bluffratt wrote:
Jophed,
Sure I can live with that. You first.
Sure I can live with that. You first.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Commander-in-fear?
Commander-in-fear?Follow
LERN2REED
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
But he's not making a basket. 
Just as Planned.
bluffratt wrote:
Under W the economy was never in a recession; despite what liberal media and political pundits said. Do you even know the definition of the word recession?
In point of fact, it was according to the people who define the terms.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Timelordwho wrote:
But he's not making a basket.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
bluffratt wrote:
Samy,
It's not erroneous. What is erroneous is this CNN hit piece attempting to change the traditional meaning of the word recession.
Quote:
Many people erroneously believe that a recession is defined by two consecutive quarters of economic activity declining. That has yet to take place during this recession.
It's not erroneous. What is erroneous is this CNN hit piece attempting to change the traditional meaning of the word recession.
The National Bureau of Economic Research is charged with defining recession and depression in real world scenarios. I take the liberty of believing that they know more about it than you, whatever the reporting source.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
As defined by whom?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
#113REDACTED,
Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 11:58 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Even NBER says a recession involves consecutive quarters of reduced GDP; along with other factors.
Samira wrote:
As defined by whom?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
As defined by whom?
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
#116REDACTED,
Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 12:48 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Good for you Jophed. Wasn't that difficult was it?
bluffratt wrote:
Good for you Jophed. Wasn't that difficult was it?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#118REDACTED,
Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 12:53 PM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Now if it was just as easy getting you to recognize the idiocy in liberalism.
Define liberalism.
I rather like Dictionary.com's definitions:
Liberalism:
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun
14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.
Liberalism:
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun
14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Define liberalism.
Red Herring IMO. Lots of people toss out the terms "liberal" and "liberalism", when they really mean something like "social liberalism".
Forget the words. Look at the actions. What sort of agenda/ideology is present? Does that result in greater or lesser liberty/freedoms. I think a lot of political debates end up getting lost in the terminology being used. Something is what it is, not just what the label you use means.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
I think that gbaji should join this group.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Where do you find this stuff. Seriously.
Just as Planned.
Quote:
Red Herring IMO. Lots of people toss out the terms "liberal" and "liberalism", when they really mean something like "social liberalism".
Lots of people toss out terms and act like everyone is on board with their imagined definition of it and then act more aghast at the notion of dissent than at the fact that two-hundred year old dictionaries are not the best defininators of words.
Quote:
I think a lot of political debates end up getting lost in the terminology being used. Something is what it is, not just what the label you use means.
The presence of an event, the opposite of what was expected.
Edited, Mar 6th 2009 9:58am by Pensive
Timelordwho wrote:
Where do you find this stuff. Seriously.
Hello, have I introduced you to the internet?
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Baron von Annabella wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Where do you find this stuff. Seriously.
Hello, have I introduced you to the internet?
Shh, Timelordwho just made a very straightforward, single-layered rhetorical question/statement, with no specific artistic quote/reference involved.
I want to savour the moment.
Recent Visitors: 239
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (239)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Commander-in-fear?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC