[TheRealVille]

I have never refused to credit the source of anything that I have quoted. Yes, out of my thousands of posts, I have forgotten to post a link a few times but I have always credited the author when the omission has been brought to my attention. Nobody who has made a large number of posts has not made a mistake or two along the way. But it is hypocritical to criticize anybody else's sources and then refuse to cite your own.

Of course, since this is just another liberal being hypocritical, you see no problem with it. You challenging somebody to comment on an unattributed quote is a real laugh. You start threads and refuse to even take a position on your own thread. If you want to substantiate a list of liberal talking points, then go right ahead. I will correct your mistakes when I don't have anything better to do.

I always post a link with anything I quote, without fail. If I find a link that I read, I sometimes post it. There is no reason to take a position on everything I post. It might just be that it is an article that I thought was interesting.

[Hoot Gibson]

I always post a link with anything I quote, without fail. If I find a link that I read, I sometimes post it. There is no reason to take a position on everything I post. It might just be that it is an article that I thought was interesting.

So, in the thousands of posts that you have made, you have never once forgotten to include a link or included a broken link by mistake? Are you absolutely, 100 percent that this is an accurate claim? I find that hard to believe. There is no shame in making an occasional mistake and I give you credit for including links with your posts. You have at least earned the benefit of doubt in that one area.Vector has not. This is not the first time that he has tried to pass off somebody else's thoughts as his own and he does not post very often. The fact that he as refused to provide a link or cite a source suggests that in his case, the omission was not a mistake.

[vector]

Tell me what's not the truth in my post

[Hoot Gibson]

Tell me what's not the truth in my post

It's not your post. You just copy and pasted some other left winger's words and are now refusing to acknowledge the real author. The talking points that you ripped off appear on no fewer than 77 far left wing blogs. Your source is not credible and you are not credible for trying to pass the list off as your own. In a word, you are a plagiarist.

As long as you are willing to rip off somebody else's work, you should at least find some better material and change a word or two here and there. nicker:

[TheRealVille]

It's not your post. You just copy and pasted some other left winger's words and are now refusing to acknowledge the real author. The talking points that you ripped off appear on no fewer than 77 far left wing blogs. Your source is not credible and you are not credible for trying to pass the list off as your own. In a word, you are a plagiarist.

As long as you are willing to rip off somebody else's work, you should at least find some better material and change a word or two here and there. nicker:

In other words, you can't dispute the post's claims. Where they came from means nothing, if they are true statements.

[Hoot Gibson]

In other words, you can't dispute the post's claims. Where they came from means nothing, if they are true statements.

In other words, if I wanted to read and respond to garbage found on sites like the Daily Kos and Democratic Underground, then I would sign up for one of those web sites, where the victims of vector's intellectual (a real stretch) property theft might be found.

[TheRealThing]

^What were the poster's claims? All I saw was an 8 item list pasted into a post box. Could mean anything or nothing. One can literally read just about anything on the liberal blog scene. For instance, Obama adherents the likes of Alan Combs say in the wake of the failed stimulus ,"America would be far worse had the stimulus not taken place". Of course, he also thinks mankind was seeded on this planet by extraterrestrial life forms visiting from outer space.

[vector]

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/

[TheRealVille]

^What were the poster's claims? All I saw was an 8 item list pasted into a post box. Could mean anything or nothing. One can literally read just about anything on the liberal blog scene. For instance, Obama adherents the likes of Alan Combs say in the wake of the failed stimulus ,"America would be far worse had the stimulus not taken place". Of course, he also thinks mankind was seeded on this planet by extraterrestrial life forms visiting from outer space.

There were 8 claims(supposed falsities), with 8 supposed truths. As usual, you and your "twin" won't refute claims, whether they could be true or not, just because you claim they come from a liberal website. Coming from a liberal website means nothing, if said points are true.

[TheRealVille]

In other words, if I wanted to read and respond to garbage found on sites like the Daily Kos and Democratic Underground, then I would sign up for one of those web sites, where the victims of vector's intellectual (a real stretch) property theft might be found.

When you have no answer, you have no answer. I see where you're going. :eyeroll:

[Hoot Gibson]

When you have no answer, you have no answer. I see where you're going. :eyeroll:

It's not that I have no answer, it's that I have no interest. I could research and refute the claims of liberal bloggers 24/7 if I wanted to but it takes more time and effort than I care to spend. Besides, nobody reads those websites except for left wing whack jobs anyway. I see your friend the plagiarist finally came clean and posted a link.

[vector]

he has no answer because it's the truth

by the way it's not a liberal web site

hint link at top of click ABOUT

[vector]

You people gonna have to stop watchin fox news

[TheRealVille]

It's not that I have no answer, it's that I have no interest. I could research and refute the claims of liberal bloggers 24/7 if I wanted to but it takes more time and effort than I care to spend. Besides, nobody reads those websites except for left wing whack jobs anyway. I see your friend the plagiarist finally came clean and posted a link.

But, if the website refutes conservative lies, it should mean a lot for you to post the real truth. When faced with truth, you two seem to shrink away. You are a staunch defender of conservatives, and those points refute conservative lies. At least expose that the points are lies, if they are.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy organization working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

The Center is dedicated to improving government policies toward low- and middle-income Americans and ensuring that government has the resources to meet its responsibilities and address critical needs. The Center also helps other nonprofits, both in Washington, DC and across the country, participate more effectively in policy debates over budget priorities and reducing poverty and inequality.

[Hoot Gibson]

But, if the website refutes conservative lies, it should mean a lot for you to post the real truth. When faced with truth, you two seem to shrink away. You are a staunch defender of conservatives, and those points refute conservative lies. At least expose that the points are lies, if they are.

Good night, hypocrite. You have declined to respond to posts because you considered the source of the information unreliable many times. I will spend my time responding what I feel like responding to - and identical Obama talking points that have been posted on 77 left wing web sites is not worth my time. Let's here again how you are not an Obama supporter. :lmao:

[TheRealVille]

Good night, hypocrite. You have declined to respond to posts because you considered the source of the information unreliable many times. I will spend my time responding what I feel like responding to - and identical Obama talking points that have been posted on 77 left wing web sites is not worth my time. Let's here again how you are not an Obama supporter. :lmao:

nicker: That's what I thought. You have let your conservative fan club down, Hoot.


I said in another thread awhile back that I had changed my mind and was voting for Obama. You can take that to the bank. I think I even said that you changed my mind.

[vector]

[attach][attach][attachment=o2515][/attach][/attach]

[Hoot Gibson]

nicker: That's what I thought. You have let your conservative fan club down, Hoot.


I said in another thread awhile back that I had changed my mind and was voting for Obama. You can take that to the bank. I think I even said that you changed my mind.

Yeah, that's what you said. Of course that does not mean it was the truth. You are the biggest supporter that Obama has on this website and you have not waivered in your support for a minute.

[Hoot Gibson]

[attach][attach][attachment=o2515][/attach][/attach]

Tiny thumbnails on my screen. What are they and from what site did you copy them? nicker:

[vector]

Da.com

[TheRealThing]

There were 8 claims(supposed falsities), with 8 supposed truths. As usual, you and your "twin" won't refute claims, whether they could be true or not, just because you claim they come from a liberal website. Coming from a liberal website means nothing, if said points are true.

My post went over your head too huh? I can assure you there are a number of differences between me and Hoot's positions but, since you have declared him my twin, I will happily accept that label. All we have tried to do is reason with you with regard to some of the liberal lies and fantasies that you have subscribed to and posted on here. I and my twin, have posted hundreds of credible sources, many outside of country, to support our various positions. Hoot pointed out that the post in question has been put up on 77 liberal websites. If I were to cite Sean Hannity as a source to support an argument I was making you'd post something like this :hilarious: . Yet liberal sources like the one in question are supposed to be taken as the unvarnished truth according to you.


I will agree with you what is true is true regardless of where it comes from.
Vector's list did have one item that has merit. Number 5, which I have pasted in here;

5) Businesses will hire if they get tax cuts.
Reality: A business hires the right number of employees
to meet demand. Having extra cash does not cause a business
to hire, but a business that has a demand for what it does will
find the money to hire. Businesses want customers, not tax cuts.

Years ago, during another run up to the presidential election, jobs were as sore a subject as they are today, as Ronald Reagan squared off against Jimmy Carter during the economic dark days of exploding inflation and few jobs. Debate raged as to the validity of the notion that government can CREATE jobs. The consensus back then, it was political eyewash. Supply and demand creates jobs, not the government. Supply side economics, is the truth. The rest of the items in Vector's list are statistical rationalizations intended to make a faultlering presidency look much better than it deserves.

[TheRealVille]

I'll do it for you.




The truth
Bush’s last budget oct 2008 to oct 2009 had
a $1.416 trillion deficit.
Obama’s first budget reduced that to $1.29 trillion.

Obama cut taxes. 40% of the “stimulus” was wasted
on tax cuts which only create debt, which is why it was so
much less effective than it could have been.


While many people conflate the “stimulus” with
the bank bailouts, the bank bailouts were requested by
President Bush and his Treasury Secretary, former Goldman Sachs
CEO Henry Paulson.
(Paulson also wanted the bailouts to be “non-reviewable by any court or any agency.”
The bailouts passed and began before the 2008 election of President Obama.

The stimulus worked, but was not enough.
In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office,
the stimulus raised employment by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million jobs.

A business hires the right number of employees
to meet demand. Having extra cash does not cause a business
to hire, but a business that has a demand for what it does will
find the money to hire. Businesses want customers, not tax cuts.

The health care reform reduces government deficits by $138 billion.

Social Security has run a surplus since it began, has a trust
fund in the trillions, is completely sound for at least 25 more years and
cannot legally borrow so cannot contribute to the deficit
(compare that to the military budget!) Life expectancy is only
longer because fewer babies die; people who reach 65 live about
the same number of years as they used to.

Government is We, the People and the money it spends is on
We, the People. Many people do not know that it is government that
builds the roads, airports, ports, courts, schools and other things
that are the soil in which business thrives. Many people think that
all government spending is on “welfare” and “foreign aid” when that is
only a small part of the government’s budget.[/QUOTE]

[TheRealThing]

I'll do it for you.




The truth
Bush’s last budget oct 2008 to oct 2009 had
a $1.416 trillion deficit.
Obama’s first budget reduced that to $1.29 trillion.

I don't know how to break this to you but Obama hasn't HAD a budget since he's been in office. He and dopenik Senate Leader (of sorts) Reid have collaborated to deny the American Public their just, and lawful, due by denying them a budget. Haven't you heard?

[TheRealVille]

I don't know how to break this to you but Obama hasn't HAD a budget since he's been in office. He and dopenik Senate Leader (of sorts) Reid have collaborated to deny the American Public their just, and lawful, due by denying them a budget. Haven't you heard?

Yea he did, he reduced the deficit by 129 trillion in it. You post conservative lies.

[TheRealThing]

Yea he did, he reduced the deficit by 129 trillion in it. You post conservative lies.

My turn :hilarious: . You know it's been 1,188 days since the United States government had a budget. The Democrats have blocked it. This will be the first time in history the US government has operated without a yearly budget. And Obama will be the first and only president to govern his whole tenure, one full term, without a budget.

[TheRealVille]

My turn :hilarious: . You know it's been 1,188 days since the United States government had a budget. The Democrats have blocked it. This will be the first time in history the US government has operated without a yearly budget. And Obama will be the first and only president to govern his whole tenure, one full term, without a budget.

Fuzzy math?

The 2011 United States federal budget is the United States federal budget to fund government operations for the fiscal year 2011, which is October 2010 – September 2011. The budget is the subject of a spending request by President Barack Obama.[3][4] The actual appropriations for Fiscal Year 2011 had to be authorized by the full Congress before it could take effect, according to the United States budget process.
The budget did not pass by the September 30 deadline, and the government was funded by a series of seven continuing resolutions continuing funding at or near 2010 levels. The budget negotiations culminated in early April 2011, with a tense legislative standoff leading to speculation that the nation would face its first government shutdown since 1995. However, a deal containing $38.5 billion in cuts from 2010 funding levels was reached with just hours remaining before the deadline. The 2011 budget was enacted on April 15, 2011, as Public Law 112-10, the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United...ral_budget

[tvtimeout]

My post went over your head too huh? I can assure you there are a number of differences between me and Hoot's positions but, since you have declared him my twin, I will happily accept that label. All we have tried to do is reason with you with regard to some of the liberal lies and fantasies that you have subscribed to and posted on here. I and my twin, have posted hundreds of credible sources, many outside of country, to support our various positions. Hoot pointed out that the post in question has been put up on 77 liberal websites. If I were to cite Sean Hannity as a source to support an argument I was making you'd post something like this :hilarious: . Yet liberal sources like the one in question are supposed to be taken as the unvarnished truth according to you.


I will agree with you what is true is true regardless of where it comes from.
Vector's list did have one item that has merit. Number 5, which I have pasted in here;

5) Businesses will hire if they get tax cuts.
Reality: A business hires the right number of employees
to meet demand. Having extra cash does not cause a business
to hire, but a business that has a demand for what it does will
find the money to hire. Businesses want customers, not tax cuts.

Years ago, during another run up to the presidential election, jobs were as sore a subject as they are today, as Ronald Reagan squared off against Jimmy Carter during the economic dark days of exploding inflation and few jobs. Debate raged as to the validity of the notion that government can CREATE jobs. The consensus back then, it was political eyewash. Supply and demand creates jobs, not the government. Supply side economics, is the truth. The rest of the items in Vector's list are statistical rationalizations intended to make a faultlering presidency look much better than it deserves.

If supply causes jobs the housing market would be going up. It has always been demand but don't tell wall street that. The bailouts proved this point quite clearly. Unless of course you agree with the bailouts, then you should vote for Romney or Obama, one helped the republicrats did it, and the other would do so as well. The ideas of Adam Smith have long been forgotten and that is the sad truth.

[tvtimeout]

I should have corrected the bolded statement earlier but better late than never. Romney balanced the budget every year that he was governor of Massachusetts. He raised user fees to balance the budgets but he complied with state law in doing so. Apparently, the Paul campaign has fed you some inaccurate talking points.

Is this another word for taxes? Man that guy is conservative... so far he is for an individual mandate and instead of cutting spending he raises fees. I can see why you would vote for him.

[TheRealThing]

Fuzzy math?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United...ral_budget

I know you're bought and sold, but are you really trying to say there has been a federal budget? I mean, there have been Obama's attempts at comedy relief in the form of budget proposals , such as the one submitted last year that didn't get even one vote of approval. Let me clarify that, there are 100 Senators, here was the vote; yea-0 nay-100

[TheRealVille]

I know you're bought and sold, but are you really trying to say there has been a federal budget? I mean, there have been Obama's attempts at comedy relief in the form of budget proposals , such as the one submitted last year that didn't get even one vote of approval. Let me clarify that, there are 100 Senators, here was the vote; yea-0 nay-100

The 2011 budget was enacted on April 15, 2011, as Public Law 112-10Look it up. That is the 2011 budget. Faux News is not being honest with you, or you are not being honest.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112pub...publ10.htm