General discussion

LOL, I wonder if they are holding signs....

Discussion is locked
Follow
Reply to: LOL, I wonder if they are holding signs....
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: LOL, I wonder if they are holding signs....
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Re: I wonder if they are holding signs
- Collapse -
(NT) You sound so happy about the news.
- Collapse -
No, laughing at them...

...since what they were concerned about is so much less a problem than we have now, yet nothing on their site showing them holding signs protesting the INCREASED unemployment rate that we currently have. In other words it was just general anti-Bush actions then, devoid of real concern over unemployment itself, or they'd be literally screaming now.

Probably because he is an Obama supporter. Be hard to support him while protesting the higher unemployment under him, wouldn't it. Just another hypocrite. Looking at his news links, his latest efforts seem aimed to undermine Christian efforts against the sin of homosexuality.

- Collapse -
Response

I recall you making a few posts quoting scripture.

The morality surrounding this debate is what drove Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, a statewide association of Christian denominations, to support extending coverage to children in Oregon and it is why nearly every religious voice in America, besides those associated with the extreme religious right, have spoken out this year in favor of health care reform. The National of Council of Churches in Christ USA, with the support of Roman Catholics, Muslims, Jews and Protestants from across the theological spectrum, recently released a statement arguing that health care reform is needed "so that all of our neighbors, especially the people living in poverty, children, and the aged, can be assured of the fullness of life that is central to the holy vision of a beloved and peaceable community."

I also recall you making posts that don't seem to agree with the above statement.

Why can't you support their statement?

- Collapse -
I wonder why everyone ignores the real culprit...

Jimmy Carter is the one that signed the Community Reinvestment Act which effectively created millions of jobs building houses for people that really couldn't afford them. Now that the overinflated housing market which was created by that crappy piece of legislation is correcting itself everyone wants to point the finger at everyone but Jimmy, the one that started that balloon.

- Collapse -
True, but...

changes to the act made in the Clinton Administration made it more dangerous and prone to abuse, which really started the ball rolling toward the cliff.

- Collapse -
the trash on the road

One person drops some trash on the road in the neighborhood. Several people walk by later and notice it, but don't pick it up, even though a garbage can is just a bit further down the road in the direction they are walking. Who is to blame when the neighborhood starts to look like a ghetto?

- Collapse -
Bush is to blame, of course...

who else?

- Collapse -
RE: who else?

Carter...he was years before Bush.

- Collapse -
Here's a nice tidy graph called the "bikini graph" covering

the losses of employment recently. Actually it's not a bikini graph, it's what used years and years ago to be called the mono-kini graph, or "the lower half of the bikini" graph.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/04/05/4118097-bikini-graph-on-jobs-and-more

I look forward to the reactions to the source. So, in the period of the graph, about 4 years, we have finally gotten to the point at which we are no longer losing employment, indeed there are small gains recently. It certainly doesn't surprise me that losses of employment continued to follow the Bush Collapse, employment doesn't turn on a dime, but at least the news is positive, and with continued avoidance of the Party of No, there's actually a chance that this will continue and eventually create enough new jobs to replace those destroyed by the preceding Administration.

Rob

- Collapse -
Interesting figures there.

I see nothing controversial in your post. So any reaction could only be objective and not subjective as far as I can tell.

Of course, I don't know how the differing sides views MSNBC, or this Maddows person, so I might be missing something there.

Mark

- Collapse -
Are you serious??

Did you miss this?

the Bush Collapse, employment doesn't turn on a dime, but at least the news is positive, and with continued avoidance of the Party of No, there's actually a chance that this will continue and eventually create enough new jobs to replace those destroyed by the preceding Administration.

The FACT is, despite the propaganda, job losses have skyrocketed under Obama. His "stimulus" and other policies have failed utterly. Remember when he promised unemployment would not exceed 8%?

Time to stop blaming others and take some responsibility.

- Collapse -
Is that graph false then?

Are you saying that the employment/unemployment trends shown in the graph is false?

If so, where are your own figures for the same period?

I'm not being contentious here. I well know how figures and graphs can show whatever the creator of them likes. But to make any informed decision of our own, we need to see the true figures for the same period.

You say, "The fact is". Show your facts, and prove those figures wrong.

Mark

- Collapse -
I don't pay any attention to his "figures"...

his intentions are well known here.

- Collapse -
Whose figures?

Robs?

He didn't create them, he just posted a link to an article which had them.

Mark

- Collapse -
Okay...

believe what you want. It's propaganda and you are being played.

- Collapse -
(NT) By both sides?
- Collapse -
No...

by Rob and Rachel.

- Collapse -
"his" figures

quoting an article hardly makes them "his"....


although i guess your intentions are sincere

,.

- Collapse -
Rachel Maddow...

by the way, is a TV "personality" of the extreme leftist persuasion who spews lies and propaganda nightly on MSNBC. I'd advise taking anything she says with a grain of salt.

- Collapse -
Ahh, that's bettter.

I did say I didn't know anything about either MSNBC or the Maddows person. Now I know a bit more.

So, she's using false figures then?

Mark

- Collapse -
Figures can lie...

liars figure.

- Collapse -
(NT) Yep, and so can words.
- Collapse -
Historical Labor Force/Unemployment Data for UNITED STATES
- Collapse -
and for March 2010
- Collapse -
Yep,

that is indeed different. Thanks Ed.

The original 'bikini graph' was a table of monthly jobs lost, showing a tapering off, but the table you provided shows the employment and unemployment figures.

It just goes to show that while using figures and graphs are fine, observers need to be aware of how other data fits in.

Mark

- Collapse -
(NT) Sounds like Rush and Glenn
- Collapse -
(NT) Look! A flying squirrel!
- Collapse -
(NT) That's the best you can do? ;-)
- Collapse -
(NT) Does it need more?

CNET Forums

Forum Info