OBAMA'S ANTI-AMERICAN ECONOMY = IN BLACK AND WHITE FOR ALL THE DUMMIES !

Are you now talking to yourself ...?

Surely you haven't reached your limit of ambush kills while they are eating:

.. it's contagious these days .... the latest trophy kills ....



YOUR MAN IS TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS I SEE! Originally Posted by LexusLover

They were in the car eating donuts?

They were in the car eating donuts? Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Sure it wasn't tacos and egg rolls?

Are you now talking to yourself ...?

Surely you haven't reached your limit of ambush kills while they are eating:

.. it's contagious these days .... the latest trophy kills ....



YOUR MAN IS TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS I SEE! Originally Posted by LexusLover

How can you be so glib about this LLIduot?

You're either mean or plain stupid.

How can you be so glib about this LLIduot?

You're either mean or plain stupid. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Neither.

How many fucking times were Michael Brown's and Garner's photos pasted all over this forum? The only pose I didn't see was one with angel's wings on them.

Does it help your "feelings" to not see some REAL VICTIMS of the VIOLENCE of the cop killing mantra and atmosphere your leaders facilitate and actually encourage by FAILING TO SPEAK AGAINST IT AND DEMAND IT END?

Take the quote from the march in NYC .... remove "cops" ..... insert

"Obama" ......

How long would those fools have stayed out of jail?

It's pretty fucking clear to me. Sorry your vision is blurred by your prejudice.

Have you forgotten this "photo op" of the "new sheriff on the block"?

You're not fooling anybody, LLIdiot.

Your insincerity and blind hatred for our president is deeply rooted, like a massive carbuncle on the inter thigh of this forum. You need to have it lanced.

How can you be so glib about this LLIduot?

You're either mean or plain stupid. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

LLIdiot is the Patriarch of the Notorious Idiot Klan, errrr Clan.

Therefore he is both "mean and plain stupid."

"It's the economy stupid." Originally Posted by LexusLover

But let's give credit where credit is due. LLIdiot was smart enough to finally hop on Clinton's economic bandwagon on 12/24/14 (even though it was 20+ years after the fact).

Better late than never!

Ain't that right, LLIdiot?

You're not fooling anybody, LLIdiot.

Your insincerity and blind hatred for our president is deeply rooted, like a massive carbuncle on the inter thigh of this forum. You need to have it lanced. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I don't "hate' anyone, kucklehead. But since you brought it up ...

... you have anyone in mind to do the "lancing"?

You are not the only one posting on here who advocates violence to resolve social issues. That does seem to be an affliction that reveals immaturity... if not down right ignorance manifesting itself in the frustration of attempting to deal with one's inability to cope with reality. Is your reality so desperate?

You, just like your fearful leader, would prefer to demonize the messenger rather than address the real problem directly .... The "real problem" is the first Black president of the United States just pissed off six years of playing around and doing NOTHING for the Black people in this country, but feeding the "i'm a Victim" syndrome with the help of the likes of his "crew" of incompetents" now led by Al Sharpton as the "race relations" czar for the White House.

Enjoy the shit-hole YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS DIGGING.

..hop on Clinton's economic bandwagon..... Originally Posted by bigtex

There's no room with you on it, even if I wanted to get on it. But since you brought up the "Clinton economic bandwagon" .... i

How was the "economy" when Clinton left office?

(And a "link would be appropriate"!!!!)

Let's start with jobs:



Then THE FACTS JACK:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=azwhJVa5rWhU

Last U.S. Recession Began Under Clinton, Economy Panel May Say

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy slipped into recession during Democrat Bill Clinton's presidency rather than under President George W. Bush, the group that officially sets the timing of the country's business cycles may decide.

The seven-member Business Cycle Dating Committee of the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based National Bureau of Economic Research may change its determination that the recession started in March 2001 to reflect recent revisions to government growth statistics, committee members, including Victor Zarnowitz, said.

``We are discussing it now, and in my opinion it should be changed,'' Zarnowitz, a senior fellow at the Conference Board in New York, said in an interview. ``In my opinion, the recession started in December 2000.''

More news as THE FACTS EMERGED:

"
Early 2000′s Recession

by admin on March 15, 2012


MARCH 2001 – NOVEMBER 2001 (8 Months)

The Early 2000s recession took place in the U.S. for a number of different reasons. One was the collapse of the dot.com bubble. A false high, created in the initial, money-making wave of the internet that swept the world, finally came crashing down to a realistic level.

Also, the September 11th attacks made against the Pentagon and the World Trade Center Towers caused a huge stir among Americans. Although Americans rallied and stayed positive through the whole thing, the economy took a hit as people stopped spending money.

A series of outrageous accounting scandals caused what was considered a huge uproar as well, and also caused a mild contraction on the North American economy. But, thankfully, the recession didn’t last long. And although it is probably still fresh on the minds of some Americans, most have probably moved on. The economy recovered, and things looked up.

The Early 2000s recession was felt in mostly Western countries and had been predicted by economists for years, since the boom of the 1990s, which was accompanied by both low inflation and low unemployment. The collapse of the dot-com bubble, the September 11th attacks, and accounting scandals contributed to a relatively mild contraction in the North American economy.

The bursting of the dot-com bubble
As consumers saw the value of their assets fall, they were less likely to purchase as many goods and services, choosing instead to save, possibly for fear of job losses. In addition, the Tech bubble saw the creation of many Web businesses with unsustainable business models that survived on high stock prices or venture capital.

As the stock bubble deflated, the cash for these companies dried up, and many failed or sharply downsized. In turn, this created a flood of server hardware on the secondary market, and hardware and telecom companies suffered as a result."

http://recession.org/early-2000s-recession/

You want the band wagon. It's yours.

How was the "economy" when Clinton left office?
Originally Posted by LexusLover

The more appropriate question would be, how was the "economy" when Clinton and your favorite Shrub left office?

Let's compare the two, shall we?

Clinton and Shrub by the Dow Jones numbers:

Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 20, 1993 = 3,253
Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 19, 2001 = 10,887.39

An increase of 7,634.39 points in 8 years.

Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 19, 2001 = 10887.39
Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 20, 2009 = 7,920.66

A decrease of 2,966.70 points in 8 years.

According to LLIdiot, "it's the economy stupid."

After all of these years, LLIdiot finally got it right!

The more appropriate question would be, how was the "economy" when Clinton and your favorite Shrub left office? Originally Posted by bigtex

Of course, it would be, if someone like you, or BL, would rather talk about the past then the present. And I can understand why YOU want to do that ... always. A fundamental difference is, which is relevant today, ..

.. the Clinton administration, like the Obaminable administration, cooked the books on the stats to give an "appearance" of a good economy .... Bush didn't.

I remember (you probably don't) Clinton ranting in December 2000 when Cheney stated on a major network interview or two that the first order of their business would be addressing the downturn in the economy that began in 2000. Clinton went ballistic. But the AFL-CIO had already posted accurate numbers on its website as to the downturn in jobs. (See the chart). And the BLS had reported the same numbers for Oct 2000 as it did for Sept 2000 to minimize the loss of jobs in the ramp up to the 2000 election.

Obaminable's administration withholds bad news as it approaches the election.

The only "funny" (hilarious actually) part about it ... is they realize how naive you and yours are ..... so you are easy to Gruberize! Gruber wasn't talking about me and mine. He was talking about you and yours, BigTits.

BL has bought it lock, stock, and barrel.

By the way: Speaking of Clinton and his economy .... why was it that he could not put in troops into Afghanistan? And also, why was it that the military vehicles in the inventory in 2001 had to be retrofitted with platting to withstand hits that resulted in 1,000's of deaths and disabling of troops? Did Clinton save money? Why didn't the Clinton administration fail to fund the retrofitting of commercial airliners to "harden" the cockpits as recommended in the 1996 report on airline safety submitted by Gore? Did Clinton save some money?

You get on that band wagon. Enjoy the ride.

Under YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE, our economy has fallen to #2 and our military is headed that way as well. Are you going to blame the next administration for having to "RETROFIT" or are you still going to blame Bush?

BigTits, apparently you were busy ambushing another one while it was eating:

You must be a stockbroker.

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/d...since-2000.gif

See the "little blue line"? "It's the economy stupid."

Median income 2008 = $57,569 adjusted for inflation
Median income 2013 = $53,713 adjusted for inflation

$4,000 decrease during YOUR MAN'S "occupation" plus the ADDED costs of YOUR MAN'S increased health care costs. Do we need to look at job salaries for the "increased employment" he brags about? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Enjoy your IRA.

I don't "hate' anyone, kucklehead. But since you brought it up ...

... you have anyone in mind to do the "lancing"?

You are not the only one posting on here who advocates violence to resolve social issues. That does seem to be an affliction that reveals immaturity... if not down right ignorance manifesting itself in the frustration of attempting to deal with one's inability to cope with reality. Is your reality so desperate?

You, just like your fearful leader, would prefer to demonize the messenger rather than address the real problem directly .... The "real problem" is the first Black president of the United States just pissed off six years of playing around and doing NOTHING for the Black people in this country, but feeding the "i'm a Victim" syndrome with the help of the likes of his "crew" of incompetents" now led by Al Sharpton as the "race relations" czar for the White House.

Enjoy the shit-hole YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS DIGGING. Originally Posted by LexusLover

That is a ridiculous pack of lies, LLIdiot.

Where have I ever advocated violence as a solution for anything? Links?

And what the fuck does the rest of your post mean, LLIdiot? Which fearful leader are you talking about? What is Al Sharpton's official position with the government? Another slobbering lie.

It's way too early for you to be Shitfaced, asshole. Come back when you can walk a straight line.

How was the "economy" when Clinton left office? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Of course, it would be, if someone like you, or BL, would rather talk about the past then the present. Originally Posted by LexusLover

LLIdiot appears to have a head start at guzzlin' the Christmas Cheer.

Let's try to follow LLIdiot's drunken timeline. Shall we?

Exhibit A: (Post #68 @10:41 am) LLIdiot asks the following question, "how was the "economy" when Clinton left office?"

Exhibit B: (Post # 69 @10:51 am) I respond by sharing LLIdiot's requested data as it relates to "when Clinton left office."

Exhibit C: (Post #70 @11:36 am) LLIdiot boldly makes the claim that I "would rather talk about the past then the present."

Damn LLIdiot, all I did was respond to your stupid questions.

If you didn't want me to answer your stupid question, why did you ask them in the first place?

Conclusion: Don't try follow the Idiot Klan, errrr Clan's bouncing ball while they are guzzlin' Christmas Cheer!

we? Originally Posted by bigtex

Are you still jabbering about Clinton? That is Bill Clinton, right?

The current President, after all you voted for him 2x's, is Obaminable.

I realize you don't want to talk about him, but that's your fault; your vote.

Enjoy.

TALE OF THE TAPE "FOR ALL THE DUMMIES!"

Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 20, 1993 = 3,253
Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 19, 2001 = 10,887.39

An increase of 7,634.39 points in 8 years.

Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 19, 2001 = 10887.39
Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 20, 2009 = 7,920.66

A decrease of 2,966.70 points in 8 years.

Dow Jones Industrial Average on January 20, 2009 = 7,920.66
Dow Jones Industrial Average on December 19, 2014 = 17,804.90

An increase of 9,884.24 points in 5 years 11 months.

FACT JACK Originally Posted by bigtex

Did you bring up the Clinton years? Yes, I thought so. And I asked you:

Are you a stockbroker? Yes, I thought so.

There you go again, just like Obaminable ... lying .....

... falsely claiming you were responding to my question, which I was actually responding to your meaningless comparison of the stock exchange closings.

To get back on topic ... how is the economy under Obaminable?