Re: The Truth about Obama's job creation record

[JohnJohnsn]

On May 23, 4:00 pm, DNC Useful Idiot and Obama Pride Charter Member
Too_Many_Tools_Too_Few_Brains <too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hmm...sure looks like Obama is doing a great job in leading America
> out of the Bush Recession and the Bush Crash of '08
>
> http://www.barackobama.com/jobsrecord
>
Obama/Biden re-election site: now _there's_ an "unbiased" source.
<guffaw>

Meanwhile:

Contrary to Government Claims of 243,000 Jobs Created, Hundreds of
Thousands of Jobs Were Actually LOST In January
Posted on February 3, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog

Government Misrepresents Employment Picture
While everyone is popping the champagne corks over the fact that the
Bureau of Labor Statistics says that 243,000 jobs were created in
January, the facts are slightly different.

Lee Alder notes:

The seasonal adjustment fudge that the Gummit adds to the mix grossly
overstated what the actual survey data showed. Here’s a picture. The
red line is the actual survey numbers. The blue line is the fake
seasonally adjusted number.

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/uploads/graphic1440.png

Remember: Red… actual. Blue… fake.

Just so you know your eyes aren’t playing tricks on you, let’s zoom in
to just the past 13 months.

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/uploads/graphic1441.png

There you have it. The headline, fake, number was up by 243,000,
purportedly the biggest increase since 2006. But what’s this? The
actual survey number showed a decrease of 1.1 million jobs. In the
world of seasonally adjusted government data, down can be up.

Karl Denninger writes:

There are times when one questions a report as possibly being wrong or
in error, and then there are times when one has to raise a flag and
say “This is an intentionally false picture being presented by a
government agency.”

I’m in the latter camp with this one, and it is rare for me to brand
something as not possibly wrong and in error, but intentionally
fraudulent.

***

Remember that last month the alleged 200,000 jobs that were gained
were a phantom; when one looked inside the household data we found
instead deterioration in both the employment participation rate and a
decline in the absolute number of employed persons, while population
rose. That is, the actual counts (as opposed to black-box statements)
said that the labor picture deteriorated in December, contrary to the
reported numbers.

This month it was worse. Far worse.

Let’s start with the “base picture” that is causing the cheering:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallery=2709

That nice red line looks good, right? Well……

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallery=2710

“Not in labor force” numbers leaped upward on an annualized basis
(seasonally adjusted the “right way”) and what’s worse on a raw basis
1.572 million people exited the labor force last month.

This is reflected in the percentage of those not in the labor force as
a percentage of the working-age population, which hit an all-time high
going back to the initiation of the data series I’ve tracked since
1999:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallery=2713

That’s 0.6% of the entire labor force that departed the working
population in one month, three times the alleged drop in the
unemployment rate. This means that internally, the numbers were even
worse than they first appear!

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallery=2711

Indeed, the total number of employed persons fell. A lot. To put a
number on it, the total number of employed persons fell by 737,000 by
actual count.

Now the cheerleaders will state that this is a common thing in
January, and indeed it is. But the correct adjustment is to look at
the population increase and subtract that back off as well. In other
words, we take the loss of employment and add the population growth.
When we do this we get a whopping 2.422 million in the wrong direction
which was bested only by the -2.618 million in January of 2009 through
the process of this downturn!

In fact other than January 2009 there has never been a single month in
my table, which dates back to 1999, that put up a worse combined
number. This “performance” rates a literal “second from utter despair
and disaster”, and the employment rate shows it:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallery=2712

This is not a strong report folks, and in fact documents an actual and
ongoing collapse in the US labor force, despite the crooning on the
mainstream media disinformation channels!

Zero Hedge points out:

It appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an
unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million
people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor
force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non
institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not
in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which
means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of
63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of
the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the
quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can
only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low
paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.

Chart below shows it all – that jump is not a fat finger!

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/People%20Not%20In%20Labor%20Force.jpg

And Labor Force Participation:

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/Participation%20Rate.jpg

This is the largest absolute jump in ‘Persons Not In Labor Force’ on
record…and biggest percentage jump in 30 years.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2012/01/20120202_notinlabor_0.png

Chart: Bloomberg

Mish writes:

■In the last year, the civilian population rose by 3,565,000. Yet the
labor force only rose by 1,145,000. Those not in the labor force rose
by 2,420,000.
■In January, the Civilian Labor Force rose by 508,000.
■In January, those “Not in Labor Force” rose by an amazing 1,177,000.
If you are not in the labor force, you are not counted as unemployed.
■Participation Rate fell .3 to 63.7%, taking out a 1984 low
■Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the
unemployment rate would be well over 11%.
Some of those labor force numbers are due to annual revisions.
However, the point remains: People are dropping out of the labor force
at an astounding, almost unbelievable rate, holding the unemployment
rate artificially low.***

The official unemployment rate is 8.3%. However, if you start counting
all the people that want a job but gave up, all the people with part-
time jobs that want a full-time job, all the people who dropped off
the unemployment rolls because their unemployment benefits ran out,
etc., you get a closer picture of what the unemployment rate is. That
number is in the last row labeled U-6.

U-6 is much higher at 15.1%. Both numbers would be way higher still,
were it not for millions dropping out of the labor force over the past
few years.

Grossly Distorted Statistics

Given the complete distortions of reality with respect to not counting
people who allegedly dropped out of the work force, it is easy to
misrepresent the headline numbers. Digging under the surface, the drop
in the unemployment rate is nothing but a statistical mirage.

In January, those “Not in Labor Force” rose by a staggering 1,177,000.
Things are much worse than the reported numbers indicate.

And TrimTabs says:

Either there is something massively changed in the income tax
collection world, or there is something very, very suspicious about
today’s BLS hugely positive number.

***

Actual jobs, not seasonally adjusted, are down 2.9 million over the
past two months. It is only after seasonal adjustments – made at the
sole discretion of the Bureau of Labor Statistics economists – that
2.9 million fewer jobs gets translated into 446,000 new seasonally
adjusted jobs.

For background on why more jobs haven’t been created, see this this

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/of-course-unemployment-is-rising-government-policy-is-guaranteeing-it.html

and this.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/04/has-the-fed-decided-to-fight-inflation-instead-of-unemployment.html

Zero Hedge also notes that the gap between implied and reported
unemployment is soaring, and that there is a marked shift from high-
paying to low-wage jobs.

-30-

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/contrary-to-government-claims-of-243000-jobs-created-almost-1-million-jobs-were-actually-lost-in-january.html

So, folks; who are we to believe here: The DNC Fool, Obama and Biden;
or Adler, Denninger, Bloomberg, et al.?

Vote here:

The DNC Fool/Obama/Biden: [ ]

Adler/Denninger/Bloomberg: [x]


http://www.barackobama.com/
"Same-sex couples should be able to get married."
--Barack Obama

Obama Pride
https://my.barackobama.com/page/s/join-obama-pride-video?source=ObamaPride-20120523-HP

[JohnJohnsn]

The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House
By Ed Lasky
May 14, 2012

Edward Klein's new book on Barack Obama, `The Amateur: Barack Obama in
the White House', is a withering portrayal of a radical adrift, in
over his head, drowning in his own incompetency -- while being weighed
down by a small circle of "advisers" who are compounding the problem
of the Amateur in the White House.

Klein's book begins with a talisman-like quote uttered by Barack Obama
when his recently appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to
boost Obama's ego by telling him, "Your legacy is going to be
preventing the second Great Depression." To which Barack Obama
responded, "That's not enough for me."

As all of America knows by now, Obama has aggressively sought to
"fundamentally transform" America -- one of the few promises he has
kept from the days of 2008. Five trillion dollars of borrowing,
ObamaCare passed over the objections of the majority of

Americans through legislative legerdemain and special deals made with
resistant politicians, failed stimulus, green programs failing left
and right as taxpayers are left holding the bag, a recovery that is
the most anemic on record, an America that has been sundered by the
man who promises to unite us, America weaker abroad and at home --
yes, America has been fundamentally transformed. Mission
Accomplished.

But how and why did Obama succeed in such a catastrophic way? That is
the question that Klein successfully answers in his extremely readable
and enjoyable book, with enough spicy details to satisfy the craving
of anyone interested in how President Obama and those closest to him
have driven us to the condition we find ourselves in as we approach
November.

One of the motifs that runs throughout the book is Barack Obama's
sheer level of incompetency. He has the fatal conceit of many
politicians: an overweening ego. That may be a prerequisite for
politicians and leaders, but when it is unleavened by a willingness to
consider the views of others, it becomes a fatal conceit. And Obama
has that trait in abundance.

Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but
omniscient -- unwilling to give any credence to the views of others
(especially but not limited to those across the aisle). Experts in
management are interviewed who point out that he lacks essential
qualities of leadership. Indeed, the book gets its title from an
outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to encourage Hillary to
take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012:

`Obama doesn't know how to be president. He doesn't know how the
world works. He's incompetent. He's...he's...Barack Obama's an
amateur.'

But Klein does not rest there. He delves into associates from Obama's
career in Cook County politics, his stint as a state senator, and his
rise to the United States Senate. There is a common pattern: Obama
likes to campaign, but once he is elected and actually starts working,
his interest flags, and he starts looking for the next "big thing" --
electorally speaking. He had few, if any, accomplishments or
professional standing in any of his previous positions. Even when he
served as a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, he
avoided any encounters with other faculty who enjoyed discussing the
law. His reluctance to engage them is revealing in and of itself,
suggesting he had a reason for his lack of confidence.

His disdain toward working with others is manifest. He has gained a
reputation over the last few years as being cold and distant, refusing
to engage, as have other presidents, in the give-and-take of politics,
in the social niceties that help grease the wheels in Washington.
Liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen recently advised him
to read Robert Caro's newest volume on the life of Lyndon Johnson as a
primer on how to be president. Johnson, of course, was a master at
pulling levers of power, but he also knew how to persuade individual
politicians on both sides of the aisle to work with him on
legislation. But, of course, LBJ also had the common touch and,
having risen from humble beginnings, never considered it beneath him
to work with those underneath him. Not so Barack Obama. He
complained to foreign leaders that he had to waste time talking with
"congressmen from Palookaville." At another time, he switched locales
and said he was tired of dealing with people from "Podunk."

His campaign trail comments regarding small-town America as being
populated by "bitter" people who cling to guns and Bibles was not a
one-off. They are reflective of his views.

But the high and the mighty also come in for the Obama treatment.
Klein reveals dismay among former Obama supporters who feel they have
been mistreated, maligned, and thrown under the bus. Obama's most
generous early donors have been all but ignored; early mentors in the
black business community have been sidelined if not completely
ditched; people don't hear from him or his staff unless a fundraiser
is coming up. But there is more: Caroline Kennedy is angry at the way
she and her family were used for campaign purposes in 2008 and then
summarily dismissed and stored away like so many movie props have been
(the latter is my description).

Even Oprah Winfrey has been stiff-armed by the Obamas. According to
the book, Oprah took a big risk in supporting Obama in 2008 and
campaigning for Obama in Iowa, being a big boost in his campaign. The
ratings for her show weakened significantly (and her new network has
been a huge disappointment). But when she has tried to visit the
White House, she has been all but treated as persona non grata.
Apparently, Michelle Obama is a possessive person who fears the
influence Oprah may have over Barack Obama (more on this below).
Oprah blames it on Michelle's anti-obesity campaign. She is quoted as
saying, "Michelle hates fat people and doesn't want me waddling around
the White House." Klein digs up a quotation of Michelle Obama's from
a White House source that seems to confirm Oprah's suspicion:

`Oprah only wants to cash in using the White House as a backdrop for
her show to perk up ratings. Oprah with her yo-yo dieting and huge
girth, is a terrible role model. Kids will look at Oprah, who's rich
and famous and huge, and figure it's okay to be fat.'

Oprah, Caroline Kennedy, Pastor Jeremiah Wright (who merits a
chapter), and Obama's former long-time doctor (who feels Obama is
distant and lacks feeling, passion, and humanity) all join a long list
of people whom the Obamas have used, abused, and then cast aside once
they moved into the White House.

A few have survived the winnowing process, of course. There is
Michelle, who might be described as the living and real-life
descendant of Lady Macbeth. The book provides some history of the
early days between Barack and Michelle: marked by some tempests, yet
also marked by Michelle's overwhelming push for Barack to win power
and wealth. Insiders are reluctant to tangle with the First Lady, and
with good reason. Michelle, like her husband, has a proclivity to
blame others for her husband's failures. Former Press Secretary
Robert Gibbs felt her sting when it was revealed that Michelle had
complained about life in the White House to the then-first lady of
France, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy. Gibbs acted to control the damage by
arranging for the Élysée Palace to issue a denial.

But the response did not come quickly enough for Michelle, and she
arranged for Valerie Jarrett -- close to the Obamas for years, and who
has an omnipresence in the White House that makes the unelected and
unconfirmed czar issue seem trivial -- to deliver a stern rebuke to
Gibbs, who counter-attacked. Anyone heard from Robert Gibbs lately?

The role of Valerie Jarrett has prompted much speculation. As Edward
Klein notes, she has a mouthful of a title -- senior adviser and
assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs and public
engagement -- that "doesn't begin to do justice to her unrivaled
status in the White House." Valerie Jarrett apparently has a role in
most major decisions: she often appears in meetings the president has
with major political leaders from Capitol Hill and with foreign
leaders as well. She often stays behind to have private discussions
with the president. Obama admitted that he ran every decision by her.

That is worrying since, as Klein notes, Jarrett's own career is not
one that would prepare her to assume such a prominent role. Hers is
no rags-to-riches story that would give her the "chops" to have such a
Svengali-like influence over the president of the United States. She
was blessed with a wonderful set of advantages -- descended from a
highly regarded political family in Chicago. Jarrett was a force to
be reckoned with in the Daley administration and then capitalized on
her political connections to land a job heading up a real estate
company in Chicago where she oversaw, among other developments,
properties that under her company's management degenerated into
slums. Business leaders are aghast that she has such a powerful role
in the White House. A donor is quoted as saying that not only is
Valerie Jarrett a liability, but others in the White House concur with
his views. Jarrett has butted heads with Rahm Emanuel, who felt that
it was wrong to focus on passing ObamaCare when the economy and jobs
should have been higher priorities.

Who won that match? Rahm returned to Chicago and became mayor in
2009.

The roles of Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett cannot be overstated.
They are symptomatic of a larger problem in the White House decision-
making process (one that I noted in "How Obama Makes Decisions").

Barack Obama, to a greater extent than any modern president, refuses
to listen to the views of others or consult with experts and advisers
outside his own tight and constricted circle from Cook County. There
are many revelations of his faulty decision making uncovered by
Klein. Indeed, one of Jarrett's roles is to shield Obama from dealing
with people who don't agree with him or who may say something that
deflates his ego.

When Bill Daley (the chief of staff) realized that the contraception
and abortifacient mandates of ObamaCare might offend Catholics, he
arranged a meeting without Jarrett's knowledge between Obama and New
York then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan to deal with an issue that would
offend many as violating the principle of religious freedom (as well
as Catholic beliefs). Jarrett went to the president and vented her
anger.

Anyone seen Bill Daley lately?

On issue after issue, President Obama remains his insular self,
refusing to seek counsel or input from others with more experience.

Critics believe he has made a mess of foreign policy precisely because
not only does he have a dearth of experience in this area, but
because, under our system, foreign policy is one of the few areas
where a president enjoys almost unlimited power. Thus, he is free to
formulate his own agenda regardless of the views of others and the
damage these policies cause.

When pro-Israel Americans met with Obama to discuss his actions toward
Israel (that many, including myself, view as being counterproductive)
he dismissed the ideas of Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation
League, with the statement "you are absolutely wrong." The president,
who has no compunction telling people that they are not only wrong,
but "absolutely wrong" in public, needs to start feeling some of the
empathy he accuses Republicans of lacking. According to veteran
journalist Richard Chesnoff, quoted in the book, "Obama's problem in
dealing with the Arab-Israeli conundrum" comes "from his one-man style
and his inflated view of his own leadership talents[.] ... [P]erhaps,
even more egregiously, he seems to have an exaggerated sense of his
own depth of understanding of the Middle East, which is simply not
borne out by his background or experience." There may be more to it
than that to explain the pressure he has put on our one true ally in
the Middle East, Israel. American Thinker published numerous articles
in 2008 covering not only Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Junior's views of
Israel as an apartheid state, but Obama's associations with anti-
Israel Palestinians in Chicago, his own suspect language regarding
Israel, and his close relationship with Samantha Power (now playing a
key role on his National Security Council), who not only has a long
anti-Israel history but also made an anti-Semitic remark that was
smothered by the media in 2008. There were good reasons for the Los
Angeles Times to run a column during the campaign that "Allies of
Palestinians see a friend in Obama."

Readers will thoroughly enjoy Klein's book on Obama. There are
substantive issues raised about Obama's leadership abilities that are
enhanced with interesting digressions regarding life inside ObamaWorld
and how those dynamics effect decisions made from the Oval Office.

Klein concludes the book with doubt that Obama could ever change his
approach toward governing and suspicion that his agenda is to impose a
vast redistribution scheme upon America that has worked so well in the
decaying and disintegrating European Union. He wonders if Republicans
are up to the task of pointing out to the public the truth about
Obama's agenda, given the overwhelming media bias in favor of Barack
Obama.

Klein's book could serve as a roadmap for Republicans.

-30-

Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/the_amateur_barack_obama_in_the_white_house.html

[MattB]

This part is true.

[Phlip]

> So, there are a lot of Professionals that have occupied the White House?
>
> Care to name one?

Maybe he means the actor. Or the CIA spook. Or the frat brat.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

The professional peanut farmer was a lowly Nuclear engineer wasn't he?


And the biggest dunce we had ever seen until Obama showed up with his
diploma to hang on the was. Obama is a Professional Marxist agitator.


--
*He has the most who is most content with the least* -Diogenes-

-Kum bay ya-

[3006 Dead]

On Mon, 28 May 2012 13:17:50 -0700, JohnJohnsn wrote:

Figures you'd be an acolyte of that lying crackpot.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 5/28/2012 6:24 PM, Phlip wrote:

The professional peanut farmer was a lowly Nuclear engineer wasn't he?

And Carter was the biggest dunce we had ever seen until Obama showed up
with his diploma to hang on the wall. Obama is a Professional Marxist
agitator (community organizer).

[de...@dudu.org]

On Mon, 28 May 2012 22:03:53 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>On 5/28/2012 6:24 PM, Phlip wrote:
>>> So, there are a lot of Professionals that have occupied the White House?
>>>
>>> Care to name one?
>>
>> Maybe he means the actor. Or the CIA spook. Or the frat brat.
>
>
>The professional peanut farmer was a lowly Nuclear engineer wasn't he?
>
>
>And the biggest dunce we had ever seen until Obama showed up with his
>diploma to hang on the was. Obama is a Professional Marxist agitator.

And are you a professional idiot or do you volunteer your services for
the amusement of mankind?

[Phlip]

> >And the biggest dunce we had ever seen until Obama showed up with his
> >diploma to hang on the was.  Obama is a Professional Marxist agitator.
>
> And are you a professional idiot or do you volunteer your services for
> the amusement of mankind?

If any of those GOP puppets had been lecturing-professors of law with
Magna cum Laude degrees, we'd never hear the end of it...

[Eddie Haskell]

"MattB" <trdel...@Nomorespamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:bon7s71881180guf5...@4ax.com...

>>arranging for the �lys�e Palace to issue a denial.

Yeah, but he speaks eloquently while lying and saying stupid things.

-Eddie Haskell

[BeamMeUpScotty]

We still don't know why an Occidental Student that was less than stellar
in academics, was sent to and accepted by Harvard....



Until we see "ALL" information to Obama's college including who paid
for it and the forms he filled out, his education is NOT real is it?
It's just some story. Like Bush and his time in the National Guard
isn't it.

[Eddie Haskell]

<de...@dudu.org> wrote in message
news:lof8s7l3k4orcajsc...@4ax.com...

No retort.

You lose again.

-Eddie Haskell

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Obama doesn't understand the constitution or the average American citizen.

[MattB]

Obama may be a idiot, but he is a flamboyant idiot.

[Eddie Haskell]

"3006 Dead" <de...@gone.com> wrote in message
news:jq1b4k$77s$4...@dont-email.me...

> On Mon, 28 May 2012 13:17:50 -0700, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>
> Figures you'd be an acolyte of that lying crackpot.

You're lying.

-Eddie Haskell

[Eddie Haskell]

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:4FC4FA19...@blackhole.nebulax.com...

>>>> arranging for the Élysée Palace to issue a denial.

Or economics or the way the world works any damn thing else.

-Eddie Haskell

[SaPeIsMa]

"Phlip" <phli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8edfbb1-35c8-4511...@tx6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

And yet his subsequent performance as a jurist makes one wonder about his
actual comprehension of the law.
IT appears that he was just a good regurgitator

[Gray Guest]

Phlip <phli...@gmail.com> wrote in news:d8edfbb1-35c8-4511-8497-
2c77e5...@tx6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com:

1) The "magna-cum-laude" has not been proven.
2) He was not a "lecturing-professors". He taught a class, but he was NOT a
"professor".

Try again.

--
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to
be sure.

What I like about this attitude is it works equally well for Iran and the
Democrat National Covention.

http://nukeitfromorbit.com/

[pyotr filipivich]

Let the Record show that Gray Guest <No_email...@wahoo.com> on or
about Wed, 6 Jun 2012 15:25:01 +0000 (UTC) did write, type or
otherwise cause to appear in talk.politics.guns the following:

>Phlip <phli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >And the biggest dunce we had ever seen until Obama showed up with his
>>> >diploma to hang on the was.  Obama is a Professional Marxist agitator.
>>>
>>> And are you a professional idiot or do you volunteer your services for
>>> the amusement of mankind?
>>
>> If any of those GOP puppets had been lecturing-professors of law with
>> Magna cum Laude degrees, we'd never hear the end of it...
>>
>
>1) The "magna-cum-laude" has not been proven.

That Obama graduated at all has not be proven.

>2) He was not a "lecturing-professors". He taught a class, but he was NOT a
>"professor".
>
>Try again.

It is interesting, is it not, how none of Obama's classmates have
ever been found or interviewed?
I do recall someone who was also on the Harvard law Review when
Obama was the "editor" - their recollections was of an editor who was
"editor" in spirit but not in deed. Much as Obama has been "present"
during his political career.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next Month's Panel: Suicide - getting it right the first time.

[Phlip]

On Jun 6, 6:42 am, "SaPeIsMa" <SaPeI...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Phlip" <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote in message

You _do_ know what a "jurist" is, right?

[SaPeIsMa]

"Phlip" <phli...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:bcd47e9b-ac1f-4c3d...@ra8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

Most likely better than you...

[3026 Dead]

Um, member of the Jurish faith?