119% of Fox news viewers will not understand this
#1
and the other 141% will simply disagree with the numbers....

[Image: 1463738_10151794025531275_914659345_n.jpg]
Reply
#2
LOL, It's true.
Reply
#3
I think many will acknowledge this fact if you acknowledge that George Bush is an American patriot while Obama is a lying, socialist, pig. Why wouldn't we give Bush more leadway; we trust him. Razz
Reply
#4
(11-11-2013, 02:59 PM)cletus1 Wrote: I think many will acknowledge this fact if you acknowledge that George Bush is an American patriot while Obama is a lying, socialist, pig. Why wouldn't we give Bush more leadway; we trust him. Razz

I think only 207% would agree with you.
Reply
#5
This FOX News viewer rates Obama, Nixon, Bush, and Carter as the worst presidents ever, in that order. But that evaluation is based on factors beyond the statistics quoted. It really is based on harm done the country.

Does that put me in the 119% or the 141%?
Reply
#6
I think it's closer to 100%.
Reply
#7
Quote:Most American students lacking basic math, science skills

Quote:The 2013 Nation's Report Card released Thursday finds that the vast majority of the students still are not demonstrating solid academic performance in either math or reading. Stubborn gaps persist between the performances of white children and their Hispanic and African-American counterparts, who scored much lower.

Overall, just 42 percent of fourth graders and 35 percent of eighth graders scored at or above the proficient level in math. In reading, 35 percent of fourth graders and 36 percent of eighth graders hit that mark.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/201.../131109650

They can always get jobs at Fox News.
Reply
#8
(11-12-2013, 07:14 AM)chuck white Wrote:
Quote:Most American students lacking basic math, science skills

Quote:The 2013 Nation's Report Card released Thursday finds that the vast majority of the students still are not demonstrating solid academic performance in either math or reading. Stubborn gaps persist between the performances of white children and their Hispanic and African-American counterparts, who scored much lower.

Overall, just 42 percent of fourth graders and 35 percent of eighth graders scored at or above the proficient level in math. In reading, 35 percent of fourth graders and 36 percent of eighth graders hit that mark.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/201.../131109650

They can always get jobs at Fox News.

Only if they're good looking and have great legs!!!
Reply
#9
(11-11-2013, 06:18 PM)Sidewinder Wrote: This FOX News viewer rates Obama, Nixon, Bush, and Carter as the worst presidents ever, in that order. But that evaluation is based on factors beyond the statistics quoted. It really is based on harm done the country.

Does that put me in the 119% or the 141%?

Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?
Reply
#10
(11-12-2013, 09:13 PM)MarkM Wrote:
(11-11-2013, 06:18 PM)Sidewinder Wrote: This FOX News viewer rates Obama, Nixon, Bush, and Carter as the worst presidents ever, in that order. But that evaluation is based on factors beyond the statistics quoted. It really is based on harm done the country.

Does that put me in the 119% or the 141%?

Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?

Well for one, Obama continued the Bush/Cheney policies of spying and endless pentagon spending and slaughtering of the innocents for resources and stretching the Empire deep into the Pacific rim that is creating a military build-up of countries not wanting to be overwhelmed by the American war machine.

At home there is sequester, the gutting the safety net and a jobless recovery where only the 10% are profiting handsomely.

And lets face it, if Obama were a ''republican'' the liberals in America would be singing a completely different tune, not unlike the disgust they showed for Bush and his policies.

Ps, outside of Watergate and his arrogance, Nixon did some good things.

And Carter, though imperfect was undone by being an outsider, a ''manufactured'' gas crisis and the very questionable Iranian hostage situation before the election.

Not to forget that Charter has been more honest about US policies since leaving office and done more for ''real'' people in his private life than any other president you care to name.
Reply
#11
(11-12-2013, 09:13 PM)MarkM Wrote: Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?

Nixon eliminated the gold standard and committed us to a road of endless inflation (wealth redistribution). Simultaneously he started the regulatory war against industry and production.

Carter's one attempt at initiating a war ended in an utter fiasco in the desert in Iran.

The only thing that Obama has done that hasn't hurt the nation is to take vacations. He is Nixon, Bush and Carter all rolled together on steroids.
Reply
#12
(11-13-2013, 10:29 AM)Sidewinder Wrote:
(11-12-2013, 09:13 PM)MarkM Wrote: Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?

Nixon eliminated the gold standard and committed us to a road of endless inflation (wealth redistribution). Simultaneously he started the regulatory war against industry and production.

Carter's one attempt at initiating a war ended in an utter fiasco in the desert in Iran.

The only thing that Obama has done that hasn't hurt the nation is to take vacations. He is Nixon, Bush and Carter all rolled together on steroids.

As expected. A non-answer.
Reply
#13
(11-13-2013, 10:29 AM)Sidewinder Wrote:
(11-12-2013, 09:13 PM)MarkM Wrote: Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?

Nixon eliminated the gold standard and committed us to a road of endless inflation (wealth redistribution). Simultaneously he started the regulatory war against industry and production.

Carter's one attempt at initiating a war ended in an utter fiasco in the desert in Iran.

The only thing that Obama has done that hasn't hurt the nation is to take vacations. He is Nixon, Bush and Carter all rolled together on steroids.

Actually Nixon was quite ''progressive'' for his time.

The good
Environmental Protection Agency
Clean Water Act
Clean Air Act
Opened relations with China

The bad
Secretly extended the war in Vietnam across the border into Cambodia.
During 1972 Re-Election Campaign he ordered his staff to break into the Democratic Party Headquarters at the Watergate Hotel.

The ugly
He lacked morals and was a paranoid.


Now to Carter;
I believe you are in error regarding President Carter attempt at initiating a war with Iran;

''On November 4, 1979, Iranian militants stormed the United States Embassy in Tehran and took approximately seventy Americans captive. This terrorist act triggered the most profound crisis of the Carter presidency and began a personal ordeal for Jimmy Carter and the American people that lasted 444 days.

President Carter committed himself to the safe return of the hostages while protecting America's interests and prestige. He pursued a policy of restraint that put a higher value on the lives of the hostages than on American retaliatory power or protecting his own political future.

The toll of patient diplomacy was great, but President Carter's actions brought freedom for the hostages with America's honor preserved.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran, began his reign in 1941, succeeding his father, Reza Khan, to the throne. In a 1953 power struggle with his prime minister, the Shah gained American support to prevent nationalization of Iran's oil industry. In return for assuring the U.S. a steady supply of oil, the Shah received economic and military aid from eight American presidents.

Early in the 1960s, the Shah announced social and economic reforms but refused to grant broad political freedom. Iranian nationalists condemned his U.S. supported regime and his "westernizing" of Iran. During rioting in 1963, the Shah cracked down, suppressing his opposition. Among those arrested and exiled was a popular religious nationalist and bitter foe of the United States, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Between 1963 and 1979, the Shah spent billions of oil dollars on military weapons. The real price of military strength was the loss of popular support. Unable to sustain economic progress and unwilling to expand democratic freedoms, the Shah's regime collapsed in revolution. On January 16, 1979, the Shah fled Iran, never to return.

The exiled Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran in February 1979 and whipped popular discontent into rabid anti-Americanism. When the Shah came to America for cancer treatment in October, the Ayatollah incited Iranian militants to attack the U.S. On November 4, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun and its employees taken captive. The hostage crisis had begun.''From.......... http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/docume...ages.phtml

As for President Obama;
To me and many others Obama is just another plutocrat doing the bidding of Wall Street and the Military/Industrial/Congressional complex. After all Obamacare is just another scam to make more money for the Insurance business at the expense of the taxpayers when Medicare for all would cost about $3,000 a year and cover everyone.
Reply
#14
(11-13-2013, 11:10 AM)gapper Wrote: As expected. A non-answer.

Sorry. Didn't mean to go over your head.
Reply
#15
(11-13-2013, 10:29 AM)Sidewinder Wrote:
(11-12-2013, 09:13 PM)MarkM Wrote: Overnight, Nixon obliterated American confidence in their own government that had been build up for generations.

Bush allowed the most severe attack against the US, led two illegal wars, ran up unprecedented debt, and destroyed the economy.

Carter is the only president to not take the country into war since, uh, well since, um, well since whom?

What, uh, harm did Obama do?

Nixon eliminated the gold standard and committed us to a road of endless inflation (wealth redistribution). Simultaneously he started the regulatory war against industry and production.

Carter's one attempt at initiating a war ended in an utter fiasco in the desert in Iran.

The only thing that Obama has done that hasn't hurt the nation is to take vacations. He is Nixon, Bush and Carter all rolled together on steroids.

I'm glad to see you're concerned about wealth redistribution (it's being redistributed UP, by the way) but it's not because of "endless inflation." I suppose inflation is endless because we have some every year (just like every other country on planet earth) but it's not just prices and costs that inflate -- wages, salaries, dividends, pensions all inflate too. Inflation has little to nothing to do with the current struggles of our middle class.

Furthermore, it's a reach to tie inflation to the loss of the gold standard, even though it makes for a good story. Here's what inflation in America has looked like since 1946.

[Image: united-states-inflation-cpi.png?s=cpi+yo...2=20131231]

Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971. You'll note that inflation actually went down after that. Today inflation has hovered around historical lows for about three decades now. Where's the fire?

Note also that prior to 1971, inflation had extremely large swings even though we were living under the supposed protection of the gold standard.

The loss of the gold standard as some sort of tragedy for the American economy is a myth. But if you want to throw your wealth away on shiny objects, be my guest. That's how the Dutch acquired Manhattan.

Leonard has defended Carter quite well, and I'll take your vague response about Obama to mean, "I have no earthly idea."
Reply
#16
(11-13-2013, 11:48 AM)Leonard Wrote: Actually Nixon was quite ''progressive'' for his time.

Precisely.

(11-13-2013, 11:48 AM)Leonard Wrote: Carter
I believe you are in error regarding President Carter attempt at initiating a war with Iran.

I believe a hostile military incursion into another country to be an act of war. This incompetent CinC attempted to lead the operation from the oval office and it turned into a complete fiasco.


(11-13-2013, 11:48 AM)Leonard Wrote: President Obama;
To me and many others Obama is just another plutocrat doing the bidding of Wall Street and the Military/Industrial/Congressional complex. After all Obamacare is just another scam to make more money for the Insurance business at the expense of the taxpayers when Medicare for all would cost about $3,000 a year and cover everyone.

Precisely. What I call crony capitalism.
Reply
#17
(11-13-2013, 04:07 PM)MarkM Wrote: I'm glad to see you're concerned about wealth redistribution (it's being redistributed UP, by the way) but it's not because of "endless inflation." I suppose inflation is endless because we have some every year (just like every other country on planet earth) but it's not just prices and costs that inflate -- wages, salaries, dividends, pensions all inflate too. Inflation has little to nothing to do with the current struggles of our middle class.

I agree completely that wealth is being redistributed UP and that is what is destroying the middle class. But if you cannot connect the dots to inflation, you will not save yourself.

Think about what you have said. Loss is not caused by inflation because we have inflation every year? Then refer to the Federal Reserve's policy to maintain an anuual inflation of 2%.

Inflation occurs in two increments. First there is a monetary inflation. The injection into the market place of more money by way of creating new dollars. The first recipients of the new, unsupported - counterfeit? - dollars get full value of those dollars. After they have changed hands and actually entered the market place, we then have more dollars circulating with no offset. Supply and demand applies to dollars as well as other valuables. All dollars become devalued and we end up with price inflation. Wealth acquired at the expense of low value dollars is more dollar costly than wealth acquired with higher value dollars. Thus, wealth is transfered surrepticiously to the first recipients.

Who gets the first phoney dollars? The reserve bankers and the Wall Street banking houses.

(11-13-2013, 04:07 PM)MarkM Wrote: Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971. You'll note that inflation actually went down after that. Today inflation has hovered around historical lows for about three decades now. Where's the fire?

Note also that prior to 1971, inflation had extremely large swings even though we were living under the supposed protection of the gold standard.

Two things you are avoiding as to 1971. The reason Nixon took us off the gold standard was the gold drain being experienced as a result of monetary inflation. He stopped that. Simultaneously, he negotiated the petro-dollar arrangement with OPEC which effectively put us on an oil standard. That put a stop to the devaluation of the dollar in ionternational exchange although our continued monetary expansion screwed the arabs by continually purchasing our oil with continually depreciating dollars. The sop to the arabs when we devalue our petro dollars is foreign aid. (Did you ever wonder why the U.S. should be providing financial support for Saudi Arabia?)
Reply
#18
SW, they say in politics, if you're explaining, you're losing.

Look, you can say, "Hey in 1978 when I bought my first gallon of gas it cost 68 cents. Today it's $3.50. That's runaway inflation!!"

But then someone else could say, "Yeah, but in 1978 I was making $2/hr. Today I'm making $8/hr. I think I'm OK."

When you start in on petro-dollars and Saudi Arabia, most people either get mad or stop listening. You're betting on the former. I'm betting on reality.

But if you're still determined to run the American economy on the gold standard, consider this -- there is not enough gold. The US GDP is over 13 trillion dollars.

Where are you going to get the gold?

In other words, want to limit the growth of an economy? Chain it to gold.

You don't address what inflation really means to Americans which is honestly not very much in the context of the overall economy. If inflation were 20%, or 10%, or even 5%, you may have a point. But it's not. And despite all the dire warnings about the Weimar Republic, it's still not. Inflation is the least of our worries. And like it or not, we have the Fed Reserve to thank for that.

On the other hand, if you want to argue that Wall St bankers are taking advantage of a corrupt system, I'd readily agree with you. You may not like my solution though -- high marginal income tax rates coupled with high margin tax rates on investment income. Hey, it worked in America for fifty years and produced the largest, most prosperous middle class in human history. The poor got richer and the rich got richer too. What's not to love? I think we could agree.
Reply
#19
I'm still not clear on what Obama did to harm the country? I've been wondering about this one for some time since my TP friends are quite convinced of it. I just don't have any idea what the heck they are talking about. What the heck are they talking about?
Reply
#20
(11-13-2013, 06:08 PM)MarkM Wrote: I'm still not clear on what Obama did to harm the country? I've been wondering about this one for some time since my TP friends are quite convinced of it. I just don't have any idea what the heck they are talking about. What the heck are they talking about?

Maybe over 11,000 pages of new regulations in his first term costing us the taxpayers and consumers about $40,000,000,000.00 more out of our pockets?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)