I’m under the impression you are a troll paid by a liberal political entity or George Sore-ass, through some intermediary. Disprove my theory with facts.
That is true if you are an African American, ignoring officer demands, resisting arrest, pulling guns on them, etc. Everyone else, I’m unaware of major problems.
It’s much faster if you just say what you mean and replace all that BS with the N-word, idiot. So Tamir Rice shouldn’t have been scared of the police by your moronic standards.
Still here, but it looks like one of your threads disappeared. Too bad because your total lack of knowledge on the labor force was exposed.
August 17, 2016 at 11:16 am
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
4
6
Still here? Not for long.
“TOTAL LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ON THE LABOR FORCE”…
is hyperbole, at best.
But, please explain why I was totally wrong while you still have posting privileges… note the word ‘privileges’, which is distinct from ‘rights’.
August 17, 2016 at 1:00 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
5
5
No, it’s fact. I told you the labor force participation rate has decreased because we have an aging population in the US. You then whined that I should adjust between periods so the numbers don’t include the larger share of older people in today’s economy (apparently you no longer think adjusting stats to look at something is data manipulation, despite making that claim to support you conspiracy theories when ranting about climate change, hypocritical IMO) and said I was incompetent (an offense you now think is bannable) even though I was replying to the statistic YOU cited. As I stated, if you look at the prime age labor force participation rate, it has decreased about 2% under both Bush and Obama, but has been rebounding and will probably not finish as bad under Obama. Much of his terms’ decrease has been due to the financial crash he inherited from Bush, and from younger people going to school and going longer, which you probably see as a bad thing.
You are arguing against your own theory and don’t even recognize it.
August 17, 2016 at 3:18 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
5
3
UW:
Let’s give a few sources here, since I know what your rebuttal will be:
You have a severe selective memory, and I believe it is intentional. If you say someone lost an argument enough they must have, right?
You’ve already explained the LPR and how Yogi was wrong. So you try to make him look bad by saying it. Only you didn’t, and you lost the argument.
These two links show that the ages where the LPR have gone down, are ages that are definitely linked to being unable to get a job.
Retirees are not the reason for this drop in the LPR, nor is more people going to college which will be your other rebuttal. It is that the economy is not creating enough jobs to go with population increases, it’s that simple.
August 17, 2016 at 3:36 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
6
3
From my source, which you will probably not read all the way:
“We can assuredly assume people ages 30 to 59 are in their prime working years and thus eliminate the claim the baby boomers are causing the labor participation rate to drop as well as young people all magically going into massive debt as they are all in higher learning institutions. Additionally, we remove some age discrimination from our examination by removing the 25 to 29 and 60 to 64 year olds out of the equation to see what’s going on with labor participation rates. Of course this increases the focus on the peak earning age groups, even though obviously 25 year olds and 60 years olds still need to make rent like everybody else. People do go back to school at all ages, yet let’s assume age 30 to 59 year old students not working while attending school are a very small percentage or this population group.
We can then weight the 30 to 59 year old labor participation rate by their percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population, thus getting their contribution to the overall labor participation rate for those aged 16 and older. How this weighting is done for all age brackets is to multiply the percentage of the total noninstitutional population each age bracket is (our ugly pie chart above), by the labor participation rate for that age bracket.
For just the age group of 30 to 59 year olds, they account for 0.73 of the 0.96 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from a year ago. The same age group is responsible for 2.29 of the 2.06 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from October 2009 to October 2013. The reason the 30 to 59 year olds 2009 to 2013 labor participation rate plunge is greater than the overall decline is due to older workers increasing in their labor participation as shown in the above graphs for ages 60 and above. From October 2007 to October 2013 the 30 to 59 year olds participating in the labor force accounted for 3.0 of the 3.1 percentage drop in the labor participation rate, unadjusted, using October to October labor force statistics.
In other words, the 30 to 59 year olds, who make up 50% of the population which has the potential to work, account for pretty much all of the labor participation rate plunge since 2007. This same age group accounts for three quarters of the labor participation rate decline of the past year. ”
And it shows all the numbers.
Learn to read something that doesn’t support your liberal “frat” team mentality.
You are what is wrong with America. You are the problem, and you will be the one who starts wars.
This is why YOUR side is starting violence at our rallies while you claim TRUMPS WORDS caused it.
Your side is truly an aggressor and must be stopped at all costs.
People like me will stop you, with facts.
I will annihilate you, with facts. And you will be defeated in the public eye, with facts.
August 17, 2016 at 7:23 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
Tim, his argument is wrong, it’s not even debatable. Yes, a blog and another blog with an anonymous author support your claim, using old data. However, actual economists support my claim.
Deutsche Bank agrees with me most of the decline is due to retired workers
“Of the 3 percentage-point decline in participation between the end of 2007 and the end of 2013, CBO estimates, about 1½ percentage points was the result of long-term trends, about 1 percentage point arose from temporary weakness in employment prospects and wages, and about one-half of a percentage point was attributable to unusual aspects of the slow recovery.”
The increase in nonparticipation due to retirement has occurred only after around 2010, while nonparticipation due to disability has been steadily increasing over the past 13 years. Similarly, nonparticipation due to schooling has been steadily increasing and has been another major contributor to the secular decline in the participation rate since 2000.
The number of those who did not look for a job (thus being out of the labor force) even though they wanted a job increased significantly between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the end of 2011. This group of “discouraged workers” explains roughly 30 percent of the total decline (around 2 percentage points) in the participation rate over the same period. Between the first quarter of 2012 and the fourth quarter of 2013, the participation rate of this group has been roughly flat.”
&
“Almost all of the decline (80 percent) in the participation rate since the first quarter of 2012 is accounted for by the increase in nonparticipation due to retirement. This implies that the decline in the unemployment rate since 2012 is not due to more discouraged workers dropping out of the labor force.”
No, you must not have read his original comment before it was deleted for personal attacks, or didn’t comprehend it. He said both Obama has caused the LPR to increase (not true, the trend started long before he was president, and when that was debunked said I was incompetent for not taking out older workers. Again, that decline started before he was president, and will be less than the terms before he took over, even with an aging population.
When you talk about doing the math, and then use data from 3 years ago to compare to data now, you are missing out on approximately 11 million additional people who have retired. You are also looking at data when the unemployment rate was 50% higher, which drastically decreases the labor force participation rate. You simply are not knowledgeable on this, and your well-researched sources are literally the first two that come up when you search for it not being due to retirement or school (if you skip the actual studies, which show otherwise, of course).
Your Forbes piece is written by an incompetent person. They state:
“Meaning, retirement cannot be thought to have played much of a role in the participation rates up until that point, and may only be tangentially affecting it now.”
Which is 100% false, and makes an assumption without looking at any data, which in fact ignores the data presented in the papers I linked to.
The BLS has data from 04 to 14 that shows it pretty clearly:
Some of the retirees and disabilities are also likely people who were slightly under the age of retirement, but chose it anyways.
This article also puts forward another reason that it is moronic to say Obamaa is the cause, which Yogi did, which is my point, when it shows (at the bottom) the huge decline long-term in manufacturing, which I’m sure many here would argue was also Obama’s fault.
Kid, stop mocking the source and pay attention to the numbers.
He source quotes BLS and puts together numbers, and you just tried to source quote your guys all saying what you perceive is correct.
I will add, that this is your weakness. You only believe sources that you deem credible, and then you refuse to digest facts.
I’m going to break down real quick how they are wrong, again:
He breaks down the percentages. The exact percentage of the lpr. Do you disagree with what he said in the below paragraph, and if so do you have charts proving that the numbers he gave are wrong? He sourced BLS, and then showed the percentages based on it.
You are wrong here.
““We can assuredly assume people ages 30 to 59 are in their prime working years and thus eliminate the claim the baby boomers are causing the labor participation rate to drop as well as young people all magically going into massive debt as they are all in higher learning institutions. Additionally, we remove some age discrimination from our examination by removing the 25 to 29 and 60 to 64 year olds out of the equation to see what’s going on with labor participation rates. Of course this increases the focus on the peak earning age groups, even though obviously 25 year olds and 60 years olds still need to make rent like everybody else. People do go back to school at all ages, yet let’s assume age 30 to 59 year old students not working while attending school are a very small percentage or this population group.
We can then weight the 30 to 59 year old labor participation rate by their percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population, thus getting their contribution to the overall labor participation rate for those aged 16 and older. How this weighting is done for all age brackets is to multiply the percentage of the total noninstitutional population each age bracket is (our ugly pie chart above), by the labor participation rate for that age bracket.
For just the age group of 30 to 59 year olds, they account for 0.73 of the 0.96 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from a year ago. The same age group is responsible for 2.29 of the 2.06 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from October 2009 to October 2013. The reason the 30 to 59 year olds 2009 to 2013 labor participation rate plunge is greater than the overall decline is due to older workers increasing in their labor participation as shown in the above graphs for ages 60 and above. From October 2007 to October 2013 the 30 to 59 year olds participating in the labor force accounted for 3.0 of the 3.1 percentage drop in the labor participation rate, unadjusted, using October to October labor force statistics.
In other words, the 30 to 59 year olds, who make up 50% of the population which has the potential to work, account for pretty much all of the labor participation rate plunge since 2007. This same age group accounts for three quarters of the labor participation rate decline of the past year. ”
“
August 18, 2016 at 8:21 am
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
6
4
As I already said, you must adjust for a demo change to get a picture of how the labor rate changed.
YOU SELECTIVELY CHOSE TO LOOK ONLY AT “PRIME AGE LABOR FORCE: rather than the entire population. That’s called “cherry picking”, a highly technical term used by statisticians.
WHY would anyone with common sense measure the effectiveness of a President based upon ONE DEMO GROUP rather than the whole US population labor force? It would only be a ‘valid measure’ if you were a BIASED LIBERAL.
August 18, 2016 at 3:57 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
“WHY would anyone with common sense measure the effectiveness of a President based upon ONE DEMO GROUP rather than the whole US population labor force?”
YOU are the one who said elderly workers had to be removed, and you had to look at the same age group, which is actually nonsense. You simply don’t know enough about this topic to discuss it coherently. Please don’t give commentary on statistical methods until you learn about confidence intervals and other basic statistics.
August 18, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
Are we really back to this again?
Confidence levels are not a part of this argument currently.
You are basically attacking his character again and I doubt you even know what you’re saying on the matter. You’re just triggered. It’s clear that happens a lot with you, and I don’t mean that as an insult. If anything I say it as pity. It must be terrible to constantly be so easily wound up.
We have the numbers here. Yours is in fact trying to cherry pick. Why are more people in both genders “taking care of home”? They say there are valid reasons and are trying to justify the gap. That is the point of your study, and that’s why I don’t buy it.
What about the college graduates who cannot find jobs? And they can’t. Then you say they need to retrain, which is why they are in college. This reinforces that there are no jobs for them. It’s not an evolving market, the jobs that used to exist are gone. They have not been replaced. And as such, they are retraining, and many are leaving the work force, are accepting stagnant wages, or are accepting part time jobs.
It is not peachy in the economy right now. People are suffering and you’re trying to claim this low LPR is a good thing?
August 18, 2016 at 6:08 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
Bob, confidence intervals point to competence. If you don’t understand basic statistics you aren’t competent to critique statistical methods. The same goes for people who think the vast majority of people are above the mean in something, like you have stated multiple times. Nobody with knowledge would take a mechanic seriously if they said their car was not running because it needed more diesel if their car used standard unleaded gas. This is one of the reasons, along with bias, that you constantly put forward terrible sources that have basic errors in them, and ignore actual studies.
I will reply to your other longer post when I have ten minutes to waste, but it’s basically all wrong, because you refuse to look at other sources.
August 17, 2016 at 4:30 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
4
Uh huh…Here’s how I read what he said,
“,” “,” “,” “,”
Here is how you read what he said “and” “and” “and” “and”.
Moving back to the point here: He said nothing that implied you were black and ignoring officer commands. In fact, it seems he is saying if you are any one of those, you may have something to worry about,
So his comment actually may have been saying Tamir should have been worried.
But moreover, in the case of Tamir, yes. You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told. You don’t even try to explain yourself to a “racist” cop for profiling you so to speak. We can’t know what happened, but unfortunately we can know that if this black kid was taught to confront the police, like oh say refuse to drop the bb gun and try to explain how they were wrong, it could easily result in him being shot. I have been searched by a cop before, and they had no reason to think I did anything other than I was wearing baggy pants and a hoodie. I was in 8th grade. I did not say anything back, I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.
It is highly unlikely Tamir was shot because he was black. It is because he had a BB gun and an officer felt threatened, which the child had to have played some part in, whether he talked back, didn’t drop the gun, or something similar. That’s the end of it.
Bob, you don’t seem to know what happened in the Rice murder, which I don’t find surprising.
“You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told.”
His state is an open-carry state, and he did nothing wrong. This is the argument the gun lovers like. Also, the police did not tell him to drop it. They lied, and said they told him 3 times from the car to drop the gun, and then when the video was released it showed them pull up, get out, and kill him in 2 seconds. It is not possible to do what they claim, and what you claim simply didn’t happen.
” I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.”
He did drop withing 2 seconds, after they killed him without giving him a chance to drop his gun. Your comments are from a fantasyworld.
August 18, 2016 at 8:27 am
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
3
5
You have a serious problem staying on topic. Work on it, or don’t waste everyone’s time with your diversionary tactics.
August 18, 2016 at 12:54 pm
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
3
4
UW quoted the Fed, which is ONE of the main problems with the US economy.
There are a few reasons why several politicians have called for an audit of the Fed for SEVERAL DECADES.
August 18, 2016 at 3:03 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
Bob, you don’t seem to know what happened in the Rice murder, which I don’t find surprising.
“You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told.”
His state is an open-carry state, and he did nothing wrong. This is the argument the gun lovers like. Also, the police did not tell him to drop it. They lied, and said they told him 3 times from the car to drop the gun, and then when the video was released it showed them pull up, get out, and kill him in 2 seconds. It is not possible to do what they claim, and what you claim simply didn’t happen.
*- When you walk around firing a BB gun, officers are pretty prone to think it’s dangerous. It is an open carry state, not an open fire state, which when a kid is playing with a BB gun…He’s basically doing what looks like firing in public.
” I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.”
He did drop withing 2 seconds, after they killed him without giving him a chance to drop his gun. Your comments are from a fantasyworld.
— Sick. Literally sick. If you’re pointing a gun around, yeah, the cops will probably become paranoid. They did not just drive up and kill him. Where is the motivation? The obvious motivation was the gun. Nothing else makes sense. How long were they cops? That was their first time seeing a black kid? If they really wanted to do this, it would have happened earlier and more often.
What happened is a black kid played with a BB gun, it looked like a real gun, and he got shot.
End of story.
September 1, 2016 at 1:17 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Lyin’ Tim Bob doing what he does best. You don’t seem to be too far from explaining your civil war you’ve been calling for in the same way your intellectual inspiration did.
August 15, 2016 at 1:18 pm
Captain Planet says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
16
10
So, does this staffer qualify as a thug or is that word reserved for those “other” people?
Plenty of unanswered questions in regard to the delay in reporting, names of others who were similarly threatened but DIDN’T file a complaint, and if this staffer owns a registered gun.
I’m not sure about the location of the incident, either. It is a place where no cameras were present, and no other witnesses, other than the possibility of another passenger.
This is just a “He said/ He said” case. It won’t get far if others similarly threatened don’t step forward into the light of day where they can be questioned under oath, in front of expert interrogators.
The bigger question is: Why is IJ wasting space reporting this incident at this point in time when nothing is YET available to corroborate the claim?
But he, “knows more than the Generals”, believe him. Every day the guy proves how little he actually knows. He loves himself, the poorly educated. Drumpf may have attended a decent school, but he sure didn’t learn anything there.
People should read the D’Antonio book about this sociopath, or for our conservative friends, Trudeau has a lot of his Trump comics in a new book and it’s entertaining, although even that is too wordy for some here.
FIVE thumbs down votes in the 45 minutes since I wrote the above post…. at 7:28 am EST.
August 16, 2016 at 9:35 am
confused says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
15
5
are you sick and tired of Yogi and Agent complaining about BOTs “censoring” their posts? do you want to downvote them, but don’t want to listen to them whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote the previous comment – upvote this one instead!
August 16, 2016 at 9:59 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
6
4
What part is a lie, that I recommend a book, or that Trudeau put out a book? Neither are really debatable or up for debate, but you seem to be in full-blown meltdown mode lately so you could be delusional.
Of course you are the person who would rather lose $30000 in a scam than spend 5 cents to read a historical book you know nothing about because you’ve been told it is bad, so I doubt think many people will take type book critiques seriously.
August 16, 2016 at 11:53 am
integrity matters says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
9
If that is true, then he learned it from Obama since that is how he said he found out about some the events WHILE he was president.
It’s funny that Obama had ZERO experience in doing ANYTHING, but all you numbnuts thought he was qualified to be president…twice!!
At least Trump has been a successful business man.
HilLIARy has been successful in selling out the US to foreign nations. Millions of dollars for favors. How much of that has actually helped the “poor and middle class”.
She continues to lie, steal and cheat and you lemmings still believe she would actually be good for the country and the people she “allegedly” wants to help. She’s helping stay below the poverty level with all her social slavery entitlements.
Integrity — you little Trump Kool-Aid drinker you, Trump is a con man who leaves unpaid bills and bankruptcies in his path. Also, do not think that Russia hasn’t hacked Trump or the GOP. They have – so while Russia might embarrass the Democrats, they will survive and thrive. It’s the Trump and the GOP who will be blackmailed by Russia.
Have some more Kook-aid.
August 18, 2016 at 12:15 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
5
They don’t need to hack Trump, he’s believes in an oligarchy run by plutocrats. He will happily help them. He has a person with ties to Russia and a person who works for Russia’s propaganda channel going to classified meetings with him.
August 18, 2016 at 12:50 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
5
Do you even know what you’re saying?
Yes, it became popular to use the word ogliarchy with regards to Russia.
How the hell is Trump in any way setting that up?
Why don’t you list the laws he intends on passing that will set up an ogliarchy.
Here’s a hint: Across the board tax cuts cannot be an ogliarchy action.
This is absurd watching how polarized you liberals have become.
August 18, 2016 at 1:02 pm
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
5
3
Russia probably hacked Hillary because she has the most to try to hide.
Of course, Russia could hack others.
But why hack Trump’s web pages and data? Trump would put the screws to ISIS, and a few other nuisance neighbors of Israel, Poland, Ukraine, and other Euro / Middle East allies of the US. In turn, that ALSO helps Russia to fight the same scourge and turn them away from Russia and its territories. IF Hilliary were POTUS, she would run into her ‘cave’ every time ISIS struck a US target or an ally of the US. She would avoid answering any questions by the media that called upon her leadership to fight back.
So, it’s no wonder to anyone who understand the Russians that they are serving their own objectives by attacking the cowardly Dems, hoping for the optimal outcome of an ally in the White House against ISIS and other Islamic Terrorists.
August 18, 2016 at 11:14 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
3
7
I seem to remember your hero being accused of thinking he knows more than Generals. He actually had the gall to call ISIS the B team and not taking the Generals seriously when they pointed out the dangers of letting them run wild all over Syria and Iraq.
BHO and HRC are good at arresting and prosecuting makers of videos that caused the 9-11-12 attack in Libya. And in arresting and prosecuting makers of videos and movies that are critical of them. But in regard to true threats to the American public and to our allies, not so much.
August 15, 2016 at 2:07 pm
B.Right says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
17
Wait a sec though….this wasn’t Trump’s fault or the director’s fault, the gun made him do it. Let’s ban guns and let the staffer sue the manufacturer.
Isn’t that what the Dems say every time a Muslim Democrat is a mass shooter?
B, Debbie Wasserman whatever can’t seem to protect her people either. 3 dead so far. Oops! We all know about the history of the Clinton’s and people dying mysteriously after having contact with them. Vince Foster was supposed to have committed suicide in the park and they found the gun 20 feet away. His office had been cleaned out within the hour.
In this half baked election, the dems will make sure there are extra cakes provided by the illegals. They will even count cakes that are past their expiration date.
Most of the dems cakes are full of fruits and nuts, anyway!
Depending on where he is he can only do it as an individual since the courts have banned the GOP from policing the polls due to their racist voter suppression, and the conservative Supreme Court backed the decision.
August 15, 2016 at 3:19 pm
philip wilbanks says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
9
While Trump is critical of a Gold Star (1) family the Gold Star he gets is for each of the law suits filed against him. He has a wall covered with them no doubt!
Kinda makes ya wonder why no one in the Drumpf family has ever served in the US military — or even paid taxes to support the military. They sure do take plenty from the US government.
The GOP attempt to unsuccessfuly rewrite history is now complete. According to Rudy Giulani, there were NO SUCCESSFUL RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORIST ATTACKS INSIDE THE U.S.
Yogi — it was on tape as well. Rudy conveniently forgot about 9-11 which is strange since he has been making his living off 9-11 since it happened — in 2001 by the way. WAY before Obama.
If you liberals hire the same idiot we have had for the past 7.5 years, we will get the SAME results. Terrible economy, lowest labor participation rate in 50 years, more food stamp recipients, more people living in poverty.
But, this is GOOD???
WhY? I will take a businessman who HAD MET A BUDGET anyday over a liberal lawyer who has NEVER signed the front of a paycheck using HER money.
These idiot politicians have driven our country into ridiculous debt by ignoring budgets.
Republicans did it TOO!
Therefore, let’s try a NON politician. NO WAY could he do worse?
The entire world is a disaster from her alleged Secretary of State work?
She screwed up the middle east even further which is saying something.
ANY IDIOT that votes for more of the same should have to pay 80% federal taxes. I prefer 33% maximum
The labor force participation rate is going to be lower in 4 years than it is now, and then lower in 8. Not because of the president, but because we have an aging population, and it counts anybody over 16 years old. The whole get a non-politician is just simplistic, backwards thinking. We had a “CEO president” in George W Bush, and he was incompetent, and among the worst presidents ever.
Lousy economic, foreign relations, military, and civil relations record.
Probably the worst, all time, for many of those categories.
The US is more deeply divided along racial, religious, and gender lines than ever before Obamiserable took office.
Obamacare, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Ukraine, Israel, Cuba, North Korea, China, Iran, UK, Poland, and many more things and places where Obamiserable failed to do anything right.
Obamiserable interjected his opinion and attempted to influence the Israeli elections and the Brexit vote. To the contrary to my opinion above, I’m glad he failed in those endeavors!
If I may use your own words, “It didn’t read like that to me…. or any person with average or better reading skills.”
At what point did UW blame anybody? How about a couple other past presidents with successful business backgrounds; President Hoover and Carter. How was the economy when they left office?
Carter was a Progressive Democrat governor with no business knowledge at all. He was the worst President in 100 years until Obama, your hero came along. Reagan was the best and restored the economy from the malaise of Carter. No Progressive Democrat is ever good for the economy. All they know is tax and spend, tax and spend and the debt is right at $20 Trillion and growing.
August 16, 2016 at 11:18 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
12
6
Agent,
He owned a peanut farm prior to becoming the Governor of GA. Are farms not businesses in your mind?
Yes, the economy improved during Reagan’s administration by utilizing Keynesian principles of increased government employment and spending during an economic downturn.
What about President Hoover?
Funny how you only mention the debt when there is a Democrat in office. What about the doubling of the debt that occurred during Presidents Reagan and GW Bush’s terms?
August 17, 2016 at 11:42 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
5
6
Ron, you should know the only REAL businesses are the ones people got into, or inherit from their family, like Bush I, Bush II, and Trump. Even when you run them into the ground and get bailed out by your rich daddy, or take illegal loans like Trump it’s a sign you are good at business.
August 17, 2016 at 3:31 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
I’m sorry, rather than taking what you learned in highschool about Hoover, and FDR, you might want to take a look at how much FDR failed during the depression.
Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.
What plans did Hoover pass that were bad?
There actually were a few, and they were liberal in nature. Could you list them?
I bet you don’t even know them.
You’re only saying what you’re saying to try to point out hypocrisy before looking at facts. It’s your weakness. You will jump sides in order to point out hypocrites. Grow up.
August 18, 2016 at 1:08 pm
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
I didn’t say UW blamed anyone. Re-read the posts and stop making Straw Man arguments about what transpired.
August 18, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
Your exact words, “Still blaming Bush for Obamiserable’s record?”
How else should we interpret?
August 18, 2016 at 1:40 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
Bob,
You said, “Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.” I agree with you 100%. However, the fact remains that he was the president when the collapse occurred. his great business background could not prevent it either.
The point I was making is that having a successful business career does not necessarily translate to national economic success. Do you have proof that it does?
August 18, 2016 at 1:42 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
4
“We had a “CEO president” in George W Bush, and he was incompetent, and among the worst presidents ever”
I would call that blaming Bush W, you can try to defend UW all you want as usual (while then trying to say you don’t support these A holes on this website, and UW is clearly the worst one on this site)
The funny thing here is then you went on to blame more CEO presidents.
I personally view Bush W as one of the best presidents we have had.
He successfully pushed back the democrats for some time, until they found a few things to blame him for and took him down.
I support his tax cuts.
I support his proposed plans for social security.
I support that he tried to change the housing market, which the same editor who called it the largest over haul of the housing market since FDR, later said he didn’t try to fix,
I support expansions of medicare, even if others view it as inefficient, he actually did expand help for the poor.
If he were democrat, no one would have said he was bad.
August 18, 2016 at 1:49 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
Bob,
If someone points out how bad of a president Carter was, is that blaming him for every negative going forward?
Please quote me where I blamed anyone for any of the financial collapses. Pointing out when they occurred and who was the president is not assigning blame, just pointing out facts. I would think you, of all people, would appreciate the use of facts.
I take it you also support the record spending, deficits, increase in the debt and the condition of the economy when he left office? Not saying he is to blame, but those things did happen under his watch.
You speak of plans and ideas. I prefer action. Actions affect the people, ideas do nothing.
August 18, 2016 at 3:12 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
“Bob,
You said, “Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.” I agree with you 100%. However, the fact remains that he was the president when the collapse occurred. his great business background could not prevent it either.
The point I was making is that having a successful business career does not necessarily translate to national economic success. Do you have proof that it does?”
Oy ve. Asking for proof where you won’t accept it is a losing argument. That was not the intent of your original comment by the way. Your intend was to make a conservative look like he was making an absurd comment, as it it remains your point now.
Regarding business experience being relevant to being president I’m going to have to ask:
Do you ACTUALLY believe that having run a business does not give you more real world experience to determine what is best for businesses in terms of regulations?
Because let me be clear, businesses see the unintended consequence of regulations, and those not in business, tend to pass more of them.
1.88 trillion. We have just about the most regulated economy out of the OECD.
Business owners usually go against these. So yes, there is evidence that the business background makes a difference in policy attempts. What you just tried to pull was what actually occurred. Now that is a different story. Hoover, in office during a recession, you are trying to make the fact that he could do nothing linked to his corporate background. I have a problem with this.
It is far too simple, for one. And for two, it doesn’t tackle what we actually need. It is just a rebuttal on your end to make your usual arguments that there is no difference between republicans and democrats, and anti regulation people and regulation people and spending people and people who try to curb spending.
You do it all the time.
It’s insanely frustrating. Do more research.
August 18, 2016 at 3:28 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
Bob,
I made my intent perfectly clear. Who are you to tell me what my intent was? I have never questioned your intent. I request the same treatment.
You asked, “Do you ACTUALLY believe that having run a business does not give you more real world experience to determine what is best for businesses in terms of regulations?” Yes. Regulations are there to control the damage businesses do in the name of maximizing profit, not to encourage the maximization of profit. In other words, regulations are not suppose to be in the best interest of business.
Would you want a politician running your business with no business experience? Of course not. So why do you want a businessman with no political experience running the country? That is insanity.
August 23, 2016 at 11:36 am
Actu says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
“Oy ve. Asking for proof where you won’t accept it is a losing argument.”
Bob is becoming like Agent and getting closer to a parody account than someone worth reading. As it is the meltdowns and future crash when Trump loses are the only reasons to read this junk.
What about climate change, the deficit, minimum wage and jobs, tax rates, minimum wage and unemployment, Trump’s statements on Mexicans, Arabs, Muslims? All of these things have 30000 word rants by you denying all the accepted evidence, and you have even denied video evidence on some of Trump’s statements, although I don’t remember which.
August 17, 2016 at 3:29 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
6
2
Bush W was among the only presidents who tried to pass multiple plans other than social security to retirement.
He also was bipartisan, and signed a bill you should have liked considering Obama supported it and blasted Romney because Romney would not support it: Tarp, the bailout.
He also kept pressure in Iraq to avoid a new terror group forming. No, toppling Saddam did not cause radical Islamic terrorists. Saddam was one himself and killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. We found mass graves. You can argue that we shouldn’t have gone because you believe the middle east wars will never go away, but Islamic terrorism wise, Bush W is the only one that tried to stop it.
Bush W did not cause the economic collapse, and he is the only reason taxes are lower on the middle class right now. That portion of the tax cuts stayed in place, UW.
Other than his last year, subtracting the Iraq war, he would have had surpluses. So…He did rather well.
This was even with the tax reductions, and even though he had two recessions occur under his watch.
You can’t say he was president during bad times and therefore was bad. You’re going to have to explain how he was the worst ever.
What laws did he pass that were bad?
I can list what he tried to pass that you democrats morons blocked.
The additional retirement plans. Explain to me how those were bad?
A lawsuit based on the premise that the defendant “did nothing”?
The Seinfeld Series Finale premise!
If it succeeds, I think I’ll sue Loretta Lynch and Comey, too!
Then, later: Obama, all 3 Clintons, Kerry, Biden, Pelosi Galore, Dingy Harry Reid, Holder, Lerner, Koskinen, Shkreli, and Gore….. all for doing nothing, and some of them for doing something destructive or harmful.
Hmm, maybe the liberal mainstream media could be enjoined as co-defendants?
i don’t see the big deal about this guy pulling a gun and threatening someone. since people think it’s bad, obviously trump’s staffer was just being sarcastic, right? :)
What would happen if a Clinton campaign staffer pulled a scalpel used to prematurely abort babies on a pregnant woman who may or may not intend to have an abortion? Would charges be filed? Would liberals push for scalpel control laws?
are you sick and tired of Yogi and Agent complaining about BOTs “censoring” their posts? do you want to downvote them, but don’t want to listen to them whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote the previous comment – upvote this one instead!
Are you sick or tired or both of your Constitutional rights?
Wait! Don’t answer that; I know you are selectively sick and tired of others exercising their Constitutional rights, but not sick & tired to do so yourself.
Yogi, are you comforted that Confused is trying to keep your posts visible? Something tells me he is going the other way. Perhaps he should have a talk with his friends to lay off the down votes. You and I both know that Progressives are into suppression of free speech.
By the way, I got about 30 down votes for reciting the Pledge of Allegiance the other day. These dudes are Anti American.
“Yogi, are you comforted that Confused is trying to keep your posts visible? Something tells me he is going the other way.”
what is that “something”? why would you even think that?
i’ve clearly laid out my intentions of trying to keep Yogi’s posts visible multiple times in this thread alone.
aside from being an idiot, why the h3ll would you think i’m trying to hide them? they were ALREADY being hidden – saying nothing would’ve meant his posts keep getting hidden. if that’s what i wanted, i would’ve let sleeping dogs lie.
August 17, 2016 at 11:28 am
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
5
5
Someone using a screen name ‘confused’ says my post makes no sense.
That makes sense to me.
August 17, 2016 at 11:49 am
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
5
5
so please explain it to me yogi. you claim i am sick and tired of others exercising their constitutional rights.
i argue otherwise and point out that i’m TRYING to get YOUR POSTS to be VISIBLE and NOT HIDDEN.
where exactly do you get the notion that i’m sick & tired of others exercising their constitutional rights when i’m suggesting people don’t downvote you but upvote my reply instead, so your post stays visible?
August 16, 2016 at 4:48 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
7
6
You are the one who constantly whined about PC culture, and the only person here saying they are trying to get the site to remove comments. Your behavior and intelligence are clowning, add if you are a parody.
I’m not TRYING to get the site to remove comments.
I’m succeeding in getting the site’s administrators to remove VILE, VULGAR, and FOUL comments and personal attacks against people whose opinions differ from the offenders’ opinions.
I’m NOT succeeding in spending my time wisely here, as several liberals continue to use STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS rather than debate the original topics. I waste my time reading such STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS made in reply to valid debates and otherwise enlightening discussions. I am at least using my time wisely by REFUSING to reply to such STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS by posters who cannot debate the issues and try to change the subject.
Wait for changes to happen here, very soon.
August 17, 2016 at 7:14 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
6
3
False equivalency.
You do this a lot.
Removing someone who just said to another user here that they may as well stop being coy and use the “N” word in a clear personal attack,
Is quite different than down voting Yogi when he says something you don’t like.
And then your reply will be “You do more personal attacks than anyone!”
And then I’ll tell you wrong,
And then blah blah blah blah blah.
Tiresome. I don’t have time to make you act like an adult.
I hope Yogi succeeds in getting you removed.
August 18, 2016 at 1:11 pm
Yogi Polar Berra says:
Like or Dislike:
3
4
I’m in discussions with the administrators about it.
August 18, 2016 at 1:43 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
5
Yogi Polar Berra,
In your discussions, please mention Bob’s vulgarities and demeaning insults. just to be fair and balanced.
Thank you.
August 18, 2016 at 2:17 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
5
3
Ron,
I give everyone chances to go back to topics on hand.
The first thing that UW says, is someone may as well say the N word etc, and rather than hold him accountable, you can only try to drag me into it.
That is because you are a part of this.
You are not separate from it.
You need to start acting better on this site.
August 17, 2016 at 3:10 pm
Andrew G. Simpson says:
Like or Dislike:
7
0
The editors of Insurance Journal respectfully request that commenters refrain from insults towards one another, avoid profanities and show respect for others at all times. If you can’t make your point or reply without insulting another person’s intelligence, morals, ethnicity, character or other trait, then please don’t post it. Those who engage in tit-for-tat exchanges ruin the forum experience for the majority who follow the rules of civil discourse. It would also help everyone if commenters stayed on topic.
It would also help IF you actually took action against multiple offense offenders. You have the ability to filter posts for profanity and offensive words. Please do so and determine the posters with the highest frequency of profanity and personal attacks.
Your actions in this regard will determine my future participation in this forum and possibly increased participation in other forums that enforce their rules more rigorously and objectively.
Yogi, it is strange that I was contacted today about renewing the subscription to IJ. I hesitated on my answer because what has been going on unchecked for the last 3-4 years. I told them that the blog had been hijacked by far left posters who use foul language, insult, give me 25 dislikes within minutes of a post and try to stifle free speech.
I asked them if they were going to step up the monitoring and eliminate this behavior or ban the nasty commenters and they said they were committed to cleaning the blog up. We will see how that commitment goes in the coming weeks. Perhaps some will get a surprise and told to leave.
It looks like the IJ staff is ASKING posters to act in a civil manner. Good luck with that working! I suggested filters to catch foul language and insults AND actual enforcement of rules for participating on this site. I don’t hold out any hope for this working to clean up the trash.
I don’t see participation requested from those who are using bots to squelch the opinions of others with whom they disagree.
I don’t see any benefit is discussing issues with posters who must resort to foul language, insults, personal attacks, and worse – Straw Man Arguments – to support their opinions.
This is literally a figurative fork in the road, so, holding true to my advice from years ago, I’m gonna take it.
So, I’m going on an extended hiabernatus from IJ, to do something more productive. See you in 2017…. or, maybe not.
August 23, 2016 at 10:55 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
Yogi, your namesake once said – when you get to a fork in the road, take it.
The ultra liberals on this site should take that fork and either get their act together, or keep on going to another site where they can vent their hate all day long.
August 18, 2016 at 8:42 am
Moon Man says:
Like or Dislike:
6
4
I find it funny there are some out here who do not believe in the First Amendment with the excuses of vulgarity, but yet back a Candidate who has been the most vulgar in the history of this country. Now this candidate may have a staffer pulling a gun on others. Is this the movie “Idiocracy”?
So the site had had no problem with explicit hate speech by Agent and others for at least the two years I’ve been around but the second people start consistently pushing back against those people they start threatening to ban people. Saying Arabs should be murdered, or people in an age group are all losers, or that people of a certain sexual orientation and identity are second class citizens, perverts, and pedophiles is okay, but calling people that make those statements jerks is unacceptable.
There is no way to do it consistently, so don’t do it at all, that’s what the voting is supposed to do.
August 18, 2016 at 2:18 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
I do stay on topic.
And I’m getting very tired of you bringing me up to give examples of people who don’t. It’s not ok, and it is bullying.
August 18, 2016 at 2:19 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
Excuse me? Pushing back?
I never start in insults. Never.
I always say how someone is wrong, and the first reply back from UW is always how I’m an idiot for using a blog, and he refuses to debate the numbers.
August 18, 2016 at 2:29 pm
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
Bob: “I never start in insults. Never.”
Never say never. You wrote up above “…these …. on this website, and …is clearly the worst one on this site”
Calling someone an (expletive deleted) is definitely an insult no matter how you may try to spin it otherwise. also, that comment was the first insult on this thread at the time you made it. please do not try and pretend that yyou only insult and swear as a retaliatory act.
full disclosure – i admit i am guilty of initiating insults here too. i don’t do it as often as you and agent and i try not to swear like you, but i can act better and will try to do so accordingly moving forward
August 18, 2016 at 2:44 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
Confused:
Moving on:
I replied, again, to someone who was dragging me into a fight.
I have numerous, countless times, been on this site where Celtica, Planet, and Ron, and Rosenblatt, could only say how I was wrong for how I talked, I then said I go over the top, so do you, stay on topic, and they refused with more insults
I allow escalations to cease. They don’t. I take responsibility. They don’t.
The only reason they say what they do, is huge egos and to feel better about their actions here which are not ok.
Ron made a point of supporting UW above by countering with me. And that makes sense?
I a said UW is …. after he basically said I source quoted a blog, and refused to debate the topic at hand without insulting.
I always reply back, I don’t just randomly come on here and say like UW did, that N word comment.
It was blatantly full on assault.
August 18, 2016 at 2:45 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
And bluntly, I don’t have to defend myself to you.
Why don’t you go hold UW accountable?
Is it perhaps because the lot of you are in fact, inciting and trolling people like Agent and myself until they blow up at you?
You can’t leave us out of it, can you?
Knock it off.
August 18, 2016 at 2:52 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
2
For example:
Actu just said something that isn’t true, and is more damaging then me.
Never say never right? He said “no” problem.
If you allow him to believe that, that is the same as allowing me to believe I defend myself.
But you said nothing to him, didn’t you?
I’m getting a little tired of the one sided habits of the polarized people here.
I have specifically told agent when he needs to back off. He has specifically told me when I have gone too far.
There is a group here that isn’t interacting properly, and it is not Yogi, Agent, myself, Integrity who debates beautifully without arguing only to have UW insult him, or the others similar.
You truly do have people like me giving opportunities to stop it. And they constantly are not taken.
I shouldn’t have to watch while I get assaulted like I am with you now, while you do nothing about UW who in this very page, said absolutely unacceptable things.
Also, referring to someone acting like…, which he was, is bluntly not starting a character assault.
I was responding to one. If a bully punches me in the face, and I say “Look this guy is acting like …
I am not going around randomly insulting people.
However, when UW says to someone who said nothing wrong “just use the N word already!” yeah…
I don’t do that, and you know it.
August 18, 2016 at 3:02 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
6
Don’t worry about a thing Ron. We will be monitoring you, UW, Confused, Captain Planet, Actu, Celtica and any other leftist blogger very closely along with the IJ IT team. If they don’t remove the nasty insulting comments right away, the contact will be made. We have had enough of this behavior and it has gone on far too long. All of you need to get your act together.
August 18, 2016 at 3:33 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
Agent,
Fair enough. Will you also alert IJ when Bob and other righties (look in the mirror) throw around nasty insults and profanity?
Unlike you, I prefer to not suppress speech, no matter how vehemently I may disagree.
August 18, 2016 at 10:30 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
Agent – if the accusations are true, do you think Stuart Jolly and Corey Lewandowski should have notified the police of the allegations? Do you think Earl Phillip did anything wrong and criminal charges should be filed against him?
People in charge can only notify police IF they knew what happened via a report by the victim.
I don’t think all the facts have been brought out to the public yet. As one of my posts says, there are many unanswered questions. The court will find out what happened, to the best of their ability.
Let’s play your speculation game;
IF someone knew and did nothing, they should be fired, and perhaps prosecuted.
IF they knew nothing because no report(s) were made, they cannot be held accountable for the inaction of the victim.
IF the alleged victim is lying, prosecution is in order,… against the liar.
IF the Trump staffers knew lies were being told by the alleged victim, they should haave at least reported it to the PD.
August 18, 2016 at 3:47 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
Ron, wake up please. You and I have both seen enough of Bob’s posts over the last few years to know that he presents his case with facts, links and after he is assaulted by insults, bad language, called an idiot or worse, he will blow up and let the insulter have it between the eyes. I have a lot of experience of being attacked and down voted on every comment and I have declared that UW is the winner of the nasty post contest followed closely by boogereater, Planet and Confused. I can deal with your sarcastic liberal nonsense, but IJ should just tell those dudes to go to Media Matters or Moveon.org and they are not welcome on an Insurance blog.
August 18, 2016 at 3:58 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
Agent,
Yes, he presents facts. However, there is never an excuse to use profanity, which you cannot deny he has also done in the past.
Let’s get back to civil debate and away from insults and profanity from both sides. That goes for you and me as well. Agreed?
August 18, 2016 at 4:16 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
There is also never an excuse to antagonize people, as you do.
Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.
We don’t need someone like you drawing away from everyone but me by saying phrases like profanity is never merited.
Treating people well is a mandate, with they profain and more or less say “owie” in swear words while you do it or not.
You are a part of this, and I’m getting tired of you finding reasons to go after me rather than saying it.
August 18, 2016 at 4:18 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
Also:
I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,
Those scenarios giving an extreme blow back makes the attacker less likely to do so if their intentions are bad, and if they are good the person will learn to be more sensitive.
August 18, 2016 at 4:24 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
For example: When someone says you’re ok with murdering Muslims, calls you a racist liar, says you hate women, or other such aspects,
Replying with a @#%%@ you, is I believe, a perfectly reasonable response.
As I said: I do not just go around saying these things, there is no excuse for those who have been tormenting me on this site, which they have been doing.
You don’t get to say, “He’s saying owie and he’s fighting back! That’s never ok!”
Yes. It is. People like you disarm the abused and the bullied against those who bully and abuse.
I have given Permanent solutions. UW has not.
You’re either a murderous gun obsessed Muslim hating person who he can attack, or you’re on his side.
I have given people solutions again and again. That has not been done with me, it’s not being done now by you and confused, no matter how much you’re trying to appear like you’re out there trying to resolve conflicts all you are doing right now is fanning flames, diverting blame, and bringing people into it who want to be left out.
August 18, 2016 at 4:25 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
And the very fact that I give solutions, honest solutions, means I’m not a bully.
When you give resolutions you are just someone who argued. A human.
Not everyone who says swear words is a bully.
August 18, 2016 at 4:26 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
Bob,
I apologize for my antagonizing behavior. I will try to restrain myself in the future.
You said, “Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.” maybe in a face-to-face confrontation, but NEVER in writing.
You said, “I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,”
Then I should be throwing profanities at you left and right. However, I restrain myself out of respect for you and the IJ community overall.
August 18, 2016 at 4:50 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
“Bob,
I apologize for my antagonizing behavior. I will try to restrain myself in the future.
You said, “Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.” maybe in a face-to-face confrontation, but NEVER in writing.
You said, “I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,”
Then I should be throwing profanities at you left and right. However, I restrain myself out of respect for you and the IJ community overall.”
I said in a previous comment that the only time you say something that appears like resolution it is due to your ego. See above. You just manipulated the situation to take away your own culpability.
I do not attack and belittle you. I call you wrong, that is all. When I say attack and belittle, you clearly do not know what I mean by attack. Your definition is quite a bit different than mine. I respond when someone clearly is not debating the topic at hand and is instead manipulating based on say, well we all know how much you read that thing you wrote last week, and can we now finally show that agent doesn’t know what he’s saying? You’ve done this ALL THE TIME to agent, from prior arguments relating it to the present. That is the manipulation I’m talking about, and it derails the conversation. Here we are right now, and you’re doing it regarding me.
I was about to say “Why don’t you just say I’m sorry I will not do that again” and you did, but then you had to throw this in didn’t you?
Oy ve. I don’t have the energy for you. Do you think that is imaginary and nothing to do with you, as to why I leave?
You make this site hostile.
August 18, 2016 at 5:44 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
I’ll be blunt:
I can be a complete jerk. I make huge mistakes in regards to talking etiquette and being defensive. Some days I’m glad I’m that way, because I’m furious with the PC crowd. Other days, it is too far.
I will try to treat you with dignity Ron.
August 19, 2016 at 7:31 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Thank you Bob.
August 18, 2016 at 2:10 pm
insurance is fun! says:
Like or Dislike:
4
3
Just another 2nd Amendment-type doing what The Donald expects of them.
Ron, correction to your assumption about my posts. I do not swear in my posts. I do insult when I am insulted and do not just “take” it like you would want me to. One article not long ago, you insulted me before I even made a comment on the subject matter. That was not your finest hour, was it? You just couldn’t wait to insult and demean me. That seems to be a Progressive trait, doesn’t it? The biggest offenders on this site on ugly insulting comments all know who they are. As I stated before, get your act together. I know it is hard to lose arguments and defend Progressive Socialism since it is in such disarray. If you can’t comment honestly without insult, don’t say anything at all. I have seen Bob almost beg to have an honest debate and look at the facts and all he gets for his trouble is being called a “dolt”, “idiot” or other choice name.
Ron, when attacked, I will come back in kind. By the way, you seem to be very concerned about Bob’s profanity when he gets angry, but I have never seen you chastise your buddies for their language and Bob is mild by comparison. Why is it ok in your mind for them, but not for Bob who also responds in kind when attacked by the left?
As far as debating, I will call it as I see it. If Progressive Socialists are the cause of the problem, I will identify them for what they are. Sorry if it offends you. You don’t have to even respond to me.
Bob, thank you for exposing the false narrative of the left. They have a very tough time digesting facts since it is counter to what they believe. My guess it is a combination of upbringing or education or lack thereof.
I’m starting a new thread hoping we can curtail the off-topic arguments regarding insults, negativity, swearing, etc. As Andrew wrote, it would help if we kept our comments on-topic. That being said…
If the accusations are found to be false when the court hears the case, what do you folks think should happen to Bordini? Yogi argued that “prosecution is in order…against the liar”, but for what? Should he be counter-sued for slander/libel or prosecuted for something else and thrown in jail?
If the accusations are found to be true and that it did happen to four other people, should Phillip be sent to jail for assault & battery or only be found civilly liable and have to pay restitution to those folks?
What do you folks think would be a fair outcome in both those scenarios?
Assuming anyone pulled a gun, the person should be charged however the courts typically charge it.
With regards to if it is a made up story, well, it he should be charged for trying to have someone typically charged, whatever that may be deemed as fair by the courts.
And this is partly due to the fact not of defamation of character or anything like that, but if he had succeeded he would have landed another person in jail, cost him his job possibly, and his life, assuming he lied.
I haven’t yet taken a position on this one. I haven’t done nearly enough research to know which to take. I don’t think anyone here really has. I see the left saying punish the guy who took out the gun, and I see the right saying punish the guy if he’s lying.
I don’t think we should be drawing conclusions at this point in time. I want to see more.
Did he report this to the police?
Yes = he may have a case
No = political &/or money grab stunt
Pretty sure no one wants to deal with the cops these days.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
That is true if you are an African American, ignoring officer demands, resisting arrest, pulling guns on them, etc. Everyone else, I’m unaware of major problems.
It’s much faster if you just say what you mean and replace all that BS with the N-word, idiot. So Tamir Rice shouldn’t have been scared of the police by your moronic standards.
Reported to IJ staff. Enjoy your involuntary vacation from these message boards.
Still here, but it looks like one of your threads disappeared. Too bad because your total lack of knowledge on the labor force was exposed.
Still here? Not for long.
“TOTAL LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ON THE LABOR FORCE”…
is hyperbole, at best.
But, please explain why I was totally wrong while you still have posting privileges… note the word ‘privileges’, which is distinct from ‘rights’.
No, it’s fact. I told you the labor force participation rate has decreased because we have an aging population in the US. You then whined that I should adjust between periods so the numbers don’t include the larger share of older people in today’s economy (apparently you no longer think adjusting stats to look at something is data manipulation, despite making that claim to support you conspiracy theories when ranting about climate change, hypocritical IMO) and said I was incompetent (an offense you now think is bannable) even though I was replying to the statistic YOU cited. As I stated, if you look at the prime age labor force participation rate, it has decreased about 2% under both Bush and Obama, but has been rebounding and will probably not finish as bad under Obama. Much of his terms’ decrease has been due to the financial crash he inherited from Bush, and from younger people going to school and going longer, which you probably see as a bad thing.
You are arguing against your own theory and don’t even recognize it.
UW:
Let’s give a few sources here, since I know what your rebuttal will be:
http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/record-low-labor-participation-rate-not-due-retirement-or-school-5431
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/15/u-s-unemployment-retirees-are-not-the-labor-exodus-problem/2/#f8033a8666cd
You have a severe selective memory, and I believe it is intentional. If you say someone lost an argument enough they must have, right?
You’ve already explained the LPR and how Yogi was wrong. So you try to make him look bad by saying it. Only you didn’t, and you lost the argument.
These two links show that the ages where the LPR have gone down, are ages that are definitely linked to being unable to get a job.
Retirees are not the reason for this drop in the LPR, nor is more people going to college which will be your other rebuttal. It is that the economy is not creating enough jobs to go with population increases, it’s that simple.
From my source, which you will probably not read all the way:
“We can assuredly assume people ages 30 to 59 are in their prime working years and thus eliminate the claim the baby boomers are causing the labor participation rate to drop as well as young people all magically going into massive debt as they are all in higher learning institutions. Additionally, we remove some age discrimination from our examination by removing the 25 to 29 and 60 to 64 year olds out of the equation to see what’s going on with labor participation rates. Of course this increases the focus on the peak earning age groups, even though obviously 25 year olds and 60 years olds still need to make rent like everybody else. People do go back to school at all ages, yet let’s assume age 30 to 59 year old students not working while attending school are a very small percentage or this population group.
We can then weight the 30 to 59 year old labor participation rate by their percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population, thus getting their contribution to the overall labor participation rate for those aged 16 and older. How this weighting is done for all age brackets is to multiply the percentage of the total noninstitutional population each age bracket is (our ugly pie chart above), by the labor participation rate for that age bracket.
For just the age group of 30 to 59 year olds, they account for 0.73 of the 0.96 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from a year ago. The same age group is responsible for 2.29 of the 2.06 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from October 2009 to October 2013. The reason the 30 to 59 year olds 2009 to 2013 labor participation rate plunge is greater than the overall decline is due to older workers increasing in their labor participation as shown in the above graphs for ages 60 and above. From October 2007 to October 2013 the 30 to 59 year olds participating in the labor force accounted for 3.0 of the 3.1 percentage drop in the labor participation rate, unadjusted, using October to October labor force statistics.
In other words, the 30 to 59 year olds, who make up 50% of the population which has the potential to work, account for pretty much all of the labor participation rate plunge since 2007. This same age group accounts for three quarters of the labor participation rate decline of the past year. ”
And it shows all the numbers.
Learn to read something that doesn’t support your liberal “frat” team mentality.
You are what is wrong with America. You are the problem, and you will be the one who starts wars.
This is why YOUR side is starting violence at our rallies while you claim TRUMPS WORDS caused it.
Your side is truly an aggressor and must be stopped at all costs.
People like me will stop you, with facts.
I will annihilate you, with facts. And you will be defeated in the public eye, with facts.
Tim, his argument is wrong, it’s not even debatable. Yes, a blog and another blog with an anonymous author support your claim, using old data. However, actual economists support my claim.
Deutsche Bank agrees with me most of the decline is due to retired workers
http://www.businessinsider.com/labor-force-participation-demographics-2016-3
The CBO agrees with me:
“Of the 3 percentage-point decline in participation between the end of 2007 and the end of 2013, CBO estimates, about 1½ percentage points was the result of long-term trends, about 1 percentage point arose from temporary weakness in employment prospects and wages, and about one-half of a percentage point was attributable to unusual aspects of the slow recovery.”
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/45011
The Federal Reserve Board agrees with me:
The increase in nonparticipation due to retirement has occurred only after around 2010, while nonparticipation due to disability has been steadily increasing over the past 13 years. Similarly, nonparticipation due to schooling has been steadily increasing and has been another major contributor to the secular decline in the participation rate since 2000.
The number of those who did not look for a job (thus being out of the labor force) even though they wanted a job increased significantly between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the end of 2011. This group of “discouraged workers” explains roughly 30 percent of the total decline (around 2 percentage points) in the participation rate over the same period. Between the first quarter of 2012 and the fourth quarter of 2013, the participation rate of this group has been roughly flat.”
&
“Almost all of the decline (80 percent) in the participation rate since the first quarter of 2012 is accounted for by the increase in nonparticipation due to retirement. This implies that the decline in the unemployment rate since 2012 is not due to more discouraged workers dropping out of the labor force.”
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2014/201464/201464pap.pdf
“Only you didn’t, and you lost the argument.”
No, you must not have read his original comment before it was deleted for personal attacks, or didn’t comprehend it. He said both Obama has caused the LPR to increase (not true, the trend started long before he was president, and when that was debunked said I was incompetent for not taking out older workers. Again, that decline started before he was president, and will be less than the terms before he took over, even with an aging population.
When you talk about doing the math, and then use data from 3 years ago to compare to data now, you are missing out on approximately 11 million additional people who have retired. You are also looking at data when the unemployment rate was 50% higher, which drastically decreases the labor force participation rate. You simply are not knowledgeable on this, and your well-researched sources are literally the first two that come up when you search for it not being due to retirement or school (if you skip the actual studies, which show otherwise, of course).
Your Forbes piece is written by an incompetent person. They state:
“Meaning, retirement cannot be thought to have played much of a role in the participation rates up until that point, and may only be tangentially affecting it now.”
Which is 100% false, and makes an assumption without looking at any data, which in fact ignores the data presented in the papers I linked to.
The BLS has data from 04 to 14 that shows it pretty clearly:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-4/people-who-are-not-in-the-labor-force-why-arent-they-working.htm
http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-4/images/reasons-for-not-working-chart-2.png
Some of the retirees and disabilities are also likely people who were slightly under the age of retirement, but chose it anyways.
This article also puts forward another reason that it is moronic to say Obamaa is the cause, which Yogi did, which is my point, when it shows (at the bottom) the huge decline long-term in manufacturing, which I’m sure many here would argue was also Obama’s fault.
https://www.minnpost.com/minnesota-blog-cabin/2014/01/decline-labor-force-driven-retirement-not-discouragement
Kid, stop mocking the source and pay attention to the numbers.
He source quotes BLS and puts together numbers, and you just tried to source quote your guys all saying what you perceive is correct.
I will add, that this is your weakness. You only believe sources that you deem credible, and then you refuse to digest facts.
I’m going to break down real quick how they are wrong, again:
He breaks down the percentages. The exact percentage of the lpr. Do you disagree with what he said in the below paragraph, and if so do you have charts proving that the numbers he gave are wrong? He sourced BLS, and then showed the percentages based on it.
You are wrong here.
““We can assuredly assume people ages 30 to 59 are in their prime working years and thus eliminate the claim the baby boomers are causing the labor participation rate to drop as well as young people all magically going into massive debt as they are all in higher learning institutions. Additionally, we remove some age discrimination from our examination by removing the 25 to 29 and 60 to 64 year olds out of the equation to see what’s going on with labor participation rates. Of course this increases the focus on the peak earning age groups, even though obviously 25 year olds and 60 years olds still need to make rent like everybody else. People do go back to school at all ages, yet let’s assume age 30 to 59 year old students not working while attending school are a very small percentage or this population group.
We can then weight the 30 to 59 year old labor participation rate by their percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population, thus getting their contribution to the overall labor participation rate for those aged 16 and older. How this weighting is done for all age brackets is to multiply the percentage of the total noninstitutional population each age bracket is (our ugly pie chart above), by the labor participation rate for that age bracket.
For just the age group of 30 to 59 year olds, they account for 0.73 of the 0.96 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from a year ago. The same age group is responsible for 2.29 of the 2.06 percentage point drop in the overall unadjusted labor participation rate from October 2009 to October 2013. The reason the 30 to 59 year olds 2009 to 2013 labor participation rate plunge is greater than the overall decline is due to older workers increasing in their labor participation as shown in the above graphs for ages 60 and above. From October 2007 to October 2013 the 30 to 59 year olds participating in the labor force accounted for 3.0 of the 3.1 percentage drop in the labor participation rate, unadjusted, using October to October labor force statistics.
In other words, the 30 to 59 year olds, who make up 50% of the population which has the potential to work, account for pretty much all of the labor participation rate plunge since 2007. This same age group accounts for three quarters of the labor participation rate decline of the past year. ”
“
As I already said, you must adjust for a demo change to get a picture of how the labor rate changed.
YOU SELECTIVELY CHOSE TO LOOK ONLY AT “PRIME AGE LABOR FORCE: rather than the entire population. That’s called “cherry picking”, a highly technical term used by statisticians.
WHY would anyone with common sense measure the effectiveness of a President based upon ONE DEMO GROUP rather than the whole US population labor force? It would only be a ‘valid measure’ if you were a BIASED LIBERAL.
“WHY would anyone with common sense measure the effectiveness of a President based upon ONE DEMO GROUP rather than the whole US population labor force?”
YOU are the one who said elderly workers had to be removed, and you had to look at the same age group, which is actually nonsense. You simply don’t know enough about this topic to discuss it coherently. Please don’t give commentary on statistical methods until you learn about confidence intervals and other basic statistics.
Are we really back to this again?
Confidence levels are not a part of this argument currently.
You are basically attacking his character again and I doubt you even know what you’re saying on the matter. You’re just triggered. It’s clear that happens a lot with you, and I don’t mean that as an insult. If anything I say it as pity. It must be terrible to constantly be so easily wound up.
We have the numbers here. Yours is in fact trying to cherry pick. Why are more people in both genders “taking care of home”? They say there are valid reasons and are trying to justify the gap. That is the point of your study, and that’s why I don’t buy it.
What about the college graduates who cannot find jobs? And they can’t. Then you say they need to retrain, which is why they are in college. This reinforces that there are no jobs for them. It’s not an evolving market, the jobs that used to exist are gone. They have not been replaced. And as such, they are retraining, and many are leaving the work force, are accepting stagnant wages, or are accepting part time jobs.
It is not peachy in the economy right now. People are suffering and you’re trying to claim this low LPR is a good thing?
Bob, confidence intervals point to competence. If you don’t understand basic statistics you aren’t competent to critique statistical methods. The same goes for people who think the vast majority of people are above the mean in something, like you have stated multiple times. Nobody with knowledge would take a mechanic seriously if they said their car was not running because it needed more diesel if their car used standard unleaded gas. This is one of the reasons, along with bias, that you constantly put forward terrible sources that have basic errors in them, and ignore actual studies.
I will reply to your other longer post when I have ten minutes to waste, but it’s basically all wrong, because you refuse to look at other sources.
Uh huh…Here’s how I read what he said,
“,” “,” “,” “,”
Here is how you read what he said “and” “and” “and” “and”.
Moving back to the point here: He said nothing that implied you were black and ignoring officer commands. In fact, it seems he is saying if you are any one of those, you may have something to worry about,
So his comment actually may have been saying Tamir should have been worried.
But moreover, in the case of Tamir, yes. You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told. You don’t even try to explain yourself to a “racist” cop for profiling you so to speak. We can’t know what happened, but unfortunately we can know that if this black kid was taught to confront the police, like oh say refuse to drop the bb gun and try to explain how they were wrong, it could easily result in him being shot. I have been searched by a cop before, and they had no reason to think I did anything other than I was wearing baggy pants and a hoodie. I was in 8th grade. I did not say anything back, I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.
It is highly unlikely Tamir was shot because he was black. It is because he had a BB gun and an officer felt threatened, which the child had to have played some part in, whether he talked back, didn’t drop the gun, or something similar. That’s the end of it.
Bob, you don’t seem to know what happened in the Rice murder, which I don’t find surprising.
“You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told.”
His state is an open-carry state, and he did nothing wrong. This is the argument the gun lovers like. Also, the police did not tell him to drop it. They lied, and said they told him 3 times from the car to drop the gun, and then when the video was released it showed them pull up, get out, and kill him in 2 seconds. It is not possible to do what they claim, and what you claim simply didn’t happen.
” I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.”
He did drop withing 2 seconds, after they killed him without giving him a chance to drop his gun. Your comments are from a fantasyworld.
You have a serious problem staying on topic. Work on it, or don’t waste everyone’s time with your diversionary tactics.
UW quoted the Fed, which is ONE of the main problems with the US economy.
There are a few reasons why several politicians have called for an audit of the Fed for SEVERAL DECADES.
Bob, you don’t seem to know what happened in the Rice murder, which I don’t find surprising.
“You should know well enough to know if you have a BB gun, which looks like a gun, you drop it when told.”
His state is an open-carry state, and he did nothing wrong. This is the argument the gun lovers like. Also, the police did not tell him to drop it. They lied, and said they told him 3 times from the car to drop the gun, and then when the video was released it showed them pull up, get out, and kill him in 2 seconds. It is not possible to do what they claim, and what you claim simply didn’t happen.
*- When you walk around firing a BB gun, officers are pretty prone to think it’s dangerous. It is an open carry state, not an open fire state, which when a kid is playing with a BB gun…He’s basically doing what looks like firing in public.
” I didn’t say no, he searched me, it was done. The safest thing to do is drop immediately and obey all commands.”
He did drop withing 2 seconds, after they killed him without giving him a chance to drop his gun. Your comments are from a fantasyworld.
— Sick. Literally sick. If you’re pointing a gun around, yeah, the cops will probably become paranoid. They did not just drive up and kill him. Where is the motivation? The obvious motivation was the gun. Nothing else makes sense. How long were they cops? That was their first time seeing a black kid? If they really wanted to do this, it would have happened earlier and more often.
What happened is a black kid played with a BB gun, it looked like a real gun, and he got shot.
End of story.
Lyin’ Tim Bob doing what he does best. You don’t seem to be too far from explaining your civil war you’ve been calling for in the same way your intellectual inspiration did.
So, does this staffer qualify as a thug or is that word reserved for those “other” people?
When the evidence is presented, we will know. You may draw your conclusion however you wish to do so.
Plenty of unanswered questions in regard to the delay in reporting, names of others who were similarly threatened but DIDN’T file a complaint, and if this staffer owns a registered gun.
I’m not sure about the location of the incident, either. It is a place where no cameras were present, and no other witnesses, other than the possibility of another passenger.
This is just a “He said/ He said” case. It won’t get far if others similarly threatened don’t step forward into the light of day where they can be questioned under oath, in front of expert interrogators.
The bigger question is: Why is IJ wasting space reporting this incident at this point in time when nothing is YET available to corroborate the claim?
That should be clear, Yogi. To annoy the hell out of you. Why else.
Actually, I’m not annoyed; I’m AMUSED.
I also enjoy the opportunity to question the motives of the author of the article.
Yogi, well alrighty then…
Great reply….. not.
Great reply! Not.
Still trying to BOT my comments into hidden status because you can’t refute them or make any reasonably reply?
And Trump thinks he can protect America? He can’t even protect his own campaign staffers.
But he, “knows more than the Generals”, believe him. Every day the guy proves how little he actually knows. He loves himself, the poorly educated. Drumpf may have attended a decent school, but he sure didn’t learn anything there.
Captain, do not forget that Drumpf watches the Sunday morning new shows to keep up to date…and knows more than the generals.
All he knows it’s what he sees in the Internet
People should read the D’Antonio book about this sociopath, or for our conservative friends, Trudeau has a lot of his Trump comics in a new book and it’s entertaining, although even that is too wordy for some here.
Actually, Captain should ignore every bit of advice you provide because what you wrote is both wrong and lies.
FIVE thumbs down votes in the 45 minutes since I wrote the above post…. at 7:28 am EST.
are you sick and tired of Yogi and Agent complaining about BOTs “censoring” their posts? do you want to downvote them, but don’t want to listen to them whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote the previous comment – upvote this one instead!
What part is a lie, that I recommend a book, or that Trudeau put out a book? Neither are really debatable or up for debate, but you seem to be in full-blown meltdown mode lately so you could be delusional.
Of course you are the person who would rather lose $30000 in a scam than spend 5 cents to read a historical book you know nothing about because you’ve been told it is bad, so I doubt think many people will take type book critiques seriously.
If that is true, then he learned it from Obama since that is how he said he found out about some the events WHILE he was president.
It’s funny that Obama had ZERO experience in doing ANYTHING, but all you numbnuts thought he was qualified to be president…twice!!
At least Trump has been a successful business man.
HilLIARy has been successful in selling out the US to foreign nations. Millions of dollars for favors. How much of that has actually helped the “poor and middle class”.
She continues to lie, steal and cheat and you lemmings still believe she would actually be good for the country and the people she “allegedly” wants to help. She’s helping stay below the poverty level with all her social slavery entitlements.
Integrity — you little Trump Kool-Aid drinker you, Trump is a con man who leaves unpaid bills and bankruptcies in his path. Also, do not think that Russia hasn’t hacked Trump or the GOP. They have – so while Russia might embarrass the Democrats, they will survive and thrive. It’s the Trump and the GOP who will be blackmailed by Russia.
Have some more Kook-aid.
They don’t need to hack Trump, he’s believes in an oligarchy run by plutocrats. He will happily help them. He has a person with ties to Russia and a person who works for Russia’s propaganda channel going to classified meetings with him.
Do you even know what you’re saying?
Yes, it became popular to use the word ogliarchy with regards to Russia.
How the hell is Trump in any way setting that up?
Why don’t you list the laws he intends on passing that will set up an ogliarchy.
Here’s a hint: Across the board tax cuts cannot be an ogliarchy action.
This is absurd watching how polarized you liberals have become.
Russia probably hacked Hillary because she has the most to try to hide.
Of course, Russia could hack others.
But why hack Trump’s web pages and data? Trump would put the screws to ISIS, and a few other nuisance neighbors of Israel, Poland, Ukraine, and other Euro / Middle East allies of the US. In turn, that ALSO helps Russia to fight the same scourge and turn them away from Russia and its territories. IF Hilliary were POTUS, she would run into her ‘cave’ every time ISIS struck a US target or an ally of the US. She would avoid answering any questions by the media that called upon her leadership to fight back.
So, it’s no wonder to anyone who understand the Russians that they are serving their own objectives by attacking the cowardly Dems, hoping for the optimal outcome of an ally in the White House against ISIS and other Islamic Terrorists.
I seem to remember your hero being accused of thinking he knows more than Generals. He actually had the gall to call ISIS the B team and not taking the Generals seriously when they pointed out the dangers of letting them run wild all over Syria and Iraq.
BHO and HRC are good at arresting and prosecuting makers of videos that caused the 9-11-12 attack in Libya. And in arresting and prosecuting makers of videos and movies that are critical of them. But in regard to true threats to the American public and to our allies, not so much.
Wait a sec though….this wasn’t Trump’s fault or the director’s fault, the gun made him do it. Let’s ban guns and let the staffer sue the manufacturer.
Isn’t that what the Dems say every time a Muslim Democrat is a mass shooter?
B, Debbie Wasserman whatever can’t seem to protect her people either. 3 dead so far. Oops! We all know about the history of the Clinton’s and people dying mysteriously after having contact with them. Vince Foster was supposed to have committed suicide in the park and they found the gun 20 feet away. His office had been cleaned out within the hour.
Agent, it sounds as if you were there when Vince Foster died. Maybe the new conspiracy theory is YOU did it…
It didn’t read like that to me…. or any person with average or better reading skills.
Just wondering if any of my friends in SC/NC knew about this? Was it part of the local news coverage?
2016 election = cakewalk for the Democratic Party.
It sure is looking like a cake walk — but cannot count the cakes until they are fully baked after Nov. 8
PS: Does Drumpf have any new jokes on Isis — because it such a laughing matter to him.
In this half baked election, the dems will make sure there are extra cakes provided by the illegals. They will even count cakes that are past their expiration date.
Most of the dems cakes are full of fruits and nuts, anyway!
are you saying if trump does not win, the election was rigged?
Dear Integrity, you better plan now on being available on election day to police the polls on behalf of Trump. He’s counting on you…
Depending on where he is he can only do it as an individual since the courts have banned the GOP from policing the polls due to their racist voter suppression, and the conservative Supreme Court backed the decision.
While Trump is critical of a Gold Star (1) family the Gold Star he gets is for each of the law suits filed against him. He has a wall covered with them no doubt!
Kinda makes ya wonder why no one in the Drumpf family has ever served in the US military — or even paid taxes to support the military. They sure do take plenty from the US government.
It is much easier to have racist rubes just give you their medals.
The GOP attempt to unsuccessfuly rewrite history is now complete. According to Rudy Giulani, there were NO SUCCESSFUL RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORIST ATTACKS INSIDE THE U.S.
You cannot make this stuff up.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/giuliani-forgets-9-11-claims-no-terror-attacks-obama-article-1.2752166
You need to listen more carefully, or read more carefully, what people say or write. The NYDN does, too!
Yogi — it was on tape as well. Rudy conveniently forgot about 9-11 which is strange since he has been making his living off 9-11 since it happened — in 2001 by the way. WAY before Obama.
Rudy didn’t forget about 9-11… he lived it.
It was extraneous to his discussion. Why mention something EVERYONE knows about?
Stumped as to how to reply? Then don’t.
Wait Celtica, this may be an historic moment. Is the left now admitting there is such a thing as “Radical Islamic Terrorists”?
If you liberals hire the same idiot we have had for the past 7.5 years, we will get the SAME results. Terrible economy, lowest labor participation rate in 50 years, more food stamp recipients, more people living in poverty.
But, this is GOOD???
WhY? I will take a businessman who HAD MET A BUDGET anyday over a liberal lawyer who has NEVER signed the front of a paycheck using HER money.
These idiot politicians have driven our country into ridiculous debt by ignoring budgets.
Republicans did it TOO!
Therefore, let’s try a NON politician. NO WAY could he do worse?
The entire world is a disaster from her alleged Secretary of State work?
She screwed up the middle east even further which is saying something.
ANY IDIOT that votes for more of the same should have to pay 80% federal taxes. I prefer 33% maximum
The labor force participation rate is going to be lower in 4 years than it is now, and then lower in 8. Not because of the president, but because we have an aging population, and it counts anybody over 16 years old. The whole get a non-politician is just simplistic, backwards thinking. We had a “CEO president” in George W Bush, and he was incompetent, and among the worst presidents ever.
Still blaming Bush for Obamiserable’s record?
Lousy economic, foreign relations, military, and civil relations record.
Probably the worst, all time, for many of those categories.
The US is more deeply divided along racial, religious, and gender lines than ever before Obamiserable took office.
Obamacare, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Ukraine, Israel, Cuba, North Korea, China, Iran, UK, Poland, and many more things and places where Obamiserable failed to do anything right.
Obamiserable interjected his opinion and attempted to influence the Israeli elections and the Brexit vote. To the contrary to my opinion above, I’m glad he failed in those endeavors!
Yogi Polar Berra,
If I may use your own words, “It didn’t read like that to me…. or any person with average or better reading skills.”
At what point did UW blame anybody? How about a couple other past presidents with successful business backgrounds; President Hoover and Carter. How was the economy when they left office?
Carter was a Progressive Democrat governor with no business knowledge at all. He was the worst President in 100 years until Obama, your hero came along. Reagan was the best and restored the economy from the malaise of Carter. No Progressive Democrat is ever good for the economy. All they know is tax and spend, tax and spend and the debt is right at $20 Trillion and growing.
Agent,
He owned a peanut farm prior to becoming the Governor of GA. Are farms not businesses in your mind?
Yes, the economy improved during Reagan’s administration by utilizing Keynesian principles of increased government employment and spending during an economic downturn.
What about President Hoover?
Funny how you only mention the debt when there is a Democrat in office. What about the doubling of the debt that occurred during Presidents Reagan and GW Bush’s terms?
Ron, you should know the only REAL businesses are the ones people got into, or inherit from their family, like Bush I, Bush II, and Trump. Even when you run them into the ground and get bailed out by your rich daddy, or take illegal loans like Trump it’s a sign you are good at business.
I’m sorry, rather than taking what you learned in highschool about Hoover, and FDR, you might want to take a look at how much FDR failed during the depression.
Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.
What plans did Hoover pass that were bad?
There actually were a few, and they were liberal in nature. Could you list them?
I bet you don’t even know them.
You’re only saying what you’re saying to try to point out hypocrisy before looking at facts. It’s your weakness. You will jump sides in order to point out hypocrites. Grow up.
I didn’t say UW blamed anyone. Re-read the posts and stop making Straw Man arguments about what transpired.
Your exact words, “Still blaming Bush for Obamiserable’s record?”
How else should we interpret?
Bob,
You said, “Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.” I agree with you 100%. However, the fact remains that he was the president when the collapse occurred. his great business background could not prevent it either.
The point I was making is that having a successful business career does not necessarily translate to national economic success. Do you have proof that it does?
“We had a “CEO president” in George W Bush, and he was incompetent, and among the worst presidents ever”
I would call that blaming Bush W, you can try to defend UW all you want as usual (while then trying to say you don’t support these A holes on this website, and UW is clearly the worst one on this site)
The funny thing here is then you went on to blame more CEO presidents.
I personally view Bush W as one of the best presidents we have had.
He successfully pushed back the democrats for some time, until they found a few things to blame him for and took him down.
I support his tax cuts.
I support his proposed plans for social security.
I support that he tried to change the housing market, which the same editor who called it the largest over haul of the housing market since FDR, later said he didn’t try to fix,
I support expansions of medicare, even if others view it as inefficient, he actually did expand help for the poor.
If he were democrat, no one would have said he was bad.
Bob,
If someone points out how bad of a president Carter was, is that blaming him for every negative going forward?
Please quote me where I blamed anyone for any of the financial collapses. Pointing out when they occurred and who was the president is not assigning blame, just pointing out facts. I would think you, of all people, would appreciate the use of facts.
I take it you also support the record spending, deficits, increase in the debt and the condition of the economy when he left office? Not saying he is to blame, but those things did happen under his watch.
You speak of plans and ideas. I prefer action. Actions affect the people, ideas do nothing.
“Bob,
You said, “Hoover was president during a collapse, this does not make him responsible.” I agree with you 100%. However, the fact remains that he was the president when the collapse occurred. his great business background could not prevent it either.
The point I was making is that having a successful business career does not necessarily translate to national economic success. Do you have proof that it does?”
Oy ve. Asking for proof where you won’t accept it is a losing argument. That was not the intent of your original comment by the way. Your intend was to make a conservative look like he was making an absurd comment, as it it remains your point now.
Regarding business experience being relevant to being president I’m going to have to ask:
Do you ACTUALLY believe that having run a business does not give you more real world experience to determine what is best for businesses in terms of regulations?
Because let me be clear, businesses see the unintended consequence of regulations, and those not in business, tend to pass more of them.
So to show you a bit about evidence regarding business elected leaders and non business leaders:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2015/05/16/the-real-cost-of-regulation-is-keeping-america-down
1.88 trillion. We have just about the most regulated economy out of the OECD.
Business owners usually go against these. So yes, there is evidence that the business background makes a difference in policy attempts. What you just tried to pull was what actually occurred. Now that is a different story. Hoover, in office during a recession, you are trying to make the fact that he could do nothing linked to his corporate background. I have a problem with this.
It is far too simple, for one. And for two, it doesn’t tackle what we actually need. It is just a rebuttal on your end to make your usual arguments that there is no difference between republicans and democrats, and anti regulation people and regulation people and spending people and people who try to curb spending.
You do it all the time.
It’s insanely frustrating. Do more research.
Bob,
I made my intent perfectly clear. Who are you to tell me what my intent was? I have never questioned your intent. I request the same treatment.
You asked, “Do you ACTUALLY believe that having run a business does not give you more real world experience to determine what is best for businesses in terms of regulations?” Yes. Regulations are there to control the damage businesses do in the name of maximizing profit, not to encourage the maximization of profit. In other words, regulations are not suppose to be in the best interest of business.
Would you want a politician running your business with no business experience? Of course not. So why do you want a businessman with no political experience running the country? That is insanity.
“Oy ve. Asking for proof where you won’t accept it is a losing argument.”
Bob is becoming like Agent and getting closer to a parody account than someone worth reading. As it is the meltdowns and future crash when Trump loses are the only reasons to read this junk.
What about climate change, the deficit, minimum wage and jobs, tax rates, minimum wage and unemployment, Trump’s statements on Mexicans, Arabs, Muslims? All of these things have 30000 word rants by you denying all the accepted evidence, and you have even denied video evidence on some of Trump’s statements, although I don’t remember which.
Bush W was among the only presidents who tried to pass multiple plans other than social security to retirement.
He also was bipartisan, and signed a bill you should have liked considering Obama supported it and blasted Romney because Romney would not support it: Tarp, the bailout.
He also kept pressure in Iraq to avoid a new terror group forming. No, toppling Saddam did not cause radical Islamic terrorists. Saddam was one himself and killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. We found mass graves. You can argue that we shouldn’t have gone because you believe the middle east wars will never go away, but Islamic terrorism wise, Bush W is the only one that tried to stop it.
Bush W did not cause the economic collapse, and he is the only reason taxes are lower on the middle class right now. That portion of the tax cuts stayed in place, UW.
Other than his last year, subtracting the Iraq war, he would have had surpluses. So…He did rather well.
This was even with the tax reductions, and even though he had two recessions occur under his watch.
You can’t say he was president during bad times and therefore was bad. You’re going to have to explain how he was the worst ever.
What laws did he pass that were bad?
I can list what he tried to pass that you democrats morons blocked.
The additional retirement plans. Explain to me how those were bad?
Good one AZ. I am sure you have earned at least 50 dislikes before they are through down voting you.
A lawsuit based on the premise that the defendant “did nothing”?
The Seinfeld Series Finale premise!
If it succeeds, I think I’ll sue Loretta Lynch and Comey, too!
Then, later: Obama, all 3 Clintons, Kerry, Biden, Pelosi Galore, Dingy Harry Reid, Holder, Lerner, Koskinen, Shkreli, and Gore….. all for doing nothing, and some of them for doing something destructive or harmful.
Hmm, maybe the liberal mainstream media could be enjoined as co-defendants?
i don’t see the big deal about this guy pulling a gun and threatening someone. since people think it’s bad, obviously trump’s staffer was just being sarcastic, right? :)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
are you sick and tired of Yogi and Agent complaining about BOTs “censoring” their posts? do you want to downvote them, but don’t want to listen to them whine about you using your free will? don’t downvote the previous comment – upvote this one instead!
Are you sick or tired or both of your Constitutional rights?
Wait! Don’t answer that; I know you are selectively sick and tired of others exercising their Constitutional rights, but not sick & tired to do so yourself.
your post makes no sense as usual yogi.
if i was tired of others expressing their constitutional rights, i would be advocating that people downvote your comment to hide.
as i am trying to keep your post visible, i am actually lobbying FOR your free speech rights to not be censored.
Yogi, are you comforted that Confused is trying to keep your posts visible? Something tells me he is going the other way. Perhaps he should have a talk with his friends to lay off the down votes. You and I both know that Progressives are into suppression of free speech.
By the way, I got about 30 down votes for reciting the Pledge of Allegiance the other day. These dudes are Anti American.
“Yogi, are you comforted that Confused is trying to keep your posts visible? Something tells me he is going the other way.”
what is that “something”? why would you even think that?
i’ve clearly laid out my intentions of trying to keep Yogi’s posts visible multiple times in this thread alone.
aside from being an idiot, why the h3ll would you think i’m trying to hide them? they were ALREADY being hidden – saying nothing would’ve meant his posts keep getting hidden. if that’s what i wanted, i would’ve let sleeping dogs lie.
Someone using a screen name ‘confused’ says my post makes no sense.
That makes sense to me.
so please explain it to me yogi. you claim i am sick and tired of others exercising their constitutional rights.
i argue otherwise and point out that i’m TRYING to get YOUR POSTS to be VISIBLE and NOT HIDDEN.
where exactly do you get the notion that i’m sick & tired of others exercising their constitutional rights when i’m suggesting people don’t downvote you but upvote my reply instead, so your post stays visible?
You are the one who constantly whined about PC culture, and the only person here saying they are trying to get the site to remove comments. Your behavior and intelligence are clowning, add if you are a parody.
I’m not TRYING to get the site to remove comments.
I’m succeeding in getting the site’s administrators to remove VILE, VULGAR, and FOUL comments and personal attacks against people whose opinions differ from the offenders’ opinions.
I’m NOT succeeding in spending my time wisely here, as several liberals continue to use STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS rather than debate the original topics. I waste my time reading such STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS made in reply to valid debates and otherwise enlightening discussions. I am at least using my time wisely by REFUSING to reply to such STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS by posters who cannot debate the issues and try to change the subject.
Wait for changes to happen here, very soon.
False equivalency.
You do this a lot.
Removing someone who just said to another user here that they may as well stop being coy and use the “N” word in a clear personal attack,
Is quite different than down voting Yogi when he says something you don’t like.
And then your reply will be “You do more personal attacks than anyone!”
And then I’ll tell you wrong,
And then blah blah blah blah blah.
Tiresome. I don’t have time to make you act like an adult.
I hope Yogi succeeds in getting you removed.
I’m in discussions with the administrators about it.
Yogi Polar Berra,
In your discussions, please mention Bob’s vulgarities and demeaning insults. just to be fair and balanced.
Thank you.
Ron,
I give everyone chances to go back to topics on hand.
The first thing that UW says, is someone may as well say the N word etc, and rather than hold him accountable, you can only try to drag me into it.
That is because you are a part of this.
You are not separate from it.
You need to start acting better on this site.
The editors of Insurance Journal respectfully request that commenters refrain from insults towards one another, avoid profanities and show respect for others at all times. If you can’t make your point or reply without insulting another person’s intelligence, morals, ethnicity, character or other trait, then please don’t post it. Those who engage in tit-for-tat exchanges ruin the forum experience for the majority who follow the rules of civil discourse. It would also help everyone if commenters stayed on topic.
It would also help IF you actually took action against multiple offense offenders. You have the ability to filter posts for profanity and offensive words. Please do so and determine the posters with the highest frequency of profanity and personal attacks.
Your actions in this regard will determine my future participation in this forum and possibly increased participation in other forums that enforce their rules more rigorously and objectively.
Yogi, it is strange that I was contacted today about renewing the subscription to IJ. I hesitated on my answer because what has been going on unchecked for the last 3-4 years. I told them that the blog had been hijacked by far left posters who use foul language, insult, give me 25 dislikes within minutes of a post and try to stifle free speech.
I asked them if they were going to step up the monitoring and eliminate this behavior or ban the nasty commenters and they said they were committed to cleaning the blog up. We will see how that commitment goes in the coming weeks. Perhaps some will get a surprise and told to leave.
I hope that IJ will follow through.
It looks like the IJ staff is ASKING posters to act in a civil manner. Good luck with that working! I suggested filters to catch foul language and insults AND actual enforcement of rules for participating on this site. I don’t hold out any hope for this working to clean up the trash.
I don’t see participation requested from those who are using bots to squelch the opinions of others with whom they disagree.
I don’t see any benefit is discussing issues with posters who must resort to foul language, insults, personal attacks, and worse – Straw Man Arguments – to support their opinions.
This is literally a figurative fork in the road, so, holding true to my advice from years ago, I’m gonna take it.
So, I’m going on an extended hiabernatus from IJ, to do something more productive. See you in 2017…. or, maybe not.
Yogi, your namesake once said – when you get to a fork in the road, take it.
The ultra liberals on this site should take that fork and either get their act together, or keep on going to another site where they can vent their hate all day long.
I find it funny there are some out here who do not believe in the First Amendment with the excuses of vulgarity, but yet back a Candidate who has been the most vulgar in the history of this country. Now this candidate may have a staffer pulling a gun on others. Is this the movie “Idiocracy”?
Think that’s the only movie made where it was set in the future but it’ll actually just end up being a documentary. We’re closer every day.
“BUT BRAWNDO HAS WHAT PLANTS CRAVE – IT HAS ELECTROLYTES!”
Rosenblatt, just two posts above, Andrew said to stay on topic and then you posted your nonsense. Way to follow instructions.
Agent,
I will be very interested in seeing how well you, Bob, Yogi, Dave, and Jack follow Andrew’s request.
Feel free to monitor me, confused, UW, Captain Planet, etc.
So the site had had no problem with explicit hate speech by Agent and others for at least the two years I’ve been around but the second people start consistently pushing back against those people they start threatening to ban people. Saying Arabs should be murdered, or people in an age group are all losers, or that people of a certain sexual orientation and identity are second class citizens, perverts, and pedophiles is okay, but calling people that make those statements jerks is unacceptable.
There is no way to do it consistently, so don’t do it at all, that’s what the voting is supposed to do.
I do stay on topic.
And I’m getting very tired of you bringing me up to give examples of people who don’t. It’s not ok, and it is bullying.
Excuse me? Pushing back?
I never start in insults. Never.
I always say how someone is wrong, and the first reply back from UW is always how I’m an idiot for using a blog, and he refuses to debate the numbers.
Bob: “I never start in insults. Never.”
Never say never. You wrote up above “…these …. on this website, and …is clearly the worst one on this site”
Calling someone an (expletive deleted) is definitely an insult no matter how you may try to spin it otherwise. also, that comment was the first insult on this thread at the time you made it. please do not try and pretend that yyou only insult and swear as a retaliatory act.
full disclosure – i admit i am guilty of initiating insults here too. i don’t do it as often as you and agent and i try not to swear like you, but i can act better and will try to do so accordingly moving forward
Confused:
Moving on:
I replied, again, to someone who was dragging me into a fight.
I have numerous, countless times, been on this site where Celtica, Planet, and Ron, and Rosenblatt, could only say how I was wrong for how I talked, I then said I go over the top, so do you, stay on topic, and they refused with more insults
I allow escalations to cease. They don’t. I take responsibility. They don’t.
The only reason they say what they do, is huge egos and to feel better about their actions here which are not ok.
Ron made a point of supporting UW above by countering with me. And that makes sense?
I a said UW is …. after he basically said I source quoted a blog, and refused to debate the topic at hand without insulting.
I always reply back, I don’t just randomly come on here and say like UW did, that N word comment.
It was blatantly full on assault.
And bluntly, I don’t have to defend myself to you.
Why don’t you go hold UW accountable?
Is it perhaps because the lot of you are in fact, inciting and trolling people like Agent and myself until they blow up at you?
You can’t leave us out of it, can you?
Knock it off.
For example:
Actu just said something that isn’t true, and is more damaging then me.
Never say never right? He said “no” problem.
If you allow him to believe that, that is the same as allowing me to believe I defend myself.
But you said nothing to him, didn’t you?
I’m getting a little tired of the one sided habits of the polarized people here.
I have specifically told agent when he needs to back off. He has specifically told me when I have gone too far.
There is a group here that isn’t interacting properly, and it is not Yogi, Agent, myself, Integrity who debates beautifully without arguing only to have UW insult him, or the others similar.
You truly do have people like me giving opportunities to stop it. And they constantly are not taken.
I shouldn’t have to watch while I get assaulted like I am with you now, while you do nothing about UW who in this very page, said absolutely unacceptable things.
Also, referring to someone acting like…, which he was, is bluntly not starting a character assault.
I was responding to one. If a bully punches me in the face, and I say “Look this guy is acting like …
I am not going around randomly insulting people.
However, when UW says to someone who said nothing wrong “just use the N word already!” yeah…
I don’t do that, and you know it.
Don’t worry about a thing Ron. We will be monitoring you, UW, Confused, Captain Planet, Actu, Celtica and any other leftist blogger very closely along with the IJ IT team. If they don’t remove the nasty insulting comments right away, the contact will be made. We have had enough of this behavior and it has gone on far too long. All of you need to get your act together.
Agent,
Fair enough. Will you also alert IJ when Bob and other righties (look in the mirror) throw around nasty insults and profanity?
Unlike you, I prefer to not suppress speech, no matter how vehemently I may disagree.
Agent – if the accusations are true, do you think Stuart Jolly and Corey Lewandowski should have notified the police of the allegations? Do you think Earl Phillip did anything wrong and criminal charges should be filed against him?
People in charge can only notify police IF they knew what happened via a report by the victim.
I don’t think all the facts have been brought out to the public yet. As one of my posts says, there are many unanswered questions. The court will find out what happened, to the best of their ability.
Let’s play your speculation game;
IF someone knew and did nothing, they should be fired, and perhaps prosecuted.
IF they knew nothing because no report(s) were made, they cannot be held accountable for the inaction of the victim.
IF the alleged victim is lying, prosecution is in order,… against the liar.
IF the Trump staffers knew lies were being told by the alleged victim, they should haave at least reported it to the PD.
Ron, wake up please. You and I have both seen enough of Bob’s posts over the last few years to know that he presents his case with facts, links and after he is assaulted by insults, bad language, called an idiot or worse, he will blow up and let the insulter have it between the eyes. I have a lot of experience of being attacked and down voted on every comment and I have declared that UW is the winner of the nasty post contest followed closely by boogereater, Planet and Confused. I can deal with your sarcastic liberal nonsense, but IJ should just tell those dudes to go to Media Matters or Moveon.org and they are not welcome on an Insurance blog.
Agent,
Yes, he presents facts. However, there is never an excuse to use profanity, which you cannot deny he has also done in the past.
Let’s get back to civil debate and away from insults and profanity from both sides. That goes for you and me as well. Agreed?
There is also never an excuse to antagonize people, as you do.
Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.
We don’t need someone like you drawing away from everyone but me by saying phrases like profanity is never merited.
Treating people well is a mandate, with they profain and more or less say “owie” in swear words while you do it or not.
You are a part of this, and I’m getting tired of you finding reasons to go after me rather than saying it.
Also:
I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,
Those scenarios giving an extreme blow back makes the attacker less likely to do so if their intentions are bad, and if they are good the person will learn to be more sensitive.
For example: When someone says you’re ok with murdering Muslims, calls you a racist liar, says you hate women, or other such aspects,
Replying with a @#%%@ you, is I believe, a perfectly reasonable response.
As I said: I do not just go around saying these things, there is no excuse for those who have been tormenting me on this site, which they have been doing.
You don’t get to say, “He’s saying owie and he’s fighting back! That’s never ok!”
Yes. It is. People like you disarm the abused and the bullied against those who bully and abuse.
I have given Permanent solutions. UW has not.
You’re either a murderous gun obsessed Muslim hating person who he can attack, or you’re on his side.
I have given people solutions again and again. That has not been done with me, it’s not being done now by you and confused, no matter how much you’re trying to appear like you’re out there trying to resolve conflicts all you are doing right now is fanning flames, diverting blame, and bringing people into it who want to be left out.
And the very fact that I give solutions, honest solutions, means I’m not a bully.
When you give resolutions you are just someone who argued. A human.
Not everyone who says swear words is a bully.
Bob,
I apologize for my antagonizing behavior. I will try to restrain myself in the future.
You said, “Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.” maybe in a face-to-face confrontation, but NEVER in writing.
You said, “I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,”
Then I should be throwing profanities at you left and right. However, I restrain myself out of respect for you and the IJ community overall.
“Bob,
I apologize for my antagonizing behavior. I will try to restrain myself in the future.
You said, “Profanity and reaction to others actions is natural I might add.” maybe in a face-to-face confrontation, but NEVER in writing.
You said, “I would argue there is a time for fighting back which would include profanity.
When someone manipulates a crowd based on false pretenses, and is good at it, which makes you feel small,
When someone attacks you, or belittles you,”
Then I should be throwing profanities at you left and right. However, I restrain myself out of respect for you and the IJ community overall.”
I said in a previous comment that the only time you say something that appears like resolution it is due to your ego. See above. You just manipulated the situation to take away your own culpability.
I do not attack and belittle you. I call you wrong, that is all. When I say attack and belittle, you clearly do not know what I mean by attack. Your definition is quite a bit different than mine. I respond when someone clearly is not debating the topic at hand and is instead manipulating based on say, well we all know how much you read that thing you wrote last week, and can we now finally show that agent doesn’t know what he’s saying? You’ve done this ALL THE TIME to agent, from prior arguments relating it to the present. That is the manipulation I’m talking about, and it derails the conversation. Here we are right now, and you’re doing it regarding me.
I was about to say “Why don’t you just say I’m sorry I will not do that again” and you did, but then you had to throw this in didn’t you?
Oy ve. I don’t have the energy for you. Do you think that is imaginary and nothing to do with you, as to why I leave?
You make this site hostile.
I’ll be blunt:
I can be a complete jerk. I make huge mistakes in regards to talking etiquette and being defensive. Some days I’m glad I’m that way, because I’m furious with the PC crowd. Other days, it is too far.
I will try to treat you with dignity Ron.
Thank you Bob.
Just another 2nd Amendment-type doing what The Donald expects of them.
Ron, correction to your assumption about my posts. I do not swear in my posts. I do insult when I am insulted and do not just “take” it like you would want me to. One article not long ago, you insulted me before I even made a comment on the subject matter. That was not your finest hour, was it? You just couldn’t wait to insult and demean me. That seems to be a Progressive trait, doesn’t it? The biggest offenders on this site on ugly insulting comments all know who they are. As I stated before, get your act together. I know it is hard to lose arguments and defend Progressive Socialism since it is in such disarray. If you can’t comment honestly without insult, don’t say anything at all. I have seen Bob almost beg to have an honest debate and look at the facts and all he gets for his trouble is being called a “dolt”, “idiot” or other choice name.
Agent,
I did not mean to accuse you of swearing. I’m sorry. However, you do dish out plenty of nasty insults.
I do not recall that post. However, if I did, I apologize.
Do you have any interest in having civil debates without insults or labels such as Progressive Socialist, Liberal, Communist, etc.?
Ron, when attacked, I will come back in kind. By the way, you seem to be very concerned about Bob’s profanity when he gets angry, but I have never seen you chastise your buddies for their language and Bob is mild by comparison. Why is it ok in your mind for them, but not for Bob who also responds in kind when attacked by the left?
As far as debating, I will call it as I see it. If Progressive Socialists are the cause of the problem, I will identify them for what they are. Sorry if it offends you. You don’t have to even respond to me.
Bob, thank you for exposing the false narrative of the left. They have a very tough time digesting facts since it is counter to what they believe. My guess it is a combination of upbringing or education or lack thereof.
I’m starting a new thread hoping we can curtail the off-topic arguments regarding insults, negativity, swearing, etc. As Andrew wrote, it would help if we kept our comments on-topic. That being said…
If the accusations are found to be false when the court hears the case, what do you folks think should happen to Bordini? Yogi argued that “prosecution is in order…against the liar”, but for what? Should he be counter-sued for slander/libel or prosecuted for something else and thrown in jail?
If the accusations are found to be true and that it did happen to four other people, should Phillip be sent to jail for assault & battery or only be found civilly liable and have to pay restitution to those folks?
What do you folks think would be a fair outcome in both those scenarios?
Assuming anyone pulled a gun, the person should be charged however the courts typically charge it.
With regards to if it is a made up story, well, it he should be charged for trying to have someone typically charged, whatever that may be deemed as fair by the courts.
And this is partly due to the fact not of defamation of character or anything like that, but if he had succeeded he would have landed another person in jail, cost him his job possibly, and his life, assuming he lied.
I haven’t yet taken a position on this one. I haven’t done nearly enough research to know which to take. I don’t think anyone here really has. I see the left saying punish the guy who took out the gun, and I see the right saying punish the guy if he’s lying.
I don’t think we should be drawing conclusions at this point in time. I want to see more.
No article about Killary trying to throw Colin Powell under the bus, right?
“I’ve got too much time on my hands.. Its taking away my sanity.”
Styx.