What part of “all men are born equal” do you not understand, the “truth” or the “self-evident”?
I honestly have no clue what point you think you are making here. I pointed out subject areas where I thought the Democrats had demonstrated accomplishment, in contrast to the Republicans. I said nothing about the economy or its importance relative to these things. If it makes you feel better, I would have preferred to see more on the economy in tonight’s speeches, but then it’s also only the first night of the convention. Get back to me when the thing’s over.
Are GM and Chrysler still in business, or are they not? Also, I guess you failed to notice, on the very same page yuou linked to, the rebuttal by Bob Lutz, who most people would say knows one or two things about the auto industry. So who am I to believe rgarding GM’s viability? In any event, should it eventually collapse, you are welcome to gloat in as boorish a manner as you choose.
Well, I’d say when it, er, constitutes a straw man.
See, like that, for example.
Not to mention rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists.
I mean, let’s at least try to be comprehensive here.
You keep repeating the “unemployement rate has been over 8% since Feb 2009” factoid here, presumably hoping that people won’t notice that you’re misrepresenting the data signficantly. In February 2009 the country was losing jobs at a spectacular rate. The fall has been halted and the country is now gaining jobs again, albeit not at a particularly fast rate. That is still “pretty damn good”, even if it could be a lot better.
What do you think of Robert Rector’s work on analysing poverty in the US?
Maybe there is someone somewhere who will buy your half-the-story version of things. It doesn’t appear to be selling here in any way.
After 3 years of 0bama policies the unemployment rate remains over 8% and economic growth remains tepid at best, despite historic economic spending (stimulus, cash for clunkers, un-ending unemployment extensions, home buyer credits, etc etc) and historic financial stimulus from the FED (QE1; QE2; “twists”; almost zero interest rates; ect.)
0bama’s economic policies have been empirical failures. In return for the massive increases to the national debt in a vain attempt to “stimulate” the economy, 3 years later GDP is still very weak (and projected to stay that way) and unemployment is still very high.
So basically you have no argument other than to keep repeating the same statements over and over after they’ve been shown to be inaccurate. Good to know.
Yes, unemployment is still high. But it is lower than it was, and moving in the right direction. Do you deny this?
And the GDP is weak because people don’t have any disposable income to spend. The GOP solution appears to be to give more money to the people who already do have money to spend. Does that make sense to you?
Going from a GDP of-9 to “tepid” is a major improvement. Misleading half truths are compelling only to the simple. The Republican convention is over.
Can you (and maybe you can’t) drop the Zero+bama crap? It doesn’t help your argument and just comes across as childish. We’ve got it you don’t like the President but claiming you want to have a rational argument about his stance or on the economy or whatever and then using this ‘tactic’ just makes me, and I’m sure others, say “this person is not willing to have a serious discussion, he just wants to name call.”
Really dude, it’s not giving your argument any ‘meaningful substance.”
I think the Democrats had a much better convention in one night than the Republicans had in three. Unlike Republicans, Democrats actually like their nominee. Unlike Republicans, the convention hall looked like America.
Michelle Obama was extraordinary. I was expecting a good speech. I was not expecting the second coming of Martin Luther King, but I got it. The contrast between the Obamas and the Romneys in their personal stories couldn’t be starker. One couple worked their way to the top, the other couple was born on third base and thought they hit a triple.
You’re being far to charitable. I think much worse things.
Brilliant! Can I steal that?
Last night made me proud to be a liberal democrat.
Of course, but I didn’t make it up. I forget where I first read that.
I first heard it about Bush I–it may be older than that.
He averted a free fall into a true depression. Instead of losing jobs, we are gaining. As other economies continue to teeter on the brink still, it’s looking not so bad.
I don’t know that any thinking people seriously believed he could fix all the messes he inherited in just four years. Got Osama, revived the auto industry, slated to exit one war, repealed DADT, passed healthcare reform, (it ain’t perfect, but he got it through!), averted a depression, got us from losing jobs to slowly gaining.
Republican’s got nothing else to work. Their candidate might be a cardboard cutout. So they just stamp their feet, roll their eyes and whine, “His plans not working! Unemployment 8%! Wah, Wah!”
Well, that’s what I hear anyway. But maybe that’s just me.
I think it was Molly Ivins quoting Ann Richards (who was speaking of Bush 41).
The quote I remember of hers about elder Bush was “he was born with a silver foot in his mouth.”
So, how do you explain phenomena like this: August was a great month for car sales and US manufacturers sold more than they predicted, despite rising gas prices, largely due to the increased number of fuel efficient cars. To me, that doesn’t sound like an economy on the brink of collapse.
Born on third base and thought he hit a triple is, I believe, a Jim Hightower quote.
Although apparently it might have been said by Barry Switzer first