« previous   misc   next »

Romney lies about Jeep outsourcing. Chrysler says BS. Romney keeps lying.


By iwog   Follow   Sat, 27 Oct 2012, 7:41pm PDT   10,133 views   95 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike (2)  

Fucking unbelievable. Republicans are voting for a real prick who defines the truth any way he wants. The benefit to society of course is that this story isn't playing well in the rust belt.

Romney repeats false claim of Jeep outsourcing to China; Chrysler refutes story
http://www.freep.com/article/20121026/BUSINESS01/121026036/?odyssey=tab|mostpopular|text|SPORTS18

« First     « Previous     Comments 56-95 of 95     Last »

rooemoore   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 6:54am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 56

tdr says

The government picked the winners and losers.

Under your definition of "picking winners and losers", the government has always picked winners and losers.

There is a guy who lives near me. Started a fairly lame security software biz in 2000. Along comes 9/11 and the government contracts roll in. In 2008 he sold the company (i.e. the govt. contracts) for $52 Million.

Did I mention that the software was lame? It fills one niche need for a few agencies to communicative with the public. Since he sold the company the software has been phased out but the new owners have expanded to some other bs security software.

This guy is a big Republican and started his company in Georgia.

Do you have any idea how many thousands of government contracts have made otherwise "small govt." conservatives super rich? It is in the thousands.

"Picking winners and losers". Where the fuck does that gem come from? Probably some Republican who owns stock in Halliburton.

gbenson   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 6:55am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 57

Rasmussen has consistently skewed 2-3% right. Two other polls yesterday have them in a dead heat.

http://www.politico.com/p/2012-election/polls/president/ohio/ohio-12-president-general-election-148

Rasmussen will either be proven right (pun intended) or wrong like they were in 2010:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

david1   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 6:58am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 58

If you are racist, rich, retarded, or religious, vote for the Republicans, Romney/Ryan. Rasmussen thinks you will.

These right-wing R's really stick together..

Alliteration! Ah!!!

gbenson   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 7:00am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 59

rooemoore, to expand upon your point. The government decides the laws and regulations that govern society. Those in turn determine winners and losers.

The free market also picks winners and losers, that's what Capital Invesment (ala Bain) is all about. You are essentially speculating as to what will succeed in the marketplace and funding appropriately so that company can overcome the hurdles it needs to enter that marketplace. When the risk is high or the reward to national security too great to ignore, then the govt steps in where private capital will not.

Still, I'd put the govt's 92% success rate up against Romney's 78% success rate any day of the week if you want to compare who can better pick winners.

rootvg   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 9:09am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 60

iwog says

rootvg says

Why would a sitting President whose party lost 63 seats in the House just two years ago be rewarded with a second term, the price of gas and unemployment rate not having appreciably improved since that time?

This isn't 1936 and Obama isn't FDR.

Period.

Right.......again you say you can't be wrong. What happens if you are wrong? Doesn't that mean every reason you've ever given here was worthless and ignorant?

I simply don't see how you recover from an Obama win. There are dozens of threads that can be bumped and each one will make you look like a fraud and a fool.

I'm not exaggerating.

I don't give a fuck about you either way.

What I'm telling you is standard conventional wisdom that you'd hear from any experienced Political Science professional. Conventional wisdom gets that way because it has a basis in fact.

I'll tell you again. Roosevelt's party gained nine seats at the 1934 midterms and he won another four years. Obama's party lost 63 seats at his 2010 midterms and is setting up to get the living shit knocked out of him a week from tomorrow. It can't be stopped. It's too late.

Has it not occurred to you why Obama seemed so flat in the first debate, or are you normally not that inquisitive? Did it ever occur to you that someone either came to him with a scandal that was about to burst or maybe someone high in the party sat him down and said, we can't have another four years of this...take the house in Hawaii, write your memoirs and shut the fuck up? Something happened and what it is, we may never know but I can tell you he hasn't been the same guy since.

We don't live in the United States of Lafayette. We don't live in your world. You live in ours.

dublin hillz   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 9:16am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 61

rootvg says

Obama's party lost 63 seats at his 2010 midterms and is setting up to get the living shit knocked out of him a week from tomorrow. It can't be stopped. It's too late.

The group of people that votes in the general election is way broader than the group of people who vote in the midterms. The people who religiously vote in the midterms are typically the hardliners and political junkies. They will have plenty of competition from regular folks in the general election and that's why your theory will not materialize. It is basically the same thing that you see in sports - superbowl attracts way more viewers than your typical NFL sunday in the regular season.

iwog   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 9:18am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 62

rootvg says

We don't live in the United States of Lafayette. We don't live in your world. You live in ours.

We're going to see very soon.

rootvg   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 9:31am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 63

dublin hillz says

rootvg says

Obama's party lost 63 seats at his 2010 midterms and is setting up to get the living shit knocked out of him a week from tomorrow. It can't be stopped. It's too late.

The group of people that votes in the general election is way broader than the group of people who vote in the midterms. The people who religiously vote in the midterms are typically the hardliners and political junkies. They will have plenty of competition from regular folks in the general election and that's why your theory will not materialize. It is basically the same thing that you see in sports - superbowl attracts way more viewers than your typical NFL sunday in the regular season.

Here again, let's see what the big boys think:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141812/avg-midterm-seat-loss-presidents-below-approval.aspx

Obama's positives have only been above fifty percent for one week of his presidency, the week after Bin Laden was killed.

Bush 43 had the same problem but his positives edged into the fifties for the week of the election and he was able to pick off Ohio and win. That's why Kerry conceded so quickly. His people knew what Bush had done in Columbus and Franklin County. There wasn't any way to fight it.

If Obama had only lost 10-15 seats (Carter lost 11 as you can see from the table) I could see your point but the history is what it is. His party lost 63 SEATS !! Common sense dictates that next Tuesday will be a bloodbath. Bush's Republicans lost 30 in 2006 and McCain got fed into the wood chipper two years later. Why would this time be any different? Answer? IT ISN'T.

You think Obama is Truman and Romney is Dewey? I can play that game. Romney's crowds are getting larger and larger especially in Ohio. The supposedly all crucial Virginia, North Carolina and Florida are gone. There's no longer a huge blue collar vote to carry the Democratic candidate through this and THEN we have the issue of Ohio not packing the Electoral punch it did even thirty years ago for Reagan.

This isn't 2008. What it is, is 1980...or worse.

PolishKnight   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 10:26am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 64

Newest article from Bloomberg:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-28/marchionne-seen-missing-fiat-sales-target-by-19-billion#p1
By Tommaso Ebhardt on October 29, 2012
"To counter the severe slump in European sales, Marchionne is considering building Chrysler models in Italy, including Jeeps, for export to North America."

I await an apology from Iwog and others who called Romney a liar. Or better yet, they take a trip to Sweden or even outside of a racially and ideologically segregated community for a few weeks. I don't expect them to do either.

PolishKnight   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 10:30am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 65

"299 people were killed in the Lebanon Barracks bombing in 1983 under Reagan's watch. Rumor has it"

Oh, that proves it alright. It was a rumor so had to be true. Like his October surprise. Oh, wait, Obama claimed he called it a terrorist attack rather than a response by offended Muslims to a silly first amendment speech rights. (No, he didn't). Thank heavens that leftists are out to protect you from Religious right wackos trying to suppress your rights, eh?

Perhaps Democrat Muslims should get moving on implementing Sharia law in the Bay Area...

tdr   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 10:33am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 66

rooemoore says

Under your definition of "picking winners and losers", the government has always picked winners and losers.

This statement was in reference to the "bankruptcy" proceedings, not who/what provided the bailout money. The government did go around existing laws & divied up the assets. This was not an orderly bankruptcy which would have let GM restructure, allowed for negotiation of contracts, etc.

Regardless of whether one thinks this approach was right or wrong, the government decided who got what outside of the legal system and bankruptcy laws and picked the "winners & losers".

And good for your neighbor. Sounds like he had the right idea at the right time, took a risk and had some success. Let's encourage more of that.

PolishKnight   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 10:53am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 67

"There is a guy who lives near me. Started a fairly lame security software biz in 2000. Along comes 9/11 and the government contracts roll in. In 2008 he sold the company (i.e. the govt. contracts) for $52 Million.
Did I mention that the software was lame? It fills one niche need for a few agencies to communicative with the public."

Indeed. At least it filled a NEED. On the other hand, how much of a need do we have for the traditional leftist electorate? (welfare mothers, felons, etc. who oppose ID voting laws because then they wouldn't be able to vote).

The only problem with the leftist electorate is that even leftists here don't want to live near them...

CL   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 11:35am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 68

rootvg says

This isn't 2008. What it is, is 1980...or worse.

But a lot of people learned from their 1980s mistakes. This isn't 1980.

The percentage of white voters has shrunk, and the fascist GOP has driven Hispanics and other minorities right into the hands of the Democrats.

The difference is, nobody LIKES Republican policies, except partisan Republicans.

They were drawn to Reagan, whereas Mittens is lackluster, even in his own Party.

Auntiegrav   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 12:23pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 69

PolishKnight says

On the other hand, how much of a need do we have for the traditional leftist electorate? (welfare mothers, felons, etc. who oppose ID voting laws because then they wouldn't be able to vote).

Disabled veterans, firemen's unions, police unions, librarians, laborers who've been exploited, elderly people who've been around long enough to see that "trickle down" doesn't, educated people who read more than just the pablum of "business"-related propaganda.

The 'traditional' left is not the problem, nor is the traditional right (actual conservatives who seek to work for a future beyond themselves..not these neo-con Randians who worship the Invisible Hand Job). The problem is that consumerism has pitted everyone against each other as some pseudo-individuals that are homogeneous sycophants to their televisions. The money thrown at campaigns by self-interested lobbying organizations has taken the old "magnify minor differences into major issues" theme and blown it way out of proportion. The somnambulant public is rising To Arms! on issues that have no real basis in reality but make easy pickings for the advertisers.
The Republicans, in their quest to pick someone who was Not Obama have come up with an actual liberal (because Obama has been compromising with corporations all along already). A real presidential leader would have put the hammer down on the shenanigans in Wall Street. Instead, the idiot news channels have taken the thing their sponsors wanted (a bailout) and turned it against Obama, when he didn't start it. Their 'hope' is to get a Republican in office who is as compliant as Hitler was for 'privatization' of what little is left of OUR government (not 'the' government). All of this is the result of consumerism: the rich get richer because the idiot poor (either too stupid or too busy to read) buy their stuff and work for them. This is only going to get worse, and the instabilities are going to get worse. There is some possibility that an Obama second term might make things a little less violent on the way down, but there isn't much chance that the natural physical laws of population, climate stability and perpetual growth economics are going to be subverted by Romney anyway. Every individual who is trying to make some point or another is trying to get us to a better world. Nobody is really concerned with what we did to the old one, or that we did it together and willingly. The opposite of consumption is not frugality: it is generosity. The reason people don't have jobs is because they are useless to their own future and the future of their places.
We can't 'fix' the disparity between reality and the fiction of our System of systems because we aren't allowed access to the tools. That means it's time to let it fail on its own and build our own things again. Every dollar.....ahh fuck it. You people don't give a shit. You just want to bitch and call names and grab the next 'investment' opportunity that was made for you by some poor bastard slaving away for nothing just because he wasn't the first one to grab the key to the government gold door and the Texas text book publishers.

jvolstad   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 12:48pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 70

Pol's lying. What a surprise......

kentm   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 1:26pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 71

http://www.politicususa.com/press-finally-wakes-romneys-lies-no-excuse-astonishingly-misleading-jeep-ad.html

rootvg   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 1:30pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 72

CL says

rootvg says

This isn't 2008. What it is, is 1980...or worse.

But a lot of people learned from their 1980s mistakes. This isn't 1980.

The percentage of white voters has shrunk, and the fascist GOP has driven Hispanics and other minorities right into the hands of the Democrats.

The difference is, nobody LIKES Republican policies, except partisan Republicans.

They were drawn to Reagan, whereas Mittens is lackluster, even in his own Party.

Just because you say that, doesn't make it true. Ohio will be down to sixteen districts in the new Congress and only four of them will be represented by a Democrat. It sure doesn't sound to me as though Republicans are unpopular there.

The same goes for most of the south and much of the midwest. Republicans run basically all of Texas and most of Florida. Democrats in Florida are a damn sight more moderate than the ones here in California. They have to be, or they wouldn't exist.

It's not the United States of California and Massachusetts.

New Renter   Mon, 29 Oct 2012, 2:10pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 73

CaptainShuddup says

So that's where the "1%" boogie man came from, Micheal Manufacture dissent Moore. So just to be informed I tried to Google Citigroup Plutocracy memo expecting to see Wikipedia, and Snopes articles and a whole slew of credible sources on the internet validating his accusation.

But no, the I found ONE single Google result, and that was all. Every link simply referenced Michael Moore's reference in his movie to the Memo.

Well I did the same. One of the first links that came up had sub-links to the memos (no reference to "Capitalism a Love Story" BTW

http://pissedoffwoman.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/the-plutonomy-reports-download/

Several others also came up but the links had-yanked-due-to-copyright-issues rather than working links. Looks like your problem in finding the websites was not due to a lack of validity but Citigroup trying to cover its ass:

http://politicalgates.blogspot.com/2011/12/citigroup-plutonomy-memos-two-bombshell.html

CaptainShuddup   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 12:26am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 74

I said credible website. Pissed off anything would be just a little biased NO?

As for the second link how do two different people make the exact same format for a blog?

Liberal factcheck you're doing it wrong.

PolishKnight   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 12:41am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 75

"Disabled veterans, firemen's unions, police unions, librarians, laborers who've been exploited, elderly people who've been around long enough to see that "trickle down" doesn't, educated people who read more than just the pablum of "business"-related propaganda."

I wouldn't be surprised if even disabled veterans tend to vote Republican. And instead of firemen and police unions, just refer to them as government unions enjoying fantastic benefits not available to the general, "uneducated" public. Which brings us to "trickle down" and "laborers who've been exploited": The "uneducated" (either lacking in higher education due to socio-economic status, inability to finish higher education, or not being in a democrat special interest race or gender entitlement group) are left behind by the left and they are the ones voting against Obama. Brings back to mind the glorious USSR where everyone was "equal" which meant if you were a party member, you got to shop at the GUM store, a special carpool lane, and could throw your opponents into jail. If you weren't special, you could go to a gulag just to "level the playing field" or free up or generate more resources. So much better than evil capitalism!

And by "education" and librarian, there's the pro-Obama/socialist media and non-friendly media which the left tries to ignore such as when Congressman Moran's son got his hand caught in the cookie jar trying to engage in voting fraud or Obama pretended like a terrorist attack was a justified Islamic protest against western free speech. Putting out those stories is "propaganda". Got it.

In the meantime, I stand by my point that the vast majority of democrat special interests are not people who are legitimate victims or heroes but rather looking for special privileges and handouts. Yes, police and firemen work hard. So do the power line workers getting power back up in NYC. So do the plumbers getting peoples' water turned back on. Heck, even non-critical jobs deserve respect such as the store clerk selling the bottled water. It's hilarious that even as the left pretends to care about workers, they at best pay a backhanded compliment by only complimenting it when they're buying votes and selling out someone else because that's how redistribution works! They don't rob from the rich. They rob from working people and then like a criminal who commits a crime, try to put the victim out of his misery to cover it up.

Finally, let's review the elderly: I found it hilarious how Obama and Biden tried to scare up the boogyman for a generation of people that they tried to convert into welfare recipients robbing their grandchildren. Many of these seniors are seeing their grandchildren move home and live in a second great depression as their granddaughters have to wait until their 30's to possibly marry a 1950's breadwinner and their grandsons are often slackers. If all they care about is their medicare and social security checks, good for them, but perhaps some care about their grandchildren. Just an observation. In the meantime, I read that Romney is ahead of Obama in the youth vote.

PolishKnight   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 12:58am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 76

Auntiegrav wrote "Their 'hope' is to get a Republican in office who is as compliant as Hitler was for 'privatization' of what little is left of OUR government "

Such a small sentence and so much it reveals. "what little is left of OUR government". Well, sure. Not just the government but the whole thing: the populace replaced by people's that are nothing like Sweden. The majority of the workers in government are cronies and this includes the police and firemen that, kudos to the left, they converted from hippie-head-bashing-fascists in the Big Lebowski to modern "heroes" of the unions. Bravo! The government, itself, is hardly "little" but massive so even if every wealthy person and his family were taken to the basement and shot and their wealth handed over to the government, it would barely cover the deficit for this year alone.

For the record, I agree that Romney is like a liberal and in many ways, is a classic liberal of the old days. The left is now just a bunch of crony capitalist fascists, Jim Crow race baiters, and man hating feminists that often have little in common with the frightened women they pander to in their ads. But sure, the Republicans need a lot of reform but as a white male who isn't a union government worker, I see no reason to throw myself under the Democrat bus. I'd rather drink cool aid and chase after a comet. That has a better chance of working out for me.

monkframe   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 1:08am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 77

tdr says

david1 says

There were no investors in 2008/2009. They would have closed up shop and the scraps would STILL be working their way through bankruptcy decisions. UAW would have owned a bunch of plants and equipment without any operating capital of their own to start production again. The plants and equipment would essentially be worthless.

But there was funding as demonstrated by the government stepping in, just has been done in the past. However bypassing bankruptcy laws is the issue. The government picked the winners and losers.

And vultures like Singer and Romney suck up taxpayer dollars by the millions and billions. Disgusting.

edvard2   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 1:39am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 78

It appears that the topic at hand has strayed wayyyyy of course. As far as I'm concerned this was over from the very start. Romney effed up and mis-spoke and now isn't admitting fault even though the original report said nothing about shutting down US factories and in fact Chrysler is ADDING 1,100 jobs for plant work in Ohio this year alone.

So I'm a little confused about what the argument is. This is a very cut and dry topic. Romney was wrong. Now he needs to own up to it. Oh well- he has lost the race anyway so who cares.

david1   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 2:13am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 79

PolishKnight says

The government, itself, is hardly "little" but massive so even if every wealthy person and his family were taken to the basement and shot and their wealth handed over to the government, it would barely cover the deficit for this year alone.

That's morbid and extreme and all except its not true. Just taking those folks making over $1MM in 2009, thats is total AGI of $727B. Assuming these folks made a 10% return on assets, that puts total assets in the $7.27T range. If you assume a more palatable 8% return on assets, their combined wealth is about $9T.

Not only would doing as you suggest cover the deficit, but it would reduce the debt over 40% as well.

If we went all the way down to those folks making more than $200k, the aggregate AGI is $2T and assuming a 10% return on assets their aggregate assets are $20T.

That would pay off the debt completely, with $4T left over.

This would be the extermination of 2.4% of the population, by the way.

But that wasn't my idea. Maybe if we just did this without killing them....

Maybe if we just, I don't know, taxed them more instead of borrowing from them, then maybe we wouldn't have these huge deficits. Maybe if we taxed them at a higher rate, like I don't know, 39.6%, while reducing some spending on unfunded wars and some domestic wastes, we would run a surplus instead.

I know, I know, pie in the sky. When did that ever happen?

What? In the year 2000??

Wha??

PolishKnight   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 2:50am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 80

"Oh well- [Romney] has lost the race anyway so who cares."

Good luck with that!

edvard2   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 3:21am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 81

PolishKnight says

Good luck with that!

Thanks. No luck needed actually...

bdrasin   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 4:48am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 82

edvard2 says

PolishKnight says

Good luck with that!

Thanks. No luck needed actually...

If you think you know for sure, you too can make a bank at Intrade. Obama is about a 2:1 favorite now, but if you think its guaranteed you should go ahead and bet!

Nate Silver's estimation is a bit more favorable, about 3:1. So there you have it - the gambler's and the professional statistician's point of view: Obama is the favorite but its nowhere near a sure thing. A 75% chance of winning is not the same as 100% chance.

edvard2   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 5:20am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 83

I followed 538 in 2008 and the site was totally dead-on. The research and amount of crunched data on that site is incredibly thorough. So I'm going with that the prediction is on that site. Yeah- its not a sure thing and Romney might very well win. But I sleep pretty well these days.

thomaswong.1986   Tue, 30 Oct 2012, 8:19am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 84

Fiat Says Jeep Output May Return to China as Demand Rises
By Craig Trudell - Oct 22, 2012 8:10 AM PT

Fiat SpA (F), majority owner of Chrysler Group LLC, plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make all of its models in that country, according to the head of both automakers’ operations in the region.

Fiat is in “very detailed conversations” with its Chinese partner, Guangzhou Automobile Group Co. (2238), about making Jeeps in the world’s largest auto market, said Mike Manley, chief operating officer of Fiat and Chrysler in Asia. Chrysler hasn’t built Jeeps there since before Fiat took control in 2009.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-21/fiat-says-china-may-build-all-jeep-models-as-suv-demand-climbs.html

There certainly could have been confusion when you read..." plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make ALL of its models in that country"

which is offset further by....

"Chrysler currently builds all Jeep SUV models at plants in Michigan, Illinois and Ohio. Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China. "

monkframe   Sat, 3 Nov 2012, 2:56pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 85

Anyone who thinks Romney will do other than outsource every job in the USA to China, if it means greater profits, needs to re-examine their belief.

Obama has huge flaws, but Romney would be consistent - be afraid if you're working class.

PolishKnight   Sun, 4 Nov 2012, 1:11am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 86

"Anyone who thinks Romney will do other than outsource every job in the USA to China, if it means greater profits, needs to re-examine their belief."

Hahahahaha!

Oh, hilarious! If only he really could. I'd love to see him outsource all the government office jobs to China. I have no problem with that. Oh, and also let's have all the socialist professors replaced with teleconferenced Chinese professors (oh, wait, that's what TAs largely are!)

thomaswong.1986   Sun, 4 Nov 2012, 1:16am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 87

monkframe says

Anyone who thinks Romney will do other than outsource every job in the USA to China, if it means greater profits, needs to re-examine their belief.

you dont need Romney to kill of Mfg (shipping jobs to China) ... Democrats have done a great job of doing that for years in places like CA.

Bellingham Bill   Wed, 7 Nov 2012, 7:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 88

I promised myself I wouldn't revisit this thread. Bad me! Bad!

"We don't live in your world. You live in ours."

um, yeah.

looking over the poster's history here, this is his first post here:

"We have two more years of this chronic doldrums dog shit economy, wring out the rest of the excesses and then we should be back to the races. That's what happened in the eighties."

I see his* non-understanding of present reality continues back to what happened in the 1980s, too.

The 1980s benefitted from a country massively underleveraged (compared to now):

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=czF

only having to deal with labor arbitrage issues with a couple of much smaller nations --not the two most population nations -- was in the midst of a massive computer technology productivity boom, AND was expanding government spending at 5%+.

Oh, and we were in the good-times of a bona-fide oil-glut too for most of that decade (North Slope and North Sea were peaking in the mid-late 1980s, China didn't have the trade to import first-world oil yet).

Oh-the-second, the baby boom was entering their 20s and 30s in 1980, not their 60s like now.

Maybe he's learned something since that first post in February, but the situation now is nothing like teh 1980s, nor can it be made to be (even though some hipsters are trying).

* (assuming he's not a lesbian)

EBGuy   Wed, 7 Nov 2012, 8:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 89

Do we need to send an away team to check up on rootvg? I'm just concerned as the guy 'knows things' that us normal mortals don't.

rooemoore   Wed, 7 Nov 2012, 10:53am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 90

EBGuy says

Do we need to send an away team to check up on rootvg? I'm just concerned as the guy 'knows things' that us normal mortals don't.

He's probably freaking out, unable to cope with the new reality. I'm guessing if you were to drive through Danville you'd be able to hear him screaming:

"THIS ISN'T THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! THIS ISN'T THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!"

dublin hillz   Thu, 8 Nov 2012, 4:42am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 91

rooemoore says

EBGuy says



Do we need to send an away team to check up on rootvg? I'm just concerned as the guy 'knows things' that us normal mortals don't.


He's probably freaking out, unable to cope with the new reality. I'm guessing if you were to drive through Danville you'd be able to hear him screaming:


"THIS ISN'T THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! THIS ISN'T THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!"

I hope their riots don't spill over into dublin!

bdrasin   Fri, 9 Nov 2012, 2:16am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 92

rootvg says

Just because you say that, doesn't make it true. Ohio will be down to sixteen districts in the new Congress and only four of them will be represented by a Democrat. It sure doesn't sound to me as though Republicans are unpopular there.

Yep, the Republicans won 53% of the congressional votes in Ohio and got 12 of the 16 representatives. The state is so severely gerrymandered that two of the seats were unopposed. Meanwhile in Pennsylvania the Democrats won 52% of the congressional votes and got only 4 of 18 representatives. Anyone else see anything wrong with this picture?

Gerrymandering districts to favor one's own party is an old trick, but in 2010 the Republicans took it to Herculean levels. They don't have a popular mandate to run the House (more Americans voted for Democrats than Republicans overall), what they've done is to rig the system to protect themselves against being accountable to the people.

Bellingham Bill   Fri, 9 Nov 2012, 8:48am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 93

bdrasin says

Yep, the Republicans won 53% of the congressional votes in Ohio and got 12 of the 16 representatives.

yeah, that quote was exactly what I was thinking about when I said that when conservatives do happen to present data, it's probably from Bullshit Mountain too.

Funny thing now is that their crook for a SOS now wants to divvy up OH's EV's by congressional district not winner-take-all -- I guess they could even do that now, after the election, if they wanted.

New Renter   Mon, 12 Nov 2012, 9:24am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 94

CaptainShuddup says

I said credible website. Pissed off anything would be just a little biased NO?

As for the second link how do two different people make the exact same format for a blog?

Liberal factcheck you're doing it wrong.

You asked for a working link to the memo - I provided it. Pissed off or not the web site clearly provided a working link to the memo and it was one of the first that came up in a Google search. The second link was provided to simply provide a plausible explanation for why copies of this memo are not more widespread.

How do two different people make the same format for a blog? Perhaps they were both lazy and used a standard public domain blog format?

curious2   Mon, 12 Nov 2012, 9:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 95

Somebody fell hard for the lie:

"Holly Solomon, 28, chased her 36-year-old husband Daniel Solomon with the family Jeep SUV on Saturday night over a political argument stemming from the fact he didn't vote.... The husband told investigators that Solomon believed her family was going to face hardship from President Barack Obama's re-election... Her husband remains in critical condition...."

« First     « Previous comments    

iwog is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net