Sarah Palin: 'I Owe America A Global Apology'

that's not tip o'neil, feel free to provide evidence to support your assertion

you know what evidence is right?

 

Coming right up, from Wikipedia:

"His biographer John Aloysius Farrell said his background in Depression-era working-class Boston, and his interpretation of his Catholic faith led O'Neill to view the role of government as intervening to cure social ailments."

O'Neill absolutely had extreme views unrepresentative of the US at large, and had a 100% rating from the liberal group ADA. Twice as many people in the US describe themselves as conservative rather than liberal, and it's been that way for decades.

 

you're just showing that you're an extremist, not tip

and of course, that you don't understand what valid evidence is


"O'Neill was an outspoken liberal Democrat and influential member of the House of Representatives, serving for 34 years, the second longest-serving Speaker in U.S. history after Sam Rayburn."

"Tip O'Neill was the nation's most prominent, powerful and loyal champion of working people. He loved politics and government because he saw that politics and government could make a difference in people's lives."

"O'Neill's emergence as a cultural figure was not restricted to commercials. Four years before his retirement, he had a cameo role in the February 17, 1983, episode of Cheers entitled "No Contest," which featured him ducking into the bar to escape a woman who pestered him on the street about his political ideals. The show, which was ranked 60th in the Nielsen ratings at that time, jumped 20 places the following week."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tip_O%27Neill

 

I'm sure the moonbats would agree with that.

Big deal, lots of conservatives with 100% ACU ratings have serviced in Congress that you would call names no doubt.

 

no, i doubt you'd do that?

again you just show that that you're the extremist

 

Pot, meet kettle.

 

what a joke

 

I'm thinking of starting a "Sarah Palin is awesome" thread just to see if it would induce apoplexy in any Palin-haters.

Who's with me?

 

Which has nothing to do with anything I have said.

Thanks for your input, though.

 

it's about the definition of an unemployed person, which is germane to the point you brought up

 

The point I brought up was that it is false to say that Obama outperformed Reagan on Jobs, Growth and Investing... If you'd like to discuss unemployment, that is a different matter, but the way unemployment between the Reagan administration and Pre-Bush 41 administration has changed. Individuals unemployed 52 weeks and longer were still counted in the labour force at that time. Unemployment statistics were changed after, resulting in an overall drop in the unemployment rate. Overall, the unemployment rate is a meaningless metric. It makes zero sense why Adam decided to use this benchmark at all...

 

which is why knowing that an unemployed person has to be ready, willing and able to work, is germane to the issue

 

That is how the unemployed are currently measured. After the 1994 metric change, individuals are interviewed for four consecutive months, are out of the sample for the next eight months, and then are interviewed for an additional four consecutive months. Before this change, an individual who was reported as unemployed was always asked the duration of their unemployment.

The difference between the two results in a divergence between pre-1990 unemployment and post-1990, which is clearly visible if you look at ALFRED statistics. It's not apples to apples.

 

your intentional obtuseness is amusing

 

Feel free to retort with more than your ignorant say so...

 

if you didn't get it the first two times, i don't think you're going to

 

What I don't get is why you don't seem to understand is that it has little to do with how CPS was measured pre 1994. But if you aren't going to cut to the chase then I'll have to make this a short conversation. I have better things to do with my night than debate morons online.

 

it's the basis for that

 

Elaborate.

 

did you not take econ 101?

the class i took explained why counting people that aren't ready, willing and able to work, as unemployed, doesn't work

 

Good idea, but too dangerous, the liability would be off the chart with the Palin-derangement syndrome crowd.

 

Could be, but I'm willing to take the risk in the interest of science so the loss of a few PDS members would be acceptable in the name of science. I've often wondered if apoplexy or cardiac arrest could be induced through the keyboard akin to how television was used in the movie "Videodrome".