Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As a con tool, it just eats at him that Obama, despite inheriting a recession where we lost 800,000 jobs as Bush was leaving office, has added 10 million jobs; while Bush added just one million.When I ask for what Obama policies created jobs, Anton and you respond by pointing to the 800 plus billion dollar stimulus as the "policy" that satisfies that request I can only smile and shake my head. The truth is there was going to be a stimulus put into effect no matter who was elected President since there was overwhelming bipartisan support for stimulus. Obviously when you spend an amount as large as 870 billion you are going to get some sort of bang for your buck. The question is...how much bang did we get for the money we spent...was the stimulus structured in the best way to create jobs and grow the economy...or was it used by the politicians in power to reward their supporters and further their agenda?
There is a reason why the Obama Stimulus didn't create the jobs that Democratic leaders promised it would, Anton! You had Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid controlling who and what got paid out of that money. It became a giant slush fund with which Democratic leaders could reward political supporters and fund their agenda. It's why we got things like Solyndra.
Recapping the Obama Administration Green Energy Stimulus Failures - IER
Hilarious when it's counting the deficits it's nothing but - OBAMA SPENT LIKE DRUNKEN SAILOR!
When it's counting the jobs that spending bought it's - ANYBODY woulda done it! He didn't do nothing special!
Well leave it to you to make IRRELEVANT arguments. It doesn't matter who-woulda-coulda. Fact is Obama DID. So when you say he DIDN"T pass job creating policies, you are WRONG.
Since you haven't been able to provide anything resembling what you would consider GOOD NUMBERS on how many jobs 800 billion dollars caused we can safely ignore your BS ramblings.
As a con tool, it just eats at him that Obama, despite inheriting a recession where we lost 800,000 jobs as Bush was leaving office, has added 10 million jobs; while Bush added just one million.
Oldstyle is off checking the conservativetalkingpoints.com site for an answer. Poor stupid con troll.Reasonable numbers? You mean like the jobs created numbers that should have been used to give a more accurate evaluation of whether or not what we were doing was creating jobs? Faun used the example of the USDA puffing up their numbers under the Bush Administration, Anton. What that department did is the exact same thing that the Obama Administration did on a massive scale...the USDA managers used a bullshit "jobs saved" number to provide a narrative that sounded wonderful and made people who didn't know better think that they were doing one heck of a job. What's MORONIC is for anyone with a little common sense to take a "jobs saved" number for anything more than it is...a self serving deception.
Yes, Reasonable numbers. Give us what you consider REASONABLE numbers.
Lets have them asshole. Enough bitching and moaning and dodging.
Time to true up and say something HONEST.
You don't know how many jobs? Just fucking say so and admit that you are arguing ENTIRELY from wishful ignorance rather than fact. Arguing entirely from NEED to deny the UNTHINKABLE, UNACCEPTABLE idea that Obama's policies actually did benefit the jobs market.
LIAR!Actual unemployment is around 23 percent. The stats are are only for those still collecting unemployment. When they can no longer collect benefits, they no longer count as being "unemployed".
As a con tool, it just eats at him that Obama, despite inheriting a recession where we lost 800,000 jobs as Bush was leaving office, has added 10 million jobs; while Bush added just one million.
800,000 was lost in just one month, with almost 9 million jobs lost before we started gaining jobs again.
It's tough to deny the obvious day in and out but that's what lemming conservatives have to do to not admit the politically un-admitable.
Actually, I heard that the 426 number was the displacement of a 70's dodge Hemi. And that is the number that the guy that has Dale Smith's ear used in determining unemployment. Poor Dale, boy is stupid but thinks he is very, very smart.Your figures are wrong. I heard unemployment is closer to 426%.Hey guys. I just found a thread I started in 2008 called us jobless claims rise to a 5 year high. Keep in mind Republicans at the time said things were great bush was great vote for McCain.Just posting the truth as I see it.if so why are you so afraid to present your best example for the whole world to see? What do you learn from your fear?
if govt is protection racket for corporations so why are you so afraid to present your best example for the whole world to see? What do you learn from your fear?
But today they aren't happy that jobless claims have now fallen to a 4 decade low?
That's brainwashed pure and simple.
Actual unemployment is around 23 percent. The stats are are only for those still collecting unemployment. When they can no longer collect benefits, they no longer count as being "unemployed". Wages are totally stagnant. 51 percent that even have a job make less than 30K which is 15 buck and hour. 38 percent make less than 20K which is ten bucks an hour....so tell me oncer again how great a job the Barrypuppet has done????
LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
Oh, that one was a gem.LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
Oh, that one was a gem.LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
Not only does he think unemployment benefits are use to determine how many folks are unemployed -- but he thinks it's the White House, and not the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which does that.
When I ask for what Obama policies created jobs, Anton and you respond by pointing to the 800 plus billion dollar stimulus as the "policy" that satisfies that request I can only smile and shake my head. The truth is there was going to be a stimulus put into effect no matter who was elected President since there was overwhelming bipartisan support for stimulus. Obviously when you spend an amount as large as 870 billion you are going to get some sort of bang for your buck. The question is...how much bang did we get for the money we spent...was the stimulus structured in the best way to create jobs and grow the economy...or was it used by the politicians in power to reward their supporters and further their agenda?
There is a reason why the Obama Stimulus didn't create the jobs that Democratic leaders promised it would, Anton! You had Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid controlling who and what got paid out of that money. It became a giant slush fund with which Democratic leaders could reward political supporters and fund their agenda. It's why we got things like Solyndra.
Recapping the Obama Administration Green Energy Stimulus Failures - IER
Hilarious when it's counting the deficits it's nothing but - OBAMA SPENT LIKE DRUNKEN SAILOR!
When it's counting the jobs that spending bought it's - ANYBODY woulda done it! He didn't do nothing special!
Well leave it to you to make IRRELEVANT arguments. It doesn't matter who-woulda-coulda. Fact is Obama DID. So when you say he DIDN"T pass job creating policies, you are WRONG.
Since you haven't been able to provide anything resembling what you would consider GOOD NUMBERS on how many jobs 800 billion dollars caused we can safely ignore your BS ramblings.
Now that companies are hiring and paying more people who gave up have started looking again.LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
[/QUOTE]When I ask for what Obama policies created jobs, Anton and you respond by pointing to the 800 plus billion dollar stimulus as the "policy" that satisfies that request I can only smile and shake my head. The truth is there was going to be a stimulus put into effect no matter who was elected President since there was overwhelming bipartisan support for stimulus. Obviously when you spend an amount as large as 870 billion you are going to get some sort of bang for your buck. The question is...how much bang did we get for the money we spent...was the stimulus structured in the best way to create jobs and grow the economy...or was it used by the politicians in power to reward their supporters and further their agenda?
There is a reason why the Obama Stimulus didn't create the jobs that Democratic leaders promised it would, Anton! You had Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid controlling who and what got paid out of that money. It became a giant slush fund with which Democratic leaders could reward political supporters and fund their agenda. It's why we got things like Solyndra.
Recapping the Obama Administration Green Energy Stimulus Failures - IER
Hilarious when it's counting the deficits it's nothing but - OBAMA SPENT LIKE DRUNKEN SAILOR!
When it's counting the jobs that spending bought it's - ANYBODY woulda done it! He didn't do nothing special!
Well leave it to you to make IRRELEVANT arguments. It doesn't matter who-woulda-coulda. Fact is Obama DID. So when you say he DIDN"T pass job creating policies, you are WRONG.
Since you haven't been able to provide anything resembling what you would consider GOOD NUMBERS on how many jobs 800 billion dollars caused we can safely ignore your BS ramblings.
So you can't name them...but it's a FACT that Obama did have policies that created jobs? I'm curious, Anton...when you make arguments like that...is there anyone that doesn't laugh?
When I ask for what Obama policies created jobs, Anton and you respond by pointing to the 800 plus billion dollar stimulus as the "policy" that satisfies that request I can only smile and shake my head. The truth is there was going to be a stimulus put into effect no matter who was elected President since there was overwhelming bipartisan support for stimulus. Obviously when you spend an amount as large as 870 billion you are going to get some sort of bang for your buck. The question is...how much bang did we get for the money we spent...was the stimulus structured in the best way to create jobs and grow the economy...or was it used by the politicians in power to reward their supporters and further their agenda?
There is a reason why the Obama Stimulus didn't create the jobs that Democratic leaders promised it would, Anton! You had Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid controlling who and what got paid out of that money. It became a giant slush fund with which Democratic leaders could reward political supporters and fund their agenda. It's why we got things like Solyndra.
Recapping the Obama Administration Green Energy Stimulus Failures - IER
Hilarious when it's counting the deficits it's nothing but - OBAMA SPENT LIKE DRUNKEN SAILOR!
When it's counting the jobs that spending bought it's - ANYBODY woulda done it! He didn't do nothing special!
Well leave it to you to make IRRELEVANT arguments. It doesn't matter who-woulda-coulda. Fact is Obama DID. So when you say he DIDN"T pass job creating policies, you are WRONG.
Since you haven't been able to provide anything resembling what you would consider GOOD NUMBERS on how many jobs 800 billion dollars caused we can safely ignore your BS ramblings.
So you can't name them...but it's a FACT that Obama did have policies that created jobs? I'm curious, Anton...when you make arguments like that...is there anyone that doesn't laugh?
Republicans congratulate Republican governors for the economic recovery they deny is happening because they don't want to give Obama any credit. How do you take someone who does this seriously? And if the economy were as bad as Republicans say why aren't republicans governors worried about their jobs? Michigan gov GOP Rick Snyder poisoned us with lead and he still has his job.When I ask for what Obama policies created jobs, Anton and you respond by pointing to the 800 plus billion dollar stimulus as the "policy" that satisfies that request I can only smile and shake my head. The truth is there was going to be a stimulus put into effect no matter who was elected President since there was overwhelming bipartisan support for stimulus. Obviously when you spend an amount as large as 870 billion you are going to get some sort of bang for your buck. The question is...how much bang did we get for the money we spent...was the stimulus structured in the best way to create jobs and grow the economy...or was it used by the politicians in power to reward their supporters and further their agenda?
There is a reason why the Obama Stimulus didn't create the jobs that Democratic leaders promised it would, Anton! You had Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid controlling who and what got paid out of that money. It became a giant slush fund with which Democratic leaders could reward political supporters and fund their agenda. It's why we got things like Solyndra.
Recapping the Obama Administration Green Energy Stimulus Failures - IER
Hilarious when it's counting the deficits it's nothing but - OBAMA SPENT LIKE DRUNKEN SAILOR!
When it's counting the jobs that spending bought it's - ANYBODY woulda done it! He didn't do nothing special!
Well leave it to you to make IRRELEVANT arguments. It doesn't matter who-woulda-coulda. Fact is Obama DID. So when you say he DIDN"T pass job creating policies, you are WRONG.
Since you haven't been able to provide anything resembling what you would consider GOOD NUMBERS on how many jobs 800 billion dollars caused we can safely ignore your BS ramblings.
So you can't name them...but it's a FACT that Obama did have policies that created jobs? I'm curious, Anton...when you make arguments like that...is there anyone that doesn't laugh?
Yup. I don't laugh because while you lie like a rug, Anton never lies. Ever. Because you know that you are lying, I don't think you have anything to laugh about. that would be you lying again.
First, Oldstyle, you have promised months ago to provide bills that republicans have brought forward to combat the disaster known as the Great Republican Recession of 2008. You promised, and then failed to do so. So, was it simply another lie of yours?
Second, you have been shown many times the numbers, in the millions, of jobs that obama has been responsible for saving and creating.
Third. You have been unable to find a single job bill by Republicans, so at this point we know it was Obama Millions of jobs saved and created, Republicans 0 jobs. That's Zero.
Fourth, you are LYING again when you quote the $800 Billion number. As you have been shown, it was $500 Billion in stimulus, and a couple hundred Billion in tax decreases that Republicans put in the Stimulus (and then voted against).
Really, oldstyle, you lie so much your posts are a waste of space.
Oh, that one was a gem.LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
Not only does he think unemployment benefits are use to determine how many folks are unemployed -- but he thinks it's the White House, and not the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which does that.
Yep. Not the brightest bulb on the tree. Pretty sure he is a congenital idiot. Really serious mental illness.
No, an idiot is someone that believes that a VERY low 62.7 percent of the work eligible population with jobs equals less the 5 percent real unemployment. But keep believing that if it gives you the warm fuzzies about the Barrypuppet and the shitheads that make up the leftard clown posse of sniveling fools.
So you can't name them...but it's a FACT that Obama did have policies that created jobs? I'm curious, Anton...when you make arguments like that...is there anyone that doesn't laugh?
It was lower than that until the late 70's. So what?Oh, that one was a gem.LIAR!the WH deducts those that no longer receive unemployment payments because it ran out as not counting on the roll.
Not only does he think unemployment benefits are use to determine how many folks are unemployed -- but he thinks it's the White House, and not the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which does that.
Yep. Not the brightest bulb on the tree. Pretty sure he is a congenital idiot. Really serious mental illness.
No, an idiot is someone that believes that a VERY low 62.7 percent of the work eligible population with jobs equals less the 5 percent real unemployment. But keep believing that if it gives you the warm fuzzies about the Barrypuppet and the shitheads that make up the leftard clown posse of sniveling fools.
So you can't name them...but it's a FACT that Obama did have policies that created jobs? I'm curious, Anton...when you make arguments like that...is there anyone that doesn't laugh?
I've named what I consider reasonable numbers. I can't name FOR YOU what YOU consider good numbers, because...well there doesn't seem to be any numbers more than ZERO that you'll accept due to your deep rooted politico needs. But on the other hand you ALSO know such numbers are moronic and so you dis-honestly abstain from naming it.
When did I ever claim ZERO jobs were created, Anton? You've been hanging out with Georgie too much...you're starting to play fast and loose with the truth just like him!
What I consider to be "reasonable" numbers are the jobs created numbers that had always been used as a barometer of job growth...not some fictional estimates based on political need.
