health care
in [Golf]
|
From: bknight on 5 Mar 2010 12:24 On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:45:25 -0500, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >In article <9d82377e-55c0-412c-a69f-fde7afa47730 >@b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... >> > >> > > A great president? Let's look objectively at how things were at the >> > > end of the Clinton administration and how things were at the end of >> > > Bush. At the end of Clinton there was a budget surplus, we were at the >> > > end of the longest persion of economic growth in US history, we were >> > > at peace, crime had fallen nationwide, unemployment was low and the >> > > United States was sitting on top of the world. At the end of Bush, we >> > > were in two wars, there was a $1.7 trillion deficit, a financial >> > > crisis and a severe recession, high unemployment, and America's >> > > standing in the world had fallen to an all-time low. All in all, the >> > > country was in worse shape than at anytime since WWII. But Bush was a >> > > great president, huh? >> > >> > Clinton is lucky that the economy didn't start to tank prior to March of >> > 1999.- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > - Show quoted text - >> >> Is that really the best you can do? You guys aren't doing a very good >> job of hodling up your side. > >The president does not contorl the economy. Then how can you assess blame there to Obama? BK
From: BAR on 5 Mar 2010 12:39 In article <shf2p55j3ubip8uki7ho5urrb8fi3f2253(a)4ax.com>, bknight(a)conramp.net says... > > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:45:25 -0500, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > > >In article <9d82377e-55c0-412c-a69f-fde7afa47730 > >@b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > >> > > >> > > A great president? Let's look objectively at how things were at the > >> > > end of the Clinton administration and how things were at the end of > >> > > Bush. At the end of Clinton there was a budget surplus, we were at the > >> > > end of the longest persion of economic growth in US history, we were > >> > > at peace, crime had fallen nationwide, unemployment was low and the > >> > > United States was sitting on top of the world. At the end of Bush, we > >> > > were in two wars, there was a $1.7 trillion deficit, a financial > >> > > crisis and a severe recession, high unemployment, and America's > >> > > standing in the world had fallen to an all-time low. All in all, the > >> > > country was in worse shape than at anytime since WWII. But Bush was a > >> > > great president, huh? > >> > > >> > Clinton is lucky that the economy didn't start to tank prior to March of > >> > 1999.- Hide quoted text - > >> > > >> > - Show quoted text - > >> > >> Is that really the best you can do? You guys aren't doing a very good > >> job of hodling up your side. > > > >The president does not contorl the economy. > > Then how can you assess blame there to Obama? Success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan. Obama is blaming everything on Bush, why can't I blame some things on Obama? Political rhetoric is grounded in reality.
From: John B. on 5 Mar 2010 13:34 On Mar 5, 10:50 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <a97d9b93-89e9-4ee0-a655-95de8481de35 > @z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > > > > On Mar 5, 9:56 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > In article <0913aca6-f3f7-4037-b57c-fd7f3a1fa7c7 > > > @c16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > On Mar 4, 8:53 pm, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:47:45 -0800 (PST), "John B." > > > > > > <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >On Mar 4, 11:29=A0am, Jack Hollis <xslee...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 23:32:28 -0800, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > >> >It's hard for me to defend the worst president since Carter.....but I wil= > > > > > >l > > > > > >> >never agree with you or anybody in saying he is a dumb man. > > > > > > >> Only a complete ideologue could ignore the objective data that Bush > > > > > >> was a man of superior to very superior intelligence. =A0 > > > > > > >I haven't seen that data. Can you tell me where to find it? > > > > > > Bush's SAT score (pre 1974) was 1206. As you might expect, his 566 in > > > > > verbal was well below his 640 in math. > > > > > > In any case, this score converts to an IQ of around 127 to 132 which > > > > > is in the superior to very superior range. > > > > > >http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Pre1974SAT.aspx > > > > > > BTW, JFK scored a 119 on the Otis IQ test when he was tested for > > > > > admission to a private high school. > > > > > That's it? That's the data? > > > > What objective criteria would you use?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Whatever there is. All Jack has to offer is a 1204 SAT score, which is > > average, although Jack claims it proves beyond doubt that Bush is a > > genius. > > You haven't provided any objective criteria. You whine about someone > using objective criteria? Good leaders are not always the smartest > people in the room. The smartest guys are usually staff guys because > they analyze things too much and are afraid to make a decision. > > > I score well on IQ tests, but I did poorly on the SATs. How does that > > square with his premise? Please try to suppress your urge to respond > > It could mean you are an idiot savant.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I haven't provided any because I don't know of any. I asked Jack to provide some, and a 1204 SAT score is all he came up with. Sorry, but I don't find that very compelling. I guess being civil is just not in you.
From: John B. on 5 Mar 2010 13:36 On Mar 5, 12:39 pm, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <shf2p55j3ubip8uki7ho5urrb8fi3f2...(a)4ax.com>, > bkni...(a)conramp.net says... > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:45:25 -0500, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > >In article <9d82377e-55c0-412c-a69f-fde7afa47730 > > >@b30g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > >> > > A great president? Let's look objectively at how things were at the > > >> > > end of the Clinton administration and how things were at the end of > > >> > > Bush. At the end of Clinton there was a budget surplus, we were at the > > >> > > end of the longest persion of economic growth in US history, we were > > >> > > at peace, crime had fallen nationwide, unemployment was low and the > > >> > > United States was sitting on top of the world. At the end of Bush, we > > >> > > were in two wars, there was a $1.7 trillion deficit, a financial > > >> > > crisis and a severe recession, high unemployment, and America's > > >> > > standing in the world had fallen to an all-time low. All in all, the > > >> > > country was in worse shape than at anytime since WWII. But Bush was a > > >> > > great president, huh? > > > >> > Clinton is lucky that the economy didn't start to tank prior to March of > > >> > 1999.- Hide quoted text - > > > >> > - Show quoted text - > > > >> Is that really the best you can do? You guys aren't doing a very good > > >> job of hodling up your side. > > > >The president does not contorl the economy. > > > Then how can you assess blame there to Obama? > > Success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan. > > Obama is blaming everything on Bush, why can't I blame some things on > Obama? Political rhetoric is grounded in reality.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Political rhetoric is grounded in reality? My gosh, now I HAVE heard everything.
From: BAR on 5 Mar 2010 13:41
In article <dd50f4b4-2c01-4a95-ae7b-55607419a258 @f8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > Bush's SAT score (pre 1974) was 1206. �As you might expect, his 566 in > > > > > > verbal was well below his 640 in math. > > > > > > > > In any case, this score converts to an IQ of around 127 to 132 which > > > > > > is in the superior to very superior range. > > > > > > > >http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Pre1974SAT.aspx > > > > > > > > BTW, JFK scored a 119 on the Otis IQ test when he was tested for > > > > > > admission to a private high school. > > > > > > > That's it? That's the data? > > > > > > What objective criteria would you use?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Whatever there is. All Jack has to offer is a 1204 SAT score, which is > > > average, although Jack claims it proves beyond doubt that Bush is a > > > genius. > > > > You haven't provided any objective criteria. You whine about someone > > using objective criteria? Good leaders are not always the smartest > > people in the room. The smartest guys are usually staff guys because > > they analyze things too much and are afraid to make a decision. > > > > > I score well on IQ tests, but I did poorly on the SATs. How does that > > > square with his premise? Please try to suppress your urge to respond > > > > It could mean you are an idiot savant.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > I haven't provided any because I don't know of any. I asked Jack to > provide some, and a 1204 SAT score is all he came up with. Sorry, but > I don't find that very compelling. I guess being civil is just not in > you. In the absence of you providing objective data we will have to rely upon the objective data Jack provided. You still have no sense of humor. |