Why Americans Are Paying More At the Pump

Damocles said:
I don't think that is the point. My guess is he'd rather the media started doing their job rather than gazing with moon eyes every time this guy spoke.Basically, the goal would be to shame them into treating this guy the same, rather than to try to get them to give both a pass.

Nobody should get a "pass"...
Click to expand...

Damo, you have got to be friggin' kidding me. The media adored Obama during the campaign. He also got his honeymoon, which I would allot was a month or 2 longer than most.

For a good 2+ years, the media has been fairly merciless on him, as they are w/ most Presidents. He has not gotten a "pass."

Your perception needs as much work as Yurt's.
 
Onceler said:
Damo, you have got to be friggin' kidding me. The media adored Obama during the campaign. He also got his honeymoon, which I would allot was a month or 2 longer than most.

For a good 2+ years, the media has been fairly merciless on him, as they are w/ most Presidents. He has not gotten a "pass."

Your perception needs as much work as Yurt's.
Click to expand...

If there were not comparisons to be made where we can see what they do to a man they dislike you may have a point. However, valid questions as to their politics can be made due to discrepancies as to how two men with the exact same issues are treated.

My guess is, rather than immediately going into defense mode you can find this avalanche of stories from CNN all about how bad Obama is and show Yurt to be wrong rather than spend time trying to just attack by ad hom.

Compare and contrast the urgency of the story when Bush's gas prices rose above 3.50 (which was way before the debt crisis first hit)... Tell us about "jobless recoveries" and how many jobs were being created during them... compare and contrast to the current job reports, etc. That's what this thread is all about. A contrast.

Standing on the sidelines with snarky comments is something many do, but not people who think they are intelligent enough to participate in actual debate.

If "my" (Yurt's) perception is off you can show it through those contrasts. If it isn't off you might learn something.

Either way I don't particularly care. From the posts I have seen of late you see yourself as a warrior of truth, however you don't seem to have much in the way of weapons (those contrasts).

In this post you've moved the goal posts. First it was "defend Bush"... Not really, the thread is about contrasts, of which you have done little to prove errant.
 
Why should I do all that? I already acknowledged that there was more speculation about Bush & oil prices, for obvious reasons. Guess ya missed that.

Now, why don't you go & find me all of those "Chicago-style politics" articles about Bush?

I'm starting to think you're really webbway, btw.
 
Damocles said:
If there were not comparisons to be made where we can see what they do to a man they dislike you may have a point. However, valid questions as to their politics can be made due to discrepancies as to how two men with the exact same issues are treated.

My guess is, rather than immediately going into defense mode you can find this avalanche of stories from CNN all about how bad Obama is and show Yurt to be wrong rather than spend time trying to just attack by ad hom.

Compare and contrast the urgency of the story when Bush's gas prices rose above 3.50 (which was way before the debt crisis first hit)... Tell us about "jobless recoveries" and how many jobs were being created during them... compare and contrast to the current job reports, etc. That's what this thread is all about. A contrast.

Standing on the sidelines with snarky comments is something many do, but not people who think they are intelligent enough to participate in actual debate.

If "my" (Yurt's) perception is off you can show it through those contrasts. If it isn't off you might learn something.

Either way I don't particularly care. From the posts I have seen of late you see yourself as a warrior of truth, however you don't seem to have much in the way of weapons (those contrasts).

In this post you've moved the goal posts. First it was "defend Bush"... Not really, the thread is about contrasts, of which you have done little to prove errant.
Click to expand...

spot on.
 
Onceler said:
Actually, it wasn't. But I appreciate your need for a life preserver since you botched every argument & misread everything I wrote, and then split.
Click to expand...

you are truly hilarious. your desperation to always claim you're right and that you "won" every argument and that everyone just happans to always misread everything you write is fraking funny.
 
Onceler said:
Do you have articles where the mainstream media "blamed" Bush, or is it just speculation? No doubt, there was much more of the latter with Bush, because of his strong ties to the oil industry, which you keep ignoring. And the fact that his admin doled out huge subsidies to oil, and that the oil industry saw record profits coincidentally under his admin, etc.

If you do have articles that specifically BLAME Bush, I'd be very surprised if they didn't also cite causality for that.

But, keep whining away, Yirked. And hey - why didn't Bush get "Chicago-style politics," but Obama does? Huh? Huh?
Click to expand...

Damo - Yurt read the above, and said that I was blaming Bush for high oil prices.

Do you concur with that conclusion from what I wrote?
 
Dunceler - Damo can explain it to you!

I need help! I need help!

Hilarious.

Again - read my post, and say again that you think I'm "blaming Bush." I need some more dopey comedy.
 
Onceler said:
You ARE ignoring it - as a reason why people speculated much more about the correlation between Bush & higher oil prices, which is the reason you keep starting these threads.

It has nothing to do w/ my personal feelings. In point of fact, I agree w/ you that Presidents have little control.

I'm glad you seem to have at least comprehended that you read my post incorrectly, but I believe it's part of the deeper issue: you read a lot of things incorrectly. When people are speculating, I think you see it as heaping "blame" or something. You have to work on your reading, as the last few exchanges on this thread have proven definitively.
Click to expand...

Apparently, Yirked the dope needs a repeat of this post.

Did you miss this? Unsurprising.
 
so in onceler's world, making fun of him needing damo to explain things (he earlier asked damo to help him out) is "hiding" behind damo and refusing to get sucked into another trauma drama classic dunceler meltdown is - running away

it would be funny if it didn't happen so often
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top