Obama up by 8......

[JennyFever]

Well sure... but then that's the nature of fascism.



So you feel that the 8 points somehow represents that 'the American people trust Obama?' I wonder on what basis you are resting that conclusion?

My bet is that you've nothing which is intellectually sound or logically valid which you'd like to offer as a basis.

I mean to do that, you'd have to show that 'the American people' have some experience with Obama, as experience is the basis of trust... yet Obama has no experience as an executive... What's more, your conclusion would require that 'the American people' as represented by that 8 point majority, would themselves be qualified to make such a judgment; yet that same group elected the very socialists which passed the legislation and signed it into law that caused the catastrophe...

That being so, the question then becomes 'on what basis would someone trust the American people, represented by that 8% majority?'

Perhaps you'll tackle some of that... but you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath, as I've little trust that such is within your intellectual means.

Although... I would be beyond astounded, if you were to pull it off.

Did Gov. Palin pen this response for you?

1. Citing a poll as a source is a legitimate way to make a point in an argument.

2. What does the American people's experience with Obama have to do with Obama's executive experience? Just because the word "experience" is in both sentences doesn't mean that they make sense together.

3. The American people, qualified or not, are the ones who will be deciding who is the next president, so the majority opinion of Americans is indeed important. Whether or not you trust the majority is irrelevant.

 

[Modbert]

Well sure... but then that's the nature of fascism.



So you feel that the 8 points somehow represents that 'the American people trust Obama?' I wonder on what basis you are resting that conclusion?

My bet is that you've nothing which is intellectually sound or logically valid which you'd like to offer as a basis.

I mean to do that, you'd have to show that 'the American people' have some experience with Obama, as experience is the basis of trust... yet Obama has no experience as an executive... What's more, your conclusion would require that 'the American people' as represented by that 8 point majority, would themselves be qualified to make such a judgment; yet that same group elected the very socialists which passed the legislation and signed it into law that caused the catastrophe...

That being so, the question then becomes 'on what basis would someone trust the American people, represented by that 8% majority?'

Perhaps you'll tackle some of that... but you'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath, as I've little trust that such is within your intellectual means.

Although... I would be beyond astounded, if you were to pull it off.

Actually, most polls have Obama up on the economy by 10-20 points if I remember correctly. You wouldn't know that as you ignore any poll that might have him up in anything but negativity eh?

 

[JennyFever]

Hey genius... would you takea moment and provide for the board the list of GW Bush economic policies which you can crrelate to the meltdown of the mortgage business?

(Now I advance this query to this member purely to prove that she is absolutely without anything approaching a valid basis to set this farce... It's a means to prove her a fool and to further prove why these idiots shoudl never be allowed within the city limits of any town which has a voting booth. The fact is she will NOT post a single economic policy which was advanced by GW Bush that has ANY potential to be correlated to the current melt-down of the mortgage and equity markets.)

Enjoy...

It's called trickle down economics, introduced by Reagan, and it doesn't work.

 

[Modbert]

It's called trickle down economics, introduced by Reagan, and it doesn't work.

Trickle down economics = Bullshit

And I agree with you Jenny. It didn't work in the 80's, 90's but for some reason the Republicans think it will work now.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

God it fun to watch the Cons on here twist and turn...



that is very true.. .they were virtually tied again before the big crisis because the RNC bounce and Palin effect had worn off. Before the RNC Obama led McCain consistently by 3 points... within the margin of error but still a lead.

Given the idolatry that Hussein has enjoyed in the media, he should be 30% up and rising. He's in all but a stastical dead heat given the margins in these polls... and the internals are falling out of his favor.

As far as I'm concerned, there's about two degrees of separation between McCain and Hussein as both are leftists... with McCain being the least offensive as a fascist and Hussein a loathesome Marxist. The simple fact is that niether one will do anything but increase the scope of government, thus further cripple the economy as a result.

I'll vote for McCain because he's the closest thing to an American running and I'd have to disown myself if I voted for a Marxist... But my hope is that Hussein wins the election, so that when he signs the non-stop increases in tax rates, government regulation, price controls, tarrifs on foreign goods, appeasement of Islamic terrorism and so on... and that results in a catastrophic collapse of the US economy, the left will not be able to blame the crash on conservatives... as they did in the wake of the progressive policies advanced by Hoover. Hoover didn't sign anything that wasn't left wing fiscal policy; a fact which is set aside to vomit incessant rejoinders that he was a 'Republican.'

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Disaster and misery that were caused by every Neocon's former hero, W. Now that the country is a shambles and W is a lame duck, you're all ready to turn your backs on him.

I'm sorry to say it, BUT THE OPINIONS OF YOU NEOCONS ARE WORTHLESS. YOU ARE THE FOOLS WHO ELECTED W TWICE AND DEFENDED HIM FOR THE LAST 7 1/2 YEARS.

Hey genius... would you takea moment and provide for the board the list of GW Bush economic policies which you can crrelate to the meltdown of the mortgage business?

(Now I advance this query to this member purely to prove that she is absolutely without anything approaching a valid basis to set this farce... It's a means to prove her a fool and to further prove why these idiots shoudl never be allowed within the city limits of any town which has a voting booth. The fact is she will NOT post a single economic policy which was advanced by GW Bush that has ANY potential to be correlated to the current melt-down of the mortgage and equity markets.)

It's called trickle down economics, introduced by Reagan, and it doesn't work.

ROFLMNAO... This is just TOO EASY! It's analogous to blungening baby seals, only without all the effort...

Four things here Sis...

First, Reagan didn't 'introduce trickle down economics...' In fact, there is no species of economic reasoning which bears such a title.

Second, the subject of your ignorance is merely the natural order... of economics.

Third, President Reagan is not President GW Bush...

Fourth, You stated quite emphatically "Disaster and misery that were caused by every Neocon's former hero, W." this implied that you were in possession of facts which lead you to conclude that Bush economic policy was responsible for the present economic 'crisis'... You were directly challenged to present this board with those facts and a basis in reasoning which correlated those facts to the above referenced conclusion; what's more it was noted in the footnote of that challenge that it was a certainty that you, in fact, had no valid basis for that conclusion and that your response would prove you to be a fool...

Congrats Sis! YOU - WENT - ALL - THE - WAY! You're now a certified FOOL...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

mccain's Economic Adviser Is Ex-texas Sen. Phil Gramm. On Dec. 15, 2000, Hours Before Congress Was To Leave For Christmas Recess, Gramm Had A 262-page Amendment Slipped Into The Appropriations Bill. It Forbade Federal Agencies To Regulate The Financial Derivatives That Greased The Skids For Passing Along Risky Mortgage-backed Securities To Investors. And That, My Friends, Is Why Everything's Falling Apart. That Is Why The Taxpayers Are Now On The Hook For The Follies Of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns And Now The Insurance Giant Aig To The Tune Of $700 Billion.

Roflmnao... Nonsense!

 

[Modbert]

Roflmnao... Nonsense!

You do realize it's a bit sad to see you the only one who's laughing at your own jokes?

Your like the kid in the corner who likes to start fires to get attention and make lame jokes that are about a year late to be made.

 

[JennyFever]

ROFLMNAO... This is just TOO EASY! It's analogous to blungening baby seals, only without all the effort...

Four things here Sis...

First, Reagan didn't 'introduce trickle down economics...' In fact, there is no species of economic reasoning which bears such a title.

Second, the subject of your ignorance is merely the natural order... of economics.

Third, President Reagan is not President GW Bush...

Fourth, You stated quite emphatically "Disaster and misery that were caused by every Neocon's former hero, W." this implied that you were in possession of facts which lead you to conclude that Bush economic policy was responsible for the present economic 'crisis'... You were directly challenged to present this board with those facts and a basis in reasoning which correlated those facts to the above referenced conclusion; what's more it was noted in the footnote of that challenge that it was a certainty that you, in fact, had no valid basis for that conclusion and that your response would prove you to be a fool...

Congrats Sis! YOU - WENT - ALL - THE - WAY! You're now a certified FOOL...

Trickle Down Economics (Wikipedia)
"Today "trickle-down economics" is most closely identified with the economic policies known as Reaganomics or supply-side economics. "

George W. Bush believes in trickle down economics and the free market, just as Reagan did. Are you telling me that this theory is something I made up? That it hasn't been practiced by W for the last 7+ years? That the economic crisis has nothing to do with the economic policies of the current administration?

Basically, it comes down to whether you believe in the Friedman school of economic thought...trickle down, or supply side economics, if you prefer.
This school of thought endorses tax cuts for the wealthy, with the belief that the wealth will trickle down.

I believe in the Keynesian school of economic thought, and improving the economy by increasing demand. This is accomplished by tax cuts for the middle and lower classes.

 

[Modbert]

Trickle Down Economics (Wikipedia)
"Today "trickle-down economics" is most closely identified with the economic policies known as Reaganomics or supply-side economics. "

George W. Bush believes in trickle down economics and the free market, just as Reagan did. Are you telling me that this theory is something I made up? That it hasn't been practiced by W for the last 7+ years? That the economic crisis has nothing to do with the economic policies of the current administration?

Basically, it comes down to whether you believe in the Friedman school of economic thought...trickle down, or supply side economics, if you prefer.
This school of thought endorses tax cuts for the wealthy, with the belief that the wealth will trickle down.

I believe in the Keynesian school of economic thought, and improving the economy by increasing demand. This is accomplished by tax cuts for the middle and lower classes.

Psst Jenny, I think you lost him when you started to throw facts and logic into the situation.

To certain right wingers like PubliusInfinitu it comes out like garble.

 

[elvis]

McCain supported spending $1 trillion dollars on a FAKE war in Iraq.

fake? I think all liberals, conservatives, and libertarians in this forum agree this war is not fake. People come back in body bags or missing limbs.....
not fake. sorry, wrong word.

 

[Haro]

fake? I think all liberals, conservatives, and libertarians in this forum agree this war is not fake. People come back in body bags or missing limbs.....
not fake. sorry, wrong word.

And he neg reped ME for accusing him of bad english skills on the same point.

 

[Haro]

It's called trickle down economics, introduced by Reagan, and it doesn't work.

OMG. Someone that understand economics more than those McCain guys saying it is ALL Clinton's fault.

 

[Haro]

ROFLMNAO... This is just TOO EASY! It's analogous to blungening baby seals, only without all the effort...

Four things here Sis...

First, Reagan didn't 'introduce trickle down economics...' In fact, there is no species of economic reasoning which bears such a title.

Second, the subject of your ignorance is merely the natural order... of economics.

Third, President Reagan is not President GW Bush...

Fourth, You stated quite emphatically "Disaster and misery that were caused by every Neocon's former hero, W." this implied that you were in possession of facts which lead you to conclude that Bush economic policy was responsible for the present economic 'crisis'... You were directly challenged to present this board with those facts and a basis in reasoning which correlated those facts to the above referenced conclusion; what's more it was noted in the footnote of that challenge that it was a certainty that you, in fact, had no valid basis for that conclusion and that your response would prove you to be a fool...

Congrats Sis! YOU - WENT - ALL - THE - WAY! You're now a certified FOOL...

You are the moron here. One of the four pillars of Reaganomics is the theory that giving breaks to big business will cause them to hire more employees and allow them to expand.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

Psst Jenny, I think you lost him when you started to throw facts and logic into the situation.

To certain right wingers like PubliusInfinitu it comes out like garble.

She hasn't thrown a single fact, she threw a wiki-link to a slang term.

Nor has she shown how the economic theories of supply-side economics are responsible.

Your circle jerk does nothing to change that fact...or rather lack thereof.

 

[Chris]

She hasn't thrown a single fact, she threw a wiki-link to a slang term.

Nor has she shown how the economic theories of supply-side economics are responsible.

Your circle jerk does nothing to change that fact...or rather lack thereof.

Phil Gramm's derivatives are responsible. Ask Warren Buffett.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

You are the moron here. One of the four pillars of Reaganomics is the theory that giving breaks to big business will cause them to hire more employees and allow them to expand.

Giving breaks? Don't you mean: letting them keep what they lawfully earn?

And since you seem to take umbrage with this notion has it been demonstrated that businesses making a profit DO NOT expand, seek new customers and hence hire new employees?

Are you saying businesses like to stay small and only marginally profitable?

 

[MichaelCollins]

fake? I think all liberals, conservatives, and libertarians in this forum agree this war is not fake. People come back in body bags or missing limbs.....
not fake. sorry, wrong word.

Fake because it was called a war on terror....by BUSHTEAM liars.

When the reality is... if a bunch of cowardly fat americans bombed and massacred your wife and children...in any country...they would face resistance.

FAKE because the only reason for the massacre...was to pretend that there was a war...so that they can spend trillions on defence/military industrial complex.

 

[Haro]

Giving breaks? Don't you mean: letting them keep what they lawfully earn?

And since you seem to take umbrage with this notion has it been demonstrated that businesses making a profit DO NOT expand, seek new customers and hence hire new employees?

Are you saying businesses like to stay small and only marginally profitable?

Let me attempt to educate you. First, the government has a right to tax us in order to protect our well being, no taxes no police, no taxes no army.
It is true that companies making more DO in fact expand. They have more money, so they expand OVERSEAS, outsourcing jobs at lower cost to themselves and pocket the profits. Some American comanies, like Haliburtan, actually mover overseas OUT of America, taking their business out of the country entirely.

 

[mdjgirl7]

......but the financial collapse and Palin's debating skills will bring McCain back.

Right?

Obama lead over McCain steady at 8 percent, new poll shows | KansasCity.com Prime Buzz

This should do it for you.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8]YouTube - Dear Mr. Obama[/ame]