A Perfect Romney Flashback That Will Make You Wish We Could Repeat 2012

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 167
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    BOARD REP
    FUZO's Avatar


    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    736
    Rep Points
    43025767

    A Perfect Romney Flashback That Will Make You Wish We Could Repeat 2012

    This twat Obama has been wrong every step of the way



    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/03/1190...h-repeat-2012/

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    ELITE MEMBER
    charley's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    as far from you as possible
    Posts
    6,232
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Ahhh Yes !!! I remember it well, but what face ????


  3. #3
    Registered User
    Swiper's Avatar


    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,747
    Rep Points
    155240554

    -S-

  4. #4
    Registered User
    solidassears's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    111
    Rep Points
    14304855

    Romney was right there is 47% who are dependent on the government; which is just the rest of us who work. Government has no money and produces nothing, it takes from productive citizens and buys the votes of the leeches with that money. At least 47% just voting to extend their government benefits. If Obama has it his way he will increase that to over 50% so that Democrats will always have the power; this is what Obamacare is all about; making everyone dependent on the government.

  5. #5
    YOU ME WE
    ELITE MEMBER
    IronAddict's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    In my skin
    Posts
    10,360
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Sometimes a revisionists look at history can be fun, but not when it's used this way.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Standard Donkey's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    6,164
    Rep Points
    541944246

    Quote Originally Posted by charley View Post
    Ahhh Yes !!! I remember it well, but what face ????

    typical liberal lol...too stupid to see that these "faces" aren't contradicting each other

  7. #7
    .45 ACP rules!


    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,586
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by FUZO View Post
    This twat Obama has been wrong every step of the way



    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/03/1190...h-repeat-2012/
    I'd still vote the same way and I didn't vote for either one. Both are bad for the country. I'm not willing to sacrifice my principles simply to vote for a political party name. It would be stupid to do that since both parties really are the same, and neither one has the interests of you or this country in mind.
    If gunners were as violent as anti-gunners believe, logically there wouldn't be any anti-gunners left.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    ELITE MEMBER
    charley's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    as far from you as possible
    Posts
    6,232
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Standard Donkey View Post
    typical liberal lol...too stupid to see that these "faces" aren't contradicting each other

    Your choice of ' Donkey' in you name is a source of amusement, understanding just how 'stubborn & stupid' you are is expressed in your 'Che' avi, a pure commie if there ever was one.

    Maybe change you name & avi to DUMB BELL.... suites you very well !

  9. #9
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by charley View Post
    Your choice of ' Donkey' in you name is a source of amusement, understanding just how 'stubborn & stupid' you are is expressed in your 'Che' avi, a pure commie if there ever was one.

    Maybe change you name & avi to DUMB BELL.... suites you very well !
    Hmmmm,


    • A donkey is stronger than a horse of the same size.
    • Donkeys have an incredible memory - they can recognise areas and other donkeys they were with up to 25 years ago.
    • Donkeys are not easily startled (unlike horses) and have a keen sense of curiosity.
    • Donkeys have a reputation for stubbornness but this is due to their highly developed sense of self preservation. It is difficult to force or frighten a donkey into doing something it sees as contrary to its own best interest or safety.
    • Donkeys are more independent in their thinking than horses and will reason, then make decisions based on their safety.
    • Training a donkey relies upon showing him or her, by words and action, that they can trust you to protect them from harm. They learn what it is we want them to do if we take time to show them.


    Apparently donkeys are being maligned unfairly. They apparently are neither stubborn nor stupid.
    Last edited by Mccringleberry; 03-05-2014 at 12:37 PM.

  10. #10
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    You are welcomed to cast aspersions at me but I agree with SD about Romney. Romney is right on both counts. The two heads are not contradictory. Both statements are true.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    NoviceAAS's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    719
    Rep Points
    106841654

    If Romney and his party believe Americans deserve more take home pay, why is it always republicans fighting against any increase to minnimum wage ?

  12. #12
    YOU ME WE
    ELITE MEMBER
    IronAddict's Avatar


    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    In my skin
    Posts
    10,360
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by NoviceAAS View Post
    If Romney and his party believe Americans deserve more take home pay, why is it always republicans fighting against any increase to minnimum wage ?
    typical american politics, say 1 thing and do another! And we now prepare for hilary, this shit is already predetermined. They just put a black man in there cause the last dope screwed up something fierce, they had to keep the populace satisfied, so they made you think there was gonna be change. Give me a phuquin break!

  13. #13
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by NoviceAAS View Post
    If Romney and his party believe Americans deserve more take home pay, why is it always republicans fighting against any increase to minnimum wage ?


    This is a typical strawman argument. Poor democrats have been voting Democrat forever and they are still poor Democrats so they use the old standby of "let's engage in class warfare and blame those rich republicans". Not the ultra rich democrats mind you, only those fat cat republicans. Read a bit about it and you'll see why there are people on both sides of the fence who are opposed to the raise.

    And before you call me a tea bagger or some other inane colloquialism I'm neither republican or democrat. They are both crooks that wipe themselves with the documents they purport to defend.

    Roughly 2.3 percent (one reference showed it as high as 4.7%) of hourly workers make the "minimum wage". That means for that 2.3 percent (to 4.7%), assuming they are working a 40 hour work week, are making roughly $15,100 a year. That is a big assumption because obamacare has made many employers cut their employees hours under 30 so they don't have to pay the obama tax.

    Now if we raise the minimum wage to the proposed $9.00 an hour the earner now makes roughly $18,700 a year, again assuming that they aren't limited to under 30 hours a week due to obamacare fees.

    Is that going to solve the problem? No way. As a matter of fact as businesses normally do they will raise the prices of things like happy meals and groceries to make up for the extra money they have to spend. This will raise the prices for the people who just got a bump in pay. They will also cut their work force to make up for the extra cash outlay.

    So let's just bump everyone to $15.00 an hour, right? Makes sense. Then the earners in an entry level job will be making double what they are now. And the businesses will just take it in stride and not raise the prices of products right?

    Wrong. Two things will happen. Employers will lay off employees and prices will go up in every industry affected.

    Here's another point of view by Don Boudraeux;
    "If government enacts legislation setting the minimum price that people can pay for a new car at $50,000, do you believe that this legislation will result in people paying $50,000 for the likes of Toyota Corollas and Ford Fiestas? Or do you realize that if government obliges car buyers to pay at least $50,000 for a new vehicle, these buyers will choose to buy no low-end cars and opt (if they buy a new car at all) instead to purchase a new BMW, Lexus, or other luxury model?"

    If a company has to pay 15 an hour for a worker do you think he's going to hire the people that they currently have working for them or more qualified people? Who would you hire? I'm hiring the guy who graduated from college with a human studies degree who has no hope of using it to become gainfully employed over someone without a HS degree. I guess I'm just a dick that way.

  14. #14
    .45 ACP rules!


    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,586
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Mccringleberry View Post

    This is a typical strawman argument. Poor democrats have been voting Democrat forever and they are still poor Democrats so they use the old standby of "let's engage in class warfare and blame those rich republicans". Not the ultra rich democrats mind you, only those fat cat republicans. Read a bit about it and you'll see why there are people on both sides of the fence who are opposed to the raise.

    And before you call me a tea bagger or some other inane colloquialism I'm neither republican or democrat. They are both crooks that wipe themselves with the documents they purport to defend.

    Roughly 2.3 percent (one reference showed it as high as 4.7%) of hourly workers make the "minimum wage". That means for that 2.3 percent (to 4.7%), assuming they are working a 40 hour work week, are making roughly $15,100 a year. That is a big assumption because obamacare has made many employers cut their employees hours under 30 so they don't have to pay the obama tax.

    Now if we raise the minimum wage to the proposed $9.00 an hour the earner now makes roughly $18,700 a year, again assuming that they aren't limited to under 30 hours a week due to obamacare fees.

    Is that going to solve the problem? No way. As a matter of fact as businesses normally do they will raise the prices of things like happy meals and groceries to make up for the extra money they have to spend. This will raise the prices for the people who just got a bump in pay. They will also cut their work force to make up for the extra cash outlay.

    So let's just bump everyone to $15.00 an hour, right? Makes sense. Then the earners in an entry level job will be making double what they are now. And the businesses will just take it in stride and not raise the prices of products right?

    Wrong. Two things will happen. Employers will lay off employees and prices will go up in every industry affected.

    Here's another point of view by Don Boudraeux;
    "If government enacts legislation setting the minimum price that people can pay for a new car at $50,000, do you believe that this legislation will result in people paying $50,000 for the likes of Toyota Corollas and Ford Fiestas? Or do you realize that if government obliges car buyers to pay at least $50,000 for a new vehicle, these buyers will choose to buy no low-end cars and opt (if they buy a new car at all) instead to purchase a new BMW, Lexus, or other luxury model?"

    If a company has to pay 15 an hour for a worker do you think he's going to hire the people that they currently have working for them or more qualified people? Who would you hire? I'm hiring the guy who graduated from college with a human studies degree who has no hope of using it to become gainfully employed over someone without a HS degree. I guess I'm just a dick that way.
    You can't be against having people on welfare while at the same time be against those same people making enough money to live on. That's like wanting to fuck a disease ridden hooker without a rubber and expecting to not get an STD from it.
    If gunners were as violent as anti-gunners believe, logically there wouldn't be any anti-gunners left.

  15. #15
    .45 ACP rules!


    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,586
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Mccringleberry View Post
    Hmmmm,


    • A donkey is stronger than a horse of the same size.
    • Donkeys have an incredible memory - they can recognise areas and other donkeys they were with up to 25 years ago.
    • Donkeys are not easily startled (unlike horses) and have a keen sense of curiosity.
    • Donkeys have a reputation for stubbornness but this is due to their highly developed sense of self preservation. It is difficult to force or frighten a donkey into doing something it sees as contrary to its own best interest or safety.
    • Donkeys are more independent in their thinking than horses and will reason, then make decisions based on their safety.
    • Training a donkey relies upon showing him or her, by words and action, that they can trust you to protect them from harm. They learn what it is we want them to do if we take time to show them.


    Apparently donkeys are being maligned unfairly. They apparently are neither stubborn nor stupid.
    It's ironic that he uses donkey in his name while at the same time a donkey is the symbol of the democratic party. Perhaps that is lost on you.
    If gunners were as violent as anti-gunners believe, logically there wouldn't be any anti-gunners left.

  16. #16
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
    You can't be against having people on welfare while at the same time be against those same people making enough money to live on. That's like wanting to fuck a disease ridden hooker without a rubber and expecting to not get an STD from it.
    Well how can you argue with a well thought out articulate analogy like that?

    Where did you get the idea that he or I were talking about welfare? I was responding to the minimum wage question. What you just did was pull out a strawman argument. If you think that the majority or even the minority of hourly workers are making $7.25 you are sorely mistaken. I pretty much spelled that out.


    I believe there are a lot of people that need welfare to survive. My aunt was one of them and I'm thankful she had it. She was on it long enough to find a job then got off of it. But I've seen with my own eyes that there is a lot of corruption in the welfare system. I have worked with people that refuse to get married so the "wife" gets to stay home and collect welfare while the "husband" goes to work and makes 50-60K. I used to work at a grocery store where a several couples would drive in a a nice SUV, dressed to the nines and sit there while the wife pays for all the food the WIC plan and food stamps could buy then have the husband come in behind her paying for the beer,cigarettes, steak etc with his debit card.


    We have all seen that there are more Americans accepting handouts from the government plantation than are not. Whose paying for all that? The ones of us not on the plantation.


    Now the minimum wage. What should it be? What's the liveable wage? $15 an hour? $19 an hour? How much more of your paycheck do you want to give up to pay for it? How much should we pay an entry level burger flipper at a fast food place? Those are entry level jobs and not skilled labor. The market wont bear it and it will result in more unemployment.


    Instead of hookers with STD analogies come up with an argument on how this should work.

  17. #17
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
    It's ironic that he uses donkey in his name while at the same time a donkey is the symbol of the democratic party. Perhaps that is lost on you.
    I think the sarcasm and irony was over your head.

  18. #18
    Regular user
    Gissurjon's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    in
    Posts
    1,310
    Rep Points
    160945391

    Quote Originally Posted by Swiper View Post
    To be fair, Obama started out with the shirtless buckin around look, when he first came into office. He got blasted by every Republican talk show host (I am a regular listener) and news person for being unprofessional. Hannity creams his pants every time he sees a pic of Obama without his jacket on....inside his office....

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Swiper's Avatar


    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,747
    Rep Points
    155240554

    Quote Originally Posted by Gissurjon View Post
    To be fair, Obama started out with the shirtless buckin around look, when he first came into office. He got blasted by every Republican talk show host (I am a regular listener) and news person for being unprofessional. Hannity creams his pants every time he sees a pic of Obama without his jacket on....inside his office....
    you're right I forgot.

    ImageUploadedByTapatalk1394074529.223958.jpg
    -S-

  20. #20
    .45 ACP rules!


    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,586
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Mccringleberry View Post
    Well how can you argue with a well thought out articulate analogy like that?

    Where did you get the idea that he or I were talking about welfare? I was responding to the minimum wage question. What you just did was pull out a strawman argument. If you think that the majority or even the minority of hourly workers are making $7.25 you are sorely mistaken. I pretty much spelled that out.


    I believe there are a lot of people that need welfare to survive. My aunt was one of them and I'm thankful she had it. She was on it long enough to find a job then got off of it. But I've seen with my own eyes that there is a lot of corruption in the welfare system. I have worked with people that refuse to get married so the "wife" gets to stay home and collect welfare while the "husband" goes to work and makes 50-60K. I used to work at a grocery store where a several couples would drive in a a nice SUV, dressed to the nines and sit there while the wife pays for all the food the WIC plan and food stamps could buy then have the husband come in behind her paying for the beer,cigarettes, steak etc with his debit card.


    We have all seen that there are more Americans accepting handouts from the government plantation than are not. Whose paying for all that? The ones of us not on the plantation.


    Now the minimum wage. What should it be? What's the liveable wage? $15 an hour? $19 an hour? How much more of your paycheck do you want to give up to pay for it? How much should we pay an entry level burger flipper at a fast food place? Those are entry level jobs and not skilled labor. The market wont bear it and it will result in more unemployment.


    Instead of hookers with STD analogies come up with an argument on how this should work.
    Not a strawman argument at all. Unless declaring everything you can't defend against a strawman is your only argument, which seems to be the case. Welfare is very much a part of this as people making minimum wage who are not kids living at home have a good chance of being on welfare because that minimum wage isn't enough to live on.
    If gunners were as violent as anti-gunners believe, logically there wouldn't be any anti-gunners left.

  21. #21
    Super Moderator
    SUPER MODERATOR
    Bowden's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    I love it when a plan comes together - KOS - Anything Goes MOD . KOS = the MOD that IM deserves.
    Posts
    1,755
    Rep Points
    811734254

    "Wrong. Two things will happen. Employers will lay off employees and prices will go up in every industry affected."

    Leading to...


    Employers will lay off employees.
    The employees left after the layoffs will be overworked, have a loss of moral and be unmotivated to provide proper customer service.
    The employer will experience higher rates of employee turnover and incur increased employee costs related to increased employee recruitment and training.
    Increased costs due to increased turnover causing increases in recruitment and training will reduce profit margins.
    The employees hired will not be as productive due to lack of experience.

    Employers will have a reduction in customer service levels leading to a decline in customer satisfaction.
    As a result customers will stop buying goods and services from the employers company and migrate to where they receive higher levels of customer service.
    The company profit margin will decline due to declining customers resulting in lost sales.
    The company will go out of business due to lack of customers.

    Employers + Employees + Customers form a symbiotic circle of economic life :-D



    Quote Originally Posted by Mccringleberry View Post

    This is a typical strawman argument. Poor democrats have been voting Democrat forever and they are still poor Democrats so they use the old standby of "let's engage in class warfare and blame those rich republicans". Not the ultra rich democrats mind you, only those fat cat republicans. Read a bit about it and you'll see why there are people on both sides of the fence who are opposed to the raise.

    And before you call me a tea bagger or some other inane colloquialism I'm neither republican or democrat. They are both crooks that wipe themselves with the documents they purport to defend.

    Roughly 2.3 percent (one reference showed it as high as 4.7%) of hourly workers make the "minimum wage". That means for that 2.3 percent (to 4.7%), assuming they are working a 40 hour work week, are making roughly $15,100 a year. That is a big assumption because obamacare has made many employers cut their employees hours under 30 so they don't have to pay the obama tax.

    Now if we raise the minimum wage to the proposed $9.00 an hour the earner now makes roughly $18,700 a year, again assuming that they aren't limited to under 30 hours a week due to obamacare fees.

    Is that going to solve the problem? No way. As a matter of fact as businesses normally do they will raise the prices of things like happy meals and groceries to make up for the extra money they have to spend. This will raise the prices for the people who just got a bump in pay. They will also cut their work force to make up for the extra cash outlay.

    So let's just bump everyone to $15.00 an hour, right? Makes sense. Then the earners in an entry level job will be making double what they are now. And the businesses will just take it in stride and not raise the prices of products right?

    Wrong. Two things will happen. Employers will lay off employees and prices will go up in every industry affected.

    Here's another point of view by Don Boudraeux;
    "If government enacts legislation setting the minimum price that people can pay for a new car at $50,000, do you believe that this legislation will result in people paying $50,000 for the likes of Toyota Corollas and Ford Fiestas? Or do you realize that if government obliges car buyers to pay at least $50,000 for a new vehicle, these buyers will choose to buy no low-end cars and opt (if they buy a new car at all) instead to purchase a new BMW, Lexus, or other luxury model?"

    If a company has to pay 15 an hour for a worker do you think he's going to hire the people that they currently have working for them or more qualified people? Who would you hire? I'm hiring the guy who graduated from college with a human studies degree who has no hope of using it to become gainfully employed over someone without a HS degree. I guess I'm just a dick that way.
    Last edited by Bowden; 03-06-2014 at 07:52 PM.

    PrunaGrow.com, the only Myostatin inhibiting geriatric Follistatin peptides that I trust 100%!!!
    NOW 10% OFF ON ALL YOUR SUPPLIES!!! Promo Code: Oldfartrep#1
    PRUNAGROW BODYBUILDING NUTRITION

    Discipline, patience, commitment and perseverance = Bodybuilding success.

  22. #22
    Super Moderator
    SUPER MODERATOR
    Bowden's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    I love it when a plan comes together - KOS - Anything Goes MOD . KOS = the MOD that IM deserves.
    Posts
    1,755
    Rep Points
    811734254

    You see this a lot in businesses like grocery stores that employ large numbers of part time employees at minimum wages that do not provide benefits like paid sick leave.
    Or in any business like a restaurant that follows the above pay low wages and benefits employee compensation models.

    There are high rates of employee turnover, high levels of inexperienced employees , instability in staffing patterns, a reduction in productivity leading to declines in customer service and customer satisfactions in those businesses.

    So when you go into a grocery store, cannot find anyone to assist you at say the deli counter and find yourself standing in long lines at the checkout counter then don't complain.
    Also don't complain when due to a lack of paid sick leave some of those employees go to work sick and contaminate with viruses and bacteria what you are buying in a grocery store and eating in a restaurant.

    Taking a chance on being infected and getting sick as hell due to sick employees who do not get sick pay is worth it as long as you do not have to pay say 5 cents more for the cost of your meal and your groceries to provide those employees with paid sick leave.
    Isn't it?

    PrunaGrow.com, the only Myostatin inhibiting geriatric Follistatin peptides that I trust 100%!!!
    NOW 10% OFF ON ALL YOUR SUPPLIES!!! Promo Code: Oldfartrep#1
    PRUNAGROW BODYBUILDING NUTRITION

    Discipline, patience, commitment and perseverance = Bodybuilding success.

  23. #23
    Super Moderator
    SUPER MODERATOR
    Bowden's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    I love it when a plan comes together - KOS - Anything Goes MOD . KOS = the MOD that IM deserves.
    Posts
    1,755
    Rep Points
    811734254

    The people that benefit the most from a company/business that employs a large number of part time workers that receive minimum wages and low or no benefits are the wealthy investor economic classes that own stock in those companies.
    The owners of that company/business.
    Or the highly compensated executives of those companies.
    The ROI and profits from those companies/businesses is flowing to the top.

    The rest of us suffer from the crap levels of customer service found in those businesses related to the type of employees that are employed in those businesses due to the levels of compensation those businesses provide.

    The impacts of high rates of employee turnover, high levels of inexperienced employees , instability in staffing patterns, and reduction in productivity lead to declines in customer service and customer satisfactions in those businesses.

    PrunaGrow.com, the only Myostatin inhibiting geriatric Follistatin peptides that I trust 100%!!!
    NOW 10% OFF ON ALL YOUR SUPPLIES!!! Promo Code: Oldfartrep#1
    PRUNAGROW BODYBUILDING NUTRITION

    Discipline, patience, commitment and perseverance = Bodybuilding success.

  24. #24
    Registered User
    bio-chem's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9,204
    Rep Points
    349837105

    Quote Originally Posted by Swiper View Post
    Holy shit. a black man with a farmers tan? WTF?
    Quote Originally Posted by LAM View Post
    Sheep get their news from the media, I get my news from Facebook. That's where the real unbiased news is found. any everyone from IM that is friends with me on FB knows this.

  25. #25
    Registered User
    bio-chem's Avatar


    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9,204
    Rep Points
    349837105

    right or wrong these fucking clowns in America would still vote Obama again. He lied in the first 4 years and the American people gave him 4 more. Even after the debacle that has been his 2nd term people would still vote Obama again over Romney. Even if there was a machine that would show people had they voted for Romney they would be better off they wouldn't believe it and still voted Obama.

    I for one voted Romney and believe he would have been astronomically better than Obama, but personally I'm glad Romney didn't win. As an LDS man I believe had Romney won every fucked up thing this country went through would have been blamed on Mormons. It wouldn't be about the difficult decisions Romney had to make, but the decisions "Mormon Romney" makes.

    Either way 52% of this countries voting populace is retarded for voting for Obama the second time, and somehow they will defend that ridiculous vote like it is their last gulp of air as they go under the waves on a sinking boat
    Quote Originally Posted by LAM View Post
    Sheep get their news from the media, I get my news from Facebook. That's where the real unbiased news is found. any everyone from IM that is friends with me on FB knows this.

  26. #26
    Moderator
    MODERATOR
    Dale Mabry's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    15,581
    Rep Points
    249481082

    Quote Originally Posted by bio-chem View Post
    right or wrong these fucking clowns in America would still vote Obama again. He lied in the first 4 years and the American people gave him 4 more. Even after the debacle that has been his 2nd term people would still vote Obama again over Romney. Even if there was a machine that would show people had they voted for Romney they would be better off they wouldn't believe it and still voted Obama.

    I for one voted Romney and believe he would have been astronomically better than Obama, but personally I'm glad Romney didn't win. As an LDS man I believe had Romney won every fucked up thing this country went through would have been blamed on Mormons. It wouldn't be about the difficult decisions Romney had to make, but the decisions "Mormon Romney" makes.

    Either way 52% of this countries voting populace is retarded for voting for Obama the second time, and somehow they will defend that ridiculous vote like it is their last gulp of air as they go under the waves on a sinking boat
    I didn't vote for Obama or Romney, but believe without a shadow of a doubt that we'd be far worse of under Romney. Maybe not middle of the road Romney, but definitely the policies he ran on. Until we get someone in there who takes entitlements, specifically subsidies and tax breaks, out of the system it really doesn't matter who's in there. I just have a sinking suspicion that this won't ever come from the GOP, I could be wrong but I doubt it given the Norquist pledge. The 2 party system needs to be broken up and the GOP is going to have to be the ones to do it. Face it, the nation is far more left than the GOP currently is, and that's sad given that the country is mostly center right.
    If sense were common, everyone would have it.

    4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

    Check out my world famous Bob Loblaw's Law Blog at http://www.synergyhw.blogspot.com/...Just kidding, it's a health and wellness blog.

  27. #27
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
    Not a strawman argument at all. Unless declaring everything you can't defend against a strawman is your only argument, which seems to be the case. Welfare is very much a part of this as people making minimum wage who are not kids living at home have a good chance of being on welfare because that minimum wage isn't enough to live on.
    When two people are addressing a topic, like minimum wage, and a third party comes in stating "You can't be against having people on welfare while at the same time be against those same people making enough money to live on." It is absolutely a strawman argument. I was arguing about the minimum wage and you tied it into welfare effectively derailing the original topic and making an accusation and assumptions about my beliefs and thoughts on welfare.

    And saying that is my only defense after I typed several paragraphs stating my stance shows me you really either didn't read or don't understand what I wrote.

    You haven't offered any solutions or addressed what I have said in any way. You're arguing on liberal talking points and not out of experience or research.

    If you look at the stats (from the dept of labor) half of the people making minimum wage are under 25 and a good percentage are in school. A large portion of those jobs are part time jobs. A portion of those are in the food service industry as servers and are paid no less then $2.13 an hour but make well over minimum wage with tips added in. They are still counted as minimum wage earners.

    Raising the minimum wage in effect is welfare. You are forcing businesses to pay people 2-3 times more then the market bears for unskilled labor in the name of giving them a "livable wage". What in your opinion is a livable wage? either hourly or annually?

    If businesses are forced to double someones pay across the board how can you possibly think it wont result in thousands of lost jobs and increased prices for products we use on a daily basis? Do you think the management and ceo's are going to take it on the chin and lose profits or do what they have to to stay profitable.

    Another question, if we double the wages and now the fry cook is making as much as the guy who worked his way up to management what happens then?

    I think you're short sighted and just can't see the far reaching ramifications this will have.

  28. #28
    Is Doin It 4 Da Shorteez
    LAM's Avatar


    Join Date
    May 2002
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Las Vegas & Florida & St. Croix
    Posts
    16,366
    Rep Points
    974265240

    Quote Originally Posted by bio-chem View Post
    I for one voted Romney and believe he would have been astronomically better than Obama, but personally I'm glad Romney didn't win. As an LDS man I believe had Romney won every fucked up thing this country went through would have been blamed on Mormons. It wouldn't be about the difficult decisions Romney had to make, but the decisions "Mormon Romney" makes.
    The US is following the same path as Japan did when their housing market crashed in 1992. They were the first country to experience a "balance sheet" recession. Which means that aggregate demand drops as spending is curbed by the private sector to pay down debt, the central bank stepped in to attempt to stabilize the economy and has artificially held interest rates low for almost 20 years now.

    Economists projected that in the US it would take a good 6-8 years for the de-levegeraing process in the US to start. 5 years later bankruptcy data shows that the majority of debt in the US is being discharged and is not being payed down, wage stagnation and loss might have something to do with that.

    Savings rates go up for those that can, spending goes down as debt payments are now the focus.

    So if one person or sectors spending is the income of another how exactly would the economy be better under a different POTUS when the current status of weak aggregate demand it's clearly a function of economics.
    William F. Buckley describes a conservative as, "someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop." - and then proceeds to drag civilization back to times best left in history's dungheap.

  29. #29
    .45 ACP rules!


    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    5,586
    Rep Points
    2147483647

    Quote Originally Posted by Mccringleberry View Post
    When two people are addressing a topic, like minimum wage, and a third party comes in stating "You can't be against having people on welfare while at the same time be against those same people making enough money to live on." It is absolutely a strawman argument. I was arguing about the minimum wage and you tied it into welfare effectively derailing the original topic and making an accusation and assumptions about my beliefs and thoughts on welfare.

    And saying that is my only defense after I typed several paragraphs stating my stance shows me you really either didn't read or don't understand what I wrote.

    You haven't offered any solutions or addressed what I have said in any way. You're arguing on liberal talking points and not out of experience or research.

    If you look at the stats (from the dept of labor) half of the people making minimum wage are under 25 and a good percentage are in school. A large portion of those jobs are part time jobs. A portion of those are in the food service industry as servers and are paid no less then $2.13 an hour but make well over minimum wage with tips added in. They are still counted as minimum wage earners.

    Raising the minimum wage in effect is welfare. You are forcing businesses to pay people 2-3 times more then the market bears for unskilled labor in the name of giving them a "livable wage". What in your opinion is a livable wage? either hourly or annually?

    If businesses are forced to double someones pay across the board how can you possibly think it wont result in thousands of lost jobs and increased prices for products we use on a daily basis? Do you think the management and ceo's are going to take it on the chin and lose profits or do what they have to to stay profitable.

    Another question, if we double the wages and now the fry cook is making as much as the guy who worked his way up to management what happens then?

    I think you're short sighted and just can't see the far reaching ramifications this will have.
    It isn't hurting other countries that require paying a wage you can live on. Being in management doesn't mean you are worth more than the next guy. Short sighted? Hardly.
    If gunners were as violent as anti-gunners believe, logically there wouldn't be any anti-gunners left.

  30. #30
    Registered User


    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    57
    Rep Points
    4302898

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
    It isn't hurting other countries that require paying a wage you can live on. Being in management doesn't mean you are worth more than the next guy. Short sighted? Hardly.
    Yep. Definitely a lib. You have dodged every question, added nothing to the discussion and made generalized references to utopian societies where everything is fair. That response is laughable.

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-21-2013, 03:10 PM
  2. Replies: 288
    Last Post: 08-31-2012, 05:43 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 10:02 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 10:02 PM
  5. Episode #35: Flashback! (11/9/2007)
    By Prince in forum Open Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 10:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
-->