Repug hate having their lies destroyed

[DarrinS]

Post 52621 is excellent. Keep it going.

[DarrinS]

I wonder how many road signs 15 million Americans can make?

[ChumpDumper]

I have stated my proof clearly. And it is only my opinion. You seem very concerned about it.

There was no proof. I'm not terribly concerned about it. You might want to be though.

I consider it a fact that people who use ad hominem attacks at any time during debate are laughable. You can disagree if you wish.

Your belief this is a debate is laughable.

You are focused on the physical nature of the signs, and me proving this sign is any different from ones you posted; neither of which concerns me.

It's not my fault you have no proof and choose to find none.

Negative. Once again, you have mistakenly identified by opinion, based on facts, as an assumption.

Sorry, it fit the definition perfectly. Looks like you made a faulty assumption about the definition too.

No problem.

You have no problem you agree you have no proof regarding your assumption about the signs. Cool.

You're laughing at yourself?

You made another faulty assumption about who wrote your quote.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm going to try to keep up with the post count smack. Maybe I'll make it to 10,000 myself in this thread!

[z0sa]

There was no proof.

We've been over this so let me switch gears: There surely is proof of you misunderstanding all of arguments thus far, as well as misinterpreting my opinion.

Your belief this is a debate is laughable.

It is a debate; and while such a belief is not laughable, I will say using ad hominem BS then deflecting when it's pointed out is certainly laughable.

Sorry

Apology for misunderstanding my argument and opinion while misusing assumption multiple times accepted.

You made another faulty assumption about who wrote your quote.

I made no assumption about the quote-writer; it was me. Why do I make you laugh at yourself?

[ducks]

What's political about this, WC?

The stimulus helped all Americans just not ex-ACORN employees, Dems, Black Panthers, commies, etc.

I've read many articles citing Repug Congrassholes who voted against the stimulus, etc, but showed up at groundbreaking, etc, ceremonies and claimed how great the funds were for their districts and "their" voters.

most amercians in the polls believe the stimulus did NOT help

[ChumpDumper]

We've been over this so let me switch gears: There surely is proof of you misunderstanding all of arguments thus far, as well as misinterpreting my opinion.

I already posted clear proof that you don't know the meaning of the word assume, and that you were in fact making an assumption.

It is a debate; and while such a belief is not laughable, I will say using ad hominem BS then deflecting when it's pointed out is certainly laughable.

I completely own my ad hominem attacks. They're fun.

Apology for misunderstanding my argument and opinion while misusing assumption multiple times accepted.

You made a faulty assumption I apologized. You are doing this a lot.

I made no assumption about the quote-writer; it was me. Why do I make you laugh at yourself?

You posted the sentence I quoted. You made a faulty assumption I was referring to another sentence. You are doing this a lot.

[DMX7]

most amercians in the polls believe the stimulus did NOT help

Do "most americans in the polls" have evidence to support this idea that the stimulus did NOT help at all?

[z0sa]

I already posted clear proof that you don't know the meaning of the word assume, and that you were in fact making an assumption.

Not at all.

I completely own my ad hominem attacks. They're fun.

You admit that was a pathetically laughable attempt; gotta start somewhere.

You made a faulty assumption I apologized.

You clearly said sorry, which is also known as apologizing.

You posted the sentence I quoted. You made a faulty assumption I was referring to another sentence.

No, I understand what you were trying to do. You left the statement ambiguous enough to be used right back on yourself.

Did you have trouble diagramming sentences in high school?

[Spurminator]

Would you please argue first, why such signs should be put up on the road in the first place? I approve of the message's attempt at informing, but I think their existence is entirely unnecessary. People should be aware of this kind of knowledge through more direct methodology (which should be and in many cases, is govt sponsored, I think): online, in newspapers and books, and in their local library/college. 950 of these signs ($665,000) could have been spent better, not on signs, but on entirely different media altogether. I'm sure there's plenty of other jobs that could have been made with this money, IOW, and been a more effective usage of the stimulus cash.

I already argued in favor of the signs. You disagreed, now it's your turn to suggest an alternative since you said the people should be informed. What methods would you use, how would it be worded, and what do you think that will cost?

I'll give you a bit of help: direct mail is more expensive than road signs. So you'll want to avoid that option.

[z0sa]

It could just be the kind of sign that is always made -- you assumed it is different somehow.

Your assumption: Signs should not be made concerning the funding of highway projects if the law providing the funding was opposed by a number of people.

You assume that it could only be a political sign because it was made and people opposed it

3 statements, dare I say assumptions, that Chump made concerning my argument and opinion, that show unequivocally and completely that he has no clue what I actually argued, or opined.

Thanks for the debate, Chump.

[z0sa]

I already argued in favor of the signs.

Could you please quote and/or restate your argument?

You disagreed,

I didn't disagree with the signs' message, and I think they have some use (as far as it can go).

now it's your turn to suggest an alternative since you said the people should be informed. What methods would you use,

Let me ask first: we both agree the people should be informed of where their tax dollars are going?

They should pour such cash into many different sectors, like expanding online sources and libraries/colleges. Government should be an important part of every American's life, but often, it isn't except Election year (or month or day or never, for many). This money could go into some novel plans, I'd think, like sending Americans to a govt college course free of individual charge (just an idea).

how would it be worded, and what do you think that will cost?

I'm averse to writing a professional estimate, sorry. I'm simply converting what was paid here, to doing other things. $665,000 in the pool of money to be drawn from.

I'll give you a bit of help: direct mail is more expensive than road signs. So you'll want to avoid that option.

Hahaha, I guess? Again, I only ever intended to convert the money we spent to other ways; a hypothetical is this we're discussing now.

[ChumpDumper]

3 statements, dare I say assumptions, that Chump made concerning my argument and opinion, that show unequivocally and completely that he has no clue what I actually argued, or opined.

Thanks for the debate, Chump.

Right, because those were your assumptions, not arguments or opinions.

It shows unequivocally and completely that he has no clue what an assumption is, even after the definition was posted for you.

Thanks for the "debate."

[z0sa]

Right, because those were your assumptions, not arguments or opinions.

Thanks for admitting finally that you think those are assumptions I made. Like I've said all along, none of them are.

Hint: I never made any argument or opinion of that sort, either.

Thanks for the debate, z0sa.

No problem.

[spursncowboys]

At total face value, I agree. I choose not to play dumb, though.

Everyone knows that the sign is political propaganda, however indirect (it's not very indirect at all, actually).

That said, I don't have a problem with the message. I do have a slight problem spending $665,000 on 950 such messages.

good point.

[ChumpDumper]

Thanks for admitting finally that you think those are assumptions I made. Like I've said all along, none of them are.

I believe I addressed the one that wasn't quite early. As you had no proof of the other assumptions you did make, they stand.

No problem.

None at all.

[Ignignokt]

Repealing the Glass Steagal Act and keeping the interest rates below market value was a stimulus and it lead to artificial wealth created which lead to an overvalued market and a crash.

So now that we found out that the market is overvalued, lets STIMULATE IT!!!!

Seriously, all you fools who are cheerleading anemic recovery and 9 % unemployment look idiotic.

Oh yeah, and the sign is pure pathetic propaganda. Traffic signs are not supposed to pimp DNC platforms, even idiots like Spurminator and chumpdumper should know that.

[Ignignokt]

And who gives a , whether it was done before. If govt introduced indentured servitude, i guess you'd apply the same logic.

[Ignignokt]

It doesn't say anything about any politicians or political parties.

Is that the requirment for propaganda??

[spursncowboys]

Do "most americans in the polls" have evidence to support this idea that the stimulus did NOT help at all?

what evidence. the evidence that it "saved or created"?
No other president used that standard. No other group of cheerleaders let a president get away with something like that. Also how many of the jobs, created by the stimulus, will stay after the money runs out and how many are just prolonged from the money?

[ChumpDumper]

So now that we found out that the market is overvalued, lets STIMULATE IT!!!!

Is it currently overvalued?

Oh yeah, and the sign is pure pathetic propaganda. Traffic signs are not supposed to pimp DNC platforms, even idiots like Spurminator and chumpdumper should know that.

It's the name of the act that funded the construction. I imagine most people don't even know that is its name.

[spursncowboys]

Why does a sign need to be put there? To give someone a job?

[ChumpDumper]

Why does a sign need to be put there? To give someone a job?

Pretty much.

Isn't that the evidence for which you were asking?

[Ignignokt]

Is it currently overvalued?

It's the name of the act that funded the construction. I imagine most people don't even know that is its name.

Nice whitewashing!

[ChumpDumper]

Nice whitewashing!

Nice avoiding the question!