Kerry's gloomy notes about economy ring hollow

Yahoo ^ | 6/23/04 | USA Today Op/Ed

[NormsRevenge]

[USA Today, headline and link only]

[NormsRevenge]

Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Kerry (news - web sites) (D-MA) acknowledges applause at a fundraising rally in San Francisco, June 23, 2004. Kerry is in the San Francisco Bay Area for the day making several campaign stops. Photo by Lou Dematteis/Reuters

---

Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. Senator John Kerry (news - web sites) (D-MA), gives a speech at a fund-raising rally in San Francisco, June 23, 2004. Kerry is in the San Francisco Bay Area for the day, making several campaign stops. REUTERS/Lou Dematteis

[NormsRevenge]

Nothing more than a Gloomy Gus...

Gloomy will be in the Bay Area for two days...

[GiveEmDubya]

Dick Cheney's speech on Kerry's gloom and doom was particularly good. Saying how Kerry's economics makes it seem that only 2 people (Kerry & Carter) thought the economic golden age of America was in the late 1970's...and that by now, Carter has to be reconsidering that a bit.

[Always Right]

Kerry taking the phrase 'statistics don't lie, but liars use statitistics' to new lows.

[Owl_Eagle]

"I was in Vietnam.  I want to be President."

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[Willie Green]

Kerry taking the phrase 'statistics don't lie, but liars use statitistics' to new lows.

It's embarrasing that Dubya has handed him some valid talking points.

[Free_at_last_-2001]

Is everybody miserable?

[RexFamilia]

Real misery is listening to Kerry and his peons (AKA buttkissers) telling lies.

[muleskinner]

When Kerry is series, he looks gloomy. When he smiles, he looks like a Horse Tooth Jackass.
Superficial, yes, but a fact nevertheless.

[ServesURight]

How can workers vote for a man who's worth more than $500 million and has lived off of taxpayers and wealthy women all his life?

[cksharks]

What valid talking points?

[siunevada]

a well-known Japanese term, sanpaku, describes a condition in which the white of the eye can be seen between the pupil and the lower lid as the subject gazes directly forward. This condition connotes a grave state of physical and spiritual imbalance. The sanpaku is out of touch with himself, his body and the natural forces of the universe. Symptomatically, sanpaku can be recognized by chronic fatigue, low sexual vitality, poor instinctive reactions, bad humor, inability to sleep soundly and lack of precision in thought and action.

[Rennes Templar]

Probably not too many Freepers are aware of Sanpaku. Unfortunately when it comes to alternative health, most of them seem to be pretty "conservative".

[rwfromkansas]

Zell Miller gave an incredible list of statistics on Hannity today that shows the economy is as good jobs-wise specifically or even better than during the 1996 election even....just an amazing flurry of facts.

I wish I could find them.....they would end the economic debate immediately with Bush coming out on top.

[L.N. Smithee]

It's embarrasing that Dubya has handed him some valid talking points.

Oh, brother. Here we go.

Ahem -- What "valid talking points?"

[Jorge]

It's embarrasing that Dubya has handed him some valid talking points.

Huh?
What's embarrasing is the anti-Bush crowd spreading their message of doom and gloom during a period of the strongest economic growth in 20 years.
In fact it's pathetic.

[siunevada]

Probably not too many Freepers are aware of Sanpaku.

The definition is just so perfect for him, you can often see the whites on the bottom of his eyes.

[perfect stranger]

Find Zell's words here

[rwfromkansas]

Ooh...thanks.

[L.N. Smithee]

Still waiting, Willie. Got anything at all? Or are you just talking...

[Willie Green]

Still waiting, Willie. Got anything at all? Or are you just talking...

My position on economic issues is well established on this forum,
so my point has already been made with anybody who matters.
Right now, I'm just kicking back, relaxing, and laughing at the
mind-numbed robots who are so eager to place their partisan
cluelessness on public display.

Oh, brother. Here we go.
Ahem -- What "valid talking points?"

LOL! Go ahead, feign ignorance all you want.
In an ironic way, it actually DOES reflect the pathetic shallowness
of the administration's economic policies.

[L.N. Smithee]

My position on economic issues is well established on this forum, so my point has already been made with anybody who matters. Right now, I'm just kicking back, relaxing, and laughing at the mind-numbed robots who are so eager to place their partisan cluelessness on public display.

LOL! Go ahead, feign ignorance all you want. In an ironic way, it actually DOES reflect the pathetic shallowness of the administration's economic policies.

So, in other words, you've got nothing. Thanks for playing.

Here's a reality check, Willie: in case you haven't noticed, Free Republic is pretty durn popular. The number of members goes into the tens of thousands, the number of hits daily into the hundreds of thousands, the number of new threads posted daily, into the hundreds. That's a lot of reading to do, and most of us don't read all the threads we see. Believe it or not, there are probably very few Freepers who hang on every word you post daily.

When you left a baseless assertion lending support to Kerry's endless hunt for negativity about Bush's economy, which is, by all indicators, growing at a breakneck pace and on track to "create" as many jobs as the high estimate prior to the downward revision, you should have been prepared to back it up.

Instead, when challenged to defend your statement, you chose not to, instead flaming me for not knowing about the all-important YOU and your supposed "point." You sound just like a typical Kerry supporter, regurgitating all the Bush-bashing sound bites, and when challenged to elaborate, you berate the doubters for needing evidence.

If you choose to respond to THIS post, come with something besides insults. Who knows? Maybe I will think that you are as special as you seem to think you are.

[Willie Green]

Here's a reality check, Willie: in case you haven't noticed, Free Republic is pretty durn popular.

As an active participant in this forum for over 6 years, I'm well aware of that, Mr. Smithee.

Believe it or not, there are probably very few Freepers who hang on every word you post daily.

That would be a difficult task for anybody.
To date, I've posted a total of 6,326 threads and 27,547 replies on a wide variety of topics.
Anybody who's unfamiliar with my position on issues is welcome to use the forum's search function to view them.

You sound just like a typical Kerry supporter, regurgitating all the Bush-bashing sound bites, and when challenged to elaborate, you berate the doubters for needing evidence.

Some of us old-timers have higher standards for discussion, Mr. Smithee. We expect other long-time participants (such as yourself) to have a better grasp of issues and where other frequent participants stand on them. Sadly, you seem to prefer the dumbed-down version of forum participation, feigning stupidity when a statement deviates from the party-line mantra, and making baseless accusations that anybody who disagrees MUST be supporting "the other side".

Frankly, Mr. Smithee, if you wish to waste your six-years of forum participation simply regurgitating such intellectually dishonest partisan drivel, that is your prerogative. But IMHO, such mindless groupthink is an insult to the intelligence of more thoughtful forum participants, and degrades the overall level of forum participation.

[L.N. Smithee]

Anybody who's unfamiliar with my position on issues is welcome to use the forum's search function to view them.

How very patronizing of you.

Some of us old-timers have higher standards for discussion, Mr. Smithee. We expect other long-time participants (such as yourself) to have a better grasp of issues and where other frequent participants stand on them.

You shouldn't be expecting anyone to have any idea on how you feel about anything. To someone who has just started lurking on FR last month, last week, or yesterday, "Willie Green" doesn't mean any more than "Jack Squat." Neither, for that matter, does "L.N. Smithee." Personally, I don't respond to "participants" as much as I respond to statements that I either agree or disagree with. I respond on a regular basis to questions about why I have a particular point-of-view. Why not? I believe what I say -- maybe someone else can learn something from me.

Once again, you seem to believe that I and two others on this thread should have embarked on a search to find out what you could have meant rather than expecting you to tell us yourself. Apparently, you think that saying "It's embarrasing that Dubya has handed [Kerry] some valid talking points" in the midst of a thread based on a rare major media editorial critical of Kerry's talking down the economy should have gone unchallenged.

Sadly, you seem to prefer the dumbed-down version of forum participation, feigning stupidity when a statement deviates from the party-line mantra, and making baseless accusations that anybody who disagrees MUST be supporting "the other side".

Frankly, Mr. Smithee, if you wish to waste your six-years of forum participation simply regurgitating such intellectually dishonest partisan drivel, that is your prerogative. But IMHO, such mindless groupthink is an insult to the intelligence of more thoughtful forum participants, and degrades the overall level of forum participation.

I didn't say you were "supporting 'the other side.'" I didn't make any accusation that you were a Kerry supporter. I cited the fact that you sound like Kerry fans, who either have convinced themselves or want us to believe they are convinced that a recession is ongoing.

I know what your tagline "Go Pat Go" means -- it means that you aren't a Kerry fan. It also indicates that you are a fan of a guy who spends more time bashing Bush than he does Democrats. So conceding that Kerry has a point when he bashes Bush would not be out-of-character for a Go-Pat-Gorilla.

I haven't "regurgitated" any "drivel." I didn't cite any "party-line mantra." I cited the fact that the numbers all indicate that Bush's economy is recovering, contrary to what Kerry is saying. I have statistics on my side. The point of the USA Today editorial is that the ever-negative Kerry doctored up the statistics in order to make something resembling a case against the recovery.

You, on the other hand, have backed up your statement with nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Bupkes. And I gave you the opportunity to provide something. And all you did was go after me for having the nerve to ask you to explain yourself rather than trying to figure you out.

Now THAT is 'intellectually dishonest!'

[Willie Green]

I know what your tagline "Go Pat Go" means -- it means that you aren't a Kerry fan. It also indicates that you are a fan of a guy who spends more time bashing Bush than he does Democrats. So conceding that Kerry has a point when he bashes Bush would not be out-of-character for a Go-Pat-Gorilla.

Since you concede that you at least superficially understand my tagline, then there really wasn't any need for me to explain my position in detail. You've already proven your incapacity to grasp such issues.

[Jorge]

.. you seem to believe that I and two others on this thread should have embarked on a search to find out what you could have meant rather than expecting you to tell us yourself.

Handing out extensive research and reading assignments is a familiar avoidance tactic of those who are unwilling or unable to respond directly to challenges.

The idea that we are supposed to research hundreds of posts in order to determine what was meant by one statement is laughable.
When posters resort to this, you know you won the debate :)