Friday, September 30, 2005
Sorry Loons
Bad news for all my fringe left friends and ankle-biters. George Bush's approval ratings are going up. Yes, that's right, going up.
According to separate polls conducted by CNN/USA Today/Gallup and Fox News the President currently has a 45% approval rating, up from 40-41% just a couple of weeks ago. At least a 5 point jump in just two weeks. Not bad. (Well, I guess it's bad if you're a "Bush is Hitler and I hate him!" lefty.)
Even better, 71% of those polled by CNN/USA Today/Gallup gave Bush high marks for the way he responded to Hurricane Rita. Don't despair, moonbats. Forecasters predict there may be another major storm in October. You can always blame that on "The Magic Man Who Controls the Weather". ¶ Friday, September 30, 2005
According to separate polls conducted by CNN/USA Today/Gallup and Fox News the President currently has a 45% approval rating, up from 40-41% just a couple of weeks ago. At least a 5 point jump in just two weeks. Not bad. (Well, I guess it's bad if you're a "Bush is Hitler and I hate him!" lefty.)
Even better, 71% of those polled by CNN/USA Today/Gallup gave Bush high marks for the way he responded to Hurricane Rita. Don't despair, moonbats. Forecasters predict there may be another major storm in October. You can always blame that on "The Magic Man Who Controls the Weather". ¶ Friday, September 30, 2005
Comments:
<< Home
Excuse me, but are you the same "James" who wrote the following on 23 August 2005:
there are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Polls can be made to say whatever the pollster wants....You can cite all the polls you want. Knowing they can be skewed, manipulated and biased doesn't equal "sticking your fingers in your ears and go "la-la-la-la-I-can't-heaaaarrrr-you!"
Not that anyone expects consistancy from the Powerline parrots, but I was just wondering if someone else was posting the latest talking points under your name.
there are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Polls can be made to say whatever the pollster wants....You can cite all the polls you want. Knowing they can be skewed, manipulated and biased doesn't equal "sticking your fingers in your ears and go "la-la-la-la-I-can't-heaaaarrrr-you!"
Not that anyone expects consistancy from the Powerline parrots, but I was just wondering if someone else was posting the latest talking points under your name.
Donnie boy,
What are you talking about? A parousal of the 23 August 2005 archives on James' blog produces no such comment by him.
I did notice a comment by you, in which you played your usual arrogant "avoid the issues and recommend dictionaries" tactic.
I do recall a comment by James similar to this, but it wasn't given on the date you suggest.
Since you think arrogance is cool:
My I recommend that you purchase a calendar and familiarize yourself as to how one works?
Bottom line here is, how much of a loon do you have to be to think that it's ok for you to present polls and liberal blogs and terrorist sympathizer websites as sources, yet when your opponent presents a poll with results that you don't like, polls are suddenly not reliable?
As to your "Powerling parrot" nonsense, turn about must be fairplay. Are you a Dailykoz or Democratic Underground parrot?
Donny, when are you going to drop the name calling, arrogant English teacher act and actually present some meaningful debate to support your position? You can can't you?
What are you talking about? A parousal of the 23 August 2005 archives on James' blog produces no such comment by him.
I did notice a comment by you, in which you played your usual arrogant "avoid the issues and recommend dictionaries" tactic.
I do recall a comment by James similar to this, but it wasn't given on the date you suggest.
Since you think arrogance is cool:
My I recommend that you purchase a calendar and familiarize yourself as to how one works?
Bottom line here is, how much of a loon do you have to be to think that it's ok for you to present polls and liberal blogs and terrorist sympathizer websites as sources, yet when your opponent presents a poll with results that you don't like, polls are suddenly not reliable?
As to your "Powerling parrot" nonsense, turn about must be fairplay. Are you a Dailykoz or Democratic Underground parrot?
Donny, when are you going to drop the name calling, arrogant English teacher act and actually present some meaningful debate to support your position? You can can't you?
First Donnie, I don't read Powerline. Nice try.
Second, if I can help demoralize loony lefties like you by citing polls, then yay me!
Second, if I can help demoralize loony lefties like you by citing polls, then yay me!
Clay:
OOPS! That 22 August, not the 23rd. My bad.
I also expected you and James to stand behind your own words. I even expected a little intellectual honesty from the two of you.
Again, my bad.
OOPS! That 22 August, not the 23rd. My bad.
I also expected you and James to stand behind your own words. I even expected a little intellectual honesty from the two of you.
Again, my bad.
# posted by 
:
Monday, October 03, 2005 10:47:00 PM
:
Monday, October 03, 2005 10:47:00 PM
Wow, I'm being lectured on "intellectual honesty" by a guy who thinks lefty blogs and Socialist websites are "sources".
A guy who thinks Cindy Sheehan speaks for America.
A guy who thinks it's "intellectually honest" to try and twist a post about honoring the troops and their mission into a call for a coup d'etat.
A guy who thinks the President of the United States should be put against a wall and shot.
A guy who wants to pretend he didn't mean religion when he said "faith-based".
Yeah, like I'm going to take tips on debating credibility from you. Get real, Donny!
A guy who thinks Cindy Sheehan speaks for America.
A guy who thinks it's "intellectually honest" to try and twist a post about honoring the troops and their mission into a call for a coup d'etat.
A guy who thinks the President of the United States should be put against a wall and shot.
A guy who wants to pretend he didn't mean religion when he said "faith-based".
Yeah, like I'm going to take tips on debating credibility from you. Get real, Donny!
I stand behind my statements (but not your simpleminded charactorizations of same).
You DON'T stand behind your statements---you just parrot whatever the rightwing attack hamsters are saying today, shifting with the ideological wind.
You've proven once again that personal responsibility is exclusively a Democratic virtue.
You DON'T stand behind your statements---you just parrot whatever the rightwing attack hamsters are saying today, shifting with the ideological wind.
You've proven once again that personal responsibility is exclusively a Democratic virtue.
You don't "stand behind" your statements. You twist and redefine them to try and inoculate yourself against being exposed as a DailyKos/Democratic Underground sounding board.
That's simply not true, Jim.
Since I started this thread by using your own words to prove that you're a flip-flopper, how 'bout you do the same to me?
Find an example of the way I "twist and redefine them to try and inoculate yourself against being exposed as a DailyKos/Democratic Underground sounding board."
Put up of shut up, kid.
Since I started this thread by using your own words to prove that you're a flip-flopper, how 'bout you do the same to me?
Find an example of the way I "twist and redefine them to try and inoculate yourself against being exposed as a DailyKos/Democratic Underground sounding board."
Put up of shut up, kid.
Donny boy,
You expect intellectual honesty do you? That's odd since you don't demonstrate that trait yourself.
You have the gall to accuse James of not standing behind his statements. Both of us are willing and have stood behind our statements. That is a problem for you. Since you can't really refute any statement with a cogent, true argument you cower away from debate.
Instead, that is why you:
a. Recommend dictionaries.
b. Ignore any posts of James' that require debate and thought and instead, play the "is this the same James who said polls could be skewed game". [is that all you've got? James makes an uncharacteristic post, in passing and you only chime in there, ignoring several current posts with plenty of substance in them to debate.]
c. Accuse James of being a right wing parrot, while you yourself are clearly a left wing parrot.
In fact, more than likely the reason for you childish behavior is because you aren't capable of thinking for yourself. You can't refute any points made here, (either due to lack of your own skills, or because the leftist blogs you frequent haven't instructed you on what to say next.) Donnie boy, since you are so fond of dictionaries, check in the dictionary of your choice.
I believe that is what is referred to as being a hypocrite.
Also, using polls yourself, and then accusing your opponent of citing polls, [even though your opponent previously pointed out the obvious fact for those who are capable of self thought, that polls aren't the "be all end all", of the real picture] and being somehow hypocritcal for citing a poll in a post, makes you look ridiculous.
What, only those sheep who get their opinions from polls, (that might just be you) are allowed to mention a poll?
Donnie boy, Donnie boy.
tsk tsk tsk...
When are you going to stop hiding behind childish tactics and give some substance to your opinion. The form side isn't working out all that well for you.
So, Donny. It looks like it is time for you, yourself to "put up or shut-up, punk.
You expect intellectual honesty do you? That's odd since you don't demonstrate that trait yourself.
You have the gall to accuse James of not standing behind his statements. Both of us are willing and have stood behind our statements. That is a problem for you. Since you can't really refute any statement with a cogent, true argument you cower away from debate.
Instead, that is why you:
a. Recommend dictionaries.
b. Ignore any posts of James' that require debate and thought and instead, play the "is this the same James who said polls could be skewed game". [is that all you've got? James makes an uncharacteristic post, in passing and you only chime in there, ignoring several current posts with plenty of substance in them to debate.]
c. Accuse James of being a right wing parrot, while you yourself are clearly a left wing parrot.
In fact, more than likely the reason for you childish behavior is because you aren't capable of thinking for yourself. You can't refute any points made here, (either due to lack of your own skills, or because the leftist blogs you frequent haven't instructed you on what to say next.) Donnie boy, since you are so fond of dictionaries, check in the dictionary of your choice.
I believe that is what is referred to as being a hypocrite.
Also, using polls yourself, and then accusing your opponent of citing polls, [even though your opponent previously pointed out the obvious fact for those who are capable of self thought, that polls aren't the "be all end all", of the real picture] and being somehow hypocritcal for citing a poll in a post, makes you look ridiculous.
What, only those sheep who get their opinions from polls, (that might just be you) are allowed to mention a poll?
Donnie boy, Donnie boy.
tsk tsk tsk...
When are you going to stop hiding behind childish tactics and give some substance to your opinion. The form side isn't working out all that well for you.
So, Donny. It looks like it is time for you, yourself to "put up or shut-up, punk.
Donnie boy,
You said:
"You've proven once again that personal responsibility is exclusively a Democratic virtue."
If you mean a necessary principle virtue in a democracy, then you are right.
If you mean that personal responsibility resides in the Democratic Party's stance then you are flat out lying.
After all, the Democrat Party has been over run with liberals. Liberals attempt to convince American citizens that they are victims of society. They aren't responsible for the consequences of their behavior and choices in any way whatsoever. That's what sugar daddy government is for - to supply their every need. All they have to do is get in line, sign a few forms and the government will feed them, cloth them, house them etc.
For liberals, who are for communism, but will settle for socialism as a stepping stone in that direction, "personal responsibility" is anethema.
So, depending upon which you mean: either you are right, or you are being extremely dishonest.
Which is it?
Again, to use your own words:
It's time to put up or shut up, kid.
Post a Comment
You said:
"You've proven once again that personal responsibility is exclusively a Democratic virtue."
If you mean a necessary principle virtue in a democracy, then you are right.
If you mean that personal responsibility resides in the Democratic Party's stance then you are flat out lying.
After all, the Democrat Party has been over run with liberals. Liberals attempt to convince American citizens that they are victims of society. They aren't responsible for the consequences of their behavior and choices in any way whatsoever. That's what sugar daddy government is for - to supply their every need. All they have to do is get in line, sign a few forms and the government will feed them, cloth them, house them etc.
For liberals, who are for communism, but will settle for socialism as a stepping stone in that direction, "personal responsibility" is anethema.
So, depending upon which you mean: either you are right, or you are being extremely dishonest.
Which is it?
Again, to use your own words:
It's time to put up or shut up, kid.
<< Home
