Pretentious Republican Tool comments

Posted in: Pistorius witness relives 'terrifying screams' See in context

Pistorius = guilty Pistorius = murderer . . . ! . . .

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: Netanyahu takes Iran nuclear deal objection to Kremlin See in context

Have the Iranians figured out what to do with the toxic nuclear waste they will produce?

Do you wonder the same of Israel?

Turning his back on ONE of our closest allies.

Feel free to remind us how it is that Netanyahu supports the U.S. as an ally. Tea party, right wing nuts & the various social conservatives want the U.S. to stick its collective neck out for THE CHOSEN PEOPLE. This is no two way street. The U.S. gains nothing. Because of the right wing extremist in the U.S. we are exposed to risk because of Netanyahu. Why should we back his ass up if he bombs Iran? These conservatives are delusional. Iran does not have to attack Israel; they simply have to develop the same technology that Netanyahu already possesses. I AM NOT FOR IRAN OBTAINING NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!! For once we have a president who is standing up for the U.S. 's best interest and all the tea party, moral majority, social conservative, neo-con right wingers want is to insist that the U.S. serve every single request that Israel, particularly the extremist far right minority of Israel, demands.

Israel bombs other countries without a single act of aggression; Palestine excluded (they just invade their land and build settlements). Follow the discussion on this thread and you will see the conservatives are asking you to buy the argument that we should support Israel in every single instance; whether or not it is counter to the interests of the U.S. - if Israel were not part of the equation. They contend that Israel should dictate U.S. policy. They contend that we should go to war to protect Israel even though Israel does nothing as an ally to benefit the U.S.; but they do continually put the U.S. at risk, if our obligation is to fight any war they begin by their transgressions against nations who did not invade them, did not bomb their territory and committed absolutely no military act of aggression but they were bombed by Israel. What a deal! What other country gets a bargain like that? Please ask yourself that if it is not the case that right wingers support Israel because they are THE CHOSEN PEOPLE, then why do they get every benefit without providing any benefits to the U.S. Oh yeah, I forgot, we get the benefit of them spying on us!

So Netyanyahu stabs the U.S. in the back by trying to turn Russia against us and we are the bad guys. According to the conservatives our president is shameful because Netyanyahu is stabbing us in the back. This of course after he was all over the U.S. talk shows telling us we had better accept his foreign policy demands on our country.

[article] ''will not tolerate nuclear proliferation.'' [assurances]

Wow, French President Francois Hollande, is going to ask Israel to get rid of all of its nuclear arsenal? Oh, that's right, French President Francois Hollande, didn't really mean what he said. He was just lying because he in fact is willing to ''tolerate nuclear proliferation.'' He was just being a demagogue. It is perfectly understandable. You have the world's top megalomaniac, Putin, receiving attention from the chosen people's megalomaniac - Netanyahu; French President Francois Hollande has to fit in somewhere; so he demagogues. A socialist president never looked so good to all these conservatives.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Posted in: Israel furious as Kerry heads to Iran talks in Geneva See in context

Netanyahu had no more influence on our presidential elections than...

Never said he did. I said "tried." Definitely a feeble attempt at a Strawman Argument. I will not do your work for you. So you or anyone else interested will have to look up his pathetic (obvious timed) press statements. Netanyahu clearly made various derogatory statements that any idiot could see though. His thinly veiled attempts were of course unsuccessful. Your attempt to equate his lack of success with his not attempting to do so is just as unsuccessful.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Posted in: Israel furious as Kerry heads to Iran talks in Geneva See in context

Really, if so, why do they still have a weapon weeks away possibly?

Have you ever provided one fact in your entire life? Could someone actually be so credulous. Just because someone uses the word "possibly" does not excuse the blatant attempt to sway opinions with what I will kindly put as non facts. In "weeks away" time (as was stated) we can all acknowledge that is was not possible or probable or anything except propaganda concerning the "weapon." This is way beyond pure conjecture, which is at best an honest attempt to project a possibility. This will NEVER happen and it is meant purely as a source of propaganda. The conservatives use propaganda so frequently concerning Obama's relationship to Iran that the totally lack credence and have exposed themselves to ridicule by setting timetables that expire and then become a distant past. Everyone remembers those timetable declarations and never again accept the credibility of any statements not backed by references.

I said the conservatives would try to dance around the content of the proposed agreement and lo and behold - they did. Shocking!

Facts: Obama arranged a coalition with Europe and others that has been so bulletproof that it has crippled Iran. Never have sanctions been so precisely aimed at oil in Iran than there was no wiggle room. Iran is begging for relief. Netanyahu is attempting to insert himself in negotiations which we and our allies constructed after he could not successfully curtail Iran's uranium production one iota. American conservatives has supported Netanyahu's edicts 100%.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Posted in: Israel furious as Kerry heads to Iran talks in Geneva See in context

I love it when all the conservative hawks out there say great things about Netanyahu's resolve. They want so badly for America to be some badass. But the conservatives roll over on their stomachs when Netanyahu demands that they do so. How pathetic is that? The hawks kow tow to Netanyahu's every whim. They will try to say how weak Obama is. Just remember to do that they need to provide the details of the talks; they can't do that. The truth is that Obama is doing a great job of making Iran bend to America's wishes. Netanyahu tried to influence our presidential election because he despises Obama; now he works for the conservatives in America trying to denounce Obama's superior efforts to manipulate Iran. Obama was the president that established the coalition with Europe and others that is now forcing Iran's hand due to the economic pressure that was a direct result of Obama's efforts.

I will always remember the foolish Netanyahu presenting his analogy of "If it quacks like a duck ..." What a tool he is.

The conservative hawks true (lack of) tenacity is exposed as they show themselves to be totally obedient to Netanyahu

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Posted in: Divided Republicans bicker over restoring their tarnished brand See in context

trying to manage the national debt

The bill comes due and you pay it. That is how you maintain good credit. People who are too stupid to realize our country needs good credit, and realize the time to fight budget battles is during the budget process and not when the debt ceiling needs to be raised do not deserve any respect at all. They are simply ignorant. Respect the process or our country's credit rating will suffer and that gets even more expensive. These guys are not heroes they just demagog and get really ignorant people to follow them; bill creating and bill paying are two separate processes. People so ignorant as to not know that difference should not be governing. But it is totally clear that their constituency and others that support their actions can't begin to understand what raising the debt limit is all about. But I do enjoy when people expose themselves by making comments that show their level of NON understanding.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Posted in: Divided Republicans bicker over restoring their tarnished brand See in context

As a party we have to do soul-searching, Graham said.

Yeah, as if.

. . . . . any of them have a soul.

11 ( +11 / -1 )

Posted in: Obama, Democrats unified now but face tough tests See in context

In January the republicans will be in deep trouble. While Americans still support cuts in spending, with just above 50% in favor of cuts, they don't support any of the methods used to coerce the remaining portion of government. Overwhelmingly, above 75% according to some polls, Americans are disgusted by the strong arm tactics used by the tea party. However the tea part has extremely strong support in their discreet areas. Also the tea party has scattered support all around the country as the extremist conservatives have concentrated areas but then are scattered scantly throughout the rest of the country. That is where danger now lies for the republicans. In January the republican dilemma will be whether to face increasing tough primary elections with a tough stance or to realize that in a general election the majority of Americans can't stand the tea party and its extremist views.

The budget issues and debt limit issues will not be far apart again beginning mid January. If they try to pass a reasonable bill quietly the hostile tea party will say things that damage some of the party's candidates in the primary elections. That is what the tea party does. Then many of the winners of the primary can't get elected in the general election because of their extremist views. I would also note that many of the tea party individuals know nothing about Economics yet boast of their fool proof methods of steering our economy. Many are being exposed for their neophyte and pseudo pollyannish statements.

If on the other hand the non tea party individuals pander to the conservative extremists many of them will not stand a chance in the general election. Now some folks on JT will attempt to tell you what I am saying but mischaracterize my synopsis. They will use the example of safe tea party seats. I fully accept that many tea party seats are safe. However bastions like the south, Idaho, some western states & your Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas type states are not representative of the entire country. The republicans need the seats scattered among the more moderate areas of America or they will lose any advantage they hold (In the house with a simple majority and in the senate to maintain cloture when they're screwing America). Often candidates can subsequently redeem themselves by voting quickly to resolve an issue where they previously lost face with the American people. Now, however, there are consequences either way unless you have a tea party safe seat. In other words the tea party is tearing apart the republican party. The tea party refused to abide by Regan's policy of never speaking badly of another republican. The tea party constituency would love nothing more than to stand up and fight in January. The tea party constituency, in fact, would like to see an even stronger stance. We have seen ignorant individuals who believe we can some how not raise the debt limit, which simply equates to refusing to pay one's bill.

I say go for it. I would love to see the tea party exposed for their zero knowledge of economics. I believe we cannot move forward in this country until the tea party is defeated. I do acknowledge that it is possible for their influence to dwindle from the inside out but it would take a lot more time. In other words if the tea party, their operatives or the less adamant individuals pass the spending bills and debt limit bills in a responsible manner then Americans would not see the true ignorant intentions and will soften their disdain for the tea party over time. But then of course the rest of the republican party will strengthen its position in, what in reality would be opposing the extremist agenda. Thus the influence would dwindle. I also firmly believe that the tea party must exercise its strength now. They have to use whatever power they can garnish presently or lose it when our economy recovers. It will recover. On a side note, funny thing how the stimulus worked in China. Maybe the tea party Economist experts can explain it as a "new paradigm" only applicable to China.

I believe an example is necessary to see the dilemma the republicans face. I believe the power the above article implies Democrats recently gained can only be maintained if they remain unified. Diverse but unified. The following paragraph best illustrates the tea party's undue influence in primaries that can cause failure in ;the republican party's prospects. I think the article touches on the dynamic of the tea party and the Democratic possible gains but I am simply offering the means of such gains. Without the following other posters can make many unfounded claims as to the improbability of my claims.

In Indiana where Richard Mourdock beat long term Senator Lugar. The tea party thrashed Lugar for any manner in which he was responsible and dedicated towards a modest approach of representing his entire state instead of just the tea party. Mourdock lost the general election by close to 6% It may not seem like a lot but Indiana is becoming a much more conservative state. The fact is that Lugar won the general election in his previous bid for the Senate with 87% of the vote. Mourdock was endorsed by several conservative interest groups, including the Americans for prosperity, Club for Growth, FreedomWorks, Citizens United and the Tea Party Express, the National Rifle Association and Indiana Right to life. They brought huge sums of money in to support Mourdock but he still could not win.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Posted in: Congress pulls U.S. back from brink, averts default See in context

Eyes shut holier than thou knee-jerkism ... or maybe you have vested interests, if so please disclose.

So, is it a vested interest to oppose a clearly designed second class health care system for those who are lesser advantaged. If so I can state without equivocation that I am fully opposed to subjecting less advantaged citizens to lesser trained medical staff. How many wealthy people will be under the care of these second rate medical staff?

And please don't try any of that b.s. about defining a vested interest. I am astute enough in economics, finance & for that matter disclosure of vested interests that I do not need your brand of schooling. I find your attention; to detail in accounting of public finances appalling. It doesn't have to be knee jerk to be simplistic. Some people can dwell over material for months and still not understand . Besides arrogantly summarizing economics, by throwing in a bit of history, which can't be summed up simplistically and never in a few paragraphs I want to highlight a gross misstatement. "This doesn't do much for unemployment, nor the tax base because capital gains are not taxable in the US." Capital gains are taxed. For those unclear, stocks sold at higher price than they originally paid are one category of capital gains. I do know it went from like 28% in 1997 to 20%, then down to 15% in 2003. Not only that in 2003 they also made provisions for lower income people to pay less than 15%. It got extended to 2012 and I simply forgot what happened since then. But forgetting is nowhere near as egregious as stating capital gains are not taxed. To try to pass off like you are so knowledgeable about economics and the U.S. financial status and then make a blunder like that calls all your so called facts into question.

I do know a lot of facts. However to try to summarize today's economic downturn would be folly. To try to say it is just so simple and those who are in power just are missing such solutions is hubris in my opinion. I try to stick to things that reasonable people can agree upon when commenting in a forum or similar venues. I can certainly handle formulating my thoughts through research if I have to produce a white paper but I don't think this is the place to condense voluminous work into a few paragraphs.

I believe everyone deserves access to the same level of health care. I believe that our country needs to pay its bills and I think congress should be taken out of that process and focus on the budget process (creating bills - double entendre intentional). At the very least raise the debt limit in a timely fashion and stop tying raising the debt limit to other legislation. It is just ignorant. To me it equivocates to sending your debtor a note when the bill is due and saying we really need to talk about your prices. When it is time to pay the bill, do so, or lack credibility financially.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Posted in: Congress pulls U.S. back from brink, averts default See in context

the Dems started by wanting an increase on the debt ceiling

So the Democrats started this mess by saying we should pay our bills? That's the gist you get out of this? Those who say that we do not need to keep our country's finances in proper order should be exposed for how dangerous their position is. First off, if you can't see the difference between creating debt and paying your debt I truly feel sorry for you. I certainly hope you are not allowed to have a credit card. Because there it is not wrong to want to curtail the amount you add to the card but you have to pay the bills. As a country it is far more important. The idiots in congress who try to pass off refusal, or delay for that matter, of raising the debt ceiling as a noble cause, are really just saying we are not going to pay the bill.

Please give the Democrats the credit for wanting to raise the debt ceiling. Please do that. It is a compliment to say the Democrats are willing to pay the bills that our country incurs.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Posted in: Congress pulls U.S. back from brink, averts default See in context

This is all about Obama seizing the core authority from Congress. Obama actually threatened to take the USA into default.

The facts are not in agreement with your statement. Congress is split in two.. That means one full branch of government, the executive branch and half of the other branch responsible for fully enacting law were in agreement. It totally lacks credulity to state one half of one branch of government is "the core authority...." Truth demands that the record state that figuratively, 1/6 of our government was against Obama's health care LAW and demanded that their will be imposed upon the American people. So with the Supreme Court, the Executive Branch and half of Congress affirming Obama's health care LAW someone is trying to assert that Obama is seizing the authority of Congress. If failing to observe the truth wasn't so sad it would be laughable. As long as the U.S. Senate is against a bill that the U.S. House of Representatives approved, then be so kind, sir, not to pass off as truth, that "Congress" is a united term when you are speaking of only 1/2 of congress. The facts are that 1/6 (not even, when you consider the Democrats in the House: but honesty dictates that I concede the majority decisions as the entire 1/6 portion of our government) of our federal government was trying to usurp power. Guess what? The presidential veto is in our constitution, look it up! Oh how I wish we could stick to the facts. Facts like the tea party are losers.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: Florida jury acquits Zimmerman in shooting of unarmed black teenager See in context

''Nobody including Trayvon Martin was just minding their own business in this whole tragic set of events smith,''

Who's business was he minding? Some people are willing to make up facts. Trayvon was out of Zimmerman's sight. He had gone between houses when Zimmerman followed him. Trayvon was in nobody's business. We must evaluate those who make up facts through innuendo.

"Woman aren't equal to men and cannot be their peers.... I got it."

Typical trickery. When a person presents an argumentative statement as the other party's it is called a Straw Man fallacy. This is EXACTLY what this is. Show the kind readers where "Woman [women] aren't equal to men..." is. It doesn't exist. Forthrightness would exclude a person from falsely attributing a statement to another if they did not make it.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: Florida jury acquits Zimmerman in shooting of unarmed black teenager See in context

Score another for one of the dumb states. You see there are blue states and then there are dumb states. Let's see a guy in a truck, who could drive away, leaves the truck, hunts the kid down, gets his ass beat, can't stand the humiliation so he murders the boy; it doesn't get much simpler than than. Don't want to get your ass beat – THEN STAY IN THE TRUCK. Oh yeah, I for got he was a hero, he was protecting the neighborhood. Except Trayvon committed NO CRIME. Murderer. So all the ig'nant hero want-a-be's win. Score one for idiot America. Greenday - ''I'm not a part of a redneck agenda.''

-11 ( +12 / -23 )

Posted in: Gays celebrate landmark U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same-sex marriage See in context

If you believe being gay is a choice then you must have gay thoughts and make a choice. Most straight dudes would say it is not a choice because they look into their past and never chose to be straight because they never had any inclination to be gay. If you believe gay people choose then you must have gay thoughts to choose from.

Come on what's wrong with conservatives wanting to take away other's civil rights? They are just trying to force their religion on others; what could be wrong with that?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Posted in: NRA calls for armed police officer in every school See in context

The NRA just produces more cowards made brave and tough by guns.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Posted in: OBAMA RE-ELECTED, SAYS BEST IS YET TO COME See in context

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Shhhhhhh

Come on don't make so much noise. Be a little quiter

I WANT TO HEAR THE FAT LADY SING !!!

She is not quite as elequent as she was 4 years ago

But it is the same tune.

OBAMA WINS!!!

Obama wins!

I knew the polling wasn't skewed like those whining republicans were saying.

Those conservatives will say anything.

Well, except the truth, when they don't like it.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

(this is a cleaned-up version of my previous post where I inappropriately was inpolite)

Too many conservatives just don't understand the Great Depression took between 11 years and 19 years to recover, and we are now experiencing the worst economic disaster since then. The worst recession since the Great Depression, now labeled the Great Recession, was so close to becoming a depression it was scary for truly intelligent people. Some of my friends have questioned the need to bail out the financial institutions. We had to do that. Our financial system would have crumbled. With outstanding Credit Default Swaps, collateralized debt obligations, Mark to Market Accounting (like Enron used that counted revenue not received and in fact, some of which would not be received in 10 years being recorded THAT YEAR AS PROFIT), structured finance vehicles that allowed a company to continue to own an entity but write it off the books by getting rid of just 3% ownership (often done with a subsidiary that lost a great deal of money), asset-backed securities that were nested in other asset backed securities and a derivative market that had just run wild with CDOs being the main culprit but not the only one. We were on the brink of collapse and Bush did several things right by saving some of the financial institutions. He should have bailed out Lehman Brothers also. We did not need a lesson in moral hazard at that point in time. We needed to stop the collapse of our markets so we didn't have the conditions of the Great Depression all over again where so many stocks were rendered worthless.

Conservatives can continue to put down Obama for not fully succeeding in 4 years; however: Great Depression 11 - 19 years for recovery, Great Recession only 4 years so far, economists recognize this is not doing very bad at all. In a few years it will be looked upon as a great success since Congress was unwilling to provide the additional stimulus needed. Economists, which use actual data have determined the stimulus worked; our economy would have been much worse; more jobs lost. I really could not give a crap if they don't agree that Bush put our economy in a condition that takes over 4 years to recover. I take my level of intelligence any day over their spewing of conservative rhetoric; facts and rational not memorizing statements repeated over and over again on tens of thousands of conservative web sites. Most of what I hear is just repetition of a verbatim explanation that the conservative blogs spew out. I think for myself and rely on my education. Economists will also tell you that Bush tax cuts did not work. There never was this great creation of jobs. You want a great creation of jobs look to the Bill Clinton years. The Bush tax cuts had two main drawbacks that can easily be explained. There are additional drawbacks but they don't compare to the two I will mention. These can also easily be referenced. a.) Bush's tax cuts put a drag on the economy because of the debt it created; along with the war debt it was not a linear drag but closer to an elongated exponential curve; meaning that the drag was greater than the sum of the tax cuts and the war debt. b.) The largest of Corporations, or many thereof, kept the money they saved on taxes. In fact many cut back the workforce while they were building up cash. It can clearly be investigated; because they are continuing to build up stores of cash (You can view the corporations public records). The corporations were unwilling to risk developing new plans tailored to used the American worker in new innovative ways to provide new products and services. They had the money but would not take the risk on the American worker.

So sorry to bust their bubble but Bush tax cuts were not effective and Obama's stimulus was.

But I have read enough posts to see the sniveling conservatives can't be bothered with messy facts. So I expect a continuation of statements that will match 10,000 other conservative blogs. Just don't expect me to reply unless there is data. You know the kind where the majority of economists agree; not just a group of conservative hacks."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

I am waiting for the moment following the election when I hear " voters have a liberal bias."

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

Don't forget the sniveling conservatives are also experts on the psychology of republicans staying away from the polls. Well I guess it is really a combination of Psychology and Sociology that would be needed. This because trends of the republicans must be analyzed to determine whether they are getting energized by the rise in polls by Obama, or are being demoralized to the point of not voting. Oh the GRAND LEFT WING CONSPIRACY.

Ha, ha, ha, the sniveling conservatives are just, so much, WAY better than Gallup at polling analysis. Yeah, Gallup is willing to risk their reputation because they just love Obama. Or maybe they are just so stupid they use 2008 "modelling."

I believe the American public will not buy into either "media bias" or "skewed polling." However it was a nice effort to deceive.

''I think it kind of goes without saying that there's definitely a media bias. We've - look, I'm a conservative person, I'm used to media bias. We expected media bias going into this,'' said Ryan.

So many times now Ryan and Romney have been asked what message they have that is not being forwarded by the media. They have yet to name a single thing they are saying which the media is not reporting. This is what dishonest conservatives do. It is their forte. They often claim MEDIA BIAS! MEDIA BIAS! (like Gomer Pyle saying, "Citizen's Arrest! Citizen's Arrest!), but they never give examples of suppressed coverage of the conservative message or of suppressed coverage of Democratic wrongdoing.

On Fox, Paul Ryan was asked to provide details by a known right wing media tool, Mike Wallace. "It would take me too long to go through all of the math," Ryan explained. Wallace repeatedly asked Ryan whether Romney's proposed tax cuts would cost $5 trillion, a question meant to establish one side of the budget equation before moving to a discussion of how Romney would pay for the cuts. But Ryan repeatedly refused to go through the addition and subtraction, instead insisting that the numbers eventually come out in his favor - Romney's proposed tax cuts would cost nothing. Wallace prompted Ryan with a video clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: No matter how many times they tell you they are going to talk specifics, really soon -- they don't do it! And, the reason is, because the math doesn't work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

So here is Ryan babbling and dropping names (I admit it I spiced to give you this wonderful montage): "...if you torture statistics enough...[blah, blah, blah]... I've been on the Ways and Means Committee for 12 years...[blah, blah, blah]... whether it was Ronald Reagan [ha, ha - gotta throw Reagan's name in there] working with Top O'Neill, the idea is from Bowles-Simpson commission on how to...[blah, blah, blah]... "

"Well, I don't have the -- it would take me too long to go through all of that, but let me say it this way. [yeah who cares about the NUMBERS, who cares about the MATH - just trust us]" That was not spiced. That was a direct answer after Chris Wallace said, "You haven't given me the message." Wallace had asked the cost of the tax cuts. That simple. But Ryan refused to provide that number saying it was revenue neutral. Look Ryan the American people are NOT dumb. Give us the cost of the tax cuts then you can tell us the value of the reduction in tax deductions, or loopholes as you are calling them. Like Obama says the numbers just do not add up. Ryan was given ample opportunity to give plain numbers: the value of the tax cuts (a deficit), and the value of closing tax deductions (a credit to the U.S. treasury). Two numbers Paul, that is all your Fox conservative colleague asked for. You FAILED!

Lest I am accused of cutting out the important parts see the evasion of details on Fox's transcript. Fact: Ryan had his chance to present a case based on mathematical produced numbers and he refused to give the details. Wallace offered him the time. Ryan did not produce the math because HE COULD NOT.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/2012/09/30/exclusive-paul-ryan-plays-latest-poll-numbers-exudes-confidence-ahead-debates

(You will have to continue the script by clicking on the next page at the bottom)

So typical is this of the conservative dishonesty. First say the liberal media is biased. Then when asked to give the details that Americans have clearly shown an interest in - evade. Newsflash to Paul Ryan - Your tax plan is the message that is not getting to the American public. You had your chance. You babbled about everything else. You chose to grandstand and drop names but you REFUSED TO GIVE THE NUMBERS. Wallace even played a video beforehand accusing you of not providing the numbers. You REFUSED TO GIVE THE NUMBERS. Sheer dishonesty on the conservatives part. It was blatantly exposed by a conservative journalist.

FAIL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

Of course the "pigmentation" and "ghetto" comments were racist comments. Let them say that in any workplace, besides the administrative offices of the KKK, and see if people let them get away with it. People are no longer willing to tolerate comments like that in public. Thinly veiled racism should be tolerated no more than outright racist remarks. I don't need to reply in any form of debate to any response to those who make and/or defend racist comments. I just need to make sure I point out agreement I have with the civilized people who have already protested.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

Omg, now Naval Recruiters have become experts in Statistics and sampling. What a bunch of crap, The sniveling conservatives that are offering their expert advise on Statistical analysis, sampling and modeling will be the same exact ones sniveling about MEDIA BIAS on November 7. The sniveling conservatives want you to believe that this "model" was or wasn't used on the 2010 election which was accurate and depicted the republican win? It doesn't matter one iota. Obama will win very close to the margin predicted by the aggregate of the polls, which you can view on RealClearPolitics. The sniveling republicans will NOT admit they were wrong about the polling. The sniveling conservatives WILL be lamenting about MEDIA BIAS.

Furthermore, logic would dictate the following: Either Romney has been ahead the entire time or the polling entities have switched their models. The republicans working for these entities would have decried the switch; surely republicans are employed by these entities too. It would also mean that since 2010 there was a mass conspiracy to switch back from the 2010 "model" to the 2008 "model," since the 2010 model was accurate and the republicans won. Are you willing to believe that Romney has been winning this entire time? You have to believe that or that the "model" was switched to reflect his recent downturn. This switch would have had to be coordinated by ALL the polling entities.

Well, when I pose a logical analysis in that manner it leaves the sniveling conservatives only one position to take. That Romney was ahead the entire time by the exact same offset that he is now trailing.

Don't forget to check the state polls after the election because you will find them to be accurate also.

The sniveling conservatives have become Statistical Analysts proficient in sampling, specifically developing statistical data models; not only that, but the ability to recognize other models without any access to the data of the people polled. Face it, they are getting their info from conservative sources. As usual there is NO TRUTH WHATSOEVER involved. So they are saying that the polling entities are using 2008 modeling; prove it. The sniveling conservatives offer no proof of what these polling entities are using as a model. Oh, no, not a rehash of their models explained in further detail to us. No, provide us with a polling entity, i.e.: Gallup, Rutgers, Quinnipiac, etc. Then state the phone calls that specific entity made and how they determined to call those numbers. When you provide those kind of specifics about the entity doing the polling then I will evaluate your case. Otherwise it is total crap. Sorry but those are real people they are calling and the people are giving real answers. The sniveling conservatives just don't like the answers the real American Public are giving.

MEDIA BIAS! . . . MEDIA BIAS!

Newsflash: Look at Fox News polls. Fox polls closely reflect other polling results. The sniveling conservatives want you to believe Fox is also using this "modeling" they speak of and are publishing the skewed results. (again I cannot get the "plus" sign to appear so I will use (up by) __ points.

FOX News 9/24 - 9/26 - Obama (up by) 5 points

FOX News 9/9 - 9/11 - Obama (up by) 5 points

FOX News Wednesday, September 19 (the following statewide polls)

Ohio: Romney vs. Obama - Obama (up by) 7 points

Florida: Romney vs. Obama - Obama (up by) 5 points

Virginia: Romney vs. Obama - Obama (up by) 7 points

MEDIA BIAS! . . . MEDIA BIAS!

The sniveling conservatives need to get a life and stop blubbering about the "skewed" polling results. They need to stop squalling about MEDIA BIAS and man up! But we know that will never happen!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Posted in: As race stands, Obama within reach of second term See in context

I love the actual topic of the news article. Like everything else real the conservatives want to dismiss the facts. Obama is kicking Romney's ass. Four years ago the conservatives tried to say the polling data was not valid. Four years ago it was very accurate; especially if you look at the trends. Two years ago the polling was accurate and did not favor the Democrats at all and the result was reflective of the prior polling. This year when Obama wins the polling will be shown to be accurate. Follow the trend of the polls. Look at all the polls available.

Face the facts Obama is winning. Just wait until he wins then the yammering, murmuring, and bemoaning will reach the same level as the last presidential win for Obama. The sniveling has never ceased since Obama won before. Those pathetic conservatives refused to govern and just decided they could win more by just saying "no" all the time. Well it worked 2 years ago. Now the American public has had a chance to digest the conservatives ideals and they are rejecting them.

MEDIA BIAS MY ASS! When you ask the conservatives what message they want heard that is not getting out they cannot provide you with anything that we are not fully aware of already. We KNOW exactly what the Republican party stands for. It is abundantly clear in their platform. Too bad for the sniveling conservatives; America rejects you.

The sniveling conservatives can whimper all they want about the validity of the polls. The polls are accurate. Obama will win. The results of the election will be accurately reflected by the polls.

Let the conservatives try to explain to us how it is the polls show: (for some reason JT won't display "plus" signs) Arizona - Romney (plus)10, Indiana - Romney (plus)12, Akansas - Romney (plus)21, Nebraska - Romney (plus)14, Georgia - Romney (plus)21, Kentucky - Romney (plus)14, Missouri - Romney (plus)12, Texas - Romney (plus)15, Arkansas - Romney (plus)21 and Mississippi - Romney (plus)18.

So, that would mean that the polling entities only skew some results. Come on, you don't think there are Republicans working at every single polling entity. There are. And they would expose the discrepancies immediately.

The conservatives are dishonest when they claim media bias and they are dishonest when they claim skewed polling. But what else is new.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Posted in: Romney says his 'heart aches' for jobless See in context

omg! . . . . He has no heart.

His wallet and need for power are the pains he feels.

Here is the source of Romney's pain: To oust the Democratic incumbent, Romney would need to take up-for-grabs Florida, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, New Hampshire and Virginia, which would put him at 267 votes, and upend Obama in either Ohio or Iowa.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Recent Comments

Popular

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.