The name calling continues.

[river_boater]

I had to block St. Olaf just because I can't stand the damned emoticons.

[NMRMN]

I had to block St. Olaf just because I can't stand the damned emoticons.

heh. I found you can turn them off in your control panel.

[river_boater]

I had to block St. Olaf just because I can't stand the damned emoticons.

heh. I found you can turn them off in your control panel.

I didn't know that. I just turned them off. Thanks for the tip.

[grousemaster]

Phantom e-mail support is comforting for you, then?

Bowing out is about your only choice at this point.

Otherwise, I'd commend you on your wise choice.

You have not shown the source is bias, you've only shared your personal suspicions, which in no way refute the study or it's contents. Are you suggesting the list of professors I provided went along with the corrupt Bush adviser in a conspiracy to falsify the 40 + page report? What if I can provide evidence that there are more democrats/liberals sitting on the board than vice versa?

Is your entire rebuttal based in the board director having advised Bush (to what extent is unknown), therefore the report is skewed? (you're also assuming the list of professors went along with the cover up)

[St. Olaf]

You omit the fact that the Bush adviser is not just a member, but instead, the president of that organization.

Did you miss that?

[sansooshooter]

You omit the fact that the Bush adviser is not just a member, but instead, the president of that organization.

Did you miss that?

Same old song and dance response.

[St. Olaf]

Same old avoidance of the issue.

[grousemaster]

You omit the fact that the Bush adviser is not just a member, but instead, the president of that organization.

Did you miss that?

Same old song and dance response.

lol, he's a broken record. He doesn't want to acknowledge the man he's demonizing is a highly respected MIT professor, or that the rest of the organization is made up of a collection of top national economic professors from some of the most respected universities in the country.

His answer is "Bush, Bush, Bush". You can't make this stuff up.

[St. Olaf]

Yes, the president of the organization is a rich Republican who served as a taxation adviser in the failed Bush administration and the rest of the members are at least, rich......so why would this group ever come up with a report that would be embarrassing to Bush and the also to the president of their organization who helped craft those same failed Bush policies?

Why indeed.

[NMRMN]

Yes, the president of the organization is a rich Republican who served as a taxation adviser in the failed Bush administration and the rest of the members are at least, rich......so why would this group ever come up with a report that would be embarrassing to Bush and the also to the president of their organization who helped craft those same failed Bush policies?

Why indeed.

:mrgreen:

I applaud this response. You are articulate, reasonable, on topic, and limited your use of emoticons.

However, I maintain, that just because the report could be biased, would not necessitate it is incorrect. So I disagree with your conclusion. Now go read it and tell us why its wrong.

[grousemaster]

Yes, the president of the organization is a rich Republican who served as a taxation adviser in the failed Bush administration and the rest of the members are at least, rich......so why would this group ever come up with a report that would be embarrassing to Bush and the also to the president of their organization who helped craft those same failed Bush policies?

Why indeed.

So....rich folks can't be trusted now? Got news for ya, the list of Democratic lawmakers worth a ton of money is long and distinguished. Where did you get their financial information anyways? Any links showing us how you came across the political affiliations of the board members?

We got that the sitting President advised Bush when called upon, that part is understood. Time to move on to the substance of the report which is pretty specific in it's findings. Can you at least find a source that credibly refutes the report (with figures and facts) to link us to?

The report fund that forcing banks to make loans to high risk borrowers lead to foreclosures, how is that o difficult for you to understand/accept?

[St. Olaf]

Thanks, but I'm not wasting my time reading a report crafted by Republicans to make Republicans look good.

I'm sure they have the ability to get the facts and then twist them to get the desired outcome.

Who cares?

[St. Olaf]

So....rich folks can't be trusted now? Got news for ya, the list of Democratic lawmakers worth a ton of money is long and distinguished.

Well, DOH!

Like Nancy Pelosi?

So you think I trust rich politicians because they call themselves Democrats?

[grousemaster]

Thanks, but I'm not wasting my time reading a report crafted by Republicans to make Republicans look good.

I'm sure they have the ability to get the facts and then twist them to get the desired outcome.

Who cares?

Again, who on the board are Republicans and where can we find this information? You really believe all those professors at liberal schools are Repubs?

[sansooshooter]

Thanks, but I'm not wasting my time reading a report crafted by Republicans to make Republicans look good.

I'm sure they have the ability to get the facts and then twist them to get the desired outcome.

Who cares?

In other words he is only trolling ! Or wants to keep his head firmly in the dark. I will leave you to guess sand or ?