Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 55 of 55
  1. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by grappler View Post
    If that's your position, why didn't you admit your error in the thread about Obama's Nobel acceptance speech, in which you called him a liar for saying that Regan had supported perestroika when he was president?
    You were right. I was in error.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  2. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Clinton produced a balanced budget and a roaring economy, while gently raising the tax burden of the wealthy...
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Hey Scary !!

    He has the potential to be seen as among the best american Presidents


    Best American President
    I guess if you like the socialist left type
  4.    #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaer57 View Post
    Be sick all you like; it happened under his watch, so credit goes where it is due.
    So under who's watch did unemployment reach over 10%?
    I find it sad/odd that people ask to be thanked. How genuine is it when you have to ask? It's like forcing your kid to call Grandma, to thank her for the new underwear she sent for their birthday.

    "To me, clowns aren't funny. In fact, they're kind of scary. I've wondered where this started and I think it goes back to the time I went to the circus, and a clown killed my dad.
    -Jack Handy, SNL-


  5.    #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If he doesn't, however, the future is bleak and he will be known as a failure. Sadly, the Republicans are banking on that but keeping votes in Congress completely partisan.
    And democrats are acting differently?
    I find it sad/odd that people ask to be thanked. How genuine is it when you have to ask? It's like forcing your kid to call Grandma, to thank her for the new underwear she sent for their birthday.

    "To me, clowns aren't funny. In fact, they're kind of scary. I've wondered where this started and I think it goes back to the time I went to the circus, and a clown killed my dad.
    -Jack Handy, SNL-


  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by ScaryHumor View Post
    So under who's watch did unemployment reach over 10%?
    As it's a lagging indicator I would say Bush.
  7. #47  
    [QUOTE=zelgo;2093608]I like the socialist left types--the best American Presidents usually are...

    Lincoln--stopped slavery--so socialist!

    stopping slavery makes you a lefty?

    I think you are confused.

    It was Sen. Strom Thurmond, then a Democrat, who unsuccessfully tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and it was Republicans who led the charge against slavery.

    oops can't change history
    Last edited by Flak1969; 12/14/2009 at 11:49 PM.
  8. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If he doesn't, however, the future is bleak and he will be known as a failure. Sadly, the Republicans are banking on that but keeping votes in Congress completely partisan.
    So, it will be their fault. Gotcha.... nevermind the fact that they cannot block anything with their numbers. The Dems will only have themselves to blame if he continues to fail (which he will).
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  9. #49  
    The fact that the latest CNN poll (no conservative network are they) has 61% of America against Obamacare means nothing right.


    More Republican blocking. Ok sure.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    As it's a lagging indicator I would say Bush.
    Of course you would. When will the lag be over for you? 2014?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  11. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Federal funds are such a huge portion of funding for research, that, when they are restricted, most of the research, in effect, becomes restricted. For example, in 2006 the federal government spent $116 billion in health-related research. At the same time, foundations, the other big funder, spent about $32 billion for everything--health is a tiny portion of that.

    Universities and NIH, which do the bulk of the bench research, depend on federal funding for the vast majority of their work. Even drug companies, which claim to be doing so much research, take most of their drugs from NIH (the Dole-Bayh Act allows drug companies to market drugs based on NIH research without paying NIH anything.) So, all those profits that could come from stem cell research can't flow without governmental investment in NIH research first.

    Without federal funding, stem cell research floundered. It was strangely reminiscent of HIV research during the Reagan years--no funding, no progress.

    Even without major funding, stem cell research has led to breakthroughs in spinal cord injury and parkinsons, in particular. Now that Obama has re-opened routes to funding, there is hope to find other uses to extend life.
    First--I was addressing the false claim. Nothing you've said here counters what I stated. In fact--you are talking all the way around it in order to keep forwarding a false notion.

    Second, during much of the Bush administration there was easy access to money for ventures of any kind, so let's not pretend that someone who wanted to pursue research couldn't get it funded. More likely--they simply didn't find it to be economically viable, or promising enough to spend money on.

    Thirdly, alternatively if the world is so dependent on the government, this sounds like a great case to NOT drain so much money from the private sector, and leave it where it will be available for viable pursuits. You seem to be saying that there are breakthroughs--if so, they should yield viable solutions shouldn't they? Solutions of this type would surely be valuable.

    Or are you telling me that a Private company that can cure AIDS or Parkinsons wouldn't become very very wealthy. I'm quite sure these would be highly sought after.

    From that same article stated above. President Bush announced, on August 9, 2001 that federal funds, for the first time, would be made available for hESC research on currently existing embryonic stem cell lines.

    Perhaps you still don't understand. President Bush PROVIDED funding for this research--he didn't reduce it, or take it away. So, the entire basis for your argument is false. President Bush's only restriction was on which lines could be studied. PRIOR to him there was LESS MONEY for Stem Cell Research. Do you understand that?

    Yet somehow, you people that are obsessed with blaming this guy, create a false scenario, where he somehow ended programs, or banned research. He made funding available--just not unrestricted funding.

    So, apparently you are the sort of person who if begging would demand a dollar when someone gave you 75 cents, and then claim that they stole money from you, and told you that you could no longer beg.

    This example demonstrates the sort of "reasoning" that has been used in politics of late--wildly misleading accusations.

    KAM
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I like the socialist left types--the best American Presidents usually are...

    Lincoln--stopped slavery--so socialist!
    What the heck are you even trying to say here? Lincoln was a socialist left? Ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    FDR--halted the Great Depression, enacted social security--so socialist!
    Actually his idiotic policies extended the Depression, and Social security is one of the biggest threats to our future economic viability. GO SOCIALISM!

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    JFK/LBJ--civil rights and medical care for the elderly--so socialist!
    JFK wasn't too much of a socialist--he economic reforms to end restrictive economic policies and proposed tax cuts (enacted after his death) to unburden the American private sector--opposite of socialism. This led to a very significant economic expansion.
    Civil rights...oh you mean the thing passed only because REPUBLICAN Senators supported it, and overrode the Democrats of the South? Right.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    If you were around back then, would you be fighting to keep slavery, cut taxes like Hoover did and extend the great depression, stop civil rights, keep the elderly sick and impoverished with social security and medicare?

    If not, I guess you like the socialist left types too.
    Your ignorance is staggering. What the hell does Slavery have to do with this? Of course the REPUBLICAN party was formed to oppose Slavery, but I guess you missed that in school.
    Hoover surely did screw things up, and if you had any knowledge of the Depression you would know that FDR after villifying Hoover (in typical Democrat Fashion) adopted many of his policies as part of the new deal.

    Civil Rights: Yeah, again, look to Democrats for that.
    Again I will cite Wikipedia, not because of the quality of the source, but to demonstrate that there is no excuse for such ignorance as is being demonstrated here--given the convenience of such sources.

    This is a breakdown of the votes for the Civil Rights act of 1964.
    By party
    The original House version:[9]
    * Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
    * Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

    Cloture in the Senate:[10]
    * Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
    * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

    The Senate version:[9]
    * Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
    * Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)

    The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
    * Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
    * Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)


    Yeah, you see those percentages. Notice that Republican support is stronger. But in your biased mind, you can't seem to understand this.

    Your inaccuracy, or dishonesty (not sure which) is really a significant issue here. You are just wrong on so many factual points it is staggering.

    Of course that is discussion Republicans and Democrats. If you really want to discuss socialism and its ultimate version--communism, then you would of course have to admit that these movements in the 20th century are responsible for the deaths of millions of people--as many as 100 million.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    As it's a lagging indicator I would say Bush.
    No, remember--President Obama told us that the stimulus package would prevent this problem. That passed, and yet, unemployment is 2% higher than President Obama said it would be if they didn't pass it.

    So, clearly, the stimulus package is not doing what he claimed it would. This is no surprise to those of us who understand that it isn't a stimulus package, never was, and was instead just a massive payoff to various special interests and political pals, as well as the standard pork-barrel stuff.

    This sort of looting of the American public is disgusting. But who cares--they can blame Bush right. Why not let them rob us, and demonstrate their hypocrisy (criticized reckless spending). I'm sure this will lead to better government for the citizens.

    KAM
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    As it's a lagging indicator I would say Bush.
    That's who we all blame; but spending, oversight, taxation, all lies with Congress, which has been controlled by the Dems since what... 2006? Don't take it personally... the Repug's are just as guilty.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15.    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post

    As for those "missing" pause tics -- we can't be sure they were ever there. I've seen him many times when they aren't.
    Barye, Seriously?





    I find it sad/odd that people ask to be thanked. How genuine is it when you have to ask? It's like forcing your kid to call Grandma, to thank her for the new underwear she sent for their birthday.

    "To me, clowns aren't funny. In fact, they're kind of scary. I've wondered where this started and I think it goes back to the time I went to the circus, and a clown killed my dad.
    -Jack Handy, SNL-


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions