SR
"You called my claim 'not even close' but we are now debating the minutia. Rather telling."

I said they weren't close when I thought you were talking about increases in debt. I admit that it didn't occur to me that someone would be so clueless as to compare beginning and ending deficit numbers as though they had any real meaning. I forgot who I was dealing with.

I'm not debating the minutia of your inane claims just pointing out that even in their inanity they were wrong. The notion that the before and after deficits have meaning is just bonkers but does indicate that the Trump economy is going so well that you're forced to resort to this inanity in an attempt to find anything wrong.

What's next? Compare Obama's greying hair to show that he worked harder than Trump? Equally valid as this load of baloney.

_________________________________________________________________

Belly,

1. Menzies didn't sell the pig iron. As AG he merely enforced the law to allow the stuff to be loaded onto ships.

2. The iron wasn't suitable for munitions. It was used in construction.

3. The event took place fully 3 years before the start of the war. Many historians argue that one proximate cause of the war was the trade embargoes against Japan. Trying to stop the sales to Japan made war more likely. But the Waterside workers at the time were taking their orders from Moscow who actually wanted to precipitate a war.

Its marvellous how these left-wing myths become fact in the mind of the historically clueless partisans. Facts? We don't need no stinking facts.

Dear mhaze,

Wow, that's impressive even from you. From the petulant to the pathetic in a single post.

You write; “I admit that it didn't occur to me that someone would be so clueless as to compare beginning and ending deficit numbers as though they had any real meaning.”

What rot. Not once through this whole conversation have you raised that point. To do so now smacks of you being desperate to weasel out of this just like your president's non-existant million dollars.

My initial post to you was as a result of you claiming of Sachs; “His complaints about the deficit would carry a modicum more credence if he'd been making the same arguments about the Obamessiah's doubling of the debt.”

I said of Trump; “In two years he has added more to the deficit, through upping military spending and forcing through self profiting tax cuts, than Obama did in his eight years in office fighting the GFC crisis.”

You called this “Utter rubbish. We've seen previously that you struggle with numbers. But the claim isn't even close.”

I even checked to make sure you understood what we were talking about; “I'm assuming you know that deficit figures are not debt and that each year either adds to the previous year's deficit figure or subtracts from it.”

You now all of a sudden decide that the numbers have no meaning.

Really childish response from you. Grow up mate.

SR,

As soon as I realised you were making this entirely inane claim that the being/end deficit numbers have any real meaning I started calling the analysis bogus ("bogus 'analysis' of bogus numbers").

I agree I misunderstood your original claim because I vastly over-estimated your understanding of these matters, but once I was set straight on your wrong-headed thinking, I called it out both generally and specifically.

But nice attempt at changing the subject. Does that often work for you? Usually you just drop the subject once you realise you've gone down the garden path eg "So Warren has always said it was her great, great, great, grandmother who family lore had said was partially native american." But changing the subject might work

Dear mhaze,

Oh bulldust. What a self-serving insipid response.

You tried saying the numbers were bogus because they needed to be adjusted for inflation. When I did that, and it showed little difference, you picked up your bat and ball and left the sandpit in a huff.

You are like a child. You got shown up now you are mightily sulking.

Not a good look mate.

Our fathers shook their heads and asked how could Germany do such things
How could Germany believe in such a man
What was wrong with them
If still alive many would see just such a man built his fame on hate and lies, even refuses to show he has paid his tax.
Rules America today and every question above must be asked again today

SR,

If the point that you are repeating is that mt-DNA is useless in determining heredity, then yes I am repeating you.
For example a person who had one relative that was Ashkinazi 50 generations (1000yrs) ago and none others (i.e 0.000 000 000 000 01% Ashkinazi) could have 100% the same mt-DNA as one of the 40% who are pure Ashkinazi.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Two-Native-American-geneticists-interpret-13326253.php

"Because Bustamante used Indigenous individuals from Central and South America as a reference group to compare Warren’s DNA, we believe he should have stated only that Warren potentially had an “Indigenous” ancestor 6-10 generations ago, not conclusively a “Native American” one. The distinction might seem hypercritical to most, but to the sovereign tribal nations of the United States it’s an important one."

So perhaps EW is 1/1000th Peruvian? So her claim to have recent Cherokee heritage is blown out of the water.

What % Chimpanzee heritage does she have?