A little perspective on the economy

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

What are you talking about

I didn't post any economic statistics in this thread, thus I can't have cherry-picked anything.

Please reread the thread and try to understand it this time.

Speaking of cherry-picking, your last post looks like you are pretty good at that.

Thanks in advance,

Frank

You gotta be kidding. You were the first ATTABOY post under the op that was saying:

Key Labor Market Statistics in 1996 and 2008 March 1996 March 2008

1. U.S. Unemployment Rate: 1996 - 5.5% 2008 - 5.1%
2. Number of Long-Term Unemployed 1996 - 1.33 million 2008 - 1.28 million
3. Average Weeks Unemployed 1996 - 17.3 weeks 2008 - 16.2 weeks
4. Median Weeks Unemployed 1996 - 8.3 weeks 2008 - 8.1 weeks
5. Not in Labor Force because discouraged over job prospects 1996 - 451,000 2008 - 401,000
6. Democrats calling for Extended Unemployment Benefits? 1996 - No 2008 - Yes
7. President’s Party Affiliation 1996 - Democrat 2008 - Republican

In summary, it's trying to claim the lies of:

The economy now is better than it was in 1996

The democrats are lying about the economy because there is a republican in the white house.

So, you line up behind that and then claim you aren't singing along with the ludicrous cherry picking in the OP which completely ignores the reality like the fact the dollar is collapsing against all major currencies?

Whatever

have a nice day


BTW, your observation of:

[quote]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

See? Statistics are lies! (Especially if they do not conform to one's own internal bias).

Could (in your case) be summed up as:

"See! Statistics are True! But, only if they can be cherry picked and twisted into something that implies this admin is doing a great job with the economy...."

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

Don't waste your time with the facts and the statistics.

The last time I tried this, I was given the following response....



See? Statistics are lies! (Especially if they do not conform to one's own internal bias).

Frank

BTW, Frank.... on the subject of lies, damn lies, and statistics.... the OP is a perfect example of one of my pet peeves: Lies of Omission. That's when somebody selectively picks out "facts" which are technically accurate but will convey a lie because other facts which negate them are intentionally omitted. This pack of statistical crap is a prime example of how spin doctors make a living doing just that.

And, yes: IT IS LYING.

Lies of Omission:

To lie by omission is to remain silent and thereby withhold from someone else a vital piece (or pieces) of information. The silence is deceptive in that it gives a false impression to the person from whom the information was withheld. It subverts the truth;it is a way to manipulate someone into altering their behavior to suit the desire of the person who intentionally withheld the vital information;and, most importantly, it's a gross violation of another person's right of self-determination.
Have you ever heard the word, "spin doctor?" This is the job title for the political campaign people who intentionally speak only a part of the truth with the goal of deceiving their listeners and getting the listener to supporting the spin doctor's candidate.

.

The Biggest Lie About Lies -- A Lie of Omission Is Not a Lie!

A lie of omission is the most insidious, most pervasive, and most common lie on the entire planet. Commonly, those who use this type of lie, have conned themselves into believing that to intentionally remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up is not a lie at all.

The Inevitable Consequences: There is also the common misconception that intentional deception by silence has no consequences. Lies of commission (telling a lie) and lies of omission (withholding the truth) are both acts of intention deception. Both reap the same consequences.

The Art of Lying

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by bountyhunter

You gotta be kidding. You were the first ATTABOY post under the op that was saying:

In summary, it's trying to claim the lies of:

The economy now is better than it was in 1996

The democrats are lying about the economy because there is a republican in the white house.

So, you line up behind that and then claim you aren't singing along with the ludicrous cherry picking in the OP which completely ignores the reality like the fact the dollar is collapsing against all major currencies?

Whatever

have a nice day


BTW, your observation of:

Could (in your case) be summed up as:

"See! Statistics are True! But, only if they can be cherry picked and twisted into something that implies this admin is doing a great job with the economy...."

Nice dodge, Bountyhunter.

You said that I cherrypicked facts and left out certain statistics.

I did not post any statistics in this thread.

I guess this just goes to show that you really don't read anything before responding to it.

Frank

[Frenchy]

At least you're consistant, Frank.


There!...I used it for you!

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by bountyhunter

Quote:

Lies of Omission:

To lie by omission is to remain silent and thereby withhold from someone else a vital piece (or pieces) of information. The silence is deceptive in that it gives a false impression to the person from whom the information was withheld. It subverts the truth;it is a way to manipulate someone into altering their behavior to suit the desire of the person who intentionally withheld the vital information;and, most importantly, it's a gross violation of another person's right of self-determination.


Have you ever heard the word, "spin doctor?" This is the job title for the political campaign people who intentionally speak only a part of the truth with the goal of deceiving their listeners and getting the listener to supporting the spin doctor's candidate.

.

The Biggest Lie About Lies -- A Lie of Omission Is Not a Lie!
A lie of omission is the most insidious, most pervasive, and most common lie on the entire planet. Commonly, those who use this type of lie, have conned themselves into believing that to intentionally remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up is not a lie at all.

The Inevitable Consequences: There is also the common misconception that intentional deception by silence has no consequences. Lies of commission (telling a lie) and lies of omission (withholding the truth) are both acts of intention deception. Both reap the same consequences.

ROFL!

Nice to know that you get your definition of "lie" from.....

*drumroll please*

Choice 101
Your Online, Abortion-Rights, Education Course.

Featuring such topics as...."how to reverse global warming"
and...

Reproductive Rights Are Dying
and
You Have Three Choices

.

1 Accept forced motherhood! -- Then teach your daughters and granddaughters how to perform coat-hanger abortions.

.

2 Do what nobody other than our pro-choice team has done. -- Come up with a new strategy that will save abortion rights -- a strategy that actually worksand implement it immediately.

.

3Support and/or participate in the fully functional, fully functioning, and already-proven program offered on our web sites.

.

Stellar source, bountyhunter! Good to know where you find most of the illogic behind your arguements

Using a definition of lie from someone's personal pro-abortion website! That's classic.

Frank

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Frenchy

At least you're consistant, Frank.


There!...I used it for you!

[one-eyed-fatman]

[FrankRizzoXD40]

it worked....for now...

Frank

[Delija]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

Here's a challenge for you. You keep claiming that I think I make the rules here. Please find ONE time where I have stated that I make the rules here.

Thanks in advance and please do not "cop out".

Franky, Franky, Franky!!!! Is this supposed to be a trick question?

No "cop out'....And no...you have probably (more than probably...almost certainly) never come out and said "I'm FrankRizzo and I make the rules around here'...

You don't need to come out and say the words....no need.

It's telling us all what is and is not "on topic" or "off topic"

It's telling us all what is and is not a 'violation of the CoC"

It's telling people (on a very regular basis)..."go back and read the thread...you obviously didn't understand it if you think i am wrong" (or words to that effect).

It's telling others what they meant or what they actually think (especially funny when someone says something facetious or tries sarcasm and you don't 'get it' and point it out and say 'SEE?!?!" -

It's telling people they have an obligation to answer your questions.

It's telling people you won't answer their questions because they wee not asked in the proper thread, words, whatever suits you (this standard of course, only applies one-way).

It's telling people that it's "my bat and ball" and you don't like the game so you are going home to pout (having the moderators close threads you started if you don't like the direction of the tangent the conversation has veered off on.

It's demanding "proof" when it suits you...this is supposed to be an open discussion, not a courtroom.

It's demanding standards from others who don't take things as seriously as you seem to (must be my imagination).

It's crying out "foul" if someone quotes you out of context, or misquotes you by mistake, but when you intentionally misquote others (uncounted times), there's no problem ("IT IS IMPOSSIBLE' and 'IT SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE TO ME' are two very different things, but it suited your purpose to make them interchangeable, so you did it...just that one example...perhaps hundreds of times).

It's all this and more.

I would guess that in truth, no one really is bothered by any of it...I think most of us find it humorous. The sad thing is that you seem to be devoid of any sense of self deprecating humor...(sometimes of any humor at all)..I'd hope that in 'real life' you are very different. But at least here, on this forum, you seem way too tightly wound. I sincerely hope you don't carry this demeanor into your real life.


How can you possibly cry "personal attack' when I encouraged you to go into politics? When I gave such reasons as your intelligence, your passion for the issues, your enthusiasm, your youth and your (seemingly) available time?

Don't worry, be happy!
D.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

Obama Climbs Back On His Anti-Gun Horse

Read the thread. Then you can join the small minority of people who cannot understand what I wrote when I said...



Others here seemed to have no problems understanding me...













Now all of these people may not agree with me, but they are capable of understanding what I said. They understand that I was comparing Obama to Hitler ONLY regarding their abilities to seemingly persuade people with rhetoric, not substance, IMO. They were both able to get people to blindly support them without regards to their ideas, substance, or record, IMO.

Now, KEVWYO, if that is your reason for calling me racist (which is inappropriate and a violation of the COC), then perhaps you need to seek some help. Before you seek help, please give that thread one final read. You may understand it if you read every post.

Frank

An interesting perspective. I guess anyone who can speak and develop a following is capable of being equated to Hitler. Would this scenario carry over into written words ??