Republican Party, Teabag Party and the Libertarian Party absolutely SUCK!

[me]

Since this post has absolutely nothing to do with the link I posted, can we assume that your intent was to provide another illustration of your inability to read at a fifth grade level?

I didn't read the link actually I was being sarcastic. I have now read the article, well glanced at it and this does have everything to do with the link you posted.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/09/175800-obamas-economic-performance-outshining-reagans/

[Exterminator]

Sorry, IJReview is not a credible source and Forbes is already right leaning.  Were you too stoned during the 80's to remember what the economy was like?

[me]

Sorry, IJReview is not a credible source and Forbes is already right leaning.  Were you too stoned during the 80's to remember what the economy was like?

Why is nothing that disputes what you believe a credible source? There are graphs and charts showing what things look like using the things that are left out when figuring Hartung's charts and graphs. You have to look at the whole picture not just part of it which is what Hartung does.

[Palehorse]

Why is nothing that disputes what you believe a credible source? . . .

Because a credible source would draw the correct conclusions.

[Exterminator]

Why don't you look up Independent Journal Review for yourself?  You make yourself look foolish with your willingness to intentionally ignore a site's lack of credibility only because it says what you want to believe.

[me]

Because a credible source would draw the correct conclusions.

So using only part of the information rather than adding all of the information makes it a correct conclusion and a credible source where using all of the information and drawing a conflicting conclusion makes it not a credible source then? Can we say BULL SHIT?

[Exterminator]

Can we say BULL SHIT?

Yes, and what you posted is just that.

[Exterminator]

The funniest part of all of this is that me doesn't even know that the article she linked to is not a response to the article I linked to.   

[me]

The funniest part of all of this is that me doesn't even know that the article she linked to is not a response to the article I linked to.   

Click on my link then click on the blue in the first setence, "Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth and Investing" , and it takes you right to your article.

The Forbes article "Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth and Investing" is roaring through the Internet. Just like another mendacious article published on the website about Obama being the smallest government guy ever (rebuttal), it has caught on for two reasons: It goes against everything we know and it is an oustanding example of "viral" confirmation bias.

The article is causing some debate online, such as with a response piece at Being Classically Liberal called "Forbes is Wrong, Reagan's economy is better than Obama's." The Forbes piece's argument hinges on the following chart, which supposedly shows Obama surpassing Reagan in terms of lowering the unemployment rate:

[Exterminator]

Click on my link then click on the blue in the first setence, "Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth and Investing" , and it takes you right to your article.

No, it doesn't.  It takes me to a Forbes article from 9/5/14.  My link is to an article from 3/10/15.  But hey, keep digging that hole!   

And therein lies the difference between people like you and people like me: I acknowledged the possibility that I could be wrong and actually went back and checked before posting.  You clearly did not because you think you're never wrong.

[Bo D]

No, it doesn't.  It takes me to a Forbes article from 9/5/14.  My link is to an article from 3/10/15. 

I think we pretty well established that she doesn't know how to navigate a simple website over in the Common Core thread.

[me]

Whatever, it will all come out in the wash sooner or later won't it?

[Exterminator]

WTF?

[me]

WTF?

Don't tell me you've never heard that expression.

[Exterminator]

Don't tell me you've never heard that expression.

Of course I have but have no idea what it has to do with the subject at hand.