Skip to main content

View Diary: The Bush Boom continues: 229K Private Payroll jobs in Feb (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  sour grapes (1.66)
    geez, we finally have good job news and you want to compose a novel explaining why up is really down.
    •  Does "novel" mean (none)
      it was too long for you to read?  

      Because you obviously didn't.  

      If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

      by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 09:10:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong novel. (none)
        nov·el. adj. Strikingly new, unusual, or different

        Novel might have meant the new/unusual combination of reading, thinking, and comprehending required to understand the abysmal forcast drawn from the numbers as presented above.

        You don't have to be a mathematician to make numbers dance and lie for you... its all in how you frame the relativity and context.

        "I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV."

        by zeitshabba on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 09:19:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes. (none)
          the new/unusual combination of reading, thinking, and comprehending

          It is admittedly different from the thinking that brought us to this point, and the thinking involved in telling us how wonderful things are and have been.  

          I look forward to more novel thinking.  The old thinking is obviously useless.  

          If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

          by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 09:29:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Put up or shut up (none)
          Can you offer any rational rebuttal to Stirling's analysis? Please, we'd all like to hear it. You just implied that he's a liar, yet you offer no argumentation to back it up.
          •  Um. (none)
            It would appear that this comment was accidentally replied to the wrong comment.

            Either that or this is the result of some reading-comprehension issues.

            "I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV."

            by zeitshabba on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 10:07:04 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  reading-comprehension (none)
              "You don't have to be a mathematician to make numbers dance and lie for you... "

              Perhaps I misunderstood. Who is it that is making the numbers "dance and lie"?

              the new/unusual combination of reading, thinking, and comprehending required to understand the abysmal forcast drawn from the numbers as presented above.

              I interpreted this as a sarcastic way of dismissing Sterling's analysis simply because it's "novel". Correct me if I'm wrong.

              •  You're wrong. (none)
                No ill meant by it, either. At least I hope none was taken.

                My 'dancing numbers' statement was directed to the Kossack who poo-pooed the dissection of what the numbers may indicate. His premise of "the numbers are up, so that's good, unlike this dairy" is like standing on the end of the Titanic that isn't sinking first and saying See? You say we're sinking, but here I am, getting farther from the water, not closer."

                I don't think I have to directly name the spinmeisters of Amereicha to whom I referred to manipulating the implied conclusions that the above debated data historically precludes.

                And my apologies for any confusion my initial statement may have caused.

                "I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV."

                by zeitshabba on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 11:37:45 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  Do you even understand the term sour grapes? (none)
      Apparently you have never read Aesop's Fables.

      cheers,

      Mitch Gore

      Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

      by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 09:51:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  sour grapes was used properly (1.75)
        All doing the election cycle, DKos'ers hammered the Bush administration (deservedly so) for his inability to grow jobs.

        Now that we cannot hammer Bush on this particular grape, we've decided that we don't want to after all.

        Instead, we have decide to bait & switch and complain about something else.

        All I am saying is that why can't we simply be happy that jobs are increasing despite the incredible mismanagement of Bush? We look like partisan hacks when we try to turn every bit of news, even the good ones, as a negative against Bush.

        And everyone who troll-rated my comment is no better than Ashcroft and his censor-bots.

        •  Actually you didn't (none)
          Sour grapes in Aesop's Fables is simply the rationalizing failure.

          This is not rationalizing failure, so your use of the term is inaccurate (not slamming you personally, most people misuse it).

          cheers,

          Mitch Gore

          Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

          by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 11:39:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  the failure I was referring to... (1.33)
            Was the failure of no longer being able to beat Bush over the head with bad job numbers.

            Now that we can't do that, we have to rationalize to ourselves why the job numbers are still bad. Up is down. Good is bad. etc etc

            I swear that 95% of the crowd on this website would be touting these exact same job numbers as a victory for the Democratic party if Kerry had won the election.

            •  You can point to failure (none)
              and whatever else you like, I simply commenting that you were not using the term "sour grapes" correctly.

              I disagree with your straw-man that we would be touting the same numbers if Kerry had one. The fundamental problems of the deficits, the declining dollar, soft job market with no real net growth, reduction of the purchasing power of stagnant wages, etc. would all be indications of the tough work that would still be ahead.

              You are certainly free to hold the opinion that "we" would be crowing over the same numbers, but I certainly would not be among this envisioned crowing you are imagining and railing against.

              cheers,

              Mitch Gore

              Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

              by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 11:47:37 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  in the future... (none)
                ...when on DK, I will only make references to "sour grapes" when speaking in the context of an actual fox and actual grapes that are actually out of reach. That should keep the anal retentives focused on the content of the posts rather than the phrasing.

                And deny the Kerry reference all you want. This diary would exist in its present form even if we had 100,000 more jobs than reported.

                •  Yeha that's the thing with us... (none)
                  .."anal retentive" people... we actually like to use language and references correctly.

                  cheers,

                  Mitch Gore

                  Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

                  by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 12:08:39 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yeha (none)
                    This diary in 25 words or less:
                    "Uh, oh. The job news is good. But Bush is still in office so this news must be bad because xxxx...."

                    That qualifies as rationalizing failure, IMO, when you cannot use the standard complaints about Bush anymore.

                    Apparently on DKos, up is now down. Some here simply cannot accept that we can have good economic news while Bush the moron is still in office.

                    I think you guys have been staring into the abyss far too long.

                    •  Horsehockey (none)
                      We were pointing out the real slope of need job growth to keep pace with population growth, for years, not just during the election run-up. The job numbers are not good because, as I noted below it is only looking at one side of the ledger. Unemployment rose by 251,000 over the same period that this "great news" on the jobs front occurred.

                      If you want to delude yourself into rah-rah-ing numbers that are not good news, and have been consistently pointed out as being not what the empty heat hype is.. be my guest.

                      I will sick with being the reality based community thank you.

                      By the way, Neitche you aren't, this has nothign to do with "staring into the abyss".

                      cheers,

                      Mitch Gore

                      Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

                      by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 12:55:40 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  got it. (1.50)
                        metaphors are not your strong suit.

                        I'll stick to short sentences with plain meanings when talking with you in the future.

                        •  Wrogn again.. (none)
                          perfectly conversant in them.

                          But your misguided attempt at concession is bemusing if nothing else.

                          cheers,

                          Mitch Gore

                          Nobody will change America for you, you have to work to make it happen

                          by Lestatdelc on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 02:10:55 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  You could start by addressing (none)
                          the analysis.  

                          You haven't done that yet.  Presumably because you can't.  You call the analysis names.  You've said nothing.  You tell us what we really think.  You've said nothing.  

                          Tell us why these numbers are good.  

                          [I'm not exactly holding my breath]

                          Condescension won't hide your intellectual impotence.  You must be thinking of some other forum.  You've contributed nothing because you have nothing.  This is just the Bush-and-Lebanon ploy with the blanks filled in differently.

                          If I wanted to hear ignorant shit like this, I'd turn on my AM radio.  What the fuck are you doing here?  

                          If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

                          by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 04:59:25 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  ummm. (none)
                            Given the history of "no jobs means Bush is bad" mantra on this site, I question the entire purpose of this diary entry.

                            This site has become so rife with pessimism that even good news has to be interpreted as bad. Why? Because a Republican is in office so therefore nothing good can happen. Nietzsche could relate to you guys.

                            I make one contrarian post to point out that 220,000 new jobs is not necessarily bad news and how does DKos respond? Troll ratings. Insults. Nitpicking over metaphors. Requests to stop posting.

                            It's almost like this site is becoming the liberal version of Freeper land.

                            Yes, Bush is the Worst.President.Ever. but even his gross mismanagement is incapable of keeping the economy down. With all of the bad crap going on, why you can't you pause and enjoy at least one piece of good news?

                          •  Bitch, bitch, bitch, (none)
                            and no argument.  Nothing.  Still.  

                            You got troll rated for distorting the post.  Quit your whining.  You've done what trolls do.  You have done nothing else.  You have not shown that you have anything else, so quit your silly little whining.  

                            Still waiting for you to address one

                            single

                            point

                            in the entire thread.  

                            Apparently because you can't.  All you do is generalize and whine and make up biases in other people to bitch about.  

                            I'll see if you've done anything worth a shit by morning.  

                            Goodbye.  

                            If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

                            by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 05:26:58 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

            •  supposition contrary to fact fallacy (none)
              you still can't construct an argument.  

              I'm sorry, what was it I was supposed to learn from you?  

              If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

              by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 04:56:14 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  See? (none)
          You're still not reading.  

          Try again.  

          How can you tell us what we think about something if you don't understand the first thing about that something?  

          If you can't handle the analysis, get the fuck out.  Chaning the subject to everyone else's personalities just means you've given up arguing.  

          Oh, you've given up arguing.  

          Bye!  

          If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

          by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 04:55:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Good? This is, as noted, the average for (none)
      Clinton's entire administration.

      400K is a good number.

      •  Never disturb a desperate man (none)
        and I use the term loosely.

        If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

        by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 04:56:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  yes, good (none)
        100,000 jobs over replacement is GOOD. I did not say they were great, nor did I compare them to the Clinton era.

        But bitching about 220,000 new jobs makes you look like a partisan hack desperate for any reason to criticize Bush. Maybe you are a partisan hack, but I kind of doubt it.

        Bitch about the job numbers NEXT month when they suck again.

        •  "100,000 jobs over replacement is GOOD." (none)
          See?  

          You didn't read the post.  You last sentence proves that, in truly laughable fashion.  

          Whining about someone else not joining you in your simple-minded reaction to an undifferentiated number makes you a desperate partisan hack, looking for any reason to cover for Bush's miserable failure to date.  

          This is not a place for people that dumb.  We're not partisan simply because we're not stupid.  

          Bye!  

          If you're not feeding red meat to our base, you're nothing but a mole.

          by Grand Moff Texan on Fri Mar 04, 2005 at 05:29:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site