Say goodbye to the internet as we know it
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 12 Aug 2010 11:00 In article <4c64047e$0$4972$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > 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. Not really, he's just in denial.
From: William Clark on 12 Aug 2010 11:02 In article <4c640713$0$4970$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 07:11:58 -0500, Moderate wrote: > > "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > > news:wclark2-45211A.19495111082010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> In article > >> <2136368492303258134.769901nospam-nomail.com(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > >> Moderate <nospam(a)nomail.com> wrote: > >>> William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > >>>> In article <i3ud1o$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. > > Well immoderate, why don't you spell it out for everyone? If you've > forgotten, the argument was that Clinton was an effective President even > though he tried to screw everything that moved and then lied about it. > You see, among the sane his behavior was seen as douchey but not nearly > as bad as misleading the country into a war that so far has cost > hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives. Or his "let's > cut taxes and print more money" economic policies. Or their endless > bungling of their handling of detainees. Et cetera. Or his single-handed assault on the English language.
From: William Clark on 12 Aug 2010 11:02 In article <4c640797$0$4991$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 09:28:02 -0400, William Clark wrote: > > 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. > > It was certified by the internet. He certainly should be certified, all right.
From: Carbon on 12 Aug 2010 11:49 On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 09:47:23 -0500, Moderate wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4c64047e$0$4972$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> 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. > > Tax revenue went up after the Bush tax cuts. Only one Democrat voted > against the authorization to send troops. Tax revenue went up, huh? I will enjoy reading your cite on that, as well as your reasoned discussion on said tax cut's effect on the deficit in light of the Bush regime's decision to invade a country which had nothing to do with 9/11. If the above has gotten you lost, here it is again: tax cut + expensive foreign wars = deficit. In case no one has told you, deficits are bad.
From: MNMikeW on 12 Aug 2010 12:34
"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4c6417fc$0$4990$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > In case no one has told you, deficits are bad. Somebody might want to tell Obama that. |