|
Post by redleg on Jan 23, 2015 10:39:05 GMT -5
I do know all that already... Then you know that Obama's career is mostly the result of exploiting the mistakes of others. That, and criminal activities that would have landed him in prison in any legal state in the union.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 23, 2015 10:40:45 GMT -5
Then you know that Obama's career is mostly the result of exploiting the mistakes of others. You mean Ryan wanting his wife to have sex with him in public... and having to withdraw from the campaign... or calling in Keys, who lived in Baltimore, who didn't even run in the GOP primary, to establish residency in Illinois... just to run against him... in which Obama won by over 40 percentage points... Which information was in a sealed divorce settlement, that "somehow" was made public. Again, who went to prison for publishing those papers?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 23, 2015 10:41:47 GMT -5
Obama exploited Jack Ryan's... odd... morals; Ryan destroyed his political career with his sexual proclivities. That's all. Obama tried to stop them from releasing Ryan's divorce information... Uh huh. And he never said "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period".
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 23, 2015 14:58:54 GMT -5
Which information was in a sealed divorce settlement, that "somehow" was made public. Again, who went to prison for publishing those papers? A politician should understand that his career may be damaged by his personal life. If he wants a career he needs to keep his personal life under control and not let it control him. Kill the messenger, what you're advocating here, is bullstuff. If you don't want people to find out about it, don't do it!
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 23, 2015 15:11:34 GMT -5
Which information was in a sealed divorce settlement, that "somehow" was made public. Again, who went to prison for publishing those papers? A politician should understand that his career may be damaged by his personal life. If he wants a career he needs to keep his personal life under control and not let it control him. Kill the messenger, what you're advocating here, is bullstuff. If you don't want people to find out about it, don't do it! I fully agree with your point. However, when a judge rules to keep private information private, by what 'right' does any political party deign to overturn that, simply for political purposes? After all, why haven't we seen The Puppet's alleged college transcripts? It would appear that The Puppet enjoys situations that see him as the only one running for a particular office, at least from his party.
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 24, 2015 16:31:58 GMT -5
It does seem that Obama is off limits to having his dirt dug up.
|
|
|
Post by Ravenchamp on Jan 24, 2015 16:54:06 GMT -5
No he's not. We'll keeping it going since the libbies ignore it
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jan 24, 2015 17:39:51 GMT -5
No he's not. We'll keeping it going since the libbies ignore it Well, that's really the problem. It's not that Obama isn't buried up to his eyeballs in dirt. From his only previous executive experience being President of the Choom Gang, to spending 20 years in Jeremiah Wright's racist cult, to the women in his administration that aren't making as much as the men. The libbies don't ignore it - they support it.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 24, 2015 17:59:59 GMT -5
Mostly people support politicians who do what they want done. Hence the poor support the liberals who give them things, and the rich support the conservatives, who give them things. The pattern might be a little subtle, but it's there.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 25, 2015 12:33:03 GMT -5
Subtle?... Heck, I go to Kroger because they give me fuel points... Walmart doesn't give me anything... and Kroger has even better prices on many things... for instance right now... gallon of milk at Kroger $ 3.59... Walmart $4.18... "ALWAYS LOWER"... @ Kroger...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 25, 2015 12:36:32 GMT -5
No he's not. We'll keeping it going since the libbies ignore it Well, that's really the problem. It's not that Obama isn't buried up to his eyeballs in dirt. From his only previous executive experience being President of the Choom Gang, to spending 20 years in Jeremiah Wright's racist cult, to the women in his administration that aren't making as much as the men.The libbies don't ignore it - they support it. Not for doing the same work... As for that comment about Wright's church... (not cult)... the most segregated entity in America is meeting this very morning... the local visible church...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 25, 2015 12:39:58 GMT -5
Obama tried to stop them from releasing Ryan's divorce information... Uh huh. And he never said "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period". Which has absolutely NOTHING to do with my comments to which you responded...
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 25, 2015 13:18:21 GMT -5
...to the women in his administration that aren't making as much as the men. Not for doing the same work... I have pointed out on past occasions that studies showing, for example, that women make $0.72 for every dollar men make contain flaws, as most of them fail to correct for the fact that women have traditionally chosen occupations that do not, as a whole, pay as well. I get told I'm sexist. There's still a disparity, but corrected it's something like $0.90/$1. Not great but not an emergency, either. What amuses me about your post, however, is that you're defending the practice when it is done by people you like and support. It gets out a conservative run company is discriminating like this, you liberals immediately scream for legislative relief.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 25, 2015 14:01:12 GMT -5
Not for doing the same work... I have pointed out on past occasions that studies showing, for example, that women make $0.72 for every dollar men make contain flaws, as most of them fail to correct for the fact that women have traditionally chosen occupations that do not, as a whole, pay as well. I get told I'm sexist. There's still a disparity, but corrected it's something like $0.90/$1. Not great but not an emergency, either. What amuses me about your post, however, is that you're defending the practice when it is done by people you like and support. It gets out a conservative run company is discriminating like this, you liberals immediately scream for legislative relief. Defending?... never... I have always, and still do, support women getting the same pay when doing the same work... I have worked with many women outside... and on rigorous jobs... and they were paid on the same wage scale... they were expected to do the same work as their male counterparts... and just as much of it... some of our men tried to "help" them do their jobs... I was very critical of them for that... I always tried to help them learn to do the job as well as their male counterparts... because they were getting paid the same wage... Damn union, huh?... P.S. I like your post... except for the last paragraph... which was completely wrong...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 25, 2015 21:30:46 GMT -5
Uh huh. And he never said "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period". Which has absolutely NOTHING to do with my comments to which you responded... Ah, but it does. He didn't say anything at all to "stop" it until it was already in the papers.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 26, 2015 7:15:31 GMT -5
Which has absolutely NOTHING to do with my comments to which you responded... Ah, but it does. He didn't say anything at all to "stop" it until it was already in the papers. And "liking your doctor and keeping him" has exactly what to do with that?...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 26, 2015 9:19:42 GMT -5
Subtle?... Heck, I go to Kroger because they give me fuel points... Walmart doesn't give me anything... and Kroger has even better prices on many things... for instance right now... gallon of milk at Kroger $ 3.59... Walmart $4.18... "ALWAYS LOWER"... @ Kroger... The difference is, you are spending your own money, and those discounts come out of Kroger's own money. The government is doing it with money stolen from someone else.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 26, 2015 9:20:41 GMT -5
Ah, but it does. He didn't say anything at all to "stop" it until it was already in the papers. And "liking your doctor and keeping him" has exactly what to do with that?... A lie is a lie, regardless of whether it's used to steal money, or to win an election.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 26, 2015 14:59:58 GMT -5
Subtle?... Heck, I go to Kroger because they give me fuel points... Walmart doesn't give me anything... and Kroger has even better prices on many things... for instance right now... gallon of milk at Kroger $ 3.59... Walmart $4.18... "ALWAYS LOWER"... @ Kroger... The difference is, you are spending your own money, and those discounts come out of Kroger's own money. The government is doing it with money stolen from someone else. Kroger gives me their $$$ in the form of fuel points... Walmart give their employees your and my $$$ in the form of food stamps and other government assistance... because they don't pay their employees enough to make it without it...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 26, 2015 15:01:13 GMT -5
And "liking your doctor and keeping him" has exactly what to do with that?... A lie is a lie, regardless of whether it's used to steal money, or to win an election. A "catch all" fer sure...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 27, 2015 9:09:30 GMT -5
The difference is, you are spending your own money, and those discounts come out of Kroger's own money. The government is doing it with money stolen from someone else. Kroger gives me their $$$ in the form of fuel points... Walmart give their employees your and my $$$ in the form of food stamps and other government assistance... because they don't pay their employees enough to make it without it... When did it become incumbent on any employer to pay whatever some employee decides they need to "make it"? The employer offers a salary. The employee either accepts that salary and goes to work, or doesn't accept it, and doesn't go to work, for that employer. If the employee is on food stamps, either they need to find another job, or get more training to move up in the company.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 27, 2015 9:52:54 GMT -5
If you want to supplement Walmart's low wages with your tax $$$... be my guest... I choose not to do that... some individuals are exploited because they just can't take on a second or third job... or find another job when none are available... or they can't move... or get more training... all that sounds so easy... much harder in reality...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 27, 2015 10:14:09 GMT -5
If you want to supplement Walmart's low wages with your tax $$$... be my guest... I choose not to do that... some individuals are exploited because they just can't take on a second or third job... or find another job when none are available... or they can't move... or get more training... all that sounds so easy... much harder in reality... So, you can't answer my question. Got it. If one is on food stamps, it's not the fault of the employer. Or are you now saying that contracts shouldn't be honored, if the employee isn't "making it" on what he/she signed on for? That employers should be forced to pay every employee whatever they need to "make it"?
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 27, 2015 13:03:44 GMT -5
If you want to supplement Walmart's low wages with your tax $$$... be my guest... I choose not to do that... some individuals are exploited because they just can't take on a second or third job... or find another job when none are available... or they can't move... or get more training... all that sounds so easy... much harder in reality... So, you can't answer my question. Got it. If one is on food stamps, it's not the fault of the employer. Or are you now saying that contracts shouldn't be honored, if the employee isn't "making it" on what he/she signed on for? That employers should be forced to pay every employee whatever they need to "make it"? Oh, I'm sorry... no employer in the U.S. is forced as an obligation to pay their employees any certain wage... they are free to exploit the community and pay whatever they want to pay and get away with it... because many workers have no choice other than to work their... and leave it up to you and me to supplement those low wages... I know individuals who have worked at Walmart for over 10 years... and are still making just over $8 per hour... not really enough to cover the rise in the cost of living over the last 10 years...
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 27, 2015 13:59:30 GMT -5
If one is on food stamps, it's not the fault of the employer. Or are you now saying that contracts shouldn't be honored, if the employee isn't "making it" on what he/she signed on for? That employers should be forced to pay every employee whatever they need to "make it"? Maybe it's not the fault of the employer. But... who would you rather pay the cost of Wal-Mart's employees (to continue the example): Wal-Mart customers? Or everyone in the Wal-Mart's region? That second one is what happens NOW. Let me anticipate the compassionate conservative's response: Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses? Maybe you'd like to simple cease providing public assistance, and hope this forces employers to raise wages (or lose their employees to those who do), but as a practical matter do you think that's likely to happen in a country half liberal and half conservative, and not all the conservatives are as hard-hearted as ol' Ebenezer was? Businessmen, many of whom claim to be conservatives, only talk the talk when it comes to less government. They *like* the social safety net because it lets them cut prices by pushing some of their manpower costs onto the electorate in general, instead of only onto their customers. You need big government for that to work.
|
|