The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[Faun]

Says you, but then you posted one link that said one thing and another link saying the opposite.

Weakest recovery is not the opposite of slowest recovery.

You posted one article that said it was the weakest and another that said it wasn't the weakest.

Try to pay attention to what you post. Meanwhile, it's your job to reconcile your inconsistent articles, not mine.

And don't forget the ones that said it was the slowest.

LOLOLOL

Yeah, that's what you changed your argument to when I pointed out the article you posted actually said it was the "slowest" -- while you posted a link to that article thinking it corroborated your claim that it was the "weakest."

That's when you lost your argument.

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Weakest recovery is not the opposite of slowest recovery.

You posted one article that said it was the weakest and another that said it wasn't the weakest.

Try to pay attention to what you post. Meanwhile, it's your job to reconcile your inconsistent articles, not mine.

And don't forget the ones that said it was the slowest.

LOLOLOL

Yeah, that's what you changed your argument to when I pointed out the article you posted actually said it was the "slowest" -- while you posted a link to that article thinking it corroborated your claim that it was the "weakest."

That's when you lost your argument.

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

 

[Faun]

You posted one article that said it was the weakest and another that said it wasn't the weakest.

Try to pay attention to what you post. Meanwhile, it's your job to reconcile your inconsistent articles, not mine.

And don't forget the ones that said it was the slowest.

LOLOLOL

Yeah, that's what you changed your argument to when I pointed out the article you posted actually said it was the "slowest" -- while you posted a link to that article thinking it corroborated your claim that it was the "weakest."

That's when you lost your argument.

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And don't forget the ones that said it was the slowest.

LOLOLOL

Yeah, that's what you changed your argument to when I pointed out the article you posted actually said it was the "slowest" -- while you posted a link to that article thinking it corroborated your claim that it was the "weakest."

That's when you lost your argument.

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

 

[Faun]

LOLOLOL

Yeah, that's what you changed your argument to when I pointed out the article you posted actually said it was the "slowest" -- while you posted a link to that article thinking it corroborated your claim that it was the "weakest."

That's when you lost your argument.

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama had the slowest recovery.
Obama had the weakest recovery.

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

 

[Faun]

Not according to you. According to what you posted, one article said it was the weakest and the other said it wasn't. That you keep lying reveals much about you.

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not according to you.

Absolutely according to me.
And according to the economic stats.

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest" when your original argument crumbled like a cupcake. Then you tried to salvage it by falsely claiming "slow" is a synonym of "weak." And you posted a link to an article that wouldn't say it was the weakest after you claimed the article said it was the weakest.

What is weakest is you -- you're the weakest link.

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You switched your argument from "weakest" to "slowest"

When discussing Obama's recovery, those terms are interchangeable.

View attachment 266048
Why This is the Worst Recovery on Record

Robert Reich says it's the worst recovery.

Do you feel that disagrees with weakest or with slowest?

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

 

[Faun]

I feel you already lost this argument when you pulled your bait and switch when you posted an article that disagrees with your later articles. Ad I said earlier, it's your problem to reconcile your conflicting articles, not mine.

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Argument? LOL!

If you're going to say Obama's recovery wasn't the weakest, it was the slowest, or vice versa, go right ahead.
I'll use either, or both. Or maybe I'll use worst?

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

 

[Faun]

Who cares what you call it? You already defeated your original argument yourself when you claimed it was the "weakest" but then posted a link to an article which stated it wouldn't call it the "wrakest." You been stuttering ever since.

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama had the worst recovery on record.

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

 

[Faun]

LOL

You said "weakest"... until you posted a link that said it wouldn't say "weakest."

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I said weakest. I said slowest. I said worst.

They all apply to Obama's recovery.

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

How'd they do that?

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

You're still gumming my ankles like this?

No, you said "weakest." Your posts are still here. You only switched to "slowest" and "worst" after your own link blew up your argument.

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

How'd they do that?

Their policies...

"Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 Republican National Convention​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, Obama's recovery really stunk.

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

How'd they do that?

Their policies...

"Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 Republican National Convention​

Which ones? Implemented when?

Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!

Sounds awful! So which new ones did he put in place that Clinton didn't already have?

 

[Faun]

LOL

I always get a chuckle when righties ***** & moan about how it takes the left too long to clean up their messes.

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

How'd they do that?

Their policies...

"Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 Republican National Convention​

Which ones? Implemented when?

Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!

Sounds awful! So which new ones did he put in place that Clinton didn't already have?

You'll have to ask him as he didn't list which policies caused it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Such a weak recovery. Why was it so weak?

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy. It takes a long to recover when the economy sheds 8 million jobs to E-3 unemployment statistics, 12 million jobs to E-6 unemployment statistics, negative 8.4 GDP, a crater where our housing markets once stood, where our stock market once stood, and where many folks could no longer borrow money because our credit markets locked up. Thanks to the policies of George Bush and Republicans, they left a recession that swallowed up between $20-$30 trillion of wealth.

Like I said, you righties crack me up when you ***** and moan that the left takes too long to clean up your messes.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

How'd they do that?

Their policies...

"Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 Republican National Convention​

Which ones? Implemented when?

Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all time high!

Sounds awful! So which new ones did he put in place that Clinton didn't already have?

You'll have to ask him as he didn't list which policies caused it.

I asked you to back up your claim.

Bush & Republicans utterly decimated the economy.

Is your claim that high home ownership decimated the economy?