[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]
Can I get you some knee pads?
BMD004
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]
Can I get you some knee pads?
BMD004
TC is a notorious idiot and I'm not surprised that he's quoting a bunch of equally notorious right wing fvcknuts in lieu of making his own argument. Look at all of those statistics they are using, 7 out of 8 of them are completely meaningless and one of them is plain out wrong (the stimulus is one of the three major reasons why the U.S. is recovering at a modest pace and not tripple-dipping like Europe). As far as economic competence goes, it's almost impossible to compare Obama to others since no other president has faced this kind of situation before.
The biggest analogy is the Great Depression and by that measure Obama has handled the situation much better than Hoover and Roosevelt since the Great Recession was much shorter lived and much less severe than the Great Depression. We also know that his policies (deficit spending) are far better than those of his competiting candidates (tax cuts and spending cuts to get a budget surplus) for recession fighting, so we can comfortably say his economics is better than McCain and Romney.
[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="Ace6301"]
Not to mention how ridiculously lopsided this article is. There are things you can criticize the President for, but this is just another example of blatant Obama-bashing to drum up people who aren't paying attention into a frenzy.
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"]
Does France still make guillotines?
1)** Barack Obama is the worst jobs president since the Great Depression.
2)** Poverty is at its highest rate since 1960s.
3)** America is experiencing its worst economic recovery ever.
4)** There are more Americans on food stamps than entire population of Spain.
5)** A record number of Americans are seeking jobs.
6)** Obamas trillion dollar stimulus failed.
7)** Under Obamas leadership we had four straight years of trillion dollar deficits.
8)** 8.8 million Americans are on disability.In an article for Investors Business Daily, Anderson writes: Prior to Obama, the second term of President Bush featured the weakest gains in the gross domestic product in some time, with average annual (inflation-adjusted) GDP growth of just 1.9 percent but average annual real GDP growth during Obamas entire first term was less than half as much at a pitiful 0.8 percent.
That performance will establish Obama firmly as the worst president ever on the economy.
Obamas GDP growth is less than half as much as the worst president in the past 60 years.
Let that process slowly. That means that if President Obama could go back in time and find a way to double his GDP performance, hed still hold the record for the worst economic president in the past 60 years.
BMD004
1) President Obama came in at a time when the economy was hemmoraging jobs and reversed that trend through targeted spending programs that rebuild the country at the same time they put people to work. To blame him for this is fallacious in the first place as he inherited this mess, and then on top of that if a President who was against federal spending had come into office we'd have millions more Americans unemployed right now. Not to mention that every time he actually does something to try and help the economy he's accused of overreaching, so which one is it? Is he a horrible dictator who can't help but stick government fingers where they don't belong, or is he completely ineffective in his ability to single-handedly solve the economic crisis and put employment rates back to where they were under Clinton? Are you mad at him for doing too much or too little? Make up your minds.
2) Right, and this has everything to do with the President and nothing to do with the wealth disparity in America. It's not the people who are making billions of dollars each year and shipping jobs overseas we should be mad at, it's the President, despite the fact that he doesn't have the power to directly affect poverty rates. Here again, we run into the issue of him being blamed for doing too much and too little at the same time.
3) Here again we have the dual problems of blaming President Obama for things he can't control and blaming him for not doing enough while criticizing his proposals as overreaches. We're comparing President Obama's recovery to Presidents Carter and Roosevelt's? First off, they had Congresses that actually passed legislation, President Obama does not. Second, every time he invests money as both of those Presidents did in much greater numbers than he did he is criticized for overreaching. Again, either he's doing too much or too little, not both at the same time. Also, if conservatives are soo focused on the free market then why are they asking President Obama where the jobs are? Shouldn't they be asking their vaunted titans of industry?
4) Again, why is this the President's problem? Why aren't we asking why more companies aren't paying a living wage, why they aren't hiring more employees, or why they're so opposed to raising the minimum wage? Raise wages, fewer people on food stamps. Simple problem, simple solution.
5) When we're talking records we have to take population growth into account. Also, again, why are we blaming the President for this and not companies who aren't hiring?
6) Failed? It added millions of jobs to the economy, it kept people from unemployment. This is exactly the kind of hypocrisy that discredits articles like this, they harp and harp on President Obama for not doing anything and when they come to a point where he actually did do something they dismiss it as a failure.
7) We've had deficits in the trillions for years now, it's not limited to President Obama. President Obama has also reduced the deficit, and unlike our last REPUBLICAN president he is actually putting everything on the books. That's a large part of why the deficit ballooned like it did, was because whereas Bush was keeping wartime spending off the books Obama was putting on the books where it belongs.
8) You're criticizing the President for the number of Americans who are on disability? Do I even have to go into how ridiculously stupid that is?
Can I get you some knee pads?Can I get you a brain? The macho-asshole douchebag trying to win an argument with a crack about fellatio, why am I not surprised?
[QUOTE="theone86"]
[QUOTE="BMD004"]Ad Hominem. Logical fallacy.BMD004
Technically he never made a claim so it's not ad hominem, ad hominem would be saying a claim cannot be true because Fox News made it.
Being a f*cking moron, life fallacy.
Fox Nation made the claims in the OP's post. The first response was "Lol Fox Nation". That's an ad hominem. The OP didn't make the claim. Fox Nation did."Being a f*cking moron, life fallacy." ... I agree with you. Which is why you should wise up.
I am telling you exactly what ad hominem is and why worlock's post wasn't ad hominem. Ad hominem is not simply insulting a source. Ad hominem is insulting a source in an attempt to discredit their claim. All worlock said was "lol fox nation." To be ad hominem it would have to be trying to dispute a certain claim through attacking the source, and he never attempted to dispute a claim. It's just a vague statement insulting F*x news generally, it's not ad hominem.
Can I get you some knee pads?[QUOTE="BMD004"]
[QUOTE="theone86"]
1) President Obama came in at a time when the economy was hemmoraging jobs and reversed that trend through targeted spending programs that rebuild the country at the same time they put people to work. To blame him for this is fallacious in the first place as he inherited this mess, and then on top of that if a President who was against federal spending had come into office we'd have millions more Americans unemployed right now. Not to mention that every time he actually does something to try and help the economy he's accused of overreaching, so which one is it? Is he a horrible dictator who can't help but stick government fingers where they don't belong, or is he completely ineffective in his ability to single-handedly solve the economic crisis and put employment rates back to where they were under Clinton? Are you mad at him for doing too much or too little? Make up your minds.
2) Right, and this has everything to do with the President and nothing to do with the wealth disparity in America. It's not the people who are making billions of dollars each year and shipping jobs overseas we should be mad at, it's the President, despite the fact that he doesn't have the power to directly affect poverty rates. Here again, we run into the issue of him being blamed for doing too much and too little at the same time.
3) Here again we have the dual problems of blaming President Obama for things he can't control and blaming him for not doing enough while criticizing his proposals as overreaches. We're comparing President Obama's recovery to Presidents Carter and Roosevelt's? First off, they had Congresses that actually passed legislation, President Obama does not. Second, every time he invests money as both of those Presidents did in much greater numbers than he did he is criticized for overreaching. Again, either he's doing too much or too little, not both at the same time. Also, if conservatives are soo focused on the free market then why are they asking President Obama where the jobs are? Shouldn't they be asking their vaunted titans of industry?
4) Again, why is this the President's problem? Why aren't we asking why more companies aren't paying a living wage, why they aren't hiring more employees, or why they're so opposed to raising the minimum wage? Raise wages, fewer people on food stamps. Simple problem, simple solution.
5) When we're talking records we have to take population growth into account. Also, again, why are we blaming the President for this and not companies who aren't hiring?
6) Failed? It added millions of jobs to the economy, it kept people from unemployment. This is exactly the kind of hypocrisy that discredits articles like this, they harp and harp on President Obama for not doing anything and when they come to a point where he actually did do something they dismiss it as a failure.
7) We've had deficits in the trillions for years now, it's not limited to President Obama. President Obama has also reduced the deficit, and unlike our last REPUBLICAN president he is actually putting everything on the books. That's a large part of why the deficit ballooned like it did, was because whereas Bush was keeping wartime spending off the books Obama was putting on the books where it belongs.
8) You're criticizing the President for the number of Americans who are on disability? Do I even have to go into how ridiculously stupid that is?
theone86
Can I get you a brain? The macho-asshole douchebag trying to win an argument with a crack about fellatio, why am I not surprised?
First off, I offered you knee pads for your ass kissing. Not fellatio. But if that's what you're into, that's your business. Secondly, I wasn't arguing with you. Your ass kissing is just funny. And you get upset so easily. That's also amusing to me. You're really entertaining.[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="BMD004"]Can I get you some knee pads?
BMD004
Can I get you a brain? The macho-asshole douchebag trying to win an argument with a crack about fellatio, why am I not surprised?
First off, I offered you knee pads for your ass kissing. Not fellatio. But if that's what you're into, that's your business. Secondly, I wasn't arguing with you. Your ass kissing is just funny. And you get upset so easily. That's also amusing to me. You're really entertaining.When I make a legitimate defense of President Obama you accuse me of ass-kissing instead of trying to actually address anything I've said, now THAT is ad hominem.
Blatant stupidity upsets me. That it's easy for you to be so blatantly stupid does not mean that I'm easily upset.
First off, I offered you knee pads for your ass kissing. Not fellatio. But if that's what you're into, that's your business. Secondly, I wasn't arguing with you. Your ass kissing is just funny. And you get upset so easily. That's also amusing to me. You're really entertaining.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="theone86"]
Can I get you a brain? The macho-asshole douchebag trying to win an argument with a crack about fellatio, why am I not surprised?
theone86
When I make a legitimate defense of President Obama you accuse me of ass-kissing instead of trying to actually address anything I've said, now THAT is ad hominem.
Nope. I never said you were right or wrong. Just that you come across as an ass-kisser. :)[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Did BMD get scared of Rawsavon?BMD004Does he still post here? I haven't seen him here since I started posting again. Nope
[QUOTE="worlock77"]Ad Hominem. Logical fallacy. He isn't criticizing the source for personal or unrelated reasons, he is criticizing them for lack of credibility and bias. Not Ad Hominem.Lol Fox Nation.
BMD004
Did BMD get scared of Rawsavon?DroidPhysX
lol
iirc, he wanted to fight raw
so bmd wanted raw to fly him out so they could fight
[QUOTE="theone86"][QUOTE="BMD004"]First off, I offered you knee pads for your ass kissing. Not fellatio. But if that's what you're into, that's your business. Secondly, I wasn't arguing with you. Your ass kissing is just funny. And you get upset so easily. That's also amusing to me. You're really entertaining.BMD004
When I make a legitimate defense of President Obama you accuse me of ass-kissing instead of trying to actually address anything I've said, now THAT is ad hominem.
Nope. I never said you were right or wrong. Just that you come across as an ass-kisser. :)And why do I come accross as an ass-kisser? Because I'm defending President Obama, ergo any defense of President Obama instantly makes me an ass-kisser which DOES carry the inference of me being wrong, ergo ad hominem.
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Did BMD get scared of Rawsavon?coolbeans90
lol
iirc, he wanted to fight raw
so bmd wanted raw to fly him out so they could fight
I miss those kinds of exchanges between usersNope. I never said you were right or wrong. Just that you come across as an ass-kisser. :)[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="theone86"]
When I make a legitimate defense of President Obama you accuse me of ass-kissing instead of trying to actually address anything I've said, now THAT is ad hominem.
theone86
And why do I come accross as an ass-kisser? Because I'm defending President Obama, ergo any defense of President Obama instantly makes me an ass-kisser which DOES carry the inference of me being wrong, ergo ad hominem.
Pretty sure he's too stupid (or at least too self absorbed) to understand this.
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Did BMD get scared of Rawsavon?coolbeans90
lol
iirc, he wanted to fight raw
so bmd wanted raw to fly him out so they could fight
That isn't true. Somebody created the username "bmd000" and started talking shit to rawsavon to make it look like it was me - it wasn't. I've never tried to fight anybody through the Internet in my life. That's silly to me.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Did BMD get scared of Rawsavon?BMD004
lol
iirc, he wanted to fight raw
so bmd wanted raw to fly him out so they could fight
That isn't true. Somebody created the username "bmd000" and started talking shit to rawsavon to make it look like it was me - it wasn't. I've never tried to fight anybody through the Internet in my life. That's silly to me.Sure.
That isn't true. Somebody created the username "bmd000" and started talking shit to rawsavon to make it look like it was me - it wasn't. I've never tried to fight anybody through the Internet in my life. That's silly to me.[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]
lol
iirc, he wanted to fight raw
so bmd wanted raw to fly him out so they could fight
coolbeans90
Sure.
I don't know what else to tell you then. You are mistaken, period. I remember at the same time there was a user I think named BluRayHighDef, and the same thing happened to them.[QUOTE="coolbeans90"][QUOTE="BMD004"]That isn't true. Somebody created the username "bmd000" and started talking shit to rawsavon to make it look like it was me - it wasn't. I've never tried to fight anybody through the Internet in my life. That's silly to me.BMD004
Sure.
I don't know what else to tell you then. You are mistaken, period. I remember at the same time there was a user I think named BluRayHighDef, and the same thing happened to them. Story doesn't ring true[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]I don't know what else to tell you then. You are mistaken, period. I remember at the same time there was a user I think named BluRayHighDef, and the same thing happened to them. Story doesn't ring trueExcept that it does. Here is a thread that talks about it. Start with the 3rd post from the bottom on page 2 and read the relevant posts all the way to page 5. http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27565238/ufcmma-highly-skilled-martial-artists-or-bloodsport-street-brawling-thuggery?page=1 I can't show you the troll's original posts because mods deleted them and banned him. BlueRayHiDef is also in that thread saying the same thing happened to him. And I know you are just busting my balls, but there you go anyway. :)Sure.
dave123321
Well it's not like the man gives people much to work with. He's no Bush in that regard.Barack Hussein
Are ideas for mocking Obama in short supply over there?
BranKetra
This has to be some form of schizofrenia for people like KingKong.... If anything bad happens within the government or economy, Obama is blamed.. If something good happens in the economy or government, Obama had nothing to do with it and it was merely by circumstances and only other factors.
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]what happened?I assume he snaped under the preasure of the liberal agenda.I see KK has gone even more insane. Poor guy.
NEWMAHAY
This has to be some form of schizofrenia for people like KingKong.... If anything bad happens within the government or economy, Obama is blamed.. If something good happens in the economy or government, Obama had nothing to do with it and it was merely by circumstances and only other factors.
sSubZerOo
You're describing most of the Republican party, not just kk.
It's funny how people think that things as large and uncontrollable as economic forces can be attributed to any one person, or even one institution. The same for people who think that economics can be compactly explained or modelled in any way (lol, economists).
Not sure if troll or overly confident anti-intellectual.It's funny how people think that things as large and uncontrollable as economic forces can be attributed to any one person, or even one institution. The same for people who think that economics can be compactly explained or modelled in any way (lol, economists).
jetpower3
[QUOTE="jetpower3"]Not sure if troll or overly confident anti-intellectual.It's funny how people think that things as large and uncontrollable as economic forces can be attributed to any one person, or even one institution. The same for people who think that economics can be compactly explained or modelled in any way (lol, economists).
Barbariser
Just someone who happens to believe that economics is not something to be taken all that seriously as a science. Models and theories are fine and all, but they are prone to breaking down in the face of changing variables and factors the modeller is probably not aware of. Which is why things as complex as economies and financial systems often surprise since, unlike physics or chemistry, their rules and what can be deduced from them via observation are very fluid.
When will people get over the pharaoh mentality? We have a conservative allegiance that is dedicated to making the country fail so they can blame it on Obama. The thing that they don't understand is that if thet ruin things, it will be their fault as it is in the details. This is not ancient Egypt. We know who is responsible for things when they happen.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment