|
0 registered (),
113
Guests and
0
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
#139177 - 08/02/08 01:35 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by NY Madman:
Besides being a great writer he adds humor and wit to any situation.... Words that were wrong in that sentence: "great," "humor," and "wit"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139178 - 08/02/08 02:04 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Wilmac, you planning on telling us what Obama stands for?
Seriously, I was hoping someone knew.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#139179 - 08/02/08 02:07 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 4114
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA. USA
|
Originally posted by Desert_Rat:
Wilmac, you planning on telling us what Obama stands for?
Seriously, I was hoping someone knew. Found this: http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf I didn't read it yet. Maybe it will enlighten us?
_________________________
Must stay away from political/religious debates. Must stay away........
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139180 - 11/02/08 06:46 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 5232
Loc: Florida
|
It seems some interesting things happened this weekend........... Obama had a good weekend sweeping four states. He really cleaned Hillary's clock in Nebraska and Washington. Hillary cried again this weekend.  ........................................... The Huckster did well this weekend. There is a problem in the state of Washington. It appears they stopped counting the votes at 87% and declared it for McCain. That's fucked up. There was supposedly only a difference of 200 votes at the time. Huck is calling for an investigation as he should. ............................................ Ron Paul is stepping back from his presidential campaign. He's downsizing his campaign and letting people go. He now has to concentrate on winning his congressional re-election primary in his Texas district in a few weeks. ............................................. Maryland, Virginia, and Washington D.C. primaries tomorrow. Republicans might as well "Huck Up" as a tactical vote against McCain. Let it go to the convention without enough delegates to declare a nominee on the first vote.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139181 - 11/02/08 07:06 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Did anyone see 60 minutes last night? Obama actually welcomed his interviewer to ask semi-tough questions. While I know CBS (heavily democratic) chose their questions carefully, at least they asked somewhat pressing q's. Hillary on the other hand... she pretty much dodged anything remotely tough to answer. She praised Obama and said that she's got a picture of him in her office. Yeah maybe on a dart board! Ugh the more I watch her the less I can stand her. McCain declined to be interviewed because of scheduling reasons. All in all though, I'm enjoying watching this stuff... I guess because I never truly realized how much bias and b.s. there is in politics and reporting. ![[ThumbsDown]](graemlins/thumbsdown.gif)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139182 - 11/02/08 07:16 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Ok, well...
I like that Obama is not calling for socialized medicine. We all saw in New Orleans how well the government can run things. However, I am really happy he's planning on making it illegal for an insurance company to turn you away because of a pre-existing medical condition. Also, I like his idea of allowing you to move from job to job without having to change medical plans. I like that he was a co-sponsor of the SCHIP Act.
I like that he would raise taxes on the wealthy and lower taxes on the middle class. That only makes economic sense, and (under Clinton) was a plan that provided us with a surplus.
He's declaring war on predatory credit and mortgage companies that have put us into the recession we're in.
I REALLY like that he's firmly against plans like CAFTA which send our jobs away and give us nothing in return.
He's a union supporter.
He's against privatization of Social Security.
He's for strengthening laws against age discrimination which have allowed companies to back out of paying the pensions that loyal employees deserve.
Plus, he's against the war and will begin pulling our troops out within one year of becoming President.
....and he's not a Clinton. Which makes me very happy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139183 - 11/02/08 09:08 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 27/02/03
Posts: 857
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023:
I like that he would raise taxes on the wealthy and lower taxes on the middle class. That only makes economic sense...
Not in my opinion, especially given the Democratic definition of "wealthy," a.k.a. you "have a job." Originally posted by WilMac1023:
He's a union supporter.
booo... Not specifically calling you (or your post) out, I just don't know much about Obama so your post was an eye-opener.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139184 - 11/02/08 09:31 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by PDXterra: Originally posted by WilMac1023:
[b]
I like that he would raise taxes on the wealthy and lower taxes on the middle class. That only makes economic sense...
Oh come on. The definition is a household making more than $200,000 a year. My wife and I both have jobs and don't make anywhere near that and live comfortably in DC of all places. So to say that a household that makes more than $200,000 a year can't afford the taxes is simply lying through the hole in your platinum grill  Originally posted by WilMac1023:
[b]
He's a union supporter.
Not specifically calling you (or your post) out, I just don't know much about Obama so your post was an eye-opener.[/b] Look, it was a Clinton that signed NAFTA and sent the jobs south. I'd rather support someone who supports the worker rather than the corporation.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139185 - 11/02/08 09:36 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 5232
Loc: Florida
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023:
....and he's not a Clinton. Which makes me very happy. I'll ignore some of the outright lies in your previous post and just get on with talking about Obama. There is VERY LITTLE difference between him and Hillary Clinton. Both want to expand government. Expand government control over the economy through numerous stealth methods disguised as other things such as global warming fraud legislation and fraudulent healthcare initiatives. Don't kid yourself about this garbage that both Democrats are proposing regarding healthcare. They both propose further controlling and regulating the industry. This business about mandating no company can turn down anyone with an existing condition is a back door method to destroy private insurance healthcare. The costs would skyrocket for everyone else and if Democrats want to madate government price controls on insurance premiums for healthcare, that kills the industry. It's a stealth method for a government takeover. I'm not even sure if such controls on a private industry are constitutional. I do know one thing that is completely unconstitutional the Democrats want to do. Their plan to increase the power of unions with this very undemocratic "card check" scam they want to institute into law is both undemocratic and unconstitutional. Obama supports this destructive fraud. It will all result in more businesses saying "fuck it" and moving overseas. Obama wants to raise taxes on corporations and investment. That's another job killer. This country already has the second highest corporate rate in the developed world. We will not be able to compete with higher corporate and higher taxes on investment. Obama is no different than Hillary. Both seek more draconian government control of people's lives and industry. Both are complete recipes for disaster. Obama is possibly a bigger disaster because his foreign policy is extremely naive where Hillary's is more pragmatic and realpolitik. Obama on foreign policy is like Jimmy Carter with a tan.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139186 - 11/02/08 09:38 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 5232
Loc: Florida
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023:
So to say that a household that makes more than $200,000 a year can't afford the taxes is simply lying through the hole in your platinum grill $200,000 a year is two NYC teachers at top salary. Are you saying civil servants are now rich people?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139187 - 11/02/08 11:38 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by NY Madman: Originally posted by WilMac1023:
[b]So to say that a household that makes more than $200,000 a year can't afford the taxes is simply lying through the hole in your platinum grill
Are you saying civil servants are now rich people?[/b]Or, $100,000 a year at top salary for ONE teacher. You also don't present how long it took them to get to that level. Or what they're teaching. Or what level of school they're teaching. Some stats would be nice to back up your claim. Because, I know several teachers from NYC, and none of them make anywhere NEAR what you're claiming.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139188 - 11/02/08 11:48 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by NY Madman:
Obama wants to raise taxes on corporations and investment. That's another job killer. This country already has the second highest corporate rate in the developed world. We will not be able to compete with higher corporate and higher taxes on investment. Madman, its stupid statements like this that give me the agent orange twitch. So, here are ten CEO Exit bonuses that expose the piggy at the trough that most of these companies are, at the expense of their workers. And then tell me how much these companies can afford to pay in taxes, mmmmkay? http://www.cnet.com/8301-13555_1-9782748-34.html 1. UnitedHealth Group's William McGuire could walk away with $1.1 billion in stock options, retirement payouts and other benefits. And this is after he allegedly defrauded shareholders in the stock option backdating scandal that started an avalanche of CEO exits and financial restatements across corporate America.
2. Lee Raymond of ExxonMobil walked away with a $400 million payout. Huge number, but most of it is retirement independent and accrued over 40 years of employment and 12 years of running the company. And God knows, those were big years for the oil giant. Shareholders aren't complaining about this one.
3. Home Depot chief Robert Nardelli's severance package was $210 million. The company's poor performance under Nardelli's six-year watch was widely publicized, but the party line was that his resignation was mutually agreed upon by Nardelli and the board. Who wouldn't agree to leave for that much money?
4. Hank McKinnell of Pfizer was forced into early retirement after 5 years. The stock slide was one thing, but adding insult to injury was his retirement package, reported to be about $180 million.
5. Dick Grasso, CEO of the New York Stock Exchange was ousted over a deferred compensation package of $140 million plus an additional $48 million for something or other. He had spent 36 years at the exchange, though.
6. AT&T's CEO Ed Whitacre picked up $158 million plus up to $106 million more, if certain conditions are met. As an aside, the current incarnation of AT&T began with Whitacre at the helm of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company in 1990. He built quite an empire in 17 years.
7. My favorite of the bunch is Michael Ovitz, who picked up $140 million when he was fired just 14 months after being hired as Disney's president. Shareholders filed suit, but neither the board nor Ovitz's boss - Michael Eisner - were found culpable in this king of all corporate governance debacles.
8. Kevin Rollins received a total of about $60 million when he resigned from Dell after three years in the hot seat. Most of that was a payout in lieu of stock options that were frozen due to Dell's stock option backdating investigation.
9. Remember Carly Fiorina? HP's rock-star CEO got a $42 million severance payout when she was ousted after 5 long years at the helm of the computer giant. The board learned its lesson and hired Mark Hurd who effortlessly (it seemed) turned the company around.
10. Yahoo's Terry Semel actually resigned with no severance package, but he made over $400 million during the prior three years with the company. Now, look at those disasters, and look at how much they were paid on their exit, and tell me the Fortune 500 companies can't pay just a LITTLE bit more in taxes for the good of everyone. Or are you also one of the piggies, Madman?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139189 - 11/02/08 11:50 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
That's not the point. The point is that an income of $200k a year is upper middle class at best.
Want to go after rich people? Hit the ones making over a million a year.
Pro union is anti-job. Madman is right on that. Look at the auto industry and what unions have done to domestic auto makers as one example. Unions have long outlived their usefulness in this country. They were formed to combat 12-14 hour work days and near-slave labor conditions that no longer exist in most industry.
Paying people $35/hr to tighten bolts is stupid. Setting them up for life with healthcare benefits that aren't even matched in white collar industry is also stupid. If auto workers made what they were worth, and manufacturers didn't have to pander to ridiculous union demands, American cars would be killing the foreign competition on cost alone.
My dad was a Teamster for many years working for UPS. The only thing the union was interested in is money for itself.
But, we can continue to be pro-union in this country so we can watch our economy crumble further under foreign competition.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139190 - 11/02/08 11:57 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
IN response to your last post, Wilmac, about CEO salaries, golden parachutes, etc.
This is just board of director idiocy.
What you fail to mention is how many of those bonuses, etc. are being paid out by unprofitable companies.
There's not much of a correlation there between those CEO packages and the profitiablity of these companies. Many of them are already hurting, but are stuck paying out contract provisions that the CEO's negotiated when they became CEOs.
Greater corporate profits translate into a healthier economy. Who owns public companies? That's right, PEOPLE own public companies. Profits that are not reinvested in the business, or used to cover future expenses are paid out to PEOPLE in dividends. Guess what else? All walks of life can own stocks. Tax the corporations more, reduce the dividents, and PEOPLE have less money in their pockets. Less money in pocket means less spending. Less spending equals a weaker economy. Heavy corporate taxation is a double whammy.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139191 - 11/02/08 12:10 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 5232
Loc: Florida
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023:
Or, $100,000 a year at top salary for ONE teacher. You also don't present how long it took them to get to that level. Or what they're teaching. Or what level of school they're teaching. Some stats would be nice to back up your claim. Because, I know several teachers from NYC, and none of them make anywhere NEAR what you're claiming. Well... of course it takes many years to reach top salary. You also have to have a masters degree with more credits beyond (which the city will pay for at a city university). I think it's 20 to 22 years for top salary. For the complete failure that is the NYC Public Schools, the 10 year salary isn't bad. It's not bad for a job where you only work 120 days a year and have ABSOLUTELY ZERO accountability. Here is a copy of the UFT's recent contract. It's long, but in it is a blueprint for one of the reasons why education is such a failure in this country. Too much power in the hands of the teacher's unions. http://www.uft.org/member/contracts/teachers_contract07-09/teachcon0709.pdf Originally posted by WilMac1023:
Madman, its stupid statements like this that give me the agent orange twitch.
So, here are ten CEO Exit bonuses that expose the piggy at the trough that most of these companies are, at the expense of their workers. And then tell me how much these companies can afford to pay in taxes, mmmmkay? What is stupid WilMac is that you think it is any of your business.... or any business of the state, how much ANY executive or CEO in the private sector is paid. It is NONE of the government's business. Unless you are a stockholder of any of these companies, it is NONE of your business either. If you want to make money like a CEO of a big company, go to school then distinguish yourself in the business world. If you can't, you have no right to complain that someone else can distinguish themselves and earn big money. It seems the system in North Korea may be more to your liking based on your complaints.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139192 - 11/02/08 12:28 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 27/02/03
Posts: 857
Loc: Portland, OR
|
Originally posted by WilMac1023:
Oh come on. The definition is a household making more than $200,000 a year. ... So to say that a household that makes more than $200,000 a year can't afford the taxes ...
200K is a big chunk of change, but not outlandish. Just look at the average salary of a congressman and/or senator! And it's not a question of "if" a household can afford it. What's the motivation for small business owners if they discover that once they break the 200K mark, they'll be taxed through the nose? Shouldn't we encourage job-creation, as opposed to punishing successful people?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139194 - 11/02/08 02:23 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 27/11/00
Posts: 1147
Loc: Montclair, NJ
|
Originally posted by NY Madman:
Obama has been doing a lot of lying on the campaign trail about his true positions regarding gun control. And McCain is bat-shit crazy. This is why Obama should be president.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139195 - 11/02/08 05:05 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 10/04/01
Posts: 4114
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA. USA
|
Originally posted by NY Madman: [b]Obama Calls for Permanent Assault Weapons Ban to Combat Inner-City Violence Link... Obama says U.S. needs to review gun policies Link.... Obama has been doing a lot of lying on the campaign trail about his true positions regarding gun control.[/b] In regards to link one, I don't know how "assault weapons" attribute to inner city violence. I don't read too much about ak47's being used against people. It's a stupid argument. Most gun violence happens with much smaller pistols and calibers (ie cheap guns). In regards to the second link, I hate to say it but in a way he's right. There is no reason Cho should have legally gotten a hold of a firearm if he had prior mental issues. It's right on the form in PA when you go to purchase a gun. It was too easy for him to lie about it I guess. Don't know the answer but banning guns altogether is not going to stop gun related violence. Also does an outright ban mean the police will not be armed also? I doubt it. I say hell no to that no matter the statistics. That's just too much of a stepping stone to "tyranny" in my opinion. We are already too close to the brink.
_________________________
Must stay away from political/religious debates. Must stay away........
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139196 - 11/02/08 06:47 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Member
Registered: 09/05/02
Posts: 5232
Loc: Florida
|
Originally posted by Samueul:
In regards to link one, I don't know how "assault weapons" attribute to inner city violence. I don't read too much about ak47's being used against people. It's a stupid argument. Most gun violence happens with much smaller pistols and calibers (ie cheap guns). They don't care. They just want to incrementally remove guns from the American public. In regards to the second link, I hate to say it but in a way he's right. There is no reason Cho should have legally gotten a hold of a firearm if he had prior mental issues. It's right on the form in PA when you go to purchase a gun. It was too easy for him to lie about it I guess. Don't know the answer but banning guns altogether is not going to stop gun related violence.
Also does an outright ban mean the police will not be armed also?
....................................................
Check out a new Obama campaign office in Texas. Look at the flag on the wall and you tell me what many of these "Obamaphiles" are about?
Obviously they know a leftist when they see one.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139197 - 11/02/08 07:22 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
WOW. from erectile dysfunction to politics!
amazing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139199 - 11/02/08 07:55 PM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Mobycat: Originally posted by Roxy_96xp:
[b]WOW. from erectile dysfunction to politics!
amazing.
Did you read the first page?[/b]HAHA - yeah i did read the first post. i stopped at the middle of the sentence. i guess ill add to this political debate without reading anyones long ass posts.. i voted for hilary but im not going to vote for her or obama in november. as a registered democrat, im going republican. females will get too power trippy as well as some african americans. and NO offense seriously. i can see it happening.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#139200 - 12/02/08 06:34 AM
Re: Man enough to admit I've got ED..
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by jorge: Originally posted by NY Madman:
[b]
Obama has been doing a lot of lying on the campaign trail about his true positions regarding gun control. No, Obama should NOT be president. Hey, I'm not crazy about McCain either, but Obama is not qualified, and once his views surface, I don't think he's thinking in line with the majority of Americans on a lot of issues. With regard to gun control, are you saying if you don't own a gun, you don't think anyone else should either? Guess what? The whole country isn't a shithole like New Jersey. (Yes, I've lived there on base at Ft. Dix) In a lot of Western states and rural areas, gun ownership nears 100% of households, and there's seldom any incidents. It's the idiot minorities in inner cities committing the vast majority of these gun crimes, and if they don't hesitate to pull the trigger on random victims, do you really think they'll observe your new gun bans? Prohibition type laws don't work. You're only taking guns away from law abiding citizens. It's already illegal for a convicted felon to possess a gun. There's background checks now on pretty much all retail gun purchases (not just handguns anymore). More laws have no effect on the gun trade on the streets, and if you think for one second that prohibition of guns will take guns out of the hands of criminals, you're dumber than I think you are. I wouldn't vote for Obama for the same reasons I wouldn't vote for Guliani. They both think that these magic bans are going to reduce crime, yet they have no stats to prove it. Also consider this: Define "Assault Weapon". Loose definitions of that could include semi-automatic .22s that you teach kids how to shoot with. The 2nd Amendment grants the right to bear arms. It makes no mention of exclusion on what specific arms I can bear.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index