Printable View
here
Yeah the election is over blah blah blah, but I was looking online yesterday for online games and found this one. It's got violence and pretty funny stuff. Might be NSFW!!!!
but the point I wanted to make was all the useful info you gain by reading it. a little bit of stuff in there I didn't even know!
Pretty funny though either way. And you kill Paris Hilton. She's hot, but who could resist! :smiley36:
God, I'd love to see Bush go into the U.N. and destroy it. I think his approval rating would go through the roof!!! That game is on an emokid website, so those kids are totally lost anyways. I didn't get to finish the game, the sticky keys started to kick in. Lots of misleading figures in there, but I'm not saying that I don't disagree with Bush on things. Fun game, but if you have to form your politicial views from playing a video game then there is no hope for you, lol.
-Mike
it tells you how to turn off sticky keys in the begining, and all the facts in that game are dead on man. There's only one or two things I didn't know before that I looked at that game yesterday. no "misleading figures". Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by reaganyouth84
What hogwash. Most of the game is infantile insults and innuendo that can't even be considered to be an assertion of fact (however wrong), so it really can't be argued. It's opinion.
There were a few areas that came close to making arguable assertions. One was about Bush allowing "corporate pigs" to shift our "growing economic problems on the struggling middle class". What the heck does that mean? Sounds like something out of Che Gueverra's mouth. Bush gave the middle class a tax cut. As for this "economic burden"; under Bush, the top 1% of earners pay 34% of the taxes. The top 25% pay 84%, and the top 50% pay 96.54% of taxes. To me, it kinda looks like that burden is skewed toward the rich, and the truth is that this progressive taxation has gotten more skewed under Bush. Also.. now this is important... thanks to those tax cuts, overall tax revenue is up. How can this be? It's because there are more jobs, more corporate earnings and greater productivity, all of which generate tax revenue. Lower the rates, and the government brings in more revenue. Same thing happened under Reagan.
Then, in the game, there's the statement that under Bush, we have "lost more jobs since the Great Depression". That's simply untrue. Of course jobs were lost in the first part of his Presidency due to recession (which began under Clinton), 9/11 and corporate scandals, none of which were his doing. Over the past 28 months, America has created more than 4.2 million new jobs, more than regaining those he lost early in his first term. And, the current unemployment rate of 5.1 percent is lower than the average of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
I didn't care for it.
...I did manage to beat it quite easily with Howard Dean's "supershriek" :smiley14:
"Hiyaaaaaaaaaaah!!!"
:smiley36: :smiley36: :smiley36: :smiley36: :smiley36:
The game pointed out one of my favorite things bush said, something along the lines of "How do we secure the future in one word: Jobs, when Americans have lost more jobs with him than with any other president since the great depression. And also, he said this about being question on how we were going to make up for spending the Social Security funds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazeman
Also, Clinton left him with a net gross so large, it was projected to last a decade. Bush blew it in his first year, and left us in the whole.
Bush won the election, I don't care if you guys think the things are all lies or not. His approval rating is in the toliet and I don't get federal aid for school anymore. :smiley2: :smiley21:
:smiley36:
What is the current unemployment rate in this country? What was it during Clinton's presidency? I leave it to you to figure out the dichotomy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayakinboy
What is the unemployment rate in this country compared to other modern industrialized nations?
What exactly is a "net gross"? heh -- the terms are mutually exclusive.... and a decade? sigh.Quote:
Also, Clinton left him with a net gross so large, it was projected to last a decade. Bush blew it in his first year, and left us in the whole.
Question: who actually allocates the spending the government does in this country?
There are plenty of things you can ream Bush for, many of which I'd agree with you... but at least be accurate. Form a coherent argument, base it on actual facts, have an understanding of the governance in this country, and away you go.
What you've posted in this thread is not coherent, not accurate, and show a fundamental misunderstanding about the way things work. All it has shown is that you don't like Bush, and are regurgitating things you've read elsewhere, and only partially understand.