 20 minutes there'll be a post by ONE of you class warriors about how the bailouts SAVED our measly asses from a REAL Depression.. I GUARANDAMTEE it.
1) You are the only one invoking class warfare, so you lose the right to say things like "your class warriors."
2) I never stated a position on anything, other than to clarify the misrepresentation you've undertaken in this thread (whether by willful ignorance or parental negligence inflicted stupidity, I don't know). So your comment about "my" class warriors just goes to show that you deal with things on the most simplistic level where sound bytes supposedly make good policy and answer all of life's questions. That makes your comments worthless off the bat.
3) You said that you agree with the bailouts, that most people agree with them. Thus, you're complaining that someone will come in and agree with you? I don't know what it is that has made you have such a bad day, but your emotional ranting is going off in a hundred indiscriminate directions and lacks any cohesive logic. Sit down, take a breath, maybe go smoke some medical marijuana, and relax.
I never said I agreed WITH the bailouts. What I said was that we all seem to agree ABOUT the bailouts. Meaning that when you originally complained that the issue was never about CEO compensation but it was about them using influence to obtain bailouts -- that we would agree that bailouts == bad. But 20 minutes later -- some of the same leftists will claim the bailouts were neccessary. No consistency left. Only rhetoric about CEOs stealing and receiving way too much money.
And BTW very FEW CEOs got "bailed out" and SOME of those who did -- didn't even WANT the money. So I sincerely doubt that the argument that corporate influence CAUSED the bailouts. Except in the cases of GM, Chrysler, and AIG and a couple of others.
If you can't read that correctly -- we are gonna need to go much s-l-o-w-e-r.. Aren't we?