Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,206 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

MiLK

Ash Flat, AR

#25705 Jul 6, 2013
Redd wrote:
<quoted text>
“beware the average man the average woman
beware their love, their love is average
seeks average
but there is genius in their hatred
there is enough genius in their hatred to kill you
to kill anybody
not wanting solitude
not understanding solitude
they will attempt to destroy anything
that differs from their own
not being able to create art
they will not understand art
they will consider their failure as creators
only as a failure of the world” &#8213; Charles Bukowski
Thank you for posting, good read. Using the laureate of American lowlife in your reply to the previous posters was clever and absolutely hilarious.
Hold on now

Ash Flat, AR

#25707 Jul 6, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>No disrespect meant but neither Barney nor myself was speaking of the unemployment rate but rather jobs added and how those numbers are interpreted.
None taken but thanks anyway. After retreading that post I can't see how you can say that though.
Barneys Mother

Jonesboro, AR

#25708 Jul 6, 2013
Redd wrote:
<quoted text>
“beware the average man the average woman
beware their love, their love is average
seeks average
but there is genius in their hatred
there is enough genius in their hatred to kill you
to kill anybody
not wanting solitude
not understanding solitude
they will attempt to destroy anything
that differs from their own
not being able to create art
they will not understand art
they will consider their failure as creators
only as a failure of the world” &#8213; Charles Bukowski
That sums up my boy. Thanks!
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#25709 Jul 6, 2013
Hold on now wrote:
<quoted text> None taken but thanks anyway. After retreading that post I can't see how you can say that though.
Simply find a study and look at the controls used and you will quickly realize that by changing what is controlled for can alter the results drastically within the same survey. In the example Barney used and the one you looked at, you will realize that those who aren't looking, aren't being counted in the unemployment rate (though that wasn't what we were talking about originally). What would the unemployment rate be if they were counted? The answer is 12.05%. They aren't working and most of them have been looking for work sometime in the past 5 years so why not count them? It's a great example of why anyone would be foolish to take one single study and form their opinion based on that study. These study's and polls are no more than tools used by one party or the other to gain a political advantage. We should simply use them as novelty tidbits of information and no more.
No doubt

United States

#25710 Jul 6, 2013
Barneys Mother wrote:
<quoted text>That sums up my boy. Thanks!
. Like father like son
Barneys Mother

Jonesboro, AR

#25711 Jul 6, 2013
No doubt wrote:
<quoted text>. Like father like son
Barney is not sure who his father is, I also lacked judgement when I was young.
Barneys Mother

Jonesboro, AR

#25712 Jul 6, 2013
Good chance his father is either his uncle or grandfather, neither will claim him.
voice of reason

San Jose, CA

#25713 Jul 7, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Simply find a study and look at the controls used and you will quickly realize that by changing what is controlled for can alter the results drastically within the same survey. In the example Barney used and the one you looked at, you will realize that those who aren't looking, aren't being counted in the unemployment rate (though that wasn't what we were talking about originally). What would the unemployment rate be if they were counted? The answer is 12.05%. They aren't working and most of them have been looking for work sometime in the past 5 years so why not count them? It's a great example of why anyone would be foolish to take one single study and form their opinion based on that study. These study's and polls are no more than tools used by one party or the other to gain a political advantage. We should simply use them as novelty tidbits of information and no more.
You are correct, and hopefully most do use them as such.
I hope that the 'Barney's' out there are the exception to the rule and not the norm, and that they are few and far between.
We are a hard-working middle class family, and we are doing all we can just to keep our heads above the water.
Our cars are paid for, house almost paid for, no credit card debt, and have the same jobs we've always had, yet we are struggling more today to make ends ends meet than ever before.
If old Barney is better off today than he was 10 years ago, then more power to him! But I have my doubts he is, even if he won't admit it!
Blind loyalty to his cause will lead him directly to the slaughter house...and he will still be blaming a republican while his political- affiliatied comrade chops off his head and leaves him to rot.
Of course, with our luck, he will still be able to cut and paste rhetoric...
MiLK

Mountain Home, AR

#25714 Jul 7, 2013
thanks for the laughs wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, you know we aren't here to seriously talk politics with you! The thread is entitled,'Did you vote today?' That pretty much let's you know this thread is for comedy! Heck, You've been rambling for years, and we've yet to see an enlightening political thought or idea from you yet that we would/could/should take seriously!
If it makes you feel better, Barney to laugh your body parts off, or roll around on the floor like a hysterical hyenia, or even to continue patting yourself on the back from your vain attempts at witty repartee and the ever-so tiresome cut and paste posts from your same old spin doctor sites, well, then let 'er rip, tater chip!
You've been making us all laugh at you for a long time now...there's no reason you shouldn't be able to get in on the fun, too.
The first post under the title DID YOU VOTE TODAY was dated June 8, 2010, and it said, "Did you vote in the June 8 election".

I fail to see how that could remotely be associated to comedy. You say this person" has been making us all laugh at you for a long time", but your message is full of anger and contempt toward this person.

With all due respect, why would/could/should anyone take you seriously?

MiLK

Mountain Home, AR

#25715 Jul 7, 2013
voice of reason wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct, and hopefully most do use them as such.
I hope that the 'Barney's' out there are the exception to the rule and not the norm, and that they are few and far between.
We are a hard-working middle class family, and we are doing all we can just to keep our heads above the water.
Our cars are paid for, house almost paid for, no credit card debt, and have the same jobs we've always had, yet we are struggling more today to make ends ends meet than ever before.
If old Barney is better off today than he was 10 years ago, then more power to him! But I have my doubts he is, even if he won't admit it!
Blind loyalty to his cause will lead him directly to the slaughter house...and he will still be blaming a republican while his political- affiliatied comrade chops off his head and leaves him to rot.
Of course, with our luck, he will still be able to cut and paste rhetoric...
You have presented an interesting situation.
YOU are saying that you have less debt than you ever have, and "doing all we can just to keep our heads above the water".

Since you have not mention that any of the hardships you are experiencing is of your own volition then one can only presume the problems you are experiencing is 100% fault of the US government.

Or you could easily conclude from your contempt for Barney an obvious Democrat, it is 100% the Democrat parties fault of your woes.
On the surface it appears you and Barney both have some distinct views on politics. Just some have to take a cheap personal shot for no other reason than a difference of opinion on policy.
MiLK

Mountain Home, AR

#25716 Jul 7, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Simply find a study and look at the controls used and you will quickly realize that by changing what is controlled for can alter the results drastically within the same survey. In the example Barney used and the one you looked at, you will realize that those who aren't looking, aren't being counted in the unemployment rate (though that wasn't what we were talking about originally). What would the unemployment rate be if they were counted? The answer is 12.05%. They aren't working and most of them have been looking for work sometime in the past 5 years so why not count them? It's a great example of why anyone would be foolish to take one single study and form their opinion based on that study. These study's and polls are no more than tools used by one party or the other to gain a political advantage. We should simply use them as novelty tidbits of information and no more.
Sir if you go to THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATICITICS web page you will find the count that you said did not get counted as well as much other information that shows you are incorrect in much of your summation of how the survey is compiled.
Labor Statistics

Jonesboro, AR

#25717 Jul 7, 2013
MiLK wrote:
<quoted text>
Sir if you go to THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATICITICS web page you will find the count that you said did not get counted as well as much other information that shows you are incorrect in much of your summation of how the survey is compiled.
If you go there you will find that we have the lowest percentage of full time working adults in the history of this country. You can prove anything with statistics, possibly a real master of it could even make it look like Obama has some sort of feasible plan for the country but then he would have to be real good at statistical fiction.
MiLK

Mountain Home, AR

#25718 Jul 7, 2013
Labor Statistics wrote:
<quoted text>
If you go there you will find that we have the lowest percentage of full time working adults in the history of this country. You can prove anything with statistics, possibly a real master of it could even make it look like Obama has some sort of feasible plan for the country but then he would have to be real good at statistical fiction.
What is todays percentage of full time working adults?

What is the recent history of this percentage, could it have been on the decrease for several years before President Obama?

Can you provide the address of the web page that confirms or denies that?

I would prefer a BLS site address if you do not mind please.




Since: Jun 12

Detroit City

#25719 Jul 7, 2013
Labor Statistics wrote:
<quoted text>
If you go there you will find that we have the lowest percentage of full time working adults in the history of this country. You can prove anything with statistics, possibly a real master of it could even make it look like Obama has some sort of feasible plan for the country but then he would have to be real good at statistical fiction.
Look at this, grabbed on to a Republican talking point and shows he has no idea of what he is talking about, but Damn it sounded good, till he figures out that lowest number in history is BS.


MAY I..........http://www.bls.gov/ cps/cpsaat01.htm

1947-56.0%

2012-58.6%,

and this number has increased in 2010, 2011, an 2012.


Worse yet, both lows were after The Great Depression and The Great Recession of which both started under a Republican administration.

Grab you a towel, and go dry behind your ears.

Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#25720 Jul 7, 2013
MiLK wrote:
<quoted text>
Sir if you go to THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATICITICS web page you will find the count that you said did not get counted as well as much other information that shows you are incorrect in much of your summation of how the survey is compiled.
That's where I got the info I posted. Maybe YOU should go there and see for yourself. I simply used that very page to prove an indisputable fact. You can make any survey say whatever you want whether you like it or not.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#25721 Jul 7, 2013
Oneford wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at this, grabbed on to a Republican talking point and shows he has no idea of what he is talking about, but Damn it sounded good, till he figures out that lowest number in history is BS.
MAY I..........http://www.bls.gov/ cps/cpsaat01.htm
1947-56.0%
2012-58.6%,
and this number has increased in 2010, 2011, an 2012.
Worse yet, both lows were after The Great Depression and The Great Recession of which both started under a Republican administration.
Grab you a towel, and go dry behind your ears.
I looked at your little chart. The percentage you gave is for total employed and not just full-time. It seems at though you don't have a problem omitting things to "prove" a point. In other words, credibility means little to you as long as you make the socialistic Democratic party look good. Either that or you just proved my point about making surveys and studies say what you want them to say. Actually, you did both.
Milk

Mountain Home, AR

#25722 Jul 7, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
That's where I got the info I posted. Maybe YOU should go there and see for yourself. I simply used that very page to prove an indisputable fact. You can make any survey say whatever you want whether you like it or not.
Sir, you made it obvious you can "make any survey say whatever (YOU) want", when you took the unemployment rate from 7% to 12%.
When you take those two categories of the unemployed and add them together and say that total supports your theory is ludicrous, and unworthy of any further discussion.




Labor Statistics

Jonesboro, AR

#25723 Jul 7, 2013
Milk wrote:
<quoted text>
Sir, you made it obvious you can "make any survey say whatever (YOU) want", when you took the unemployment rate from 7% to 12%.
When you take those two categories of the unemployed and add them together and say that total supports your theory is ludicrous, and unworthy of any further discussion.
l
Thank you for understanding the obvious but why do you keep discussing? We are becoming a nation of part timers and temporary employees and you illustrious leader is content with it. When less than half of the available workforce has employment, non liberals see a problem.
that is your call

San Jose, CA

#25724 Jul 7, 2013
MiLK wrote:
<quoted text>
The first post under the title DID YOU VOTE TODAY was dated June 8, 2010, and it said, "Did you vote in the June 8 election".
I fail to see how that could remotely be associated to comedy. You say this person" has been making us all laugh at you for a long time", but your message is full of anger and contempt toward this person.
With all due respect, why would/could/should anyone take you seriously?
You don't have to take me seriously, nor did I ever ask that you try.
Frankly, unless you are 'this person' I was directing my comment to, I am not obligated to answer your questions at all.
And, even though It is interesting that you would pick this post out of the thousands of others, if you genuinely need help understanding things, I will be glad to share with you my reason as to your 'Why...?'
'This person' has been ranting, cursing, and belittling anyone that dares post here in his stomping grounds that differs politically, spiritually, or even remotely hints that they are questioning one of his posts.
(Oddly enough, I guess you must have missed all the cursing and name calling 'this person' has bellowed for years while you were picking this one out to critique and and go back to its original beginning to clarify for us all.)
Therefore,'this person' is a class A,#1 bully, that has turned serious discussion in this thread thread into a mockery with his intolerant and belligerent 'three Billy goats gruff' bellowing at anyone that dares cross him for over 3 years now, as you so dutifully pointed out.
Thus, that is the 'why' to your worried and bothered questions.
I hope that helps you come to terms with and understand my cold, cruel heart.
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#25725 Jul 7, 2013
Milk wrote:
<quoted text>
Sir, you made it obvious you can "make any survey say whatever (YOU) want", when you took the unemployment rate from 7% to 12%.
When you take those two categories of the unemployed and add them together and say that total supports your theory is ludicrous, and unworthy of any further discussion.
So can YOU. There are no superpowers here, just simple statistics 101. I simply added those not counted. In any event, point and case. I'll take the fact that you no longer want to discuss it as an admission that I'm right.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arkansas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 23 min woodtick57 6,432
glt Sun dark ghost 1
News Arkansas governor says he'd sign religious prot... Sun Fa-Foxy 21
News NWA population rises above 500,000, Fort Smith ... Mar 28 upfortruth 1
any way to meet local gay men Mar 28 male47 1
News Arkansas Senate panel backs 'conscience protect... Mar 26 WeTheSheeple 5
News The myth of the evangelical voter Mar 22 Just Say No 1
More from around the web