- Joined
- Feb 2, 2006
- Messages
- 17,343
- Reaction score
- 2,876
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
It's YOUR standard -- don't get all sniffly over me for using it against you.I wonder if you will ever argue honestly. :shrug:
It's YOUR standard -- don't get all sniffly over me for using it against you.I wonder if you will ever argue honestly. :shrug:
megaprogman said:Nevermind, there is no point to this since you have stated in the past you don't do context.
This is a subjective statement, and therefore carries exactly as much force as you stating you don't like liver.
It's YOUR standard -- don't get all sniffly over me for using it against you.
Now, this is just sour grapes. You set a standard and I'm using it.Yeah, I have a habit of getting bogged down by dishonest people...
National Debt Up $3 Trillion on Obama's Watch - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
Let the excuses begin!
Really - at what point will liberals hold The Obama responsible for this?
Now, this is just sour grapes. You set a standard and I'm using it.
Don't like it? Perhaps you should exhibit a little honesty and reconsider that standard.
Hardly. Your standard must necessarly applies everywhere, not just where you want it to - else you're just trying to conveniently pick and choose when a subjective argument is valid and when its not.I have already explained why you are doing it dishonestly :shrug:
I didnlt take anything you said out of context, and you know it.Ok, than this would give me license to take what you say out of context...
Hardly. Your standard must necessarly applies everywhere, not just where you want it to - else you're just trying to conveniently pick and choose when a subjective argument is valid and when its not.
THAT is dishonest.
Oh. So, sometimes, criticisms based on subjective standards are not valid?Thats not true and you know it. All situations are not the same and they require different types of thinking to understand them.
Oh. So, sometimes, criticisms based on subjective standards are not valid?
Like... when?
The economy was in recession when GWB took office, which continued for 6-9 more months.Bush came into office owing what? Bush inherited a great economy.
I bit of it yes, but I really wouldn't call it blame as almost all of the spending was necessary. To me, blame implies that he did something wrong (really the biggest blame I have for him, is he hasn't done enough)
The economy was in recession when GWB took office, which continued for 6-9 more months.
Oh. So, criticiems based on subjective standards -are- always valid.That's not true either.
You said that GWB inherited a great ecomomy.Recession with a balanced budget?
Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."- September 29, 2008
Necessary ??
Was the rebuilding of New York City and care for the people there after 9/11 unnecessary ??
Was the rebuilding of the nation's economy after 9/11 unnecessary ??
Was defeating the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11and the nation that harbored them unnecessary ??
Was the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security to protect us from another attack unnecessary ??
Was rebuilding New Orleans after Katrina unnecessary ??
Which ones would you have eliminated ?
How much of it was spent before Jan 21 2009?Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?
Oh. So, criticiems based on subjective standards -are- always valid.
Except, of course, they carry no more weight than stating you dont like liver.
How then have I done anything to take you out of context?
You said that GWB inherited a great ecomomy.
Unless you were offering sarcasm, your statement is demonstrably incorrect.
You also don't like liver. So what?New Orleans is still largely in ruins, but overall, I don't think it was necessary beyond cleaning up any unsafe areas
You also don't like liver. So what?Of course, and I supported some of the stimulus that Bush did, even though I think he did it in an ineffective manner
You also don't like liver. So what?Afghanistan was, Iraq was not
You also don't like liver. So what?Yes[the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security to protect us from another attack was unnecessary]
You also don't like liver. So what?New Orleans is still largely in ruins
You also don't like liver. So what?Iraq, homeland security, a lot of the silly measures that cost lots of money but do nothing for our safety...
You also don't like liver. So what?the medicare prescription thing, no child left behind (even though that was largely unfunded), some other stuff.
How much of it was spent before Jan 21 2009?
Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."- September 29, 2008