I'm having the same problem over here: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=70049&page=2 Apparently, his opinion is fact.
Mia - nice try, but not unexpected. Gtech - I never said 55.2 indicated stagnancy or decline, though you have attempted to paint what I wrote as so. I said it is barely above stagnant, which is what it is to me. In other words, no mark of a boom, as I said, "nothing to write home about." Further, if we are to accept the NACM stats, the current picture is nowhere near as rosy, at 50.6. Incontrovertibly, again, if we accept their reading, stagnancy. These stats seem to be at odds with the stats you post from the White House. I am sure there are stats which contradict each other all over the place. I would rather put my money in an independent reading of things, than that posted by a regime which stands to benefit by casting a rosier picture than reported elsewhere. Both Reagan and Bush, while purporting to be fiscal conservatives, actually were, and are, in my mind, quite the opposite. Cutting taxes - fiscal conservative. Ballooning spending - not fiscal conservatives. It is not enough to say you are a fiscal conservative if you gut the things only Conservatives wished gutted - social security, public assistance, and the like - but you must hold the rein on public spending everywhere - including the defense budget. Absent that, you are pandering to the conservative base and not being true to the fiscally conservative ideal. To take it further - free trade is the definition of liberalism. Would you follow a protectionist policy? Or seek to make American enterprise more competitive by opening it up to unimpinged commerce across our hemisphere's borders?
You know it is funny.. Like that silly Loose Change thread. I've found if you actually read through the sources presented to make a insane claim, more often than not, you find that the sources cited say quite the contrary. It makes me wonder if those that run around posting internet links and articles from conspiracy websites actually read through the "sources" they provide, or just Goolge for "need evidence that Bush sucks, lie, is dumb, etc., etc.." You know, I just tried this in Google. "bush:www.conspricywhackonutjob.com" and came up with over 30 million indexed pages.
So you did say it before you didn't say it? Kind of like "I was for it, before I was against it." Stagnancy again? A flip, then a flop, now it's a flip again. Will another flop be forthcoming? Hate to bum you out here, but I used your source, the CNN source you posted to contest you with. The forbes was thrown in for history. The other was simply to show how rediculous your efforts are to paint the economy as something other that what EVERYONE is saying it is. But opinions are fact Highest in 31 years. Two decade high of 63.6. 34th straight month of growth. And yet, words like stagnant are used, before they are not used, then used again. This is what I was referring to...the blind hatred. Highest in 31 years, two decade high, 34th straight month of growth, and the hatred is obscuring reality. This is great news, but somehow it's bad news. Hmmm. Oh, the doom and gloom! So once again, your opinion is fact. Thanks, but I posted facts on the previous page. No "in my mind" was necessary to convey their reality. Depends, but most likely your second option.
The loose change thread was embarrassing for those guys! It was quite apparent they put absolutely no effort into checking the validity of those misleading them. Speaking of googling, I was doing a search last night for: alex jones is a nutjob To my surprise, DP was on the second page with one of my posts: http://www.google.com/search?q=alex+jones+is+a+nutjob&hl=en&lr=&start=10&sa=N That ought to draw in a few more young angry white males with low IQs
Hahhahah. OK, Gtech. You are apparently incapable of either (a) understanding the English language, or (b) will repeat your misconstrual of what I actually wrote, over and over, until it is reified. You may continue in the playground of your mind unhindered. I've got better things to do.
It's like saying that there was a pink pig flying outside my window yesterday, I took a picture of him, but unfortunally he came back and took my camera. Unfortunally, nobody else saw it apart from a few crackheads
Nothing at all. I appreciate the link. I will keep this one on my favorites, along with this one for all my news and information: Objective News, All Here, All the Time.
Many people come to me for proof. No one has been willing to accept it. Proof is not a bunch of internet links. Proof is a series of experiments that will cost you time, effort, and money to reproduce. In return, you will gain feeling of insecurity, disgust, and understanding that you are a brainwashing victim. (No insult intended, I was a brainwashing victim just like you long ago)
Ok, let's start from the beginning. Do you think that there's very few other forums and sites that aren't censored? What do you think about all 9/11 conspiracy sites, shouldn't they be censored