Does Anyone feel like Bailing

Originally Posted by classicman

Gotcha. Trying to use INDEPENDENT SOURCES is a bad thing. One must accept the Gov't for what they say. Thats your plan - ok.
Now I understand where we differ.

You want to use them as your only source of information and I want other corroborating information from independent sources.

Damn, dude. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

That is not what I said at all.

Please read my post objectively.

I am all for holding the government accountable...with FACTS, not rumors, innuendos and/or unsubstantiated allegations.

BUT...if you are making unfounded or undocumented allegations against any government source document...PROVE iT!

Now it is totaly un*fucking" believeable.

[classicman]

Sorry - I was simply following your lead.

All I am saying is that I want unbiased, independent information from someone other than the Gov't. What the hell is wrong with that?

I give up.

You have worn me out on this one.

[classicman]

take two aspirin and we'll start again in the morning.

I'll do that.

And I'll also be waiting for you to post any evidence from your lead:

Originally Posted by classicman

I'll still take the word of the independent source over the biased one.

Not mine/ You suggested bias in the DoAg report and company filing..which, in fact was what started it all.

Where is the bias in either of these documents that you alleged?

That was my question and it was really a simple question and you twisted it and turned it and dodged the question and continue to dodge it.

You made a charge....back it up!

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

I'll do that.

And I'll also be waiting for you to post any evidence from your lead:

Where is the bias in either of those documents.
Not mine -- suggesting bias in the DoAg report and company filing..which, in fact was what started it all.

Where is the bias in either of these documents that you alleged?

Its really a simple question.

What a fucking cock.

You ask Classic to step up but you can't do the same your self. Go crawl back under your rock you Policy Wanker.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

What a fucking cock.

Wacko extremists who know - and forget to first learn reality ... must then post profanity. You obscenities only confirm lower intelligence. Stop it. Or we must discuss which head your thoughts come from. You have nothing to contribute. So keep your cheap shot, extremist inspired profanity to yourself.
.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

You have nothing to contribute. So keep your cheap shot, extremist inspired profanity to yourself..

This coming from one who attacked a posters wife by calling her a "gonorrhea dripping whore" and never apologizing?

Originally Posted by classicman

This coming from one who attacked a posters wife by calling her a "gonorrhea dripping whore" and never apologizing?

Selective outrage.

I never heard you complain about Merc's constant comparison of a member of Congress to those who committed the worst atrocities of the 20 century...or Lookout's frequent macho need to refer to cunts.

And a broken record:

Originally Posted by classicman

OK I feel as though I have said this a dozen times. . .
I would prefer independent verification from an uninvolved party. When questioning something the Gov't says/does/claims... I would prefer not to just take the Gov'ts word for it or use the same Gov't as proof that what the say is factual/correct/true. Instead I would like corroborating evidence/proof/input from an outside source.
That is all.

I got it.....just wanted to give you one more chance to answer a direct question in response to your sarcastic, uninformed post on that particular grant in question.

But evidently you prefer making sweeps claims of bias w/o proof. It is certainly more convenient.

Guilty until proven innocent....nice! Not the American way....the MerClassic way!

added:

What? no comment on those independent, objective economic research firms and the jobs created?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Redux

Where is the bias?

OK I feel as though I have said this a dozen times. . .
I would prefer independent verification from an uninvolved party. When questioning something the Gov't says/does/claims... I would prefer not to just take the Gov'ts word for it or use the same Gov't as proof that what the say is factual/correct/true. Instead I would like corroborating evidence/proof/input from an outside source.
That is all.

One simple question.

Where is the evidence of bias in either of those docs.

Classic made the allegation. I asked it to be documented.

What is so fucking hard to understand about that?

I understand the trick to turn it back on me...it sure beats having to come up with the evidence.

I'm on to your tricks...and so are others

You guys didnt invent them....but the tricks are getting stale and you both have been exposed...again.

I actually think it is pretty funny.

Classic goes on a "gotcha" raid and finds the grant to Jennie-O Foods for $5+ million and proceeds to make sarcastic uninformed comments:

Originally Posted by classicman

Contract: Small Turkey Deli Breasts $5,379,000 Willmar MN Jobs created...unreported. Great accounting.

I wish I could find out how this works, $5 million plus... for turkey breasts? nice going.

I provide him with details that does not not contradict his source..but supplements it to "explain how it worked"

Originally Posted by Redux

Project report .... $5 million for 2.9 million lbs for domestic food assistance programs....less than $2/lb....seems like a reasonable price.

Jobs created - 285.

Rather then acknowledge the information, or God forbid, thank me for the additional details....he then proceeds with more sacasm and to trash the source as biased:

Originally Posted by classicman

Oh I'm sorry - How could I have possibly misinterpreted you.

I'll still take the word of the independent source over the biased one.
.

Come on...now thats funny...in a wingnut sorta way.

Then it became a matter of more twisting and dodging...still unwilling to acknowledge the additional information....digging his heals in on the unsubstantiated "bias" charge.

And at that point it went from funny to pathetic, particularly with the added hypocrisy.

Then back to funny again with even more twisting and dodging....and the insightful contributions from Merc.

[TheMercenary]

Promises are made to be broken...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QoG5u_6kjI

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Promises are made to be broken...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QoG5u_6kjI

John Stossel......one of those "objective, independent" sources?


Pardon me for borrowing one of your laughs.

How convenient for him to start with a "broken promise" on middle class tax cuts yet ignore the $288 billion in tax cuts in the stimulus bill (about 1/3 of the entire bill) that will benefit, to some extent, most American taxpayers

Including:

$116 billion in new payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010.

$70 billion for a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009

$15 billion for expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families

$14 billion for expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010

and tax cuts for small businesses:
$15 billion to companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.

How could Stossel miss this and instead focus on legislation (cap and trade, health care) in which he asserts there were middle class tax increases (wrong) when those final bills didnt even exist.

Caution: Fox fair and balanced at play!

What makes this so funny is the fact that most of the tea baggers and other extremists probably dont even know that many of them got or are getting these tax cuts

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by Redux

What makes this so funny is the fact that most of the tea baggers and other extremists probably dont even know that many of them got or are getting these tax cuts

True. Sort of like your lot with good ol' W's tax cuts "for the rich".