Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
C'mon now. No one can be worse than George Bush Jr. Brought down the economy to a recession. Obama unfortunately had to shoulder his bludder. Obama did a pretty good job stabilizing the economic downturn.
Economists say that his policies slowed recovery, drastically.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Economists say that his policies slowed recovery, drastically.
Yep, there are definitely things that he did wrong; I've yet to see a president that didn't. It's just sad that right wing nutters are just as nutty as their left wing counterparts. Act like adults and stop with the foolishness. All this partisan garbage is exactly why one of the the nations with the most potential continues to be bogged down in inanity.
Grow up, all of you. How people can be so blind as to think that it's either left or right and nothing in between is beyond me to comprehend, but I'm tired of seeing it. Act like you're not still in middle school discovering sarcasm and passive-aggressive half-truths for the first time.
I'm not a fan of much of what Trump has said, for instance, but I give him credit 100% for his firm stance on the Ethics committee that his 100% would not allow to be voted out of place before he even took office and his claims that he will push for real universal health care. He has a long way to go, but anger and tirades are pointless. I wish people on both sides would figure that out.
It's okay though, as has been made very clear with the recent march, women are the majority and there are plenty of sensible men out there to boot. It seems that more than ever those who want to approach things with at least a bit of rationalism and a minimum amount of anger will continue to do so going forward. I very much hope that the days of twisted rhetoric that have become the norm on places like this site are going out the window.
Again, grow up. You and everyone else who continues with the slanted portrayals and empty agendas focused on nothing but making yourselves feel better.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
You're right. Unemployment down from near 10% to 4. Kept the Big Four of Detroit from going bankrupt and they are all far beyond solvent now. Made Bin Laden dead. Didn't manage to make the world hate the U.S. even more before even taking office. Very poor job by that Obama guy.Yep, there are definitely things that he did wrong; I've yet to see a president that didn't. It's just sad that right wing nutters are just as nutty as their left wing counterparts. Act like adults and stop with the foolishness. All this partisan garbage is exactly why one of the the nations with the most potential continues to be bogged down in inanity.
Grow up, all of you. How people can be so blind as to think that it's either left or right and nothing in between is beyond me to comprehend, but I'm tired of seeing it. Act like you're not still in middle school discovering sarcasm and passive-aggressive half-truths for the first time.
I'm not a fan of much of what Trump has said, for instance, but I give him credit 100% for his firm stance on the Ethics committee that his 100% would not allow to be voted out of place before he even took office and his claims that he will push for real universal health care. He has a long way to go, but anger and tirades are pointless. I wish people on both sides would figure that out.
It's okay though, as has been made very clear with the recent march, women are the majority and there are plenty of sensible men out there to boot. It seems that more than ever those who want to approach things with at least a bit of rationalism and a minimum amount of anger will continue to do so going forward. I very much hope that the days of twisted rhetoric that have become the norm on places like this site are going out the window.
Again, grow up. You and everyone else who continues with the slanted portrayals and empty agendas focused on nothing but making yourselves feel better.
4% unemployment. 😆
Do you really believe that? Even a cursory look at how the unemploymemt rate is calculated shows it's bullshit.
Originally posted by cdtm
4% unemployment. 😆Do you really believe that? Even a cursory look at how the unemploymemt rate is calculated shows it's bullshit.
I really do hope that this continues to be a movement where people become informed and involved so that those who choose to be on the left or right and ignore the reality of things, ignore a push for fair treatment for all, and ignore change and stability both based on scientific & reasoned thinking rather than just passion-especially baseless passion--will be left behind. The time for rhetoric and hate is passing away. If you really want to cling to that, enjoy doing so alone.
Originally posted by Robtard
Care to name/list these things that SJWs due which trigger you such?
Though I wouldn't say they "trigger" me, they just irk me. Mostly because I actually agree with the heart of many of causes they claim to represent and their hypocrisy undermines the causes they're trying to push.
Originally posted by Ascendancyk.
Let's go to the other side then and assume it's 6%, which is higher than the most conservative estimates; that's till a major improvement over 10%. If that's literally all that you pulled out of my post as worst discussing then you fall into those I was just addressing: grow up.I really do hope that this continues to be a movement where people become informed and involved so that those who choose to be on the left or right and ignore the reality of things, ignore a push for fair treatment for all, and ignore change and stability both based on scientific & reasoned thinking rather than just passion-especially baseless passion--will be left behind. The time for rhetoric and hate is passing away. If you really want to cling to that, enjoy doing so alone.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
You're right. Unemployment down from near 10% to 4.
False.
But let's go through a few things, first, before we tackle this often posted misleading fact.
Firstly, what did the Economic Stimulus do for the US Economy when it comes to the U6 statistic (there are some proposing a new system of identifying unemployment that is better and much more accurate representations of unemployment such a a pure "working age but not working, not working enough, under employed, etc." It would be like the U6 but count ALL working age people which is, economically, much more accurate than any of the currently tracked unemployment stats)?
Nothing, really. It boosted average household spending by 3.5% for Q2, in 2008. But U6 actually WENT UP that summer in 2008. Did it slow the loss of jobs? Perhaps. But the fact is, U6 went up, not down, not stagnated. It went up. So that's fail #1 for economic recovery. 2008 was under Bush. But this was something that Obama supported. It was rather bipartisan, too.
Secondly, the Economic Stabilization Act (bailout) in 2008 was George Bush thing, as well. But its governance and oversight was lead by Democrats. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, etc. It was strongly supported by Obama, as well. What was the result?
U6 got worse! It went up VERY shortly after this went into effect and it stayed up past 16% until October of 2011. Twenty Eleven! That's literally years after the fact. What good did it do? Why did it take so long? We had similar losses in the economy in recent history but it did not stagnate so severely like this, before.
Here, an economists breaks down why this never works and compares various econonmic schools of thought:
"(1) If nearly $1.4 trillion budget deficits are not enough stimulus, how much is enough? (2) If Keynesian stimulus repeatedly fails, why still rely on the theory?This is no longer a theoretical exercise. The idea that increased deficit spending can cure recessions has been tested repeatedly, and it has failed repeatedly. The economic models that assert that every $1 of deficit spending grows the economy by $1.50 cannot explain why $1.4 trillion in deficit spending did not create a $2.1 trillion explosion of new economic activity."
Thirdly, Obama's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did nothing, as we later knew, back in 2009. None of these worked.
Here is a more accessible breakdown (because it is explained in plainer language) of the economics of the failure of this economic stimulus:
I highly recommend to stop drinking Democratic koolaid and, instead, read more from educated and published authors. Don't just fall for that proganda bullshit that Obama saved the economy. He really didn't. And he was doing the same thing Bush, was. So if you honestly believe Obama saved the economy then a majority of the work was done by Bush before Obama so credit Bush for the majority of the work, not Obama. More on this in a little bit...
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp
Originally posted by Ascendancy
Kept the Big Four of Detroit from going bankrupt and they are all far beyond solvent now.
Holy f*ck, you can tell you've been indoctrinated by some bullshit propaganda. Not even left-leaning political sites will say stupid shit like this. This is not an original thought by you so you cannot be blamed for thinking up this stupid shit.
It was only 2 Car Companies, not 4. And he didn't save them. GM and Chrysler were the companies.
To summarize this:
"But auto sales growth is still lagging the rest of the economy, and GM is actually a drag on those numbers. Basically, the part of the industry that Obama did not “save” is actually doing better than the part he “saved.”"
And here is an article from PoliticalFactCheck that says, at best, Obama and Bush are responsible for saving GM:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/sep/06/did-obama-save-us-automobile-industry/
The next time you hear a US Liberal say that Obama saved the big four, let them know it was only 2 and, at that, it was only partial, and, at that, Chrysler was largely saved by acquisition from another company instead of the US and that GM is struggling and lagging behind the Car companies that didn't get a bailout.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
Made Bin Laden dead.
This is a good one BUT....it would have happened among any president, not just Obama because Obama didn't do any of the ground work. The foundations for getting Bin Laden is BILL CLINTON'S and GEORGE BUSH's credit, not Obama. When Obama said that "Getting Osama Bin Laden" is a top priority, he insulted the key personnel who were already doing that. "Gee, why didn't we think of that." It was an egotistical grab at boosting his approval ratings. People were already hot at work on this even before Bush and on through Bush's presidency. If you want to credit this to anyone, credit Bill Clinton because he was hard on Terrorism and started many of our anti-terrorist efforts in the US Government. Bush amplified it and Obama rode on the backs of Clinton and Bush.
Read this article which outlines the history of how we got Bin Laden. Hint, almost all of the ground work that lead up to his death were done under the Bush administration with programs/efforts established by Clinton:
Imagine how insulted Clinton feels when Obama takes credit for Bin Laden's death? Imagine the weird looks on Bush's face when Obama took credit for the death when almost every last bit of work to get Bin Laden was done under Bush?
Come on, here...I'm crediting a great Democratic President (Clinton) and a violent warmongering Republican president (Bush) for their efforts instead of Obama. Surely that is an honest approach? Obama gets credit for not dismantling the efforts and programs from Clinton and Bush.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
Didn't manage to make the world hate the U.S. even more before even taking office. Very poor job by that Obama guy.
Americans hated the US Government more than ever at the beginning of 2016:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/americans-hate-the-u-s-government-more-than-ever/
And the view of America worsened in many countries under Obama such as the Middle East and Russia. Credit goes to Obama's PR team and Obama's charisma for repairing much of the damage Bush did to European opinions of America, however.
So it is not so clear cut and dry as you portray it. I think you'd have a great point if you used Bill Clinton as an example. Bill Clinton was a pretty damn good president...just ruined the last bit of his stay in Office with the sex scandal shit. He greatly boosted international opinion among many countries after Bush Sr.
Originally posted by Ascendancy
Yep, there are definitely things that he did wrong...
All the rest of what you say is fair and actually really good. I really liked it. And you are spot on. Had to cut it to save space.
Originally posted by darthgoober
For me it's the double standards most of them seem to espouse and the way they just plug their ears and speak more loudly when someone brings up a valid counterpoint. That's not to say that all of them are like that, but I've seen a lot that are.Though I wouldn't say they "trigger" me, they just irk me. Mostly because I actually agree with the heart of many of causes they claim to represent and their hypocrisy undermines the causes they're trying to push.
Exactly. Rape, racism, and all that jazz still happen in this country. No need to exacerbate it, because it not only does a disservice to those who experience it currently, it also does one to people who(in the past) have fought to make things better, because things are indeed better.
Originally posted by Surtur
Exactly. Rape, racism, and all that jazz still happen in this country. No need to exacerbate it, because it not only does a disservice to those who experience it currently, it also does one to people who(in the past) have fought to make things better, because things are indeed better.
For instance, (at least at one point, it may have changed since I last heard) when training to be a fire fighter men have to be able to carry a certain amount of weight up and down a certain amount of stairs to demonstrate that they can conceivably carry a person out of a burning building. Women applicants also have to carry a certain amount of weight, but it's less weight than what the men have to carry... WTF?! Do unconscious victims suddenly become lighter because it's a female trying to carry them?! Allowing lower standards for women means that in reality male fire fighters are IN FACT, generally better at the job of saving people from burning buildings and therefore are superior at their jobs. The only way for women to truly be recognized as equal in the field is to remove the double standard so that the women fire fighters are ACTUALLY equal in the job at hand. Same thing with the military. Women need to do things like sign up for the draft, have to shave their heads in basic training, and have the same physical prerequisites as men to if they really want to have all the same opportunities in the field because if the men have stricter requirements, then the men are automatically more deserving of the desired positions. True equality is about equal opportunities, not equal outcomes.
By the same token, DHS should hold stay at home dads to the same standards of cleanliness that they hold stay at home moms to... oh that's right, they already do.
Originally posted by darthgoober
Yeah all the laws against things like racism and sexism that we need are already on the books, now it's just a matter of making sure they're properly enforced. We don't need to create more variations on the "victims" theme, we people to step up and take what's been offered so that they won't feel like victims anymore. Equality will never be achieved by giving special treatment to those who were once oppressed because it sends the message that they still need special treatment in order to be equal and are therefor, inferior without that special treatment.For instance, (at least at one point, it may have changed since I last heard) when training to be a fire fighter men have to be able to carry a certain amount of weight up and down a certain amount of stairs to demonstrate that they can conceivably carry a person out of a burning building. Women applicants also have to carry a certain amount of weight, but it's less weight than what the men have to carry... WTF?! Do unconscious victims suddenly become lighter because it's a female trying to carry them?! Allowing lower standards for women means that in reality male fire fighters are IN FACT, generally better at the job of saving people from burning buildings and therefore are superior at their jobs. The only way for women to truly be recognized as equal in the field is to remove the double standard so that the women fire fighters are ACTUALLY equal in the job at hand. Same thing with the military. Women need to do things like sign up for the draft, have to shave their heads in basic training, and have the same physical prerequisites as men to if they really want to have all the same opportunities in the field because if the men have stricter requirements, then the men are automatically more deserving of the desired positions. True equality is about equal opportunities, not equal outcomes.
By the same token, DHS should hold stay at home dads to the same standards of cleanliness that they hold stay at home moms to... oh that's right, they already do.
It's not just in the fire fighters field, it's also in the police force.
I once heard a story of at least 3 females police officers suing Texas police station for being sexist towards them. Get this? They claimed there discriminated against because they were fat! Just because they were told to lose weight, and they're required to pass the police physical fitness.
Originally posted by SquallX
It's not just in the fire fighters field, it's also in the police force.I once heard a story of at least 3 females police officers suing Texas police station for being sexist towards them. Get this? They claimed there discriminated against because they were fat! Just because they were told to lose weight, and they're required to pass the police physical fitness.
Yep, I remember another instance where the female officers were complaining they had to complete the same fitness tests as men did.
It might be the same case though, sounds similar.