Who do you support for Governor in Oh...
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#31811 Jul 22, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet, the stock market continues to reach new highs. What metric are you using?
You do remember that the stock market crash happened before Obama took office, right?
<quoted text>
When George W. Bush took office in 2001, real (inflation adjusted) median household income stood at $54,766. When he left office it was at $53,285, and was headed downward.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M...
The most recent numbers (May 2014) show the real median household income currently at $53,385.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/upd...
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/39...

above government link of your own home town demographics say differently.

PS: the great sell off prior to Obama taking office because of fear, had corporations go into preservation mode they currently still reside in. Without all the monopoly money by the fed being poured into the market it would still be in the dumper.

You need to brush up on reality, and lay off the kook aide.
Old Guy

Mason, OH

#31812 Jul 22, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/39...
above government link of your own home town demographics say differently.
We weren't talking about Cincinnati, we are talking about the USA as a whole. I presented my sources, let's see yours.
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>

PS: the great sell off prior to Obama taking office because of fear, had corporations go into preservation mode they currently still reside in.
That's a pretty good trick. The US was already in recession in 2007. Obama wouldn't even be nominated until late August of 2008.
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to brush up on reality, and lay off the kook aide.
Why don't you just present your facts, and lay off the juvenile slogans?
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#31813 Jul 22, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
We weren't talking about Cincinnati, we are talking about the USA as a whole. I presented my sources, let's see yours.
<quoted text>
That's a pretty good trick. The US was already in recession in 2007. Obama wouldn't even be nominated until late August of 2008.
<quoted text>
Why don't you just present your facts, and lay off the juvenile slogans?
Because he can't.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#31814 Jul 22, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
Because he can't.
but but but...I posted a government link.

It had cincinnati, and then national on another tab had you been paying attention.

Old guy does not pay attention either.

According to you 2, this is the best the economy has ever been in history, but figures don't lie, and liars figure spin wins.

maybe you need to look further, and not listen to NPR for news. Remember your news sites must be subsidized or they can't remain open.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#31815 Jul 22, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
We weren't talking about Cincinnati, we are talking about the USA as a whole. I presented my sources, let's see yours.
<quoted text>
That's a pretty good trick. The US was already in recession in 2007. Obama wouldn't even be nominated until late August of 2008.
<quoted text>
Why don't you just present your facts, and lay off the juvenile slogans?
maybe if you re-visited the posted link you could find the tab to national numbers.

why don't you pay attention, and not spin your adolescent opinions here as fact?.

My source was the united states government.

Why do you want to ignore your own city?.....you embarrassed a third live in poverty?
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#31816 Jul 22, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
but but but...I posted a government link.
It had cincinnati, and then national on another tab had you been paying attention.
Old guy does not pay attention either.
According to you 2, this is the best the economy has ever been in history, but figures don't lie, and liars figure spin wins.
maybe you need to look further, and not listen to NPR for news. Remember your news sites must be subsidized or they can't remain open.
The link you posted had national figures on it? You might want to take another look. You would think that you would be right about something once just by accident.
Old Guy

Mason, OH

#31817 Jul 22, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
Fact.....the average american family has lost $5000 of annual income under Obama.
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
When George W. Bush took office in 2001, real (inflation adjusted) median household income stood at $54,766. When he left office it was at $53,285, and was headed downward.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M...

The most recent numbers (May 2014) show the real median household income currently at $53,385.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/upd...
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39/39...
above government link of your own home town demographics say differently.
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
We weren't talking about Cincinnati, we are talking about the USA as a whole. I presented my sources, let's see yours.
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you want to ignore your own city?.....you embarrassed a third live in poverty?
I'd like to keep talking about your original assertion "the average american family has lost $5000 of annual income under Obama."

As I demonstrated above, you were wrong on a simple factual matter --- one that was easy to check. Then, rather than respond directly, you try to deflect the argument to something unrelated. That diversion might work for you occasionally in real time conversation, but it doesn't play well here. Here we have a record of everything that is said. We can always go back and look at exactly what the other person said.

I think that you know that your original assertion is wrong. You seem smart enough to read a table, and understand it. And yet you are unwilling to admit it.

If your hope is to somehow deceive us with easily checked lies, obvious evasions, or juvenile insults, you are sadly mistaken. You only make yourself look bad.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#31818 Jul 22, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I'd like to keep talking about your original assertion "the average american family has lost $5000 of annual income under Obama."
As I demonstrated above, you were wrong on a simple factual matter --- one that was easy to check. Then, rather than respond directly, you try to deflect the argument to something unrelated. That diversion might work for you occasionally in real time conversation, but it doesn't play well here. Here we have a record of everything that is said. We can always go back and look at exactly what the other person said.
I think that you know that your original assertion is wrong. You seem smart enough to read a table, and understand it. And yet you are unwilling to admit it.
If your hope is to somehow deceive us with easily checked lies, obvious evasions, or juvenile insults, you are sadly mistaken. You only make yourself look bad.
This is the guy who went on for days about how his 40 plus lawyers had made him an overseas corporation who would never pay a penny of income tax again and then has spent the subsequent two years bragging about how much income tax he pays. There's a little more going on there than stubbornness.
shooting blanks stepson

Cleves, OH

#31819 Jul 22, 2014
Clark Griswald
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#31820 Jul 22, 2014
ino wrote:
YAHOOOO !!!!
YIPPEEE!!!!!
HAPPY !!!!!
A federal appeals court panel in the District struck down a major part of the 2010 health-care law Tuesday, ruling that the tax subsidies that are central to the program may not be provided in at least half of the states.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health...
We won the battle but not the war. There could be two more appeals processes involved before all is said and done. But it is going in the right direction. Another newspaper smack on the snoot of big ears and it is funny.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#31821 Jul 22, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it make you feel better to cling to your false premise that everyone who disagrees with you is on welfare?
I think its because if you accept the other possibility as true, that the people who refuse to do your job are people who are smarter, better educated, and have better jobs than you, it destroys your Rush Limbaugh fantasy life that you really could have been something if the darn Obama had never been elected.
No, disagreeing with me is just part of it.

I go to Topix quite a bit when the weather is crappy like when it rains or during the winter, and it seems that no liberals work. How can that be???? Are they all smarter and better educated?

It seems to me I'm one of the few people that have a job on Topix. Everybody else? Independently wealthy, has a business at home, retired..........

I can understand one or two perhaps, but all of them?

Next is the political stance those so-called successful people take. I mean, if a person worked themselves to a point where they no longer have to work, why would they side with a party that wants to take more of what they have and give it to those that don't want to achieve anything in life? It just doesn't make sense, or as Cantoon said frequently "Voting against your own interest."

So I ask myself, why would these successful people want more government in their lives? After all, if truly successful, government didn't make them that way, they made themselves that way, and that includes getting government out of the way if anything.

However, it would make sense if a person with such a political position needed government for something outside of what the Constitution grants citizens. After all, successful people don't need government for anything, government dependents need government for just about everything. It would make sense those people would be behind a larger government. The larger the government, the more government can give them.

I have successful people in my family. I have millionaires in my family. I know what aggression it took for them to be successful. Lots of hard work, money, taking huge risks and education. Most successful people look down on those who did nothing for themselves or even tried. They are not willing to open up their wallets and purse and say "Take what you need! You didn't feel like working, well I did, so here you go!!"

Most successful people feel government is a hindrance and not a help. Government isn't paving the way, government is getting in the way. Liberalism is rewarding the irresponsible while punishing the responsible. And I don't know of many irresponsible successful people.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Medina, OH

#31822 Jul 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
No, disagreeing with me is just part of it.
I keep telling you that one of your main intellectual problems is your inability to see degree. With you, EVERY liberal, EVERY conservative has to have the exact same demographics. It's an ignorant way to think, but you cling to it. Let me try to answer your questions for one liberal.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I go to Topix quite a bit when the weather is crappy like when it rains or during the winter, and it seems that no liberals work. How can that be???? Are they all smarter and better educated?
Yes.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems to me I'm one of the few people that have a job on Topix. Everybody else? Independently wealthy, has a business at home, retired..........
I can understand one or two perhaps, but all of them?
Yes.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Next is the political stance those so-called successful people take. I mean, if a person worked themselves to a point where they no longer have to work, why would they side with a party that wants to take more of what they have and give it to those that don't want to achieve anything in life? It just doesn't make sense, or as Cantoon said frequently "Voting against your own interest."
Again, with the all or nothing. You have to characterize people who need help as being worthless so you can sleep at night when you tell them to go F themselves. To me, helping people who need it isn't against my self interest. It is in my self interest to live in a better community. It is in my self interest to help people who need it and to have a government that helps it weakest, not its strongest.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
So I ask myself, why would these successful people want more government in their lives? After all, if truly successful, government didn't make them that way, they made themselves that way, and that includes getting government out of the way if anything.
However, it would make sense if a person with such a political position needed government for something outside of what the Constitution grants citizens. After all, successful people don't need government for anything, government dependents need government for just about everything. It would make sense those people would be behind a larger government. The larger the government, the more government can give them.
I have successful people in my family. I have millionaires in my family. I know what aggression it took for them to be successful. Lots of hard work, money, taking huge risks and education. Most successful people look down on those who did nothing for themselves or even tried. They are not willing to open up their wallets and purse and say "Take what you need! You didn't feel like working, well I did, so here you go!!"
Most successful people feel government is a hindrance and not a help. Government isn't paving the way, government is getting in the way. Liberalism is rewarding the irresponsible while punishing the responsible. And I don't know of many irresponsible successful people.
Again, you should leave the thinking to the smart people who have sought an education and can think in complex and nuanced manners and you should move things from one place to another.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#31823 Jul 22, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
The link you posted had national figures on it? You might want to take another look. You would think that you would be right about something once just by accident.
look again so called genius....it is a tab you have to actually click.

is that to much work for you?
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#31824 Jul 22, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
I keep telling you that one of your main intellectual problems is your inability to see degree. With you, EVERY liberal, EVERY conservative has to have the exact same demographics. It's an ignorant way to think, but you cling to it. Let me try to answer your questions for one liberal.
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Again, with the all or nothing. You have to characterize people who need help as being worthless so you can sleep at night when you tell them to go F themselves. To me, helping people who need it isn't against my self interest. It is in my self interest to live in a better community. It is in my self interest to help people who need it and to have a government that helps it weakest, not its strongest.
<quoted text>
Again, you should leave the thinking to the smart people who have sought an education and can think in complex and nuanced manners and you should move things from one place to another.
you are so smart a tab evades your genius brain.

you re-define affirmative action to just plumb dumb.
Pope Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#31825 Jul 22, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
look again so called genius....it is a tab you have to actually click.
is that to much work for you?
Really? Why wouldn't you link directly to the page that contains the information you think supports your claim? That's odd.
Canton

Canton, OH

#31826 Jul 22, 2014
Neat fact of the day: Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are the only two presidents to reduce the deficit in the last 50 years. Say it with me. In fact, look at yourself in a mirror and say "Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are the only two presidents to reduce the deficit in the last 50 years" Now what is you have been blabbering about all these years and who have you been voting for? Thought so. This is the part where you Tea Baggers call this easily fact checked information a lie. Ready? Go...
woo-boy

Van Wert, OH

#31827 Jul 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
No, disagreeing with me is just part of it.
I go to Topix quite a bit when the weather is crappy like when it rains or during the winter, and it seems that no liberals work. How can that be???? Are they all smarter and better educated?
It seems to me I'm one of the few people that have a job on Topix. Everybody else? Independently wealthy, has a business at home, retired..........
I can understand one or two perhaps, but all of them?
Next is the political stance those so-called successful people take. I mean, if a person worked themselves to a point where they no longer have to work, why would they side with a party that wants to take more of what they have and give it to those that don't want to achieve anything in life? It just doesn't make sense, or as Cantoon said frequently "Voting against your own interest."
So I ask myself, why would these successful people want more government in their lives? After all, if truly successful, government didn't make them that way, they made themselves that way, and that includes getting government out of the way if anything.
However, it would make sense if a person with such a political position needed government for something outside of what the Constitution grants citizens. After all, successful people don't need government for anything, government dependents need government for just about everything. It would make sense those people would be behind a larger government. The larger the government, the more government can give them.
I have successful people in my family. I have millionaires in my family. I know what aggression it took for them to be successful. Lots of hard work, money, taking huge risks and education. Most successful people look down on those who did nothing for themselves or even tried. They are not willing to open up their wallets and purse and say "Take what you need! You didn't feel like working, well I did, so here you go!!"
Most successful people feel government is a hindrance and not a help. Government isn't paving the way, government is getting in the way. Liberalism is rewarding the irresponsible while punishing the responsible. And I don't know of many irresponsible successful people.
Thanks for another big laugh. How full of it can you get?
They cannot kill a Spook

Toledo, OH

#31828 Jul 22, 2014
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for another big laugh. How full of it can you get?
What are your dimensions ?
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#31829 Jul 22, 2014
Canton wrote:
Neat fact of the day: Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are the only two presidents to reduce the deficit in the last 50 years. Say it with me. In fact, look at yourself in a mirror and say "Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are the only two presidents to reduce the deficit in the last 50 years" Now what is you have been blabbering about all these years and who have you been voting for? Thought so. This is the part where you Tea Baggers call this easily fact checked information a lie. Ready? Go...
Wow, that's quite an accomplishment given the fact Presidents don't reduce deficits--Congress does.

Another coincidence: both men presided with a Republican Congress........ what are the odds??????
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#31830 Jul 22, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
I keep telling you that one of your main intellectual problems is your inability to see degree. With you, EVERY liberal, EVERY conservative has to have the exact same demographics. It's an ignorant way to think, but you cling to it. Let me try to answer your questions for one liberal.
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Yes.
<quoted text>
Again, with the all or nothing. You have to characterize people who need help as being worthless so you can sleep at night when you tell them to go F themselves. To me, helping people who need it isn't against my self interest. It is in my self interest to live in a better community. It is in my self interest to help people who need it and to have a government that helps it weakest, not its strongest.
<quoted text>
Again, you should leave the thinking to the smart people who have sought an education and can think in complex and nuanced manners and you should move things from one place to another.
That's exactly what I do: move things from one place to another. How do you think your groceries got to the grocery store? They grew them there? How do you think your tools got to the hardware store? They made them there? How do you think gasoline got to the gas pumps? A gasoline machine?

Yes, truck drivers move things. Through rain, through snow, through fog, through night, we move things.

And it's your apparent ignorance that leads you to believe because blue collar workers actually do work, they are incapable of the "thinky" stuff. How Sarah Palin of you.

So you like to help people? Why do you need government for you to help people? You're so brilliant that you can't figure out a way to do that on your own?

Well..... that's the cradle-to-grave mentality. You can't do anything without government. You need government to tell you how to eat, what to watch on television, what to plant in your front yard, what to keep your thermostat at in the summer and winter, what kind of vehicle you should drive, and as you posted, how to "help" people.

See, we working people do all that on our own. We don't need government to tell us any of these things. It's something that you probably never heard of in your Socialist dilemma, it's called common sense. When you sign up to be a Cradle-to-Graver, they take the common sense part out of your brain. That's why you can't live without your precious federal government.

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.

Citizen Sound-Off Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min huntcoyotes 270,576
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia i... (Oct '10) 8 min The WindBag 104,083
Election Who do you support for Governor in Minnesota in... (Oct '10) 11 hr Phineus 861
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virg... (Oct '10) 11 hr Billy 101,570
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Kentucky (... (Oct '10) 14 hr Jagoe 844
Election Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 16 hr GOPee BLOODBATH 109,864
Election Who are you voting for in the Michigan Governor... (Oct '14) 18 hr Ryan 26
More from around the web