|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: an adult opinion on NAFTA
Bart, you published a guy who wrote:
> PS: I liked Bill. But he fucked me over signing NAFTA...
> Every time someone says that, I ask them
to explain how NAFTA screwed you.
> So far, I've never gotten a reply that makes
any sense. Care to be the first?
> Most Leftys hate NAFTA but they can't say
why - they send links, instead.
Well, it's too late for JerryD to be first, because
I beat him to it, and you know it.
But, you're going to keep spreading this lie,
aren't you, even though I, without the use
of any "links" explained exactly how NAFTA screwed
the workers in this country,
and I totally destroyed the strawman argument
of your "scientist". But, you're not gonna
let your fellow sycophants see that, are you?
You're just gonna ignore it, and keep
telling the lie that "no one can say why they
hate NAFTA".
So instead of answering
the question, you send me a Snot-gram
saying that you've already answered the question
in a prior Snot-gram?
Seriously, if you sent something before, it's
probably still in your Out Box,
meaning it would've been easier to copy-and-paste
that and answer the damn question,
but instead, you chose to send the Snot-gram
because - hell, I don't know.
Were you trying to prove you're too stupid to
be lazy?
Tell me, Bart, how does it benefit anyone in this
country to nominate someone
that you have to lie about in order to make them
look good?
Is that a real sentence?
Have you ever thought of re-reading your crap
before you hit "Send?"
You keep saying that none of the "Leftys" (sic)
can explain how NAFTA screwed anyone,
but I notice that neither you, nor the other
Clinton sycophants can explain how the "prosperity"
of the '90's benefitted all those who lost their
jobs to Mexicans because of Clinton's NAFTA.
You're not making any sense.
When *I* have extra-strong opinions about something,
I can explain myself.
When you have extra-strong opinions about
something, you make wild, unsubstantiated claims
(all those jobs
went to Mexico because of NAFTA!!) and demand
that I explain things to you.
If you feel strongly about something,
say what the fuck it is in plain English or shut up.
I would love to see you respond to that point honestly, but you can't.
The point that you fabricated without any substantiation?
How could anybody explain what's in your unable-to-explain mind?
All you can do is offer up non sequiturs and straw man arguments.
I asked for someone to explain NAFTA.
Your answer was "I
already explained it."
That's not an answer.
How can anybody reason with you?
It's a little vague to just say that we had "prosperity"
in the '90's.
But, who prospered, Bart? The auto workers in
Detroit, or the CEO's.
Who are the Clintons more loyal to, do you think?
Krazy Keith (Yes, that Keith)
Perhaps the difference in our respective IQs is causing this rift (Not
a compliment).
If you want to claim there was no prosperity in the Nineties, I can
only assume
(because you can't speak for yourself) that you prefer the Bush years.
Remember how this started?
> Most Leftys hate NAFTA but they can't say why
- they send links, instead.
Since you can't explain why you hate NAFTA, you send me a snot-gram, instead
I'd like to say, "Good day, Sir!" but the simplicity of that
statement
might knock you out of your chair and I don't want to be responsible.
Send e-mail
to Bart | Discuss
it on The BartCop Forum | Comment
on it at the BartBlog