Buftex Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 The "bayonet community" is offended: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/obama-offend-bayonet-community-horses_n_2005868.html Not from The Onion!
B-Man Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 Donald Sensing on bayonets. “Sarcasm and condescension only work if the speaker’s presumption of lofty superior knowledge is borne out by his command of actual facts. You can’t successfully accuse your opponent of being an ignoramus when you don’t know what you’re talking about yourself.” OBAMA LINE ABOUT HORSES, BAYONETS FAILS FACT-CHECK. And the Navy calls submarines boats, not ships.
Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 BAYONETS FAILS FACT-CHECK. And the Navy calls submarines boats, not ships. No, it worked
Chef Jim Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 Foreign policies of the 1980s Social policies of the 1950s Economic policies of the 1920s Best line in all the debates! Zing! So you don't like economic good times? In the 1920's the good times were rolling.
dayman Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 (edited) So you don't like economic good times? In the 1920's the good times were rolling. I think Obama was referring to Romney's support of prohibition Edited October 23, 2012 by TheNewBills
Chef Jim Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 The "bayonet community" is offended: http://www.huffingto..._n_2005868.html Not from The Onion! So a comment fron one bayonet manufacturer means the bayonet community is offended? Glad to see you get your hard hitting news from TMZ.
Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 So you don't like economic good times? In the 1920's the good times were rolling. That's an ignorant statement. Even during the time of the twenties when they wre "good" the rural areas of the country were already in depression, and you consider the beginning of the Great Depression a good economic time? And there was a slump early in the decade as well
Chef Jim Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 That's an ignorant statement. Even during the time of the twenties when they wre "good" the rural areas of the country were already in depression, and you consider the beginning of the Great Depression a good economic time? And there was a slump early in the decade as well So you're going to look at the last two months of the decade and say "but, but, but the Depression started in the 20's!!" The 1920's represent some of the best economic boom times this country has ever seen. But go ahead and fall you a one liner in a dumb ass Presidential debate.
Duck_dodgers007 Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 So you're going to look at the last two months of the decade and say "but, but, but the Depression started in the 20's!!" The 1920's represent some of the best economic boom times this country has ever seen. But go ahead and fall you a one liner in a dumb ass Presidential debate. How were the farmers doing in the 1920's you hopelessly moronic imbecile? You probably do not know that half of America lived in the rural countryside in the 1920's. And the decade that started the greatest economic depression in history you consider wonderful?
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 That's an ignorant statement. Even during the time of the twenties when they wre "good" the rural areas of the country were already in depression, and you consider the beginning of the Great Depression a good economic time? And there was a slump early in the decade as well The "Roaring Twenties"??? You're using The Roaring Twenties as your example of a sour economy??? You're using The Roaring Twenties as your example of a sour economy AND simultaneously lauding the last four years as an Era of noteworthy growth??? Really??? Have we crossed over into some parallel universe that actually runs perpendicular???
TheMadCap Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 How were the farmers doing in the 1920's you hopelessly moronic imbecile? You probably do not know that half of America lived in the rural countryside in the 1920's. And the decade that started the greatest economic depression in history you consider wonderful? Oh Davey...
Chef Jim Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 And the decade that started preceded the greatest economic depression in history you consider wonderful? Damn straight I do! Oh and I corrected your post for more accuracy.
3rdnlng Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 The "Roaring Twenties"??? You're using The Roaring Twenties as your example of a sour economy??? You're using The Roaring Twenties as your example of a sour economy AND simultaneously lauding the last four years as an Era of noteworthy growth??? Really??? Have we crossed over into some parallel universe that actually runs perpendicular??? The non-agricultural economy throughout the 1920's truly was roaring starting in 1921. The agricultural economy suffered after WW1 with low commodity prices due to Europe's farms producing again. That lasted into the Great Depression. Give Davey a break. He is partially right and that happens so rarely that he needs to savor it. http://www.shmoop.com/1920s/economy.html
IDBillzFan Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 Oh Davey... Don't blame Davey. All he knows is to repeat what Obama tells him. He doesn't even know what Obama means by that quote. But it sounds nice...it has a good beat...and Davey can dance to it.
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 The non-agricultural economy throughout the 1920's truly was roaring starting in 1921. The agricultural economy suffered after WW1 with low commodity prices due to Europe's farms producing again. That lasted into the Great Depression. Give Davey a break. He is partially right and that happens so rarely that he needs to savor it. http://www.shmoop.com/1920s/economy.html No, he's not "partially right". He's not making a nuanced argument, taking into consideration various market segments or approaching those segmental portions with a micro approach. He's an admitted Keynesian. He doesn't believe in a micro approach. Your criticism falls on sand.
3rdnlng Posted October 23, 2012 Posted October 23, 2012 No, he's not "partially right". He's not making a nuanced argument, taking into consideration various market segments or approaching those segmental portions with a micro approach. He's an admitted Keynesian. He doesn't believe in a micro approach. Your criticism falls on sand. The 1920's were a wonderful time to be an American for most of the population. His argument that the decade of the 20's was not good is a silly one. His comment that some rural families had a rough time during the 20's is accurate. I would think that you would have understood that from my post. I won't spend any more time arguing for or against anything that little weasel posted here.
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 24, 2012 Posted October 24, 2012 The 1920's were a wonderful time to be an American for most of the population. His argument that the decade of the 20's was not good is a silly one. His comment that some rural families had a rough time during the 20's is accurate. I would think that you would have understood that from my post. I won't spend any more time arguing for or against anything that little weasel posted here. Some individuals have good times and some individuals have tougher times in every economic instance. The "economy" is not some solid brick (and I know you know this, and don't intend to patronize). Some sectors thrive, other stagnate or fail. The aggregate is what matters, or atleast that's the macro school argument...
dayman Posted October 24, 2012 Posted October 24, 2012 Some individuals have good times and some individuals have tougher times in every economic instance. The "economy" is not some solid brick (and I know you know this, and don't intend to patronize). Some sectors thrive, other stagnate or fail. The aggregate is what matters, or atleast that's the macro school argument... I've got an idea what if there was like a unit, in charge of the economy? And they planned it out so it all balanced out and everyone had a job and all the jobs were functioning in unity. Sounds perfect.
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 24, 2012 Posted October 24, 2012 I've got an idea what if there was like a unit, in charge of the economy? And they planned it out so it all balanced out and everyone had a job and all the jobs were functioning in unity. Sounds perfect.
dayman Posted October 24, 2012 Posted October 24, 2012 Seriously, also then we would be better equipped to adapt to changes. First thing we should do is tell all the farmers to stop farming and make steel.
Recommended Posts