To the libs who believe obama's policies work

[MANTI5 10+ year member]

you just did the same thing....//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/thumbsupwink.gif.129404938effda6ad9cca39e7f4b58a3.gif

No, when he does it it's higher reasoning that you don't understand because he said it louder, with more force, and you're an idiot.

 

[Imtjnotu 5,000+ posts]

Because GWB wanted revenge for 9-11. No other reason. Couldn't invade the Saudis 'cuz they're our friends.

revenge yet none of the terrorists were from iraq lulz.........WMD's yet none were found lulz....

 

[schackel 10+ year member]

Your ego is also getting in the way of any real discusion. Look at any of the post you have made. every single one, you are attacking not listening to anything. I can see the evidence you are bringing and understand why you are so worked up but relax.

 

[schackel 10+ year member]

Explain.

you didnt respond to any of the other things i said. you just freaked out on the last sentence...understandable though

 

[perfecxionX 10+ year member]

So let me get this straight. Dropping out of the workforce has nothing to do with losing a job? I just want to make sure I understand you right. Is that what you're saying? I am very interested in defeating liberalism, and if you feel belittled that is merely your own guilt manifesting itself.

Unemployed individuals who are actively looking for a job are considered part of the labor force. One of the reasons people drop out of the work force is because they simply quit looking for a job. Jobs lost means that companies actually cut jobs from their payroll. The claim your links are making is that the number of job seekers in Jan did not actually go from 8.5 to 8.3 as reported because many of the people who were looking for a job simply stopped. I do not recognize myself as a progressive/social liberal, I recognize myself as a classical liberal, and if you dont know what the difference is you should stop using the word.

Who is not in the labor force?Labor force measures are based on the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years old and over. Excluded are persons under 16 years of age, all persons confined to institutions such as nursing homes and prisons, and persons on active duty in the Armed Forces. As mentioned previously, the labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed. The remainder—those who have no job and are not looking for one—are counted as "not in the labor force." Many who are not in the labor force are going to school or are retired. Family responsibilities keep others out of the labor force.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#nilf

 

[legendndisguise 10+ year member]

I just got a job after being laid off in January of 2011. Contractual money ran out and the government didn't want to bring me on. I have been looking everywhere for work and finally start one next week. However, I am taking almost a $10,000 cut a year in pay. Companies don't want to pay for the experience, they're being cheap.

 

[The_Grimy_One 10+ year member]

I will vote for Obama too! At least he likes sports... Besides Clinton he is the coolest president. All the president is, is an icon of the nation. I can give a schit what you "think" he does... Their are much more people above him, who run the government. I am in no way a racist, but do you think the powerful white men would allow a black man, or any other race of that nature to have that much power??? NO. Someone tells Obama what to do... Oh, and every president lies... Lol. Get over it.

 

[rodneypierce 10+ year member]

like has been said 100 times already, what power does the president even have? Your pissed at the wrong person..........

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

Unemployment figures (and most other economic data *cough* inflation) have always been cooked. The fact is when you pay people not to work and punatively tax those who do you will have unemployment. This is common sense.

 

[ahole-ic]

Unemployed individuals who are actively looking for a job are considered part of the labor force. One of the reasons people drop out of the work force is because they simply quit looking for a job. Jobs lost means that companies actually cut jobs from their payroll. The claim your links are making is that the number of job seekers in Jan did not actually go from 8.5 to 8.3 as reported because many of the people who were looking for a job simply stopped.

The unemployment numbers are put out there to show that the economy is turning around.... that people are being hired. The assertion is that fewer jobless claims = more people are employed. You are contending that since people stopped looking for work that doesn't count as a jobless claim, when in fact it does. You are explaining how the unemployment number is calculated. I'm well aware of that. I believe one of the articles I posted even talked about it. I have 5 but I think I only posted 3. Anyways, I understand the u3 and u6 numbers. You can reference the last thread this was discussed for proof of that. It was some idiot saying he was glad obama was president after the state of the union.

To say that people out of work, who have given up on finding a job no longer counts as a jobless American is silly. Just because they don't go to the unemployment office anymore IS NOT an indicator that the economy is turning around. This entire thread was to combat the premise that unemployment was actually going down. In fact it proved that it is not.

I do not recognize myself as a progressive/social liberal, I recognize myself as a classical liberal, and if you dont know what the difference is you should stop using the word.


How the Government Measures Unemployment

Also, it makes no difference whether you call yourself stinky turd, a corny turd, or a bloody turd. A liberal is still a turd to me.

 

[DoesDad 10+ year member]

So what do you guys think of Obama telling the Catholic hospitals across the United States that they have a year grace period and then they have to start giving abortions to whoever wants them? All for Obamacare. Gee, the libs are all over separation of church and state unless you're a CHRISTIAN! If you're a fvcking Muslim they'll build you a mosque right by the WTC rubble. Just to add insult to injury for the familes of the thousands who died there.

How many of you buy your own health ins. off your employers or perhaps privately? Did it go up or down this year? Chances are it went up like 88% of us. But didn't Obama say Obamacare was going to LOWER costs?

And Rabbit you're a good dude. But to think that the president doesn't have any real power look at the Keystone pipeline? He and he alone is the only one that can sign that into effect. How does buying our oil off a friendly neighbor instead of the Saudi's who hate our guts and would like us to die make any sense at all? And don't say he didn't have to look at the environmental effect. He had 3 solid years and the EPA and State Dept. even ok'd it. And the really fcked up thing is we have OUR OWN resources right under our fvcking feet that the libs won't let us get to.

The only person pulling Obama's strings maybe is George Soros or his ugly wife. Everyone that voted for him wanted "hope and change". Instead they got a Marxist, Chicago "thug style" politician who wants to tear the best country in the world down. I find it sad and frustrating....

 

[Scratchy 10+ year member]

See links I posted above. There was no evidence proving otherwise. Please provide a link to said evidence if you're telling the truth.

There is no evidence proving that you aren't a mouth breathing mo-Ran, either. Therefore...

(see what I did there?)

 

[ahole-ic]

There is no evidence proving that you aren't a mouth breathing mo-Ran, either. Therefore...




(see what I did there?)

I posted verifiable proof. you just post ad hominems. Yeah... I do see what you did there.

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

I step out for a bit and I can see that this has just kept going on and on.

If you look closely at what is posted by Ecrack in this thread and others, he is the same as any other political enthusiast. They find a side that they think is right and then do everything in their power to attempt and make everyone see it from their point of view.

Attacking each and every post that does not agree with his. Arguing to some one like this on a topic that is based on statistics that in no way accurate yields no results for anyone involved.

Perhaps I'm being to "general" though. Maybe I should direct more attention to the real issue of this thread? lol

Anyway, I'm done..you all have fun poking at him and attempting to "debate" a one sided debate.

 

[Scratchy 10+ year member]

. We did some good there. Not everything, but we did some good.

First off, Iraq was (and is) a generally secular society, it did not abide by sharia law. Women were free to persue education, and many did. That is a canard. Not defending saddam's fantasies, but there was (and is) much more to that country than the cartoon images that most ignant (sic) 'mericans were fed. There was ZERO evidence of ANY involvement of AQ until after the invasion. AQ was more about the Saudis and fundamentalist wahaabi sects, not Suuni or shia internicene sruggles.

Second off, there are at least 4000 American mothers who might disagree when they go visit their chidren's graves.