Poll: FDR # 1 President

[Mr.Fitnah]

We can apply that logic to anyone can't we?

You can't prove the Packers wouldn't have won championships without Vince Lombardi
You can't prove that the Declaration of Independence would have been any worse or better without Jefferson
You can't prove the Cold War would have ended any later without Reagan

Its great being the Dude isn't it?

Exactly.

So why do you insist that the illogical and unprovable argument is valid in your case?

So why do we bother to post on this fucking Politics board?

To answer the lies of ignorant fools like you to avoid the pit falls of the past .

 

[Fenris Wolf]

Fenris. Son! I am talking to you. Look me in the eye, that's right in the eye. You have not offered anything, and you are telling those who are better informed that they don't know what they are talking about? Run along, sit, listen, and learn. Now, scoot!

Come on, now I've heard some real bullshitters in my day, and you aren't fooling me. You can try to discredit me, call me crazy, call me a liar all you want, but when the day is done, how's that iconic liberal knowledge working out for your heroes? I don't think they can fight their way out of a wet paper bag, even when they break the rules which they must do in order to obtain an advantage, as history has proved time and time again. Maybe you can come over some time and sit on my knee and I'll tell you all about it. If this is what the schools are teaching, I'd ask for my money back, if I were you.

LOL...Same old Rightwing revisionist history nonsense

Schools? Schools know nothing and have a leftwing agenda
Historians? All elitists who hate conservatives
Scientists? Overeducated eggheads with a liberal agenda
The Media? Socialist agenda to pervert the American agenda

Yes pray to the supplyside alter and try to convince yourself that history is all wrong.

You took part of what I said and added a bunch of shit that's not true in a pathetic attempt to make me look foolish. The only problem with that is anyone who reads it will realize you are a complete ass with a rectum bigger than your IQ.
I have been to public school, and even in those days I saw a skewed version of history mostly because of the information that was presented in the text books had a left leaning, which I later realized once I had more in depth academic history in high school. Maybe this is why all you liberal kooks say that the right is always on the wrong side of history?
I have no problem with historians, what I have a problem with are people who credentials to bend the truth to fit their political allegiance.
Scientist, hell, I have no problem with scientist. My sister is a scientist, a genetic engineer, who has a 6 figure income and travels the world for a....large...and...evil corporation hell bent on making an evil profit through goods and services, I'm sure you're pissing yourself now huh. What bothers her and I are people who make false assumptions without the scientific process in the name of science in order to bolster the opinions of has been and never were politicians and freaks in order to make a profit and to create a new tax.

Media, do you mean news or sensationalism, because I haven't seen real news in a long time, only sensationalism and propaganda? Let me guess you get your facts from Chris Mathews or Keith Olberman as they are more superior to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck, because they are a leftist shill and the other are rightwing scum....how am I doing, pretty close?

 

[Oddball]

We can apply that logic to anyone can't we?

You can't prove the Packers wouldn't have won championships without Vince Lombardi
You can't prove that the Declaration of Independence would have been any worse or better without Jefferson
You can't prove the Cold War would have ended any later without Reagan

Its great being the Dude isn't it?

Exactly.

So why do you insist that the illogical and unprovable argument is valid in your case?

So why do we bother to post on this fucking Politics board?

To call bullshit artists like you out on your bullshit.

Looks like I scored a hit or two here today.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mr. Fitnah. Son, you are reactionary, predatory fool, who is fooling no one. You don't have it what it takes, sonny. You can't post evidence to a topic, you cry when you get called out, you whine like a baby, and you hide behind folks like Dude. So sad too bad.

 

[Old Rocks]

You did? Care to name your dealer?

 

[Bfgrn]

That post hoc ergo propter hoc dog don't hunt, Sparky.

And of course the media showed us soup kitchen America...If it bleeds it leads was their motto way back then, too.

Fraid not Dudester....

That was America of the 30s-50s. There were areas of extreme poverty that rivaled third world living conditions. Yes the "bleeding heart" media brought it all into our living rooms...those bastards!

LBJ cared enough to do something about it

Entirely irrelevant.

Since you cannot roll back the hands of time and see what would have happened had FDR's silly programs not been implemented, then your story is just that....A story.

Armchair mind reader opinions that FDR "cared" prove nothing, from an objective standpoint.

We do have a real good idea Jethro...you cannot defy the laws of nature, or the ultimate role of government's responsibility...We, the PEOPLE; you know, those things that always get in the way of right wing solutions; those annoying little mortal creatures that can starve, die, get sick...the things that always fuck up the mammon loving Pharisees...

The FDR administration soon increased funds to FERA, and added additional programs to get people back to work and revitalize the American economy. Hopkins and the Brain Trust were criticized for excessive spending by conservative members of Congress, who claimed that the economy would sort itself out in the long run. To which Hopkins replied, "People don't eat in the long run, they eat every day."

 

[JakeStarkey]

But, Dude, my friend, you are not the expert.

You are not even close to really understanding the issues here.

You truly do not understand philosophy, history, economics, or the concept of liberal arts, much less those of math and science.

Those who have made it their lives' professions to read, discuss, and write about such matters have with their findings contradicted you comments.

You simply put a spin of subjectivity (your subjectivity) and dismiss it.

Your findings are dismissed.

 

[Oddball]

Compared to you, Jake the Fake, I'm a certifiable Swami.

I understand a whole helluva lot more than you "think" (for lack of a better term) that I do.

Any time you want to have a 1-on-1 go at it, just tee up the callout.

That goes for you too, Double Nut.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Compared to you, Jake the Fake, I'm a certifiable Swami.

I understand a whole helluva lot more than you "think" (for lack of a better term) that I do.

Any time you want to have a 1-on-1 go at it, just tee up the callout.

That goes for you too, Double Nut.

You don't think, Dude, you merely emote, and that, son, is worthless among men and women of understanding. Scoot.

 

[Oddball]

G'head...Fake....Bring it....

Pick a topic.

I dare ya...

 

[Trajan]

Compared to you, Jake the Fake, I'm a certifiable Swami.

I understand a whole helluva lot more than you "think" (for lack of a better term) that I do.

Any time you want to have a 1-on-1 go at it, just tee up the callout.

That goes for you too, Double Nut.

You don't think, Dude, you merely emote, and that, son, is worthless among men and women of understanding. Scoot.

anyway, seriously, whats you definition of a robber baron...?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Compared to you, Jake the Fake, I'm a certifiable Swami.

I understand a whole helluva lot more than you "think" (for lack of a better term) that I do.

Any time you want to have a 1-on-1 go at it, just tee up the callout.

That goes for you too, Double Nut.

You don't think, Dude, you merely emote, and that, son, is worthless among men and women of understanding. Scoot.

anyway, seriously, whats you definition of a robber baron...?

A workable answer from robber baron: Definition from Answers.com

A disparaging term dating back to the 12th century which refers to:

1. Unscrupulous feudal lords who amassed personal fortunes by using illegal and immoral business practices, such as illegally charging tolls to passing merchant ships.

2. Modern-day businesspeople who allegedly engage in unethical business tactics and questionable stock market transactions to build large personal fortunes.

Investopedia Says: Due to the robber barons' unethical business practices, such as the exploitation of labor, the general public typically regards these aggressive capitalists with disdain. However, some historians argue that the late-19th century entrepreneurs usually referred to as "robber barons" - including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller - are responsible for building a large portion of the U.S.'s current economic clout, because of their large investments in burgeoning American industries. Many also went on to become high-profile philanthropists.

Yes, revisionist historians try to revive the reputations of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. Yes, I studied in a Carnegie Library, but I know the blood spilled with which the money to build it. I suggest you study all the history about these guys.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Mr. Fitnah. Son, you are reactionary, predatory fool, who is fooling no one. You don't have it what it takes, sonny. You can't post evidence to a topic, you cry when you get called out, you whine like a baby, and you hide behind folks like Dude. So sad too bad.

Play all you want, history proves you are a turd
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2473000-post127.html

 

[Oddball]

Put up or shut up, Fake.



Pick a topic...Pick the terms.



Quit talking and start chalking.

 

[Bfgrn]

You don't think, Dude, you merely emote, and that, son, is worthless among men and women of understanding. Scoot.

anyway, seriously, whats you definition of a robber baron...?

A workable answer from robber baron: Definition from Answers.com

A disparaging term dating back to the 12th century which refers to:

1. Unscrupulous feudal lords who amassed personal fortunes by using illegal and immoral business practices, such as illegally charging tolls to passing merchant ships.

2. Modern-day businesspeople who allegedly engage in unethical business tactics and questionable stock market transactions to build large personal fortunes.

Investopedia Says: Due to the robber barons' unethical business practices, such as the exploitation of labor, the general public typically regards these aggressive capitalists with disdain. However, some historians argue that the late-19th century entrepreneurs usually referred to as "robber barons" - including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller - are responsible for building a large portion of the U.S.'s current economic clout, because of their large investments in burgeoning American industries. Many also went on to become high-profile philanthropists.

Yes, revisionist historians try to revive the reputations of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. Yes, I studied in a Carnegie Library, but I know the blood spilled with which the money to build it. I suggest you study all the history about these guys.

You can't debate DUD...Pharisees only understand one form of capital...and it is never human capital.


Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

 

[Oddball]

Really?

Pick a topic, Double Nut, and I'll do the 1-on-1 with you.

I'm not going anywhere, Jethro.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

anyway, seriously, whats you definition of a robber baron...?

A workable answer from robber baron: Definition from Answers.com

A disparaging term dating back to the 12th century which refers to:

1. Unscrupulous feudal lords who amassed personal fortunes by using illegal and immoral business practices, such as illegally charging tolls to passing merchant ships.

2. Modern-day businesspeople who allegedly engage in unethical business tactics and questionable stock market transactions to build large personal fortunes.

Investopedia Says: Due to the robber barons' unethical business practices, such as the exploitation of labor, the general public typically regards these aggressive capitalists with disdain. However, some historians argue that the late-19th century entrepreneurs usually referred to as "robber barons" - including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller - are responsible for building a large portion of the U.S.'s current economic clout, because of their large investments in burgeoning American industries. Many also went on to become high-profile philanthropists.

Yes, revisionist historians try to revive the reputations of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. Yes, I studied in a Carnegie Library, but I know the blood spilled with which the money to build it. I suggest you study all the history about these guys.

You can't debate DUD...Pharisees only understand one form of capital...and it is never human capital.


Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

Coward , punk ass coward.

 

[Bfgrn]

A workable answer from robber baron: Definition from Answers.com

A disparaging term dating back to the 12th century which refers to:

1. Unscrupulous feudal lords who amassed personal fortunes by using illegal and immoral business practices, such as illegally charging tolls to passing merchant ships.

2. Modern-day businesspeople who allegedly engage in unethical business tactics and questionable stock market transactions to build large personal fortunes.

Investopedia Says: Due to the robber barons' unethical business practices, such as the exploitation of labor, the general public typically regards these aggressive capitalists with disdain. However, some historians argue that the late-19th century entrepreneurs usually referred to as "robber barons" - including Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller - are responsible for building a large portion of the U.S.'s current economic clout, because of their large investments in burgeoning American industries. Many also went on to become high-profile philanthropists.

Yes, revisionist historians try to revive the reputations of the Rockefellers and Carnegies. Yes, I studied in a Carnegie Library, but I know the blood spilled with which the money to build it. I suggest you study all the history about these guys.

You can't debate DUD...Pharisees only understand one form of capital...and it is never human capital.


Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

Coward , punk ass coward.

He who angers you conquers you.
E. Kenny


Mr. have-a-Fit is pwned

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dude, you had the opportunity to engage in post #40 in this thread. Why don't you respond there?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You can't debate DUD...Pharisees only understand one form of capital...and it is never human capital.


Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

Coward , punk ass coward.

He who angers you conquers you.
E. Kenny


Mr. have-a-Fit is pwned

Mr. F has been crying all day.