From: Moderate on

"William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wclark2-45211A.19495111082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article
> <2136368492303258134.769901nospam-nomail.com(a)news.suddenlink.net>,
> Moderate <nospam(a)nomail.com> wrote:
>
>> William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote:
>> > In article <i3ud1o$la$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
>> > "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:2010081023240999746-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom...
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, you're wrong. This is one more place where the left and
>> > > > right
>> >>> differs. While the right likes to "stand by their man" even when
>> > > > he's
>> >>> demonstrably behaving like an idiot, the left will not hesitate to
>> > > > call
>> >>> out their leaders when their leaders fail to do what we elected them
>> > > > to
>> >>> do.
>> >>
>> >> So sayeth the Bill Clinton apologists.
>> >
>> > Er, I think Clinton was elected to make life better by creating a
>> > strong
>> > economy for Americans to enjoy. That he palpably did, so he justified
>> > the support and there is nothing to apologize for. The fact that your
>> > boy pissed it all away within eight years still sticks in your craw.
>> >
>> > The Lewinski nonsense was just the GoP hypocrites (yes, that's you
>> > Mssrs. Gingrich, Burton, etc.) trying to bring him down by whatever
>> > means they could.
>>
>> Thanks for perfectly making my point. I knew you would not disappoint
>> :-)
>
> We aim to please. Too bad you didn't actually have a point - at least,
> not one supported by any cogent facts.

You are my fact as well as several others who have posted in this thread.

Now I would agree that there is not much point in pointing out an error in
one of RB's posts, but this one was a slow pitch right over the center of
the plate. It was an easy homer.


From: William Clark on
In article <i40oeb$8tr$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
"Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:

> "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:wclark2-45211A.19495111082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> > In article
> > <2136368492303258134.769901nospam-nomail.com(a)news.suddenlink.net>,
> > Moderate <nospam(a)nomail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote:
> >> > In article <i3ud1o$la$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> >> > "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:2010081023240999746-noneofyourbusiness(a)allcom...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Actually, you're wrong. This is one more place where the left and
> >> > > > right
> >> >>> differs. While the right likes to "stand by their man" even when
> >> > > > he's
> >> >>> demonstrably behaving like an idiot, the left will not hesitate to
> >> > > > call
> >> >>> out their leaders when their leaders fail to do what we elected them
> >> > > > to
> >> >>> do.
> >> >>
> >> >> So sayeth the Bill Clinton apologists.
> >> >
> >> > Er, I think Clinton was elected to make life better by creating a
> >> > strong
> >> > economy for Americans to enjoy. That he palpably did, so he justified
> >> > the support and there is nothing to apologize for. The fact that your
> >> > boy pissed it all away within eight years still sticks in your craw.
> >> >
> >> > The Lewinski nonsense was just the GoP hypocrites (yes, that's you
> >> > Mssrs. Gingrich, Burton, etc.) trying to bring him down by whatever
> >> > means they could.
> >>
> >> Thanks for perfectly making my point. I knew you would not disappoint
> >> :-)
> >
> > We aim to please. Too bad you didn't actually have a point - at least,
> > not one supported by any cogent facts.
>
> You are my fact as well as several others who have posted in this thread.
>
> Now I would agree that there is not much point in pointing out an error in
> one of RB's posts, but this one was a slow pitch right over the center of
> the plate. It was an easy homer.

Which gives a glaring insight into what passes for your IQ.
From: bknight on
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 07:38:04 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

>In article <qcm6665osaq44coj3oi4rpalmu1ijitc7p(a)4ax.com>,
>bknight(a)conramp.net says...

>> You shallow idiot. You still didn't read the article. It wasn't
>> written by an economist, but it did explain why numbskulls like you
>> don't understand the 2000" recession didn't happen in 1999 or 2000.
>
>A recession is like the coast. When you start walking out into the water
>you first get your toes wet, then it coverts your feet, then you are up
>to your waist and then you fall off the edge into the abyss. The step
>into the abyss is not beginning of your journey into recession.

What does this nonsense have to do with the discussion?

Why, nothing. Its from Bert the Shallow, who, when lost, just
blabbers and changes the subject.

BK
From: Carbon on
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 06:54:55 -0500, Moderate wrote:
> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:4c634830$0$14243$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:56:16 -0400, BAR wrote:
>>> In article <wclark2-D02BAB.19501711082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
>>> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
>>>> In article <4c631edb$0$4846$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
>>>> Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:44:16 -0500, bknight wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:46:47 -0700 (PDT), dsc-ky
>>>>>> <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Aug 11, 3:18Â pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You want an apology for eight years of prosperity?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Eight years of prosperity? Â I guess you forgot about Clinton's
>>>>>>>> recession in 2000.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Times were pretty good in the Clinton years (for whatever reason -
>>>>>>> just pure luck most likely).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "recession" (commonly thought of as a non- recession because
>>>>>> it was hardly noticed) was actually in 2001.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> Clinton was hardly perfect but he was a good President, especially
>>>>> compared to what came before and after. I don't care that he screwed
>>>>> his interns. I do care that, unlike either Bush, he actually managed
>>>>> to balance the budget.
>>>>
>>>> Or that he actually knew what a budget was.
>>>
>>> Balancing the budget is just a matter of accounting. Any competent
>>> accountant can "balance" a budget.
>>
>> If it's as easy as that the Republicans should hire some right away.
>
> Republican's haven't been in control of the budget for four years.
> There is no budget.

You think Democrats were behind the Bush tax cuts and the quagmire in
the middle east? Wow. You really are paranoid.
From: MNMikeW on

"William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:wclark2-9364F5.21482911082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article <MPG.26cd10b72dd131b598a1e4(a)news.giganews.com>,
> BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <wclark2-D02BAB.19501711082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
>> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
>> >
>> > In article <4c631edb$0$4846$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
>> > Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:44:16 -0500, bknight wrote:
>> > > > On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:46:47 -0700 (PDT), dsc-ky
>> > > > <Dudley.Cornman(a)eku.edu> wrote:
>> > > >> On Aug 11, 3:18� pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>> > > >>> "R&B" <none_of_your_busin...(a)all.com> wrote in message
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>> You want an apology for eight years of prosperity?
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Eight years of prosperity? � I guess you forgot about Clinton's
>> > > >>> recession in 2000.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Times were pretty good in the Clinton years (for whatever reason -
>> > > >> just pure luck most likely).
>> > > >
>> > > > The "recession" (commonly thought of as a non- recession because
>> > > > it
>> > > > was hardly noticed) was actually in 2001.
>> > > >
>> > > > http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm
>> > >
>> > > Clinton was hardly perfect but he was a good President, especially
>> > > compared to what came before and after. I don't care that he screwed
>> > > his
>> > > interns. I do care that, unlike either Bush, he actually managed to
>> > > balance the budget.
>> >
>> > Or that he actually knew what a budget was.
>>
>> Balancing the budget is just a matter of accounting. Any competent
>> accountant can "balance" a budget.
>
> So you do admit that Dubya was not competent. Good, after all this time.

Dems must not be either as we have no budget this year.