PDA

View Full Version : Elections Did anyone see Obama on "Meet the Press" this morning? Obama is too stubborn....


chris
07-27-2008, 12:38 PM
Obama is too stubborn to admit when he is wrong.

As a CEO, I admit frequently that I've made a mistake...and then quickly move to fix it.

Brokhaw replayed numerous quotes showing that the SURGE had a major impact on the IRAQ war. Obama wouldn't admit that....he instead spinned and spinned about how the Sunnis would have become allies even without the SURGE....and how the whole war was a stragetic mistake...rather than "cowboy up" and admit that McCain was right.

This guy may be a great Senator, but he is not ready to be President.

I've decided on whom I will support with my time and money.....McCain.

Deberg_1990
07-27-2008, 12:40 PM
Sine when does any politician admit they made a mistake??

They all know the game. They are all the same.

DeezNutz
07-27-2008, 12:44 PM
Isn't the whole unwillingness to admit when wrong thing one of the biggest complaints dems. had about W? Now those same voices will be defending their man. Quite the vicious cycle.

alanm
07-27-2008, 12:44 PM
Barry hasn't even been in office long enough to be called a great senator. That's like calling Croyle a great QB. :shake:
And while we're on the subject what ever happened to guys stepping down from office to run for President.
It used to be the norm until about 15 yrs ago.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 12:47 PM
Has John McCain ever admitted that the entire War in Iraq and its Occupation was one of the worst mistakes in United States history and he made a grievous error when he supported the war and continued to argue for it from its inception to today?

DaKCMan AP
07-27-2008, 12:49 PM
Sounds like you already had your mind made up.

Skip Towne
07-27-2008, 12:53 PM
Sine when does any politician admit they made a mistake??

They all know the game. They are all the same.

They are all the same. It pisses me off to see thousands of people at a convention cheering for a ****ing politician.

Adept Havelock
07-27-2008, 12:53 PM
Sounds like you already had your mind made up.

I'm quite sure that this thread is in no way reflective of a man who already had decided not to vote for the Democratic candidate:

http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=184557

;)

They are all the same. It pisses me off to see thousands of people at a convention cheering for a ****ing politician.

Isn't that the sad and sorry truth.

Boon
07-27-2008, 12:55 PM
They are all the same. It pisses me off to see thousands of people at a convention cheering for a ****ing politician.

Well said. To expect anything from a politician is pissing in the wind!!

Deberg_1990
07-27-2008, 01:02 PM
They are all the same. It pisses me off to see thousands of people at a convention cheering for a ****ing politician.

I get a laugh out of people that think whatever random politician gets in office will somehow have some huge effect on their life.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:05 PM
I get a laugh out of people that think whatever random politician gets in office will somehow have some huge effect on their life.

If Kerry had won in 2004, today, your right to once own a firearm could very well have been taken away from you by the Supreme court.

Some food for thought.

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 01:05 PM
I get a laugh out of people that think whatever random politician gets in office will somehow have some huge effect on their life.

I think it's funny that there are people who believe it won't affect their life.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:08 PM
The year 2000: Bush and Gore are exactly the same. It doesn't matter which one gets elected!

Messier
07-27-2008, 01:11 PM
If Kerry had won in 2004, today, your right to once own a firearm could very well have been taken away from you by the Supreme court.

Some food for thought.

That would never happen under any president. The NRA lobby is way too strong.

Deberg_1990
07-27-2008, 01:14 PM
I think it's funny that there are people who believe it won't affect their life.


Look, i swing conservative by nature, so naturally i tend to vote that way. But politicians dont control, where i live, where i work, what i eat, how many kids i have etc...

Life is what YOU YOURSELF make of it, not anyone in Washington DC.

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 01:16 PM
If Kerry had won in 2004, today, your right to once own a firearm could very well have been taken away from you by the Supreme court.

Some food for thought.

How could Kerry (or any president, for that matter) make the Supreme Court take away firearms?

Methinks someone isn't familiar with the three branches of government.

Or is a paranoid, delusional individual who lives in fear.

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 01:25 PM
How could Kerry (or any president, for that matter) make the Supreme Court take away firearms?

Methinks someone isn't familiar with the three branches of government.

Or is a paranoid, delusional individual who lives in fear.

I guess you missed the 5-4 decision on the unconstitutionality of the DC gun ban.

chris
07-27-2008, 01:51 PM
Sounds like you already had your mind made up.

Amazing how you can read my mind.

No, actually I hadn't.

Both candidates leave much to be desireed. McCain has less negatives.

beer bacon
07-27-2008, 01:52 PM
Amazing how you can read my mind.

No, actually I hadn't.

Both candidates leave much to be desireed. McCain has less negatives.

McCain on abortion

In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.” He explained that overturning Roe would force “women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.” Yesterday, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a conservative, McCain said the opposite.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You’re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.

MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn’t advanced in the six years he’s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn’t done?

MCCAIN: I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support…. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.

The old McCain didn’t want an amendment and didn’t want Roe overturned. The new McCain completely disagrees with the old McCain.

BEFORE

McCain 8/24/99: "But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."

AFTER

McCain 2/18/07: "I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned"

McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell’s debate coach.

McCain on Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy

McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he is now in favor of them.

BEFORE

McCain 5/26/01: "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle class Americans who most need tax relief."

AFTER

In 2006 McCain votes to extend Bush tax cuts

McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.

McCain and torture

McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.

McCain 11/16/07: "One of the things that kept us going when I was in prison in North Vietnam was that we knew that if the situation were reversed, that we would not be doing to our captors what they were doing to us"

"I want to tell you. Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney all think it is O.K. They have one thing in common. They don’t understand the military and the culture of this nation. If they did, they could never condone such behavior."

McCain voted against a ban on CIA torture.

McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won’t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.

McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

McCain on campaign finance reform

BEFORE

McCain: "I'm the only one special interests don't give any money to."

AFTER

McCain's campaign manager and many key campaign officials are telecom lobbyists, who have given at least $765,000 to his campaign (and that's just one special interest)

BEFORE

McCain author of McCain Feingold amendment, limiting use of soft money in campaigns.

AFTER

McCain likely in violation of campaign finance laws after accepting primary public funds. He then got on multiple state primary ballots for free under the condition that he had accepted said public fundraising, and he also used public funding as collateral for a bank loan for his campaign. McCain was not punished for any of this since Bush would not appoint enough members to the FEC Commission so that they could investigate and pass judgment on any campaign violations.

McCain on Iraq

Iraq

BEFORE

McCain 9/29/02: “We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.”

McCain 1/22/03: “But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” [ThinkProgress]

AFTER

McCain: 1/4/07: "When I voted to support this war, I knew it was probably going to be long and hard and tough, and those that voted for it and thought that somehow it was going to be some kind of an easy task, then I’m sorry they were mistaken. Maybe they didn’t know what they were voting for."

The Estate Tax

BEFORE

"I am concerned that repeal of the estate tax would provide massive benefits solely to the wealthiest and highest-income taxpayers in the country. A Treasury Department study found that almost no estate tax has been paid by lower- and middle-income taxpayers. But taxes have been paid on the estates of people who were in the highest 20% of the income distribution at the time of their death. It found that 91% of all estate taxes are paid by the estates of people whose annual income exceeded $190,000 around the time of their death."

AFTER

"Another of my disagreements with Senator Obama concerns the estate tax, which he proposes to increase to a top rate of 55 percent. The estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books, and the first step to reform is to keep it predictable and keep it low."

Wiretaps

BEFORE

"There are some areas where the statutes don’t apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is."

AFTER

McCain spokesman: "Neither the administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the A.C.L.U. and trial lawyers, understand were constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001,”

Immigration Reform

#1

BEFORE

McCain introduces bill on immigration reform.

AFTER

January 30, 2008, when asked if he would vote for his own bill: ""No, I would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the borders secured first.""

BEFORE

May 22, 2008: "[We must enact comprehensive immigration reform. We must make it a top agenda item if we don’t do it before, and we probably won’t, a little straight talk, as of January 2009."

AFTER

National Review: "Team McCain tells me the senator’s comments were poorly worded. There’s been no discussion within the campaign of altering their stance on illegal immigration, and as far as everyone on the campaign is concerned, the policy is still, ’secure the border first.’"


Offshore drilling

BEFORE

1999 campaign: McCain opposes offshore drilling

AFTER

McCain 6/15/08: ""There are areas off our coasts that should be open to exploration and exploitation, and I hope we can take the first step by lifting the moratoria."

HonestChieffan
07-27-2008, 02:04 PM
Obama will suffer from over exposure. Its happening and can only get worse.

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 02:39 PM
I guess you missed the 5-4 decision on the unconstitutionality of the DC gun ban.

So?

Are you telling me that if John Kerry had been elected, that he personally would have persuaded the Supreme Court to re-open the case and vote differently?

WTF?

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 02:45 PM
Look, i swing conservative by nature, so naturally i tend to vote that way. But politicians dont control, where i live, where i work, what i eat, how many kids i have etc...

Life is what YOU YOURSELF make of it, not anyone in Washington DC.

Well, I can certainly tell you that if B.O. wins the presidency, it will affect my life in numerous ways, mostly financial.

Between state and federal taxes, my wife and I are paying 46% before deductions. B.O. has stated that he'll further tax Americans making more than $250k per year.

Additionally, the Capital Gains tax has been at an historic low. B.O. has stated that he'll raise Capital Gains to 25% and quite possibly, 30%.

While that might not mean much to you, it affects me drastically. I purchased my home (which was in poor shape) for $779k. It's currently worth more than $1.9 million, even in this depressed economy. If I were to sell it right now, I'd owe more than $160k in state and federal Capital Gains. If B.O. wins (and there's talk of raising CA C.G. up a couple of points), my house is essentially unsellable. I'm stuck.

So yes, there are many ways in which a President can personally affect lives of Americans.

jAZ
07-27-2008, 02:45 PM
Obama is too stubborn to admit when he is wrong.

As a CEO, I admit frequently that I've made a mistake...and then quickly move to fix it.

Brokhaw replayed numerous quotes showing that the SURGE had a major impact on the IRAQ war. Obama wouldn't admit that....he instead spinned and spinned about how the Sunnis would have become allies even without the SURGE....and how the whole war was a stragetic mistake...rather than "cowboy up" and admit that McCain was right.

This guy may be a great Senator, but he is not ready to be President.

I've decided on whom I will support with my time and money.....McCain.

He's not wrong. I posted what he's saying 7 months ago.

And beyond what you are saying here, there has been ZERO movement on the only essential issue of political reconciliation (how to divide oil revenues) which makes or breaks peace.

And that was the gamble Bush and McCain took that no one is talking about.

They gambled that getting another 500 or so of our soldiers be killed would create enough security to allow the Iraqis to come to terms politically and lead to a relatively peaceful, stable Iraq (and thus allowing us to keep our troops there for 100 years according to McCain's plan, but I digress).

The only measure of success is real political reconciliation and that's ultimately measured by an oil deal.

The surge is over, and while we paid dearly for increased security (something no one doubted would happen to some degree), the very thing we disputed would fail has failed.

Security doesn't = political sacrifice.

In fact, pain = political sacrifice.

As a CEO you should know that you don't give in negotiations unless you think holding out will hurt you more than what you give up in negotiations.

When the pain of fighting is greater than the losses of negotiation, negotiations will win. I said that day 1, and that remains true today.

The surge remains a bad idea in spite of improved security because of the flawed nature the surge was based on.

Boon
07-27-2008, 02:48 PM
Well, I can certainly tell you that if B.O. wins the presidency, it will affect my life in numerous ways, mostly financial.

Between state and federal taxes, my wife and I are paying 46% before deductions. B.O. has stated that he'll further tax Americans making more than $250k per year.

Additionally, the Capital Gains tax has been at an historic low. B.O. has stated that he'll raise Capital Gains to 25% and quite possibly, 30%.

While that might not mean much to you, it affects me drastically. I purchased my home (which was in poor shape) for $779k. It's currently worth more than $1.9 million, even in this depressed economy. If I were to sell it right now, I'd owe more than $160k in state and federal Capital Gains. If B.O. wins (and there's talk of raising CA C.G. up a couple of points), my house is essentially unsellable. I'm stuck.

So yes, there are many ways in which a President can personally affect lives of Americans.

Sell now! Before the doom and gloom hits.

Taco John
07-27-2008, 02:51 PM
Obama will suffer from over exposure. Its happening and can only get worse.


We're not talking about a Hollywood film career here. There's no such thing as overexposure in a presidential election.

DaKCMan AP
07-27-2008, 02:57 PM
We're not talking about a Hollywood film career here. There's no such thing as overexposure in a presidential election.

You just don't get it.

If Obama continues to get tons of exposure he will suffer from over-exposure.

If Obama doesn't get as much coverage going forwared he will suffer from under-exposure.

If Obama gets just the right amount of coverage he will suffer from just-right-exposure.

OBAMA WILL SUFFER!!!!!!!!!!!

Nightfyre
07-27-2008, 03:17 PM
Well, I can certainly tell you that if B.O. wins the presidency, it will affect my life in numerous ways, mostly financial.

Between state and federal taxes, my wife and I are paying 46% before deductions. B.O. has stated that he'll further tax Americans making more than $250k per year.

Additionally, the Capital Gains tax has been at an historic low. B.O. has stated that he'll raise Capital Gains to 25% and quite possibly, 30%.

While that might not mean much to you, it affects me drastically. I purchased my home (which was in poor shape) for $779k. It's currently worth more than $1.9 million, even in this depressed economy. If I were to sell it right now, I'd owe more than $160k in state and federal Capital Gains. If B.O. wins (and there's talk of raising CA C.G. up a couple of points), my house is essentially unsellable. I'm stuck.

So yes, there are many ways in which a President can personally affect lives of Americans.

Actually, you get a $250,000 deduction from gains on sale of principal residence. If you file a joint return with a spouse, it is $500,000. Plus, if you had any home improvements, they could be capitalized. In terms of the average affect on home sales, it will have very little.

***Disclaimer*** This is hypothetical tax advice. I am not liable for any consequences of employment of this advice.

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 03:24 PM
Actually, you get a $250,000 deduction from gains on sale of principal residence. If you file a joint return with a spouse, it is $500,000. Plus, if you had any home improvements, they could be capitalized. In terms of the average affect on home sales, it will have very little.

***Disclaimer*** This is hypothetical tax advice. I am not liable for any consequences of employment of this advice.

Dude, I appreciate it but that's already factored in.

1,900,000.00 - 779,000.00 - 500,000k = $621k taxable Capital Gains.

12% to the Feds and 12% to the state of CA and I'm looking at around $150k if I sold today.

Under B.O., I'd owe a ton more. And this is a down market (My home was around $2.2 before the "crash". Right now, it's between $1.9 - 2.0).

Again, if B.O. wins, my home is essentially unsellable. Not that I'm ever planning on selling because if I decided to rent, I could rent my home for 10k a month, yesterday.

But the point for bringing this up was to illustrate that the choice of President can have a major impact on an individual or family.

Nightfyre
07-27-2008, 03:36 PM
Dude, I appreciate it but that's already factored in.

1,900,000.00 - 779,000.00 - 500,000k = $621k taxable Capital Gains.

12% to the Feds and 12% to the state of CA and I'm looking at around $150k if I sold today.

Under B.O., I'd owe a ton more. And this is a down market (My home was around $2.2 before the "crash". Right now, it's between $1.9 - 2.0).

Again, if B.O. wins, my home is essentially unsellable. Not that I'm ever planning on selling because if I decided to rent, I could rent my home for 10k a month, yesterday.

But the point for bringing this up was to illustrate that the choice of President can have a major impact on an individual or family.

My point is that your house is an exception to the rule. Typically, 250k/500k with capitalized improvements is more than enough to cover the home. Just saying, the average american household would not be in your position.

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 03:49 PM
My point is that your house is an exception to the rule. Typically, 250k/500k with capitalized improvements is more than enough to cover the home. Just saying, the average american household would not be in your position.

While that *may* be true, there are millions of Americans just like me who would be affected by a Presidential change.

Which is contrary to Deberg's post.

Same goes for the taxable income rates.

ILChief
07-27-2008, 03:50 PM
If Kerry had won in 2004, today, your right to once own a firearm could very well have been taken away from you by the Supreme court.

Some food for thought.


just like Bill Clinton took all the guns away, right?

***SPRAYER
07-27-2008, 03:54 PM
just like Bill Clinton took all the guns away, right?


http://www.twilightzone.org/images/tzguide/tz_98.jpg

DaneMcCloud
07-27-2008, 05:19 PM
I guess you missed the 5-4 decision on the unconstitutionality of the DC gun ban.

So?

Are you telling me that if John Kerry had been elected, that he personally would have persuaded the Supreme Court to re-open the case and vote differently?

WTF?

I'm still waiting for your answer

Cave Johnson
07-27-2008, 05:48 PM
1) There's very little to be gained by either Barry or McCain in admitting they've been wrong on a policy or issue.

2) A CEO is voting for McCain? What's next, you'll tell me that the "God Hates Fags" crowd is voting for him too?

Ultra Peanut
07-27-2008, 06:05 PM
It's like he's not willing to own up to the past!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ieHwOm4ljA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ieHwOm4ljA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

If Kerry had won in 2004, today, your right to once own a firearm could very well have been taken away from you by the Supreme court.Hahahahahahahahahaha. You've got to be taking the piss.

Nightfyre
07-27-2008, 08:28 PM
While that *may* be true, there are millions of Americans just like me who would be affected by a Presidential change.

Which is contrary to Deberg's post.

Same goes for the taxable income rates.

I agree with you on the issue of taxation. I was mostly being a smartass (and it's not anything personal.) Forgive me :)

chris
07-27-2008, 09:09 PM
1) There's very little to be gained by either Barry or McCain in admitting they've been wrong on a policy or issue.

2) A CEO is voting for McCain? What's next, you'll tell me that the "God Hates Rump Rangers" crowd is voting for him too?

Voted for Carter and Clinton the 1st time, idiot. Think the next time before you post.

jAZ
07-27-2008, 11:34 PM
Voted for Carter and Clinton the 1st time, idiot. Think the next time before you post.
Wow, that seems uncalled for given the limited sarcasm and reasonably substanative content of his post. And I thought I posted some reasonable comments in reply.

I'm disappointed in your interest in name calling and avoiding comments on substance.

I know, I'm an idiot.

jAZ
07-27-2008, 11:37 PM
Dude, I appreciate it but that's already factored in.

1,900,000.00 - 779,000.00 - 500,000k = $621k taxable Capital Gains.

12% to the Feds and 12% to the state of CA and I'm looking at around $150k if I sold today.

Under B.O., I'd owe a ton more. And this is a down market (My home was around $2.2 before the "crash". Right now, it's between $1.9 - 2.0).

Again, if B.O. wins, my home is essentially unsellable. Not that I'm ever planning on selling because if I decided to rent, I could rent my home for 10k a month, yesterday.

But the point for bringing this up was to illustrate that the choice of President can have a major impact on an individual or family.

You are right, the stark difference between McCain and Obama is greatest for the $2M house voters. I don't mean that as any sort of criticism at all. Just acknowledging the point you are touching on.

DaneMcCloud
07-28-2008, 12:54 AM
You are right, the stark difference between McCain and Obama is greatest for the $2M house voters. I don't mean that as any sort of criticism at all. Just acknowledging the point you are touching on.

Thank you for clarifying.

Even with that info, we still may vote for him (actually, more than likely).

Again, I'm just pointing out how a President can directly affect an individual.

chris
07-28-2008, 07:31 AM
Wow, that seems uncalled for given the limited sarcasm and reasonably substanative content of his post. And I thought I posted some reasonable comments in reply.

I'm disappointed in your interest in name calling and avoiding comments on substance.

I know, I'm an idiot.

You are right; I apologize.

No, you're not an idiot. We are way apart on many issues; but your posts show that you put thought behind them.....at least most of the time. :)

chris
07-28-2008, 07:35 AM
1) There's very little to be gained by either Barry or McCain in admitting they've been wrong on a policy or issue.

2) A CEO is voting for McCain? What's next, you'll tell me that the "God Hates Rump Rangers" crowd is voting for him too?

My apology for snapping at your post.

I missed the sarcasm.

I'm tired of people assuming that all business executives, white, 50 years, vote straight Republican. (As you can tell, you sorta hit a sore spot.)

(I'm embarassed to admit that I voted for Carter. Now, that was a guy not qualified to be President. With the Gerry Ford pardoning Nixon issue hurting the Reps chance for victory, would Carter have won any other "normal election"?? Hummm, good discussion idea...)

Again, sorry.

memyselfI
07-28-2008, 07:41 AM
He is a pompous windbag. He will be HIS own undoing.

VAChief
07-28-2008, 07:52 AM
He is a pompous windbag. He will be HIS own undoing.

"Blue light special on irony...aisle three."

Amnorix
07-28-2008, 08:13 AM
Obama is too stubborn to admit when he is wrong.



Did you vote for Bush2? Have we ever had a more stubborn President than him? Or do you call it "steel willed resolve" or "granite composure in the face of adversity" or somesuch?

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 08:52 AM
They vote in McCain and it will be more of the same-I hope all of those McCain supporters are actually happy with the America of today, because they are endorsing our shit economy, never-ending war, and corporate take-over. Hope you idiots are happy, with your first eight years, get ready for four more of more of the same. It's disappointing how many people actually don't know **** all about endorsing McCain.

chris
07-28-2008, 08:54 AM
They vote in McCain and it will be more of the same-I hope all of those McCain supporters are actually happy with the America of today, because they are endorsing our shit economy, never-ending war, and corporate take-over. Hope you idiots are happy, with your first eight years, get ready for four more of more of the same. It's disappointing how many people actually don't know **** all about endorsing McCain.

"corporate take-over"??


Please educate me in details terms what this means...beside typical babble about evil corporations.

thanks

HonestChieffan
07-28-2008, 08:59 AM
They vote in McCain and it will be more of the same-I hope all of those McCain supporters are actually happy with the America of today, because they are endorsing our shit economy, never-ending war, and corporate take-over. Hope you idiots are happy, with your first eight years, get ready for four more of more of the same. It's disappointing how many people actually don't know **** all about endorsing McCain.

That "never ending war" seems to be quite well in hand on a path to a successful conclusion. I know that has to just irk a lot of people.

"Our Shit Economy" is still at levels of employment that economists would catagorize as full employment. Oil has skyrocketed...and the answer from congress is to do nothing, zero, nada...but that is not relevant cause it wouldnt be Bush's fault would it.

"Corporate take over"...WTF is that

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 09:31 AM
If you guys don't understand how special interest groups and lobbyist groups have gotten the eyes and ears of politics, than you really should do some reasearch before getting into the discussion. You also might might be too blind to actually notice all of the FOREIGN companies taking over AMERICAN corporations, than I really don't need to give you a free lesson on corporate takeover.

Enron, ring any ****ing bells, with all of the hijacking of the energy sector based on greed?

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 09:34 AM
That "never ending war" seems to be quite well in hand on a path to a successful conclusion. I know that has to just irk a lot of people.

"Our Shit Economy" is still at levels of employment that economists would catagorize as full employment. Oil has skyrocketed...and the answer from congress is to do nothing, zero, nada...but that is not relevant cause it wouldnt be Bush's fault would it.

"Corporate take over"...WTF is that
Never ending war, where McCain will be in Iraq for the next 100 years, right? His words, not mine. Sure, the end is near, that is, if you live under a rock and or choose to bury your head in the sand. Or how about going to that war based on WMDs, that don't even exist-yea, they must know the plan was a surge all along, right. Give me a break.

HonestChieffan
07-28-2008, 09:43 AM
well no that is not quite what he said but the left obamamaniacs do paraphrase it and repeat it over and over.

markk
07-28-2008, 09:44 AM
Never ending war, where McCain will be in Iraq for the next 100 years, right? His words, not mine. Sure, the end is near, that is, if you live under a rock and or choose to bury your head in the sand. Or how about going to that war based on WMDs, that don't even exist-yea, they must know the plan was a surge all along, right. Give me a break.

I'll have what he's having.

***SPRAYER
07-28-2008, 09:46 AM
I'll have what he's having.


Make mine a double.

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 09:49 AM
well no that is not quite what he said but the left obamamaniacs do paraphrase it and repeat it over and over.

Why is is that anybody that doesn't agree with Fascist America, they are left-wingers? Nice little boxes to lump everybody into, huh? It's bullshit, but since you are so programmed, you can't even see that some don't just walk the party line, because they can form their own opinions, not swallow every ****ing lump of shit, the Republicans desperately want swallowed down.

Pure garbage.

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 09:50 AM
I'll have what he's having.
Bartender, Markk wants a brain, shitstain wants a double, please.

***SPRAYER
07-28-2008, 09:51 AM
Bartender, Markk wants a brain, shitstain wants a double, please.


HEY! DON'T GET CHIPPY WITH ME!

:mad:

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:02 AM
Put in "McCain 100 years in Iraq" on youtube and you'll clearly see what the Warmonger wants to do, that's right stay the course for 100 plus years-

Why the **** can't you all see McCain is W. part two?

chris
07-28-2008, 10:13 AM
If you guys don't understand how special interest groups and lobbyist groups have gotten the eyes and ears of politics, than you really should do some reasearch before getting into the discussion. You also might might be too blind to actually notice all of the FOREIGN companies taking over AMERICAN corporations, than I really don't need to give you a free lesson on corporate takeover.

Enron, ring any ****ing bells, with all of the hijacking of the energy sector based on greed?


Your posting suggests you really don't understand capitalism.

So it's OK for a USA company to buy an EU company; but not the other way around??

What doesn Enron have to do with the price of crude oil? Apples and oranges.

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:16 AM
Your posting suggests you really don't understand capitalism.

So it's OK for a USA company to buy an EU company; but not the other way around??

What doesn Enron have to do with the price of crude oil? Apples and oranges.
You aren't even keeping up in the first few posts, so come back, when you can. I'll be happy to civilly debate the merits between the two candidates, but have you already forgotten that you two called me out on corporate take-overs? Apparently.

chris
07-28-2008, 10:28 AM
You aren't even keeping up in the first few posts, so come back, when you can. I'll be happy to civilly debate the merits between the two candidates, but have you already forgotten that you two called me out on corporate take-overs? Apparently.

I hear Mars is great this time of year and you have a summer home there.

Re-read the post.

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:34 AM
I hear Mars is great this time of year and you have a summer home there.

Re-read the post.
If you hear Mars is great this time of year, than that makes YOU the whack job. Again, I read it properly the first time, if you can't keep up, than don't bother in the first place, especially if you are going to draw up dumbfounded claims about whether or not I under stand capitalism.

Yes or no, does congress pander to corporate America? Big Oil, Pharmacuetical companies, etc. any of those ring a bell??

markk
07-28-2008, 10:36 AM
If you hear Mars is great this time of year, than that makes YOU the whack job. Again, I read it properly the first time, if you can't keep up, than don't bother in the first place, especially if you are going to draw up dumbfounded claims about whether or not I under stand capitalism.

Yes or no, does congress pander to corporate America? Big Oil, Pharmacuetical companies, etc. any of those ring a bell??

i see the re-education program is going nicely. maybe you will get a framed picture of Dear Leader to hang in your house if he gets elected?

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:38 AM
i see the re-education program is going nicely. maybe you will get a framed picture of Dear Leader to hang in your house if he gets elected?Great deflection, now discredit what I actually said.

***SPRAYER
07-28-2008, 10:39 AM
Yes or no, does congress pander to corporate America? Big Oil, Pharmacuetical companies, etc. any of those ring a bell??

Trial lawyers? Teachers unions?

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:42 AM
Trial lawyers? Teachers unions?Way to answer the question. ROFL

chris
07-28-2008, 10:49 AM
If you hear Mars is great this time of year, than that makes YOU the whack job. Again, I read it properly the first time, if you can't keep up, than don't bother in the first place, especially if you are going to draw up dumbfounded claims about whether or not I under stand capitalism.

Yes or no, does congress pander to corporate America? Big Oil, Pharmacuetical companies, etc. any of those ring a bell??

This is point where I get off the argument train. Remember the old saying something to the effect that "when arguing with a fool, better to keep quiet that remove all doubt about who is the greater one"

Congrats, you win the prize. I've wasted enough time on this topic already.

BigChiefFan
07-28-2008, 10:55 AM
This is point where I get off the argument train. Remember the old saying something to the effect that "when arguing with a fool, better to keep quiet that remove all doubt about who is the greater one"

Congrats, you win the prize. I've wasted enough time on this topic already.

So in other words you can't contradict what was said, so you'll pull the old, he's a whack job argument. Try again, because that is epic fail on your part.

Again, attempt to discredit what I said, by using factual information, instead of attempting to discredit my character. I even asked a simple yes or no question and you can't even answer it.

Cave Johnson
07-28-2008, 11:02 AM
My apology for snapping at your post.

I missed the sarcasm.

I'm tired of people assuming that all business executives, white, 50 years, vote straight Republican. (As you can tell, you sorta hit a sore spot.)

(I'm embarassed to admit that I voted for Carter. Now, that was a guy not qualified to be President. With the Gerry Ford pardoning Nixon issue hurting the Reps chance for victory, would Carter have won any other "normal election"?? Hummm, good discussion idea...)

Again, sorry.

No worries. My involvement with the Carter administration consisted of me being a bit of a party trick, telling my parents' friends who the president was at age 2-3.

As for the sore spot, you can partially blame W.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mn4daYJzyls&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mn4daYJzyls&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Chief Faithful
07-28-2008, 02:42 PM
What I don't understand is if the surge played no difference why was Obama working so hard to pull out troops when he knew the presurge strategy was working? Why work so hard to pull defeat from victory?

HolmeZz
07-28-2008, 03:00 PM
What I don't understand is if the surge played no difference why was Obama working so hard to pull out troops when he knew the presurge strategy was working? Why work so hard to pull defeat from victory?

What? :spock:

ROYC75
07-28-2008, 03:38 PM
They are all the same. It pisses me off to see thousands of people at a convention cheering for a ****ing politician.

WORD ..........

mlyonsd
07-28-2008, 03:47 PM
What I don't understand is if the surge played no difference why was Obama working so hard to pull out troops when he knew the presurge strategy was working? Why work so hard to pull defeat from victory?

He said more US troops would only make the security situation worse.

Chief Faithful
07-28-2008, 04:07 PM
He said more US troops would only make the security situation worse.

I don't understand that at all. The surge allowed the troops to virtually integrate themselves with the Iraqi's, which is what was needed to secure the trust of the local tribal leaders. Without the extra troops they could not have integrated into the local issues they way they did. The surge worked because they got closer to the people not because they created more distance.