Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Guest123018-4 · 09-07-2012, 10:32 PM

The idiot is the one that does not understand how the numbers are fixed or denies the realty of same.

Guest040616 · 09-07-2012, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

OBAMA BITCH SLAPPED BY THE NEW UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS...

If gaining 90,000+ jobs during the month of August 2012 is a "bitch slap," what phrase would you use to describe the 3.5 million jobs lost during the George W. Bush years?

BTW Whirly, did you vote for Dub? If so, how many times?

Whirlaway · 09-08-2012, 05:51 AM

Nope..didn't vote for either Bush...Both were terrible Presidents Imo, esp Bush 2.

Guest040616 · 09-08-2012, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Nope..didn't vote for either Bush...Both were terrible Presidents Imo, esp Bush 2.

Who did you vote for, Ralph Nader? Or did you decide to become nostalgic and cast your vote for Pat Paulsen? Perhaps next time, you could gain additional cover by writing in George Washington or Abe Lincoln!

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigtex

If gaining 90,000+ jobs during the month of August 2012 is a "bitch slap," what phrase would you use to describe the 3.5 million jobs lost during the George W. Bush years?

Whirly, you seem to be trying desperately to hide something.

If in Whirlyworld gaining 90,000+ jobs equals a "bitch slap," what phrase would the dingbats residing in Whirlyworld use to describe losing 3.5 million jobs?

Whirlaway · 09-08-2012, 08:48 AM

I'd describe it as "Obamanomics", because that is about how many jobs we have lost under Obama.

Under Obama our "labor force participation" is back to levels not seen since 1981. That's going backward not "forward."

Also, Friday's wage data showed hourly earnings fell in August. Wages for the year are up only 1.7%, less than inflation. Again, that is going backward not "forward."

The net jobs added by Obama is zero. Again, going backward not "forward."

In 2009, Obama promoted his $1 trillion stimulus plan based on it creating 5 million more jobs than we have and unemployment would be 5.6%. It hasn't come close. The net new jobs Obama has created is near 0 (that is zero). Astonishing, I know.

The President has no new plan to get us out of this mess (a mess that was created by both Republicans and Democrats) and compounded by Obama. He needs to be fired !

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigtex

If in Whirlyworld gaining 90,000+ jobs equals a "bitch slap," what phrase would the dingbats residing in Whirlyworld use to describe losing 3.5 million jobs?

CJ7 · 09-08-2012, 08:50 AM

speaking of bitch slapped

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/b...says-1.3982365

Randy4Candy · 09-08-2012, 09:43 AM

Ummm, IDK, +96,000 looks a little better than -750,000 as a monthly number. Of course, even though I've got some of mine, I'm not against others gettng there's.

That's the thing I marvel at amongst the TPunk Parrotriots, other than the ability to repeat whatever is said to them frequently, they are devoid of any long term memory.

Whirlaway · 09-08-2012, 10:10 AM

Funny; your measurement of success is a very very low bar.

Obama has been a failure. Man up, admit it.

Randy4Candy · 09-08-2012, 10:21 AM

I would if he was, but he's not. Don't bother trying to twist that as my saying that he has been a resounding, amazing success because he hasn't been. However, "Plan 9 from TPunk Outer Space," i.e. revisiting with steroids the Bush/Rove program, isn't even close.

You and your ilk think it would be a "cleansing experience" to relive the 1930s - as long as you wouldn't have to participate. Your premise that this would be a good thing is totally ridiculous and eveyone knows it. The fact that you don't only points out how truly sad of a case you are. Besides, if that scenario were allowed to be replayed, the resulting 40 year swing AWAY from from those who made it happen towards the Democrats would happen again. And you want that to happen, right? I'm doing my best here to save you from yourself.

Whirlaway · 09-08-2012, 11:38 AM

Stand by failure,,,,,it fits you well Randy4Candy.

JD Barleycorn · 09-08-2012, 12:37 PM

I have to ask why some apparently intelligent people would stupidly assume that a job loss rate of 800,000 a month would continue without government help. Come on think about it. Liberals are so static in their thinking. Let me give you an example of static thinking relevant to this board. You are driving down the street looking for a little action from a SW. You spy a very hot girl making her way down the sidewalk and she is giving off the looking at the street traffic vibe. Now if you're CJ your front passenger seat if filled up with fast food wrappers and the last four months of porno mags you stole from the 7/11. You pull around the corner and start throwing stuff in the back seat. You also have to clean up those spilled shakes from the floor boards. So you take about three minutes to get ready. You drive back around and (get this) you assume being the static thinker you are that the woman in question will be exactly where you left her. No movement in any direction because you didn't will it. Your same assumption is made about job losses though I don't understand why. We conservatives know that the economy will right itself without government, job losses will cease, and that woman will move further down the street if she doesn't get picked up first.

So to keep saying that the job losses would have continued is the height of stupidity from a thinking person.

i'va biggen · 09-09-2012, 08:12 AM

You should get women off this board and leave the SW alone they are dangerous....

JD Barleycorn · 09-09-2012, 09:45 AM

I didn't make it simple enough for you?

Fact check: George Bush is not the president. We could go back and look at the job loss of Herbert Hoover, FDR, or LBJ if we want to talk about history. The thing today is that this is the most lackluster "recovery" since FDR. If we weren't calling it a "recovery" then it would have to be called a recession. If we looked at how many people were working instead of the manipulated numbers then unemployment would be much higher.; 11.9% if we only used the population numbers from 2009, 19% if we include the people coming into the job market. I think people noticed this time that more people dropped out than got jobs and the White House took credit for that. Ouch!!!

i'va biggen · 09-09-2012, 11:36 AM

Fact check if I push you over a cliff it is your fault if you hit bottom.

JD Barleycorn · 09-09-2012, 01:00 PM

According to liberal reasoning, I will still be standing next to the drop off until government makes me hit the bottom.

I wonder if you really meant to make a threat of violins against me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiaOFOMPOBc Take note how the democrats try to hurt these young women with very short dresses.