7
   

CNN - the embarrassment of New Organizations

 
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 08:10 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Frankly DTOM, I wouldn't expect you to consider any anti-american, anti-conservative screed a diatribe, and so I have factored your comment accordingly.

One sign ("CNN Sucks") tells us all we need to know about these events.

Right?



wrong, as usual.

but of course anything you don't like is "anti-american", so i have factored the value of your comment accordingly.

Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 08:14 pm
@DontTreadOnMe,
Wow!

That just cut me to the quick!

(You might have tried, with the same success, "I know you are, but what am I?')
0 Replies
 
kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 11:40 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
finn said

Quote:
Is that really your response?

What "rational" world can you imagine where at least 10% of the inhabitants will not be irrational?

And so if 10% of the conservatives participating in these events are irrational, we can, therefore, conclude that conservatives, in general, are no longer rational?

This has got to be the weakest and most idiotic Kuvy response ever.

You really are better than this one (at least I think so).


Let me walk you through it then, the issue is that racist signs were evident throughout the tea bagging rallies yet no one at the rallies thought that the signs were beyond the Pale of acceptable behavior for protesting taxes, or even considered civily unacceptable and removed.

It does not matter whether 10% of your fellow traveler on the far right wing are irrational for promoting racism, because I think all of you generally are borderline psychopaths who live in a make believe world of your own where objectivity, rationalism, logic, and ethics, are considered personal vices or diseases, but the issue at hand is that the other alleged 90% of you mouth breathers do nothing to stop the craziness of your lunatic fringe.

And that is the criticism I have against you and your right wing nut compadres. It is not so much you stand for nothing but that you will stand for anything.
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 12:24 am
@parados,
So, my $9.3 trillion figure I quoted - which you mocked - is incorrect? You blasted me for making up numbers, I provide the source from CBS, and you sidestep the answer?

Of course, I could have provided links to any mainstream media outlet; you really missed this when it was in the news, parados?

Now, it's fuzzy math... Rolling Eyes

Go back to the first post you addressed, now that you are aware that the $9.3 trillion is not a number I pulled out of thin air.

As you said:

Quote:


"If that scared me, I wouldn't be able to get out of bed in the morning because the right seems to make up numbers every day. Between you, ican, Woiyo etc. You guys make up numbers all the time and then act scared about the numbers you made up and demand that the rest of us be scared of your numbers. Wooohhh, scarey number there LV. Too bad it doesn't have anything to do with the US budget for the next 8 years."



$9.3 trillion, as reported by the CBO. Not asking you to be scared; simply asking you to address the truth.

Looks like maybe it does, indeed, have something to do with the budget, no?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 07:07 am
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:

But this money is coming from somewhere, isn't it? Obama is attempting to create a deficit that could total $9.3 trillion, more than four times what Bush created.


Yes, you ARE using fuzzy math LV. Even if it is fuzzy math you didn't bother to check, it's still fuzzy.
How many years are you using for Obama? How many are you using for Bush?

Why are you comparing 10 to 8?
Why don't we compare 10 t0 10? or 8 to 8?
Why does the Bush comparison not include the 2009 budget year which took effect in Oct of 2008?

Your argument like the article you posted is full of ****. Comparing 10 years to 8 years is not a valid comparison.

There are some interesting things in the CBO numbers for the budget. They seem to assume none of the TARP money will be repaid. Something we already see some companies trying to do.

This is not included in your numbers for Bush....
Quote:

CBO estimates that the Treasury Department will report a deficit of $563 billion for the first four months of fiscal year 2009
Oct 2008 - Jan 2009.


parados wrote:
Too bad it doesn't have anything to do with the US budget for the next 8 years."


Quote:
$9.3 trillion, as reported by the CBO. Not asking you to be scared; simply asking you to address the truth.

Looks like maybe it does, indeed, have something to do with the budget, no?

No, the 9.3 still has nothing to do with the next 8 years of US budget. My statement is still accurate.


A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Apr, 2009 09:10 pm
@parados,
Quote:

No, the 9.3 still has nothing to do with the next 8 years of US budget. My statement is still accurate.



You use numbers from the White House; I use the CBO. Which, would you say, is more partisan?

The CBO is saying over 10 years, btw.

But tell me, how does this extreme deficit have nothing to do with the budget over the next eight years? Interest payments alone will be substantial every year as the Obama deficit grows, eventually to 9.3 trillion.

Or are you buying the party line that all this federal spending will do away with the deficit?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Mon 27 Apr, 2009 05:30 pm
@kuvasz,
Apparently I've over-estimated you Kuvy.
Or maybe I've under-estimated you: Apparently you were either, a la Santa, at every Tea Party or you have the means to know what did and did not happen at everyone.

Somehow you know that the few actually racist signs appearing at certain Tea Parties were, in each and every case, unchallenged by the majority of attendees.

Either you are omniscient or have pathetic tunnel vision --- hmnnn...which is more likely?

Laughable Kuvy, laughable

I'm guessing that Ms Garafola is a frequent visitor to your wet dreams.

kuvasz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Apr, 2009 11:46 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
finn dabuzz sprayed.....

Quote:
Apparently I've over-estimated you Kuvy.
Or maybe I've under-estimated you: Apparently you were either, a la Santa, at every Tea Party or you have the means to know what did and did not happen at everyone.

Somehow you know that the few actually racist signs appearing at certain Tea Parties were, in each and every case, unchallenged by the majority of attendees.

Either you are omniscient or have pathetic tunnel vision --- hmnnn...which is more likely?

Laughable Kuvy, laughable

I'm guessing that Ms Garafola is a frequent visitor to your wet dreams.

Let me again, led you by the hand.

Since apparently, you were raised by wolves, this is how you deal with racism. You do not accept, dismiss or apologize for it; you shun it.





btw if you must know, whenever I hear the word 'wet dreams' I think of you.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Apr, 2009 05:39 pm
@kuvasz,
No less lame, but your tenacity deserves some sort of credit.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/19/2022 at 02:51:14