[sdnativeson]

duplicate

[sdnativeson]

duplicate

[sdnativeson]

This was discussed on an prior thread some time ago, wish I could recall where. I was under the same assumption as you mdal, but if I remember correctly the ultimate outcome on the thread was the same as TG’s reply.

[sdnativeson]

This was discussed on an prior thread some time ago, wish I could recall where. I was under the same assumption as you mdal, but if I remember correctly the ultimate outcome on the thread was the same as TG’s reply.

[sdnativeson]

This was discussed on an prior thread some time ago, wish I could recall where. I was under the same assumption as you mdal, but if I remember correctly the ultimate outcome on the thread was the same as TG’s reply.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[sdnativeson]

“It’s naive to think ” I don’t see where I labeled anything but a specific opinion or statement.

If I meant to call Alex naive I would have said “Alex, you are naive”. I didn’t do that, did I? What do you get out of distorting what was said?

As I spoke directly to the context of Alexs statement -of which was Wall streets “reaction”, I resorted to producing nothing more than a basic fact of how our government works, which I believe, is pertinent. I also said market, not economy. Vanity? Ideology? Please.

Shall I assume you are telling me Wall Street and foreign markets wait with baited breath for the President to speak? LOL. Yeah, Greenspan, Bernancke(?) and the Fed are/were irrelevent. You don’t get it because you don’t think about it. At least not far enough.

I also fail to see where I demanded anything of anyone. You are totally misrepresenting anything that I opined.

An afterthought, there has/had been alot of growth in the markets and US economy during the last seven years (regardless of the cause that isn’t my point) and alot of people smarter (well, supposedly) than either you or I were saying things like “unprecedented growth” “robust economy” blah blah… who gave little if any credit to GW.

My point is, if he isn’t (and he isn’t imho) responsible for the “boom” for want of a better word he isn’t responsible for the “bust” either.

The fact that you don’t get it, well that is your problem.

[sdnativeson]

I can remember when it was expected of a person.

Good question and exercise Raybyrnes. And your observation
imho seems dead accurate.

This is the mentality/mindset that is actively promoted in our society (I can’t help but think of the visa check card commercial with everyone on autopilot until some “person” pulls out cash).

So much for individuality or free-will we are being weighed, measured, packaged, labeled and delivered as promised. Time to stop, this isn’t the medium for a topic like that.

[sdnativeson]

I can remember when it was expected of a person.

Good question and exercise Raybyrnes. And your observation
imho seems dead accurate.

This is the mentality/mindset that is actively promoted in our society (I can’t help but think of the visa check card commercial with everyone on autopilot until some “person” pulls out cash).

So much for individuality or free-will we are being weighed, measured, packaged, labeled and delivered as promised. Time to stop, this isn’t the medium for a topic like that.

[sdnativeson]

I can remember when it was expected of a person.

Good question and exercise Raybyrnes. And your observation
imho seems dead accurate.

This is the mentality/mindset that is actively promoted in our society (I can’t help but think of the visa check card commercial with everyone on autopilot until some “person” pulls out cash).

So much for individuality or free-will we are being weighed, measured, packaged, labeled and delivered as promised. Time to stop, this isn’t the medium for a topic like that.

[sdnativeson]

I concur with your first two paragraphs, I would just toss in “Democrat” right alongside Republican verbatim.
I think Clinton was a pretty benign president overall. My biggest gripe is that he looked directly into the camera and lied to the public, when he didn’t have to {please spare me any bush does that everyday or some crap if you don’t know what I mean by what I said, just say that).

Interesting point, you might want to see where a good percentage of the money that Bill has earned after leaving office has come from, I’ll leave it at that before I get labeled

The laughingstock of every civilized and uncivilized country? Generalization, I spend a good portion of the year traveling overseas and I wouldn’t use that term – when Clinton was being investigated we were, those who were aware of it couldn’t understand why it was made such a big deal(like alot of people here). Now I didn’t say that everywhere I go I am met with open arms but, I would say beyond the authorities, most – I said most really don’t care.

We are still dangerous, very dangerous for a myriad of reasons. A sample, a conversation with an aquaintance – he commented (paraphrasing)it’s difficult to understand you americans, you elect Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and another Bush – you change your politics like my daughter changes her clothes, I don’t know what I am going to see next. (not exactly subtle with the insult but not completelyl inaccurate either)

If you want GW to “abdicate” then to be both honest and fair you gotta ask the same of congress don’t you?

Anyway having said that I don’t express my opinions to try to change anyones mind, it’s a dialogue right? I do try to make people think outside their comfort zone. to me being polarized is to be intellectually dead

[sdnativeson]

I concur with your first two paragraphs, I would just toss in “Democrat” right alongside Republican verbatim.
I think Clinton was a pretty benign president overall. My biggest gripe is that he looked directly into the camera and lied to the public, when he didn’t have to {please spare me any bush does that everyday or some crap if you don’t know what I mean by what I said, just say that).

Interesting point, you might want to see where a good percentage of the money that Bill has earned after leaving office has come from, I’ll leave it at that before I get labeled

The laughingstock of every civilized and uncivilized country? Generalization, I spend a good portion of the year traveling overseas and I wouldn’t use that term – when Clinton was being investigated we were, those who were aware of it couldn’t understand why it was made such a big deal(like alot of people here). Now I didn’t say that everywhere I go I am met with open arms but, I would say beyond the authorities, most – I said most really don’t care.

We are still dangerous, very dangerous for a myriad of reasons. A sample, a conversation with an aquaintance – he commented (paraphrasing)it’s difficult to understand you americans, you elect Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and another Bush – you change your politics like my daughter changes her clothes, I don’t know what I am going to see next. (not exactly subtle with the insult but not completelyl inaccurate either)

If you want GW to “abdicate” then to be both honest and fair you gotta ask the same of congress don’t you?

Anyway having said that I don’t express my opinions to try to change anyones mind, it’s a dialogue right? I do try to make people think outside their comfort zone. to me being polarized is to be intellectually dead

[sdnativeson]

I concur with your first two paragraphs, I would just toss in “Democrat” right alongside Republican verbatim.
I think Clinton was a pretty benign president overall. My biggest gripe is that he looked directly into the camera and lied to the public, when he didn’t have to {please spare me any bush does that everyday or some crap if you don’t know what I mean by what I said, just say that).

Interesting point, you might want to see where a good percentage of the money that Bill has earned after leaving office has come from, I’ll leave it at that before I get labeled

The laughingstock of every civilized and uncivilized country? Generalization, I spend a good portion of the year traveling overseas and I wouldn’t use that term – when Clinton was being investigated we were, those who were aware of it couldn’t understand why it was made such a big deal(like alot of people here). Now I didn’t say that everywhere I go I am met with open arms but, I would say beyond the authorities, most – I said most really don’t care.

We are still dangerous, very dangerous for a myriad of reasons. A sample, a conversation with an aquaintance – he commented (paraphrasing)it’s difficult to understand you americans, you elect Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and another Bush – you change your politics like my daughter changes her clothes, I don’t know what I am going to see next. (not exactly subtle with the insult but not completelyl inaccurate either)

If you want GW to “abdicate” then to be both honest and fair you gotta ask the same of congress don’t you?

Anyway having said that I don’t express my opinions to try to change anyones mind, it’s a dialogue right? I do try to make people think outside their comfort zone. to me being polarized is to be intellectually dead

[sdnativeson]

“Typical talk-radio-conservative crap. Slam others for precisely what you’re doing – insist that they’re the ones with the problem as a way to distract attention from your own activities.

Example: The phrase “Leftwing Media Bias” Conservatives seem to believe that any information that runs contrary to their talking points is inherently biased. Well, duh! ”

I read this as saying that I (sdns) was espousing “conservative crap” and therefore a “conservative”
The example “Leftwing Media Bias” I read as validation to the former. Therefore tossing out labels. I am incorrect?

If you are an engineer then why so adverse to my stating that you should know how things work and look at it from all sides and applying it your political/economic views?

What do you expect of your engineers are they “slammed” because you expect them to know how things work in their given discipline, to evaluate their work and to approach a task or problem from a different perspective?

[Author]

Posts