Let the forum know when you actually decide to provide some real hard evidence reinforcing your faulty claims..
Economically, Could Obama Be America's Best President?
Let the forum know when you actually decide to provide some real hard evidence reinforcing your faulty claims..
Let the forum know when you actually decide to provide some real hard evidence reinforcing your faulty claims..
Recession Officially Over, U.S. Incomes Kept Falling
Recession Officially Over, U.S. Incomes Kept Falling
I gotta run and enjoy life.
But you stay here and keep defending your internet honor that you so vehemently argue to the death with the last word..
I gotta run and enjoy life.
But you stay here and keep defending your internet honor that you so vehemently argue to the death with the last word..
More Americans than ever using food stamps
A record 47.8 million people are enrolled in the program despite the recession's end and a stronger economy.
While the unemployment rate actually has come down from the 10 percent readings it showed in 2009, the amount of participants for the SNAP program has soared.
There were fewer than 31 million people on food stamps as recently as November 2008, but an aggressive effort from President Obama's administration has helped build participation, with the total increasing by 44 percent since the president took office in January 2009.
https://www.cnbc.com/id/48898378
![]()
Now if those dummies at CNBC only knew there was no evidence for their claims!
![]()
More Americans than ever using food stamps
A record 47.8 million people are enrolled in the program despite the recession's end and a stronger economy.
While the unemployment rate actually has come down from the 10 percent readings it showed in 2009, the amount of participants for the SNAP program has soared.
There were fewer than 31 million people on food stamps as recently as November 2008, but an aggressive effort from President Obama's administration has helped build participation, with the total increasing by 44 percent since the president took office in January 2009.
https://www.cnbc.com/id/48898378
![]()
Now if those dummies at CNBC only knew there was no evidence for their claims!
![]()
Well since I'm not longer interested in hearing you waste my time with faulty evidence and garbage that is not true,
Well since I'm not longer interested in hearing you waste my time with faulty evidence and garbage that is not true,
You have an attitude problem, don't ever address me the way you did.
I didn't even address you (post #7). I just went right into my point which you conveniently avoided. seems like that's you MO.
-the post regarding o Riley's segment on race, you didn't even address the content of the thread. you argued he has speech writers etc. and didn't argue the content. you avoided the issue
-you tell lords you're not affiliated with either party and that supporting a party is dumb. yet I asked you in another thread (which you also avoided) why every thread you make is anti-republican. If you were truly neutral, we would at least see some threads out of you that are in some kind of disagreement to democratic policies. yet in your 26 thread a day average, we haven't seen any criticizing democrats.
-I simply pointed out you made two threads in complete contradiction to each other on post #7. my reply was to dl36 on post 11.
and then you're going demand I address you in a certain way? ![]()
you got... just problems in general
You have an attitude problem, don't ever address me the way you did.
I didn't even address you (post #7). I just went right into my point which you conveniently avoided. seems like that's you MO.
-the post regarding o Riley's segment on race, you didn't even address the content of the thread. you argued he has speech writers etc. and didn't argue the content. you avoided the issue
-you tell lords you're not affiliated with either party and that supporting a party is dumb. yet I asked you in another thread (which you also avoided) why every thread you make is anti-republican. If you were truly neutral, we would at least see some threads out of you that are in some kind of disagreement to democratic policies. yet in your 26 thread a day average, we haven't seen any criticizing democrats.
-I simply pointed out you made two threads in complete contradiction to each other on post #7. my reply was to dl36 on post 11.
and then you're going demand I address you in a certain way? ![]()
you got... just problems in general
More than 76,000 workers went on the federal government's disability program in July, according to the latest data from the Social Security administration, bringing the total number of new enrollees this year to 534,038.
Although that is down somewhat from the same month last year, enrollment in the Social Security Disability Insurance program remains sharply higher than it has been historically. Since 2009, an average of about 1 million workers have gone on SSDI annually — a 31% increase from the average enrollment over the previous 10 years.
As a result, a record 8.9 million workers are now collecting disability benefits, which is up 15% since the recovery officially started in mid-2009.
More than 76,000 workers went on the federal government's disability program in July, according to the latest data from the Social Security administration, bringing the total number of new enrollees this year to 534,038.
Although that is down somewhat from the same month last year, enrollment in the Social Security Disability Insurance program remains sharply higher than it has been historically. Since 2009, an average of about 1 million workers have gone on SSDI annually — a 31% increase from the average enrollment over the previous 10 years.
As a result, a record 8.9 million workers are now collecting disability benefits, which is up 15% since the recovery officially started in mid-2009.
More than 76,000 workers went on the federal government's disability program in July, according to the latest data from the Social Security administration, bringing the total number of new enrollees this year to 534,038.
Although that is down somewhat from the same month last year, enrollment in the Social Security Disability Insurance program remains sharply higher than it has been historically. Since 2009, an average of about 1 million workers have gone on SSDI annually — a 31% increase from the average enrollment over the previous 10 years.
As a result, a record 8.9 million workers are now collecting disability benefits, which is up 15% since the recovery officially started in mid-2009.
You have issues the way you take to the internet, politics.
Like you think somehow you're accomplishing something here, changing peoples minds, which you're not..
You defending your anonymous internet honor little buddy?
More than 76,000 workers went on the federal government's disability program in July, according to the latest data from the Social Security administration, bringing the total number of new enrollees this year to 534,038.
Although that is down somewhat from the same month last year, enrollment in the Social Security Disability Insurance program remains sharply higher than it has been historically. Since 2009, an average of about 1 million workers have gone on SSDI annually — a 31% increase from the average enrollment over the previous 10 years.
As a result, a record 8.9 million workers are now collecting disability benefits, which is up 15% since the recovery officially started in mid-2009.
You have issues the way you take to the internet, politics.
Like you think somehow you're accomplishing something here, changing peoples minds, which you're not..
You defending your anonymous internet honor little buddy?
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally. then the follow up post by stiln is going to be: 'the little posters coming to your rescue...'. again, completely ignoring the content of the argument and getting personal. stiln- you are fooling no one, and are only exposing yourself as a gigantic tool.
Huh?
You're an alias..... Wanna guess why that is?
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally. then the follow up post by stiln is going to be: 'the little posters coming to your rescue...'. again, completely ignoring the content of the argument and getting personal. stiln- you are fooling no one, and are only exposing yourself as a gigantic tool.
Huh?
You're an alias..... Wanna guess why that is?
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally. then the follow up post by stiln is going to be: 'the little posters coming to your rescue...'. again, completely ignoring the content of the argument and getting personal. stiln- you are fooling no one, and are only exposing yourself as a gigantic tool.
chkn dinner
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally. then the follow up post by stiln is going to be: 'the little posters coming to your rescue...'. again, completely ignoring the content of the argument and getting personal. stiln- you are fooling no one, and are only exposing yourself as a gigantic tool.
chkn dinner
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally.
da road- stiln asks for evidence, completely ignores the content of the argument, and goes on personal attacks. like the links provided by stiln are better evidence than the sources/links you provide? on the post above, you provide statistics and link, and stiln's reply is to demean you personally.
Like you think somehow you're accomplishing something here, changing peoples minds, which you're not..
Like you think somehow you're accomplishing something here, changing peoples minds, which you're not..
Hot Forum Topics
-
🤢🥴💩_ Fubah's risky baseball bets _🥶😲🥵
448,439
-
🏈🏈🏈 “To BEt, or not to BEt, that is the question” ...Fubah2's risky bets
302,119
-
PART DEUX
274
-
🏈🏈🏈 Fubah2's risky CFB bets
257,521
-
I'm embarrassed for Trump supporters
58,272
-
Couple Beers
4,423
-
Thursday 09/17/2026
525
-
Trump lies so much.
20,718
-
Wednesday 09/16/2026
711
-
We have picked a terrible time to have the stupidest president ever
28,958
Warning - External Link
Report User
This post is spam
Delete Post
Remove Thread
Scan Results
Login/Register
Accounts are free and easy to create.
Search
