Now who are you voting for?

[Rex Tyus]

Yes I read it and the point is my post is as relavent as the article. Sorry that was lost on you. There are too many variables to over simplify which president is best based on those statistics. Aside from the fact the dems and reps did not control 40 consecutive years each and then the other. It is a MOOT point. I appologize for being too vague in my response. If it still is over your head I appoligize again as I really don't have the time to explain it.

One of the problems this country has is basing perception on the performance of a companies stock price vs the companies actuall profitability. Does .com ring a bell? If company execs were paid on profitablity vs stock value we would see a different environment. But that is another topic.

With 2750 posts?
Evidently you got plenty of time my friend.

Poor choice of words on my part. I should have said, I lack the vocabulary to dumb it down anymore. :shock:

 

[ruff]

[quote="Rex Tyus":1hf7z26n]Yes I read it and the point is my post is as relavent as the article. Sorry that was lost on you. There are too many variables to over simplify which president is best based on those statistics. Aside from the fact the dems and reps did not control 40 consecutive years each and then the other. It is a MOOT point. I appologize for being too vague in my response. If it still is over your head I appoligize again as I really don't have the time to explain it.

One of the problems this country has is basing perception on the performance of a companies stock price vs the companies actuall profitability. Does .com ring a bell? If company execs were paid on profitablity vs stock value we would see a different environment. But that is another topic.

With 2750 posts?
Evidently you got plenty of time my friend.

Poor choice of words on my part. I should have said, I lack the vocabulary to dumb it down anymore. :shock:[/quote:1hf7z26n]
I read your posts Rex.
Yes you can.

 

[Rex Tyus]

I read your posts Rex.
Yes you can.

LOL! You think that is informative, wait until you actually hear me speak. 8)

 

[ruff]

I read your posts Rex.
Yes you can.

LOL! You think that is informative, wait until you actually hear me speak. 8)

I assume it will be on NPR.

 

[Rex Tyus]

What's NPR? Is it anything like FOX radio?

 

[Jay D]

Radio version of PBS television. National Public Radio. Somewhat of a left leaning talk radio station.

 

[ruff]

What's NPR? Is it anything like FOX radio?

Jay is right.
You could also try KPFA but they think that Lennin was a damn right winger.
See, Rex.......when you go that far to the right, you are practically to the left.

Your liberal friend.

Sorry, your bleeding heart liberal friend.

 

[Rex Tyus]

DON'T GET ME WRONG. I like liberals. The world needs them, it truly does. They temper the right. My point is liberals just DON'T NEED TO BE IN CHARGE. It has to do with the detached from reality thing. :mrgreen:

 

[Mike Draper]

DON'T GET ME WRONG. I like liberals. The world needs them, it truly does. They temper the right. My point is liberals just DON'T NEED TO BE IN CHARGE. It has to do with the detached from reality thing. :mrgreen:

We need solid thinking Democrats, not emotional acting liberals.

 

[ruff]

DON'T GET ME WRONG. I like liberals. The world needs them, it truly does. They temper the right. My point is liberals just DON'T NEED TO BE IN CHARGE. It has to do with the detached from reality thing. :mrgreen:

We need solid thinking Democrats, not emotional acting liberals.

I have a solid state amplifier, does that qualify?

 

[XTREME1]

I decided to post this here for the nonsupports

In a special courts martial held on the polity of this BB, komrade FCC has been found guilty the arrogant and specious attitude towards the Joe da Plumbers...
Joe was found guilty of trying to live the American dream by working hard and building up a business to hire more people, and pass more money into the system that suports us all, and then he had the noive to complain about OBwan wanting to put him back out of business with extra taxes, just the thing that has ALWAYS stifled business growth, the engine room of the country's spirit and economic machine...
Interim aclu field commander greenone, Kolfer and FCC has issed a communist bull that there will be no more gatherings of American entrepreneurs or other successful business people on this BB...
His deputy minister of kollective taxing, whachoo guring is in here to make sure that the spark of freedom and growth of business is STAMPED OUT...

They will all be out this week to attend the pogrom on gun toting religious zealots in western Pennsylvania along with bullgannin murtha who has condemmed the racist pigs there who simply refuse to vote for a communist...

Meanwhile we are bracing ourselves in case the triumverate of dingey harry, lugosi, and OBwan take over the government and do what comes so natural to them, TAX AND KILL...

Down with Joe da Plumbers and all pro-American business interests...

The pogrom continues...

 

[floorguy]

yea heres the cycle for ya....

the reps come in to fix the shit that the dems left....

takes a few years to iron out

then when the dems come in they ride the coat tails of the rep changes, and make a few of their own, thus screwing shit up again for the reps to fix again....


hence is why it "looks" so good for the dems...

 

[Rex Tyus]

As a curious investor I am intrigued by your theory. Are you saying the difference in price/ actual is administration dependent? Every year this comparison has been made dems come out on top. Is my stock worth less if I sell it during a dem admin because of perception of a higher value?

How in the hell did you get that from my post?

See response number one.

What I am saying is it is a stupid comparison. There have been 18 republican (if my memory and math is right) to 10 democratic presidents since Old Abe. The market grows and contracts. The odds of a republican being in office during a market contraction is nearly twice as likely. The comparison doesn't take in account the total growth that accured, only a snapshot % increase while a dem was in office. It is a meaningless statistic. Let me repeat................
IT IS A MEANINGLESS STATISTIC. Unless of course you proport we should only buy stock during a Democratic administration and sell at the begining of a Rep adminstration. :roll: If that is what you think, here is your home work assignment, run that scenario and tell me how much money would have been lost with that practice.

 

[Guest]

Greenie,

Ignorance huh. Funny you say that thinking Obama was voted in because hes black. I think Hillary made obviously some very tactical mistakes in helping her lose. One, underestimating Obama. And, two, the whole inevitability that I am entitled to the nomination' ended up hurting her quite dramatically. Then she started doing what McCain was doing, attacking Obama and that drove her numbers down, like McCain. Barack was elevated, sort of above it all and he handled himself as such. Hillary talked a lot about Bush too, during the debates and speeches. Barack talked more about McCain and Romney. As such he offered Democrats a preview of how he’ll be able to take on repulicans. So you are smoking something if you think he won cause he's black, get real people.

I mentioned out of the 2 we have to choose from I think Obama will do better. Is he the saviour, I doubt it, but McCain sure isnt....

:mrgreen:

Hiilary lost because she figured she would get the black vote ( seeing as Bill was the first black Pres. ) . I guess she never figured that blacks would vote for Barrack 94 -1 .

By the time she fugured it out and started exposing Obama , she simply ran out of time . If you remember , once she did get tough , she pretty much dominated the rest of the way.

McCain should have learned something from Hillary and challenged Obama , but he played soft and with the liberal media sucking up to Obama and slamming him nearly every night on TV , it has definately hurt him. factor in the money advantage from Obama ( just where is all this cash coming from ?????) and its no wonder he may be ahead in a few areas.

The real question is " why isnt he opening up a huge advantage over McCain , given all his money , support and near 100 % black vote ??

I am with Joey Johnson I really beleive the American people have figured out how to play the " politically correct " game . The silent McCain supporters will be there in droves to make such Obama wont be elected . Then we can listen to the pundits talk about the " racist angle " of whites voting for McCain in spite of the fact that nearly all Blacks are voting for Obama .

 

[floorguy]

ok yes I wanna know where the money is coming from???

can we get one of them inquiries up and going....cuz that mofo has some serious cash from some place....and it aint his book

 

[windmarkbob]

This one is voting for "that one".

 

[renegade_cowboy]

ok yes I wanna know where the money is coming from???

can we get one of them inquiries up and going....cuz that mofo has some serious cash from some place....and it aint his book

The money is coming from overseas, from terroist groups. They figure if Obama is elected than they have a better chance of taking over America, turning it into a 3rd world country, causing mass chaos. Obama is just a muslim in christian cloths poised to turn America in to crap hole. He will raise *all* taxes for everyone. Rev Wright will be the nations spiritual adviser. Ayers will be head of education teach the youths how to blow up building and all women will be forced back into the kitchen. The real Obama will show his real self later next year when he plunges the economy to the lowest levels of all time, millions will lose their jobs. He will allow Iran, N. Korea to move operation over here to work on nuclear "power plants". Canada will be invaded and taken over, along with Mexico. :shock: Huh what???

 

[Ernie G]

You know Brent some of that is probably not far from the truth, especially when he teams up with madam speaker and the other left wing loans in congress. They can do alot of damage in four years, but don't worry, your kids and my grand kids can pay for it.

 

[Rex Tyus]

The money is coming from overseas, from terroist groups. They figure if Obama is elected than they have a better chance of taking over America, turning it into a 3rd world country, causing mass chaos. Obama is just a muslim in christian cloths poised to turn America in to crap hole. He will raise *all* taxes for everyone. Rev Wright will be the nations spiritual adviser. Ayers will be head of education teach the youths how to blow up building and all women will be forced back into the kitchen. The real Obama will show his real self later next year when he plunges the economy to the lowest levels of all time, millions will lose their jobs. He will allow Iran, N. Korea to move operation over here to work on nuclear "power plants". Canada will be invaded and taken over, along with Mexico. :shock: Huh what???

I am glad you finally understand. :shock:

 

[renegade_cowboy]

[quote="The Green One":q5s85tz8] The money is coming from overseas, from terroist groups. They figure if Obama is elected than they have a better chance of taking over America, turning it into a 3rd world country, causing mass chaos. Obama is just a muslim in christian cloths poised to turn America in to crap hole. He will raise *all* taxes for everyone. Rev Wright will be the nations spiritual adviser. Ayers will be head of education teach the youths how to blow up building and all women will be forced back into the kitchen. The real Obama will show his real self later next year when he plunges the economy to the lowest levels of all time, millions will lose their jobs. He will allow Iran, N. Korea to move operation over here to work on nuclear "power plants". Canada will be invaded and taken over, along with Mexico. :shock: Huh what???

I am glad you finally understand. :shock:[/quote:q5s85tz8]


I do understand people really think something like that would happen and is true. Fear is a powerful tool. Funny.

 

[Rex Tyus]

Fear is a powerful tool.

So is ignorance. Yet one is self inflicted.

 

[renegade_cowboy]

Fear is a powerful tool.

So is ignorance. Yet one is self inflicted.

Yeah I really know what you mean. :wink:

Palin 2012

 

[joey895]

[quote="Rex Tyus":22ppym7w]

Fear is a powerful tool.

So is ignorance. Yet one is self inflicted.

Yeah I really know what you mean. :wink:

Palin 2012[/quote:22ppym7w]

Now we're making some progress.

 

[renegade_cowboy]

Yeah I really know what you mean. :wink:

Palin 2012[/quote]

Now we're making some progress.[/quote]


Yes we are....

MILF 2012 she'll never abused her power. Do you think her cloth expense will be higher in 2012?? $250,000??

 

[Ernie G]

Yeah!! Palin in 2-12, works for me!!

 

[Ernie G]

Oh Brent grow up, How much do you think pretty-boy is spending on those suits, oh i forgot only liberals can spend like that.

 

[renegade_cowboy]

Oh Brent grow up, How much do you think pretty-boy is spending on those suits, oh i forgot only liberals can spend like that.

Noy sure, if it was in the hundreds of thousands i'm sure we would of heard about it as a counter attack, so it may not be close. For all we know he shops at Mens Wherehouse. :shock: The hairdresser was the highest paid employee on the McCain side.

 

[Ernie G]

Spoken like a true liberal. You people should practice what you preach.

 

[joey895]

Not that I think what kind of clothes a candidate wears is worth debating but since you just don't seem to be able to let it go. Here is an interesting article from Hillaryclintonforums.com no less, hardly a republican strong hold. Of course I'm sure you won't read it because you are a typical closed minded liberal.

"There's a big brouhaha about the $150,000 spent for campaign outfits for the Palin family, but it was necessary for the seven-member Palin family to update their modest wardrobe for a national campaign and the clothes will eventually go to charity. A candidate should wear appropriate clothes for campaigning. For example, Margaret Thatcher bought a new campaign wardrobe for each election. And by the way, she won every national election she competed in (3 total).

Clothing is a necessary campaign expense. Also, the new clothes are owned by the Republican National Committee (RNC). Jake Tapper at ABC said the clothing belongs to the RNC and will be returned to the RNC (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...wrinkle-i.html). The McCain campaign is getting public financing, so it seems that the clothes were paid for by private donations to the RNC. But whether they were paid for by private or public financing it is necessary for Palin and her family to be appropriately dressed, especially because TV, internet, and other media are a vital part of campaigning and fashion faux pas will be noted.

Palin normally doesn’t spend much on her appearance. When she became governor and started working in Anchorage which has upscale salons, she decided to continue visiting her hometown beauty parlor that charges $30 for a haircut (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/fa...se&oref=slogin).

Palin frequently shops for used clothing for herself and her family. Just before she was offered the VP nomination, Palin went on a family expedition to a secondhand store called Out of the Closet. A saleswoman named Alison said Palin frequently visits the shop and the shop owner Ms. Arvold says Palin has been shopping at Out of the Closet for years and she noticed Palin on TV wearing used clothing from the shop (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1221...ys_us_page_one).

Palin told Alaska Magazine that her daughter Bristol bought a $15 dress for a big gala event. This met with Palin’s approval; she told reporter Melissa DeVaughn that there was no need for a $300 gown. When a crew from Vogue arrived to interview and photograph Palin for a story Palin recalled, “In the interview you could tell that the writer was trying to get me to focus on the gender and appearance issues, but I kept talking about energy and national security, and not relying on foreign sources of energy.” The reporter continued to try to change the subject away from politics towards fashion. Palin told DeVaugn, “I don’t know about fashion. It’s bunny boots and fleece and The North Face. So I tried to talk about that, but it’s just not the way I’m wired” (http://www.alaskamagazine.com/index....876&Itemid=141). Even as a teenager Palin was a tomboy and didn't care much about clothes.

When Palin joined the McCain campaign she didn’t have an expensive wardrobe that general election candidates usually have. Therefore, the McCain campaign had to buy a lot of clothes for her to meet the expectations of the public and the press. Also, there are seven people in the Palin family, so the campaign had to buy clothes for seven people. McCain spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said that the clothing will “go to a charitable purpose after the campaign (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/14805).

The media brouhaha about the Palin family’s new wardrobe seems slanted based on what I’ve read. The media should mention that the Palins didn’t have much national campaign clothing so they needed to buy appropriate clothing, there are seven members of the Palin family so that's a lot of clothes to buy, the clothes were bought by the RNC and will go back to the RNC and then to charity. Furthermore, women candidates are required to wear a greater variety of clothes than men candidates. Few people notice if a male candidate wears the same suit three days of the week on TV, but if a woman wears the same outfit for two days some people watching the TV will consider that inappropriate. So women candidates have to buy more clothes than men candidates. When all those factors are considered, the expense for the Palin family’s campaign wardrobe is not outrageous as some people in the media are implying.

As governor Palin normally chose moderate priced and inexpensive used clothing for herself and her family, but as a VP candidate she wears what the McCain campaign recommends. New clothes were necessary, so new clothes were lent to the Palins and those clothes will be returned to the RNC to be given to charity after the campaign. That is a smart strategy and also charitable, thus helpful to society."

 

[renegade_cowboy]

Great copy and paste Joey. I guess no women can resist $150,000 in free cloths and $22,000 hair dresser. We all know it was her and McCain handlers who pushed for the new cloths, Im sure it was not her idea. But, But she could of said , you know what, thanks but no thanks, just like she did with the bridge to nowhere.
You gotta admit that is a black eye for the campaign. She is working on 2012 to be the front runner for their party. Its cool it is what it is and the voice of America will speak on Nov 4th on who they want to be president.

We all can still be friends, even though we disagree....