ANd this guy wants to be the Prez?

[Demigorgon]

"From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people." - Howard Dean


Be afraid. Be very afraid.

[aerocontrols]

link (http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=31248) for context.

[Nyarlathotep]

Someone collected a whole book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743222229/002-8558233-5924006?v=glance) on stupid thing GWB said, and he IS our prez.

If one were to avoid voting for someone because they say stupid things, there would be no one left to vote for.

[Nasarius]

Well, we're not going to get anyone who's agnostic/atheist/deist anytime soon, so I guess it's better to take a believer with the right idea rather than a fundie with the wrong idea. *shrug*
Unless of course you're against homosexual marriage, in which case there's no point in arguing.

[Ladyhawk]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
Someone collected a whole book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743222229/002-8558233-5924006?v=glance) on stupid thing GWB said, and he IS our prez.

If one were to avoid voting for someone because they say stupid things, there would be no one left to vote for.


How true, but you have to admit..on the surface, it's pretty funny! It's funnier in light of Dean's inability to determine if Job is in the Old T or the NewT. There's just a certain irony to this particular statement.

Thanks for sharing it , Demi..

[mjh36]

The thing to fear with Dean is not his stupidity, but his shrewd and fabulously correct policy of taking advantage of the fact that many Americans are ignorant of the world around them and will fall easily for the best line they hear that week.

Be afraid that Dean's entire platform is "I hate Dubyah" and consists of very little else. He promised to repeal the Bush tax cuts but also promised not to raise taxes. OK, that sounds pretty dumb, but isn't scary until you hear throngs of idiots cheering him for his stupidity.

And for the record, every time Bush says the word "nuke-ya-ler" when referring to nuclear weapons, it makes me want to bean him in the head with a brick. And I also used to feel like I needed a shower every time Bill Clinton told me that "he feels my pain."

[Thanz]

I happen to agree with with what Dean said in the quote in the opening post. What am I missing? :confused:

And why should I be afraid, let alone very afraid?

[Tmy]

Ummm is that quote supposed to be outragous or sumthin? Why be afraid???

people just want to pick on every little thing Dean says/does.

Hes the new Hillary, hate him just because!!!! I think people from the Dems hate him cause hes bucking the system and Repubs hate him cause hes a legit threat.

Politics is so much like High School. The cliques are out to destroy him. "Pssst, did you hear? Howard Dean is a big slut."

[Ignatius]

Originally posted by Tmy

The cliques are out to destroy him. "Pssst, did you hear? Howard Dean is a big slut."

Dean is a slut?! Ohh muy gawd!
[runs off to tell Suzy and Beth]

[Vorticity]

Originally posted by Thanz
I happen to agree with with what Dean said in the quote in the opening post. What am I missing? :confused:
Ditto. What's wrong with it?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Thanz
I happen to agree with with what Dean said in the quote in the opening post. What am I missing? :confused: Gotta agree. I find gays to be about as unnatural as lefties* or redheads.





*that is, left-handed people. Which, incidently, I am.

[Tmy]

Yeah like for sure. I cant believe hes running for class president. No way will people vote for him when they find out he DRIVES A 95' HYUNDIA! And he buys his clothes at Target. EEEEEEwwwww

[Jon_in_london]

Umm... no. How is that threatening? He is merely ridiculing the position of the fundie loonies.

The only thing that worries me with regards to the US presidency is the bible-thumping talking puppet monkey called George.

[Aoidoi]

While the statement is a bit silly (the logic boils down to "nothing that exists is a sin," which makes me wonder what "sin" is) it doesn't really bother me. The civil unions thing seems fine to me from the little I know about it. It wasn't a particularly bad line as far as religio-political statements go. I really wish Bush would shut up about religion.

Frankly, I feel rather better about him hearing he is the least religious of the politicians.

[roger]

Originally posted by mjh36
The thing to fear with Dean is not his stupidity, but his shrewd and fabulously correct policy of taking advantage of the fact that many Americans are ignorant of the world around them and will fall easily for the best line they hear that week. What are you talking about? Did you read the linked article? I suspect not.

"Dean said he does not often turn to his faith when making policy decisions"

"Earlier Tuesday when he and the other candidates were asked at a debate if religion has influenced any of their policy decisions, Dean was the only one not to respond."

"Dean has been expanding on his religious views in a series of conversations with reporters, but his remarks Tuesday and Wednesday were the first time he has talked about how faith has influenced his policy making"

"Dean,... is increasingly trying to broaden his appeal by talking about faith and centrist policies "

"Some Democrats have said Dean...might appear too secular to win over an increasingly religious electorate."

From what I can make of that article, you have a fairly secular or at least closed-mouth-about-religious man sharing his views about a topic a heck of a lot of the population cares deeply about.

I don't share his thinking (he is against gay marriage, and I don't base any decisions on christianity), but I see nothing but principled behavior being reported in this article.

"At several campaign stops this week, Dean said if Republicans push gay issues, he will talk 'issues that unite us'" such as health insurance for every American."

from here (http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=31248).

edited to shorten some quotes to remain within fair use.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Ladyhawk



It's funnier in light of Dean's inability to determine if Job is in the Old T or the NewT.


OMFG!!! YOU MEAN THERE MIGHT BE A PRES WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFF BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT!!!!! OMFG WTF!!!!! WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TOO!?!? ITS THE END OF CIVILISATION AS WE KNOW IT!!!!! OH! THE HUMANITY!!! WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

[Tmy]

Am I the only one who laughs when I see politians going to church or talking religion. Its such an insencere photo op to impress the church folks. Thats why no one comes forward with their specifc religions. No one says Im a "morman" or "baptist" , They all just use "GOD" and are as generic as possible so as not to alienate any voters. They wont even use "Jesus" in their speehes. Tell me, if you are truley a devote christian, how can you never mention Jesus????

[Thanz]

Originally posted by Aoidoi
While the statement is a bit silly (the logic boils down to "nothing that exists is a sin," which makes me wonder what "sin" is) it doesn't really bother me.
Not quite. All it is saying is that the mere existence of it should not be a sin. Here is a quote that explains it better than I can, from a member of the Anglican group Integrity that works for gay rights in the Church:
My name is Chris Ambidge, I'm a cradle Anglican, and I've been a gay man for just about as long - certainly from before my ability to make conscious choices. I no more selected my orientation than I selected blue eyes, or right-handedness.

God created in me - just as in you - an ability to love and a need to be loved. I know in the depths of my soul that for me, intimate love will be for another man. I cannot believe in a god so cruel and spiteful to create those abilities and needs in me, and then say "no-no, you can't use them!"



source (http://www.geocities.com/integritytoronto/chris6jul01.html)

[Hexxenhammer]

[8/6/00 - NY Times] Four months ago in Texas, Gov. George W. Bush signed a proclamation declaring June 10 to be Jesus Day, and urging all Texans to "follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods."

More:
Mr. Bush, who has put his Christian faith front and center in the campaign, has tried to project an image of inclusiveness to people of all ethnicities and religions. In the past, he has been put on the defensive for saying that the only way to heaven was through Christ, and for naming Jesus as his favorite political philosopher.
And this guy IS our president? I've been afraid for 3 years...

[Otther]

I absolutely loathe howard dean, but I'm also on the boat that doesn't understand why this is so bad...

Sure, a few of us (both believers and unbelievers) will notice the absurd reasoning. But overall it will probably appeal to the underdeveloped capacity for logic that most Americans possess.

[headscratcher4]

Why is this any sillier, or why should I be more afraid, of Dean and this statement, than I should be of GWB and his krypto-religiosity? I wonder I GWB knows, when pushed, what books are in what part of the Bible? One suspects that his form of revealed religion doesn't require heavy biblical scholarship.

Dean's got a mess 'o problems politically and personality-wise, but the fact that he isn't particularly publicly religious (or knowledgable about the Bible) isn't one of them imo. The self-satisfied piety of Bush is, imo.

[Demigorgon]

Aoidoi said it best - the logic boils down to "nothing that exists is a sin,"

That's why it's ridiculous. It isn't about whether it's ok to be gay. With this reasoning God also wants murders, pedophiles, rapist.....on and on........

[Andonyx]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
Aoidoi said it best -

That's why it's ridiculous. It isn't about whether it's ok to be gay. With this reasoning God also wants murders, pedophiles, rapist.....on and on........

Yes, that's why Dean is saying it's absurd.

You do understand the same people who hate gays because they believe it's a sin in the eyes of God are the ones saying we should turn over control of the nation to God.

If God can't even create a world free of gays and "other sinners" do we want him running our country?

[Ignatius]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
Aoidoi said it best -

That's why it's ridiculous. It isn't about whether it's ok to be gay. With this reasoning God also wants murders, pedophiles, rapist.....on and on........

Understood, but if you want to make this election into a contest for the guy that says the least stupid things, I'm 100% with you!
;)

[Hexxenhammer]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
Aoidoi said it best -

That's why it's ridiculous. It isn't about whether it's ok to be gay. With this reasoning God also wants murders, pedophiles, rapist.....on and on........ If you read the old testament, it's quite obvious some of his favorite people are murderers, pedophiles, and rapists.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
That's why it's ridiculous. It isn't about whether it's ok to be gay. With this reasoning God also wants murders, pedophiles, rapist.....on and on........ Why... it's almost ...as if there are ...no moral absolutes!!!

**gasp**
**shock**
**dismay**
:eek:

[Aoidoi]

Disclaimer: I have no problem with homosexuality, I just find Dean's statement to be logically inconsistent.

Originally posted by Thanz

Not quite. All it is saying is that the mere existence of it should not be a sin. Here is a quote that explains it better than I can, from a member of the Anglican group Integrity that works for gay rights in the Church: I skimmed the speech, it seems quite reasonable as the position of a homosexual Christian. However, I do not see the difference in logic. God can't create a sinner? According to Christianity God has created everything and there is not only sin in this world but original sin which everyone starts off tainted with. Just because Chris does not believe in an evil or cruel God does not mean God is constrained by his beliefs. Nor does God having created something necessarily imply it is not sinful. This has been the Catholic argument against homosexuality for ages. I don't agree, but it seem consistent with their theology.

I mean, God creates murderers and rapists, too. (before the required outcry, it's an example of clear sins that God allows to exist in the world he created). Some (very small percentage) of murderers simply feel the need to murder, which seems to be the same argument that Chris is making. There are prohibitions against these things in the Bible, just as there are prohibitions against homosexuality. From a scriptural POV, I don't see how one can justify holding the belief that homosexuality is acceptable. Many churches find this an unfortunate prohibition and reject it, but

I don't think this is necessarily related to Dean's quote though.

"...if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people."
to
"...if God had thought X is a sin, he would not have created people who do X."
to
"...God would not have created people who sin."

The only logically valid conclusion to this statement is that nothing humans do is a sin. You can argue nature vs. nurture or whatever, but that's the meaning of the statement at it's base.

edit: LOL, a lot of comments since I started typing. Note that I didn't see the last 5 or so posts :D

[hgc]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Why... it's almost ...as if there are ...no moral absolutes!!!

**gasp**
**shock**
**dismay**
:eek: Yo! Materalist/Atheist! Did you learn that in your mathematical book of morality?

[Thanz]

Originally posted by Aoidoi


I don't think this is necessarily related to Dean's quote though.

"...if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people."
to
"...if God had thought X is a sin, he would not have created people who do X."
to
"...God would not have created people who sin."

Here is where I see the disconnect: I don't think that the second statement follows from the first. You are classifying homosexuality solely as a behaviour, rather than as a quality of the who the person is like race or gender. I don't particularly want to get into the debate over whether orientation is a choice or something you were born with, but for the record I believe it is the latter and in those circumstances Dean's statement makes sense.

It is like saying "If God had thought being caucasion was a sin, he wouldn't have made caucasions" or whatever other inborn trait you care to put in there.

[patnray]

The quote is a perfect example of the futility of mixing logic with religion. I wasn't sure if he was defending homosexuals or poking fun at theists...

[Tmy]

Dean doenst really believe any of that.

Its just a well crafted political statement. Bringing up God implies that hes sorta religious (score points wh the church crowd), mention gays and unions (score points with gay crowd) mention union and not marriage (score points wh church crowd that doesnt mind gays, but are freaked out by gay "marraige").

Put to gether you have a great comment that covers contraversial topics yet it wont offend a good 87% of democrats.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london



OMFG!!! YOU MEAN THERE MIGHT BE A PRES WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFF BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT!!!!! OMFG WTF!!!!! WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TOO!?!? ITS THE END OF CIVILISATION AS WE KNOW IT!!!!! OH! THE HUMANITY!!! WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!


Hey, whoa, there J_I_L, it's not that big a deal... It's just a book... Get some perspective!















:D <------ For the humorously challenged

[Mr Manifesto]

[8/6/00 - NY Times] Four months ago in Texas, Gov. George W. Bush signed a proclamation declaring June 10 to be Jesus Day, and urging all Texans to "follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods."

Another Jesus day? The clown's already got four, how many does he want?

[Ladyhawk]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london



OMFG!!! YOU MEAN THERE MIGHT BE A PRES WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFF BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT!!!!! OMFG WTF!!!!! WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TOO!?!? ITS THE END OF CIVILISATION AS WE KNOW IT!!!!! OH! THE HUMANITY!!! WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!


JIL,
Have you absolutely no sense of humor????? Jebus Cripes.. lighten up.....otherwise, I will have to ask god to punish you with boils and sores and stuff like that, and I really don't have time coz it's late and I wanna call it a day, ok?

[Ion]

Originally posted by mjh36

...
Be afraid that Dean's entire platform is "I hate Dubyah" and consists of very little else.
...

What's wrong with "I hate Dubyah"?

I hate Dubyah, and there is nothing wrong with it.

Everyday.

For example, today, I read in the San Diego Union Tribune, under 'Team hunting Iraqi weapons taken off duty':

"...The 61-page study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a non partisan research institution...criticizes President Bush and top officials for systematically misrepresenting the threats...what the study shows is that this war wasn't necessary..."

(hint: look at how much U.S. money was taken from the U.S. economy, look at how many people were murdered, when "...this war wasn't necessary...")

and under 'IMF says U.S. debt a threat to the world':

"...Prepared by a team of IMF economists,...,questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts...The report warns that the United States' net financial obligations to the rest of the world could be equal to 40 percent of its total economy withinn a few years..."
Originally posted by Aoidoi
Disclaimer: I have no problem with homosexuality, I just find Dean's statement to be logically inconsistent.
...
"...if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people."
to
"...if God had thought X is a sin, he would not have created people who do X."
to
"...God would not have created people who sin."

The only logically valid conclusion to this statement is that nothing humans do is a sin.
...

The only logically valid conclusion is that nothing humans do is a sin.

And for that matter, nothing nature does is a sin.

'Sin' is a Bible invention, not found in the nature.

I like Dean's "...From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people...".

What I am afraid of, is Bush's religion and PNAC culture, that starts murderous wars and that fires people from jobs, in the name of a profiteering greed.

I am neither gay, nor religious, but I like Dean's thinking when governor of Vermont, and when running for the U.S. Presidency under an intelligent platform by speaking in this quote and elsewhere.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
ANd this guy wants to be the Prez?

"From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people."
-- Howard Dean

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I think it's nauseating that Howie suddenly got religion in response to the pollsters, but very afraid? :rolleyes:

There is no God, therefore any implication of the form "If God..." is either trivially true or meaningless.

Sure I don't have a problem with gay couples. But I don't believe for a minute that Howie prayed over it or considered God's alleged will when signing the domestic partner bill as governor of Vermont (that's the context).

Biblically speaking, intrinsically gay people are not even in the universe of discourse, only prohibited actions.

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by Ion

What's wrong with "I hate Dubyah"?

I hate Dubyah, and there is nothing wrong with it.


As an emotional reaction or as a political platform?

OK hate W, but you can't beat somebody with nobody.

If you hate W's policies, don't try to beat him by out-Godding him, because that won't work. :p

[Ion]

Originally posted by Abdul Alhazred


As an emotional reaction or as a political platform?
...

Both.

Regarding Bush from a political platform viewpoint, I posted this:
Originally posted by Ion

...
For example, today, I read in the San Diego Union Tribune, under 'Team hunting Iraqi weapons taken off duty':

"...The 61-page study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a non partisan research institution...criticizes President Bush and top officials for systematically misrepresenting the threats...what the study shows is that this war wasn't necessary..."

(hint: look at how much U.S. money was taken from the U.S. economy, look at how many people were murdered, when "...this war wasn't necessary...")

and under 'IMF says U.S. debt a threat to the world':

"...Prepared by a team of IMF economists,...,questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts...The report warns that the United States' net financial obligations to the rest of the world could be equal to 40 percent of its total economy withinn a few years..."
...

The study that concludes "...this war wasn't necessary..." -which I quote in my post as wasting thousands of lifes and billions of U.S. taxmoney- is published by the NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE and KNIGHT RIDDER NEWS SERVICE, and can also be read here:

Yahoo article on Carnegie Endowment study (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040108/wl_nm/iraq_usa_weapons_dc_2)

I remember that in 2001 a Canadian official said privately -and was caught- that Bush is a moron.

I think that Bush is a moron, indeed.

[Elektrix]

This isn't really anything that new for him. It is part of the strategy he mentioned before where he is now going to talk more about religion and Jesus in particular, especially in the south, because he said he realizes how important talking about religion and Jesus is to voters in the south.

This is basically in response to the criticism he was getting for not talking about his religion at all, so now he is going to increasingly refer to religion and Jesus in particular in his speeches, etc.

-Elektrix

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Thanz
I happen to agree with with what Dean said in the quote in the opening post. What am I missing? :confused:


Seeing as how there is no proven genetic homosexuality origin (at least not yet), you have to assume Dean is either a mark (being that he must have fallen for Time magazine articles speculating on possible genetic links) or that he thinks its okay to rob a bank of the devil made you do it.

So he either believes in something not yet proven (not so bad, since many do) or believes a deity guides the behavior.

Bush has said much dumber stuff than this, mind you Dean is supposed to be the smart, sassy, straight talkin savior of America in the eyes of his marks.

[Ion]

I don't see these in Dean' statement:
Originally posted by corplinx


Seeing as how there is no proven genetic homosexuality origin (at least not yet), you have to assume Dean is either a mark (being that he must have fallen for Time magazine articles speculating on possible genetic links) or that he thinks its okay to rob a bank of the devil made you do it.
...

Are you doing OK, over there?

[fishbob]

"From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people." From a religious point of view, this statement is merely pandering to the churchies. From a NON-religious point of view, this statement is still pandering to the churchies. So a politician is pandering to a big block of voters. So what?

[Ion]

Originally posted by fishbob
From a religious point of view, this statement is merely pandering to the churchies. From a NON-religious point of view, this statement is still pandering to the churchies.
...

Yes.
Originally posted by fishbob

...
So a politician is pandering to a big block of voters. So what?
Nothing.

Just right-wing nuts of the style "...Be afraid. Be very afraid." and "...he thinks its okay to rob a bank of the devil made you do it." (with misspellings by a native that I highlight), who start salivating over their far-fetched emotions.

People like these are easily less intelligent than me...

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Ion

"...he thinks its okay to rob a bank of the devil made you do it."[/i] (with misspellings by a native that I highlight), who start salivating over their far-fetched emotions.


Be nice, that was the best strawman I could come up with after a 14 hours of recovering a big unix system at work.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Thanz
I happen to agree with with what Dean said in the quote in the opening post. What am I missing? :confused:

And why should I be afraid, let alone very afraid?

It's not the CONCLUSION that's outrageous, it's the LOGIC behind it. The logic behind this quote is that if X exists, "God wanted it to", so X is OK. According to this logic, Ted Bundy did nothing wrong--if God didn't WANT him to kill hundreds of women, he wouldn't have created him, would he? And, for that matter, if God wanter us to fly, he would have given us wings. Down with the satanic auerospace industry!

That said, in context, it seems more of a tongue-in-cheek answer than a serious one, more making fun of the "if God wanted..." arguments of the religious right than really claiming that his true reason for supporting homosexual unions. The idea behind Dean's response seems to be that, if the religious right can bring up the silly "God's will" argument against such unions, he can being up the same no-more-silly "God's will" argument for such unions.

Since the real point Dean is making seems to be precisely "let's leave God's will out of this", NOT "I know what God wants", I agree there isn't anything to "be afraid" here. But not because his argument is logical.

[hammegk]

I can see the headlines now:

First male Pedophiles to marry have adopted their 100th child.


Not everyone can just marry one the kids ala Woody.

[Tmy]

If you want to pick on his logic then the most illogical part of the statement is the assumption that theres an all powerful being who is responsible for creating humans and their preprogramed desires (aka "God".)

[daenku32]

Originally posted by corplinx


Seeing as how there is no proven genetic homosexuality origin (at least not yet), you have to assume Dean is either a mark (being that he must have fallen for Time magazine articles speculating on possible genetic links) or that he thinks its okay to rob a bank of the devil made you do it.

So he either believes in something not yet proven (not so bad, since many do) or believes a deity guides the behavior.

Bush has said much dumber stuff than this, mind you Dean is supposed to be the smart, sassy, straight talkin savior of America in the eyes of his marks.

You want solid proof that Homosexuality is genetic before considering that possibility?

I think speculation that God exists is the part that raises the logic question. Because if God does exist, who's to say he didn't make gays just as they are with they gay behaviour.

Most Christian apologists I have talked to say that God created Good things only and that sin come from our free will influenced by Satan. So since gays were created as gays their gay activities are not actions of the free will or Satan, but merely things God hard-coded into them.

See, if you think existance of God is logical, you can make anything that relates to it logical.

Fortunately, I'm certain that he has Secular reasons to allow gay behaviour, because that's why I as an Atheist care about.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by daenku32

Most Christian apologists I have talked to say that God created Good things only and that sin come from our free will influenced by Satan. So since gays were created as gays their gay activities are not actions of the free will or Satan, but merely things God hard-coded into them.

But even that's kind of ridiculous, since God also created Satan, and everything Satan does would presumably be because he wants him to do it.

Then again, no-one ever said this stuff was logical....:)

-Elektrix

[Ion]

In line with this:
Originally posted by Ion

What's wrong with "I hate Dubyah"?

I hate Dubyah, and there is nothing wrong with it.

Everyday.

For example, today, I read in the San Diego Union Tribune, under 'Team hunting Iraqi weapons taken off duty':

"...The 61-page study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a non partisan research institution...criticizes President Bush and top officials for systematically misrepresenting the threats...what the study shows is that this war wasn't necessary..."

(hint: look at how much U.S. money was taken from the U.S. economy, look at how many people were murdered, when "...this war wasn't necessary...")

and under 'IMF says U.S. debt a threat to the world':

"...Prepared by a team of IMF economists,...,questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts...The report warns that the United States' net financial obligations to the rest of the world could be equal to 40 percent of its total economy withinn a few years..."
...

I already posted a link about the Carnegie' study.

This:

International Monetary Fund Occasional Report (http://www.imf.org/external/Pubs/NFT/Op/227/index.htm#overview)

is the link about the IMF study.

So to recap:

a chimp, 'graduated' from Yale and Harvard, surrounded by little chimps like Condi Rice 'graduated' from Stanford, are in charge with 'running' the U.S..

But in the San Diego Union Tribune of Thursday January 8, 2004, I read in page C4:

"...Intel Corp, Hewlett-Packard Co. and six other digital technology companies urged the Bush administration to reduce taxes and improve schools so that the U.S. industry can beat competitors..."

I work for one of the U.S. companies mentioned here, I am being imported on the basis of my education "...so that the U.S. industry can beat competitors..." because it seems to me that given Bush and Rice, Yale, Harvard and Stanford don't do much good for the U.S....

Same when I read this thread, I see mediocre right-wing and religious superstitious feeble minds posting here, and I can tell that the U.S. schools in general don't do much good for the U.S..

At least with Dean you got a successful intellectual from Vermont, good to replace the chimp who is now U.S. President.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Ion
At least with Dean you got a successful intellectual from Vermont, good to replace the chimp who is now the U.S. President.

Intellectual? What sort of certifying test did he take or previous experience does he have to justify this classification?

I am not argueing that he isn't smarter than George. I just think calling him an intellectual is a bit of a stretch.

[Ion]

He is a medical doctor, successful in medicine based on his intellect.

His wife is similar.

I guess who is alike, they get together.

Then they spread this intellect:

when Dean was governor of Vermont, there was universal health care for the under-18.

That is already against the dog-eat-dog Bush's corporate style:

people deserve to afford to clean their teeth.

And to look decent:

slim, well dressed, well educated.

Opposite to Bush's Texas and 'No child left behind' baloney.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
I work for one of the U.S. companies mentioned here, I am being imported on the basis of my education "...so that the U.S. industry can beat competitors..." because it seems to me that given Bush and Rice, Yale, Harvard and Stanford don't do much good for U.S....

Same when I read this thread, I see mediocre right-wing and religious superstitious feeble minds posting here, and I can tell that the U.S. schools in general don't do much good for the U.S..


:D Imported with that French education that didn't even teach you what a recession is? That's right, it's not France's fault, you're just a nitwit.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
.. surrounded by little chimps like Condi Rice 'graduated' from Stanford, are in charge with 'running' the U.S..

By the way, I see you are racist as well as stupid. Nice combo!

[Ion]

You mean you still haven't learned, bathroom-challenged-toxy?
Originally posted by BTox


:D Imported with that French education that didn't even teach you what a recession is? That's right, it's not France's fault, you're just a nitwit.
How many jobs were in U.S. in January 2001?

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox


By the way, I see you are racist as well as stupid. Nice combo!
It's a better combo than toxy's.

Take toxy, aka BTox, -right here- for example:
Originally posted by Ion

...
people deserve to afford to clean their teeth.

And to look decent:

slim, well dressed, well educated.
...

toxy, too, deserves to clean his teeth.

And to look decent:

slim, well dressed, well educated.

No toxy left behind.

You hear me?

No toxy left behind!

[Ion]

The International Monetary Fund Occasional Report link that I provided, shows:

Dean's national health care initiative will help on the Medicare front.

(OK, it doesn't show this to toxy, aka BTox, but disregard toxy here because the poor guy went to school in the U.S. and to him that is a handicap he can't recover from)

Look at Figure 1.8, "Health Expenditures and Life Expectancy in OECD Countries.":

The cost of health care within the United States is out of line with the costs of health care in all other countries, including countries with universal health care.

I guess Bush and Bill Frist policies allow U.S. insurance companies to skim 20 to 30 percent right off the top for profits to the stockholders and for obscene salaries to the C.E.O.s and board members.

Dean has advocated a balanced budget, which is what the International Monetary Fund wants.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BTox


By the way, I see you are racist as well as stupid. Nice combo!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's a better combo than toxy's.



I see you admit to being a racist and stupid. Thanks for confirming the obvious!

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox


I see you admit to being a racist and stupid. Thanks for confirming the obvious!
You know what?

Your last posts make me guess that you are a black guy.

And an idiot:

you figure that when I call Rice -who is black- a chimp, I am being racist against blacks.

However, since I call Bush -who is white- a chimp, it must be that I call Bush and Rice chimps because of them being idiots regardless of skin color.

I pretty much like Carol Moseley-Braun thinking, who is black.

So it is not a racist thing with me, but idiocy.

Like yours, toxy.

As for Rice, I call her a chimp because when the link between Niger and Iraq in nuclear was proved to be a forgery, she said that the President of the U.S. is not a fact checker.

She is that dumb...

I guess Stanford the school and Rice, they deserve each other:

she 'graduated' from Stanford with all the affirmative action garbage going on, Stanford is a low grade school then, and as I wrote "Intel Corp., Hewlett-Packard Co and six other digital technology companies urged the Bush administration to...improve schools so that the U.S. industry can beat competitors...".

Meanwhile "...the U.S. industry can beat competitors..." by hiring mercenaries like me, because idiots like toxy cannot do mathematics, never learned proper mathematics:

Fast Fourier Transforms, Laplace transforms (gee, the French school of mathematicians is high up in Engineering and Science), differential equations, all being used in high-tech developments, now that's too much world competitition in intellectuality for BTox from New Jersey and the likes.

BTox with his low U.S. schooling, cannot even articulate any arguments in this thread, he just grunts a little bit, that's all.

[TillEulenspiegel]

Ummm Dr. Rice gentlemen, The fact that she holds a doctorate means approximately zero when it comes to a political position . Remember She was appointed to mirror and codify the direction of Bush policy and turn it into a cohesive policy.

Mssrs. Kissenger, Goebbels and Karadzic all held this accreditation so any correlation between being educated and adopting a sensible position is...Disputable.

Don't bother to quibble about comparison is of Nazis and Bush cabinet members as that is not what I am alluding to

[RandFan,Jr.]

Originally posted by Nasarius
Well, we're not going to get anyone who's agnostic/atheist/deist anytime soon, so I guess it's better to take a believer with the right idea rather than a fundie with the wrong idea. *shrug* "Belilver"? Fundie? What's the diference? Right idea? Give me a break.

[Ion]

Originally posted by RandFan,Jr.

...
Right idea?
...

I will give you one right idea:
Originally posted by Ion

...
Dean has advocated a balanced budget, which is what the International Monetary Fund wants.
And there are many more, in this thread and elsewhere.

Which you can start to appreciate when you study properly.

Not like "...I love to wright about fantasy...", which is in your signature and is incorrect.

[RandFan,Jr.]

Originally posted by Ion
which is in your signature and is incorrect. Just because I made a mistake in my signature does not mean that I dont understand. why not just make an argument and not talk down to me? You don't know me and you don't know what I know.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


OMFG!!! YOU MEAN THERE MIGHT BE A PRES WHO MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFF BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT!!!!! OMFG WTF!!!!! WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TOO!?!? ITS THE END OF CIVILISATION AS WE KNOW IT!!!!! OH! THE HUMANITY!!! WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!! WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!


It is sort of a question of basic literacy, I think.

[Skeptic]

Ummm Dr. Rice gentlemen, The fact that she holds a doctorate means approximately zero when it comes to a political position .

Exactly. Which is why it's about time people should tell Chomsky & co. to shut the hell up.

Why they think that, just because they're academics with Ph.D., they know the first thing about politics, is beyond me.

[The idea]

Originally posted by Skeptic
[...] it's about time people should tell Chomsky & co. to shut the hell up.

Why they think that, just because they're academics with Ph.D., they know the first thing about politics, is beyond me.
(1) Chomsky gets prestige by writing books about political issues.
(2) Chomsky gets money by writing books about political issues.
(3) Chomsky perhaps fancies himself to be an American Solzhenitsyn.

Now what were you advising? You would have to find some alternative activity for Chomsky that is equally rewarding for him.

On the other hand, why does it even matter what Chomsky says or whether he says anything? Is he abusing the courts by bringing frivolous lawsuits? Maybe the solution is for you to just tune him out.

[Ion]

Originally posted by RandFan,Jr.

...
...why not just make an argument...
...

I told you:

"...Dean has advocated a balanced budget, which is what the International Monetary Fund wants."

In contrast to Dean's platform and to Dean's policy when governor of Vermont, Bush indebts U.S. with wrong tax cuts and wrong war.

I posted the link showing what the International Monetary Fund wants 16 posts ago, and I summarized some of Dean's feats 14 posts ago.

Dean and Bush are like day and night, achievement-wise.

[Ion]

I disagree with this:
Originally posted by Ed

It is sort of a question of basic literacy, I think.
I don't care much about the Old Testament and the New Testament after I studied and found them erroneous, so off-hand I would confuse things in them.

However I care about speaking four languages without many confusions, I care about performing mathematics without many confusions, I care about being more lucid during the day than confused people that surround me, etc..

Languages, mathematics and little or zero Bible, they do make for a lot of literacy.

As for Dean's knowledge, he knows a lot, he is a medical doctor who made it on his own intellect (not with the help of legacy like Bush or affirmative action like minorities), he is a successful ex-governor of Vermont (in contrast with Bush when governor of Texas), and Dean is easily more literate than the chimp who is now the U.S. President.

Probably Dean doesn't care much about the Bible, like I don't care much about the Bible too.

[Malachi151]

The thing to fear with Dean is not his stupidity, but his shrewd and fabulously correct policy of taking advantage of the fact that many Americans are ignorant of the world around them and will fall easily for the best line they hear that week.

What planet do you live on?

I would venture to say that the two presidents to take biggest advantage of this in the past 30 years have been Ronald Reagan and George Bush Jr, DUH!

Ah yes, I forgot, Bush's record clearly shows that he offers "fair and balanced" views to the publc :rolleyes" cripes!

[Malachi151]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Ummm Dr. Rice gentlemen, The fact that she holds a doctorate means approximately zero when it comes to a political position .

Exactly. Which is why it's about time people should tell Chomsky & co. to shut the hell up.

Why they think that, just because they're academics with Ph.D., they know the first thing about politics, is beyond me.

Why you think that posting on the internet means you know anything about anything is beyond me :D

(Translation of Skeptic's ideas): Only people who agree with me know anything, everyone else needs to "shut the hell up".

He so smaat.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
Languages, mathematics and little or zero Bible, they do make for a lot of literacy.

You mean illiteracy. Dean has as much chance of winning as you have of ever grasping even the simple concept of recession - in other words, no chance.

[Ion]

Imbecile, how many jobs were in U.S. in January 2001, before Bush?

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
Imbecile, how many jobs were in U.S. in January 2001, before Bush?

Wow, it took you that long to post the same inane question every time I ask you what a recession is? You're not only stupid, and racist, but boring. ho hum...

[Ion]

When was I racist?

Just because you are black?

And an idiot?

Statistical reports from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/), has data that can be produced in the form of a customized data report (http://data.bls.gov/labjava/outside.jsp?survey=bd). If you browse to THAT PAGE (http://data.bls.gov/labjava/outside.jsp?survey=bd), select "Employment," "Level - In Thousands," "Gross Job Gains" and (holding down your "Control" button) "Gross Job Losses," make your choice from "Seasonally adjusted" and/or "Not seasonally adjusted," and then click on the "Get Data" button, you will be presented with a set of numbers for the years 1993 through the first quarter of 2003. When you receive that page, you may also click on "include graphs" and change the range of years before pressing the "Go" button to receive your modified query results.

Unfortunately, the results are not presented with any "net" numbers, and also it appears to me that the seasonal adjustments have gone bonkers since the economy headed south after Bush took office. So, lets look at the rates for the annual numbers without seasonal adjustments (in theory, looking at the annual numbers, not seasonally adjusted, ought to give you the same results as the seasonally adjusted numbers; this is true prior for 2001, anyway), as calculated by Microsoft Excel: 1993 - added 2,585,000 jobs. 1994 - added 3,174,000 jobs. 1995 - added 2,449,000 jobs. 1996 - added 2,440,000 jobs. 1997 - added 2,967,000 jobs. 1998 - added 2,854,000 jobs. 1999 - added 2,612,000 jobs. 2000 - added 1,904,000 jobs. 2001 - lost 3,011,000 jobs. 2002 - lost 425,000 jobs. 2003 (first quarter only) - lost 2,669,000 jobs.So, what is Bush's record to date on the jobs front? The net from the available Business Employment Dynamics reports is that Bush has lost 6,105,000 American jobs!

I don't understand how Bush can run for reelection on this kind of a record.

So, imbecile, how many jobs were in U.S. in January 2001, before Bush?

[Ion]

It's not me who persecutes you BTox with your "...racist..." whining.

It's the nature:

you are an idiot, regardless of your skin color.

But I bet you look for free rides in U.S. anyway -like affirmative action, when you are too disabled to learn sciences-.
Originally posted by BTox

...
...every time I ask you what a recession is?...
...

Helpless I.Q., toxy?

So you ask me for help once again, with "...what a recession is?".

http://www.jobwatch.org/ima/4-200401cumulativedecember650.gif

But no U.S. recession, eh, imbecile?

Are there many like you at your place, toxy?

[Ion]

This:
Originally posted by Ion

...
But I bet you look for free rides in U.S. anyway -like affirmative action, when you are too disabled to learn sciences-.
...
So you ask me for help once again, with "...what a recession is?".
...

makes me thinking what your problem is BTox.

Based on what the U.S. affirmative action does to you, toxy:

1.) you don't see a recession, you have a mercy job even though you are not capable in fields in demand -sciences, like me-;

2.) I bet that you think you should get mercy sex too;

I don't know about your chances in getting mercy sex because this depends on women not on the government, you know?

3.) whoever disputes your mercy free rides in the U.S., is a "...racist...".

Well, at my level, I earn 1.) -by being imported to the U.S.-, and 2.).

I don't value your pitiful U.S. free rides, toxy.

That's why most U.S. people see the recession, but you don't see it:

you haven't earned 1.) and 2.), and if they don't come by affirmative action to you then you bitch in 3.) that someone is a "...racist...".

toxy, you are coward and uneducated...

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion
This:

makes me thinking what your problem is BTox.

Based on the U.S. affirmative action:

1.) you don't see a recession, you have a mercy job even though you are not capable in fields in demand -sciences, like me-;

2.) I bet that you think you should get mercy sex too;

I don't know about your chances in getting mercy sex because this depends on women not on the government, you know?

3.) whoever doesn't give you mercy free rides in U.S., is a "...racist...".

Well, at my level, I earn 1.) -by being imported to the U.S.-, and 2.).

I don't value your pitiful U.S. free rides, toxy.

That's why most U.S. people see the recession, but you don't:

you haven't earned 1.) and 2.), and if they don't come by affirmative action to you, then you bitch in 3.) that someone is "...racist...".

You are wrong.

[Ion]

I think that you are wrong:
Originally posted by Grammatron

You are wrong.
Me, I am right.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion
I think that you are wrong:

Me, I am right.

You are very wrong because of what I said right here:

You are wrong.

Therefore you are wrong.

[Ion]

Which proves that I am right and you Gramma, you are wrong.

(Gramma, you are still a lapdog from your life as a serf in U.S.S.R., and you will remain.)

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion
Which proves that I am right and you Gramma, you are wrong.

(Gramma, you are still a lapdog from your life as a serf in U.S.S.R., and you will remain.)

Sir I am insulted and I expect an apology.

[Skeptic]

Now what were you advising? You would have to find some alternative activity for Chomsky that is equally rewarding for him.

Well, linguistics--where he REALLY knows what he's talking about--sounds like a possiblity. In fact, that's precisely the problem with Chomsky: he thinks that just because he is a genius in one field, linguistics, he is also a genius in another, politics. This is just not true.

Of course he has the right to say anything he wants about politics; what I wonder about is why anybody bothers to listen.

[Ion]

Originally posted by Grammatron

Sir I am insulted and I expect an apology.
If I knew you in person I would tell you the same thing that I wrote here, to your face.

From a number of threads here I saw you being a servile follower in awe of the U.S. authority that deceives and murders.

Not a strong thinker with an independent analytical will.

Not a free man.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
So, what is Bush's record to date on the jobs front? The net from the available Business Employment Dynamics reports is that Bush has lost 6,105,000 American jobs!

I don't understand how Bush can run for reelection on this kind of a record.



There's that French "education" at work again. You claim to have knowledge of mathematics, and can't even do a simple addition. That is scary stupid, my friend!

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
But I bet you look for free rides in U.S. anyway -like affirmative action, when you are too disabled to learn sciences-.

More racist blather, I see.


Originally posted by Ion
So you ask me for help once again, with "...what a recession is?".



And you still don't know? Pitiful!

[BTox]

I gotta tell you, this one gave me one of the biggest laughs I've had in weeks - thanks!


Originally posted by Ion
Based on what the U.S. affirmative action does to you, toxy:

Gee, I sure wish affirmative action applied to me. :D

Originally posted by Ion
1.) you don't see a recession, you have a mercy job even though you are not capable in fields in demand -sciences, like me-;

A mercy job? Hilarious as it applies to me. Blatantly racist if I was, in fact, black or another minority. And not capable in the sciences? :D Oh, man, if you only knew. I've been employed in the life sciences for almost 25 years. If you worked for my company (global, multi-billion dollar), you'd be working for a PhD who works for me! Still howling over this one!

Originally posted by Ion
2.) I bet that you think you should get mercy sex too;

I don't know about your chances in getting mercy sex because this depends on women not on the government, you know?

I suppose you may have something here. My wife does give me mercy sex from time to time.

Originally posted by Ion
That's why most U.S. people see the recession, but you don't see it:

Actually U.S. citizens do not see a recession, because it doesn't exist anymore. Only nincompoops educated elsewhere seem to hold this inane view. I suppose you also believe in tinkerbell the fairy?

Originally posted by Ion
you haven't earned 1.) and 2.), and if they don't come by affirmative action to you then you bitch in 3.) that someone is a "...racist...".


Allow me to give you U.S. etiquette tip number 2: being a supporter of a liberal democrat candidate like Dean, and at the same time holding a position as Grand Wizard of the KKK, is typically frowned upon by those circles. I'm sure you can find a local skinhead/nazi candidate that better fits your social philosophy.

Good luck, nitwit!

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion

If I knew you in person I would tell you the same thing that I wrote here, to your face.

From a number of threads here I saw you being a servile follower in awe of the U.S. authority that deceives and murders.

Not a strong thinker with an independent analytical will.

Not a free man.

No apology? I should have known that you did not care about people. However, since you are willing to insult me to my face, feel free to PM me your address in San Diego, next time I am down there I will come over so we may have a more in-depth discussion on this matter.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Grammatron


No apology? I should have known that you did not care about people. However, since you are willing to insult me to my face, feel free to PM me your address in San Diego, next time I am down there I will come over so we may have a more in-depth discussion on this matter.

Good gravy. I long for the day when little boys stop bridging up to each other on the internet. Grow up.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Good gravy. I long for the day when little boys stop bridging up to each other on the internet. Grow up.

You assume incorrectly that I want to fight him, I merely want to hold a normal insult free, full of facts discussion with him. If it takes a face-to-face meeting, than perhaps he will agree to one as he keeps only dishing out insults atop his Euro-educated high horse.

[Ion]

I skip over all your nonsense toxy, because I dismantled it already, except this:
Originally posted by BTox

...
A mercy job?
...

You know why you are scared of Europeans, toxy?

In Europe you don't get affirmative action, schools are free for everyone and people get admitted only on learned merit based on anonymous exams.

It's not the afirmative action free ride that you get in the U.S., toxy, under the myth of US. 'competitivity':

in Europe you get in only on incognito exams of anonymous learned merit.

Then you get selected on skills like me to come to the U.S. because of lack of skilled locals.

Including lack of skilled locals that come from the U.S. affirmative action.

In Europe, you can whine about "...racism..." and "...KKK..." like you do it in this thread when not getting affirmative action, but that doesn't advance you anywhere there.

[Ion]

Originally posted by Grammatron

...
...full of facts discussion with him.
...

Full of facts?

You got it.

Look for the Carnegie study that I posted here about Bush's war being unnecessary, murderous and a waste.

Look for the IMF study that I posted here about Bush's tax cuts being disastrous to the U.S. and the world.

Look for how many U.S. jobs I prove here that Bush has lost since 2001.

Look for the balanced budget that I show here that Dean advocates.

Look for the feats that Dean as a Vermont governor achieves and which I enumerate here.

And other facts.

These facts come from my posts in this thread.

But zero facts come from you.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion

Full of facts?

You got it.

Look for the Carnegie study that I posted here about Bush's war being unnecessary, murderous and a waste.

Look for the IMF study that I posted here about Bush's tax cuts being disastrous to the U.S. and the world.

Look for how many U.S. jobs I prove here that Bush has lost since 2001.

Look for the balanced budget that I show here that Dean advocates.

Look for the feats that Dean as a Vermont governor achieves and which I enumerate here.

And other facts.

These facts come from my posts in this thread.

But zero facts come from you.

Aside from the fact that they are either or opinions or incorrect and were shown before here thusly.

[Ion]

Department of Labor's numbers are opinions or incorrect?

No way.

They are hard numbers.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion
Department of Labor's numbers are opinions or incorrect?

No way.

They are hard numbers.

You must forgive me but all I saw was "Bush has lost 6,105,000 American jobs!" with no link to department of labor to back it up. If you would be so kind as to provide this link that would be great.

[WildCat]

Originally posted by Ion
In Europe you don't get affirmative action, schools are free for everyone and people get admitted only on learned merit based on anonymous exams.
Then how do they know who to admit, if the exams are anonymous? :confused:

Originally posted by Ion
It's not the afirmative action free ride that you get in the U.S., toxy, under the myth of US. 'competitivity':

in Europe you get in only and only on incognito exams and anonymously learned merit.
I take it these exams don't include writing composition? I've seen schizophrenic homeless crackheads who could form a thought with more clarity than that one. But I'll give the incorrect spelling and poor grammar a pass since you're not a native speaker of English.

Originally posted by Ion
Then you get selected on skills like me to come to the U.S..

You can whine about "...racism..." in Europe when not getting affirmative action, but that doesn't get you anywhere there.
Another disjointed, convoluted, incoherent thought.

I'm beginning to think that you arrived to the US via adoption by a childless couple who couldn't adopt a healthy white baby, so they had to settle for a mentally disabled orphan from Europe. Maybe you ate a lot of lead paint chips as a toddler?

[Ion]

Then look again.

Click on the right buttons of the links that I posted.

Because you didn't do it yet, your claim of 'opinions' and 'incorrect' show you being sloppy.

Which I noticed many times before, when you skim over many facts that are posted with your preconceived limitations.

[Ion]

I will skip over most of the post written by this U.S. imbecile here, and will address only the imbecility below, with the rest of his imbecilities for him to correct and catch up:
Originally posted by WildCat

Then how do they know who to admit, if the exams are anonymous? :confused:
...

Like in the timed events (swimming, track, etc.) of the Olympic Games.

There are no medals allocated for affirmative action.

There are anonymous results.

Gee, I have just spoken to a Taliban mind from Chicago...

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion
Then look again.

Click on the right buttons of the links that I posted.

Because you didn't do it yet, your claim of 'opinions' and 'incorrect' show you being sloppy.

Which I noticed many times before, when you skim over many facts that are posted with your preconceived limitations.

I am sorry to inform you but you are making a mistake in reading these statistics. Firstly you did not account for population change that occurred between 1999 and now. Where's in 1999, at the height of the economic boom we had 272 million people, now we have 292 million. Since I currently do not have exact numbers for employable people in 1999 or today I cannot correctly give you the true number of jobs gained and lost. However, considering that even with the population growth the unemployment level went up only 1.7 percent, I do not see it that staggering, certainly it does not prove your point of 6.1mil jobs lost under Bush.

[Ion]

Originally posted by Grammatron

I am sorry to inform you but...
...

I am sorry to inform you but the total nonfarm payroll employment in U.S., year by year is here:

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab1.htm

and it was there in another thread too, where you participated and I posted it.

For you to complain seven posts ago that these are 'opinions' and 'incorrect', but not to study the numbers that I repeatedly posted before, tells me that you are coming in these 'discussions' with a set mind, not with a critical analytical mind.

And I guess why.

The U.S. Department of Labor year by year here, show job losses under Bush, while he joyrides to war with taxpayer's money:

.) look at the number of nonfarm jobs in the U.S. in January 2001, before Bush;

.) look at the number of nonfarm jobs in the U.S., now in November 2003, under Bush.

Again, you haven't posted any data yourself in contrast to me, but man, with your mindset you talk...

[The idea]

Originally posted by Skeptic
Well, linguistics--where he REALLY knows what he's talking about--sounds like a possibility. In fact, that's precisely the problem with Chomsky: he thinks that just because he is a genius in one field, linguistics, he is also a genius in another, politics. This is just not true.

Oh no, it's a "he thinks he's so smart" accusation.
I recall reading an interview in which he said that people have claimed that he was using linguistics to deconstruct politics. Chomsky said that he doesn't even know what that means. He said that people are conned into thinking that some special qualification is needed to understand politics and contrasted it with the way ordinary people approach sports.

Originally posted by Skeptic
Of course he has the right to say anything he wants about politics; what I wonder about is why anybody bothers to listen.
He has a cult following. Just as there is a sequence Abraham, Moses, etc., there is a sequence Marx, Lenin, Stalin, etc., and some kind of sequence like Freud, Dali, Chomsky, etc.

[mjh36]

A few things to note while considering lon's vitriolic assault on Bush on the job front:

1) Using the adjusted method for calculating unemployment, by adding all people marginally working (i.e. part time, temp, migrant), which is a favorite trick of the liberal side to inflate the unemployment percentage, the unemployment rate in November was 9.7% Funny thing though, using that same method, the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows unemployment as high as 12.8% in the mid-90's. I forget...who was president in the mid-90's?

2) Manufacturing levels and productivity are up. In fact, productivity is at its highest rate since 1984. What this means is that we are making more with less. This one of the hidden factors behind unemployment that pundits like to ignore. When you can make more things with less people, then fewer people will be employed to make those things. This isn't a bad thing. Assembly lines cost thousands of jobs in the early 1900's, and that was good for production. Computer switchboards made an entire industry of switchboard operators obsolete, and that was good for the country as a whole. Progress and increased efficiency will always result in fewer jobs in areas that improve.

3) Illegal immigrants take up a ton of jobs that the average American refuses to do, such as chicken plucking, crop picking, etc. These are jobs that are unfilled by Americans, so part of the unemployment percentage is attributed not to lack of jobs, but lack of Americans willing to perform them.

4) During a recession, unemployment benefits are 50-70% of gross income for up to 39 weeks. Congress recently chopped the recession 13 extra weeks off the max benefit period and it is back to a standard 26 weeks at 50-70% gross. Our average (non-recession) unemployment period per individual is 8.4 weeks. In Europe, where unemployment benefits are 80-90% of gross income and paid up to one year, the unemployment rates are as follows:
-Belgium = 11.6%
-France, Italy, Germany = all at 9% or more
-Europe as a whole = 8.5%
-current US unemployment = 5.9%

Additionally, taxes in Europe are greater than they are in the US, and it is because of overboard social programs like above. If you give people more money for longer times while out of work, where is the incentive to return to work?

5) The recession began in late 1999, went slightly more sharply in 2000, and besides 9-11, the US economy took its biggest hit in November of 2000. Who was president? Add in the DotCom bubble burst, the Y2K scam of the millenia, and a speculative market from 1997-1999 rivaled only by 1928-1929, and the economy was due for the hit. This had nothing to do with Clinton really, and the October 2002 Atlantic monthly has an article by Clinton's chief economic advisor on the Roaring 90's and how it all happened.

6) The Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy. The first chapter of just about any economics text book tells us that lower taxes are good for economic growth. Partisan and classist rhetoric aside, the tax cuts did as economists have predicted they would.

So while I can appreciate Bush bashing on the steel tariff, the war in Iraq, and even his "compassionate conservatism" which is little more than buying votes like everyone else...I refuse to pin this absurd notion of him destroying, annihilating or simply eliminating 6 million jobs. It is bunk, pure and simple.

[Ion]

A little sentimental here:
Originally posted by mjh36
A few things to note while considering lon's vitriolic assault on Bush on the job front:
...

aren't we?

Let me prove that you do post without having studied what is already posted.
Originally posted by mjh36

...
1) Using the adjusted method for calculating unemployment,...

2)...

3) ...

4) ...
...
So while I can appreciate Bush bashing on the steel tariff, the war in Iraq, and even his "compassionate conservatism" which is little more than buying votes like everyone else...I refuse to pin this absurd notion of him destroying, annihilating or simply eliminating 6 million jobs. It is bunk, pure and simple.
Read this proof that was posted before:
Originally posted by Ion

...
http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab1.htm
...
The U.S. Department of Labor year by year here, shows job losses under Bush, while he joyrides to war with taxpayer's money.
...

I don't care about U.S. official unemployment and GDP, which are massaged numbers.

I care about the bare number of total nonfarm jobs in U.S..

Look for the U.S. total jobs in January 2001, before Bush.

Look for the U.S. total jobs in between January 2001 and the end of 2003, month by month, under Bush.

Explain to me why Bush joyrides to killing wars with taxpayer's money, in between 2001 and 2003.
Originally posted by mjh36

...
6) The Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy. The first chapter of just about any economics text book tells us that lower taxes are good for economic growth. Partisan and classist rhetoric aside, the tax cuts did as economists have predicted they would.

I posted this:
Originally posted by Ion

...
http://www.jobwatch.org/ima/4-200401cumulativedecember650.gif
...

didn't I?

It shows that, no:

the Bush tax cuts are in the wrong places (they are for rich idle people) and do not stimulate the economy.

Anything else worth repeating?

No wonder that Bush has supporters, when these supporters don't have critical thinking since an alarm bell rang in February 2003 when Bush's envoy to the U.N. (Powell) lied to the world about Iraq.

[mjh36]

Those are lovely graphs Lon, but they don't explain how Bush killed those jobs. Please cite the examples of how Bush killed 6 million jobs. I mean, Clinton signed NAFTA and made moving manufacturing to Mexico easier which was a marginally good thing (better had it been implemented as drawn up) and cost American jobs. The last thing I recall Bush doing directly related to the labor force was the following two things:

1) The absurd steel tariff, which was enacted in the vain hope that it would protect the American steel industry and the JOBS of the steel workers. His policy, his signature and the WTO went nuts and we repealed it...rightfully so. So that example shows him clearly trying blatant protectionism to save American workers.

2) The capital gains, dividend and corporate taxes are cut as part of his tax cut package. This allows companies to retain more of their earnings for re-investment, development, as well as insulating from layoffs and downsizing by both increasing wealth of the company and fortifying investor confidence. Again, a benefit to the worker as a corollary effect, but a benefit nonetheless.

So please, show me the bill that he proposed that Congress passed, a policy or program he implemented by executive order, or any other official administrative process where George Bush called for the elimination of 6 million jobs. A graph of total jobs will not suffice. I need to see the direct cause and effect, I need to see the policy, the vote or the paperwork where he chose to sh1tcan 6 million people.

[Ion]

Originally posted by mjh36
Those are lovely graphs Lon, but they don't explain how Bush killed those jobs.
...

When I write that Bush joyrides to killing wars with taxpayer's money, that's one big explanation.

In another thread I posted that since 2000, the index of confidence in the U.S. consumer economy skydives.

$100 billion of taxpayer money wasted in Iraq's war would have been better spent by Bush stimulating the consumer economy.

Another big explanation is that Bush is not as intellectual as the German bureaucrats are.

Keeping capital and jobs in Germany, not outsourcing jobs, that's a success of the German bureaucrats backed up by a heavy German history.

[mjh36]

Few more things to note here Lon:

1) The larger of the multi-step tax cuts was not passed until May of 2003. And was paired down by Congress to just over one quarter of what Bush had originally planned for. That pairing down was led, coincidentally, by 2 GOP reps, and 1 GOP and 1 Dem senator. So how 1/4 of Dubyah's 2003 tax cut cost jobs in 2001 is sort of weird.

2) The beginning of the recession was Nov 2000. The 9-11 spike helped temporarily push the valley a bit lower. Since May 2002, the economy has been going back up, with growth higher right now than in decades. The reason I mention this is because job markets and the unemployment statistic typically lag the real economy by 6-12 months. This time next year, the numbers will tell the tale. This is chapter 3 of basic economics, at least in my old textbook.

3) Once more, explain how cutting taxes cuts jobs? The workers keep more money, the employer pays less employee payroll tax, the company pays less corporate and capital gain tax, the investor gets higher dividends on investment with less tax on the gain. The only place tax cuts hurt is in social programs and prok barrel spending. Other than that, they are good for the economy all the way around.

4) In Jan, 1995, the Congressional Budget Office predicted a deficit, going along current trends of the time and projected expenditures, that the deficit would be $322 billion. The actual deficit for 2002 was less than $250 billion.

The economy began tanking in summer of 2000. That is a fact, and it takes very little effort to understand it. It is now rebounding at a good rate, again a fact. In between, we had Pearl Harbor II, Enron, WorldCom, the War on Terrorism and a variety of gloomy things. But nowhere in any of those things do I see how a tax cut cost 6 million jobs.

[Ion]

Originally posted by mjh36
Few more things to note here Lon:
...
3) Once more, explain how cutting taxes cuts jobs? The workers keep more money, the employer pays less employee payroll tax, the company pays less corporate and capital gain tax, the investor gets higher dividends on investment with less tax on the gain. The only place tax cuts hurt is in social programs and prok barrel spending. Other than that, they are good for the economy all the way around.
...

and
Originally posted by mjh36

...
The economy began tanking in summer of 2000.
...

mjh36, I am Ion, not Lon.

Ion is I (like in Inside), o, n.

I cannot dissect all of your post, I am at work, but I will focus on these two quotes.

1) Regarding the first quote, I wrote that Bush cut taxes for the rich.

Not for the middle class.

When investing in the rich, the rich is either idle, or not idle and invests in new products.

The new products cannot be bought by a poorer middle class.

It is the middle class that invests in the consumer economy.

A good model of industrial success, including unions, universal health care, solid manufacturing, solid or grounbreaking designs is found in Germany.

2.) Regarding the second quote, it is in January 2001 when he took office, that Bush should have focused on the consumer economy.

Instead he neglected the consumer economy.

By taxing it to supply his wars, by cutting taxes for the rich not the middle class.

[mjh36]

Originally posted by Ion

When I write that Bush joyrides to killing wars with taxpayer's money, that's one big explanation.

In another thread I posted that since 2000, the index of confidence in the U.S. consumer economy skydives.

$100 billion of taxpayer money wasted in Iraq's war would have been better spent by Bush stimulating the consumer economy.

Another big explanation is that Bush is not as intellectual as the German bureaucrats are.

Keeping capital and jobs in Germany, not outsourcing jobs, that's a success of the German bureaucrats backed up by a heavy German history.
But you claim that tax cuts cost jobs. How?

Yes, consumer confidence has fallen since 2000 and it started with the Y2K scam, then the DotComs collapse and hit NASDAQ hard, the Enron/WorldCom thing and then 9-11. Of those things, which had anything to with Bush other than him being president for the latter two?

How does that $100 billion wasted on the war stimulate an economy? The only way it can is if the government gives it to the consumer to spend. There are two ways to do that (1) give everyone in America a check for $500, or cut American workers' taxes so they keep a net $100 billion. Either way, they get more money and pay less tax as a percentage of their income.

Oddly, you suggest that instead of going to war with Iraq, Bush should have just cut taxes. I agree with the tax cuts part, and so did Dubyah when he cut taxes and stimulated the economy. Of note, he wanted to add more money to the consumer pool, but Congress ix-nayed that and gave us 1/4 of his proposal. The war, well we can debate that until hell freezes over and probably will.

On the Germany thing. Germany has higher unemployment, higher taxes, engages in protectionism and tariffs that seem to be fine for the World Trade Organization so long as it is any country other than the US doing it. Germany has a far lower ratio of working people to welfare recipients than the US. Germany has a far smaller military and defense presence than the US. Germany has higher housing prices and price controls by the government. Bottom line (and this isn't insulting, it is a political science fact):

-Germany is part of the European secular socialist conglomerate

-The United States is capitalist republic, with ever increasing government controls on how freely the capitalism is allowed to function.

FYI, Germany and France are both in welfare induced economic deep water that may take decades to pull out of. So it goes with socialism, and so it will always go with socialism. It is a great system initially, but because it feeds on its own organs, eventually it kills itself. Plenty of attempts in the last 500 years, and none of them have worked as well as capitalism.

[Ion]

I will focus on this:
Originally posted by mjh36

But you claim that tax cuts cost jobs. How?
...
FYI, Germany and France are both in welfare induced economic deep water that may take decades to pull out of.
...

Tax cuts for the rich -like I wrote- is either idle when the rich is satisfied regardless, either generating new products that the middle class cannot buy anyway.

When the consumer confidence index went from 136 in 2000 to 91 in November 2003, that's a sign that the the middle class cannot afford to buy as much into the consumer economy.

Regarding Germany and France, U.S. would be lucky to ever get to that level.

I was there for years, I saw it, and I am here in the U.S. for a specific hobby that I have, not related to the ineptitude of Bush's economics and society.

In short, for millions of U.S. people it is not worth working, considering that in Germany and France unemployed people keep 90% of their salary for 12 months, after which it declines a little into the 80s and 70s, but not much.

Then why it is worth to be unemployed in Germany and France?

I will tell you why.

People are esily more educated there than in the U.S., there is universal health care available to them, they are well dressed (unlike in the U.S.), and do things with a purpose -like getting a meaningful new training or a meaningful new job related to a passion, not to survival-.

A life with purpose that makes sense.

And you can see better looking and cleaner cities than in the U.S..

In the U.S., below my level, I see a rat race for desesperate people who always run behind to pay bills, and above my level I see greedy, fat (literally obscene fat) people who dog-eat-dog for the gluttony of more profits.

In both instances in the U.S., ugliness like not taking personal care of oneself, is blatant.

[mjh36]

I love the "tax cuts for the rich" mantra. Do you realize that the top 5% income earners in this country pay 50% of the total personal income tax of the entire nation? The top 20% pay 79% of the entire personal income tax. How the heck do you cut your tax intake without making it benefit them disproportionately, since they are disproportionately paying the lion's share of America's tax burden?

Of the three great Lies of the Left, the Tax Cut of the Rich is the one most easily believed because nobody can do the math to see that when your progressive and confiscatory tax structure is made to penalize success by an obscene amount, then when you relax the success penalties, the successful will be of the most benefit, as they were previously the most victimized.

The only way to cut taxes, given that "The Rich"pay 80% of America's bills, and make sure the cut goes only to the middle and lower class, is to eliminate the lower two taxpayer divisions entirely, while leaving "The Rich" to pay 100% of the burden. Ahhh, there's an idea. People already think rich people rule the government, how much fun would the media have if "The Rich" paid 100% of the bills? Staggering thought.

[hammegk]

Ion=Loon, not "Lon".

mjh36: Why are you bothering?

[mjh36]

Originally posted by Ion
I will focus on this:
Regarding Germany and France, U.S. would be lucky to ever get to that level.

In short, for millions of U.S. people it is not worth working, considering that in Germany and France unemployed people keep 90% of their salary for 12 months, after which it declines a little into the 80s and 70s, but not much.

Then why it is worth to be unemployed in Germany and France?

I will tell you why.

People are esily more educated there than in the U.S., there is universal health care available to them, they are well dressed (unlike in the U.S.), and do things with a purpose -like getting a meaningful new training or a meaningful new job related to a passion, not to survival-.

A life with purpose that makes sense.

And you can see better looking and cleaner cities than in the U.S..

In the U.S., below my level, I see a rat race for desesperate people who always run behind to pay bills, and above my level I see greedy, fat (literally obscene fat) people who dog-eat-dog for the gluttony of more profits.

In both instances in the U.S., ugliness like not taking personal care of oneself, is blatant.
This is the difference between socialism and capitalism. In its early stages, and I already stipulated to this, socialism is a wonderful thing. Everyone has what they need and can do what they want. The problem is, and you already reminded everyone, is that there is little incentive to work in a society where you get 90% of your gross income while unemployed, and do for up to a year. After that, welfare in Germany and France pays recipients far better than America. The effect of that is that France and Germany have gone from an avergae of 12 people working for every 1 person on welfare in the 70s, to 2 people working for every 1 person collecting welfare in the late 90s. Keep following that graph and see where it leads...

Where it leads is eventually the break even ratio, and beyond that, more people unemployed than working. So it goes with socialism, and always has. Removing the incentive to work and produce based on cozy safety nets has resulted in the ruination of more than a few societies. It works great on paper and even well in reality...but only for brief periods. Then it either must be reformed towards capitalism, or swallow itself whole. History bears this out.

One note, and this is as an American, our ugliness is typically concentrated in areas where social welfare is at its highest. In working class neighborhoods, where your property value is a function of your upkeep efforts and those of your neighbors, blight is severely reduced. Most middle class neighborhoods where I live have strict zoning laws about everything, all the way to how you bag your lawn clippings. Aesthetic beauty benefits everyone monetarily, and as a result, is maintained. Again, the unseen hand of capitalism.

Our ugliness is most prevalent where people do not own anything and are therefore all too comfy with allowing decay. Ours is a distracted culture where idle hands do more than evil, they do nothing at all. And before we paint too rosy a picture of France and Germany, I have been to most of the population centers of both countries and I can say with absolute clarity that French and German cities have just as much urban ugliness as do Los Angeles or New York. In fact, outside of the Paris tourist traps, Paris is akin to a below average neighborhood in Manhattan.

Loathing America is your prerogative, but your statements are myopic and disingenuous.

[mjh36]

One more thing,

you claim that for millions of Americans, there is no incentive to work. You also claim that all the breaks in this country go to "The Rich." If both the money and good fortune follow "The Rich" then why would anyone not wish to achieve their status? The lack of incentive to work in this country is increasing because the benefits for not working are increasing. In my earlier post, I showed how France/Germany went from 12:1 to 2:1 on the worker:welfare thing, but America has gone 16:1 to 7:1 in the same period. As the ratio gets closer to 1, so does American apathy and laziness.

Once more the cheap seats...

Socialism is a good short term and horrible long term economic model. The invisible hand of capitalism in the free market environment is what has always produced the most longevity of societies in history. The minute utopian ideals tie that invisible hand behind society's back is the same minute things take the turn for the worse.

[Ion]

Originally posted by hammegk
Ion=Loon, not "Lon".

mjh36: Why are you bothering?
hammegeek,

you should ask yourself before making noise:

why are you bothering with your "Why are you bothering?"?

[Ion]

Because of a lack of time, I will focus on this:
Originally posted by mjh36
One more thing,

you claim that for millions of Americans, there is no incentive to work. You also claim that all the breaks in this country go to "The Rich." If both the money and good fortune follow "The Rich" then why would anyone not wish to achieve their status?
...

In U.S. just about anyone does "...wish to achieve their status...".

I spend more than 12 hours per week on my hobby, my work is secondary to me passion-wise, and I make close to six figures in my work because managers think that talent in U.S. is rewarded with greedy perks.

I laugh at U.S.people's faces, because I see them chasing their tails while neglecting their well-being in favor of material possessions.

As for the welfare and unemployment things that you mention, like I wrote -and you struggle to learn my perspective- there is no point to work in U.S. in most jobs, while you can be unemployed in Europe for a much better income.

Then, while unemployed in Europe, you can take care of your personal well-being better than chasing your tail in miserable U.S. jobs.

Let me give you one such example.

I read while in Canada, 'These Dutch, how unAmerican' in a newspaper.

It said that the government gave free brothel passes to the unemployed, so as to keep the social tensions down.

I saw examples of similar style, while in France.

[Grammatron]

Ion, thank you for that wonderful addition to my signature, I will treasure it always.

[mjh36]

Well now I know how to prove my point about France and Germany decaying, once again, into ruination. We should send all of our unemployed Americans to France and Germany. They can live it up. WOOT!

One question: if it rules so much to be a sloth in France and Germany, why do so many people flock to America to work?

[Ion]

Originally posted by mjh36
Well now I know how to prove my point about France and Germany decaying, once again, into ruination.
...
One question: if it rules so much to be a sloth in France and Germany, why do so many people flock to America to work?
I think that U.S. is decaying, certainly not Germany.

I lived in Western Europe and the U.S..

Mercedes-Benz was a good German car before Chrysler decayed it.

German beer is better than the decayed U.S. beer.

And so on.

By comparison, buying German is often buying better products than buying American.

U.S. is decaying.

More so now under Bush, than under Clinton.

As for flocking to work, I work but my hobby is more important.

As for others flocking to work, there are a lot of immigrants from third-world countries who think that U.S. is everything.

U.S. high-tech companies employ East Indians and Asians at over 50%.

Eastern European countries send immigrants who have an inferiority complex towards U.S..

To them, there is their native third-world country, and there is the American way.

They don't know -like I do- that there is a third way, the best way, the Western European way.

[Elektrix]

What are the current unemployment rates in Germany? During the last German elections I seem to recall reading about how in some areas unemployment was incredibly high (something like 40% unemployment in some parts of Germany).

Just curious.

-Elektrix

[Ion]

Another dumb.

Again, dumby, it is better to be unemployed in Germany than employed in U.S. in most jobs.

As for the U.S. being in decay under Bush, mjh36, chew this:

Al Martin Raw (http://www.almartinraw.com/)

.) the total U.S. national debt is: $20.6 trillion;

.) the total U.S. public and private debt: $39.4 trillion;

.) the total U.S. assets: $26 trillion.

So, the total interest for all the U.S. debt is three times the U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

But, sure Bush is sending U.S. to Mars with money that U.S. doesn't have.

Keep in mind though that under Clinton, just three years ago, U.S. had a balanced budget. Now, Bush lost that.

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by Ion
Another dumb.

Again, dumby, it is better to be unemployed in Germany than employed in U.S. in most jobs.

As for the U.S. being in decay under Bush, chew this:

Al Martin Raw (http://www.almartinraw.com/)

.) the total U.S. national debt is: $20.6 trillion;

.) the total U.S. public and private debt: $39.4 trillion;

.) the total U.S. assets: $26 trillion.

So, the total *interest* for all our debt is three times the U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

But, sure Bush is sending U.S. to Mars with money that U.S. doesn't have.

Whoa, jeez, why are you attacking me? I was asking a serious question, because I was curious about it, and I figured you would be able to answer it. I wasn't trying to make a judgement on Germany or compare unemployment in Germany to employment in the US or anything else. I was simply asking a question about unemployment rates.

I have no idea why you are calling me dumb, and I think it's uncalled for, frankly.

I will keep in mind not to ask any more questions though.

-Elektrix

[Ion]

That big number of 40% was in places in the former East Germany, like Leipzig, after the two Germanies unified in 1990.

The number in these places was staying high during the 90s.

I don't know the current unemployment numbers in Germany, but they must level more now to what West Germany used to be.

All in all, buying German beats buying American most of the time.

And the German social net is way better than the American social net.

And the German women look better than the American women.

I still would like to see Claudia Schiffer's type in the U.S..

I saw Claudia Schiffer's type pretty often among Germans.

Who have time and passion for enjoying quality sex.

But in the U.S. I see unkept fat people instead who chase their tails to either survive like slaves or be gluttons like porks.

[hammegk]

Chew on these stats, not that you would understand them.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterwilliams/ww20040114.shtml

Or babble on. You are correct that we won't be chatting anymore.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Ion
That big number of 40% was in places in the former East Germany, like Leipzig, after the two Germanies unified in 1990.

The number in these places was staying high during the 90s.

I don't know the current unemployment numbers in Germany, but they must level more now to what West Germany used to be.

All in all, buying German beats buying American most of the time.

And the German social net is way better than the American social net.

And the German women look better than the American women.

I still would like to see Claudia Schiffer's type in the U.S..

I saw Claudia Schiffer's type pretty often among Germans.

Who have time and passion for enjoying quality sex.

But in the U.S. I see unkept fat people instead who chase their tails to either survive like slaves or be gluttons like porks.

Most of this is your opinion; the rest is your bigotry. Not really impressive or convincing, then again, you're Ion, the JREF resident retard. One question, (I have doubts you’ll answer) if you hate the US and think it's such a horrible place, why are you still here?

[Ion]

Most of this:
Originally posted by Tony

Most of this is your opinion; the rest is your bigotry.
...

is your opinion, and the rest is your bigotry.
Originally posted by Tony

...
One question, (I have doubts you’ll answer) if you hate the US and think it's such a horrible place, why are you still here?
Reading difficulties with what I already answered a few posts ago in this thread, Baloney?

[Ion]

Originally posted by hammegk
Chew on these stats, not that you would understand them.
...

loony-geek,

convince me.

Every link that I post, I am explaining it too.

Why should I open yours?

Just being an American slob here (which is a classic in this country anyways), who throws in a link and smirks like an imbecile?

No, thanks, loony-geek, you will have to explain the link with your own capabilities (if you have at least two tiny capabilities) and convince me that I need to look for something in it.

[Otther]

Ion,

Germany's unemployment rate rose in December to 10.4 percent from 10 percent the previous month
the more prosperous western part of the country, which had a jobless rate of 8.4 percent, and the formerly communist east, which had a rate of 17.9 percent.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/apbiz_story.asp?category=1310&slug=Germany%20Jobless

The nation’s (US) unemployment rate dropped to 5.7 percent
http://arkansasbusiness.com/news/headline_article.asp?aid=36297


Is it a GOOD or BAD thing that Germany's unemployment is higher than the US's?

[Loon]

Hammegk (and others),

Please note that your opponent in this arugment is "Ion," which means "charged particle." I am "Loon," which refers to an aquatic foul with red eyes, found both in Europe and North America (the bird, not just the eyes); the term also refers to the insane or those who hold/act on bizarre beliefs.

To keep this germane to the original topic, Dean's quote does reflect a lack of deep thought on the issue of sin, but religious overtones will be a necessary thing in this election, whether we like it or not. Bush's opponent will have to sling the G word as much as possible to win.

To stay germane (no pun intended) to the Germany/Europe vs. US thing, note first that American beer is indeed notoriously bad. Note second that most scientists are leaving Europe for the US, depite their attachment to the countries they call home:

http://www.time.com/time/europe/html/040119/brain/story.html

[Ion]

Originally posted by Otther
Ion,
...
Is it a GOOD or BAD thing that Germany's unemployment is higher than the US's?
10% is not bad, given that U.S. is over 9% (when adding the expired enemployed to the 5% of currently unemployed) without considering the welfare recipients and is way over 10% when adding the welfare recipients too.

(i.e.: U.S. plays tricks in accounting unemployment with artefacts like this)

From the point of view of someone who is educated, worked in a field, and cannot find work in that field anymore, that person is better off to be unemployed in Western Europe than to be employed in U.S. in some alternative low job:

most U.S. jobs are menial and not worth crawling for, while in Western Europe the person gets 90% of the salary for a while and gets to rest and improve one' skills in the meanwhile.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion

From my point of view, with my Engineering degree if I couldn't find Engineering work, I would rather be unemployed in Western Europe than being employed in U.S. in some alternative job:

most U.S. jobs are menial and not worth crawling for, while in Western Europe one gets 90% of the salary for a while and gets to rest and improve one' skills meanwhile.

Jiminy, the sanitation "engineer" with the french education that is the equivalent of a 6th grade U.S. education is still babbling here? Do you have no shame, man?

PS Know what a recession is yet?

[Ion]

I know this:
Originally posted by Loon

...
Note second that most scientists are leaving Europe for the US, depite their attachment to the countries they call home:
...

I make more money in the U.S. than I would in Western Europe.

The thing that I emphasized many times here and in other threads, is that managers think that they buy me with this money like if this money is the highest value that U.S. has to offer.

To me money is maybe the sixth or seventh item down a list.

My list starts with something that I came for, in U.S..

In 2002 when I was with a well-known company, in fact from your country Loon with a subsidiary in San Diego, a manager who tried to imitate the U.S. style told me "...That's why I pay you so much money...", I judged that he should have been competent professionally in the first place (one of the six items on my list ahead of the money), I told him that he is an idiot, that my life doesn't depend on him and I left the company on the spot.

Now, I work with another world-class company, and even for more money like if I cared about this the most.

I like to be free...

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox


Jiminy, the sanitation "engineer" with the french education that is the equivalent of a 6th grade U.S. education is still babbling here? Do you have no shame, man?

PS Know what a recession is yet?
Know what a recession is yet, toxy?

Regarding Engineering, the U.S. Bachelor is equivalent to an associate diploma in Europe.

You know nothing in Engineering, toxy.

So don't babble anymore with your U.S. education, equivalent to a 1st grade French education.

For you to get past a 1st grade French education, I am sure that you need some kind of affirmative action, toxy.

Can't help you there...

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion


So don't babble anymore with your U.S. education, equivalent to a 6th grade French education...

There's that butter knife wit again. Say, tell us, are you the driver of the truck or the guy that hangs on the back and dumps the cans?

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
.

You know nothing in Engineering, toxy.



Hey, you're like rouser - once in a blue moon you post something almost correct. I don't know much about engineering as I'm a real scientist (actually a manager of scientists, now) in the biological sciences. Occasionally I interview engineers but they tend to be on the slow side, you know...

[Ion]

You mean that you are the garbage collector, toxy?

Did you need affirmative action to 'make it' happen?

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox

...
...Occasionally I interview engineers but they tend to be on the slow side, you know...
Nah, it's just you who is time delayed.

As for being a manager, you know the saying is that who cannot do it, teaches and manages:

I bet that you are null in biology too and you cannot do biology.

[BTox]

Gee, my 8 year old son is a better debater (and can sling better insults) than you. He's even got a better grasp of economics than you! Well, I'm sure you'll need several hours to come up with a snappy retort, and I need to get to sleep. Nighty-night, nitwit!

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox
Gee, my 8 year old son is a better debater (and can sling better insults) than you.
...

Then why are you spending time 'debating' with me?

You are lying to yourself, toxy.

That's why outside yourself, you need affirmative action to 'make something'.

[Otther]

given that U.S. is over 9% (when adding the expired enemployed to the 5% of currently unemployed) without considering the welfare recipients and is way over 10% when adding the welfare recipients too. Can you source this assertion?

[Ion]

Originally posted by Otther
Can you source this assertion?
This:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimes_ts/20031229/ts_latimes/joblesscountskipsmillions

was published December 29, 2003.

Notice in it, the statement:

"...Add these three groups together and the jobless total for the U.S. hits 9.7%, up from 9.4% a year ago..."

It is my experience that in Western Europe when the official rate is 10%, then it is a honest 10% without artefacts.

The bottom line is:

U.S. is crap, especially now under Bush, when compared to the Western Europe.

Without a hobby that I keep alive while in the U.S. (hint: think that sunny San Diego has golden beaches), I wouldn't bother with this barbaric, religious and greedy country.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion

This:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimes_ts/20031229/ts_latimes/joblesscountskipsmillions

was published December 29, 2003.

Notice in it, the statement:

"...Add these three groups together and the jobless total for the U.S. hits 9.7%, up from 9.4% a year ago..."

It is my experience that in Western Europe when the official rate is 10%, then it is a honest 10% without artefacts.

The bottom line is:

U.S. is crap, especially now under Bush, when compared to the Western Europe.

Without a hobby that I keep alive while in the U.S. (hint: think that sunny San Diego has golden beaches), I wouldn't bother with this barbaric, religious and greedy country.

Let me educate you on some Geography that you obviously did not learn. Greece, Spain and Italy are in Europe, they all have wonderful, sunny beaches. I guess that means you can go ahead and leave now, don't let the door hit your a** on your way out.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Otther
Can you source this assertion?

I think I've determinied Ion's problem here - he is confusing Germany with the U.S.

Germany has been in recession the entire year of 2003, the U.S. recession ended 4Q 2001.

FRANKFURT (AFP) - The German economy, the biggest in the 12-country eurozone, notched up its worst performance in 10 years last year when it shrank by 0.1 percent, effectively entering its second recession in a decade, new data showed.



Source: german recession (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1203&e=5&u=/afp/20040115/bs_afp/germany_economy_growth&sid=96001027)

Yet the U.S. economy continues to boom:

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Inflation appears vanquished even as the US economy gathers strength, analysts said, as data showed the recovery at last reaching the battered labor market.

Consumer prices edged up 0.2 percent and retail sales rose a modest but respectable 0.5 percent in December, Thursday's data showed.

Last week, the queue of new jobless claimants shrank by 11,000 to 343,000.

"The job picture is brightening, consumers continue to spend at a healthy rate and yet, because of existing slack in the economy and strong productivity growth, inflation is remaining very low," said BMO Financial Group senior economist Sal Guatieri.


"The data really paint a picture of an economy that is gathering strength on a sustained basis," Guatieri said.




Source: u.s. economic news (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1203&e=2&u=/afp/20040115/bs_afp/us_economy&sid=96001027)

Poor ion, hatred and jealousy of the greatest nation and strongest economy on the planet is just killing him...

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion

I think that U.S. is decaying, certainly not Germany.

I lived in Western Europe and the U.S..

Mercedes-Benz was a good German car before Chrysler decayed it.



Btw, this is hilarious. I guess you don't know that Daimler-Chrysler is a German company run by German executives. If the Benz was a good car, the only ones you can blame are the Germans.

PS I only buy Japanese cars - much better than European.

[Ion]

Originally posted by Grammatron

Let me educate you on some Geography that you obviously did not learn. Greece, Spain and Italy are in Europe, they all have wonderful, sunny beaches.
...

By all means Gramma, when you come to San Diego, stop by La Jolla High School swimming pool during a club workout.

You would understand that I blossom here, not in Greece, Spain and Italy.

Although I heard good things about Greece, Spain and Italy, when you check the world rankings at www.swimnews.com, then you will find that I am in the right spot for this.

The rest, outside of this, that's just an inconvenience to me, nothing more.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Ion

By all means Gramma, when you come to San Diego, stop by La Jolla High School swimming pool during a club workout.

You would understand that I blossom here, not in Greece, Spain and Italy.

Although I heard good things about Greece, Spain and Italy, when you check the world rankings at www.swimnews.com, then you will find that I am in the right spot for this.

The rest, outside of this, that's just an inconvenience to me, nothing more.

No thanks Ion; I don't swing that way.

I'm just kind of shocked though that your Utopian Europe can't produce a good swimming pool that you can properly blossom in.

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox

...
Yet the U.S. economy continues to boom:
...

I did post the total nonfarm jobs in U.S. from the U.S. Department of Labor, didn't I?

It shows losses by millions since January 2001, when Bush started to waste taxmoney in wars.

So I did post the U.S. Department of Labor figures.

(As for Mercedes-Benz (Ger.), you don't know toxy, but it was bought in the late 90s by Chrysler (U.S.) and degraded since).

[mjh36]

Ion reminds me of all the spoiled, petulant children that accompanied Charlie into the chocolate factory. I want, I want, I want!!

Toss in the impressive array of sophomoric web tactics, such as: changing poster name into a slur, ignoring anything that contradicts a claim, word/grammar dancing and the all time favorite..."well if you don't like it, don't read it and I must be teh rulest if you will waste your time arguing with me."

What I really like is the utter and shameless narcissism, which is complimeted by bigotry, ignorance, myopia and selfishness, wrapped in a pretty bow of anger and hostility.

But as my 6 year old daughter frequently reminds me, it is far tougher to debate with the irrational and immature than it is to argue with your equal.

[mjh36]

And Ion, you still haven't shown me, step by step, how spending money on a war or tax cuts costs jobs. Seriously, go slowly and step by step and give me that cause and effect relationship that you cling to with such zeal.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
(As for Mercedes-Benz (Ger.), you don't know toxy, but it was bought in the late 90s by Chrysler (U.S.) and degraded since).

That one partially correct post you made yesterday was your month's quota, I see. Do a little research on DAIMLER-Chrysler, nincompoop!

[Ion]

Originally posted by Grammatron

...
I'm just kind of shocked though that your Utopian Europe can't produce a good swimming pool that you can properly blossom in.
That's what I thought when I made my decision years ago.

I achieved my decision, which shows determination, but I notice that what I thought is proven wrong now.

I thought that a Michael Jordan (U.S.) type can exist only in U.S., and the equivalent to basketball's Michael Jordan in swimming was at the time, Matt Biondi (U.S.).

But guess what?

In recent years, Alex. Popov (Rus.), Pieter van den Hoogenband (Ned.), Lars Frolander (Swe.), Franck Esposito (Fra.), Thomas Ruprath (Ger.), and many more, they proved me wrong.

So, it's time to think for me...

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by BTox


That one partially correct post you made yesterday was your month's quota, I see. Do a little research on DAIMLER-Chrysler, nincompoop!

Indeed..... Daimler-Benz ACQUIRED Chrysler, forming Daimler-Chrysler. I have no idea why someone, especially Ion who professes to know so much about how great German businesses are, would think that Chrysler acquired Daimler-Benz. This is something even 5 seconds of research can verify.

Of course, Ion will probably not admit this mistake, will probably call us "dumby", etc. Of course, Ion, you are free to prove me wrong if you would like to acknowledge you were wrong on this point. I won't hold my breath though.

-Elektrix

[Ion]

Originally posted by mjh36
And Ion, you still haven't shown me, step by step, how spending money on a war or tax cuts costs jobs. Seriously, go slowly and step by step and give me that cause and effect relationship that you cling to with such zeal.
There is no step by step, there is only one step:

$100 billions wasted in a murderous war, were better spent in government's investing in the middle-class' consumer economy, like tax cuts for the middle and the lower class, like funds for companies (that's what France does to Alcatel, Thomson, etc.).

[Ion]

Originally posted by Elektrix


Indeed..... Daimler-Benz ACQUIRED Chrysler, forming Daimler-Chrysler. I have no idea why someone, especially Ion who professes to know so much about how great German businesses are, would think that Chrysler acquired Daimler-Benz. This is something even 5 seconds of research can verify.

Of course, Ion will probably not admit this mistake, will probably call us "dumby", etc. Of course, Ion, you are free to prove me wrong if you would like to acknowledge you were wrong on this point. I won't hold my breath though.

-Elektrix
I didn't know that Daimler-Benz acquired Chrysler, I thought it was the other way around.

It takes five seconds to verify it indeed, but I am already multi-tasking.

I know that a car mechanic that I use, told me that since the acquisition, Mercedes-Benz degraded.

Mercedes-Benz remains an example of better cars than Ford.

In other products that I know, buying German is buying better quality than American, and this point stands.

[mjh36]

$100 billions wasted in a murderous war
I forget, which war in history was non-murderous?

And I still don't see how you get your figures. The job decline happened before any money was spent on Iraqi freedom, but somehow it is the retro-active fault of the funding of the war? And he did cut middle class taxes, but as a percentage of the total tax cut, it is misrepresented, as the middle class account for less than 20% of the tax income anyway.

So I still can't find a connection between the war and the loss of jobs for the 2 years that preceded it. Whatever.

You get a vote in November, I guess you can take your tin foil hat on down to the polls and show Dubyah who's boss!!

[Elektrix]

Originally posted by Ion

I didn't know that Daimler-Benz acquired Chrysler, I thought it was the other way around.

It takes five seconds to verify it indeed, but I am already multi-tasking.

I know that a car mechanic that I use, told me that since the acquisition, Mercedes-Benz degraded.

Mercedes-Benz remains an example of better cars than Ford.

In other products that I know, buying German is buying better quality than American, and this point stands.

Thanks Ion, I appreciate your at least acknowleding that.

I am not so sure about how much the Mercedes-Benz portion of the company has degraded. I do know that the Chrysler division has degraded quite a bit though (there are in fact Chrysler investors who are suing them because the original promise that this acquisition would result in two companies that would both be equal didn't pan out, and that the Chrysler division is doing poorly and being run by some people that were sent from the DaimlerChrysler headquarters in Stuttgart).

I am not so sure Mercedes is declining that much..... my boss drives Mercedes cars and even the newest ones he's gotten have had incredible quality, incredible engineering, etc.

-Elektrix

[Ion]

This is incorrect:
Originally posted by mjh36

...
The job decline happened before any money was spent on Iraqi freedom, but somehow it is the retro-active fault of the funding of the war?
...

This is correct:

the job decline started to happen before any money was spent on Iraq.

When this was happening, under Bush's watch, his paramount priority if he was a good president should have been to stimulate the U.S. economy with $100 billions, not to waste $100 billions on murders.

"2003 marked the third consecutive year of recession..." is the official stance of the company I work for as stated in an e-mail five seconds ago.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion

I didn't know that Daimler-Benz acquired Chrysler, I thought it was the other way around.


Well, here's a start - you at least admit one of your inane claims to be completely wrong. There is hope...

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion

"2003 marked the third consecutive year of recession..." is the official stance of the company I work for as stated in an e-mail five seconds ago.

The company you work for is as idiotic and wrong as you? No wonder you work there!

Tip: divest any and all stock in this "company"...

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox

The company you work for is as idiotic and wrong as you? No wonder you work there!

Tip: divest any and all stock in this "company"...
The company I work for is an U.S. icon.

I think they are right about this, and you are stupid.

Which me, you and your eight year old, we already know it.

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox


Well, here's a start - you at least admit one of your inane claims to be completely wrong. There is hope...
Good grief...

It reinforces my main position that buying German is better than buying American.

In response to a post claiming that Germany decays, which I countered with buying German is better than American, so U.S. decays but not Germany.

[Skeptic]

I saw Claudia Schiffer's type pretty often among Germans.

Who have time and passion for enjoying quality sex.

...as your porn video collection conclusively proves. Now, if only you could get any of them to have sex with YOU...

(In my experience, Ion, people who brag about their sexual conquests of beautiful women are, in reality, they same people who couldn't get laid in a whorehouse if they were made of money.)

[Ion]

This tells me that you need need to gain more experience:
Originally posted by Skeptic

...
(In my experience, Ion, people who brag about their sexual conquests of beautiful women are, in reality, they same people who couldn't get laid in a whorehouse if they were made of money.)
I still poke fun, many years later, at 'In 10 minutes you'll know if you're average' by The San Jose Mercury News from February 14, 1996, where 'average' designates the U.S. average:

"You're the guy...
...
.) Is 5 feet, 9 inches tall and weighs 172 pounds;

.) Has 70 to 80 pounds of muscle;

.) Can run a mile in 12 minutes...;
...
.) Has sex with 5 to 10 partners during his lifetime;
...
..."

Bwahaha! :D Where do the Americans live? In churches? And hospitals?:D Bwahaha!

I wrote earlier in this thread that "...U.S. is crap, especially now under Bush, when compared to the Western Europe...".

Trust me on this.

[shuize]

"... US is crap, especially now under Bush, when compared to the Western Europe ... Trust me on this." -- Ion

And yet you stay, work and pay taxes to support the Bush administration.

Something to do with swimming apparently. Can't be the beaches, as pointed out above. Not the swimming talent or coaching, as you mentioned.

So what is it that keeps you in the U.S. Ion? It couldn't be that you're just a hypocrite, could it?

[Ion]

Originally posted by shuize

...
Not the swimming talent or coaching, as you mentioned.

So what is it that keeps you in the U.S. Ion? It couldn't be that you're just a hypocrite, could it?
Hypocrite means doing what one is criticizing others about.

The coach in U.S. where I am now is good for me.

The swimming talent across U.S. in national competitions, is good too.

I discovered recently that other places outside U.S. are also improving and are already very good.

[shuize]

Hypocrite means doing what one is criticizing others about -- Ion
Are you not living in and paying taxes to the very system you decry?

It's not like you lack the option to go anywhere else.

You are firm in your claim that the quality of life is better in Western Europe, for example. Yet you stay in the U.S.

You've claimed it's not the money that keeps you there. Apparently you could to just as well in France.

You say that swimming originally brought you to San Diego but have also mentioned that programs abroad are much better than you originally thought.

I submit that if you continue to stay and pay taxes to an admistration you claim is crap, despite the having the opportunity to leave at any time, then you are in fact a hypocrite for doing exactly what you criticize others about.

There are a ton of ex-pats just like you in Japan. They spend all of their free time bitching and moaning about how bad things are here but, funny enough, renew their contracts every year.

[Skeptic]

What did you expect?

In most of these cases, Ion's inlcuded, the REAL cause for hating the USA is envy of its success and the desire to join it, if possible.

Ion simply has the usual "death-to-the-USA-until-I-get-a-green-card" attidue.

[Ion]

I got your point:
Originally posted by shuize

...
I submit that if you continue to stay and pay taxes to an admistration you claim is crap, despite the having the opportunity to leave at any time, then you are in fact a hypocrite for doing exactly what you criticize others about.
...

There are things that still keep me here:

.) when Bush went to war to Iraq based on lies in U.S. and in U.N., then it opened my eyes;
up to that moment I thought that I should make better efforts;
since then, I see that this war is how U.S. lives professionally too;
U.S. lives professionally in the same wrong way as their war is;
dog-eat-dog for profits and unhealthy living;
behind a hypocrisy of make believe do-good religion;

.) if Dean wins the election, with the support of Carol Moseley-Braun -who is unelectable in this chimp country because she is a black liberal female- and with the support of others, then the U.S. administration becomes again of European type of progressive thinking;

I wasn't criticizing the U.S. during the Clinton's years when I came in 1996;
I was saying that Clinton has the European type of intelligence, and for the rest of the U.S. society, I was taking it as a different lifestyle than mine, only somewhat inconvenient and incompatible to me;

.) I am changing people around me, with my European style;
for example, the reason that I stick in this forum now, more than in www.infidels.org which has more intellectuals, is to show and change people;
for example again, the reason you reply to me -and same for others-, is because I am changing you as we speak;

.) in 2000, when looking for work, I had job offers from all over U.S.;
I said then that work doesn't matter to me as much anymore, but lifestyle does, and I came to San Diego;
last year, in the swimming program that I mentioned, I swam in a competition, my second lifetime best (i.e.: my second fastest time in life), and I said that to do it in spite of all the incompatibility that I feel with the American society, it's worthy;

a few days ago, in December, in the swimming program that I mentioned, I swam my best workouts in years.

[Ion]

Originally posted by Skeptic
What did you expect?

In most of these cases, Ion's inlcuded, the REAL cause for hating the USA is envy of its success and the desire to join it, if possible.

Ion simply has the usual "death-to-the-USA-until-I-get-a-green-card" attidue.
Any proof for this in my case?

I think that you got your facts wrong, in my case.

[shuize]

Originally posted by Skeptic
What did you expect?

In most of these cases, Ion's inlcuded, the REAL cause for hating the USA is envy of its success and the desire to join it, if possible.

Ion simply has the usual "death-to-the-USA-until-I-get-a-green-card" attidue.

Yes. But is it not: "Death-to-the-USA-until-I-get-a-green-card" and then "We-have-enough-immigrants, now-it's-time-to-close-the-borders?"

[Ion]

Originally posted by shuize

...
But is it not: "Death-to-the-USA-until-I-get-a-green-card" and then "We-have-enough-immigrants, now-it's-time-to-close-the-borders?"
If you say so, then it must be like this for you.

That's why you and me, we are different.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ion
I
.) I am changing people around me, with my European style;
for example, the reason that I stick in this forum now, more than in www.infidels.org which has more intellectuals, is to show and change people;
for example again, the reason you reply to me -and same for others-, is because I am changing you as we speak;


Still as clueless as ever, eh? You're from a 3rd world country, remember? The only changes you are making in others is further lowering their opinion of you from blithering idiot to..

[Ion]

Originally posted by BTox


Still as clueless as ever, eh? You're from a 3rd world country, remember? The only changes you are making in others is further lowering their opinion of you from blithering idiot to..
Still clueless toxy, with your 3rd world mentality that lowers my opinion of you from blithering idiot?