[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Here it is again:

Besson. You still haven't even commented on the point of the thread.

Do you agree or disagree that Biden is either not telling the truth, or clueless and that the media is going to give him a pass on it like they did when Obama claimed no one had a clue that the surge would work?

Please, try and stay on topic. Trying to hijack it so we won't discuss embarrassing things about "D's" IS wasted intellect.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Please, try and stay on topic.

Let me reiterate this part. Stay on topic please and thank you.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The responsibility of effective communicated is shared among speaker/writer and listener/reader, Laminar. I politely clarified what I was trying to say, you did not respond in kind.

aaaaand you still haven't answered my question. There's no discussion here. There's no back-and-forth. There's me asking a question, and you assuming I have some hidden agenda within that question and trying to preempt it. Rollseyes.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

aaaaand you still haven't answered my question. There's no discussion here. There's no back-and-forth. There's me asking a question, and you assuming I have some hidden agenda within that question and trying to preempt it. Rollseyes.

Could you restate your question in different words then? There is some sort of disconnect here.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Besson. You still haven't even commented on the point of the thread.

Do you agree or disagree that Biden is either not telling the truth, or clueless and that the media is going to give him a pass on it like they did when Obama claimed no one had a clue that the surge would work?

Please, try and stay on topic. Trying to hijack it so we won't discuss embarrassing things about "D's" IS wasted intellect.

I don't care who you discuss and I don't care about Biden. This thread is clearly just one of many on the same theme of chipping away at the stimulus. Is debating whether Biden is a naughty man or not really what you wanted to do here? Really?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Heh heh. The old "c-could you p-please repeat the question?" stall never fails. And here we thought it was just an old schtict from high school comedy movies.

It's not that hard besson. Come on, I know you can say it:

"NO, no one made that claim."

Then try: "Yes, Biden lied by saying 'everyone guessed wrong' ,".

You can even say, "Yeah, politicians lie and say stupid things and try to skirt their critics who call them on it because that's what all politicians do."

I know, I know, we're talking about a "D" not an "R" so it must be difficult.

Cheer up though, here's one case where Biden wasn't lying:
"I think he [Obama] can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training."

[besson3c]

You and stupendousman win at internet argument game and scoring points. You win. I lose.

So, now can we have an intellectual conversation?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I don't care who you discuss and I don't care about Biden.

Then kindly remove yourself from the thread I started.

If you don't wish to discuss it's subject matter, you can start your own thread to go off on tangents and see if anyone takes the bait.

[besson3c]

I guess I was wrong. This thread is not a thinly veiled attempt to talk about Obama's stimulus plan, I honestly thought it was. I will abide by your request.

Hopefully everything I said prior will be in effect for your next thread about the economy... A man can dream!

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Hopefully everything I said prior will be in effect for your next thread about the economy... A man can dream!

There's really no need to debate "the economy". Both Joe Biden and I agree that the economy is STILL in the toliet, and not where the Obama administration claimed it would be with it's stimulus package. When we AGREE, there's no need to debate.

Were there seems to be a disagreement though is whether or not there was anyone who understood that Obama's stimulus plan would not work the way they said it was going to. It's my opinion that Joe Biden's comments are false.

If you have either a differing opinion, or share my opinion, now is the time to respond. Othewise, start your own thread for whatever you choose to debate.

[Big Mac]

The "stimulus" pork plan has utterly failed by the objective standard its proponents gave by which to rate it. They said it would prevent the unemployment rate from slipping past 8%. It has not. So instead of admitting the Glorious Leader was wrong, they simply move the benchmark. And the MacNN Socialists talk about the failure of capitalism.

Could PWL be getting dumber?

[Rumor]

Ug.

First off, the stimulus package began with the previous administration. This administration did add to the total, I will not argue that. Whether it has worked or not remains to be seen. It isn't something that will accomplish its goal in a few days, or even months (sadly). It takes time.

Second, if you think you can do better than Obama/Bush/Clinton/Reagan/etc., then get get your ass off a forum and run for office. Otherwise, what you think you may know doesn't mean ****.

Most of you guys are so partisan and the blinders are so big, you could not see something work from the "other" party even if it was obvious. You would just rather spew your hate of the other ideology. This goes for all Republican/Democrats/Liberals/Conservatives/etc.

Hopefully, someday people will realize that it isn't about being left or right, but about what will work with the most benefit for the general populace. Not rich people. Not interest groups. Not close friends. The general populace.

To be OT, yes Biden lies. All people lie, not just politicians. Politicians just happen to be public figures that get called out the most.

[besson3c]

Well, since I've invested this much time in this thread, I might as well try to get out of it what I can...

Is it your opinion (stupendousman and Big Mac) that the stimulus hasn't worked *at all* thus far (and that enough time has elapsed for us to be able to assess this accurately), or hasn't worked as well as Obama was selling it? If the former, what do you base this assertion on? If the latter, is the notion of politicians overselling the stuff they want (for whatever reason - be it they think it is the wisest course of action, or a grab bag of a whole bunch of other possibilities) really new, particular to this administration, or surprising?

[Big Mac]

It has failed according to the objective standard set forth by the administration. Has it completely failed to provide any jobs? Obviously not. It has created some, but the losses that they guaranteed would not occur have far offset the gains. The bill has also done irreparable harm to the country by wasting so much money we don't have to spend, ballooning our deficit to levels far in excess of Bush's worst year. That money that the federal government is creating out of thin air will come back to bite us down the line in the form of rampant inflation and immense debt service payments. It is indeed completely deceitful for Biden to say everyone got it wrong with their predictions on the success of Obama's package because Republicans were consistently against the bill, predicting it would fall far short of its touted goals.

Rumor, I see that you don't like partisan debates, but there are real outcomes and consequences associated with partisanship. Conservatives and liberals have opposing views on how governments should operate and what policies are in the best interest of the majority of the country.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Ug.

First off, the stimulus package began with the previous administration.

No. The previous administration engaged in bail-outs that likely didn't help anything, but the "stimulus package" we are referring to was the huge spending plan Congress planned AFTER Obama got in office that all the Republicans opposed due to the fact it would not create the "stimulus" that was claimed.

This administration did add to the total, I will not argue that. Whether it has worked or not remains to be seen. It isn't something that will accomplish its goal in a few days, or even months (sadly). It takes time.

As stated above, it's goal was to limit unemployment to a certain percentage. It has failed to do so, as predicted. It really doesn't matter if you add cash to the economy if jobs are being lost.

Second, if you think you can do better than Obama/Bush/Clinton/Reagan/etc., then get get your ass off a forum and run for office. Otherwise, what you think you may know doesn't mean ****.

I don't think I could do better than any of those people other than Obama. I think that maybe a trained chimp could have done as well. It doesn't take much talent to take money for personal political goals, lie and say it's for "stimulus", then lie again when the stimulus doesn't happen when you say no one knew it wouldn't work.

Will you yourself have to lose your job before the dishonesty starts to have some effect on you?

Most of you guys are so partisan and the blinders are so big, you could not see something work from the "other" party even if it was obvious. You would just rather spew your hate of the other ideology. This goes for all Republican/Democrats/Liberals/Conservatives/etc.

This isn't about "hate". It's about judging verifiable successes or failures and whether those involved are telling the truth about them. Whether or not I "hate" is irrelevant when you judge whether the people in question succeeded or failed, and were told in advance that their plans would not achieve their desired results. I know It's a lot easier to shift blame to the messenger when you don't like the message though.

Hopefully, someday people will realize that it isn't about being left or right, but about what will work with the most benefit for the general populace. Not rich people. Not interest groups. Not close friends. The general populace.

The general populace is suffering from record unemployment. There were better solutions offered that might have curbed this suffering and the Obama administration made things WORSE by adding unsupportable debt in order to put forth this failed plan. You are right. It's not about left or right. It's about incompetence and dishonesty. If you are too far "left" to admit that, then you are part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

To be OT, yes Biden lies. All people lie, not just politicians. Politicians just happen to be public figures that get called out the most.

Who is calling out Biden besides me? Politicians lie when they think they can get away with it. Bush couldn't get away with it. Anything he said which could later to be shown was factually false was said to be a "lie" by him and the media made a big deal of it. Biden lies bold-faced in a way that is either intentional or shows a lack of intellect on his part and there's no similar media scrutiny. The way to keep politicians honest is to hold them responsible for untruths. You and the media don't seem interested. You've provided the lame "everyone does it" excuse, for example.

Physician, heal thyself.

[Wiskedjak]

I'm missing something here. Did Bush's stimulus package somehow succeed while Obama's failed? Clearly, at least a bunch of people guessed wrong, during both the current and previous administrations. I'd say Biden is guilty of gross exaggeration here and not defining "everyone", rather than of lying.

[ebuddy]

- Bush did it first... and I thought this whole thing was about "change"

Torches, calls for exit strategies, and cries of failure for one supposed governing philosophy. And for the other?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I'm missing something here. Did Bush's stimulus package somehow succeed while Obama's failed?

Are you talking about the one he used to get us out of the Clinton recession when he had Republicans in charge of Congress? You know, the one where there was growth and low unemployment until a couple of years after Republicans were out of control and Bush was a "lame duck".

Clearly, at least a bunch of people guessed wrong, during both the current and previous administrations.

The Bush administration had NOTHING to do with the "stimulus package" that did nothing to actually attack a recession where most of the spending didn't come until years later. Most everyone other than the Democrats didn't "guess wrong".

I'd say Biden is guilty of gross exaggeration here and not defining "everyone", rather than of lying.

I'd say he purposely was not defining "everyone" because "everyone" are all the people on HIS TEAM. That's not any more honest that flat out lies, IMO.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I'm missing something here. Did Bush's stimulus package somehow succeed while Obama's failed?

No, I guess that's why most are confounded on why we'd go ahead with more of the same philosophy. Then, suspicion creeps in and this is seemingly less and less about "the economy" and more and more about using fear to manipulate the masses. A notion that just a couple short years ago, was reprehensible.

BTW, what does Bush have to do with Obama's spending now???

I'd say Biden is guilty of gross exaggeration here and not defining "everyone", rather than of lying.

In this I'd say Biden's biggest problem is one of honesty.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

BTW, what does Bush have to do with Obama's spending now???

BUSH MADE THEM DO IT!!!!

Seriously, I agree with the other guys. Let's vote out Bush and Cheney, and Obama and Biden. Oh wait..we already did the former. I guess it's now time to do the latter.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Are you talking about the one he used to get us out of the Clinton recession when he had Republicans in charge of Congress?

sooooo .... CLINTON MADE THEM DO IT?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

BTW, what does Bush have to do with Obama's spending now???

Nothing, of course. I'm not speaking about the motivations behind the stimulus spending, as requested by the OP. Rather, I'm speaking about Biden and the accusation of a lie when he said "everyone guessed wrong".

[Big Mac]

An electorate of largely civic-ignorant, shallow, spoiled and apathetic citizens who don't appreciate the reasons why America was once so great, will vote in the most charismatic candidate - and more importantly, the candidate who tells them what they want to hear. What do the masses want to hear (right now)? That government can give more to them, do more for them, take better care of them, care more for the disadvantaged, and generally spend and regulate without consequence. That's how our president came to power. And really, I don't see the political equation changing that much in four years even if all of our most dire predictions about the Administration materialize, unless Republicans get their act together soon.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

vote in the most charismatic candidate and more importantly the candidate who tells them what they want to hear. What do the masses want to hear?

Isn't that how *all* politicians get into power? When was the last time a politician was elected for telling voters what they *didn't* want to hear?

[BadKosh]

But a bigger question is why Biden was hailed as the intellectual when he has been proven to be a self centered dolt with no clear understanding of anything. He has a two page list of gaffs so far! The Dems lied to us about Biden, who also turns out to be an idiot and a liar. Are you surprised?

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

But a bigger question is why Biden was hailed as the intellectual

He was? Maybe you were watching a different primary/general election campaign than me. I recall him being hailed as the white, working class antidote to Obama's dreamy elitism.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

sooooo .... CLINTON MADE THEM DO IT?

Made them put forth a plan that got us out of a recession?

Not really. They put forth a plan and the recession was halted due to no effort made by Clinton. But to be fair, recessions are normally cyclical. Every eight years or so you are likely to have one. After Reagan I think it was something like 11 years. Sooner or later you're going to have one.

What an administration CAN be judged on is what kInd of plan they put into place to reduce the impact of a cyclical recession. As we can see, Obama's plan isn't working as intended.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

He was? Maybe you were watching a different primary/general election campaign than me. I recall him being hailed as the white, working class antidote to Obama's dreamy elitism.

I remember him being marketed as he guy with the experience and knowledge Obama didn't have, when asked hard questions made crap up, gaffed, lied or refuted Obama's stand on policies. It was enough to fill an entire episode of SNL.

Of course, that never happened. The media was too busy playing "gotcha" with Sara Palin who had more real-world political successes than Obama and Biden combined.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I remember him being marketed as he guy with the experience and knowledge Obama didn't have, when asked hard questions made crap up, gaffed, lied or refuted Obama's stand on policies. It was enough to fill an entire episode of SNL.

Of course, that never happened. The media was too busy playing "gotcha" with Sara Palin who had more real-world political successes than Obama and Biden combined.

So to clarify, he wasn't "hailed as the intellectual." He was hailed as the guy with experience.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

So to clarify, he wasn't "hailed as the intellectual." He was hailed as the guy with experience.

To be honest, I don't know either way about the "intellectual" part. I don't remember whether that precise term was used.

All I know is that they made him out to be qualified for the job because he knew what he was doing, and wasn't stupid.

I think that they should be sued for false advertising. Sarah Palin's burps makes more sense than Joe Biden on any given day.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Ug.

First off, the stimulus package began with the previous administration. This administration did add to the total, I will not argue that. Whether it has worked or not remains to be seen. It isn't something that will accomplish its goal in a few days, or even months (sadly). It takes time.

TARP was not a "stimulus package."

Dear Leader promised that unemployment would be halted at 8% if his "stimulus plan" were passed.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

To be honest, I don't know either way about the "intellectual" part. I don't remember whether that precise term was used.

All I know is that they made him out to be qualified for the job because he knew what he was doing, and wasn't stupid.

I think that they should be sued for false advertising. Sarah Palin's burps makes more sense than Joe Biden on any given day.

I see. The next time I post something in the PWL I'll make a point to highlight some portion and mark it "For stupendousman's future tangential partisan rant".

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Wait...did someone actually make the claim that the point of the stimulus bill is to screw the economy ASAP and get us on the road to rebuilding it sooner?

Originally Posted by Laminar 

That's how I interpreted it - "the point of the stimulus bill is to screw the economy ASAP (read: expedite the downturn) and get us on the road to rebuilding it sooner (read: + recovery)."

Did supporters of the stimulus bill make this claim?

Originally Posted by Laminar

Did supporters of the stimulus bill make this claim?

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Could you restate your question in different words then? There is some sort of disconnect here.

I don't know how I could make the question any simpler - I'd like to think that you're being purposefully ignorant as some sort of "tactic" against me, but I'm afraid I have a hard time believe that.

So here's the question, again:

Did proponents (supporters, those who promoted, those who voted for, etc.) of the stimulus bill (the bill you referred to in this post) making the following claim: "The purpose of the stimulus bill is to ruin the economy more quickly, which would in turn lead to more timely recovery"?

In your words: "Expedite the downturn + recovery."

I was under the impression that the point of the stimulus bill was to avoid the downturn, not run towards it faster. I see the reasoning behind it, but I wasn't aware of any of the supporters of the bill actually saying that killing the economy was the actual goal of the bill.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Second, if you think you can do better than Obama/Bush/Clinton/Reagan/etc., then get get your ass off a forum and run for office. Otherwise, what you think you may know doesn't mean ****.

This assumes politicians get into office by merit. Unfortunately they get into office by politics, so qualities like intelligence, foresight, decisiveness, etc. are ignored while gladhanding, physical appearance, speaking ability, demeanor, etc. are all that matters.

[ort888]

This is what it sounds like... when doves cry.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Second, if you think you can do better than Obama/Bush/Clinton/Reagan/etc., then get get your ass off a forum and run for office. Otherwise, what you think you may know doesn't mean ****.

I wanted to respond to this paragraph specifically because I find it very troubling. So Rumor, you believe that private citizens aren't allowed to critique political elites unless they've attempted to mount their own campaigns for office? According to that view, only politicians should be allowed to vote because they're the only ones directly trying to run things. Or do you mean even more narrowly that the only people who should voice their opinions on presidential politics are current and ex-presidents? Are you sure that's what you believe?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It has failed according to the objective standard set forth by the administration. Has it completely failed to provide any jobs? Obviously not. It has created some, but the losses that they guaranteed would not occur have far offset the gains. The bill has also done irreparable harm to the country by wasting so much money we don't have to spend, ballooning our deficit to levels far in excess of Bush's worst year. That money that the federal government is creating out of thin air will come back to bite us down the line in the form of rampant inflation and immense debt service payments. It is indeed completely deceitful for Biden to say everyone got it wrong with their predictions on the success of Obama's package because Republicans were consistently against the bill, predicting it would fall far short of its touted goals.

Rumor, I see that you don't like partisan debates, but there are real outcomes and consequences associated with partisanship. Conservatives and liberals have opposing views on how governments should operate and what policies are in the best interest of the majority of the country.

See, this is another pattern here...

The losses do not offset the gains - what do you base this on? I'm not even necessarily disagreeing with you, but if I wanted to I couldn't because I have no idea what you base this on. Some articles you read? Your gut feeling?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that this is based on some articles you read, the other problem with these debates is that it is painfully easy to cherry pick some narrative that suits your tastes. We will all do this, but again, why don't you account for some of the alternative narratives and state what makes them wrong? One narrative being that the stimulus package has helped slow the downturn of the economy, and without it those losses would be much higher and occurring over a longer period of time. I know this is vague, but that will at least get us in the door as far as this conversation goes.

As far as your last comment to Rumor, the problem isn't that people are either partisan Conservatives or Democrats, and not even that our positions always seem to be based on party affiliation (although this has some problems too). The big problem is that debates from both sides almost always end up being just like this one: claims made that are not substantiated, no attempt to address the legitimacy of an opposing argument in an intellectual way, and instead just ratcheting up the volume and repetition of the original conclusion, etc.

Look, this whole debate is about some very complicated balances. There is some legitimacy to both sides. There is no logical point in making this about good vs. evil, black vs. white, right vs. wrong (in a way that could be explained to a child), extreme vs. extreme. Yes, there are people that genuinely believe in some extremes, but the vast majority of us don't and just want to have a discussion about this without all of this philosophical baggage.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I don't know how I could make the question any simpler - I'd like to think that you're being purposefully ignorant as some sort of "tactic" against me, but I'm afraid I have a hard time believe that.

So here's the question, again:

Did proponents (supporters, those who promoted, those who voted for, etc.) of the stimulus bill (the bill you referred to in this post) making the following claim: "The purpose of the stimulus bill is to ruin the economy more quickly, which would in turn lead to more timely recovery"?

In your words: "Expedite the downturn + recovery."

I was under the impression that the point of the stimulus bill was to avoid the downturn, not run towards it faster. I see the reasoning behind it, but I wasn't aware of any of the supporters of the bill actually saying that killing the economy was the actual goal of the bill.

This is a very bizarre question, the way you've worded it. I'm not sure where you got the notion that anybody wants to "kill the economy". My perception is that most supporters never thought that the stimulus bill would allow us to completely avoid the downturn, the downturn was inevitable. However, the thought was that it would expedite the entire process so that we are not in a downturn period for an extended period of time, that it would shorten this downturn period so that we can move on to the recovery period faster, that the bottom where we bottom out isn't as terrifying as it might have been otherwise.

Whether these claims are sound is a whole other matter, but does this clarify?

Just so you know, the whole "killing the economy" phrase seemed very much like a leading question.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Look, this whole debate is about some very complicated balances.

Actually, no. The debate here is about whether the stimulus has done what Obama claimed it would do in regards to unemployment. Remember, it was an emergency - if we didn't pass his plan ASAP unemployment levels would get to...well..were we are TODAY!

Also, did any kind of substantial number of people at the time explain to Biden and Obama that their plan would not work because they'd shifted a majority of the spending years down the road?

You're free to either refute or deny either way, using facts. All this "well...there's no black or white" isn't the case when you can demonstrate clearly what has been said is true or not. Either people warned Obama or they didn't. Either the numbers are somewhere in the ballpark of what they claimed they should be or they aren't.

This isn't some kind of hard to understand philosophical question. If you try to make it into one, it's clear you want to be confused for some reason.

[besson3c]

I think I'm just about done in this thread. It doesn't seem conducive to good discussion when we are busy flinging around terms such as "Dear Leader", bickering about which administration is to blame, posting pictures of monkeys, and whatever else... No blame, I skim read most of that stuff anyway.

Hopefully we will reach a day where we can keep our emotions in check. Perhaps it's too soon for this particular issue.

[Big Mac]

You're just ignoring the truth, besson. There are only so many ways stupendousman can explain it (and the rest of us echo that explanation). I'm sorry if it's too hard for you to admit, but I imagine you could grasp these simple concepts if you had the desire to - you understand much more complex computing concepts yet don't want to grok this.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Actually, no. The debate here is about whether the stimulus has done what Obama claimed it would do in regards to unemployment. Remember, it was an emergency - if we didn't pass his plan ASAP unemployment levels would get to...well..were we are TODAY!

Also, did any kind of substantial number of people at the time explain to Biden and Obama that their plan would not work because they'd shifted a majority of the spending years down the road?

You're free to either refute or deny either way, using facts. All this "well...there's no black or white" isn't the case when you can demonstrate clearly what has been said is true or not. Either people warned Obama or they didn't. Either the numbers are somewhere in the ballpark of what they claimed they should be or they aren't.

This isn't some kind of hard to understand philosophical question. If you try to make it into one, it's clear you want to be confused for some reason.

I was referring to the broader issue, responding to BigMac's post. I was not addressing Obama's words or alleged promises.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

You're just ignoring the truth, besson. There are only so many ways stupendousman can explain it (and the rest of us echo that explanation). I'm sorry if it's too hard for you to admit, but I imagine you could grasp these simple concepts if you had the desire to - you understand much more complex computing concepts yet don't want to grok this.

No, I'm just not going to do your work for you. I come here to for the intellectual exercise of debating, not to spread political religion. I can't agree with you because you haven't made your case yet, as stated in my response to you. If I don't know where you are coming from, there is really nothing I can say. Your perceptions and feelings are no more or less valid than anybody else's, I can't debate your feelings.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I think I'm just about done in this thread. It doesn't seem conducive to good discussion when we are busy flinging around terms such as "Dear Leader", bickering about which administration is to blame, posting pictures of monkeys, and whatever else... No blame, I skim read most of that stuff anyway.

Hopefully we will reach a day where we can keep our emotions in check. Perhaps it's too soon for this particular issue.

Replace "this thread" with "this board" and I think you nailed it.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

You're just ignoring the truth, besson. There are only so many ways stupendousman can explain it (and the rest of us echo that explanation). I'm sorry if it's too hard for you to admit, but I imagine you could grasp these simple concepts if you had the desire to - you understand much more complex computing concepts yet don't want to grok this.

The truth that Republicans are virtuous knights riding white steeds... fighting back the vast waves of scheming fork-tongued Democrats who are secret minions of satan?

No, I think I've got that by now.

[Big Mac]

What don't you two understand about the administration guaranteeing certain objective results and then falling far short of them? Do you not understand the words coming from my keyboard? Are you being purposely dense? Willfully stupid? Come now!

I'm done banging my head against the wall in this thread. Exit, stage right.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

What don't you two understand about the administration guaranteeing certain objective results and then falling far short of them?

Maybe they've gotten used to that sort of thing due to the previous 8 years?

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

What don't you two understand about the administration guaranteeing certain objective results and then falling far short of them? Do you not understand the words coming from my keyboard? Are you being purposely dense? Willfully stupid? Come now!

I'm done banging my head against the wall in this thread. Exit, stage right.

It's been what, 3 months since they passed this crap? What was supposed to happen?

Are you seriously this up in arms because a politician told a half truth? really? It's all they ****ing do. Every god damned one of them spits out half-truths and spin all day long.

Is this really a shock?

You don't like the stimulus plan. We get it. I don't like it either, but I don't have any better ideas. It doesn't mean I have to rant on and on like a foil hat wearing crazy person.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by ort888 

It's been what, 3 months since they passed this crap? What was supposed to happen?

I believe they're referring to the promise that the stimulus plan would prevent unemployment from rising above 8%, which it apparently has.

[besson3c]

Laminar: if that's the case then I agree that it was tactically foolish to make a promise like that when these sorts of things are very difficult to predict, it would have been smarter to cover their asses a little. However, this is taking this at face value, perhaps it was only meant to be a benchmark or goal of some sort. If we are to take this at face value, what is actionable based on this? What do we do, abort the entire plan in its infancy because of this?

Should we have aborted the war in Iraq after the first sign of stuff not working out as planned? If so, I guess that would be after a few months after Rumsfeld said that he didn't think we would be there for 4 months, or whatever the number was?

I understand where these guys are coming from, because I never supported the Iraq war either and remember being frustrated by this Rumsfeld claim not coming to fruition. I probably would have wanted a complete course correction at the time, just to have things my way. However, this would be putting my ego and emotional needs over logic. You'd need to make the case explaining how a complete 180 would be a good strategic move.