Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095266965.WX5XkS7LQt4+idu19d04bg@teranews... On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:41:09 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095261721.m9yz/7tepYEAPetvTvLPxQ@teranews... On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:57:26 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095192909./Wl3rcn/JAP8b7yrZmYwew@teranews... On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:43:14 -0400, Harry Krause wrote: ulysses wrote: The one on the top of your head, on which the sheet fits so nicely? Yes, folks, this is why I FINALLY gave up on liberalism. Sanctimonious, semi-educated, twits. ulysses You're just a typical uselessnet rightie, hiding behind a handle and a munged email address... Hiding from what? poorly educated, barely literate, and spoonfed mountains of political garbage every day. Typical leftist. Too machine-headed to come up with original retorts. So, what, specifically, was the original poster (Jonathan) so "stupid" about that caused you to reply "Talk about stupid. History, I take it, was never one of your strong suits." Please be specific. Thank you. Jeff Okay .. Jeff .. ery .. I .. will .. try ... cut/paste His Bush's economic policy (which has put the majority of US citzens in the tightest financial bind since the great depression) end cut/paste My .. point .. : Anybody .. who knows .. History .. knows .. .. that any .. "dire" .. economic .. conditions .. that we are having .. today .. are as nothing .. NOTHING .. compared to what .. our forebears .. endured .. back .. in .. the .. 1930s. Just .. as one .. example .. .. , .. during the 1930s .. we did not .. have .. annual GDP growth rates .. of .. PLUS .. two .. or three .. or .. four .. percent. .. Indeed .. , .. GDP growth rates .. were .. in .. SEVERE .. and .. frighteningly steady .. DECLINE .. back then .. -- Hence .. , .. the term .. De .. pression. Have .. a .. nice .. .. day. ulysses Thanks, Ulysses: I'm typing this really slowly, so you can follow along. Do you understand what Jonathan meant by " . . . since the great depression"? The modifying clause means "not including the great depression, or other events prior to the great depression." So your alleged point is totally inapposite. Given this display of poor reading comprehension, I'm inclined to doubt your grasp of any history you might have read. Care to try again? So, if I say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," what I 'm *actually* saying is "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since right up to but not including the Great Depression"? Do I got that right, Jeffery? No, you don't. What you are, in effect, saying is that you haven't seen anything this bad since after the great depression until now, not "right up to . . ." The original poster's statement excludes the great depression and events prior to it. It includes only events occurring after the great depression. Talk about stupid. Reading, I take it, was never one of your strong suits. Jeff P.S. I'm still waiting, if you care to support your assertion that the original poster was wrong by posting contrary evidence. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:03:20 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann"
wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095266965.WX5XkS7LQt4+idu19d04bg@teranews.. . On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:41:09 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095261721.m9yz/7tepYEAPetvTvLPxQ@teranews... On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:57:26 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095192909./Wl3rcn/JAP8b7yrZmYwew@teranews... On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:43:14 -0400, Harry Krause wrote: ulysses wrote: The one on the top of your head, on which the sheet fits so nicely? Yes, folks, this is why I FINALLY gave up on liberalism. Sanctimonious, semi-educated, twits. ulysses You're just a typical uselessnet rightie, hiding behind a handle and a munged email address... Hiding from what? poorly educated, barely literate, and spoonfed mountains of political garbage every day. Typical leftist. Too machine-headed to come up with original retorts. So, what, specifically, was the original poster (Jonathan) so "stupid" about that caused you to reply "Talk about stupid. History, I take it, was never one of your strong suits." Please be specific. Thank you. Jeff Okay .. Jeff .. ery .. I .. will .. try ... cut/paste His Bush's economic policy (which has put the majority of US citzens in the tightest financial bind since the great depression) end cut/paste My .. point .. : Anybody .. who knows .. History .. knows .. .. that any .. "dire" .. economic .. conditions .. that we are having .. today .. are as nothing .. NOTHING .. compared to what .. our forebears .. endured .. back .. in .. the .. 1930s. Just .. as one .. example .. .. , .. during the 1930s .. we did not .. have .. annual GDP growth rates .. of .. PLUS .. two .. or three .. or .. four .. percent. .. Indeed .. , .. GDP growth rates .. were .. in .. SEVERE .. and .. frighteningly steady .. DECLINE .. back then .. -- Hence .. , .. the term .. De .. pression. Have .. a .. nice .. .. day. ulysses Thanks, Ulysses: I'm typing this really slowly, so you can follow along. Do you understand what Jonathan meant by " . . . since the great depression"? The modifying clause means "not including the great depression, or other events prior to the great depression." So your alleged point is totally inapposite. Given this display of poor reading comprehension, I'm inclined to doubt your grasp of any history you might have read. Care to try again? So, if I say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," what I 'm *actually* saying is "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since right up to but not including the Great Depression"? Do I got that right, Jeffery? No, you don't. What you are, in effect, saying is that you haven't seen anything this bad since after the great depression until now, not "right up to . . ." You're right, I got that turned around. So, to amend, when I say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," my actual meaning is "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since *just after* but not including the Great Depression"; or, put differently, "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression but not the Great Depression itself"? Is that right? It still seems awkward to me. Because when I hear someone say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," I take them to mean that things today are as bad as they were back then. ulysses |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095272053.X9cY0fJzPW3oG4ozAj6mWA@teranews... Because when I hear someone say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," I take them to mean that things today are as bad as they were back then. I take it to mean that the person who would say such a thing is a partisan idiot whose opinion matters not. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095272053.X9cY0fJzPW3oG4ozAj6mWA@teranews... On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:03:20 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095266965.WX5XkS7LQt4+idu19d04bg@teranews.. . On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:41:09 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095261721.m9yz/7tepYEAPetvTvLPxQ@teranews... On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:57:26 GMT, "Jeffrey McCann" wrote: "ulysses" wrote in message news:1095192909./Wl3rcn/JAP8b7yrZmYwew@teranews... On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:43:14 -0400, Harry Krause wrote: ulysses wrote: The one on the top of your head, on which the sheet fits so nicely? Yes, folks, this is why I FINALLY gave up on liberalism. Sanctimonious, semi-educated, twits. ulysses You're just a typical uselessnet rightie, hiding behind a handle and a munged email address... Hiding from what? poorly educated, barely literate, and spoonfed mountains of political garbage every day. Typical leftist. Too machine-headed to come up with original retorts. So, what, specifically, was the original poster (Jonathan) so "stupid" about that caused you to reply "Talk about stupid. History, I take it, was never one of your strong suits." Please be specific. Thank you. Jeff Okay .. Jeff .. ery .. I .. will .. try ... cut/paste His Bush's economic policy (which has put the majority of US citzens in the tightest financial bind since the great depression) end cut/paste My .. point .. : Anybody .. who knows .. History .. knows .. .. that any .. "dire" .. economic .. conditions .. that we are having .. today .. are as nothing .. NOTHING .. compared to what .. our forebears .. endured .. back .. in .. the .. 1930s. Just .. as one .. example .. .. , .. during the 1930s .. we did not ... have .. annual GDP growth rates .. of .. PLUS .. two .. or three .. or .. four .. percent. .. Indeed .. , .. GDP growth rates .. were .. in .. SEVERE .. and .. frighteningly steady .. DECLINE .. back then ... -- Hence .. , .. the term .. De .. pression. Have .. a .. nice .. .. day. ulysses Thanks, Ulysses: I'm typing this really slowly, so you can follow along. Do you understand what Jonathan meant by " . . . since the great depression"? The modifying clause means "not including the great depression, or other events prior to the great depression." So your alleged point is totally inapposite. Given this display of poor reading comprehension, I'm inclined to doubt your grasp of any history you might have read. Care to try again? So, if I say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," what I 'm *actually* saying is "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since right up to but not including the Great Depression"? Do I got that right, Jeffery? No, you don't. What you are, in effect, saying is that you haven't seen anything this bad since after the great depression until now, not "right up to . . ." You're right, I got that turned around. So, to amend, when I say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," my actual meaning is "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since *just after* but not including the Great Depression"; or, put differently, "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression but not the Great Depression itself"? Is that right? It still seems awkward to me. Because when I hear someone say "Man, I haven't seen things this bad since the Great Depression," I take them to mean that things today are as bad as they were back then. Hmm. Interesting. I see your point now. I think you are right. It could be read either way with equal logic, I guess. Sorry. Jeff |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Harry reveals his true colors! | General | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General |