kallend 2,027 #26 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuote"Our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term." State of the Union Address, January 2002 For goodness' sakes man! Can't you see Bush was speaking in geological terms when he said this? That's the only explanation that makes any sense at all.And I suppose he needed Imaginary WMDs to solve his Complex problem of how to start a Real war.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n2skdvn 0 #27 February 10, 2004 http://factcheck.org/ for both sidesif my calculations are correct SLINKY + ESCULATOR = EVERLASTING FUN my site Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nightjumps 1 #28 February 10, 2004 Quotethe aftermath of the .com crash and 9/11 were Bush's fault. Ya know he may not be totally to blame for failure, but as the leader, he is responsible for corrective action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiveNFlorida 0 #29 February 10, 2004 QuoteSo, his predictions were wrong. I can't imagine the mess the dems would have created under the same circumstances. Well, it doesn't matter because really all you can do is imagine. No one knows what they would have projected. Also, no one knows if having a dem in power would have made the situation better/worse altogether. QuoteWhat fuckups are his? AGAIN, what would YOU do differently? BEFORE AFTER Whenever YOU want. How would YOU create jobs? It's rather easy to fault predictions, but we're still waiting for your cure. GWB's waiting, Congress is waiting, Greenspan's waiting... Hell, the whole world's waiting. Well, Kallend isn't running for president. That doesn't mean he can't see when things aren't going well. Hell, my physics lab instructor has got to be the worst teacher ever in the history of community college. But, just because I recognize this, doesn't mean i'd have a game plan to fix it. I couldn't teach a physics class to save my life. Understand that i'm not trying to start a fight here, but some of these replies/requests are not very reasonable. I am a democrat i'd suppose, although I do not bother to vote. So, whoever this argument favors, I really couldn't care less. I will say that I think that Bush is a blubbering idiot. And, no, that doesn't mean I could be the president, but I do know a moron when I see one Angela. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YellowDog 0 #30 February 10, 2004 Just remember this little law of physics: For every action, there is and and equal and opposite reaction. Applying this principle to politics makes a lot of "mud." Hmmm. ---> One Half of Almost Nearly Normal <--- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ltdiver 3 #31 February 10, 2004 QuoteThe President's Economic Report, published today, predicts 2.6M new jobs this year. Last year, the Bush administration predicted the creation of about 1.7 million jobs. But the USA actually lost 53,000 jobs last year, bringing the total number of jobs lost since Jan 2001 to 2.2 million. Question, Kallend my friend.... We may have initiated 1.7M new jobs last year. The loss of 53,000 came from the -whole- job market....not just the new jobs created. It goes along the same lines as when people claim there is a 50% divorce rate in our country. It's -not- 50% of -new- marriages that go belly up, but 50% of the whole -lot- of them that do. Make sense? ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeteH 0 #32 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteGreat record your guy has. Why thank you very much! It's about time you came around and recognized that the Dems have no solution. Why even though the great one was asked several posts up, HE CAN COME UP WITH NO SOLUTION EITHER! It is very, very easy to cast stones my friend. Where's you're answer Raf? I'm not American, but I know one thing I would've made differently. Bush (who has been saying he supports free trade!), used steel tariffs to protect American steel industry. He saved some steel workers jobs and helped steel industry, but afterwards it's been calculated that the steel-using industry suffered about tariffs and lost more jobs and money than steel industry gained. And don't say it's easy to say this afterwards. I've been a free trade (that is really free and includes everything) supporter for long time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
countryscrub 0 #33 February 10, 2004 yes this very same tarrif that he lifted and allowed a russian steel suplyer to buy out rouge steel who went bankrupt this year after 309 millions in losses seince 1999 ... and with the new company giving the russians a way to under cut the import teirrifs thus in turn putting many many other us steel company in jepordy ... not to mention with the ratifaction of their new contract puting the companys employees who were on medical out on the street with zero benifits and no disibaliy pay.... im one of those workers i broke my back three days before the new contract ... ill be laid up for three months in need of medical care my insurence ends the 29th of this month and will have zero income comming in the pay cobra to continue further medical care still need my opinion of teh man ...or can you guess_________________________________________ i used to do alot of things ....skydiving wont be one of them :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antithesis 0 #34 February 10, 2004 QuoteHell yes, let's all vote for that lying sack of shit Kerry who can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything. He'll line his on pockets faster than the Clinton's and swear the money came from his generous wife. I'm not sure how I feel about Kerry.. But how do you come up with this statement? I travel the land, Work in the ocean, Play in the sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #35 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteHell yes, let's all vote for that lying sack of shit Kerry who can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything. He'll line his on pockets faster than the Clinton's and swear the money came from his generous wife. I'm not sure how I feel about Kerry.. But how do you come up with this statement? Kerry: Talks down his opponents for being in the pockets of special interests, yet he takes more special interest money than any of them. Voted for the war, and now speaks out against it. Voted for No Child left Behind, and now speaks out against it. What does Kerry focus on when he stumps -- his own lengthy politcal record? No. He focuses on two things: Bush's "failures", and his own record as a military man. When you look at Kerry's record vs. what he says today, you get a real sense of the meaning of "lying hypocrite". . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Antithesis 0 #36 February 10, 2004 Well it may be too bad that Kerry is the best that the Dems have to offer.. Because I don't see Bush getting re-elected. There is too strong of an anti bush sentiment right now in this country. I believe that you're right, Bush's failures seem to be a hot topic right now I travel the land, Work in the ocean, Play in the sky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #37 February 10, 2004 Quote. . . I don't see Bush getting re-elected. There is too strong of an anti bush sentiment right now in this country. Polls indicate otherwise -- only about half the popultation is anti-Bush now, so it looks too close to call at this point. Public sentiment this far away from an election means little anyway. I see him getting re-elected if the economy and the Iraq occupation continue on a positive track. WMD will be a dead horse come November. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #38 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe President's Economic Report, published today, predicts 2.6M new jobs this year. Last year, the Bush administration predicted the creation of about 1.7 million jobs. But the USA actually lost 53,000 jobs last year, bringing the total number of jobs lost since Jan 2001 to 2.2 million. Question, Kallend my friend.... We may have initiated 1.7M new jobs last year. The loss of 53,000 came from the -whole- job market....not just the new jobs created. It goes along the same lines as when people claim there is a 50% divorce rate in our country. It's -not- 50% of -new- marriages that go belly up, but 50% of the whole -lot- of them that do. Make sense? ltdiver Ok...lets look at specifics than. 150,000 new people a month enter the job market. Meaning 150,000 NEW jobs have to become available so that existing workers don't lose their jobs, and new workers can find them. In 01/04 there were 112,000 new jobs. Net result - 38,000 newly unemployed people. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdwhalen 0 #39 February 10, 2004 I just read this whole thread. Seeing the dispassionate discourse these Bush threads consistently evoke it is difficult to see why some pundits consider Bush a lightning rod of public opinion - love him or hate him. (By the way Kerry/Edwards in '04! Looks like W, like his dad, will be a One Term Bush. Just goes to show ya as a country we're stupid but not that stupid. Whats the old saying fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!)"I have magic buttons ;)." skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #40 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe President's Economic Report, published today, predicts 2.6M new jobs this year. Last year, the Bush administration predicted the creation of about 1.7 million jobs. But the USA actually lost 53,000 jobs last year, bringing the total number of jobs lost since Jan 2001 to 2.2 million. Perhaps you can explain to us exactly what GWB did to cause the loss of these jobs and what President Kallend would have done differently. Right after you explain why you continue to apologize for the lying incompetent loser. There is a diffence between apologizing and supporting. Do you still apologize for a corrupt and futile democratic party, or is it your common action to run away from the deceit and failure of what ever party that you happen to bandwagon jump on at the time?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #41 February 10, 2004 QuoteOk...lets look at specifics than. 150,000 new people a month enter the job market. Meaning 150,000 NEW jobs have to become available so that existing workers don't lose their jobs, and new workers can find them. In 01/04 there were 112,000 new jobs. I heard the same numbers on an NPR broadcast yesterday. It was a "this is how unemployment is calculated" explanation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #42 February 10, 2004 QuoteI can think of a couple of things Jib, #1 OBL would be dead and we wouldn't be in Iraq. OBL would be dead but for leaks to an irresponsible media about how we were tracking him with sat phones. Quote#2 The money we spent on the war could have gone on our own infranstructure, hell I can name 4 aluminum plants not in production because the cost of power is to high. Fuel? You mean the cost of oil? Isn't that what dems claim the war was over? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #43 February 10, 2004 Quote. . . it is difficult to see why some pundits consider Bush a lightning rod of public opinion - love him or hate him. Every president is a cause of political polarity. What's hard to see? Quote(By the way Kerry/Edwards in '04! Looks like W, like his dad, will be a One Term Bush. As long as you realize you feel this way based on something besides poll numbers, then by all means . . . have at it! . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #44 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe President's Economic Report, published today, predicts 2.6M new jobs this year. Last year, the Bush administration predicted the creation of about 1.7 million jobs. But the USA actually lost 53,000 jobs last year, bringing the total number of jobs lost since Jan 2001 to 2.2 million. Perhaps you can explain to us exactly what GWB did to cause the loss of these jobs and what President Kallend would have done differently. Right after you explain why you continue to apologize for the lying incompetent loser. There is a diffence between apologizing and supporting. Do you still apologize for a corrupt and futile democratic party, or is it your common action to run away from the deceit and failure of what ever party that you happen to bandwagon jump on at the time? 1. What makes you think I was ever a Democrat? False assumption on your part. 2. Explain how any behavior of anyone else explains or excuses the abysmal failures of this administration, which can't even meet its own stated objectives.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #45 February 10, 2004 QuoteMy cure? - Vote the lying dupe out of office in 2004. And replace him with a lying dupe who thinks he can pay off a $6,000,000 loan by himself after earning $150k last year? Without interest that would take 40 years! With math like that, imagine his job predictions! -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdwhalen 0 #46 February 10, 2004 Bush seems to be special in this regard. Maybe it has something to do with post 9-11 America. http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101031201/"I have magic buttons ;)." skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #47 February 10, 2004 QuoteWell it may be too bad that Kerry is the best that the Dems have to offer.. Because I don't see Bush getting re-elected. There is too strong of an anti bush sentiment right now in this country. I believe that you're right, Bush's failures seem to be a hot topic right now Not so sure I agree with that. I grew up with Hoover Democrats preaching about evil republicans all my life in NC. Now, all I hear there and all across the south is how Bush is the saviour of the US. I've heard the comment many times - "it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for a democrat again" If Kerry gets the Dem nomination - then Bush gets my vote - the lesser of the two evils in my opinion. What I would give for another choice though....Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #48 February 10, 2004 It might have been an incorrect assumtion, but only because you cannot be officially affiliated with an american political party. It would seem that you aren't even a US Citizen. Easy, it is, to judge from rock looking down, another, to actually be a part of the mountain. edited:typos, punctuation, and boldI'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CrazyThomas 0 #49 February 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteDo any of you lefties remember that the economy was tanking way before Bush took office? I remember with great humor the liberal cable show pundits blaming Bush for the economy within a week of his inauguration. Bush's 2003 job creation prediction came AFTER 9/11 and the .com crash, and it was still hopelessly wrong. January 2003 was AFTER 9/11/2001. Jobs prediction - WRONG Deficit prediction - WRONG WMDs in Iraq - WRONG "We'll get bin Laden" - WRONG Great record your guy has. OK, even with all the "Reasons" (Anti-Bushes read =lies) for going to Iraq, and telling Saddam to step down, what happened? Oh wait, that's right. Saddam is now caged up like he should be, and we may actually have a chance to free a country from a dictator. Is it our responsibility? I don't think so, but Bush said he would take Saddam out of power, and it pretty much seems like he did. All the Iraq contracts are going to Haliburton? Good, at least it is an AMERICAN company. Maybe we should have just let those contracts go to the cheese eating surrender monkeys. I am glad Bush took us to Iraq. It beats waiting for Iraq to come to us. Sure, maybe we should have taken a little more agression out on Afghanistan, but Saddam needed removal, and it got done. Thomas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #50 February 10, 2004 Really want to know where 200,000 good existing jobs are? Who has them? Do a search on "hi tech" "visas". Real simple. There are currently 200,000 H-1B visas issued. The reason, experienced American engineers make 65K a year. Foreign workers are paid 45K a year. Foreign workers are let go after 4 years. It takes 7 years to get pension status. Companies save 20K a year and have no long term obligation to the worker. There are great jobs out there. Americans just can't get them. Even if you will work for 45K, Americans aren't wanted because they will eventually get pensions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
