[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I recall trying to talk at your level on the econ thread. I even provided a “beginners” link to show you how silly you were being. Instead of reading it you simply continued to miss the point and shout about how “bad” and how much a “failure” Obama is (not even 6 months into his first term).[/quote]
No, you provided a “beginner’s link” when one wasn’t necessary, since I wasn’t a beginner. More than anything, it was a smokescreen provided when you didn’t have any original thoughts on the matter.
And the stimulus package that was “sold” to the public to prevent unemployment from going over 8% is “bad” - which is why you see so much public support for it eroding. That was the point - but you had nothing substantive to add in response except an awesome “beginner’s link!”. Not my problem to fix.
You aren’t poking fun at it - for you to be doing that, something you wrote would have to be funny.
We are still waiting on TME’s explanation as to who is manufacturing the Clinton crisis for political advantage - he hasn’t said.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
<<< You aren’t poking fun at it - for you to be doing that, something you wrote would have to be funny.
We are still waiting on TME’s explanation as to who is manufacturing the Clinton crisis for political advantage - he hasn’t said.[/quote]
Basic conceptual and linguistic coherence would be a step in the right direction.
You beat me to it the other day on this deal with TME accusing high level Dems of concocting a story potentially damaging to themselves so as to provide a media diversion for Palin. Hmmmm… what political planet is that supposed to make sense on?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
I recall trying to talk at your level on the econ thread. I even provided a “beginners” link to show you how silly you were being. Instead of reading it you simply continued to miss the point and shout about how “bad” and how much a “failure” Obama is (not even 6 months into his first term).
No, you provided a “beginner’s link” when one wasn’t necessary, since I wasn’t a beginner. More than anything, it was a smokescreen provided when you didn’t have any original thoughts on the matter.
And the stimulus package that was “sold” to the public to prevent unemployment from going over 8% is “bad” - which is why you see so much public support for it eroding. That was the point - but you had nothing substantive to add in response except an awesome “beginner’s link!”. Not my problem to fix.[/quote]
The new woman, AlisaV (sp?) explained it to you there and I again in so many words. That you still scream about how it has “already failed” means that you don’t understand the theoretical basics. Taking one projection and extrapolating failure from that is either intellectually dishonest or silliness.
[quote]
You’ll have to excuse me if I’ve given up and I just poke fun at threads such as this. Your (in)capacity to understand notwithstanding.
You aren’t poking fun at it - for you to be doing that, something you wrote would have to be funny.[/quote]
It so hurts me that you don’t find me funny when I’m poking fun at you.
And also completely ignoring my post about it…