StrangeSox Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 6, 2012 -> 11:55 AM) Ford's was blatant and direct about the topic, so not the same. But, for the record, I thought it was BS that ObamaCo made an issue of it (if they even did). They didn't! The only source for this claim is one article in the Detroit News that makes this claim completely unattributed, not even to the usual "anonymous sources." The Chrysler ad was explicitly non-partisan, but it allowed the viewers to project onto it with little effort. Edited February 6, 2012 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 6, 2012 -> 12:05 PM) They didn't! The only source for this claim is one article in the Detroit News that makes this claim completely unattributed, not even to the usual "anonymous sources." OK. I have no idea either way, and I was fine with both ads. I was just frustrated I got dragged into a fight where people were characterizing my views as something they weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Chrysler explicitly edited out pro-union signs from the images that were used in that ad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I really get the feeling this is going to be the ugliest, most-negative election I've ever seen in my lifetime. In a clear signal that the 2012 presidential election is gearing up to be a monumental slug fest, the Obama campaign told big-money donors late Monday evening to begin writing their checks to Priorities USA, a top Democratic "super PAC" and make the president's reelection effort competitive with its deep-pocketed GOP opponents. The president's blessing of the super PAC comes nine months before Election Day and gives Obama's top bundlers the opportunity to help jump-start the outside group, which donors had previously avoided. Obama -- who has kept a distance from the outside group which supports his re-election bid -- plans to send campaign officials, cabinet officers and senior aides to super PAC events on his behalf. Campaign officials said Obama himself, Vice President Joe Biden and their spouses would not be appearing at the group's fundraising events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Feb 2, 2012 -> 03:48 PM) Obama's average favorability never dipped below 50%, Romney's favorability is around 30% today. Wow, it's that low? I doubt he gets that number anywhere near 50%, a cardboard box has more personality than Mittens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 08:48 AM) Wow, it's that low? I doubt he gets that number anywhere near 50%, a cardboard box has more personality than Mittens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 Barry Soetoro gets to stay on the Georgia ballot after bithers score an own-goal: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/0...l-born-citizen/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 08:16 AM) I really get the feeling this is going to be the ugliest, most-negative election I've ever seen in my lifetime. Do we get to see all of the flip flop stories tonight? Nevermind, its Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 12:31 PM) Do we get to see all of the flip flop stories tonight? Nevermind, its Obama. So, if I were to go to CNN.com and have the first story I find on the matter use the phrase "change of position" in the first 5 words, you'd find that adequate and stop asserting the media was in Obama's favor? In a change of position, Barack Obama's reelection campaign will begin using administration and campaign aides to fundraise for Priorities USA Action, a super PAC backing the president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 11:34 AM) So, if I were to go to CNN.com and have the first story I find on the matter use the phrase "change of position" in the first 5 words, you'd find that adequate and stop asserting the media was in Obama's favor? That kind of reinforces my point actually. Obama gets "Change of position", Romney gets "Flip-flopper". I know which I would rather have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 You really want to bring a charge of "media bias" because of a 'flip-flopper' moniker? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 (edited) Anyone who complains about media bias needs to take a hike. Certain networks have certain positions. Get the f*** over it. So f***ing what if CNN uses a different term between segments talking about what people post on Twitter. That network is mindless drivel 99% of the time. Edited February 7, 2012 by Steve9347 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 12:38 PM) That kind of reinforces my point actually. Obama gets "Change of position", Romney gets "Flip-flopper". I know which I would rather have. Maybe if Romney waited til the next paragraph in a speech to contradict himself, it wouldn't be as appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Did you guys see Obama during the Google+ question/answer session? some lady mentioned her husband was unemployed. Obama sarcastically quipped "Oh wow, that really surprises me (rolls eyes)". He is totally out of touch and siding the wall street bankers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 11:58 AM) Anyone who complains about media bias needs to take a hike. Certain networks have certain positions. Get the f*** over it. So f***ing what if CNN uses a different term between segments talking about what people post on Twitter. That network is mindless drivel 99% of the time. One thing we can all agree on is that CNN is totally in the tank for Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 11:38 AM) That kind of reinforces my point actually. Obama gets "Change of position", Romney gets "Flip-flopper". I know which I would rather have. The media needs to have one term that they always use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 8, 2012 Author Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 4, 2012 -> 01:26 PM) Everyone took a cut in this case...except the high level taxpayers, who got a nice tax cut. Which contributed to the state being in the red and having no money. Maybe not the biggest reason, but you can't say "The state had NO MONEY" when they found money for tax cuts. But then, we demand teachers sacrifice, we demand workers sacrifice, but we never demand the rich sacrifice. And then, things improve for the state, but the "Emergency sacrifices" stay in place. Tennessee is doing this one right now. Massive cuts to the education budgets over the last 3 years, financial situation now improving, first thing that happens...tax cuts. Alabama State Rep. says raising teachers' salaries is unchristian "It's a Biblical principle. If you double a teacher's pay scale, you'll attract people who aren't called to teach. "To go in and raise someone's child for eight hours a day, or many people's children for eight hours a day, requires a calling. It better be a calling in your life. I know I wouldn't want to do it, OK? "And these teachers that are called to teach, regardless of the pay scale, they would teach. It's just in them to do. It's the ability that God give 'em. And there are also some teachers, it wouldn't matter how much you would pay them, they would still perform to the same capacity. "If you don't keep that in balance, you're going to attract people who are not called, who don't need to be teaching our children. So, everything has a balance." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Feb 7, 2012 -> 11:24 PM) Did you guys see Obama during the Google+ question/answer session? some lady mentioned her husband was unemployed. Obama sarcastically quipped "Oh wow, that really surprises me (rolls eyes)". He is totally out of touch and siding the wall street bankers. was that the one where he spent 3 minutes trying to offer the person a job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 07:49 AM) was that the one where he spent 3 minutes trying to offer the person a job? Why are you feeding the troll... again? He is obviously trying to get a reaction. It is obvious to him and everyone else what that quote meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 08:04 AM) Why are you feeding the troll... again? He is obviously trying to get a reaction. It is obvious to him and everyone else what that quote meant. Sure, Obama hates the unemployed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 09:04 AM) Why are you feeding the troll... again? He is obviously trying to get a reaction. It is obvious to him and everyone else what that quote meant. I was seriously asking if it was the person he seemed like he was trying to hire or if there was another one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 08:05 AM) Sure, Obama hates the unemployed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 08:22 AM) I'm channeling my inner MrG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 8, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) I'm channeling my inner MrG. Spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 03:44 PM) Obama is attempting to sell homeowners down the river to protect banks from any real litigation over their many dishonest practices in the last several years. The latest move to get AG Schneiderman behind the mortgage settlement deal by placing him on a joke of an investigation committee is winning over his liberal apologists. Yet More Mortgage Settlement Lies: Release Looks Broad, Not Narrow; Other States Screwed to Bribe California to Join This terrible deal is going to go through. Every state but Oklahoma is now on-board for giving banks a slap on the wrist for committing massive mortgage fraud for years and leading the economy off a cliff. edit: Oklahoma's AG is staying out of the deal because he doesn't believe the banks should face any penalty. OBAMA!!!! http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/02/the...settlement.html This is the best (worst) part: 2. That $26 billion is actually $5 billion of bank money and the rest is your money. The mortgage principal writedowns are guaranteed to come almost entirely from securitized loans, which means from investors, which in turn means taxpayers via Fannie and Freddie, pension funds, insurers, and 401 (k)s. Refis of performing loans also reduce income to those very same investors. Edited February 9, 2012 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts