RE: Debate #3

RE: Debate #3 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Moonhead -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 5:28:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Neither Obama nor Romney ever served in the military. Neither's old enough to have needed to cop out of doing so during a war where they had a draft call up, either. (Unlike certain chickenhawk chimps who could be mentioned...)

thishereboi -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 5:30:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Mittens turned into a Democrat last night. Did he disagree with anything? He's even for the gov't backing the auot bailout now Dude is frightening What is frightening is how much you missed. He wasn't for the bailout. He was for allowing the car companies to go through bankruptcy, and to give them backing when they emerged. That certainly isn't what happened, now, is it? Would you buy a car from a manufacturer that had just emerged from bankruptcy ? Of course not,when I buy a car I want to know that the company will be there to stand behind their product,to live uo to all agreed upon guarantees and such . What good is a warranty if you fear the solvency of the company. Bankruptcy would have been the effective end of the car makers.....not a step towards solvency as Romney suggests,you and he are engaging in mental masturbation when you assert otherwise. Would you buy a car from a manufacturer that just had to take a bailout to avoid bankrupcy? Either way the company was about to go under and was saved.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 5:34:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Part of my every day perusal of left and right websites, seeing whats being said, by whom, about what...and why. part of it is morbid fascination part of it is a sick sense of humour part of it is self edumakashun I cant stand most of the crew on fox, and often want to take a spork to my nostrils, but then I feel the same about msnbc too. Krauthammers nostrils scare me It has been my fantasy for a while to attend a party Krauthammer's a guest at, give him a mickey and while he's out paint his face with Louis XV make-up (complete with the powdered wig and fake rosey cheeks) and leave him sitting naked on a toilet to be found that way. Krauthammer SUCKS.

Lucylastic -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 5:37:36 PM)
OMG I have visions of him doing Black Adder 3s Stephen Frys role!!! LOL

Moonhead -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 5:39:33 PM)
That's a bit rough on whoever finds the oaf like that, surely? [sm=jaw.gif] Somebody might be mentally scarred for life...

Owner59 -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 6:39:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 If I recall correctly, I think it was Ford that refused to accept bailout money.. not that they werent hurting just as much as the other corps,.. just they found a different way to become stronger rather than one of the corp welfare bums (and weaker).. shouldnt that be what companies strive for? and who American citizens/consumers should support when buying a new vehicle? Just sayin' For wasn't hurting as much as they other two. They had done their restructuring, sans Fed-bucks in the few years prior. They didn't "need" it and declined the working capital because of the attached strings. Ford commented recently that that supported and still support the bailout. The New York Times just announced a record number of hits on it`s Mitt Romney "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" letter to the editor link,just after last night`s debate.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 6:42:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy CBS poll shows undecideds favored Obama over Romney by 30 points on foreign policy. Romney is trying to win the election now by mirroring public opinion on the issues, hence his departure from (1) leaving troops in IRAQ; (2) not having a firm deadline to exit Afghanistan; (3) negotiating with IRAN. If you know of other pivots and policy reversals, please add them to the list. As Obama stated, Romney is "all over the map." [image]local://upfiles/210115/BB538316B902456CA543DAB8302C6F1E.jpg[/image] In all fairness....I think we should wait for rich to complete factoring his chart before we declare a winner....[sm=rofl.gif] I wonder how rich will grade that look of school-girl adoration Romney had when he was staring at the President. Poor Barack's skin must've been crawling. And how about that winning strategy of "economic development" to put Al Qaeda out of business? You know what that means... A jobs program in the Arab world and more outsourcing. If you work in an IT Job, don't forget to duck.

tj444 -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 7:28:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 If I recall correctly, I think it was Ford that refused to accept bailout money.. not that they werent hurting just as much as the other corps,.. just they found a different way to become stronger rather than one of the corp welfare bums (and weaker).. shouldnt that be what companies strive for? and who American citizens/consumers should support when buying a new vehicle? Just sayin' For wasn't hurting as much as they other two. They had done their restructuring, sans Fed-bucks in the few years prior. They didn't "need" it and declined the working capital because of the attached strings. I dont think any of the car manufacturers (Ford included) were selling much of anything when the US fell into this depression (& imo it was a depression, not a softer, less harsh "recession").. so I think Ford had to make changes to stay in business with the "New Economy".. They could have taken the easy route like those corp welfare bums but didnt.. imo Ford deserves respect for that.. Buffet's Wells Fargo & Bk of A are also corp welfare bums.. no surprise tho cuz Buffet is great buds with Obama.. imo the banksters should have been allowed to go bankrupt along with the other corp welfare bums.. Its so strange that the US voters claim to be so against the 1% but will still re-elect the Prez that bailed the 1% out.. but hey, its not my country so its JMO..

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 8:43:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri He wasn't for the bailout. He was for allowing the car companies to go through bankruptcy, and to give them backing when they emerged. That certainly isn't what happened, now, is it? May I please see the 2009 article where he says that? Because that's when this dialogue of letting the car companies fail began. I'm not saying you aren't right, but I don't remember him talking about it in the same light. Until a few weeks ago that is.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:28:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Democracy is a start, did you really expect it to be honey and butterflies after oooh less than a year?? You're having a laugh Romney probably has a "derivatives" algorithm explaining the path to democracy through default swaps and outsourcing on his web site. That for me was the best part. When he started to dodge questions with "you can go to my website" hokum. I hope Obama beats Romney and John Galt, jr "like a runaway sister wife", as Bill Maher so eloquently stated.

DomKen -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:31:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Neither Obama nor Romney ever served in the military. Neither's old enough to have needed to cop out of doing so during a war where they had a draft call up, either. (Unlike certain chickenhawk chimps who could be mentioned...) Romney did. He got a deferment for his 'missionary' work in a french villa.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:31:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic OMG I have visions of him doing Black Adder 3s Stephen Frys role!!! LOL Black Adder <snort> loved that show[:D]

tazzygirl -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:32:42 PM)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/23/barack-obama/obama-says-romney-opposed-any-government-help-resc/

DomKen -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:42:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/23/barack-obama/obama-says-romney-opposed-any-government-help-resc/ This is a case, one of many this year, where politifact is simply wrong. The claim by them is that Romney may have supported government backed Debtor in Possesion (DIP) loans that would have bridged the companies as they emerged from bankruptcy. The problem is there were no financial institutions, nor even groups of institutions, liquid enough to provide the amount of capital GM and Chryser needed. Without the direct government loans, that Romney specifically rejected, the auto companies would have had no choice but to fully liquidate, i.e. go out of business. You can find many different auto execs and financial industry experts that concur on this analysis. Romney either didn't know enough about the state of the investment banks, highly unlikely, or he was calling for the liquidation of 2 of the big 3 US automakers.

tazzygirl -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:51:04 PM)
I offered the link up for the article that Fmrfgopgal asked for. Embedded in the Politifact link is this one... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0 Which is what I think she was asking for.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:56:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Would you buy a car from a manufacturer that just had to take a bailout to avoid bankrupcy? Either way the company was about to go under and was saved. you don't HONESTLY think that's what happened? As simple as that? That would reflect a very poor understanding of the events. I mean, no offense, but there was enormous change required in the agreement and most business and economic analysts felt the overall outcome was well worth what went into it. But in answer to your question, here go have a look: http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.filter.html/GM/EN/News/US_Monthly_Sales.html

Owner59 -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 9:59:47 PM)
A lotta lotta lotta people are reading that letter to the editor since the 3rd debate.Record numbers according to the NYT. Kinda like an online history/fact check lesson...... Gotta hand it to Al Gore for inventing the internetz.....[:D]

DesideriScuri -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 10:35:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FMRFGOPGAL quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri He wasn't for the bailout. He was for allowing the car companies to go through bankruptcy, and to give them backing when they emerged. That certainly isn't what happened, now, is it? May I please see the 2009 article where he says that? Because that's when this dialogue of letting the car companies fail began. I'm not saying you aren't right, but I don't remember him talking about it in the same light. Until a few weeks ago that is. Yup. quote: The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk. In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check. This was from November of 2008. Considering Congress authorized the bailouts starting in October of 2008, with Bush signing them, there would be no 2009 article. The article is from 2008.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 10:56:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Toysinbabeland I guess what she is saying is that Mister Obama is a troll Got Mirror?

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Debate #3 (10/23/2012 11:10:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/23/barack-obama/obama-says-romney-opposed-any-government-help-resc/ This is what I was actually after... But thanks Tazzy http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125