You win some. - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Four Fingers · 12-26-2003, 10:24 AM

"This week's final GDP report for the third quarter indicated that GDP growth was indeed as fast as preliminary estimates suggested, with blockbuster growth in consumer and business spending driving growth above 8 percent."

This is huge. Hugely huge. Europe's economy, by comparision, is sleeping. Sweden's annual growth is less than 3%. Belgium GDP growth is only a tiny bit above 2%.

A recent Gallop poll revealed that more than 60% of the American public believe that the American economy is getting better. This is the highest value for this category since Bush got in office. His approval ratings, by the way, are 63 vs. 34 again. He's gonna win the elections.

Bush, like Reagan and Thatcher, is an economic visionary. Congratulate the US, for there is not much more that you can do without embarassing yourself. Really.

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 10:43 AM

Gee, great economy, huge gains in Iraq, and Libya and Iran on the verge of cooperation. Why vote democrat in 04? What could they possibly have to offer? This is not a slam, but rather an honest question.

debaser · 12-26-2003, 10:56 AM

Quote:

He's gonna win the elections.

Maybe. It will probably come down to the wire like it did last time, such is politics in our nation. When both sides just play the polls the results will always be neck and neck.

debaser · 12-26-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
Why vote democrat in 04? What could they possibly have to offer?

Balance.

floydthebarber · 12-26-2003, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
Gee, great economy, huge gains in Iraq, and Libya and Iran on the verge of cooperation. Why vote democrat in 04? What could they possibly have to offer? This is not a slam, but rather an honest question.

Bush and his cronies are idiots IMO. That's all the reason I need not to vote for the guy.
It's funny, a year ago when the ecomomy was in the tank the neo-cons were saying that the shrub has little to do with the ecomomy. Now that its is picking up, bush gets the credit

Locobot · 12-26-2003, 11:17 AM

GDP growth is not the only measure of economic prosperity. If fact it's not a particularly accurate measure. Check out jobless rates, hunger, and poverty indexes if you want a more complete picture. A guy at work is always hyping me about the rebounding stock market. When I ask him if he owns stock he shrivels, he doesn't. When high-paying middle-class jobs that provide for healthcare and retirement start to reappear I'll start believing in Bush's "economic vision."

Ustwo · 12-26-2003, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Locobot
GDP growth is not the only measure of economic prosperity. If fact it's not a particularly accurate measure. Check out jobless rates, hunger, and poverty indexes if you want a more complete picture. A guy at work is always hyping me about the rebounding stock market. When I ask him if he owns stock he shrivels, he doesn't. When high-paying middle-class jobs that provide for healthcare and retirement start to reappear I'll start believing in Bush's "economic vision."

In other words, look at as many things until you find something that looks negative in order to justify your preconceived notions. The American standard of living is quite high right now and the jobless rate even in the WORST of this was still very low by historical standards. Just say "I don't like Bush and it has nothing to do with the economy" and be done with it.

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by floydthebarber
Bush and his cronies are idiots IMO. That's all the reason I need not to vote for the guy.
It's funny, a year ago when the ecomomy was in the tank the neo-cons were saying that the shrub has little to do with the ecomomy. Now that its is picking up, bush gets the credit

A year or two ago Bush inherited a sagging econonmy from the last administration, just as the last administration inherited a nice econonomy from the prior admin. I guess you forgot that. And I guess saying liberal is a bad term, but Neo con is cool. Double standard? Or are liberals just scared of the term liberal?

Locobot · 12-26-2003, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ustwo
In other words, look at as many things until you find something that looks negative in order to justify your preconceived notions. The American standard of living is quite high right now and the jobless rate even in the WORST of this was still very low by historical standards. Just say "I don't like Bush and it has nothing to do with the economy" and be done with it.

I don't like Bush and it has something to do with the economy. If you feel more in touch with arcane measures like GDP than hunger, poverty, or unemployment then you probably weren't effected by our recent economic slump. I don't believe that extreme deficit spending and tax cuts for the richest of the rich are sound economic values. What ever happened to fiscal conservatism?

The president doesn't have a great deal of direct control over the economy. Clinton didn't cause the 90s bubble, Bush wasn't responsible for 9/11 and the economic fallout. It's therefore hilarious to me when Bush isn't responsible for economic downturns, but he becomes and "economic visionary" when we start to have gains.

floydthebarber · 12-26-2003, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
A year or two ago Bush inherited a sagging econonmy from the last administration, just as the last administration inherited a nice econonomy from the prior admin. I guess you forgot that.

I didn't forget anything, why would you say that? How did you get that from my post?

Quote:

And I guess saying liberal is a bad term, but Neo con is cool. Double standard? Or are liberals just scared of the term liberal? [/B]

I'm not afraid of the term liberal at all, it causes me no grief what so ever. I'm no liberal and I'm no neo-con, I'm my own person that looks at the issues the way I see them. Does being called a neo-con bother you?

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 01:06 PM

Nope it doesnt, but every time i type Liberal I get five post telling me not to resort to personal attacks. Its the liberals that think the term liberal is akin to a personal attack. WHy are they ashamed of their own tag?

floydthebarber · 12-26-2003, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
Nope it doesnt, but every time i type Liberal I get five post telling me not to resort to personal attacks. Its the liberals that think the term liberal is akin to a personal attack.

Well then, maybe you should stop using that term if it's considered being a personal attack on this forum. If you read the newbie section you'd see this forum does not tolerate personal attacks. Maybe the next step is banning you; I don't think anyone would want to see that.

Quote:

WHy are they ashamed of their own tag?

Can you please point me to the thread where they said they were ashamed of this? Me thinks you put words in peoples mouths a bit too much.

Ustwo · 12-26-2003, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Locobot
I don't like Bush and it has something to do with the economy. If you feel more in touch with arcane measures like GDP than hunger, poverty, or unemployment then you probably weren't effected by our recent economic slump. I don't believe that extreme deficit spending and tax cuts for the richest of the rich are sound economic values. What ever happened to fiscal conservatism?

I didn't say I liked Bush's socialistic tendencies now did I? But again you fail to make a point. We KNOW the economy is growing at a record pace, thats in the numbers. You talk about other numbers, well then show them, show how horrible Bush has been and how the babies are starving in the street. Don't do what the left did in the global warming thread and pretend to have numbers but only have lies. Come forth with your wisdom and showith unto me these foul crimes of neglect of the evil Bush.

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by floydthebarber
Well then, maybe you should stop using that term if it's considered being a personal attack on this forum. If you read the newbie section you'd see this forum does not tolerate personal attacks. Maybe the next step is banning you; I don't think anyone would want to see that.

Can you please point me to the thread where they said they were ashamed of this? Me thinks you put words in peoples mouths a bit too much.

Stop using the term liberal cause liberals consider being called a liberal a bad thing? Wow, how about if you are a liberal, and not embarressed by being one, you take pride in the tag? What you are saying is that liberals should not be refered to as they all agree that being tagged as such is a detriment. I am sorry that liberals are ashamed of their politcal views. I assumed people were proud of their politcal views. I guess that only applies to conservatives. My bad.

floydthebarber · 12-26-2003, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
What you are saying is that liberals should not be refered to as they all agree that being tagged as such is a detriment.

Err, don't put words in my mouth please. Starting a sentence with "what you are saying" makes you sound like my wife

Read my words...that's what I said.
I have no idea why some liberals don't like to be called that, I also don't care. If they view it as a personal attack however, that's enough for me to not call them that. It's no more complicated than that.

Quote:

I am sorry that liberals are ashamed of their politcal views. I assumed people were proud of their politcal views. I guess that only applies to conservatives. My bad.

I'm sure everyone is proud of their views, no matter where they are situated. I don't know where you are going on this, but if you can show me where people of the left said they where ashamed of their views I'd be more than happy to read it. Unless you start the post with "what they are saying"...

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 06:44 PM

You said saying the word liberal is a personal attack. So what should I say then when talking about people with leftist political views? The truth is, the fact that the left is ashamed of their own label speaks volumes on the nature of their own beliefs.

Locobot · 12-26-2003, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ustwo
I didn't say I liked Bush's socialistic tendencies now did I? But again you fail to make a point. We KNOW the economy is growing at a record pace, thats in the numbers. You talk about other numbers, well then show them, show how horrible Bush has been and how the babies are starving in the street. Don't do what the left did in the global warming thread and pretend to have numbers but only have lies. Come forth with your wisdom and showith unto me these foul crimes of neglect of the evil Bush.

Bush has socialistic tendencies? Fascinating! And contrary to pretty much all popular thought on the man. Maybe you can PM me about that as it's off-topic.

I think the economy is gradually improving, but to say it's roaring like never before is a contrivance, and rather transparent one this close to an election. It's also harmful to many who can't find jobs or the kind of high-paying jobs with benefits that can support a family. I'm not a clearing house of economic statistics.

I didn't ask for an explanation of GDP and what that actually means or how it actually helps put food on dinner tables or make mortgage payments. Since you are hellbent on getting some numbers I'll provide some I found with only the most lackadaisical internet research:
As of 4 months ago:

Quote:

Homelessness Reaches New Levels - 3.5 million people, 39% of them children, currently experience homelessness every year. 60% of all new homeless cases are single mothers with children.
....
There has been a 40% increase in the Berkeley, California homeless population over the last two years. New York City has reported a 42% increase over the last two years, Boston a 37% increase, Los Angeles, CA a 47% increase, San Diego, CA 41%, Washington, D.C. 39%, Seattle, WA. 43%, Portland, OR 36%, Chicago, IL 47%, St. Louis, MO 34%, Atlanta, GA 40%, Tampa, FL 46%, St. Petersburg, Fl 45%, Miami, FL 49%, New Orleans, LA 41%, Phoenix, AZ a staggering 56%, with most other major cities reporting at least a 25-30% increase over the last two years.

41% of all homeless are single males, 41% families, 13% single females, and 5% being unaccompanied minors. The homeless population is estimated to be 50% African American, 35% white, 12% Hispanic, 2% Native American, and 1% Asian.

An average of 23% suffer from mental illness, 38% suffer from substance abuse, 10% are veterans, and 22% are employed.

Over 40% of homeless persons are eligible for disability benefits, but only 11% actually receive them. Most are eligible for food stamps, but only 37% receive them. Most homeless families are eligible for welfare benefits, but only 52% receive them.

Published reports suggest that most homeless families with children are headed by single women between the ages of 26 and 30 who have never been married and have two children. According to one study, homeless women are significantly more likely to have low birth weight babies than are similar poor women who have housing.

Lack of affordable housing leads the list of causes for homelessness, with mental illness and lack of needed services, substance abuse, low paying jobs, domestic violence, unemployment, poverty, prison release, down turn in economy, limited life skills and cuts in public assistance being the other top reported causes.

The average wait for public housing was 19 months; the average wait for Section 8 certificates and vouchers was 21-23 months. 45% of cities have stopped taking public housing applications in at least one assisted housing program due to extensive waiting lists.

Source: http://informationclearinghouse.info/article4305.htm

floydthebarber · 12-26-2003, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
You said saying the word liberal is a personal attack. So what should I say then when talking about people with leftist political views? The truth is, the fact that the left is ashamed of their own label speaks volumes on the nature of their own beliefs.

I never said the word liberal is a personal attack, you did.

Quote:

but every time i type Liberal I get five post telling me not to resort to personal attacks.

All I said that if people are telling you that it's a personal attack, maybe you shouldn't use that term. That said I don't know what you can use instead...maybe democrat?....I dunno, nor do I care.

Endymon32 · 12-26-2003, 08:43 PM

How about liberal, and if a person doesnt like the term, than that is more telling of the liberal than anything else.

And to the other poster, Bush's medicine for the elderly plain is flat out socialist. No ands or ifs about it. And its not contrairy to all popular thought on the man. In fact its one of his major criticisms, thats is a socialist program.

Ustwo · 12-26-2003, 09:06 PM

Locobot - No offense but do you have any sources of information not on some wacky nutball website? It makes truthout.org seem like nothing but a non-biased reading of the sports page. After checking the stories on that site I decided it was time to put on my tinfoil hat and live in a hole I will dig with my 2 bare hands to escape the power of king George.

Also ask yourself where he gets his homeless numbers on. But for fun lets just post a quote that gives the flavor of the article that wasn't in yours....

Quote:

The most shocking sight to see is homeless and starving children, living right near some of the richest neighborhoods!!!!! Right here in "humanitarian" America, home of the worlds largest "humanitarian" and "liberating" force (or is it FARCE?).

Yes, I'm sure the streets near me would too be filled with the starving masses if it weren't for the death squads our city government sends out daily to shield us from the truth!

Reading the full article made me think of the Simpsons. Mostly because he used the words 'Child/Children' 35 different times. I kept hearing “Won't somebody please think about the children?” over and over in my head as I read.

And for all this horror George has bestowed on us, his solution like every good liberal is cut our defense budget and feed the world. Brilliant, I wish I would have thought of that.

Locobot · 12-28-2003, 12:10 AM

Ustwo- Yes I agree about the tone and general paranoia in the article I posted. I did preface its introduction by saying that I found it with the least amount of effort possible. You can't deny however that I answered your call for statistics that directly refute the premise of this thread. Again, I am not a clearing house for economic statistics. If you want me to find more evidence from other legitimate sites you can start answering some of the questions and concerns I posted about GDP. If you're actually interested in getting a more complete picture of what is going on with our nation's economy you can do this research yourself. Start by finding foodstamp application rates, then look at unemployment rates. Good! Now we're learning!

Re: W. Bush's socialist leanings, Ustwo & Endymon32
Bush is not a socialist. If you sat down with the man and asked him why he had socialist leanings I gaurantee you that he would be insulted and most likely stop talking with you. It is true that there is socialism in our country and that we all enjoy the benefits of it daily. In fact it is a large part of what makes our country great and a land of opportunity. Medicare is a program with deep roots in socialist thought (it is also one of the most popular pieces of legislation in the last 50 years). Although Bush did get Medicare legislation passed, it is--by the admistration's own admission--an attempt to dismantle Medicare. Ever wonder why the Bush Medicare plan doesn't take effect until after the election (mid-2005)? [Much noggin scratching]

Calling W. Bush a socialist is the kind of distortion that is all too regular in your posts Ustwo. If fact if you continue to misrepresent, distort, and lie about things that I write or post I will discontinue discourse with you. If this is your goal I don't feel you belong on this forum.

Strange Famous · 12-28-2003, 03:24 AM

Amerca will reject Bush because he is a lair, a virtual illiterate, and a warmonger.

Endymon32 · 12-28-2003, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by debaser
Balance.

Balance? So you mean to swing the pendulum back the Democrates will halt the economy? Halt the progress in Iraq, and let other nations go rogue to counter act the cooperatation we are getting fron Iran, and Libya?

No thanks.

Endymon32 · 12-28-2003, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
Amerca will reject Bush because he is a lair, a virtual illiterate, and a warmonger.

If Bush gets reelected, which he will, Will you stop posting here? I will save your post as proof that, yet again, you are wrong on everything you post.

debaser · 12-28-2003, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
Balance? So you mean to swing the pendulum back the Democrates will halt the economy? Halt the progress in Iraq, and let other nations go rogue to counter act the cooperatation we are getting fron Iran, and Libya?

No thanks.

If republicans had complete control of this country it would be just as screwed up as if democrats had complete control.

Strange Famous · 12-28-2003, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
If Bush gets reelected, which he will, Will you stop posting here? I will save your post as proof that, yet again, you are wrong on everything you post.

No

But I think Bush is very unlikley to win, or even "win" by coup d'tat as he did last time with the help of the Supreme Court and his brother.

Despite anything else, don't Americans feel embarassed to have a "president" who you have to admit sounds like he has no idea what he is talking about most of the time? There are whole books full of silly or nonesense quotes from Dubya

Endymon32 · 12-28-2003, 09:30 AM

Most americans like bush, look at the polls. And you ignored the link that i posted that showed the election was without fraud. But then i knew you would. Why would you want proof on something you are completly wrong about? That would just get in the way of your ignorant ranting.

debaser · 12-28-2003, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
Most americans like bush, look at the polls. And you ignored the link that i posted that showed the election was without fraud. But then i knew you would. Why would you want proof on something you are completly wrong about? That would just get in the way of your ignorant ranting.

You may want to tone it down a bit. Your good points are getting muddled by your hositility...

Endymon32 · 12-28-2003, 09:37 AM

Well, he did ignore my links, and BUsh is very popular, the elections WAS without fraud, so that makes his posts ignorant ranting. Sorry for pointing that out.

debaser · 12-28-2003, 09:39 AM

Just trying to help you out, man. I've seen too many get the axe for doing exactly what you are doing now. Just FYI...

Strange Famous · 12-28-2003, 09:41 AM

Bush did win by fraud, Michael Moore has gone into quite a lot of the detail to explain that Al Gore won the election. This is something we have to say, in this thread we are talking about Bush being "re-elected", so we need to be sure we know that Al Gore won the last election, he received more votes in Florida, the "chads" notwithstanding, the people of Florida voted for Gore, the state was given to Bush.

debaser · 12-28-2003, 09:45 AM

First off Strange, take everything Micheal Moore says with a grain of salt. He has his own agenda, and is not above stooping to sophistry to achieve his own ends. If that fails, he lies outright.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America held that the elections were legitimate, therefore they were. I don't like it anymore than you do, as I actually live here and have to work for the man, but he is the legitimate president of the USA.

Ustwo · 12-28-2003, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
Bush did win by fraud, Michael Moore has gone into quite a lot of the detail to explain that Al Gore won the election. This is something we have to say, in this thread we are talking about Bush being "re-elected", so we need to be sure we know that Al Gore won the last election, he received more votes in Florida, the "chads" notwithstanding, the people of Florida voted for Gore, the state was given to Bush.

Well if MICHAEL MOORE said it, it MUST be true!

Strange Famous · 12-28-2003, 09:57 AM

Michael Moore may be sometimes cheap, and I dont doubt that he twists and selects data to show what he wants.

But at the same time, in his books "Stupid White Men" I think it was called, in black and white there are the facts of the electoral fraud committed by the Supreme Court & Bush.

debaser · 12-28-2003, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by debaser

The Supreme Court of the United States of America held that the elections were legitimate, therefore they were.

Endymon32 · 12-28-2003, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strange Famous
Bush did win by fraud, Michael Moore has gone into quite a lot of the detail to explain that Al Gore won the election. This is something we have to say, in this thread we are talking about Bush being "re-elected", so we need to be sure we know that Al Gore won the last election, he received more votes in Florida, the "chads" notwithstanding, the people of Florida voted for Gore, the state was given to Bush.

Again you didnt read my links that show that Moore is completly in error, but I now expect that from you.

nanofever · 12-29-2003, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by debaser
The Supreme Court of the United States of America held that the elections were legitimate, therefore they were.

Going to have to disagree with you. The legitimacy of the ruling is only as legitimate as the supreme court at that time, which changes depending on court activism and the like.

Endymon32 · 12-29-2003, 10:19 PM

I thought the fact that it was proven that there was no voter fraud in florida showed that the election was legitimate?

nanofever · 12-30-2003, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endymon32
I thought the fact that it was proven that there was no voter fraud in florida showed that the election was legitimate?

Is Endymon32 a troll or does he/she really believe this ? I'm going to have to side with troll and stop answering silly, unsupported statements like this.

Thanks G'day

Pacifier · 12-30-2003, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Four Fingers
Europe's economy, by comparision, is sleeping. Sweden's annual growth is less than 3%. Belgium GDP growth is only a tiny bit above 2%.

In the nations you mentioned the GDP is calculated a bit different than in the US. So it is not so easy to compare them. But still the US GDP is not bad

But as Locobot said, you should also look at other numbers. The number of people living in povetry has risen from 2001 to 2002:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html

12-26-2003, 10:24 AM	#1 (permalink)
Four Fingers Crazy	You win some. "This week's final GDP report for the third quarter indicated that GDP growth was indeed as fast as preliminary estimates suggested, with blockbuster growth in consumer and business spending driving growth above 8 percent." This is huge. Hugely huge. Europe's economy, by comparision, is sleeping. Sweden's annual growth is less than 3%. Belgium GDP growth is only a tiny bit above 2%. A recent Gallop poll revealed that more than 60% of the American public believe that the American economy is getting better. This is the highest value for this category since Bush got in office. His approval ratings, by the way, are 63 vs. 34 again. He's gonna win the elections. Bush, like Reagan and Thatcher, is an economic visionary. Congratulate the US, for there is not much more that you can do without embarassing yourself. Really. __________________ "Always do right - this will gratify some and astonish the rest."

12-28-2003, 12:10 AM	#21 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	Ustwo- Yes I agree about the tone and general paranoia in the article I posted. I did preface its introduction by saying that I found it with the least amount of effort possible. You can't deny however that I answered your call for statistics that directly refute the premise of this thread. Again, I am not a clearing house for economic statistics. If you want me to find more evidence from other legitimate sites you can start answering some of the questions and concerns I posted about GDP. If you're actually interested in getting a more complete picture of what is going on with our nation's economy you can do this research yourself. Start by finding foodstamp application rates, then look at unemployment rates. Good! Now we're learning! Re: W. Bush's socialist leanings, Ustwo & Endymon32 Bush is not a socialist. If you sat down with the man and asked him why he had socialist leanings I gaurantee you that he would be insulted and most likely stop talking with you. It is true that there is socialism in our country and that we all enjoy the benefits of it daily. In fact it is a large part of what makes our country great and a land of opportunity. Medicare is a program with deep roots in socialist thought (it is also one of the most popular pieces of legislation in the last 50 years). Although Bush did get Medicare legislation passed, it is--by the admistration's own admission--an attempt to dismantle Medicare. Ever wonder why the Bush Medicare plan doesn't take effect until after the election (mid-2005)? [Much noggin scratching] Calling W. Bush a socialist is the kind of distortion that is all too regular in your posts Ustwo. If fact if you continue to misrepresent, distort, and lie about things that I write or post I will discontinue discourse with you. If this is your goal I don't feel you belong on this forum. Last edited by Locobot; 12-28-2003 at 12:13 AM..

12-28-2003, 03:24 AM	#22 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	Amerca will reject Bush because he is a lair, a virtual illiterate, and a warmonger. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

12-28-2003, 09:39 AM	#30 (permalink)
debaser Sir, I have a plan... Location: 38S NC20943324	Just trying to help you out, man. I've seen too many get the axe for doing exactly what you are doing now. Just FYI... __________________ Fortunato became immured to the sound of the trowel after a while.

12-28-2003, 09:41 AM	#31 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	Bush did win by fraud, Michael Moore has gone into quite a lot of the detail to explain that Al Gore won the election. This is something we have to say, in this thread we are talking about Bush being "re-elected", so we need to be sure we know that Al Gore won the last election, he received more votes in Florida, the "chads" notwithstanding, the people of Florida voted for Gore, the state was given to Bush. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

12-26-2003, 10:43 AM	#2 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	Gee, great economy, huge gains in Iraq, and Libya and Iran on the verge of cooperation. Why vote democrat in 04? What could they possibly have to offer? This is not a slam, but rather an honest question.

12-26-2003, 11:17 AM	#6 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	GDP growth is not the only measure of economic prosperity. If fact it's not a particularly accurate measure. Check out jobless rates, hunger, and poverty indexes if you want a more complete picture. A guy at work is always hyping me about the rebounding stock market. When I ask him if he owns stock he shrivels, he doesn't. When high-paying middle-class jobs that provide for healthcare and retirement start to reappear I'll start believing in Bush's "economic vision."

12-26-2003, 01:06 PM	#11 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	Nope it doesnt, but every time i type Liberal I get five post telling me not to resort to personal attacks. Its the liberals that think the term liberal is akin to a personal attack. WHy are they ashamed of their own tag?

12-26-2003, 06:44 PM	#16 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	You said saying the word liberal is a personal attack. So what should I say then when talking about people with leftist political views? The truth is, the fact that the left is ashamed of their own label speaks volumes on the nature of their own beliefs.

12-26-2003, 08:43 PM	#19 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	How about liberal, and if a person doesnt like the term, than that is more telling of the liberal than anything else. And to the other poster, Bush's medicine for the elderly plain is flat out socialist. No ands or ifs about it. And its not contrairy to all popular thought on the man. In fact its one of his major criticisms, thats is a socialist program.

12-28-2003, 09:30 AM	#27 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	Most americans like bush, look at the polls. And you ignored the link that i posted that showed the election was without fraud. But then i knew you would. Why would you want proof on something you are completly wrong about? That would just get in the way of your ignorant ranting.

12-28-2003, 09:37 AM	#29 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	Well, he did ignore my links, and BUsh is very popular, the elections WAS without fraud, so that makes his posts ignorant ranting. Sorry for pointing that out.

12-28-2003, 09:45 AM	#32 (permalink)
debaser Sir, I have a plan... Location: 38S NC20943324	First off Strange, take everything Micheal Moore says with a grain of salt. He has his own agenda, and is not above stooping to sophistry to achieve his own ends. If that fails, he lies outright. The Supreme Court of the United States of America held that the elections were legitimate, therefore they were. I don't like it anymore than you do, as I actually live here and have to work for the man, but he is the legitimate president of the USA. __________________ Fortunato became immured to the sound of the trowel after a while.

12-28-2003, 09:57 AM	#34 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	Michael Moore may be sometimes cheap, and I dont doubt that he twists and selects data to show what he wants. But at the same time, in his books "Stupid White Men" I think it was called, in black and white there are the facts of the electoral fraud committed by the Supreme Court & Bush. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

12-29-2003, 10:19 PM	#38 (permalink)
Endymon32 Banned	I thought the fact that it was proven that there was no voter fraud in florida showed that the election was legitimate?