tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post3096500808321544867..comments2024-03-28T12:43:07.327-04:00Comments on Dave Dubya's Freedom Rants: Mystery SolvedDave Dubyahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-7999822284985196582011-09-01T15:14:22.873-04:002011-09-01T15:14:22.873-04:00Jack,
Thanks.
WD,
Apparently not only am I the DN...Jack,<br />Thanks.<br /><br />WD,<br />Apparently not only am I the DNC attack machine, but I have been weilding all my power crushing Wall Street and multi-national corporations, along with dictating spending policies at the federal level. How? Why, all under the dominance of my socialist jackboot, of course.<br /><br />Big Money is powerless against me. This is why brave and heroic souls defend their interests here.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-5042701537924578712011-09-01T15:08:29.099-04:002011-09-01T15:08:29.099-04:00And I missed something because moderation is turne...And I missed something because moderation is turned back on. I will have to read later and figure out why, as if I didn't know already, Just!John Mystehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16263634313238599515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-14870219765573966572011-09-01T15:07:47.839-04:002011-09-01T15:07:47.839-04:00Dave's posts usually get over a 100 comments b...Dave's posts usually get over a 100 comments because no one is willing to let anyone else have a the last word. <br /><br />This post is a continuation of the last in part. The post does not really have over 100 comments if you look at it in context. It has hundereds of thousands of comments. <br /><br />So far as know, only egomaniacs post here, which is but one of the things that makes me love the site. <br /><br />Dervish, you definitely should join in. You are a very fine fit, sir.John Mystehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16263634313238599515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-10946792581974659092011-09-01T11:56:39.943-04:002011-09-01T11:56:39.943-04:00WOW! more than 100 comments? I'm impressed. Th...WOW! more than 100 comments? I'm impressed. The comments for <a href="http://www.w-dervish.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">my blog</a> usually stay well below 20. Even though reading "Sleeping with The Devil" (my blog) "Leads To Great Bliss & Complete Knowledge". Also, some people find it "very funny".<br /><br />Plus "Dave Duyba's Freedom Rants" functions as the DNC's attack machine? That being the case, this blog must be also be very profitable. Attack machines aren't cheap (or so I'd guess).<br /><br />Sarah Palin is only "maybe running for president" to make money. She won't actually run.Dervish Sandershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671865801885224353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-52054902785174840922011-08-31T00:45:48.208-04:002011-08-31T00:45:48.208-04:00{Dave,
I could not possibly agree with you more! W...{Dave,<br />I could not possibly agree with you more! WELL PUT!Jack Jodellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12465017098355576489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-42238078992816514122011-08-30T22:33:11.398-04:002011-08-30T22:33:11.398-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Just the Facts!noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-11412338667412620482011-08-30T18:51:52.451-04:002011-08-30T18:51:52.451-04:00JG,
Sad, but true.
And every time we try to make ...JG,<br />Sad, but true.<br /><br />And every time we try to make our case, we are met with the "You hate corporations" and "You hate the rich" crap.<br /><br />And we patiently remind them we oppose anti-democratic and corrupt corporatocracy within government. We do not hate the wealthy or corporations.<br /><br />They then wrap themselves in their own hatred of the very government they, or their masters, have bought control. <br /><br />No wonder there's no reasoning between the ideologies. The common interests of all Americans and public services are crushed underneath the tragi-comic theatrics of appeasement.<br /><br />And that is just the outcome that is desired by the "no compromise" side.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-69868599258192235562011-08-30T18:30:08.005-04:002011-08-30T18:30:08.005-04:00Dave, you responded to The Heathen Republican with...<b>Dave</b>, you responded to <b>The Heathen Republican</b> with this...<br /><br />"<i>...I have plenty of criticism for Obama. Much of it is in plain sight in this blog. You just can't see it for some reason.</i>"<br /><br />Isn't it amazing? As much as you and I harp about the corporatism infused within this administration, and the corporate-state that rules every facet of our lives, they <i>still</i> view us as die-hard Democrats for some reason. Yet, they will unceasingly defend Bush for <i>each and every</i> economic snafu, his bankrupting militaristic adventures, and will always make it seem like Bush handed Obama a blank slate.<br /><br />For some reason they're okay with the corporate-state; corporatism isn't a threat to them. They still think in the old Democrat vs. Republican; liberal vs. conservative, paradigm. The corporate-state has engulfed them and they still haven't figured it out. They haven't realized, as much as you've emphasized this, and, indeed, made it the whole theme of this blog, that the two-party system died, and the ruling mechanism is a faithful conglomeration of the two.<br /><br />As Chris Hedges morosely said this week:<br /><br />"<i>...The trolls dominate or have neutralized every major institution in the country on behalf of their corporate paymasters. The press, education, Wall Street, labor and our political parties are managed by trolls or have been destroyed by them. Sometimes these trolls speak like liberals. Sometimes they speak like conservatives. Sometimes they are secular. Sometimes they are Christians. But the language they use is a cover for the relentless march toward a totalitarian capitalism and a kingdom where the trolls, if not the rest of us, live happily ever after. Rick Perry and John Boehner overtly make war on Social Security. Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi say they would like to save Social Security but are sadly powerless before the decisions of a congressional super committee they helped form. The result, of course, is the same. We get to choose the rhetoric and manner in which we are deceived and disempowered. Nothing more.</i>" ...truthdig, 8/29/2011Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-38840161564291198932011-08-30T17:34:52.706-04:002011-08-30T17:34:52.706-04:00HR,
My question to you is, if your point was to po...HR,<br /><i>My question to you is, if your point was to point out Bush's poor job growth, why not also point out Obama's even worse job growth?</i><br /><br />Thank you for doing it for me. <br /><br />Don't worry, I have plenty of criticism for Obama. Much of it is in plain sight in this blog. You just can't see it for some reason.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-47941675280098659252011-08-30T14:02:41.109-04:002011-08-30T14:02:41.109-04:00"You seek to charge Obama by a sort of Ex Pos...<i>"You seek to charge Obama by a sort of Ex Post Facto accusation."</i><br /><br />Dave, if you look back through my comments, I have not attemped to blame Obama for anything. The closest I came was to use your logic and applied it to Obama, but as you've shown, your logic only applies to Bush. Yet you claim you're not a Democrat.<br /><br /><i>"You continue to distract from my still valid point as I illustrated. I showed real evidence of Bush’s massive failure in job growth."</i><br /><br />I don't disagree with your point about Bush. Never have and have no need to distract from it. I only jumped in to defend against your silly charge of racism. <br /><br />Other than that, I stayed out of the conversation until you drew me in -- by name -- to the discussion of job growth (in your response to T.Paine). That's where you partially copied a list from Politifact, which I had to point out because it undermines your credibility, whether you see it or not.<br /><br />My question to you is, if your point was to point out Bush's poor job growth, why not also point out Obama's even worse job growth? You claim you're not a Democrat, so you have no loyalty to Obama.<br /><br />If you dislike Obama so much, and claim he's just a corporatist like Republicans, and liberals haven't been in power for 40 years, then shouldn't you attack Obama as much as you attack Bush? But you don't. Sounds like a Democrat to me.Eric Norenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14648635662703229678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-41811711118148973342011-08-30T13:37:36.273-04:002011-08-30T13:37:36.273-04:00Just the Troll is no longer welcome here due to hi...Just the Troll is no longer welcome here due to his utterly disrespectful rudeness and trolling behavior. I fairly warned him and cut him a lot of slack. I also warned him I would show his contemptible behavior towards a person with MS.<br /><br />http://tomdegan.blogspot.com/2011/08/tax-poor.html<br /><br /><br />Over at Tom Degan’s Rant Yaz responded to JTF’s troll-style dumping of an article that was completely unrelated to the original post. It was a Wall Street Journal piece on the feds confiscating suspected illegally harvested and imported wood at the Gibson guitar factory.<br /><br />Yaz said...<br /><i>Guitars now, Just the Facts? Seriously? You're worried about freaking guitars? Tom's rant was about the poor.<br /><br />You see I have Multiple Sclerosis. It hit me around 40 and took me down hard. Medical bills wiped out the last of my savings even though I once had free-market insurance. I live off Social Security Disability, Medicare and SNAP now. Without them, I would be just like the man in Tom's picture. I might even be dead. <br /><br />I want to know why my food stamps have been cut. I want to know why my medication costs have just suddenly doubled. Why are food prices so high? Why is it so hard for me to eat healthy? Why is my landlord looking at possible foreclosure? No subprime here. Why? What is going on?<br /><br />Trust my limited future to you free market freaks? No! I'm not that stupid. I know you hate me. I'm disabled and I'm poor and you just want me to die and get off your back.</i><br /><br /><br />Just the Facts! responded:<br /><br /><i>Gee Yaz maybe the poor wouldn't be poor if they could get a job at one of the coal mines our GOVT has closed or at Gibson? Did ya ever think about that?</i><br /><br />Then he followed up with:<br /><br />Just the Facts! said...<br /><br /><i>One simple question, why does government need/allow private business if private for profit business is so rotten?</i><br /><br />(Then true to his pattern, this follows immediately.)<br /><br />Just the Facts! said...<br /> <i>Yaz,<br /><br />RE: bad book keeping.<br /><br />Can you find for me, the books showing where our stimulus dollars have been spent?<br /><br />Can I have a copy of the White House guest book?<br /><br />Can I please have an audit performed on Fannie Mae/Freddy Mack's books?<br /><br />Is there any way I can review the book keeping for Senator Dodd and Representative Frank's income sources and investments?<br /><br />Where can I find the books that would explain the purchase arrangements behind Obama's home in Chicago?<br /><br />Show me who was watching the books before the GOP took control of the House under Clinton and the check cashing/House post office scam was uncovered?<br /><br />And finally, you make a lot assumptions that because I hate big govt that I hate the poor and sick and those who CAN not work, and you assume that I am healthy, wealthy and got it all.<br /><br />Surprise, I don't have wealth, I don't have health, and I don't got it all! So stop with the guilt trip.<br /><br />Life is taking what you got and making the best of it with out thinking of your self as a victim. Better to be remembered as one who crawled to the top of the heap as opposed as someone who thought the heap was against them and gave up trying. Hope your life turns itself around, due to your own actions, not by the actions of others.</i><br /><br />How’s that for Just The Troll’s “conservative compassion”?Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-10513604468122493222011-08-30T13:14:34.261-04:002011-08-30T13:14:34.261-04:00Failed what Dave, not asking nice easy questions?Failed what Dave, not asking nice easy questions?Just the Facts!noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-15223728155203001842011-08-30T12:14:49.888-04:002011-08-30T12:14:49.888-04:00Just The Troll,
I’m going to respond to your ques...Just The Troll,<br /><br />I’m going to respond to your questions...for that last time. I no longer have time to waste reading what you have to write, let alone responding to your rude attention seeking behavior. I’m sure most readers would agree with me. <br /><br />Your questions are inane, illogical, presumptive, repetitive and full of false assumption and accusation. <br /><br />Short answer to all of them: I dare however I care to dare. <br /><br />You’ve ignored my warnings and questions. You are a troll. How’s that for an answer to one of your questions? <br /><br />I told you I was serious when I asked you to learn what trolls do. That was the end of your “probation”. <br /><br />You failed.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-42038656963163356322011-08-30T12:09:29.560-04:002011-08-30T12:09:29.560-04:00HR,
Had I “simply pulled Bush's job creation ...HR,<br /><br />Had I “simply pulled Bush's job creation number from the list,” on its own, my point about Bush’s failure would not have been as clear. Whatever you say about the incomplete data on Obama is completely “beside the point”. This is the reality and logic you cannot tolerate. <br /><br />Your fallacious reasoning would also say if Iraq explodes into more civil war, it is Obama’s fault, not Bush’s, even though his crimes created the instability for such bloodshed. You seek to charge Obama by a sort of Ex Post Facto accusation. His was not the crime and it was committed before his election. You want to blame Obama for Bush’s failure. We get that. Isn’t blaming Clinton good enough? You must blame liberals and the president for everything that your elites have done. Your “logic” allows that. (Here is where you would take issue with my word “crimes” and run a brand new distraction. I will take a pre-emptive measure and substitute the word “deeds” for “crimes”.)<br /><br /><i> but you're still defending your actions saying you've done nothing wrong.</i> <br /><br />I did nothing wrong relevant to my point of discussion. It is merely your opinion that I “did something wrong”. You continue to distract from my still valid point as I illustrated.<br /><br /><i>I showed real evidence of Bush’s massive failure in job growth. His recession sent unemployment numbers skyrocketing. During 2008 the unemployment rate began its upward zoom. Obama was dealt the worst Republican mess since the Great Depression. We needed an FDR and got an appeasing corporatist.</i><br /><br />Yup. This is still true no matter what Obama has done and no matter how much you distract, project, or redefine. And you obsess with the “sideline discussion” for the distraction it provides. <br /><br />Here is the inevitable logical conclusion: You still do not have facts to disprove my statement. This is why you pull the classic Right Wing distraction. You have nowhere to go on this point but off track.<br /><br />Deal with it, or deny it. It is true.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-89258611049954145612011-08-30T11:05:34.073-04:002011-08-30T11:05:34.073-04:00Heathen Republican, I've never been accused of...<b>Heathen Republican</b>, I've never been accused of <i>not</i> being a critical thinker -- until now. Have you <i>ever</i> been accused of having <i>no</i> sense of humor?<br /><br />Until now? <b>;-)</b>Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-44983006373705573522011-08-30T10:23:55.360-04:002011-08-30T10:23:55.360-04:00Jefferson, is that the best you can do? Regular re...Jefferson, is that the best you can do? Regular readers of <a href="http://heathenrepublican.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">The Heathen Republican</a> know that I regularly insert myself into media interviews in order to demonstrate better ways to present conservative issues.<br /><br />Yes, I replaced Michael Steele that night because his best defense of Rick Perry was that he was targeting his message to his audience. Note that I included the date of my "appearance" so that anyone who was interested could see that I wasn't really on the show.<br /><br />Of course, no one would really believe that that was a real transcript. My real name wasn't used, and do you really think Chris Matthews would allow a blogger that goes by a pseudonym to appear on his show?<br /><br />Clearly you're a very critical thinker. Our public school system should be proud of you. But thanks for the plug.Eric Norenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14648635662703229678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-40774425562281819452011-08-30T10:18:58.310-04:002011-08-30T10:18:58.310-04:00Dave, you're sinking further into a hole of yo...Dave, you're sinking further into a hole of your own creation. First rule of holes: stop digging.<br /><br /><i>"There really was no need for the Obama number in my point. Looking back, I'm glad I didn't use it because it gave you a convenient little distraction from my valid point on Bush's job record."</i><br /><br />Had you simply pulled Bush's job creation number from the list, I could buy your argument. So here's your chance to earn back 100% of your credibility: Kindly explain how Harry Truman's job creation ties into your argument about Bush's job record. Or Lyndon Johnson's. Or Gerald Ford's.<br /><br />You see, if your justification is that you eliminated Obama because his job record was irrelevant to your point, then surely every other president you listed <i>is</i> relevant to your point.<br /><br />Since none of the other presidents were used in your earlier point about Bush's job record, I think we can all safely assume you intentionally left off Obama's number.<br /><br /><i>"Look at the deliberate mischaracterization you included to make your point. [Quoting] Bush demolished our economy in the eight months between January 2001 (inauguration) and September 2001 (attacks)? [End quote] Now I never said that. I never implied it. I didn't even suggest it."</i><br /><br />You're right. I misread "Speaking of cherry picking, weak excuses like the internet bubble burst and 9/11 were long gone by the time Bush finished demolishing our economy and left us a broken system that even a good president couldn’t repair."<br /><br />I thought you were saying that Bush demolished the economy before 9/11 even happened. I see now that you were saying they were way in the past.<br /><br />(BTW, consider that a short tutorial on admitting when you're wrong.)<br /><br /><i>"Along with their projection and distraction, redefining words and meanings is a consistent and favorite tactic."</i><br /><br />You mean like redefining "cherry picking" to make it sound like you didn't, Dave?<br /><br />Look, you could've shown a little integrity, and we could've avoided this sideline discussion, had you simply admitted to leaving Obama out entirely, admitted some culpability, and moved on. A simple "Ooops, you caught me." would've been sufficient, but you're still defending your actions saying you've done nothing wrong.Eric Norenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14648635662703229678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-19381252037650265422011-08-30T08:09:58.029-04:002011-08-30T08:09:58.029-04:00Must have been a slow night at the Guardian's ...Must have been a slow night at the Guardian's resident. Up until 3:58 a.m. searching HR's blog to find one error. <br />Great investigative work Guardian, if only you had spent half a much effort vetting our President maybe we wouldn't be in the liberal caused mess we are in.Just the Facts!noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-7623251019655988852011-08-30T03:58:19.093-04:002011-08-30T03:58:19.093-04:00Heathen Republican, you said...
"He had the ...<b>Heathen Republican</b>, you said...<br /><br />"<i>He had the same option that the article's author had: to include Obama and add a disclaimer that the reader could weigh in context. Dave didn't include Obama because it didn't make his point. That's cherry picking.</i>"<br /><br />You have the audacity to point out a minor sin of omission, while you openly, and without reservation, lie about appearing on a television show, <i>Hardball</i>, <a href="http://heathenrepublican.blogspot.com/2011/08/heathen-republican-on-msnbcs-hardball.html" rel="nofollow">in your own blog</a>. Nowhere do I find a disclaimer indicating you, in fact, <i>weren't on</i> the TV show. The only possible defense you could have is that you <i>are</i>, actually, Michael Steele. Are you?Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-5939422644400139442011-08-30T00:02:01.415-04:002011-08-30T00:02:01.415-04:00HR,
There really was no need for the Obama number ...HR,<br />There really was no need for the Obama number in my point. Looking back, I’m glad I didn’t use it because it gave you a convenient little distraction from my valid point on Bush’s job record. You really needed it to run your distraction. That’s kind of funny, really. <br /><br />And there you go again with your projection of cherry picking at me when that is exactly what you are doing. First thing is this. “Cherry picking” means including only what makes your point, and excluding everything that contradicts your point. Obama’s record doesn’t contradict my point, no matter whether he found a job for every American or none at all. It was what we call in reality, “beside the point”.<br /><br />Look at the deliberate mischaracterization you included to make your point. <i> Bush demolished our economy in the eight months between January 2001 (inauguration) and September 2001 (attacks)?</i> <br /><br />Now I never said that. I never implied it. I didn’t even suggest it. But you cherry picked a little fib to make your point. Now I’m the one laughing. <br /><br />The “internet bubble burst and 9/11” are favorite and handy cherry picked excuses for all of Bush’s failures. Those excuses are trumpeted along with what we “America-hating liberals” have done while abusing our enormous amount of power over Wall Street and multinational corporations. <br /><br />Now its my turn to laugh again. You “pointing out rhetorical tricks” is hilarious. This is why the Right needs their own language, because when we use meaningful words to honestly show how they are wrong, they need to invent scary words like Death tax and Death panels to incite negative emotions and draw meaningful words away from discussion. <br /><br />Along with their projection and distraction, redefining words and meanings is a consistent and favorite tactic...I mean “rhetorical trick”.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-62303983143675141792011-08-29T21:01:57.101-04:002011-08-29T21:01:57.101-04:00Dave,
HR answered your questions, how about dealin...Dave,<br />HR answered your questions, how about dealing with this one.<br />How dare liberals demand we all share the pain in dealing with out debt due in large part to the endless spending for the "endless" War on Poverty,<br />while our President does not share the pain to take care of his own family? Uncle Omar and Aunt Zeituni.<br /><br />How dare liberals demand we share the pain in dealing with our debt brought about in large part due to the spending for our "endless" War on Poverty when close to 50% of Americans pay not federal income tax!<br /><br />How dare liberals and the near 50% of Americans who do not pay income tax demand any thing from the rest of us who are carrying the full load NOW! <br /><br />Yes Dave, how dare you leave current President off your post, how dare you allow fellow liberals call conservatives foul names, while you restrict your blog due to the use of the term "libtards".<br /><br />How dare you call the over 50% of us who pay ALL of the Federal taxes Nazis, or haters of the poor, or profit hungry. How much more do you liberals want from us before you will have enough for your failed liberal policy's?Just the Factsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-73468279855005363562011-08-29T20:51:17.843-04:002011-08-29T20:51:17.843-04:00Gosh Dave, Bush demolished our economy in the eigh...Gosh Dave, Bush demolished our economy in the eight months between January 2001 (inauguration) and September 2001 (attacks)? And yet you claim that Obama's record is incomplete 2 1/2 years in?<br /><br />We get to measure Bush's record from the day he started (the unemployment rate Clinton left him) yet we don't have to measure Obama until we recover from Bush's downward spiral (apparently at some future time)?<br /><br />I don't worry about undermining my position by pointing out your rhetorical tricks. I'm confident my words will hold up in front of any objective observer.Eric Norenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14648635662703229678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-29129052420260530422011-08-29T20:45:05.822-04:002011-08-29T20:45:05.822-04:00Nice try Jefferson. I'm not criticizing the ar...Nice try Jefferson. I'm not criticizing the article; I'm criticizing Dave's conscious decision to copy and paste every president from the article except for Obama.<br /><br />He had the same option that the article's author had: to include Obama and add a disclaimer that the reader could weigh in context. Dave didn't include Obama because it didn't make his point. That's cherry picking.Eric Norenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14648635662703229678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-23050534216869776522011-08-29T20:43:47.722-04:002011-08-29T20:43:47.722-04:00HR,
Thank you for looking it up. I did intentional...HR,<br />Thank you for looking it up. I did intentionally leave Obama off the list because he was not the subject of discussion and his record is incomplete. Obama’s record is irrelevant to the discussion at that point. <br /><br />Speaking of cherry pickling, weak excuses like the internet bubble burst and 9/11 were long gone by the time Bush finished demolishing our economy and left us a broken system that even a good president couldn’t repair. Unfortunately we do not have a good president. Our fate is sealed with only corporatists and appeasers in power. <br /><br />The fact you choose to ignore is the Republican’s downward spiral was kicking in full speed by January 2009, as reflected by the jobs lost under Obama. And who knows how much worse things would be had it not been for Obama’s severely diluted single effort at recovery to stem the Republican/corpo-Dem catastrophe? <br /><br />On the contrary, I am making legitimate points, but you obviously need to say I’m being unfair when I make them. That undermines your position, not mine. Republicans do tend to whine when the vast mountain of evidence shows how bad their policies are for all Americans but the elites that own the Republican Party.<br /><br /><i>”Picking individual data that hurts Republicans, and then ignoring the same data when it hurts Democrats is just...”</i> ...not what I am doing at all here, as any neutral observer can plainly see. <br /><br /> <br />Just The FOX(R),<br />Your mere presence in this conversation is proof of my taking the high road of tolerance by allowing you to troll here. I’ve given you more opportunities for fair discussion than most reasonable people would. You continually ignore my questions, demand answers to yours, and dump crap on us that is not under discussion. And then you have the sheer gall to question my credibility. Yeah, there are double standards here all right, thanks to you.Dave Dubyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03279370558997246976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-134372208798387606.post-35172448706173282752011-08-29T20:35:10.787-04:002011-08-29T20:35:10.787-04:00Heathen Republican, I think you're being disin...<b>Heathen Republican</b>, I think you're being disingenuous in your critique. As noted in the linked article, right above the presidential listing, the following caveat is very clear:<br /><br />"<i>Because President Barack Obama has served just one year in office -- a length of time that some would consider statistically problematic -- we ran the Democratic numbers both with and without Obama, so that readers could choose their preferred statistic.</i>"<br /><br />It's pretty petty on your part to compare each president's post-war job creation record, based upon either four or eight years in office, against an incumbent president who inherited an economy that was, just months before, described as being on the brink of collapse.<br /><br />That's an unfair comparison. Perhaps in January 2013 you'll be able to make your claim. Until then, your case rings very hollow.Jefferson's Guardianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16950868026721859555noreply@blogger.com