On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:20:36 -0400, DSK wrote:

PocoLoco wrote:
Are you calling names again?

Of course not. Why would I do that? *I'm* the one with fact based
logical opinions here.


DSK

Opinions, yes.

They're much like the word Kevin uses in all his posts.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

PocoLoco wrote:
Opinions, yes.


Let's see, which opinion is more valid- one based on real economics, as
explained in most freshman economics tests, and correctly using terms as
defined within that specialty, or a bunch yak-yak from people who are
trying to make excuses for the failed policies of a politician whom they
worship (who nontheless has systematically violated every principle they
try to claim)?

Which one is more valid, the one with documentation from many sources,
or the one that repeatedly says "you're wrong so shut up" and can offer
no back up? Other than a bunch of me-too from sock puppets, all equally
lacking in knowledge of facts?

Which opinion carries more weight with you, those stated by somebody who
bad-mouths libby-rulls and vigorously hates the Clintons (and homos and
Muslims etc etc) or one that presents some historical fact and real life
data?

Opinions, yes.

DSK

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:54:51 -0400, DSK wrote:

PocoLoco wrote:
Opinions, yes.


Let's see, which opinion is more valid- one based on real economics, as
explained in most freshman economics tests, and correctly using terms as
defined within that specialty, or a bunch yak-yak from people who are
trying to make excuses for the failed policies of a politician whom they
worship (who nontheless has systematically violated every principle they
try to claim)?

Which one is more valid, the one with documentation from many sources,
or the one that repeatedly says "you're wrong so shut up" and can offer
no back up? Other than a bunch of me-too from sock puppets, all equally
lacking in knowledge of facts?

Which opinion carries more weight with you, those stated by somebody who
bad-mouths libby-rulls and vigorously hates the Clintons (and homos and
Muslims etc etc) or one that presents some historical fact and real life
data?

Opinions, yes.

DSK

FWIW, your opinions carry no weight with me.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

PocoLoco wrote:
FWIW, your opinions carry no weight with me.

It is impossible teach a one who refuses to learn.

DSK

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:07:49 -0400, DSK wrote:

PocoLoco wrote:
FWIW, your opinions carry no weight with me.

It is impossible teach a one who refuses to learn.

DSK

A teacher's job is to motivate students in such a way that they *want* to learn.
You're no teacher.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

It is impossible teach a one who refuses to learn.


PocoLoco wrote:
A teacher's job is to motivate students in such a way that they *want* to learn.

If you start paying me to teach you, then I *will* motivate you.
Otherwise, you can stew in your ignorance.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
PocoLoco wrote:
FWIW, your opinions carry no weight with me.

It is impossible teach a one who refuses to learn.

A teacher finds a way to teach the student. Your method is to beat and
belittle everyone into submission. It has not worked yet and will not work
in the future so, give it up.

Doug,
I don't know which one do you think?


"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
PocoLoco wrote:
Opinions, yes.


Let's see, which opinion is more valid- one based on real economics, as
explained in most freshman economics tests, and correctly using terms as
defined within that specialty, or a bunch yak-yak from people who are
trying to make excuses for the failed policies of a politician whom they
worship (who nontheless has systematically violated every principle they
try to claim)?

Which one is more valid, the one with documentation from many sources, or
the one that repeatedly says "you're wrong so shut up" and can offer no
back up? Other than a bunch of me-too from sock puppets, all equally
lacking in knowledge of facts?

Which opinion carries more weight with you, those stated by somebody who
bad-mouths libby-rulls and vigorously hates the Clintons (and homos and
Muslims etc etc) or one that presents some historical fact and real life
data?

Opinions, yes.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:
I have always been a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.

That clearly explains why you so vigorouosly support a President who is
fiscally irresponsible far beyond any liberal dreamed of being, and
socially repressive.

... You probably have just always been stupid.

yep, that must be why I understand science & economics, and you can only
answer by pretending I said something else then falling back on feeble
insults.

DSK


I do not vigorously support the POTUS. Did not vote for either him or
Kerry. The Dem's, of which I am a registered member, have for the last few
election cycles, seen fit to put up unelectable extremists. As to the Iraq
war, probably needed doing, but in a much better fashion. If you do not
think Saddam was a danger, remember why he started the first Gulf War.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
PocoLoco wrote:
Are you calling names again?

Of course not. Why would I do that? *I'm* the one with fact based logical
opinions here.


DSK


Opinions that are neither fact based, or logical is a truer statement.