"It's taking some time, considering that you don't think it qualifies as a problem when someone goes from upper-middle-class to lower-middle-class."
Why are you making this debate so easy for me?! You know that you can't substantiate your claim above about me anymore than you can find existing demographic data to support your earlier wild-eyed claim about the American middle-class actually shrinking in physical size.
Likewise, your "spin", along with this entire thread, about Bush's rephrasing of a reporter's question (e.g. "In other words"), borders upon hysterical.
You people are far too eager, yes, EAGER to bash Bush for any percieved ill. Your objectivity is shot.
Why are you making this debate so easy for me?! You know that you can't substantiate your claim above about me anymore than you can find existing demographic data to support your earlier wild-eyed claim about the American middle-class actually shrinking in physical size.Fine, Southack, you win. You can celebrate the fact that entire nature of the middle class is changing, that folks who used to make decent incomes over $60K a year now face jobs earning half that, but, hey, they're still middle class. By their fingernails.
Enjoy your victory lap. And when the data comes out next year showing what's happened over the last two years to middle-class earners, I'm sure you'll be here, telling us how it's all a good thing.
And tell us all how we just want to bash Bush with our criticisms - but I'm sure if Bush loses next year because he didn't listen to his base, you'll be back to blame his defeat on us.
You're reprehensible.