I think the Dems are trying to set up their post mortem for after the elections. If so this will be the storyline parroted after the election by the lap dog media too. All the "big money" shelled out by "unknown sources" misinformed and fooled the electorate into voting Republican. Therefore they won't view the election results as being valid. The Holder Justice Dept. will surely jump into action wasting milions of tax payers dollars investigating a straw dog that they set up themselves.

mcsmack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Holder Justice Dept. will surely jump into
> action wasting milions of tax payers dollars
> investigating a straw dog that they set up
> themselves.

Yeah, but that dog won't hunt. Maybe he should look at all of his foreign donations from 2008. Does that mean his Presidency is bought and paid for by foreigners?

Obama is the machine and his vision of empire has failed.

He needs his card pulled on this campaign finance scare tactic. He had no probs whatsoever when it was his side raking in donations in 2008.

Not a genuine bone in this punks body.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

I'm Troll@AOL, and I approve this thread.
.

==================================================================================
"Why don't you LOSERS just pack your flower print DOUCHE BAGS
and get your stoopid @$$#$ THE FUCK OFF MY INTERNETZ!"

- 'philscamms' (the YT Watchdog) ; internet & YouTube® extraordinaire.

-
Attachments:

What will be interesting is how he reacts on Nov.3rd. Everyone is talking about whether or not he will moderate to the right or middle like Clinton did with the more moderate Republicans and Democrats reaching across the isle to govern.

I don't see that happening. For one thing Obama and Clinton are two completely different animals. Clinton was progressive for sure but it wasn't burned into his soul like Obama. Clinton was serious about his liberalism but when push came to shove he really didn't have the conviction that Obama does or the deep seated and seething self righteous anger for that matter. Clinton at least liked to cut loose and have a little fun every once in awhile much to Hillary's consternation.

Obama strikes me as someone who doesn't really care much for the his office. He is rather more consumed by the power he has assumed from it. That explains all the vacation time, time spent away from the White House and still more time away being scheduled away within days after the election.

I don't think Obama will be near as radical after the election either. I don't think he has that much energy to continue his true agenda through legislation. His ideology is simple to understand and emblazoned on the countries conscience now. Other then wielding a few executive orders around on whatever issues don't anticipate much more action then that. He is lazy and will look more and more defensive and desperate as time goes by.

Bill Clinton signed the Welfare reform act (after vetoing an almost identical bill 3 times) to help him win his 2nd term.He did this as a maneuver to make it his own and takes credit for it to this day. Obama has said he doesn't care if he wins a second term or not and I believe him. I really don't think he likes being the president that much and will write off a second term loss as the electorate not being smart enough to realize his gifted genius. He will view it as our loss not his.

one thing's for sure.....he's a hell of an improvement over the last guy who had the job. that we can all agree on

GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.

At the first level are the party's candidates, who can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate or as conservative, as their circumstances require.

Next come the outside groups that refuse to disclose their donor lists. They are doing the dirty work of pounding their Democratic opponents in commercials for which no one is accountable. The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.

And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his allies cast President Obama as the central figure in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling participation by the most extreme 10 percent or 15 percent of the electorate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/17/AR2010101702603.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1⊂=AR

Hmmmm..

Has Obama disclosed his donor list from 2008? How much of that money came from foriegn sources?

Think for yourself Pis'son.




pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.
>
> At the first level are the party's candidates, who
> can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate or
> as conservative, as their circumstances require.
>
> Next come the outside groups that refuse to
> disclose their donor lists. They are doing the
> dirty work of pounding their Democratic opponents
> in commercials for which no one is accountable.
> The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent
> "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.
>
> And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his
> allies cast President Obama as the central figure
> in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling
> participation by the most extreme 10 percent or 15
> percent of the electorate.
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic
> le/2010/10/17/AR2010101702603.html?hpid%3Dopinions
> box1⊂=AR

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Apparently since the GOP blocked that bill he doesnt need to disclose the campaign finance.

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Apparently since the GOP blocked that bill he
> doesnt need to disclose the campaign finance.


Oh, OK then.

Why all the crying about donors, cuntass?

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

I Noticed you can't refute all three points so you just rely on insults. Very effective tactic. (applause)

Refute points? It's some analysis from the Washington Post.

Can your douchebag prez run on his accomplishments? Why are other dems running away from him in almost every case?

Oh, I know, the repubs are just the big bogeyman. Bullshit scare tactics are all you have.


pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I Noticed you can't refute all three points so you
> just rely on insults. Very effective tactic.
> (applause)

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Refute points? It's some analysis from the
> Washington Post.

that are perfectly Valid made points by a commentator.

>
> Can your douchebag prez run on his
> accomplishments? Why are other dems running away
> from him in almost every case?
>
Sounds a lot like the GOP when Bush Couldnt run on his accomplishments and his candidates ran from him in 2006


> Oh, I know, the repubs are just the big bogeyman.
> Bullshit scare tactics are all you have.
>
>

ah Irony.

> pas'ion Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I Noticed you can't refute all three points so
> you
> > just rely on insults. Very effective tactic.
> > (applause)

Seriously, the end result of Dionne's analysis is this?

...As it is, these Democrats and scores like them elsewhere face Republican opponents who can be calmly affable, knowing they have behind them oodles of secret cash and a far right that sees Nov. 2 as Armageddon.

Where was he when Soros was funding most of the groups supporting the democrats in 2008? I seem to remember the folks at moveon.org and many others who were quite active on the 'harpy trail' pushing attacks and attack ads against the Republicans.

And my point is, it isn't just that 'well they did it too' - it's more the 'what a fucking hypocrite' and maybe he should just go pound sand elsewhere. His 'Op-Ed' is nothing more than another note in the 'ooh the bad republicans and their evil money' BS mantra. Yeah, please, let's see the Democrats run on their record - then it would truly be a slaughter.

I am not sure what all the corporate bashing is about anyway. Without them many of us would not have jobs, or be paying taxes that fund these folks working at the Federal government levels. I guess it plays well to their union buddies - but more people working for large corporations probably are not impressed, and they are more likely to go out and vote then the disenchanted folks just trying to make ends meet that need to be bused to their polling place.

Again, the Democrats this time around are all a bunch of whiners.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I am not sure what all the corporate bashing is
> about anyway. Without them many of us would not
> have jobs, or be paying taxes that fund these
> folks working at the Federal government levels. I
> guess it plays well to their union buddies - but
> more people working for large corporations
> probably are not impressed, and they are more
> likely to go out and vote then the disenchanted
> folks just trying to make ends meet that need to
> be bused to their polling place.
>
> Again, the Democrats this time around are all a
> bunch of whiners.


These are the same corporations that fund the GOP and ask for exorbitant Tax breaks Then turn around and sit on large piles of cash reserves and do not hire american workers. They then Over seas and Offshore jobs to other countries. Thus Hurting the American workforce.

as opposed to the whining you do on a daily basis? oh, the irony. the stimulus bill preserved hundreds of thousands of jobs and even created jobs outside of the private sector. if the tide shifts back to the private sector by reduction in gov't services (many of which, gov't contractors in this area see a direct benefit), the result will be that corporations will simply shift our american jobs overseas. how does that help our gdp and unemployment rate? i don't see it having a positive effect.

that was directed at the no fun police, rv up there

mako Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> as opposed to the whining you do on a daily basis?
> oh, the irony. the stimulus bill preserved
> hundreds of thousands of jobs and even created
> jobs outside of the private sector. if the tide
> shifts back to the private sector by reduction in
> gov't services (many of which, gov't contractors
> in this area see a direct benefit), the result
> will be that corporations will simply shift our
> american jobs overseas. how does that help our
> gdp and unemployment rate? i don't see it having
> a positive effect.

Not to poke fun - but ok I will. Daily basis? Yeah, I can see you pay attention.

The government had been paying plenty of contractors to do work for years. Little of their work - well pretty much none - can be outsourced to overseas contracts. The benefit to the Fed was, they didn't have to pay all the benefits to these contractors - that was all handled by the contracting companies. It saved the Fed a good bit of money in pensions, benefits, all sorts of associated costs. About the only place they lost was on institutional knowledge - where folks would turn over and maybe they would lose someone that really knew a particular system. But then again, they had documentation standards that required most documents to be written to a 6th grade education level to ensure folks wouldn't be too stupid to understand them later on. As far as overseas jobs go - maybe you should talk to your boy Clinton. He was the one that negotiated and signed NAFTA into effect - probably one of the biggest mechanisms by which many of our US jobs were outsourced - to Mexico and beyond.

What Obama has done is setup an unsustainable level of Federal spending on FTEs - there is just no way to justify the expenditures the Federal government will have to put out for all these new hires. It is likely the cycle will flip back, and maybe these folks will get lucky and move back to contracting, or maybe not. But for sure the Fed will be cutting spending, and it is likely going to be a lot of these folks with new jobs that will get the axe. Likely we will see the Federal workers Union go on strike though when that plan is on the way.

You are comparing apples and oranges though in the long run. Most of the stimulus money affected jobs that had NOTHING to do with the MANUFACTURING sector. NOTHING. That is where we need to create jobs, and nothing in the stimulus, or in any policy advanced by the Democrats addresses that SAD FACT. They mainly pushed money to their union hacks, and to other State and local governments. Certainly those jobs were maintained, but little else.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

so, wait, who pushed nafta in the first place? i thought it was the brainchild of bush sr.? no? and, who supports it now? big business? republicans? am i right?

that said, when or if the republicans gain any sort of power politically, we're totally fucked. unemployment will skyrocket and we'll be back to the wild west of deregulation which will lead to decreased investor confidence. then, we will become china's little bitches, no?

pucks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so, wait, who pushed nafta in the first place? i
> thought it was the brainchild of bush sr.? no?
> and, who supports it now? big business?
> republicans? am i right?
>
> that said, when or if the republicans gain any
> sort of power politically, we're totally fucked.
> unemployment will skyrocket and we'll be back to
> the wild west of deregulation which will lead to
> decreased investor confidence. then, we will
> become china's little bitches, no?

No.

Just because folks want less government spending, it doesn't mean they want to deregulate everything. That is just fear mongering by the Democrats (talking point number???) to make people think that all the tea party folks and other conservatives want is to get rid of all government regulation. Funny - it was Obama who just other day rolled over on calling the Chinese out for currency manipulation. And it was Clinton and company that got in deep with heavy campaign cash from the Chinese government through proxies. Seems like they are the ones playing to the tunes of the Chinese.

The only reason unemployment will 'skyrocket' now is if the Feds let the thousands of new Federal workers go. A lot of this could have been resolved if the Democrats in Congress had worked out some kind of solution for the Bush tax reductions, but they were too pansy ass to do that either. But keep trying to deflect from the fact that the most meaningful legislation they could manage to pass before they left was to mandate that TV commercials couldn't be louder than other broadcasts - sometime in 2012.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Retardocrats

==================================================================================
"Why don't you LOSERS just pack your flower print DOUCHE BAGS
and get your stoopid @$$#$ THE FUCK OFF MY INTERNETZ!"

- 'philscamms' (the YT Watchdog) ; internet & YouTube® extraordinaire.

but, in the early 90s, nafta was pushed by bush sr. and the republican pro-business lobby, right?

today, twenty years later, this policy is wholly endorsed by the pro-business lobby and republicans, right?

and republicans vocally support outsourcing jobs, right?

how will this help us? i don't know if i like this line of thinking. seems illogical. it's almost like republicans being critical of deficits and such falling on deaf ears when republicans couldn't even handle it themselves from 2000 thru 2006. if our only hope is this nutcase tea party movement, then we're definitely screwed. i'm sure you'll agree that think tankers they are not.

clint didier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but, in the early 90s, nafta was pushed by bush
> sr. and the republican pro-business lobby, right?
>
>
> today, twenty years later, this policy is wholly
> endorsed by the pro-business lobby and
> republicans, right?
>
> and republicans vocally support outsourcing jobs,
> right?
>
> how will this help us? i don't know if i like
> this line of thinking. seems illogical. it's
> almost like republicans being critical of deficits
> and such falling on deaf ears when republicans
> couldn't even handle it themselves from 2000 thru
> 2006. if our only hope is this nutcase tea party
> movement, then we're definitely screwed. i'm sure
> you'll agree that think tankers they are not.

The only question you posed that had a yes was the first one. All the rest are false. And NAFTA was a germ long before GHWB Sr was in office.

History of NAFTA
http://useconomy.about.com/od/tradepolicy/p/NAFTA_History.htm

When Was NAFTA Started?:
NAFTA was signed by President George H.W. Bush, Mexican President Salinas, and Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in 1992. It was ratified by the legislatures of the three countries in 1993. The House approved it by 234 to 200 on November 17 and the Senate by 60 to 38 on November 20. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on December 8, 1993 and entered force January 1, 1994. Although it was signed by President Bush, it was a priority of President Clinton's, and its passage is considered one of his first successes. (Source: History.com, NAFTA Signed into Law, December 8, 1993.

How Was NAFTA Started?:
The impetus for NAFTA actually began with President Ronald Regan, who campaigned on a North American common market. In 1984, Congress passed the Trade and Tariff Act. This is important because it gave the President "fast-track" authority to negotiate free trade agreements, while only allowing Congress the ability to approve or disapprove, not change negotiating points. Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney agreed with Reagan to begin negotiations for the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which was signed in 1988, went into effect in 1989 and is now suspended due to NAFTA. (Source: NaFina, NAFTA Timeline)

Meanwhile, Mexican President Salinas and President Bush began negotiations for a liberalized trade between the two countries. Prior to NAFTA, Mexican tariffs on U.S. imports were 250% higher than U.S. tariffs on Mexican imports. In 1991, Canada requested a trilateral agreement, which then led to NAFTA. In 1993, concerns about liberalization of labor and environmental regulations led to the adoption of two addendums to NAFTA. (Source: Infoplease.com, NAFTA)

Maybe you should get your FACTS straight before you open your retardedness up for all to see.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/18/2010 05:33PM by Registered Voter.

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.
>
> At the first level are the party's candidates, who
> can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate or
> as conservative, as their circumstances require.
>
> Next come the outside groups that refuse to
> disclose their donor lists. They are doing the
> dirty work of pounding their Democratic opponents
> in commercials for which no one is accountable.
> The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent
> "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.
>
> And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his
> allies cast President Obama as the central figure
> in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling
> participation by the most extreme 10 percent or 15
> percent of the electorate.

Your theory still depends on the electorate being as dumb as a box of rocks to be valid. Do "these ads" have some magical power just because they're funded by News Corp or something viewers automatically suspend analytical reasoning and fall for any given point of view? That doesn't put much faith in your supporting electorate. It could be the young people aren't energized because Obama is yesterdays rock star. It's Bieber time baby!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/18/2010 05:40PM by mcsmack.

mcsmack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pas'ion Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.
> >
> > At the first level are the party's candidates,
> who
> > can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate
> or
> > as conservative, as their circumstances
> require.
> >
> > Next come the outside groups that refuse to
> > disclose their donor lists. They are doing the
> > dirty work of pounding their Democratic
> opponents
> > in commercials for which no one is accountable.
> > The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent
> > "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.
> >
> > And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his
> > allies cast President Obama as the central
> figure
> > in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling
> > participation by the most extreme 10 percent or
> 15
> > percent of the electorate.
>
> Your theory still depends on the electorate being
> as dumb as a box of rocks to be valid. Do "these
> ads" have some magical power just because they're
> funded by News Corp or something viewers
> automatically suspend analytical reasoning and
> fall for any given point of view? That doesn't put
> much faith in your supporting electorate. It could
> be the young people aren't energized because Obama
> is yesterdays rock star. It's Beiber time baby!

Back when they were all voting for Obama, of course they were so smart. Obviously only intellectual power houses could get his true message of hope and change. And... we see where that got them. I have to imagine most of the problem really comes down to the fact that Obama sold them a bill of goods.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

so, the republicans do not support free trade and outsourcing jobs? that's not what I heard. where do they stand on this? on that note, where do the tea party intellectuals stand on this? i need to know before nov. 2nd for our american freedom and things and such.

on your second message, bush sold a bill of goods and all we got was crap. wmds? where are they? curbing illegals? only when they stop building our houses. deficit? blowing the budget? do you agree that you're a hypocrite? wow. just wow.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> mcsmack Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > pas'ion Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.
> > >
> > > At the first level are the party's
> candidates,
> > who
> > > can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate
> > or
> > > as conservative, as their circumstances
> > require.
> > >
> > > Next come the outside groups that refuse to
> > > disclose their donor lists. They are doing
> the
> > > dirty work of pounding their Democratic
> > opponents
> > > in commercials for which no one is
> accountable.
> > > The Republican candidates can shrug an
> innocent
> > > "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.
> > >
> > > And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and
> his
> > > allies cast President Obama as the central
> > figure
> > > in a conspiracy against America itself,
> fueling
> > > participation by the most extreme 10 percent
> or
> > 15
> > > percent of the electorate.
> >
> > Your theory still depends on the electorate
> being
> > as dumb as a box of rocks to be valid. Do
> "these
> > ads" have some magical power just because
> they're
> > funded by News Corp or something viewers
> > automatically suspend analytical reasoning and
> > fall for any given point of view? That doesn't
> put
> > much faith in your supporting electorate. It
> could
> > be the young people aren't energized because
> Obama
> > is yesterdays rock star. It's Beiber time baby!
>
> Back when they were all voting for Obama, of
> course they were so smart. Obviously only
> intellectual power houses could get his true
> message of hope and change. And... we see where
> that got them. I have to imagine most of the
> problem really comes down to the fact that Obama
> sold them a bill of goods.


So the children aren't the future? Son Of A bitch! Could be a large segment of them are a bunch of spoiled little brain dead idiots being educated by older tenured brain dead idiots that no more prepare them for the real world then watching 100 hrs of Jersey Shore would.

simon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> on your second message, bush sold a bill of goods
> and all we got was crap. wmds? where are they?
> curbing illegals? only when they stop building
> our houses. deficit? blowing the budget? do you
> agree that you're a hypocrite? wow. just wow.


Talking about your buddy Obama and the current Congress. But please, try again to change the subject when you have no ground for your original argument.

Obama and the Democrats screwed the pooch. Go cry me a river that they are about to get their asses handed to them in the election because they performed (or outperformed) 'as expected' by the rest of us that didn't vote for Obama. They have no one to blame but themselves, but you can keep pushing the fear mongering stuff if you want.

Too funny.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

mcsmack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So the children aren't the future? Son Of A bitch!
> Could be a large segment of them are a bunch of
> spoiled little brain dead idiots being educated by
> older tenured brain dead idiots that no more
> prepare them for the real world then watching 100
> hrs of Jersey Shore would.

Maybe they should do a 'Survivor Democrats' and put on some of the losers from this year. That would be enlightening.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

mcsmack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pas'ion Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > GOP strategy. Three pronged attack.
> >
> > At the first level are the party's candidates,
> who
> > can be as reasonable or as angry, as moderate
> or
> > as conservative, as their circumstances
> require.
> >
> > Next come the outside groups that refuse to
> > disclose their donor lists. They are doing the
> > dirty work of pounding their Democratic
> opponents
> > in commercials for which no one is accountable.
> > The Republican candidates can shrug an innocent
> > "Who, me?" Deniability is a wonderful thing.
> >
> > And then, on the far right, Glenn Beck and his
> > allies cast President Obama as the central
> figure
> > in a conspiracy against America itself, fueling
> > participation by the most extreme 10 percent or
> 15
> > percent of the electorate.
>
> Your theory still depends on the electorate being
> as dumb as a box of rocks to be valid. Do "these
> ads" have some magical power just because they're
> funded by News Corp or something viewers
> automatically suspend analytical reasoning and
> fall for any given point of view? That doesn't put
> much faith in your supporting electorate. It could
> be the young people aren't energized because Obama
> is yesterdays rock star. It's Bieber time baby!


The propaganda appears to be working on you.

I Noticed you can't refute any points so you just rely on insults. Very effective tactic. (applause)

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

pas'ion Wrote:
-
> > Your theory still depends on the electorate
> being
> > as dumb as a box of rocks to be valid. Do
> "these
> > ads" have some magical power just because
> they're
> > funded by News Corp or something viewers
> > automatically suspend analytical reasoning and
> > fall for any given point of view? That doesn't
> put
> > much faith in your supporting electorate. It
> could
> > be the young people aren't energized because
> Obama
> > is yesterdays rock star. It's Bieber time baby!
>
>
> The propaganda appears to be working on you.

The Ads are doing what they are meant to be doing. Misleading the public. The more money available the more ads can be bought and the more blanket bombing of the airwaves. If you repeat lies enough times people will begin to believe them as truth and if there isnt enough money from the opposition to refute these constant misinformation then its difficult to wage a successful campaign on the actual facts. Justin Bieber is not running for office so to say its his time is silly and misleading. He isnt even old enough to vote let alone a US citizen.

Hmmmmmmmmm.

Not qualified to vote and a non-citizen,
kinda reminds me of somebody.
.

==================================================================================
"Why don't you LOSERS just pack your flower print DOUCHE BAGS
and get your stoopid @$$#$ THE FUCK OFF MY INTERNETZ!"

- 'philscamms' (the YT Watchdog) ; internet & YouTube® extraordinaire.

the video got pulled.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

pas'ion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pas'ion Wrote:
>> The Ads are doing what they are meant to be doing.
> Misleading the public. The more money available
> the more ads can be bought and the more blanket
> bombing of the airwaves. If you repeat lies
> enough times people will begin to believe them as
> truth and if there isn't enough money from the
> opposition to refute these constant misinformation
> then its difficult to wage a successful campaign
> on the actual facts. Justin Bieber is not running
> for office so to say its his time is silly and
> misleading. He isnt even old enough to vote let
> alone a US citizen.

I guarantee you pas'ion, if the ads don't fool you they aren't fooling anyone. Bieber included. I have a feeling you two have similar mental acuity.