Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

It's official. Obama is just like Bush. Except Europe loves him and even more people hate him than hated Bush. At least Bush had his loyalists.

Just to be a bit more accurate...via Rassmussen...

Bush's job approval in the month he left...35%
Obama's current job approval...50%

 

[XYZ]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Just to be a bit more accurate...via Rassmussen...

Bush's job approval in the month he left...35%
Obama's current job approval...50%

And what was Bush's job approval shortly after 9/11? Or in the few years following? How about his old man in the wake of Desert Storm? Yeah, I can randomly grasp at numbers, too. Not sure what that has to do with Gitmo, but you keep banging away.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

And what was Bush's job approval shortly after 9/11? Or in the few years following? How about his old man in the wake of Desert Storm? Yeah, I can randomly grasp at numbers, too. Not sure what that has to do with Gitmo, but you keep banging away.

TBA said "even more people hate him than hated Bush." 5mn demonstrated that Obama's job approval is much higher than Bush's was. He responded to, and demolished, TBA's assertion.

TBA brought up popularity, so if this doesn't follow from the Gitmo discussion that's his non sequitor, not 5mn's.

None of this is to diss TBA, who was being ironic, and who probably enjoyed 5mn's comeback more than anybody.

This is not talk radio. It's easy to expose rhetorical dodges here.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

With border guards and a fence!

Oh wait...

Interesting comparison between Mexico and states long dominated by Democrats

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

I promise you my three are growing up in that environment...I figure it will be easier for them to succeed while their peers are literally fat, dumb and happy watching DWTS 2030 and playing PS12 simultaneously as Shamrock shakes are injected directly into their stomachs.

yah, there's an aspect to it that by having so many kids raised and educated poorly, there's a lot less job competition for kids who are raised and educated well.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

yah, there's an aspect to it that by having so many kids raised and educated poorly, there's a lot less job competition for kids who are raised and educated well.

Except then our kids will have to support the lazy parents' kids.

Oh wait, I'm the one in favor of that...

I have told my daughters, "I don't care if you're rich. I care a lot that you're self-sufficient." This matters doubly for women, since they're stuck with the garbage if their man decides to "go out for a ride and never come back" (thanks a lot for celebrating a scumbag, Bruce).

But they're also being raised to select men (or women, hope hope) well, too.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

TBA said "even more people hate him than hated Bush." 5mn demonstrated that Obama's job approval is much higher than Bush's was. He responded to, and demolished, TBA's assertion.

TBA brought up popularity, so if this doesn't follow from the Gitmo discussion that's his non sequitor, not 5mn's.

None of this is to diss TBA, who was being ironic, and who probably enjoyed 5mn's comeback more than anybody.

This is not talk radio. It's easy to expose rhetorical dodges here.

Right, except that in a shocking development, 5mn isn't telling the truth.

Chart.

44% approve to 50% disapprove. Better than Bush though, I'll give you that.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Well, my local school district has voted to bus kids all over town for school to desegregate. Is this the 60's? Seriously.

I'm willing to be it's an NCLB vote. We can have 4 average elementary schools but we can't have 3 exceptional and 1 failing elementary school.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Right, except that in a shocking development, 5mn isn't telling the truth.

Chart.

44% approve to 50% disapprove. Better than Bush though, I'll give you that.

45-47 from RCP's average.

"Not telling the truth" is way too strong -- there's plenty of variance, and even the "GOP in-house poll in all but name" Rasmussen has Obama at 50.

(Also, if I had to make a list of the dozen habitual truth-stretchers on our political threads, 5mn would not only not be on it, he wouldn't even have crossed my mind. He's fairer than I, anyway. )

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

45-47 from RCP's average.

"Not telling the truth" is way too strong -- there's plenty of variance, and even the "GOP in-house poll in all but name" Rasmussen has Obama at 50.

(Also, if I had to make a list of the dozen habitual truth-stretchers on our political threads, 5mn would not only not be on it, he wouldn't even have crossed my mind. He's fairer than I, anyway. )

that's because you agree with 5mn. I'd say he's not one of the worst truth-stretchers (which isn't saying that much, given some of the whoppers we see around here), but he's got very slanted views on some issues and his comments likewise tilt that way very strongly, leading to some stretching. But, he's no Rover, certainly.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

It's not a huge deal obviously, just saying that 45% isn't 50%.

As for truthfulness, the man claims he gets shot at on his way to work!

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

As for truthfulness, the man claims he gets shot at on his way to work!

Every day I commute home from the DC area to prime deer country. My only question is .22 or .38?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

that's because you agree with 5mn. I'd say he's not one of the worst truth-stretchers (which isn't saying that much, given some of the whoppers we see around here), but he's got very slanted views on some issues and his comments likewise tilt that way very strongly, leading to some stretching. But, he's no Rover, certainly.

I think there's more than a semantic difference between slanting and lying. I see a bright line between deliberately cherry picking friendly data and being unaware of unfriendly data because of being locked in an echo chamber. It gets really fuzzy when you are aware of unfriendly data but discount it because it comes from a source you find questionable.

Point taken, though, that when I make that top 10 list (only a top 5 list -- I think everybody else is trying their level best) it's 60% ranting right, 20% hollering left, and 20% pouting pox on both their houses.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Speaking of Rover, where the hell is that crazy SOB?

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

I think there's more than a semantic difference between slanting and lying. I see a bright line between deliberately cherry picking friendly data and being unaware of unfriendly data because of being locked in an echo chamber. It gets really fuzzy when you are aware of unfriendly data but discount it because it comes from a source you find questionable.

Point taken, though, that when I make that top 10 list (only a top 5 list -- I think everybody else is trying their level best) it's 60% ranting right, 20% hollering left, and 20% pouting pox on both their houses.

well, for a top ten or top five list, I probably wouldn't put him in it either, but that's more down to there being stiff competition for the top ten/top five. Again, on your 60 percent ranting right, I'd expect that given your lefty views. But seriously, there is a lot more lefties on this board than righties, and the lefties rant every bit as good at the righties. No need to explain the numbers flowing from that.

You can slant without being dishonest or purposely misleading, but it takes a lot of discipline for people to do that, something we don't see a cornucopia of around here.

 

[Foxton]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

that's because you agree with 5mn. I'd say he's not one of the worst truth-stretchers (which isn't saying that much, given some of the whoppers we see around here), but he's got very slanted views on some issues and his comments likewise tilt that way very strongly, leading to some stretching. But, he's no Rover, certainly.

Most humorous coming from you, considering not that long ago you were exposed for using actual lies to try and support a position.

 

[geezer]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Every day I commute home from the DC area to prime deer country. My only question is .22 or .38?

I take it you're not a big gun nut or deer hunter.

Here's an early look at the GOP 2012 contenders, though I'm not confident the eventual nominee is even mentioned.

That leaves us with a top tier of five front-runners: Romney, Palin, Gingrich, Pawlenty and Daniels. Romney is the organizational front-runner; Daniels is the first pick of wonks and DC eggheads; Palin probably has the most devoted following among actual voters; Gingrich will dominate the debates, and Pawlenty (vying with Daniels) is the least disliked.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

well, for a top ten or top five list, I probably wouldn't put him in it either, but that's more down to there being stiff competition for the top ten/top five. Again, on your 60 percent ranting right, I'd expect that given your lefty views. But seriously, there is a lot more lefties on this board than righties, and the lefties rant every bit as good at the righties. No need to explain the numbers flowing from that.

You can slant without being dishonest or purposely misleading, but it takes a lot of discipline for people to do that, something we don't see a cornucopia of around here.

You do see people applying that discipline, though, and at times people even point out the flaws in an argument from their own "side." We are all, of course, on the same side -- you pull your oar, I'll pull mine, and we'll move forward rather than in a circle. Kumbaya.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

I take it you're not a big gun nut or deer hunter.

One of those issues like immigration where I just don't care either way. I always said to my righty friends that I'd trade them straight up, so to speak, unfettered gay marriage for whatever gun control or lack of it they wanted. It appears I am going to get my way, so AFAIC they can kill whatever they want as long as it aint my kid.

My next trade offer: they can have prayer in public schools back in (this helps young atheists in their identity formation anyway, and gives them something useful to rebel against) if ID and Creationism and all those other frauds are banished from public school to private Christian madrassas.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Obama XVIII : Now with 100% more Gov't sponsored starvation

Most humorous coming from you, considering not that long ago you were exposed for using actual lies to try and support a position.

More useful contributions to the discuss from you.