Sequestration = 54% unemployment....

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Maxine Waters Warns 170 MILLION Jobs Could Be Lost Due to Sequestration Cuts — But There’s a Huge Problem With Her Estimate | Video | TheBlaze.com

Or maybe Ms. Waters misspoke?

No need for replies of anger here, just wanted to bring a little levity to the forum.


Eric_8... I'm surprised you didn't find this, but in less than one minute, I found the statistic that she was flubbing in this article. Here's an excerpt:

The Bakersfield Californian said:
United for Medical Research, a coalition of research institutions, universities and advocates in the health industry that seek funding for the National Institutes of Health, said the state would lose $170 million in awards which could affect more than 3,000 jobs. {emphasis added}

It's a California paper, Rep. Maxine Waters is a Californian. She goofed up. People do that all the time -- especially in highly emotional, fast-paced, high stakes discussions.

I don't find quite as much humor in it because I'm sure this will become the discussion topic on the nightly news shows as opposed to the important point she wanted to make. And, I've done this before too. It happens.
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Eric_8... I'm surprised you didn't find this, but in less than one minute, I found the statistic that she was flubbing in this article. Here's an excerpt:



It's a California paper, Rep. Maxine Waters is a Californian. She goofed up. People do that all the time -- especially in highly emotional, fast-paced, high stakes discussions.

I don't find quite as much humor in it because I'm sure this will become the discussion topic on the nightly news shows as opposed to the important point she wanted to make. And, I've done this before too. It happens.

I think that would be a flub (assuming it is) that speaks to either her complete lack of intelligence or gross negligence on the subject. Either way, it's not something I want her making a bogus speech about.

I'll be honest: I'm not going to fact check it because it's not at all important, and I don't have enough time to check every stupid thing said by every stupid politician, much less the desire to do so.

As I said from the jump, this is meant to be comical, and the fact that her eye shadow seems like she's trying to reprise Whitney Houston circa 1985 only helps in that regard.

If it's a flub, she's stupid and/or negligent in her duties. If it's not a flub, she's a lying sack of excrement.
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I think that would be a flub (assuming it is) that speaks to either her complete lack of intelligence or gross negligence on the subject. Either way, it's not something I want her making a bogus speech about.

Come on... you've never made a mistake before? You've never done anything that confused two similar but obviously different things? Me, I've accidentally called people by the wrong name, forgot a number, transposed a digit when copying things into a spreadsheet, and made quite a few mistakes along the way. But, I'm only human. Perhaps you are a Cyberdyne Systems Model 101 with an artificial neuron network and are therefore superior to humans.

I'll be honest: I'm not going to fact check it because it's not at all important, and I don't have enough time to check every stupid thing said by every stupid politician, much less the desire to do so.

Catch-22: if it's not important... why post about it? I don't have the interest either, but when somebody whiffs a quote like that, I'm wanting to know... what were they thinking? That's the difference between us, I guess: you are too smart to give a shit, and I am too dumb to think she got the number correct.

As I said from the jump, this is meant to be comical, and the fact that her eye shadow seems like she's trying to reprise Whitney Houston circa 1985 only helps in that regard.

Oh... right... it was funny that she made a mistake, but you had no interest in the subject except to point it out and hold her up for ridicule. Hey, different strokes for different folks. [I think I can help you on this one... "jokes" and "funny stories" go in the Et Cetera, Et Cetera forum.] Intentionally posting it in the Politics forum makes me think you weren't just laughing at it, you just wanted to make political statement about it.

Eye shadow: okay, 1 point to Gryffindor. Luckily, Congressional seats aren't doled out on looks.

If it's a flub, she's stupid and/or negligent in her duties. If it's not a flub, she's a lying sack of excrement.

... because only stupid and/or negligent people 'flub' a quote.

You're brutal -- hopefully you don't hold yourself to that same standard because the only way to avoid a similar flub is to become a professional deaf/mute.
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Come on... you've never made a mistake before? You've never done anything that confused two similar but obviously different things? Me, I've accidentally called people by the wrong name, forgot a number, transposed a digit when copying things into a spreadsheet, and made quite a few mistakes along the way. But, I'm only human. Perhaps you are a Cyberdyne Systems Model 101 with an artificial neuron network and are therefore superior to humans.



Catch-22: if it's not important... why post about it? I don't have the interest either, but when somebody whiffs a quote like that, I'm wanting to know... what were they thinking? That's the difference between us, I guess: you are too smart to give a shit, and I am too dumb to think she got the number correct.



Oh... right... it was funny that she made a mistake, but you had no interest in the subject except to point it out and hold her up for ridicule. Hey, different strokes for different folks. [I think I can help you on this one... "jokes" and "funny stories" go in the Et Cetera, Et Cetera forum.] Intentionally posting it in the Politics forum makes me think you weren't just laughing at it, you just wanted to make political statement about it.

Eye shadow: okay, 1 point to Gryffindor. Luckily, Congressional seats aren't doled out on looks.



... because only stupid and/or negligent people 'flub' a quote.

You're brutal -- hopefully you don't hold yourself to that same standard because the only way to avoid a similar flub is to become a professional deaf/mute.

1. Drat! I've been found out.

2. I thought it was comical...and posted it as such.

3. LOL good lord! INTENTIONALLY? C'mon man, check my postings. I think this is just about the only forum I use. That's about as intentional as it gets. She's a politician, talking (woefully fallaciously) about a political topic, so I posted it here. Admittedly, it's not a joke in the "did you hear about that one politician) family, so putting it in a jokes section would be pretty poor form.

Funny that you would consider me a Gryffindor!

4. Guilty as charged, though it's not that she made a mistake, it's the mistake she made that leads me to believe she was either negligent in her prep (possibly spouting talking points), or she's not very intelligent and could not differentiate the two.

Trust me big guy, if I'm going to deride Ms. Waters, I will be far more deliberate. I think she's absolute scum, and have little to no respect for her, little only because she might be a decent person when removed from politics.
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
1. Drat! I've been found out.

2. I thought it was comical...and posted it as such.

3. LOL good lord! INTENTIONALLY? C'mon man, check my postings. I think this is just about the only forum I use. That's about as intentional as it gets. She's a politician, talking (woefully fallaciously) about a political topic, so I posted it here. Admittedly, it's not a joke in the "did you hear about that one politician) family, so putting it in a jokes section would be pretty poor form.

Funny that you would consider me a Gryffindor!

4. Guilty as charged, though it's not that she made a mistake, it's the mistake she made that leads me to believe she was either negligent in her prep (possibly spouting talking points), or she's not very intelligent and could not differentiate the two.

Trust me big guy, if I'm going to deride Ms. Waters, I will be far more deliberate. I think she's absolute scum, and have little to no respect for her, little only because she might be a decent person when removed from politics.

Definitely Gryffindor... you project an image, but I think you're one of the more sane and thoughtful people here. Slytherin would never have you - you're not corrupt enough.

Back to Rep. Waters: I seriously think she got caught up in the moment and flubbed a fact. I hate calling people I don't know 'absolute scum' because I have no way of knowing and that would be a really bad thing to be wrong about.
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Definitely Gryffindor... you project an image, but I think you're one of the more sane and thoughtful people here. Slytherin would never have you - you're not corrupt enough.

Back to Rep. Waters: I seriously think she got caught up in the moment and flubbed a fact. I hate calling people I don't know 'absolute scum' because I have no way of knowing and that would be a really bad thing to be wrong about.

LOL well thank you for having the decency not to assign me to Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff (sp?). I think I'd be walking a fine line between Slytherin and Gryffindor, as some of my views are just a bit extreme.

I did say little to no respect because there is the possibility that she's a decent person with (in my opinion) severely warped views on what our country should be. As it pertains to her policy views, I find her to be quite scummy.
 

Bardox

Loved Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Posts
2,234
Media
38
Likes
551
Points
198
Location
U.S.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I tend to dismiss the sewage that comes from Glenn Beck and his flunkies, but I'm bored so... I saw Bernanke's testimony that Waters is talking about and that 170 million number she just pulled out of her ass. Bernanke said sequestration would slow the recovery by about 0.6% and cost the equivalent 750 thousand jobs. So I call bull shit! If you want to see what Bernanke said...

Bernanke Urges Sequestration Alternative - YouTube
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Eric_8... I'm surprised you didn't find this, but in less than one minute, I found the statistic that she was flubbing in this article. Here's an excerpt:



It's a California paper, Rep. Maxine Waters is a Californian. She goofed up. People do that all the time -- especially in highly emotional, fast-paced, high stakes discussions.

I don't find quite as much humor in it because I'm sure this will become the discussion topic on the nightly news shows as opposed to the important point she wanted to make. And, I've done this before too. It happens.
While interesting that you were able to find another "170 million" number in place of jobs, and it is obvious that she flubbed somewhere... I highly doubt that was the specific thing she was actually planning on saying.

Why would she cite that number instead of any one of these other much bigger numbers also referenced in that article:
"California stands to lose up to $3.2 billion[b/] in federal defense spending, and hundreds of millions more for public health, education and the environment if lawmakers do not come up with an 11th-hour deal to avert the sequester on Friday."

If youre saying that she made the mistake and misread the article entirely (and thought the article actually said 170 million jobs), thats even worse on her end since there shouldve been all kinds of red flags that popped up had she thought before she went to speak.
1) The dollar sign
2) The population of the US.
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
While interesting that you were able to find another "170 million" number in place of jobs, and it is obvious that she flubbed somewhere... I highly doubt that was the specific thing she was actually planning on saying.

Why would she cite that number instead of any one of these other much bigger numbers also referenced in that article:
"California stands to lose up to $3.2 billion[b/] in federal defense spending, and hundreds of millions more for public health, education and the environment if lawmakers do not come up with an 11th-hour deal to avert the sequester on Friday."

If youre saying that she made the mistake and misread the article entirely (and thought the article actually said 170 million jobs), thats even worse on her end since there shouldve been all kinds of red flags that popped up had she thought before she went to speak.
1) The dollar sign
2) The population of the US.


I didn't suggest what you are saying, lovinglife. I do not think she was reading the article to the people at this gathering. I think "170 million" got stuck in her head and she wanted to use that along with another statistic from her reading to talk about job losses. If you've never been the subject of a press conference and you've never had to rely on your memory to outline a set of points, I don't think you can be excruciatingly critical in a Monday-morning quarterback sort of way.

Did she make an incorrect statement? Yes. Did she flub a number? Yes. Is she the Anti-Christ? No. (The Anti-Christ comes from "the East" according to Christian eschatology.)

So, it just makes me wonder why it's so important to vilify her for this comment? Pick apart votes she's made or legislation she has sponsored, pick apart meetings she's attended, pick apart themes she has restated multiple times. Hate her because she's a Democrat if that makes you feel better. But you guys are ridiculous for sitting on this one thing and 'making' it newsworthy.
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I didn't suggest what you are saying, lovinglife. I do not think she was reading the article to the people at this gathering. I think "170 million" got stuck in her head and she wanted to use that along with another statistic from her reading to talk about job losses. If you've never been the subject of a press conference and you've never had to rely on your memory to outline a set of points, I don't think you can be excruciatingly critical in a Monday-morning quarterback sort of way.

Did she make an incorrect statement? Yes. Did she flub a number? Yes. Is she the Anti-Christ? No. (The Anti-Christ comes from "the East" according to Christian eschatology.)

So, it just makes me wonder why it's so important to vilify her for this comment? Pick apart votes she's made or legislation she has sponsored, pick apart meetings she's attended, pick apart themes she has restated multiple times. Hate her because she's a Democrat if that makes you feel better. But you guys are ridiculous for sitting on this one thing and 'making' it newsworthy.
I am not vilifying her, but I also dont think she needs protection. While I havent had to do a press conference, I have had to do several 15-30 minute speeches based on memory.

Like I said, it is obvious she flubbed somewhere but what you are claiming is not necessarily true. She doesnt need protection from a mistake (though she would do well to let people know what she meant).
 

Redwyvre

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Posts
608
Media
0
Likes
320
Points
128
Location
Minneapolis (Minnesota, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Interesting thread!!! Lord have mercy!! What a mistake! It made me wonder what was she thinking. Population of the US 311.5 million. Population of the US that is working age 239,618,000.
Taking 85 billion out of the economy will be remarkable. This crop of Republicans are bound and determined to shrink the government so here we go. What is odd is generally speaking there is usually no incentive to shrink the government.
 

ColoradoGuy

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Posts
1,170
Media
35
Likes
1,467
Points
308
Location
Denver (Colorado, United States)
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I am not vilifying her, but I also dont think she needs protection. While I havent had to do a press conference, I have had to do several 15-30 minute speeches based on memory.

Like I said, it is obvious she flubbed somewhere but what you are claiming is not necessarily true. She doesnt need protection from a mistake (though she would do well to let people know what she meant).

What I am "claiming is not necessarily true"? Hey... news flash... neither of us know exactly what happened because neither of us were there. What I was suggesting was that people make mistakes innocently sometimes... and the thread was hardly worthy of this forum if all the OP wanted to point out was the humor in the situation, as he claimed.

I wasn't 'protecting her'... in fact, you can search the Forum. I've never 'protected' any politician. How well would that work anyway?

What I do, from time to time, is disrupt the presentation of overtly bigoted, racist, partisan, or ill-reasoned bullshit that crops up in this Forum by challenging posts, interjecting fact and posing logical questions. That's all.