BMW Luxury Touring Community

meese

Mar 6th, 2009, 12:28 am

Well, just picking nits here...but that would include pretty much every politician...especially the current crop in the White House now. Spending trillions of $$ we DON'T have is definately "not working within the economy".And how is that any different than the last bunch of crooks spending trillions that we didn't have, and are still paying for? No-bid Halliburton contracts? Zero-accountability bank bailouts? An insanely expensive war on a country that never attacked us?

The national debt doubled under Reagan/Bush, dropped significantly under Clinton, then shot back up under Bush Jr. So "especially" singling out the current crop makes no sense at all.

Or was the plan all along to get us so far in the hole that only another global war could pull us out? Too bad McBush wasn't given the chance to follow through on that plan.

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif

If you're gonna bitch and blame all the politicians, then at least blame all of them equally.

meese

Mar 6th, 2009, 12:45 am

When family members misstep, we do not abandon them; we support them and help them manage their challenges and get back on course.True enough, but when your brother/cousin/sister-in-law moves in, eats all your food, trashes your house, raids your wallet, and sells your car to feed their habit, then you do kick them out and let them fend for themselves. It's called tough love, or more accurately, it's called get the &@$# out and don't come back. ;)

Morley

Mar 6th, 2009, 6:04 am

And how is that any different than the last bunch of crooks spending trillions that we didn't have, and are still paying for? No-bid Halliburton contracts? Zero-accountability bank bailouts? An insanely expensive war on a country that never attacked us?

.
I would suggest you actually READ what someone writes and not try to see too many things that AREN'T there, you'll make out better in life that way.

Do you see this????
Well, just picking nits here...but that would include pretty much every politician
Does it sink in???? Did I exempt anyone, other than in YOUR mind????? The "especially" was because they are the CURRENT crop of spenders, got it??? Current.(not the berry)
You seem to think that it is your DUTY to try to trash my every post. That somehow you are "better". Get over yourself, it ain't so. Failiing that, at least take some pamprin.

hoog62

Mar 6th, 2009, 7:10 am

It's all the Republicans/Bush's fault.

Damn Ken, is there anything you won't twist around to an opportunity to grind your axe? Anything?

Here's a picture of a Duck.....GO!

http://cathyscamera.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/duck.jpg

patroa1

Mar 6th, 2009, 8:58 am

http://www.supportthebig3.com/letter.html Now, if you feel it is important, go ahead and click and read...
:rant:

Deacon, I did'nt see anyone comment on your link, I wonder why? Maybe it's easier to sit back and just smugly bash people without figuring out the truth. Let's look at some of the myths.

1. All autoworks are lazy. Really----- is this observation based on first hand knowledge or what someone's buddies cousins, uncle told them. Just look at some of the people on this site who seem to have unlimited time every day to surf the web while supposedly at work. I don't know any autoworkers that have time to do that, hell most of us barely had 30 minutes for lunch.

2. Autoworkers are overpaid. I don't think so------- Why is it that everybody knows what autoworkers make, but I sure don't know what you make , nor do I care. Working for GM was my career choice and I'am proud of the work I did.Why is it that American manufacturing use to set the example to the world for wages and benefits and now we are told we must settle for third world wages.Just so you know the average autoworker makes $28/hr that figures out to a base wage of $58,240 per year, not a ridiculous wage in my book but you people seem to think we should all work for $14/hr. which is a base wage of $29,120 which is $5,000 above poverty level for a family of four. How many of you want to work for that? If you did who buys the cars, houses, motorcycles and everything else, I'll tell you NOBODY, because the prices won't go down just everyones stanard of living, that goes for all you engineers, IT's and small business owners also.For God's sake people take your head out of your ass.

3. Too many benifits This I also won't apologize for because I agreed to work in a place with bad air, dangerous chemicals, etc. which I suspect most of you couldn't have hacked any way.I also don't believe health care is a Right... it's a privilege that I earned for working in those conditions. But if you believe that it's a Right and you want to pay 55% of your wages to have Universal health care like Europe ... Go For It.... just don't whine about the level of care.

I'am ashamed of what America has become We are no longer leaders we are followers. No longer do we set the goals for the rest of the world to strive for, now we say we have to be no better than you or even less.

When are we going to tell government to get out of our lives? When are we going to tell them to stop with the Unfunded Mandates, Unfair Trade agreements etc.

When Are We Going to Lead Again? Or are we going to just settle for less.:rant:

jayjacobson

Mar 6th, 2009, 1:05 pm

THE AUTO INDUSTRY BAILOUT
Obama team working 'around the clock' on auto crisis
Task force planning to visit Detroit, Bloomberg reports
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Barack Obama's administration is working "around the clock" to form an approach to the challenges facing General Motors and the auto industry, a White House spokeswoman said today.
"The administration is very mindful of the challenges in the auto sector," the spokeswoman said.
"Our team is working around the clock to develop the most thoughtful approach ... story Published: Mar 5 12:15 pm U.S. Eastern time [REG]
....Besides, you can't bitch about how this administration is handling an auto industry bailout and completely ignore the phenomenally wasteful bank bailout promoted and shoved through buy the last administration....
Sure you can! This administration WAS (as in PAST TENSE) about change, remember? NOT business as usual! :confused: Of course, the only "change" you're really getting is for your pocket! :( Oh the contortions you must withstand to support your "Messiah." :D
I think they should be allowed to fail. It's Darwinism at its best. ... Unable to compete ... Die out and someone else will fill the ecological niche. Just look what happened to the dinosaurs - Which on its own is not so bad of a comparison.

Everybody who is rigid enough NOT to work within the economy has no right of existing.
+1, Andy! AND what do you think will happen the next time the economy takes a big shit? :confused: You got it....We'll get to bail 'em out AGAIN! :eek: :wtf: :cussing: Porkulus is just so foolish on so many levels.... :( :crybaby:
And how is that any different than the last bunch of crooks spending trillions that we didn't have, and are still paying for?....
Ken, you're so quick to do contortions to defend your "Messiah" you did not even bother reading Morley's statement! He also included "every politician." So I guess our moms were right, after all....Just because someone does something stupid, does that mean you have to, also?! :confused:
True enough, but when your brother/cousin/sister-in-law moves in, eats all your food, trashes your house, raids your wallet, and sells your car to feed their habit, then you do kick them out and let them fend for themselves. It's called tough love, or more accurately, it's called get the &@$# out and don't come back. ;)
:rotf: Another zinger, mister! Hearing a huge socialist like you talking about tough love is quite amusing! :histerica
....When are we going to tell government to get out of our lives? When are we going to tell them to stop with the Unfunded Mandates, Unfair Trade agreements etc......When Are We Going to Lead Again? Or are we going to just settle for less.:rant:
:rotf: Pat, what are you suggesting, here? :confused: It ALMOST sounds like you're advocating personal RESPONSIBILITY! :eek: :eek2: Now I don't mind the "F" word, BUT, not even I can approve of the EVIL "R" word! :kaboom: This is a family forum, mister. You should be ashamed of yourself! :D Can you imagine what would happen if people started to figure out that they didn't need their local, worthless, nanny-state, big government hack--to run their lives?! :wack: Now let that be a lesson to you. :o :histerica

Morley

Mar 6th, 2009, 5:05 pm

:
2. Autoworkers are overpaid. I don't think so------- Why is it that everybody knows what autoworkers make,
.Just so you know the average autoworker makes $28/hr that figures out to a base wage of $58,240 per year
3. Too many benifits This I also won't apologize for because I agreed to work in a place with bad air, dangerous chemicals, etc. which I suspect most of you couldn't have hacked any way.

Just to rebutt some of your talking points:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_45/b3958038.htm

http://rightvoices.com/2008/11/18/average-total-compensation-for-a-big-three-autoworker-is-7321-an-hour-toyota-honda-and-nissan-pay-a-still-generous-4420-an-hour-in-total-compensation-%E2%80%94-a-cost-edge-of-nearly-40/ this one seems to have a political agenda.
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=02&year=2008&base_name=nutty_math_on_auto_worker_pay

Can you answer as to why the non-union non-big3 workers work under better conditions and are happy?

meese

Mar 6th, 2009, 7:16 pm

It's all the Republicans/Bush's fault.Hmm, maybe a little paraphrasing there, Dave? I give you facts and charts and figures and twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one is and you ignore all that and put words in my mouth instead? :rolleyes:

Damn Ken, is there anything you won't twist around to an opportunity to grind your axe? Anything?Tell you what, I'll stop bashing the right if y'all stop blaming every little thing in the world on that damn liberal left. Fair enough?

http://cathyscamera.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/duck.jpgWell, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . . :D

hoog62

Mar 6th, 2009, 8:39 pm

Tell you what, I'll stop bashing the right if y'all stop blaming every little thing in the world on that damn liberal left. Fair enough?

Sooner or later the left will need to get into the "now". They've been in control of Congress for quite awhile, and have basically been in control of the Presidency for a few months now. Obama made some big promises like...working with those from the other side of the aisle (fail so far), and the end of earmarks. Think he's going to veto the Omnibus bill? Yeah, I don't either...

Done is done...this is all on the Democrats now.

dshealey

Mar 6th, 2009, 8:56 pm

There is no mention there at all as to exactly what that approach might be. So no conclusions can be made yet.

Besides, you can't bitch about how this administration is handling an auto industry bailout and completely ignore the phenomenally wasteful bank bailout promoted and shoved through buy the last administration. (Oops - I meant by the last administration, but perhaps that Freudian typo actually fits better.) $350 billion just handed over with no conditions attached and no accountability required at all? At least they had the sense to set the other $350 billion aside for someone else to handle.

Start talking about stringing up Paulson and all the bailout CEOs first, then maybe you'd have some credibility to start bitching about the Big Three. I was speaking about only the Auto Industry, particularly GM as that is the one in the news right now.

I agree with you on the bailouts, as I have already stated multiple times before. Absolutely NO need to keep bringing old news back up, as it is filthy water already under the bridge. No need to keep on making the same mistakes over and over though. Gotta start biting the bullet somewhere. Total sickness over the bailouts so far are making the majority of the public insensitive to the continuing gnashing of teeth by the companies now "needing" more money.

meese

Mar 6th, 2009, 11:33 pm

Obama made some big promises like...working with those from the other side of the aisle (fail so far), and the end of earmarks.And every attempt made has been rebuffed outright. The right has said point blank that they will fight him on every single item and do their damnedest to make him fail, then say "I told you so" just in time for the 2010 elections, or, at the latest, the 2012 elections.

As for earmarks, McCain couldn't be bothered to hold up his campaign promises and speak out against the previous pork, even when it would have cost him nothing and maybe even gained him some respect. But now he's all over the "wasteful pork spending" when once again, he has no hope of changing anything. So much for bi-partisan politics. And no, I never expected it to work, but I would have bet a fortune that things would go exactly this way.

The problem of course is that if he fails, we all fail. But none of that matters when your only goal is to get back into power, whatever the cost to the people that you're supposedly representing.

It's still very ugly out there, and it ain't gonna get any better if we all continue bickering. Let's see if all that glorious patriotism I kept hearing about can be used to pull ourselves together for the betterment of everyone, instead of driving the wedge deeper for the gain of a few at the expense of many.

I'm not holding my breath.

meese

Mar 6th, 2009, 11:39 pm

Absolutely NO need to keep bringing old news back up, as it is filthy water already under the bridge. No need to keep on making the same mistakes over and over though. Gotta start biting the bullet somewhere.I do understand, David. But it's hard to claim water under the bridge when folks here are still bitching about how Clinton got us into this whole mess.

And it is extremely frustrating the majority of the bitching and complaining about the new guy is over the exact same things that the old guy did. People have very short, selective memories when it suits them.

Hell, maybe Jay is right and we're all doomed anyway. Now there's a comforting thought. :eek:

jayjacobson

Mar 7th, 2009, 5:29 am

....Tell you what, I'll stop bashing the right if y'all stop blaming every little thing in the world on that damn liberal left. Fair enough?....
Tell YOU what, let's agree that there is more than enough blame to go around, and stop making excuses for these worthless hacks--including the current one! :)
....Well, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . . :D
So what you're saying is, "if the shoe fits, Cinderfella!" :D
....Hell, maybe Jay is right and we're all doomed anyway. Now there's a comforting thought. :eek:
Ken, you're STILL not understanding me. So let me try this AGAIN: if we keep doing the same things expecting different results, THEN we very well may be "doomed." Since we have been doing the same silly things for a very long time now, with much less than satisfactory results, perhaps it's time to try something new? :confused: :think:

hoog62

Mar 7th, 2009, 7:34 am

And every attempt made has been rebuffed outright. The right has said point blank that they will fight him on every single item and do their damnedest to make him fail, then say "I told you so" just in time for the 2010 elections, or, at the latest, the 2012 elections.
Of course you have a quote from an actual elected official that backs up, right? Or are you just parroting the administration's character assassination techniques? (When is the last time a sitting President publicly admonished a private citizen by name?) The Dems in Congress don't seem to have any intention of working with the other side of the aisle as evidenced by the "we won, too bad" comments that came out.

As for earmarks, McCain couldn't be bothered to hold up his campaign promises and speak out against the previous pork, even when it would have cost him nothing and maybe even gained him some respect. But now he's all over the "wasteful pork spending" when once again, he has no hope of changing anything. So much for bi-partisan politics. And no, I never expected it to work, but I would have bet a fortune that things would go exactly this way.
Again, "he did it too!!!" It's Obama's game; he ran on "Hope and Change". Let's see if it was anything more that lip service. He'll make a ton of points with me the day he snatches the leash on his own party instead of making lame excuses for them.

The problem of course is that if he fails, we all fail. But none of that matters when your only goal is to get back into power, whatever the cost to the people that you're supposedly representing.
Or when your goal is to push through your agenda, whatever the cost to the people that you're supposedly representing. The Dems control it all. If they/he fail(s), who else could they blame it on?

It's still very ugly out there, and it ain't gonna get any better if we all continue bickering. Let's see if all that glorious patriotism I kept hearing about can be used to pull ourselves together for the betterment of everyone, instead of driving the wedge deeper for the gain of a few at the expense of many.
Ken......you're standing on the wedge.

patroa1

Mar 7th, 2009, 9:04 am

Just to rebutt some of your talking points:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_45/b3958038.htm

http://rightvoices.com/2008/11/18/average-total-compensation-for-a-big-three-autoworker-is-7321-an-hour-toyota-honda-and-nissan-pay-a-still-generous-4420-an-hour-in-total-compensation-%E2%80%94-a-cost-edge-of-nearly-40/ this one seems to have a political agenda.
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=02&year=2008&base_name=nutty_math_on_auto_worker_pay

Can you answer as to why the non-union non-big3 workers work under better conditions and are happy?

Actually Morley this one that you sited http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/...auto_worker_pay supports my contention that autoworkers do not make $70/hr. (wages and benefits).

That $70/hr. figure comes from combining the hourly wages and benefits from active employee's and the pensions and health care costs of retiree's and then dividing that figure by the number of active employees only, this is a totally misleading number.

Non Big 3 companies like Toyota, Nissan,etc. pay their employees about what the Big 3 pay in wages and benefits and in time their legacy cost for retirees will start to approach the Big 3's and increase their costs overall, but the costs for total compensation for active employees will remain the same, about a less than $10/hr difference and that number is shrinking as we speak.

As far as Big 3 workers being unhappy .... I don't think so ..... I was never unhappy with the job, I was unhappy with some Company decisions that you knew where wrong and with the Union fighting to save the jobs of the 1% of deadbeats that you find in any company, and their silly work rules. The unions at one time helped to raise the standard of living for everybody now they are just big business like Ford, GM, IBM etc..

The working conditions in alot of the plants are horrible especially parts plants but you have to remember the age of these plants. The plant I worked at was old, it built Liberator bombers in WWII for crying out loud, it is really hard to upgrade ventilation etc.in a plant that old but they tried. They added a new separate plant inside the old one to build the "Six Speed " transmission that was state-of -the -art and a real pleasure to work in, as are most of the new plants. The transplants are les than 20 yrs. old, even so Eight of the 10 most productive vehicle assembly plants in North America belong to Chrysler, Ford or GM.

But I'm never going to change your mind about this just like nobody is going to change Meese's mind that Obama is a diaster, but thats another topic.

Morley

Mar 7th, 2009, 11:02 am

As far as Big 3 workers being unhappy .You read too much into it. I didn't say the big 3 workers were unhappy. What I was saying was that the non-union workers WERE happy, they have reasonable benifits, decent pay and good working conditions. Over all they seem to have better working conditions (and no union dues). If the unions are doing their jobs and "looking out for the workers", why are the non-union workers as or more productive than their union counterparts and as or more satisfied with their jobs?
I never claimed to "know" how much the union auto workers make, just what information I can glean from the net and news articles and interviews. And to that end...why are the big 3 in such dire straights compared to the other auto mfg's?

patroa1

Mar 7th, 2009, 12:01 pm

You read too much into it. I didn't say the big 3 workers were unhappy. What I was saying was that the non-union workers WERE happy, they have reasonable benifits, decent pay and good working conditions. Over all they seem to have better working conditions (and no union dues). If the unions are doing their jobs and "looking out for the workers", why are the non-union workers as or more productive than their union counterparts and as or more satisfied with their jobs?
I never claimed to "know" how much the union auto workers make, just what information I can gleem from the net and news articles and interviews. And to that end...why are the big 3 in such dire straights compared to the other auto mfg's?

Morley, if you check sales figures for the other auto companies are just as dismal as the Big 3 and the Big 3 are not subsidized by the goverment as are the other manufactures are.
Also they pay their workers close to union wages and are located in the south where the cost of living is lower, thus keeping the union out.

I'm not a big union fan for a lot of reasons but I'am a "Proud GM Retiree" .

Check the J.D. Power reports and you will see we now match or exceed the quality of foreign manufactures, no easy task when you consider the crap the companies forced us to build in the 80's.

Morley

Mar 7th, 2009, 12:19 pm

Morley, if you check sales figures for the other auto companies are just as dismal as the Big 3 and the Big 3 are not subsidized by the goverment as are the other manufactures are.
Also they pay their workers close to union wages and are located in the south where the cost of living is lower, thus keeping the union out.

I'm not a big union fan for a lot of reasons but I'am a "Proud GM Retiree" .

Check the J.D. Power reports and you will see we now match or exceed the quality of foreign manufactures, no easy task when you consider the crap the companies forced us to build in the 80's.
Yes, the "others" are suffering from non sales BUT it hasn't been going on as long as the big 3's problems. GM's sales have been flagging for a long time now...I will say, I have ALWAYS bought GM products (except that $150 Toyota I had in Germany). And I will say...their quality in several departments has been lacking... In the 70's..still using old tech. In the 80's, interior design and materials..very poor, this reached into the 90's...After that, priced out of what I am willing to pay for a car.
And service? Once my cars' warantees expired, GM never touched another car I owned. even under warantee they were lackluster but I wasn't going to pay for the parts.

meese

Mar 7th, 2009, 12:51 pm

Since we have been doing the same silly things for a very long time now, with much less than satisfactory results, perhaps it's time to try something new? :confused: :think:Oh, I understand you, Jay. But again I ask" What do we do about it?" Give us a comprehensive, cohesive plan that we can all get behind and that will actually have a positive impact and then we'll see some real change. Until then, it's all just the same old silly words over and over again.

meese

Mar 7th, 2009, 12:58 pm

Of course you have a quote from an actual elected official that backs up, right?Did you not hear the CPAC speech? "I want Barack Obama to fail." The speech is littered with many other ludicrous quotes as well. My favorite is "Because, after all, what's important in politics is winning elections. And so we have to understand that the American people, they want Big Government. We just have to find a way to tell them we're no longer opposed to that." Um, I'm sorry, isn't the whole right wing platform based on less government and the ability for each of us to do our best to succeed?

You should read the whole speech sometime. It'd be rather entertaining if this guy wasn't actually serious. But at least he's consistent. He said on his own show, before Obama was even sworn in “I disagree fervently with the people on our [Republican] side of the aisle who have caved and who say, ‘Well, I hope he succeeds.’ I hope he fails."

True, Rush isn't "elected" but at this moment he is the de facto leader of the GOP. And if you don't believe that, then how is it that Michael Steele, the RNC Chairman calls him "Incendiary and Ugly" one day, then actually apologizes to him the next? Is that something like being shot in the face, then apologizing to the guy who shot you? Tell me, who has the power base here?

Then again, Rush isn't known for his comprehensive grip on reality. After all, this is a man who condemns drug users and mocks rehabilitation yet has admitted his own serious addiction to opiates. But it's understandable that he might be a bit confused, as this is the same guy who stated quite emphatically "There is no conclusive proof that nicotine's addictive...and the same thing with cigarettes causing emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease." So much for decades of research and Surgeon General's reports, then. But at least he's known for his sincere belief in Family Values: "I believe that strong, wholesome family values are at the very core of a productive, prosperous, and peaceful society." Yet he has been divorced three times, and usually with the next "girlfriend" already waiting in the wings. Then again, what do you expect from a guy that makes $45 million/year, but claims that the official poverty line isn't really a problem for many Americans: "$14,400 for a family of four? That's not so bad." Hmm.

But if the GOP is comfortable with him as their spokesperson, then I say, let them have him.

SLTex

Mar 7th, 2009, 3:29 pm

Ken,

You are always pissed about something. Now you are pissed about Rush.

Are you every happy? Take a deep breath and tell us what you are not pissed about.

I am happy to be alive, happy to be a Texan, happy to be an American, happy to be a veteran and happy to ride an LT. There I started it. Try it, you will feel better.

No conservative or liberal, left or right, just right down the middle, life isn't that bad!

:) SLTex

meese

Mar 7th, 2009, 4:02 pm

Just answering a direct question . . . :)

But I have to admit, this is pretty funny:

http://www.dd.chalmers.se/~joherik/foto/gravmaskin.jpg

hoog62

Mar 7th, 2009, 4:36 pm

Just answering a direct question . . . :)

...and the (too) simple answer was "No, I don't". But as I thought, you could only came back with the party line....demonize Rush. You do learn well from your Liberal overlords.

Here's a little clue...if Rush had the influence the left gives him credit for, McCain wouldn't have walked away with the GOP nomination.

Now, Rush's speech at CPAC, in context, ....

It didn't take long for people to get fired up when they figured out that they're going to be paying mortgages for people who should never have been lent money in the first place for the bogus excuse of maintaining property values in the neighborhood. This is something that -- the complacency of the American people is something they're going to rely on along with their authoritarian efforts to control it. But they will not succeed at this. Because we're not quitters. We don't acquiesce. We're not going to give up the American dream and watch idly while it is restructured and transformed.

As I say, we want the best: Happiness for everybody. Now, about my still-to-me mysteriously controversial comment that I hope President Obama fails. I was watching the Super Bowl. And as you know, I love the Pittsburgh Steelers. [Cheers and Applause] So they have this miraculous scoring drive that puts them up by four, 15 seconds left. Kurt Warner on the field for the Cardinals. And I sure as heck want you to know I hope he failed. I did not want the Cardinals to win. I wanted Warner to make the biggest fool of himself possible. I wanted a sack, I wanted anything. I wanted the Steelers to win. I wanted to win. I wanted the Cardinals to fail.

This notion that I want the President to fail, folks, this shows you a sign of the problem we've got. That's nothing more than common sense and to not be able to say it, why in the world do I want what we just described, rampant government growth indebtedness, wealth that's not even being created yet that is being spent, what is in this? What possibly is in this that anybody of us wants to succeed? Did the Democrats want the war on Iraq to fail!

CROWD: Yes!

RUSH: They certainly did. They not only wanted the war in Iraq to fail, they proclaimed it a failure. There's Dingy Harry Reid waiving a white flag: [doing Harry Reid impression] "This war is lost. This war is" -- [Cheers and Applause] They called General Petraeus a liar before he even testified. Mrs. Clinton -- [Crowd Booing] -- said she had to, willingly suspend disbelief in order to listen to Petraeus. We're in the process of winning the war. The last thing they wanted was to win. They hoped George Bush failed. So what is so strange about being honest to say that I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed?

Let me add a caveat here. My friends, I know what's going on. I know what's going on. We're in the aspects here of an historic presidency. I know that. But let me be honest again. I got over the historical aspects of this in November. President Obama is our president. President Obama stands for certain things. I don't care, he could be a Martian. He could be from Michigan, I don't know -- just kidding. Doesn't matter to me what his race is. It doesn't matter. He's liberal is what matters to me. And his articulated -- his articulated plans scare me. Now, I understand we can't say we want the President to fail, Mr. Limbaugh. That's like saying -- this is the voice of the New Castrati, by the way, guys who have lost their guts. You can't say Mr. Limbaugh that you want the President to fail because that's like saying you want the country to fail. It's the opposite. I want the country to survive. I want the country to succeed.

I want the country to survive as we have known it, as you and I were raised in it, is what I mean. Now, I have been called -- and I can take it. Pioneers take the arrows, I don't mind what anybody says about me, any time ever. I don't have time for it. I don't give other people the power to offend me. And you shouldn't either, by the wasted time being offended.

I mean, there's some people you can't say you want the President to fail. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States, the Democrat Party has actively not just sought the failure of Republican presidents and policies and now wars for the first time, the Democrat Party doesn't stop at failure. Talk to Judge Robert Bork or Justice Clarence Thomas about how they tried to destroy lives, reputations and character, and I'm supposed to say I don't want the President to fail? We're in for a real battle. We are talking about the United States of America -- and there will always be an America, don't misunderstand me -- we're talking about it remaining the country we were all born into and reared and grown into. And it's under assault. It's always under assault. But it's never been under assault like this from within before. And it's a serious, serious battle.

jayjacobson

Mar 7th, 2009, 6:37 pm

Oh, I understand you, Jay. But again I ask" What do we do about it?" Give us a comprehensive, cohesive plan that we can all get behind and that will actually have a positive impact and then we'll see some real change. Until then, it's all just the same old silly words over and over again.
We'll can start with the premise that throwing money at every problem is not the answer, but the problem. Tax rates are way to high and the government is way to big, on all levels. Instead of porkulus, how about some personal responsibility? What I mean is that we all need to change the way we think about money and how we spend it--or allow it to be spent, in this case. All this toxic debt associated with these toxic companies needs to be cleared from the economy, not enabled--so the next time the economy goes to shit, we have to pork them out again. Of course, the archaeic tax system, which allows these nanny-state hacks so much control over our lives needs to be scraped, and replaced with a very small consumtion tax. The federal government has way to much of our money to spend on all of this tom foolery. I'd yes that gives us a few years of work to do. We can then go from there. :)

Also, instead of worrying about the "defacto leader of the GOP," or any other group of worthless hacks, let's all start thinking for ourselves! Maybe that can be added to our personal responsibilty, also.
Morley, if you check sales figures for the other auto companies are just as dismal as the Big 3 and the Big 3 are not subsidized by the goverment as are the other manufactures are.
Also they pay their workers close to union wages and are located in the south where the cost of living is lower, thus keeping the union out.

I'm not a big union fan for a lot of reasons but I'am a "Proud GM Retiree" .

Check the J.D. Power reports and you will see we now match or exceed the quality of foreign manufactures, no easy task when you consider the crap the companies forced us to build in the 80's.
Pat, maybe if the worthless hacks at GM listened to guys like you, they wouldn't be on the verge of bankruptcy? AND I don't care how big their profits are, there is no reason to have a corporate jet(s). The top hack(s) can buy a business class ticket just like all the rest of us that need to fly and work at the same time! But, of course, that's really up to their board of hack control.

pickerbiker

Mar 7th, 2009, 7:19 pm

...and this just in. Toyota and Honda seaking BILLIONS in loans from the Japanese government. Gee, guess they're just a bunch of idiots as well. What is it about the worldwide auto industry that seems to just attract poor business minds?

SLTex

Mar 7th, 2009, 8:32 pm

We agree. That is funny!

bowlesj

Mar 7th, 2009, 8:36 pm

1. All autoworks are lazy. Really----- is this observation based on first hand knowledge

As I have said on this site before. Yes they are truly unskilled, performing the same function every 1.5 minutes. I can train in on any assembly line job in 30 minutes. Yes, stated from experience.

When one of the UAW can learn in 30 minutes to trouble shoot a commercial aircraft autopilot, repair it, and declare it airworthy to transport your family around the world, for an expected salary of $20/hr then we'll talk.

2. Autoworkers are overpaid. I don't think so------- Why is it that everybody knows what autoworkers make, but I sure don't know what you make , nor do I care. Working for GM was my career choice and I'am proud of the work I did.Why is it that American manufacturing use to set the example to the world for wages and benefits and now we are told we must settle for third world wages.Just so you know the average autoworker makes $28/hr that figures out to a base wage of $58,240 per year, not a ridiculous wage in my book but you people seem to think we should all work for $14/hr. which is a base wage of $29,120 which is $5,000 above poverty level for a family of four.

See above compensation expectation for those maintaining your transportation.

Furthermore, I currently have "unskilled" assembly workers working for me for $11 hour that any UAW worker I have ever met could NEVER learn to do their assembly job.

Life's a bitch and I'll be thrilled when the UAW figures that out. Sorry you may be personally affected by that learning process. Except if I remember correctly you are retired from an engine plant, so good on ya.

So just remember, some of us have been there and do know :cool:

Morley

Mar 7th, 2009, 8:57 pm

As I have said on this site before. Yes they are truly unskilled, performing the same function every 1.5 minutes.

When one of the UAW can learn in 30 minutes to trouble shoot a commercial aircraft autopilot, repair it, and declare it airworthy to transport your family around the world, for an expected salary of $20/hr then we'll talk.

That has been a common bitch from A&P's since they were declared "unskilled labor" while the UAW workers are "skilled labor". How many of the UAW workers have to go to school for 2 years and get licensed by the government to do their jobs?

bowlesj

Mar 7th, 2009, 9:04 pm

That has been a common bitch from A&P's since they were declared "unskilled labor" while the UAW workers are "skilled labor". How many of the UAW workers have to go to school for 2 years and get licensed by the government to do their jobs?

Thank you very much - the defense rests :)

meese

Mar 7th, 2009, 9:45 pm

We'll can start with the premise that throwing money at every problem is not the answer, but the problem.OK, lets go with that for a minute. Still the problem remains that those who throw the money around are in the perfect place to catch whatever happens to fall out around the edges. How do we fix that?

Not theoretically, mind you, but what are the steps that we as collective individuals can take? Voting them out doesn't work, because you just get a different class of money-grabbers in their place.

And I'm all for scrapping the tax code and going with a flat-rate based on earnings or consumption, but how do we actually make that happen? I'm listening . . .

meese

Mar 7th, 2009, 10:11 pm

Hey Dave, the Iraq war failed before it had begun - because they never attacked us. How can you "win" when you don't even know who the true enemy is? All the rest is just rhetoric and hand-waving, while handing out Billions in no-bid contracts to your old buddies and vilifying your detractors as unpatriotic. So scrap that entire paragraph.

And while the Super Bowl analogy is colorful and interesting, it simply doesn't apply here. Not unless the outcome of that game has a direct impact on the lives and livelihood of every single fan sitting in that stadium. That spectacle truly is a game, with two teams pitted against each other for nothing more than bragging rights, but it has no real effect at all on the lives of the spectators. So throw out that whole paragraph as well.

But politics isn't a game. Just ask any of the folks you know that have already lost their jobs, or are scared stiff that they're about to. This isn't about losing a $50 bet because your guy fumbled the ball. It's about whether any of us will still have a job to pay our bills, and a house to come home to after work each day.

As for the rest of us poor sods paying for those who bought houses that they couldn't afford, what makes that any different than paying for the second or third houses of morally bankrupt and criminal CEOs? I didn't sign up to bail out the banks or Wall Street, yet there goes my tax money just the same. So if they're gonna spend it (and you know they will), why not spend it on normal, working class Americans who are having a tough time, rather than giving it away to folks who make more money in a year than you and I will make in our lifetime? So kill that whole paragraph as well.

Now tell me, does he really have anything of substance left to say?

There was a recent comment here about Cobra insurance being too expensive. Seems to me that someone is trying to do something about that exact problem, so that maybe those who get caught up in all this mess can still afford to cover their families in case the worst happens. But somehow I doubt that will pass, as the health care companies are more concerned about daily profits than they are about taking care of folks who need it.

No, health care should not be free. But it should be available and affordable for normal, hard-working folks. Here's a thought: make health care affordable for the average citizen (yes, citizen - the illegals are on their own), then exempt our employers from paying for it at all. Families get the benefit of knowing they are covered even if they change jobs (or lose one), businesses get to drop their monthly expenses and thus are more competitive, health care workers still get paid and have plenty of job opportunities because there will be more patients, and the only ones who lose are the big corporations that have decided that profit means more than the care that they're supposed to be providing in the first place.

And maybe you could even start by auditing the existing health care rates for MediCare and other government-funded programs to make sure that those payments actually reflect the costs and values of the work being done, instead of just "whatever we can get away with."

Nah, that couldn't possibly work. I mean, who would have the audacity to propose such outrageous ideas, and actually have the power to pull them off? :rolleyes:

Fedexrider

Mar 8th, 2009, 12:00 am

Well Ken finally got through to me. I'm gonna drink the Koolaid, throw away my guns, and go burn some flags. I finally realized how much more highly evolved the left is :bowdown: . Come on all you naysayers and get on board the Socialist train. Weve got the Messiah at Engineer so what can go wrong? And if something does go wrong it will be Reagan/Bush's fault and we will be right and isn't being right the most important thing? ;) :rolleyes: :brick: :brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

jayjacobson

Mar 8th, 2009, 12:57 am

OK, lets go with that for a minute. Still the problem remains that those who throw the money around are in the perfect place to catch whatever happens to fall out around the edges. How do we fix that?....
Around the edges? :histerica You mean blatent robber barrens? Robbing the tax payers! :D
....but what are the steps that we as collective individuals can take? Voting them out doesn't work, because you just get a different class of money-grabbers in their place......And I'm all for scrapping the tax code and going with a flat-rate based on earnings or consumption, but how do we actually make that happen? I'm listening . . .
Yes, as long as we keep voting the "money-grabbers" in, we will continue to have porkulus as usual. If enough people get sick of it, maybe another political party will become viable. I wonder if people will ever get sick of some worthless hack running their life from cradle to grave? :think:
....maybe you could even start by auditing the existing health care rates for MediCare and other government-funded programs to make sure that those payments actually reflect the costs and values of the work being done, instead of just "whatever we can get away with....."
Or, better yet, maybe get government out of health care altogether! That would go a long way to keeping costs down.
...and this just in. Toyota and Honda seaking BILLIONS in loans from the Japanese government. Gee, guess they're just a bunch of idiots as well. What is it about the worldwide auto industry that seems to just attract poor business minds?
Well let's hope the Japanese handle it better than we did.
....Come on all you naysayers and get on board the Socialist train....
Wasn't that the Marxists train? :confused: :think: Same thing, you say? :confused: Let that be a lesson to me! :D

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:48 am

Well Ken finally got through to me. I'm gonna drink the KoolaidOnce again, what y'all cry about the loudest is what y'all are most guilty of . . .

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:52 am

Yes, as long as we keep voting the "money-grabbers" in, we will continue to have porkulus as usual.OK, but again, how do we accomplish that? Find me a non-money-grabbing politician. Go ahead, I'll wait. http://www.nabble.com/images/smiley/smiley_whistling.gif

Be honest now Jay, ya got nothin', nope, nothin' at all.

jayjacobson

Mar 8th, 2009, 4:11 am

OK, but again, how do we accomplish that? Find me a non-money-grabbing politician. Go ahead, I'll wait. http://www.nabble.com/images/smiley/smiley_whistling.gif

Be honest now Jay, ya got nothin', nope, nothin' at all.
Again, as long as we are willing to put up with business as usual, we'll get exactly what we disserve. Yes, among the two major political parties, you'll wait forever....So, time for another party, yet?

I have the same "nothing" that you and every other citizen has--one vote. But, the difference between me and you is that I will never defend or excuse business as usual.

patroa1

Mar 8th, 2009, 9:44 am

As I have said on this site before. Yes they are truly unskilled, performing the same function every 1.5 minutes. I can train in on any assembly line job in 30 minutes. Yes, stated from experience.

When one of the UAW can learn in 30 minutes to trouble shoot a commercial aircraft autopilot, repair it, and declare it airworthy to transport your family around the world, for an expected salary of $20/hr then we'll talk.

See above compensation expectation for those maintaining your transportation.

Furthermore, I currently have "unskilled" assembly workers working for me for $11 hour that any UAW worker I have ever met could NEVER learn to do their assembly job.

Life's a bitch and I'll be thrilled when the UAW figures that out. Sorry you may be personally affected by that learning process. Except if I remember correctly you are retired from an engine plant, so good on ya.

So just remember, some of us have been there and do know :cool:

John, I never implied that assembly workers were skilled labor, but comparing them to A&P mechanics is apples and oranges. What I said is we're all not lazy nor stupid. Most of the people I worked with could troubleshoot the $ 250,000 machine they were machining parts on long before any engineer could.

I retired from a transmission plant as a metrologist, and yes I had to go to school to learn the job, a total of 4yrs. and even though I'm retired I just finished classes on the latest software for the Zeiss CMM ( on my dime) that is used in most plants as I still do occasional contract work. I guess what I'm saying is I don't think we were over paid , I think that your guys are under paid.

What I see in this whole discussion is that we are all falling into the "class warfare" trap. This is America, never should we sit here and say "you guys make to much" or begrudge what anybody earns, this is exactly what those political hacks in Washington want, that way we are all beholding to the benevolent government for everything.

Have we forgotten the "American Dream" ? I know Washington has, they want everybody to settle for working for that $11 -$14 per hour so we can supposedly compete with places like India, thats just plain nuts. Maybe if we ended things like H1B visa's we could provide more jobs and better wages. Maybe if government stopped trying to control everything we could go back to pursuing the "American Dream", the thing that brought millions to these shores in search of. To say we have to settle for a whole lot less is just plain wrong.

So let's put away the class warfare, Remember every great civilization has always fallen from within, if we continue this way it will happen here .

By the way John we have never met but I bet this autoworker could learn that assembly job you talked about:)

hoog62

Mar 8th, 2009, 11:57 am

Hey Dave, .... <more rush="" bashing="" axe="" grinding="">more Rush bashing/axe grinding

You have your opinions and Rush has his. Neither of you represents my position so basically you're both wrong. Sorry about that. :rolleyes:

Rush has been singled out as the distraction de Jure for the mindless masses who live in the evening news world. In my opinion...it's an arrogant, risky play by the White House, and one that will ultimately fail. Why would you give one of your most ardent detractors a wider audience? What the Obama administration is doing plays well with the hard core left, but they will end up alienating (and losing) the moderates that crossed over and those in their own party.

Just like the religious right did to the Republicans.

But since we're giving Rush all this airtime, he's challenged the President to a live debate. I guess that means that Obama's hiding from him if he doesn't go through with it. Right? :histerica
In fact, Mr. President, you know what, I know these are tough economic times, and you're trying to convince people that you're "saving" the taxpayers money, that you're cutting spending, that you're cutting the deficit. In that vein, I, Mr. President, will send my jet, EIB One, to pick you up and bring you here and take you back to wherever you want to go. You'd love it. It's not as big and luxurious as your jet, but it's got enough seats for your Secret Service detail. But it is something to behold. I'm very proud of it, Mr. President. I worked for it. I paid for it. Taxpayers pay you for your travel. Nobody pays me for mine. I pay for it. I pay for the airplane. I pay for the travel. I pay for practically everything I do. We can talk about that, too. I could tell you what that's like.

And once you land, by the way, I have a fleet of SUVs because I have guests here all the time. I have four or five SUVs. I can send a caravan to pick you up. I'll even put you up at The Breakers. It's a five-star resort. I'll do it all on my dime. We don't want the taxpayers footing any of the bill for this -- and my jet burns a lot less fuel than your two and your C-130 to bring your limousine and SUV caravan here. In fact, you know what, Mr. President? I'll tell you what I will do, if you will do this. I will promise to order some Wagyu Kobe beef at $100 a pound, just like you serve at your cocktail parties and your Super Bowl parties. I'll get it from Allen Brothers in Chicago, since you like that. I know you like $100-per-pound beef. You serve it at the White House.

But I'll cover the cost. I will cover the cost, Mr. President, so that the taxpayers do not have to pay for it, as they did your Super Bowl party, and as they do your Wednesday afternoon cocktail party. So you have no excuses. Your flunkies are demanding this debate. Your flunkies are targeting a private citizen with an enemies list that so far has three or four names on it: Mine; Rick Santelli; Jim Cramer at CNBC; and let's not forget Joe the Plumber, who your allies in Ohio also tried to destroy. The difference is that Joe the Plumber does not have his own microphone every day. They're shutting Santelli up at CNBC. They're going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he'll go down with a fight. That isn't going to happen here, to me.

I'm calling. I'm ready. I'll do everything I can to facilitate it. You're a very courageous man, Mr. President. I am, after all, just The Last Man Standing. If you take me out, if you can wipe me out in a debate and prove to the rest of America that what I say is senseless and wrong, do you realize you will own the United States of America? You will have no opposition. You have America's media in your back pocket. It's amazing. In 1972, Richard Nixon had an enemies list, and the media was outraged by this. They were outraged. At the same time, those who weren't on it were a little jealous. But they were outraged that a president would engage in this kind of behavior toward the media. Now they go after a private citizen.

Rahm Emanuel is leading the team going after a private citizen, and the Drive-By Media applaud, get on board and help further the mission. We live in different times. So if you can wipe me out -- and, by the way, Mr. President, and Mr. Emanuel: Don't make the mistake of assuming I'm wiping myself out here in the process. I want to thank you guys for elevating me beyond the stature I already earned and achieved, because now more and more Americans have the opportunity to learn who you really are, what your ideas will really accomplish, and what damage and harm I think your policies will bring for a very, very long time to them and to this country. So I want to thank you for the opportunity. Obviously, it's a threat targeting me. I've extended the invitation. I'm looking forward to hearing back from whoever in your cabal one way or the other on accepting my offer. </more>

bowlesj

Mar 8th, 2009, 12:11 pm

By the way John we have never met but I bet this autoworker could learn that assembly job you talked about:)

I appreciate your personal position and will leave this friendly, between Minnesotans.

Yes you could easily learn the specifics of the job, but trust me, you would never be able to do it at full rate production. I have as good hand eye coordination as any upper 40 year old and am in excellent physical health and can only perform at 70% on a very good sore day. I've had all kinds of roofers, bricklayers, carpenters, machinists, press operators, etc be very humbled by these positions. And there is a facility in South St. Paul you could try your hand at, you wouldn't need to travel all the way down here. :D

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 12:12 pm

You have your opinions and Rush has his. Neither of you represents my position so basically you're both wrong. Sorry about that. :rolleyes:So what you're saying is that you got nothin' either? OK then. ;)

Hmm, you agree that Rush is wrong, yet you continue to quote him heavily when it serves your purpose? Interesting . . .

And when Rush says all those things he says that cater to the extreme right, then he's a "maverick" that doesn't truly represent the party. Yet when anything is said against Rush, it comes straight from Obama himself? Interesting . . .

OK Dave, you win, we're all wrong and only you have the one true answer. Well, you and Jay, of course. ;)

hoog62

Mar 8th, 2009, 12:39 pm

So Rush is wrong, yet you continue to quote him heavily when it serves your purpose? Interesting . . .

And when Rush says all those things he says that cater to the extreme right, then he's a "maverick" that doesn't truly represent the party. Yet when anything is said against Rush, it comes straight from Obama himself? Interesting . . .

OK Dave, you win, we're all wrong and only you have the one true answer. Well, you and Jay, of course. ;)

I didn't bring Rush into this thread, you did. You took his comments out of context to serve your purpose, just like your taking mine out of context now. Funny how you mentioned "putting words in my mouth" earlier as that is one of your favorite ploys in these threads.

Let's see...
....what are the steps that we as collective individuals can take? Voting them out doesn't work, because you just get a different class of money-grabbers in their place.
So you're suggesting that a revolution is only way we can stop Obama. Interesting...

patroa1

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:02 pm

I appreciate your personal position and will leave this friendly, between Minnesotans.

John, sounds like a good idea.... except.... I'm from Michigan Oh well close enough. BTW I didn't take it personally.

Yes you could easily learn the specifics of the job, but trust me, you would never be able to do it at full rate production. I have as good hand eye coordination as any upper 40 year old and am in excellent physical health and can only perform at 70% on a very good sore day. I've had all kinds of roofers, bricklayers, carpenters, machinists, press operators, etc be very humbled by these positions. And there is a facility in South St. Paul you could try your hand at, you wouldn't need to travel all the way down here. :D

What ... it sounds like you don't what me to come down to beautiful North Carolian, trying to hog all that warm weather for yourself:D .

BTW I still say your guys are under paid:(

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:02 pm

What out of context? You're quoted directly at the top of my posts, and we're still in the same thread. You want context, look up a page or two. :)

Funny how my quoting you is "out of context", but you simply paraphrase anything I post and dismiss it with a simple hand wave. Because that works so well.

What the Obama administration is doing plays well with the hard core left, but they will end up alienating (and losing) the moderates that crossed over and those in their own party.(Note: this is a direct quote from Dave, from his post dated Sunday, March 8, 2009 @ 9:57 a.m. PST (also note that this site hasn't yet switched to daylight savings time, so there is an hour discrepancy there)). Apparently, even the conservatives disagree with you (http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279/page/1).

So you're suggesting that a revolution is only way we can stop Obama. Interesting...The revolution is already under way, but it isn't going after Obama . . .

patroa1

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:16 pm

The revolution is already under way, but it isn't going after Obama . . .

Your absolutely correct Comrade..... it's going after us.

hoog62

Mar 8th, 2009, 1:43 pm

What out of context? You're quoted directly at the top of my posts, and we're still in the same thread.

In my opinion...it's an arrogant, risky play by the White House, and one that will ultimately fail. Why would you give one of your most ardent detractors a wider audience? What the Obama administration is doing plays well with the hard core left, but they will end up alienating (and losing) the moderates that crossed over and those in their own party.

(Note: this is a direct quote from Dave, from his post dated Sunday, March 8, 2009 @ 9:57 a.m. PST
Those are my words, in context. But you turn that into...
Yet when anything is said against Rush, it comes straight from Obama himself?
White House Chief of Staff and White House Press Secretary are part of the administration, right?

Thanks for proving my point Ken.

And I'm not real sure why you posted that link. My point was that you were spouting the party line where Rush is concerned. I said he does not represent the GOP as a whole. From your link...
....Here's what I wrote: President Obama (http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=Barack+Obama) and Rush Limbaugh (http://www.newsweek.com/related.aspx?subject=Rush+Limbaugh) do not agree on much, but they share at least one thing: Both wish to see Rush anointed as the leader of the Republican party.

...Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence—exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we're cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush's every rancorous word—we'll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time...

But do the rest of us understand what we are doing to ourselves by accepting this leadership? Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s. He plays an important role in our coalition, and of course he and his supporters have to be treated with respect. But he cannot be allowed to be the public face of the enterprise—and we have to find ways of assuring the public that he is just one Republican voice among many, and very far from the most important.
Again, thanks for proving my point Ken.

bowlesj

Mar 8th, 2009, 2:29 pm

John, sounds like a good idea.... except.... I'm from Michigan Oh well close enough. BTW I didn't take it personally.

Yea I see. Don't know where I got that :rolleyes:

I still say your guys are under paid:(

Yes they are and $25-30 for assembly line work is overpaid - need to find the middle ground.

BTW. You know why my guys are underpaid? Our executive level is top heavy and equals 7% of total manpower and represents 40% of total salary. Yes, unbelievable.

batdriver51

Mar 8th, 2009, 2:56 pm

Rush would grind that little pinhead up like hamburger and he knew it. Can't get away from his teleprompter.

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 3:32 pm

Rush would grind that little pinhead up like hamburger and he knew it. Can't get away from his teleprompter.Are you kidding? We just proved that Rush is nothing more than a self-serving egotist who spouts hatred in the hopes that it'll somehow keep him relevant. Meanwhile even his own party is taking a step back and saying "Now hang on here a minute . . ."

Rush claims he commands 14 - 20 million listeners (using dittohead math), but the real figure seems to be closer to 3.5 - 4 million unique listeners, which is maybe 1/10th of 1% of all Americans. Whereas "that pinhead" garnered almost 67 million votes out of 125 million cast, or 53%. Even comparing Rush's listeners to voting Americans, he still only ends up with maybe 3/10ths of 1% (that's 0.03%, or practically nothing).

A month into his Presidency, Obama still rates a 62% approval rating, while Rush has a 62% unfavorable rating. I'll simplify the numbers for you: "that pinhead" has a 2 to 1 positive approval, while Rush has 2 - 1 against him. And more and more of those against are coming from within his own party . . .

So careful what horse you back there, as the numbers just aren't on your side. Then again, nether is logic, it seems. ;)

batdriver51

Mar 8th, 2009, 4:11 pm

Typical liberal BS

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 4:24 pm

Typical liberal BSUm, OK then, you win. Sheesh.

jayjacobson

Mar 8th, 2009, 5:13 pm

So what you're saying is that you got nothin' either? OK then. ;)......OK Dave, you win, we're all wrong and only you have the one true answer. Well, you and Jay, of course. ;)
It's interesting how anyone that doesn't share your Marxists views has "NOTHING," Ken. I NEVER said I had "the one true answer." AGAIN, we have been trying the same things for a very long time now--only to make things worse--somehow expecting different results. So, perhaps instead of trying your OLD "nothing", AGAIN, we might consider some NEW "nothing," FINALLY?! :confused: :D
....The revolution is already under way, but it isn't going after Obama . . .
So just MORE business as usual!..... ;)
....So careful what horse you back there, as the numbers just aren't on your side. Then again, nether is logic, it seems. ;)
:rotf: Another zinger, Ken! :D You, of all people, talking about logic is HUMOR at it's finest! So tell me, oh "NOTHING" master: if this Rush dude has so little influence, why are you wasting so much TIME on him?! :confused: :histerica

meese

Mar 8th, 2009, 9:33 pm

It's interesting how anyone that doesn't share your Marxists views has "NOTHING," Ken. I NEVER said I had "the one true answer."Jay, I'm still waiting for you to come up with any answer. That's where the nothing comes from.

You keep claiming that it's all just the same as it ever was, and that anyone who doesn't agree is deluded, or just plain stupid. Adding tons of smileys doesn't disguise that at all. ;)

You also claim that the only way out of this imminent doom is to take a hard left turn (or right turn, if you prefer). Or is that a complete u-turn? I can't tell anymore. But you don't provide any clear path to doing that. "We have to save our grandkids from economic slavery" but how exactly do we do just that? http://www.k-bikes.com/forums/images/smilies/dunno.gif

Even Morley claims we should just take back all that ill-gotten cash from the politicians and give it back to the people, who paid for it all in the first place. But he can't provide a clear path to that, either. Do we go to their houses and ask for a check? Do we garnish their wages (benefits, too)? Or do we just raid their bank accounts (good luck with that one)? And if we actually do get any money out of it all, how do we divvy it up fairly? Yet when the same tactic is applied to businesses that are clearly corrupt to the point of being criminal, he's one of the first to stand up and scream "Socialism!" :rolleyes:

Even if we grant you that all politicians are flawed, and go so far as to say that the whole system in fact sucks, then what? Have you found a better candidate? Or a better political system? Because if Mr. Smith (Jimmy Stewart, not Brad Pitt) is running somewhere, please tell us. I'd vote for him, and I know a lot of other folks would, too.

But we have to choose the best (or least bad) from what we're offered. I sure don't think Obama is perfect. He's overly ambitious, and he underestimates the incredible inertia of a system that has evolved to protect the players, at the cost of the entire game (yes, on both sides of the aisle). But at least he's focusing on America, instead of trying to cram democracy down some other country's throat (and letting us pay for it all). Yes, he'll screw up, probably big time. And the pundits will be there, screaming "I told you so!" In fact, they're already lining up.

But based on the choices we were offered, he seems to be the least bad, and in fact,may even have a good idea or two. So I voted for him over the other guy. Now that may well be a minority in this particular (very skewed) group, but it sure wasn't a minority throughout the entire voting populace.

As I keep saying, the pendulum is merely swinging left for a while. But it will come back around again. It always does. Unless, of course, we all cut the rope through constant bickering and infighting. Then it all simply comes crashing down and we all suffer equally.

Maybe you are right and we (and our grandkids) are all doomed. Sigh.

Morley

Mar 8th, 2009, 9:37 pm

WOW! I wouldn't let hm bait me in PM's so now he is rampaging here...classy.

jayjacobson

Mar 9th, 2009, 2:42 am

Jay, I'm still waiting for you to come up with any answer. That's where the nothing comes from....
AGAIN Ken--speaking of repitition--the answer IS STILL is the SAME as it's always been. I'm not suggesting revolution--other than at the ballot box. You know Ken, you don't listen worth a shit, either! :histerica (Speaking of smileys! :D)
You keep claiming that it's all just the same as it ever was, and that anyone who doesn't agree is deluded, or just plain stupid. Adding tons of smileys doesn't disguise that at all....
WRONG AGAIN, mister! I NEVER said "anyone," OR anything about "stupid!" The smileys are to confuse you. Apparently, they're working quite well! :histerica
You also claim that the only way out of this imminent doom is to take a hard left turn (or right turn, if you prefer). Or is that a complete u-turn? I can't tell anymore. But you don't provide any clear path to doing that. "We have to save our grandkids from economic slavery" but how exactly do we do just that?....
WRONG AGAIN, big daddy K! I never said anything about "a hard left turn," "right turn," OR "U-turn!" What I said was--AGAIN--if/when enough people get sick of business as usual, perhaps another party will become viable. I think I see the problem here: people way outside of your Marxists views do not compute with you. So you have to twist what they say into something easier for you to understand. No problem, my friend, whenever you lob me that slow curve ball, I'm gonna hit it out of the park. So keep 'em coming! :D
Even Morley claims we should just take back all that ill-gotten cash from the politicians and give it back to the people, who paid for it all in the first place. But he can't provide a clear path to that, either. Do we go to their houses and ask for a check? Do we garnish their wages (benefits, too)? Or do we just raid their bank accounts (good luck with that one)? And if we actually do get any money out of it all, how do we divvy it up fairly? Yet when the same tactic is applied to businesses that are clearly corrupt to the point of being criminal, he's one of the first to stand up and scream "Socialism!"....
That's like asking how do we get porkulus back? :confused: Whether it be GM or your local worthless hack(s), the only way to get it "back" is to NOT pork it out to begin with! If/when enough people get sick of some worthless hack running their life, craddle to grave, we may see some change. Doubtful, however, cause that would involve personal responsibilty! :eek:
Even if we grant you that all politicians are flawed, and go so far as to say that the whole system in fact sucks, then what? Have you found a better candidate? Or a better political system?......Maybe you are right and we (and our grandkids) are all doomed. Sigh.
It's up to us to create a better candidate and better political system. If "we" continue to go through our life asking what out country can do for us (with our hand out all the time), instead of taking responsibility for our own lives, then, yes, MAYBE our grand kids are doomed. :( :crybaby: :brick:
WOW! I wouldn't let hm bait me in PM's so now he is rampaging here...classy.
Ken's not a nut....Just passionate! Yeah, that's it! :rotf:

meese

Mar 9th, 2009, 1:23 pm

Again, Jay, then find me the perfect candidate. Until that happens, we have to choose from what we're offered.

kevincook

Mar 10th, 2009, 11:16 am

Rush claims he commands 14 - 20 million listeners (using dittohead math), but the real figure seems to be closer to 3.5 - 4 million unique listeners, which is maybe 1/10th of 1% of all Americans.

WOW, the USA now has 3.5 billion people? That must be Obama math. :rolleyes:

Kevin

jayjacobson

Mar 10th, 2009, 8:07 pm

WOW, the USA now has 3.5 billion people? That must be Obama math. :rolleyes:
Now, now, Kevin.....That's porkulus math! :D

batdriver51

Mar 10th, 2009, 8:48 pm

Rush Is Right, Don't doubt him

meese

Mar 11th, 2009, 2:57 am

Rush Is Right, Don't doubt himI disagree, actually. And have since I first heard him spewing his hatred and crap more than 20 years ago.

Besides, aren't you supposed to sign that "Ditto!" to show your solidarity and inability to think for yourself? Unless you meant he was the Right™, of course. Which simply proves my original argument. :cool:

meese

Mar 11th, 2009, 3:03 am

WOW, the USA now has 3.5 billion people? That must be Obama math. :rolleyes: Oh no! A decimal place typo! Your entire argument must therefore be invalid. No wait, maybe you are invalid. Yeah, that's it. :rolleyes:

Does it make you feel any better if he has 1/100th of 1% of all Americans bamboozled instead? Or once again, does that just make my original argument a bit stronger? :cool:

Wow, you guys make this all so easy . . .

batdriver51

Mar 11th, 2009, 5:22 am

Well, if he was so ineffective and had such a small following as you indicate, the marxist scum such as Reid, Pelosi, and Obama would not be trying so hard to get him censored (the "fairness" docterine ) Funny how they are oh so concerned about the freedom of speech only when it applies to them, never mind that they have the mainstream media which all all lefties too. What a bunch of hypocrites!! Most have never even listened to him.

kevincook

Mar 11th, 2009, 6:41 am

1/100th of 1% . . .

You're kidding right??

Look, I didn't say anything about the validity of your argument. I was just trying to point out an error and inject a little humor into the discussion. Your response seems pretty defensive and has a derogatory tone.

Limbaugh is no more the leader of the republican party than Soros is the leader of the democrat party. Limbaugh just happens to have 3-4 million people listening to him everyday for 3 hours. This makes him a lightning rod for criticism. I just think the politicians on both sides are jealous of him because the most they could hope for would be a 20 second sound bite a couple of times per week. Even the president, any president, can't get that much exposure on a daily basis.

Kevin

meese

Mar 11th, 2009, 11:45 am

meese

Mar 11th, 2009, 11:53 am

C'mon, Rick, they're not trying to censor Rush. In fact, the more he talks, the bigger hole he digs himself. And if the 1/10,000 of 1% who actually believe him want to drag the rest of the party down with them, then so be it. ;) (Note smiley to denote humor and/or sarcasm.)

And yes, I have listened to him on rare occasions over many years. Usually when trapped traveling through podunk America where there are only two stations, and I can only handle so much repetitive country music. That's why I'm so vehemently opposed to the vile filth that he passes off as self-righteous "truth" for America. I've heard it, and it sucks. (Sorry, no smiley there.)

jayjacobson

Mar 11th, 2009, 8:31 pm

Hmm, most folks use smileys to indicate humor :), or sarcasm :rolleyes:, or other emotions, as pure text is easily misunderstood. And no, "officially" he's not the leader of the party, even if he does have 1/1000 of 1% listeners (think I can get him down to zero anytime soon? :D)

As for him being the leader of the party, when he gets to spew his hatred at the CPAC and the Chairman actually apologizes to him, well, draw your own conclusions there. :)
C'mon, Rick, they're not trying to censor Rush. In fact, the more he talks, the bigger hole he digs himself. And if the 1/10,000 of 1% who actually believe him want to drag the rest of the party down with them, then so be it. ;) (Note smiley to denote humor and/or sarcasm.)

And yes, I have listened to him on rare occasions over many years. Usually when trapped traveling through podunk America where there are only two stations, and I can only handle so much repetitive country music. That's why I'm so vehemently opposed to the vile filth that he passes off as self-righteous "truth" for America. I've heard it, and it sucks. (Sorry, no smiley there.)
:rotf: I can't understand why anyone would think Ken is anal?! "Vile filth?" Don't bag on PMSNBC like that! :histerica