[khchris(original)]

Originally Posted by Glice

Ricechex recieves kudos for shouting and being a fair sport in a ridiculous argument. I have nothing to add to a foresworn debate.

I didn't think you did. Remember, ricechex made the argument ridiculous by trying to debate truth. I'm sorry your buddy ricechex has had to endure all of this when he could've easily walked away and accepted being wrong about almost everything he's said.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by khchris(original)

I didn't think you did. Remember, ricechex made the argument ridiculous by trying to debate truth.

I prefer my bait to be somewhat larger than a maggot. Try dangling a 15-yr-old in front of me, then we'll talk.

[khchris(original)]

Originally Posted by Glice

I prefer my bait to be somewhat larger than a maggot. Try dangling a 15-yr-old in front of me, then we'll talk.

Wow, that was a plethora of information, scout! That is cute though, you coming in defense or your buddy ricechex. Brings a tear to my eye

[ricechex]

JUST TO SHOW U WHAT U DO, I GRABBED MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT AND YR RESPONSE TO SHED LIGHT ON YOUR PRACTICE OF ARGUING OTHER THINGS, CHANGING THE ARGUMENT.

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."

kh: Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

see? if ur gonna change things , change the argument, then lets debate it for what it is ..

YES, POSITIVE. DID I MENTION THE LEFT? WHY ARE U ARGUNG THAT?
LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE PRESIDENT, AND BOTH THE SENATE AND HOUSE ARE IN REPUBLICAN'S POWER. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMMIGRATION, SPECIFICALLY. (U HAVE TROUBLE WITH ISOLATING THE MAIN POINTS.) THAT MAKES THE RIGHT THE BATTLEGROUND FOR THE POLICY.
SINCE WHEN DOES GW AND THE REPUBLICANS EVEN LISTEN TO THE LEFT?

my main issue is yr desire to want to use other points, beliefs, and what have u, and throw them into the argument wily nilly... and it serves only to get yr political points in.

that's why i always say yr bushman.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by khchris(original)

Wow, that was a plethora of information, scout! That is cute though, you coming in defense or your buddy ricechex. Brings a tear to my eye

A source of information

A source of definitions to words

If you want to find out things, try searching with this

A better place than here to waste your energies

I should really charge for these services...

[khchris(original)]

Originally Posted by ricechex

JUST TO SHOW U WHAT U DO, I GRABBED MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT AND YR RESPONSE TO SHED LIGHT ON YOUR PRACTICE OF ARGUING OTHER THINGS, CHANGING THE ARGUMENT.

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."

kh: Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

see? if ur gonna change things , change the argument, then lets debate it for what it is ..

YES, POSITIVE. DID I MENTION THE LEFT? WHY ARE U ARGUNG THAT?
LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE PRESIDENT, AND BOTH THE SENATE AND HOUSE ARE IN REPUBLICAN'S POWER. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMMIGRATION, SPECIFICALLY. (U HAVE TROUBLE WITH ISOLATING THE MAIN POINTS.) THAT MAKES THE RIGHT THE BATTLEGROUND FOR THE POLICY.
SINCE WHEN DOES GW AND THE REPUBLICANS EVEN LISTEN TO THE LEFT?

my main issue is yr desire to want to use other points, beliefs, and what have u, and throw them into the argument wily nilly... and it serves only to get yr political points in.

that's whay i always say yr bushman.

1. What part of "divided" and "specifically the right" do you not understand? Hey, you said it. Don't get upset if what you said wasn't what you intended to say. Maybe you should finish highschool first. I didn't change anything, just reacting to what you've said.

2. I'm the "bushman"? I think you better look in the mirror:

ricechex-"How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."


So, I guess you just want to "eliminate immigration and specifically illegal immigration" like your CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN REPUBLICAN friends? It's people like you who VOTED BUSH IN OFFICE!!!

[nature scene]

man, do these guys suck the life out of every thread or what?

[khchris(original)]

ricechex-"i also am the one with a poli sci degree, not u. "
Where did you get your degree from and when?

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."
Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

ricechex-"The traditional conservative viewpoint is to put a halt on immigration and especially the illegal variant."
So, the traditional conservative viewpoint it to put a halt on people wanting to come to the country?(hehehe...I just had to laugh

ricechex-"But now, that is being sort of pushed to the side and ignored by the Bushie conservatisim, b/c their new focus is on the eternal bottom line of greed, money. This side are the same people who push outsourcing..again, Bush influence."
Oh, but um...didn't Clinton get NAFTA passed and wasn't "outsourcing" already a problem before GWB got elected as president?

ricechex-"Bush has a real problem trying to find the happy medium between two major voices: businesses and bush backers that want to pay workers little, and no record for government accountabilty, thus no benefits etc,.. and voices that want accountabilty, the traditional republicans who say illegals take jobs, and cost U.S taxpayers millions. "
That was a problem way before either Bush was elected into office, probably going back further than even the 60s. Take notes: Democrats=protecting the workers rights; Republicans=protecting the owners/business rights. It's always been that way, scout.

ricechex-"Bill Clinton this, Bill Clinton that. Hey, u know Bill Clinton started world war II?"
This coming from someone who supposedly has a political science degree?(giggles)

ricechex-"Now what r u talking about? U are talking about quality and efficency of a company that started way back in the 80's."
No ricechex. Honda started over 40 years ago, not in the 80s.(LOL!)

ricechex-"KH is just a bush guy, lock, stock, and barrel. We can see right thru him..and he was called out on it, and identified as such a long time ago.Every argument, it's on display. Sometimes it is thinly veiled, sometimes not. How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."

Um...are you sure you're not the REPUBLICAN? I've always voted for Democrats, which is why I show more compassion for human rights. You on the other hand believe they should not have any rights before "legal citizens", a common believe of CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS.(hehehe...you just gave yourself up, ricechex)

ricechex-"Why doesn't the republican view line up with the pres. That is HIS agenda, not congress. Know the facts, learn the facts. it is also a credit to a real president who worked for the people, reached across the lines, unlike yr ass of a pres."

My favorite president, Bill Clinton, was the reason why our country was so dominant in the 90s. Part of that was because his fiscal beliefs and policies were more aligned with Republicans. One excellent example of that was Bill Clinton getting NAFTA passed, which was originally concepted and in passing through the Bush Administration in the late 80s but expanded upon by Bill Clinton's administration.

Ricechex, you have to have a "happy medium" that will make most of the people happy, not just republicans only and not just democrats only. THAT is why Bill Clinton will go down as one of the greatest presidents ever...because he was a Democrat with some Republican ideals, especially in fiscal policy. Don't be too ignorant of this fact. If you didn't know this, then you definitely don't have any degree whatsoever.

ricechex-"Right. But the 80's was the pertinent decade in which they took over the auto industry. Learn the facts, know the facts."
They didn't "take over" the industry until early-mid 90s. They did, however, start getting popular in the 1970s when they started "outsourcing" in America. But, I guess "Rome was built in a day..."(hehehe).

ricechex-"Outsourcing has exploded twenty fold over the span till where we r know, especially since Bush. In light of all the criticism and uproar from most Americans, Bush praises it."
"Twenty fold" especially since Bush? That's funny because during his 1st term, the growth rate of outsourcing was only 1% during his first term. Unless you think that just over a couple of years during his 2nd term it has "ballooned"(giggles).

ricechex-"NAFTA, SHMAFTA. We're talking outsourcing(Jesus, get in the game)... and that is fast becoming a republican trait."
Even though Bill Clinton, a DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT, got NAFTA passed? I'm not sure you know exactly what NAFTA is or "outsourcing" really is:

"NAFTA has placed American workers in direct competition with other countries where wages are a fraction of ours," he said. "We’ve set up a situation where American workers, even though they are the most productive workers in the word, cannot compete because it’s such an unleveled playing field."http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/1131.php

ricechex-"Outsourcing is not, as u republicans like to say a "Clintonian",( haha.)product. let's agree on that. Therefore u r wrong."

What is NAFTA again? "Outsourcing appears to threaten the livelihood of domestic workers and, in the United States, the American Dream. This is especially true for high-tech workers who were promised the “jobs of tomorrow”- a phrase Bill Clinton iterated in 1994 to justify his conservative position on NAFTA."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsourcing

The affects of NAFTA? "Labor unions in Canada and the United States have opposed NAFTA for fear that jobs would move out of the country due to lower labor costs in Mexico."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

So, do you STILL insist that NAFTA 'has nothing to do with 'outsourcing'"???(giggles) Sorry, I had to laugh

ricechex-"China practically owns us, we sell vital ports for security to Dubai, and we're fighting an illegal war based on lies by our federal govt."
Dude, where do I begin with this statement? 1. It's the other way around...we have more power economically than China. Why else would we be 'outsourcing' there? If they owned us(as you say), then they would be 'outsourcing' to us. But, what does the Iraq War have anything to do with 'outsourcing'?

ricechex-"Since the W Bush tenure, we have had large technological companies outsourcing to countries all over the world, namely to India. This involved many different nations that NAFTA had nothing to with. The explosion of outsourcing, world wide, is happening now!"
Are you talking about the first or second Bush? Because if you're talking about the 2nd Bush, well the US had been outsourcing hi-tech companies WAY BEFORE GWB was elected.

ricechex-"By name alone,it should tell u it had do with free trade, and tarrifs,and a trade bloc, with set goals to help trade... not outsource, b/c they hadn't even identified it in the way that we see it today."
So, I guess Mexico wasn't a source for "cheap labor" for America afterall!(hehehe, had to laugh!)

ricechex-"Read my paragraph again. we're outsourcing huge technological companies like IBM and HP,manufacturing to China, and port security nowadays. where ya been"? That would never have been done during Clinton.That's all GW,baby."

"Manufacturing---- In 1994, HP decided to outsource its manufacturing to third-party vendors and oversea countries to lower costs and raise profits. Today, desktop computers are assembled in Guadalaraja, Mexico where HP employs approximately 1,500 workers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard

So I guess that was "all GW baby"(hehehe). Holy shit! Mexico? In 1994, the year NAFTA was passed? WOW! Who would've thought America would be using MEXICAN WORKERS to cut down on lower costs and raise profits???(giggles) Yeah, it would "never have been done during Clinton's administration"(LOL!).

ricechex-"the right has accomplished in just five years the creation of a low-wage economy, a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Bush and his econmic advisors continue to openly support these policies. But you're still talking about NAFTA. That's "old news".haha. Bush sees the results of outsourcing, and is dumb enough to push CAFTA."

That is mostly the result of "outsourcing", which became popular in the 90s. Bush hasn't done anything to help the problem, but by blaming Bush for "outsourcing", you not only look ridiculous, but you look like you're a highschool kid trying to act older than you really are.


And again, there is no way you have ANY kind of degree.


Want some more humiliation? Come on down!!!(giggles)
And you have a DEGREE???(LOL!)

LOL!

I'll be surprised if you come back(wink), but I know you will because you don't really care how stupid you look right now. This is just too easy

Ricechex, just give it up. You look rather ridiculous.

You can either give up, answer the questions, or continue to be humiliated.

[khchris(original)]

Originally Posted by nature scene

man, do these guys suck the life out of every thread or what?

Well, it's not like ricechex is doing himself any favors. He's been wrong on everything, I've even proven it with links and references, but he still insists he is right or that I 'twisted' his words, even though I am basing everything straight from his quotes.

He should've given up a long time ago.

LOL, he still doesn't want to say where he got his "political science degree".

Man, I'm really going to town on that guy(giggles)!

[ricechex]

[quote=ricechex]

Originally Posted by khchris(original)

1. Nobody said NAFTA was the "outsourcing boom that it is today". Nobody. I never said it . Nobody except yourself says this. I totally agree. Today's "outsourcing" is a much bigger problem than when Clinton got NAFTA passed. NAFTA opened the floodgates to "outsourcing". But, I guess your "online degree" didn't teach you that.(giggles)

Duh. What's the argument?

THANK U. God, thank u. YES, this is what i said originally. U DON'T REALIZE IT, but your frenzy to argue and fabricate things out of quotes, made up quotes, and out of context statements, allowing yr political bias to muddy things, is what led to this ridichulous debate. wE'RE FINALLY GETTING SOMEWHERE.

What I said was that NAFTA "STARTED" the trigger effect of outsourcing(keyword: S-T-A-R-T-E-D)

FINE, AGREED. haha..but i was never arguing that. I know bush didn't START outsourcing. I NEVER SAID THAT!

2. Honda was much more popular in the 80s than it was in the 70s. This is just retarded because that goes without saying. It's obvious. What I said was Honda's popularity STARTED(KEYWORD: S-T-A-R-T-E-D) in the 70s, not the 80s. Honda was already becoming popular by the time the 80s came around. (giggles)

FINE, HOLY SHIT, AGREED. IT WaS ONLY THE START! HONDA WAS MUCH MORE POUPULAR in the 80's . U SAID IT YRSELF.

I WAS ONLY CONCERNED WITH THE HIGH POINTS, THE BOOM, THE EXPLOSION, OF OUTSOURCING, AND THE JAPANESE CAR INVASION.


THOSE TWO THINGS ARE THE ONLY THINGS I WAS ARGUING! AFTER ALL THIS TIME, U WERE ARGUING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I SAID. U ATTACKED MY ORIGINAL STATEMENTS, AND WERE ARGUING SOMETHING DIFFERENT, B/C I GUESS U LIKE TO ARGUE.

Look, i already proved my points above. it's over. it takes a man to admit he was wrong.

where do u go to high school?

[khchris(original)]

Just as long as you can accept you've been completely wrong, I'll lay off. But if you keep insisting that I am "twisting your words", which I haven't, and insist you're still correct on your statements, then I'm going to keep reposting all your ridiculous remarks(quoted, of course).

ricechex-"i also am the one with a poli sci degree, not u. "
Where did you get your degree from and when?

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."
Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

ricechex-"The traditional conservative viewpoint is to put a halt on immigration and especially the illegal variant."
So, the traditional conservative viewpoint it to put a halt on people wanting to come to the country?(hehehe...I just had to laugh

ricechex-"But now, that is being sort of pushed to the side and ignored by the Bushie conservatisim, b/c their new focus is on the eternal bottom line of greed, money. This side are the same people who push outsourcing..again, Bush influence."
Oh, but um...didn't Clinton get NAFTA passed and wasn't "outsourcing" already a problem before GWB got elected as president?

ricechex-"Bush has a real problem trying to find the happy medium between two major voices: businesses and bush backers that want to pay workers little, and no record for government accountabilty, thus no benefits etc,.. and voices that want accountabilty, the traditional republicans who say illegals take jobs, and cost U.S taxpayers millions. "
That was a problem way before either Bush was elected into office, probably going back further than even the 60s. Take notes: Democrats=protecting the workers rights; Republicans=protecting the owners/business rights. It's always been that way, scout.

ricechex-"Bill Clinton this, Bill Clinton that. Hey, u know Bill Clinton started world war II?"
This coming from someone who supposedly has a political science degree?(giggles)

ricechex-"Now what r u talking about? U are talking about quality and efficency of a company that started way back in the 80's."
No ricechex. Honda started over 40 years ago, not in the 80s.(LOL!)

ricechex-"KH is just a bush guy, lock, stock, and barrel. We can see right thru him..and he was called out on it, and identified as such a long time ago.Every argument, it's on display. Sometimes it is thinly veiled, sometimes not. How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."

Um...are you sure you're not the REPUBLICAN? I've always voted for Democrats, which is why I show more compassion for human rights. You on the other hand believe they should not have any rights before "legal citizens", a common believe of CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS.(hehehe...you just gave yourself up, ricechex)

ricechex-"Why doesn't the republican view line up with the pres. That is HIS agenda, not congress. Know the facts, learn the facts. it is also a credit to a real president who worked for the people, reached across the lines, unlike yr ass of a pres."

My favorite president, Bill Clinton, was the reason why our country was so dominant in the 90s. Part of that was because his fiscal beliefs and policies were more aligned with Republicans. One excellent example of that was Bill Clinton getting NAFTA passed, which was originally concepted and in passing through the Bush Administration in the late 80s but expanded upon by Bill Clinton's administration.

Ricechex, you have to have a "happy medium" that will make most of the people happy, not just republicans only and not just democrats only. THAT is why Bill Clinton will go down as one of the greatest presidents ever...because he was a Democrat with some Republican ideals, especially in fiscal policy. Don't be too ignorant of this fact. If you didn't know this, then you definitely don't have any degree whatsoever.

ricechex-"Right. But the 80's was the pertinent decade in which they took over the auto industry. Learn the facts, know the facts."
They didn't "take over" the industry until early-mid 90s. They did, however, start getting popular in the 1970s when they started "outsourcing" in America. But, I guess "Rome was built in a day..."(hehehe).

ricechex-"Outsourcing has exploded twenty fold over the span till where we r know, especially since Bush. In light of all the criticism and uproar from most Americans, Bush praises it."
"Twenty fold" especially since Bush? That's funny because during his 1st term, the growth rate of outsourcing was only 1% during his first term. Unless you think that just over a couple of years during his 2nd term it has "ballooned"(giggles).

ricechex-"NAFTA, SHMAFTA. We're talking outsourcing(Jesus, get in the game)... and that is fast becoming a republican trait."
Even though Bill Clinton, a DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT, got NAFTA passed? I'm not sure you know exactly what NAFTA is or "outsourcing" really is:

"NAFTA has placed American workers in direct competition with other countries where wages are a fraction of ours," he said. "We’ve set up a situation where American workers, even though they are the most productive workers in the word, cannot compete because it’s such an unleveled playing field."http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/1131.php

ricechex-"Outsourcing is not, as u republicans like to say a "Clintonian",( haha.)product. let's agree on that. Therefore u r wrong."

What is NAFTA again? "Outsourcing appears to threaten the livelihood of domestic workers and, in the United States, the American Dream. This is especially true for high-tech workers who were promised the “jobs of tomorrow”- a phrase Bill Clinton iterated in 1994 to justify his conservative position on NAFTA."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsourcing

The affects of NAFTA? "Labor unions in Canada and the United States have opposed NAFTA for fear that jobs would move out of the country due to lower labor costs in Mexico."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

So, do you STILL insist that NAFTA 'has nothing to do with 'outsourcing'"???(giggles) Sorry, I had to laugh

ricechex-"China practically owns us, we sell vital ports for security to Dubai, and we're fighting an illegal war based on lies by our federal govt."
Dude, where do I begin with this statement? 1. It's the other way around...we have more power economically than China. Why else would we be 'outsourcing' there? If they owned us(as you say), then they would be 'outsourcing' to us. But, what does the Iraq War have anything to do with 'outsourcing'?

ricechex-"Since the W Bush tenure, we have had large technological companies outsourcing to countries all over the world, namely to India. This involved many different nations that NAFTA had nothing to with. The explosion of outsourcing, world wide, is happening now!"
Are you talking about the first or second Bush? Because if you're talking about the 2nd Bush, well the US had been outsourcing hi-tech companies WAY BEFORE GWB was elected.

ricechex-"By name alone,it should tell u it had do with free trade, and tarrifs,and a trade bloc, with set goals to help trade... not outsource, b/c they hadn't even identified it in the way that we see it today."
So, I guess Mexico wasn't a source for "cheap labor" for America afterall!(hehehe, had to laugh!)

ricechex-"Read my paragraph again. we're outsourcing huge technological companies like IBM and HP,manufacturing to China, and port security nowadays. where ya been"? That would never have been done during Clinton.That's all GW,baby."

"Manufacturing---- In 1994, HP decided to outsource its manufacturing to third-party vendors and oversea countries to lower costs and raise profits. Today, desktop computers are assembled in Guadalaraja, Mexico where HP employs approximately 1,500 workers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard

So I guess that was "all GW baby"(hehehe). Holy shit! Mexico? In 1994, the year NAFTA was passed? WOW! Who would've thought America would be using MEXICAN WORKERS to cut down on lower costs and raise profits???(giggles) Yeah, it would "never have been done during Clinton's administration"(LOL!).

ricechex-"the right has accomplished in just five years the creation of a low-wage economy, a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Bush and his econmic advisors continue to openly support these policies. But you're still talking about NAFTA. That's "old news".haha. Bush sees the results of outsourcing, and is dumb enough to push CAFTA."

That is mostly the result of "outsourcing", which became popular in the 90s. Bush hasn't done anything to help the problem, but by blaming Bush for "outsourcing", you not only look ridiculous, but you look like you're a highschool kid trying to act older than you really are.


And again, there is no way you have ANY kind of degree.

You can either give up, answer the questions, or continue to be humiliated.

I graduated from El Camino High School in 1993. When do you graduate?

Consider this as a "lesson taught". You're already giving up, you're afraid to face your own ridiculous statements.

[ricechex]

1. "Today's "outsourcing" is a much bigger problem than when Clinton got NAFTA passed", (THUS THE X-PLOSION, good)

Thank u.

2. "Honda was much more popular in the 80s than it was in the 70s. This is just retarded because that goes without saying. It's obvious"

and thank u. the efficiency and craftsmanship expertise of the japanese auto dominated(and started) in the 80's. That means it exploded in sales. the boom etc..

that's it. anyone insane enough could go back and see those were my only debates.

u, unfortunately, were in 10 others by yourself.

[atari 2600]

i actually meant the flamer guy, (original)...that his dad & my dad...oh well, nevermind i wasn't clear, porkmarras...bastard that i am, i don't even know my dad if it makes you feel better...

Originally Posted by nature scene

man, do these guys suck the life out of every thread or what?

like porkmarras posted, nature scene posted a message that is voicing a concern about wanting to read & participate in an actual discussion instead of all this garbage that any political thread turns into eventually. My hope is that people please report chronic flamers with the "Report Bad Post" function. If enough of us do this, then we may be able to remove the flamers.

people have a difficult time standing the heat in the kitchen & exploring the actual issue, so some side-issue usually gets concocted by the political flamer & so the discussion got derailed. Funny, when i watched Real Time with Bill Maher this weekend, he was stating most of the same things I was earlier in the week in this topic about holding the companies responsible (under RICO ---the actual law was not mentioned by Maher, however) that enable illegal immigrants. Rep. Martinez (R-FLA) also said some things about how illegals hurt themselves because they are subjected to labor abuses.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by khchris(original)

You can either give up, answer the questions, or continue to be humiliated.

Yeah, Ricechex. I bet you never, ever show your (pseudo-) face around here again after the tirade of humiliation you have faced. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the humiliation YOU, Richchex, have faced, causes severe depression and perhaps suicide. In fact, so grave is your humilation, I suspect it may open a vacuum which threatens to consume the entireity of the earth, nay the universe.

[For khchris's benefit - Hyperbole, Irony & Humour ]

[ricechex]

well u know Glice, we are both fucking idiots at this point. but i have always wanted to tell khchris that he takes information from someone on one issue, or one argument, and uses the information to create other arguments, or tangeants, that go off everywhere.

[khchris(original)]

Straight from the "horse's mouth"

ricechex-"i also am the one with a poli sci degree, not u. "
Where did you get your degree from and when?

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."
Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

ricechex-"The traditional conservative viewpoint is to put a halt on immigration and especially the illegal variant."
So, the traditional conservative viewpoint it to put a halt on people wanting to come to the country?(hehehe...I just had to laugh

ricechex-"But now, that is being sort of pushed to the side and ignored by the Bushie conservatisim, b/c their new focus is on the eternal bottom line of greed, money. This side are the same people who push outsourcing..again, Bush influence."
Oh, but um...didn't Clinton get NAFTA passed and wasn't "outsourcing" already a problem before GWB got elected as president?

ricechex-"Bush has a real problem trying to find the happy medium between two major voices: businesses and bush backers that want to pay workers little, and no record for government accountabilty, thus no benefits etc,.. and voices that want accountabilty, the traditional republicans who say illegals take jobs, and cost U.S taxpayers millions. "
That was a problem way before either Bush was elected into office, probably going back further than even the 60s. Take notes: Democrats=protecting the workers rights; Republicans=protecting the owners/business rights. It's always been that way, scout.

ricechex-"Bill Clinton this, Bill Clinton that. Hey, u know Bill Clinton started world war II?"
This coming from someone who supposedly has a political science degree?(giggles)

ricechex-"Now what r u talking about? U are talking about quality and efficency of a company that started way back in the 80's."
No ricechex. Honda started over 40 years ago, not in the 80s.(LOL!)

ricechex-"KH is just a bush guy, lock, stock, and barrel. We can see right thru him..and he was called out on it, and identified as such a long time ago.Every argument, it's on display. Sometimes it is thinly veiled, sometimes not. How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."

Um...are you sure you're not the REPUBLICAN? I've always voted for Democrats, which is why I show more compassion for human rights. You on the other hand believe they should not have any rights before "legal citizens", a common believe of CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS.(hehehe...you just gave yourself up, ricechex)

ricechex-"Why doesn't the republican view line up with the pres. That is HIS agenda, not congress. Know the facts, learn the facts. it is also a credit to a real president who worked for the people, reached across the lines, unlike yr ass of a pres."

My favorite president, Bill Clinton, was the reason why our country was so dominant in the 90s. Part of that was because his fiscal beliefs and policies were more aligned with Republicans. One excellent example of that was Bill Clinton getting NAFTA passed, which was originally concepted and in passing through the Bush Administration in the late 80s but expanded upon by Bill Clinton's administration.

Ricechex, you have to have a "happy medium" that will make most of the people happy, not just republicans only and not just democrats only. THAT is why Bill Clinton will go down as one of the greatest presidents ever...because he was a Democrat with some Republican ideals, especially in fiscal policy. Don't be too ignorant of this fact. If you didn't know this, then you definitely don't have any degree whatsoever.

ricechex-"Right. But the 80's was the pertinent decade in which they took over the auto industry. Learn the facts, know the facts."
They didn't "take over" the industry until early-mid 90s. They did, however, start getting popular in the 1970s when they started "outsourcing" in America. But, I guess "Rome was built in a day..."(hehehe).

ricechex-"Outsourcing has exploded twenty fold over the span till where we r know, especially since Bush. In light of all the criticism and uproar from most Americans, Bush praises it."
"Twenty fold" especially since Bush? That's funny because during his 1st term, the growth rate of outsourcing was only 1% during his first term. Unless you think that just over a couple of years during his 2nd term it has "ballooned"(giggles).

ricechex-"NAFTA, SHMAFTA. We're talking outsourcing(Jesus, get in the game)... and that is fast becoming a republican trait."
Even though Bill Clinton, a DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT, got NAFTA passed? I'm not sure you know exactly what NAFTA is or "outsourcing" really is:

"NAFTA has placed American workers in direct competition with other countries where wages are a fraction of ours," he said. "We’ve set up a situation where American workers, even though they are the most productive workers in the word, cannot compete because it’s such an unleveled playing field."http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/1131.php

ricechex-"Outsourcing is not, as u republicans like to say a "Clintonian",( haha.)product. let's agree on that. Therefore u r wrong."

What is NAFTA again? "Outsourcing appears to threaten the livelihood of domestic workers and, in the United States, the American Dream. This is especially true for high-tech workers who were promised the “jobs of tomorrow”- a phrase Bill Clinton iterated in 1994 to justify his conservative position on NAFTA."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsourcing

The affects of NAFTA? "Labor unions in Canada and the United States have opposed NAFTA for fear that jobs would move out of the country due to lower labor costs in Mexico."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

So, do you STILL insist that NAFTA 'has nothing to do with 'outsourcing'"???(giggles) Sorry, I had to laugh

ricechex-"China practically owns us, we sell vital ports for security to Dubai, and we're fighting an illegal war based on lies by our federal govt."
Dude, where do I begin with this statement? 1. It's the other way around...we have more power economically than China. Why else would we be 'outsourcing' there? If they owned us(as you say), then they would be 'outsourcing' to us. But, what does the Iraq War have anything to do with 'outsourcing'?

ricechex-"Since the W Bush tenure, we have had large technological companies outsourcing to countries all over the world, namely to India. This involved many different nations that NAFTA had nothing to with. The explosion of outsourcing, world wide, is happening now!"
Are you talking about the first or second Bush? Because if you're talking about the 2nd Bush, well the US had been outsourcing hi-tech companies WAY BEFORE GWB was elected.

ricechex-"By name alone,it should tell u it had do with free trade, and tarrifs,and a trade bloc, with set goals to help trade... not outsource, b/c they hadn't even identified it in the way that we see it today."
So, I guess Mexico wasn't a source for "cheap labor" for America afterall!(hehehe, had to laugh!)

ricechex-"Read my paragraph again. we're outsourcing huge technological companies like IBM and HP,manufacturing to China, and port security nowadays. where ya been"? That would never have been done during Clinton.That's all GW,baby."

"Manufacturing---- In 1994, HP decided to outsource its manufacturing to third-party vendors and oversea countries to lower costs and raise profits. Today, desktop computers are assembled in Guadalaraja, Mexico where HP employs approximately 1,500 workers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard

So I guess that was "all GW baby"(hehehe). Holy shit! Mexico? In 1994, the year NAFTA was passed? WOW! Who would've thought America would be using MEXICAN WORKERS to cut down on lower costs and raise profits???(giggles) Yeah, it would "never have been done during Clinton's administration"(LOL!).

ricechex-"the right has accomplished in just five years the creation of a low-wage economy, a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Bush and his econmic advisors continue to openly support these policies. But you're still talking about NAFTA. That's "old news".haha. Bush sees the results of outsourcing, and is dumb enough to push CAFTA."

That is mostly the result of "outsourcing", which became popular in the 90s. Bush hasn't done anything to help the problem, but by blaming Bush for "outsourcing", you not only look ridiculous, but you look like you're a highschool kid trying to act older than you really are.

And again, there is no way you have ANY kind of degree.

Want some more humiliation? Come on down!!!(giggles)
And you have a DEGREE???(LOL!)

Ricechex, just give it up. You look rather ridiculous.

You can either give up, answer the questions, or continue to be humiliated.

[HaydenAsche]

This Thread Is Ridiculous. RiceChex must have passed only Political Science classes and failed all the rest.

[atari 2600]

ricechex-"i also am the one with a poli sci degree, not u. "
Where did you get your degree from and when?
this is a rather juvenile quibble that cannot be proved or disproved & should be dropped immediately; it should have never arisen in the topic.
ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."
Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?
The Left has always had more special interest groups & as a result, has been very divided for quite some time. This is one of the primary reasons (along with the ever-present & corrupting influence of lobbyists) why the Democratic Party has lost its effigacy. We are now in the throes of national economic, energy, environmental & security crisis & so the Democratic Party is making a concerted aeffort to be more unified, or at the very least appear as if it's more unified because major elections are up & coming.
What ricechex is undoubtably referring to as far as the Right becoming more divided is Bush's recent nose-dive in the polls. The Republicans are becoming more divided. Now there are some legitimate reasons why gasoline has risen so much in price recently, but the facts are that no one likes seeing Exxon-Mobil & the other multinational energy companies gouging the American consumer. Also the WMD lie, the Plame outing, the proposed Dubai secuirty port deal & domestic spying are all coming to bear.
ricechex-"The traditional conservative viewpoint is to put a halt on immigration and especially the illegal variant."
So, the traditional conservative viewpoint it to put a halt on people wanting to come to the country?(hehehe...I just had to laugh
The traditional conservative viewpoint it may be, but the conservatives in power now are thieves in traditionalist clothing. They have happily looked the other way to help line the coffers of their constinuency through exploiting cheap illegal labor. These neo-conservatives also like to start fake wars to steal money from contracts & have now spent almost 10 trillion dollars. The country is very arguably less safer & they are, very arguably, a lot richer now.
ricechex-"But now, that is being sort of pushed to the side and ignored by the Bushie conservatisim, b/c their new focus is on the eternal bottom line of greed, money. This side are the same people who push outsourcing..again, Bush influence."
Oh, but um...didn't Clinton get NAFTA passed and wasn't "outsourcing" already a problem before GWB got elected as president?
Clinton did pass NAFTA. But Clinton also did a lot that was good. He got state lotteries passed to fund college scholarships, even in states like Virginia & Georgia that were heavily opposed to any form of legalized gambling at first. Clinton also helped to spearhead the balanced budget amendment. Since the IT boom was happening at the same time that our fiscal house was put in order, many, many Americans enjoyed unprecedented prosperity for awhile under his presidency. But Bill Clinton always was a bought-&-paid for puppet Democratic president. He was in the inside loop because of the landing strip he allowed in Mena, AR for the CIA to run cocaine into during the Iran-Contra scandal, for instance. As far as outsourcing, it did begin under Clinton, but it has only reached these unprecedented levels under the unwatchful, uncaring auspices of the Bush administration.
ricechex-"Bush has a real problem trying to find the happy medium between two major voices: businesses and bush backers that want to pay workers little, and no record for government accountabilty, thus no benefits etc,.. and voices that want accountabilty, the traditional republicans who say illegals take jobs, and cost U.S taxpayers millions. "
That was a problem way before either Bush was elected into office, probably going back further than even the 60s. Take notes: Democrats=protecting the workers rights; Republicans=protecting the owners/business rights. It's always been that way, scout.
Yeah, that's generlly true assessment from khchris, but why the tone? Richechex just stated the obvious & khchris addresses him like he's pretending to be Robert Culp or something.

 

ricechex-"Bill Clinton this, Bill Clinton that. Hey, u know Bill Clinton started world war II?"
This coming from someone who supposedly has a political science degree?(giggles)
I'm not sure if this was an attempt at comic relief or not. It's just that difficult for me to imagine khchris laughing at anything out of joy. His laughter (like all the political flamers) seems to mainly stem from the sick evil glee of torturing & badgering someone.
ricechex-"Now what r u talking about? U are talking about quality and efficency of a company that started way back in the 80's."
No ricechex. Honda started over 40 years ago, not in the 80s.(LOL!)
Oh god, the fucking Honda thing that went on & on. Honda gained marketplace branding for autos in the 1970s. They've had an ever-growing company since then for cars, but of course the company have been making engines & motorcycles since the early 20th century. The Civic was introduced in '72 & the Accord in '76. The Civics & CVCCs were popular, but it was with the Accord's more mid-sized design that they really started to gain a huge market share like they still enjoy today. Honda was popular with American car buyers in the '70s just like khchris stated, but Honda also grew their sales in the '80s becoming even more of a household name, which is probaby (one would naturally assume) why ricechex wrote what he did the first time.
ricechex-"KH is just a bush guy, lock, stock, and barrel. We can see right thru him..and he was called out on it, and identified as such a long time ago.Every argument, it's on display. Sometimes it is thinly veiled, sometimes not. How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."
Um...are you sure you're not the REPUBLICAN? I've always voted for Democrats, which is why I show more compassion for human rights. You on the other hand believe they should not have any rights before "legal citizens", a common believe of CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS.(hehehe...you just gave yourself up, ricechex)
Personally, I agree with ricechex here. khchris is always trying to save face these days & he's so obstinate that he will never admit what a big Bush-backer he was in the beginning. So he's a sniveling coward for being so terrified by 9/11 that he went clamoring for daddy --- daddy please help me, i'm scared--- Bush & he's also a rat bastard for refusing to admit that he was wrong about Bush. Furthermore, based on this fellow's posting history I contend that it's not too difficult to perceive that khchris' posts in this thread were made deliberately to derail the thread & to start an arguement with someone as per his modus operandi, i.e., a flamer who loves Bush.
ricechex-"Right. But the 80's was the pertinent decade in which they took over the auto industry. Learn the facts, know the facts."
They didn't "take over" the industry until early-mid 90s. They did, however, start getting popular in the 1970s when they started "outsourcing" in America. But, I guess "Rome was built in a day..."(hehehe).
ricechex-"Outsourcing has exploded twenty fold over the span till where we r know, especially since Bush. In light of all the criticism and uproar from most Americans, Bush praises it."
"Twenty fold" especially since Bush? That's funny because during his 1st term, the growth rate of outsourcing was only 1% during his first term. Unless you think that just over a couple of years during his 2nd term it has "ballooned"(giggles).
...more rehash & it just continues on & on with yet more redundancies from here...hope that was enlightening for everyone.

[khchris(original)]

atari 2600-"this is a rather juvenile quibble that cannot be proved or disproved & should be dropped immediately"

If you're going to "brag" about your degree, why would you be hesitant to tell others where you got your degree from? Obviously, he doesn't have a degree whatsoever.

atari 2600-"The Left has always had more special interest groups & as a result, has been very divided for quite some time. This is one of the primary reasons (along with the ever-present & corrupting influence of lobbyists) why the Democratic Party has lost its effigacy. We are now in the throes of national economic, energy, environmental & security crisis & so the Democratic Party is making a concerted aeffort to be more unified, or at the very least appear as if it's more unified because major elections are up & coming. What ricechex is undoubtably referring to as far as the Right becoming more divided is Bush's recent nose-dive in the polls. The Republicans are becoming more divided. Now there are some legitimate reasons why gasoline has risen so much in price recently, but the facts are that no one likes seeing Exxon-Mobil & the other multinational energy companies gouging the American consumer. Also the WMD lie, the Plame outing, the proposed Dubai secuirty port deal & domestic spying are all coming to bear."

What ricechex really wanted to say was the country is divided "because"(and not "specifically") of the right.

atari 2600-"The traditional conservative viewpoint it may be, but the conservatives in power now are thieves in traditionalist clothing. They have happily looked the other way to help line the coffers of their constinuency through exploiting cheap illegal labor. These neo-conservatives also like to start fake wars to steal money from contracts & have now spent almost 10 trillion dollars. The country is very arguably less safer & they are, very arguably, a lot richer now."

It isn't in any "traditional conservative viewpoint" to eliminate immigration. That's pretty much a "racist/prejudice" belief, unless you want to generalize "traditional conservatives" as "racists". Then you've crossed the line of rationality.

atari 2600-"Clinton did pass NAFTA. But Clinton also did a lot that was good. He got state lotteries passed to fund college scholarships, even in states like Virginia & Georgia that were heavily opposed to any form of legalized gambling at first. Clinton also helped to spearhead the balanced budget amendment. Since the IT boom was happening at the same time that our fiscal house was put in order, many, many Americans enjoyed unprecedented prosperity for awhile under his presidency. But Bill Clinton always was a bought-&-paid for puppet Democratic president. He was in the inside loop because of the landing strip he allowed in Mena, AR for the CIA to run cocaine into during the Iran-Contra scandal, for instance. As far as outsourcing, it did begin under Clinton, but it has only reached these unprecedented levels under the unwatchful, uncaring auspices of the Bush administration."

Wrong. The growth rate of "outsourcing" has declined when GWB was voted into office. When 9/11 happened, it hurt our economy and alot of businesses went out. Because our economy is suffering, people are now wanting the president to do something about it. Because Bush has done nothing to help stop a monster already made, people are pointing fingers at a president for a problem that was already there BEFORE he was even voted into office. It may not have been obvious since our economy was doing great under Clinton, but just like when "teams lose games", people look for answers and it's usually the "coach"(or president in this case). But make no mistake about it, the growth rate of outsourcing went down when Bush got elected. KEYWORDS: GROWTH RATE. Is it bigger than when Clinton was in office? Duh.

atari 2600-"Yeah, that's generlly true assessment from khchris, but why the tone? Richechex just stated the obvious & khchris addresses him like he's pretending to be Robert Culp or something."

I think you've missed the point there, atari. Singling out a president for that is just stupid because even Clinton struggled with it. Every president struggles with it. You either screw over the owners or the workers. Just as in sports, either the owners are screwing over the players or the players are screwing over the owners. Nothing new, so why criticize a president for a problem that's always been there from the beginning? That was the point, atari.

atari 2600-"I'm not sure if this was an attempt at comic relief or not. It's just that difficult for me to imagine khchris laughing at anything out of joy. His laughter (like all the political flamers) seems to mainly stem from the sick evil glee of torturing & badgering someone."

That's nice.

atari 2600-"Oh god, the fucking Honda thing that went on & on. Honda gained marketplace branding for autos in the 1970s. They've had an ever-growing company since then for cars, but of course the company have been making engines & motorcycles since the early 20th century. The Civic was introduced in '72 & the Accord in '76. The Civics & CVCCs were popular, but it was with the Accord's more mid-sized design that they really started to gain a huge market share like they still enjoy today. Honda was popular with American car buyers in the '70s just like khchris stated, but Honda also grew their sales in the '80s becoming even more of a household name, which is probaby (one would naturally assume) why ricechex wrote what he did the first time."

You missed the point again, atari 2600. There were several points: #1. Honda did not start in the 80s. If you read his statement, this cannot be misunderstood, that is unless you are defending a guy against someone you hate. #2. KEYWORDS: STARTED TO GAIN POPULARITY. Ricechex refused to believe that Honda began to gain popularity in the 70s. If you want to talk about being top sales, well then we'll have to go into the 90s, and not in the 80s. Either way, ricechex was wrong on both statements: Honda certainly did not start in the 80s and #2 Honda gained popularity in the 70s.

atari 2600-"Personally, I agree with ricechex here. khchris is always trying to save face these days & he's so obstinate that he will never admit what a big Bush-backer he was in the beginning. So he's a sniveling coward for being so terrified by 9/11 that he went clamoring for daddy --- daddy please help me, i'm scared--- Bush & he's also a rat bastard for refusing to admit that he was wrong about Bush. Furthermore, based on this fellow's posting history I contend that it's not too difficult to perceive that khchris' posts in this thread were made deliberately to derail the thread & to start an arguement with someone as per his modus operandi, i.e., a flamer who loves Bush."

I'm a democrat, thank you. Since you agree with Ricechex, I guess you must be a Christian Conservative Republican who doesn't want to lend a helping hand to those in need. 2 peas in a pod. And now you wonder why people pick on an emotionally unstable child as yourself? Maybe if you stopped calling people names and starting fights, people wouldn't pick on you.

BTW, how's that "complaint to the FBI" going?(LOL!). Nobody's taking you serious anymore, atari 2600. All this talk about how you were going to call the police or whatever because I said you "lived at home"(giggles).

atari 2600-"...more rehash & it just continues on & on with yet more redundancies from here...hope that was enlightening for everyone."

Some people, like ricechex, don't learn the first time.


I think it was cute that you tried to come in defense of your fellow Christian Conservative Republican friend RICECHEX, but maybe you should stay out of arguments.

You're just going to start crying, calling people names(as you did just now), and whine because I was making fun of you for living with "mommy and daddy".

Atleast you could've read the entire thread. Because you did not take the time to read the entire thread and solely concentrated on my statements only, you've completely missed the points I was making that were directed towards ricechex's statements.

Atleast read the thread before you go around jumping in the middle of arguments. And certainly don't try to overcomplicate the obvious.

[khchris(original)]

Straight from the "horse's mouth"

ricechex-"i also am the one with a poli sci degree, not u. "
Where did you get your degree from and when?

ricechex-"What fuels alot of this anger is how divided the country is, and specifically the right."
Are you sure that it's more divided on the right than it is on the left? How would you explain Bush being re-elected for a 2nd term?

ricechex-"The traditional conservative viewpoint is to put a halt on immigration and especially the illegal variant."
So, the traditional conservative viewpoint it to put a halt on people wanting to come to the country?(hehehe...I just had to laugh

ricechex-"But now, that is being sort of pushed to the side and ignored by the Bushie conservatisim, b/c their new focus is on the eternal bottom line of greed, money. This side are the same people who push outsourcing..again, Bush influence."
Oh, but um...didn't Clinton get NAFTA passed and wasn't "outsourcing" already a problem before GWB got elected as president?

ricechex-"Bush has a real problem trying to find the happy medium between two major voices: businesses and bush backers that want to pay workers little, and no record for government accountabilty, thus no benefits etc,.. and voices that want accountabilty, the traditional republicans who say illegals take jobs, and cost U.S taxpayers millions. "
That was a problem way before either Bush was elected into office, probably going back further than even the 60s. Take notes: Democrats=protecting the workers rights; Republicans=protecting the owners/business rights. It's always been that way, scout.

ricechex-"Bill Clinton this, Bill Clinton that. Hey, u know Bill Clinton started world war II?"
This coming from someone who supposedly has a political science degree?(giggles)

ricechex-"Now what r u talking about? U are talking about quality and efficency of a company that started way back in the 80's."
No ricechex. Honda started over 40 years ago, not in the 80s.(LOL!)

ricechex-"KH is just a bush guy, lock, stock, and barrel. We can see right thru him..and he was called out on it, and identified as such a long time ago.Every argument, it's on display. Sometimes it is thinly veiled, sometimes not. How ironic that he has a heart and compassion for the illegal immigrants and the cheap produce, but fails to see the larger picture that Americans should come first. They should come first when considering them to die in a war based on lies, and they should come first for jobs, and they should come first for American's rights. That should never change."

Um...are you sure you're not the REPUBLICAN? I've always voted for Democrats, which is why I show more compassion for human rights. You on the other hand believe they should not have any rights before "legal citizens", a common believe of CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS.(hehehe...you just gave yourself up, ricechex)

ricechex-"Why doesn't the republican view line up with the pres. That is HIS agenda, not congress. Know the facts, learn the facts. it is also a credit to a real president who worked for the people, reached across the lines, unlike yr ass of a pres."

My favorite president, Bill Clinton, was the reason why our country was so dominant in the 90s. Part of that was because his fiscal beliefs and policies were more aligned with Republicans. One excellent example of that was Bill Clinton getting NAFTA passed, which was originally concepted and in passing through the Bush Administration in the late 80s but expanded upon by Bill Clinton's administration.

Ricechex, you have to have a "happy medium" that will make most of the people happy, not just republicans only and not just democrats only. THAT is why Bill Clinton will go down as one of the greatest presidents ever...because he was a Democrat with some Republican ideals, especially in fiscal policy. Don't be too ignorant of this fact. If you didn't know this, then you definitely don't have any degree whatsoever.

ricechex-"Right. But the 80's was the pertinent decade in which they took over the auto industry. Learn the facts, know the facts."
They didn't "take over" the industry until early-mid 90s. They did, however, start getting popular in the 1970s when they started "outsourcing" in America. But, I guess "Rome was built in a day..."(hehehe).

ricechex-"Outsourcing has exploded twenty fold over the span till where we r know, especially since Bush. In light of all the criticism and uproar from most Americans, Bush praises it."
"Twenty fold" especially since Bush? That's funny because during his 1st term, the growth rate of outsourcing was only 1% during his first term. Unless you think that just over a couple of years during his 2nd term it has "ballooned"(giggles).

ricechex-"NAFTA, SHMAFTA. We're talking outsourcing(Jesus, get in the game)... and that is fast becoming a republican trait."
Even though Bill Clinton, a DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT, got NAFTA passed? I'm not sure you know exactly what NAFTA is or "outsourcing" really is:

"NAFTA has placed American workers in direct competition with other countries where wages are a fraction of ours," he said. "We’ve set up a situation where American workers, even though they are the most productive workers in the word, cannot compete because it’s such an unleveled playing field."http://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/1131.php

ricechex-"Outsourcing is not, as u republicans like to say a "Clintonian",( haha.)product. let's agree on that. Therefore u r wrong."

What is NAFTA again? "Outsourcing appears to threaten the livelihood of domestic workers and, in the United States, the American Dream. This is especially true for high-tech workers who were promised the “jobs of tomorrow”- a phrase Bill Clinton iterated in 1994 to justify his conservative position on NAFTA."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outsourcing

The affects of NAFTA? "Labor unions in Canada and the United States have opposed NAFTA for fear that jobs would move out of the country due to lower labor costs in Mexico."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

So, do you STILL insist that NAFTA 'has nothing to do with 'outsourcing'"???(giggles) Sorry, I had to laugh

ricechex-"China practically owns us, we sell vital ports for security to Dubai, and we're fighting an illegal war based on lies by our federal govt."
Dude, where do I begin with this statement? 1. It's the other way around...we have more power economically than China. Why else would we be 'outsourcing' there? If they owned us(as you say), then they would be 'outsourcing' to us. But, what does the Iraq War have anything to do with 'outsourcing'?

ricechex-"Since the W Bush tenure, we have had large technological companies outsourcing to countries all over the world, namely to India. This involved many different nations that NAFTA had nothing to with. The explosion of outsourcing, world wide, is happening now!"
Are you talking about the first or second Bush? Because if you're talking about the 2nd Bush, well the US had been outsourcing hi-tech companies WAY BEFORE GWB was elected.

ricechex-"By name alone,it should tell u it had do with free trade, and tarrifs,and a trade bloc, with set goals to help trade... not outsource, b/c they hadn't even identified it in the way that we see it today."
So, I guess Mexico wasn't a source for "cheap labor" for America afterall!(hehehe, had to laugh!)

ricechex-"Read my paragraph again. we're outsourcing huge technological companies like IBM and HP,manufacturing to China, and port security nowadays. where ya been"? That would never have been done during Clinton.That's all GW,baby."

"Manufacturing---- In 1994, HP decided to outsource its manufacturing to third-party vendors and oversea countries to lower costs and raise profits. Today, desktop computers are assembled in Guadalaraja, Mexico where HP employs approximately 1,500 workers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard

So I guess that was "all GW baby"(hehehe). Holy shit! Mexico? In 1994, the year NAFTA was passed? WOW! Who would've thought America would be using MEXICAN WORKERS to cut down on lower costs and raise profits???(giggles) Yeah, it would "never have been done during Clinton's administration"(LOL!).

ricechex-"the right has accomplished in just five years the creation of a low-wage economy, a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Bush and his econmic advisors continue to openly support these policies. But you're still talking about NAFTA. That's "old news".haha. Bush sees the results of outsourcing, and is dumb enough to push CAFTA."

That is mostly the result of "outsourcing", which became popular in the 90s. Bush hasn't done anything to help the problem, but by blaming Bush for "outsourcing", you not only look ridiculous, but you look like you're a highschool kid trying to act older than you really are.

And again, there is no way you have ANY kind of degree.

Want some more humiliation? Come on down!!!(giggles)
And you have a DEGREE???(LOL!)

Ricechex, just give it up. You look rather ridiculous.

You can either give up, answer the questions, or continue to be humiliated.