Sarah Palin and the liberal psyche

[ArlJim78]

good video which will make some heads explode around here. the guy calls it pretty much right on the money.

oo-MhwEZay4

[PaceAdvantage]

Bingo bango...if they didn't fear her as much as the video claims, you wouldn't be reading all these rants from hcap around here about her, which he usually starts UNPROVOKED...this is but one tiny example from one tiny place...

[bigmack]

How did this guy climb inside my head and get the same read?

You have to wonder, how is it a failed VP candidate has so much effect over nerds like hcap, Olbermann, BigEd, Richie Maddow, Andrea "My First Husband Was Black, then I married a Greenspan" Mitchell, Chrissy Matthews, the entire staff of The NYTimes, The Washington Post, The Atlanta Journal & on .............

Little people with little minds. Poor souls.

[redshift1]

Fascinating premise bandied about on conservative blogs and forums "why does the left fear Sarah Palin". Accompanied with witty bullet points like:

Makes liberals heads explode.

Makes liberals run around like their hair"s on fire.

Imbuing Palin with some hitherto unknown, fear inducing mystical power is not dissimilar from a waving of the wand.... pumpkin to chariot, washerwoman to princess brand of spellbinding rhetoric.

Note, Palin's popularity polling at historic lows now that's scary.

[bigmack]

Fascinating premise bandied about on conservative blogs and forums
You spend time at those? Great.

Sources?

[PaceAdvantage]

Note, Palin's popularity polling at historic lows now that's scary.Scary for who?

[bigmack]

Scary for who?
This will complete the trifecta of questions this dope has no answer for.

redshift1 is an Orange County poser. They don't come much worse.

[NJ Stinks]

I doubt righties can grasp this but here goes again.

The left fears Sarah Palin because the fools on the right side of the aisle selected her to to be John McCain's running mate. If anything happened to McCain - not an outlandish thought given his age and life history - Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I doubt righties can grasp this but here goes again.

The left fears Sarah Palin because the fools on the right side of the aisle selected her to to be John McCain's running mate. If anything happened to McCain - not an outlandish thought given his age and life history - Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.

Call me rightie if it makes you feel better (that's a general statement, not directed at you NJ) - but (this part is directed at you, NJ):

On what planet does your explanation make sense if we are two years removed from the election, the election that voted against her ticket, and this beat keeps playing to this day?

You "lefties" keep this up to this very moment because if John McCain dies... she what??????????????

God help me if when I slam at the remote it lands on another channel with her shrilling at me someday, but.... come on... you have to admit...

[NJ Stinks]

Call me rightie if it makes you feel better (that's a general statement, not directed at you NJ) - but (this part is directed at you, NJ):

On what planet does your explanation make sense if we are two years removed from the election, the election that voted against her ticket, and this beat keeps playing to this day?

You "lefties" keep this up to this very moment because if John McCain dies... she what??????????????

God help me if when I slam at the remote it lands on another channel with her shrilling at me someday, but.... come on... you have to admit...

I can't admit that. Just because we got lucky and McCain/Palin lost two years ago doesn't mean Palin cannot be resurrected someday. It would be one thing if it was universally accepted that Palin was just a bad dream. That's not what I see from the right today.

(I use the word "rightie" because it's easier than typing Republicans/conservatives all the time.)

[prospector]

I doubt righties can grasp this but here goes again.

The left fears Sarah Palin because the fools on the right side of the aisle selected her to to be John McCain's running mate. If anything happened to McCain - not an outlandish thought given his age and life history - Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.
i fear nothing..nobody
i was one of those who voted for palin and NOT mc cain...and i ain't alone..

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Just because we got lucky and McCain/Palin lost two years ago doesn't mean Palin cannot be resurrected someday. ...

So... your original answer that was clear to all but righties... means... nothing?

Your expanded answer seems to imply exactly what your trite answer disputed.

You've lost me here but I won't pin it all on you.

[boxcar]

I doubt righties can grasp this but here goes again.

The left fears Sarah Palin because the fools on the right side of the aisle selected her to to be John McCain's running mate. If anything happened to McCain - not an outlandish thought given his age and life history - Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.

If this were truly the reason, all that fear would be expressed in the past tense. That is all history, yet, you whackjobs on the Left still fear her even though she's not an elected official, hasn't announced that she's running in 2012, nor has any grassroots organization or movement expressed any serious interest in her, as of yet. Therefore, your fear is as irrational as your political ideology. :p

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

- Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.

As much as I dislike BO and his policies the thought of Uncle Joe becoming Prez is much much more alarming to me than the ex- Governor of Alaska stepping into the Presidency.

[mostpost]

good video which will make some heads explode around here. the guy calls it pretty much right on the money.

oo-MhwEZay4
Warning!!! Do not buy a used car from this man. He's a charlatan and a smooth talker, but there is no there there. The whole seven minutes and fifty four seconds is nothing but a series of strung together sound bites. Never does he provide proof of his assertions. Never does he do anything but put words together in what he obviously thinks is such a clever way.

On the other hand this guy is the perfect spokesman for Sarah Palin. No substance.

Permit me to explain something here. Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

There is a very good reason I don't like Sarah Palin. She slanders me. Me and everyone else who espouses a liberal philosophy. To Sarah we are not just people who disagree with her. We are evil people who are bent on destroying the United States of America. We are corrupt and immoral. We are lazy and selfish. Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?

[TrifectaMike]

I doubt righties can grasp this but here goes again.

The left fears Sarah Palin because the fools on the right side of the aisle selected her to to be John McCain's running mate. If anything happened to McCain - not an outlandish thought given his age and life history - Palin would have become president.

If that doesn't make you fearful, I don't know what will.

Please wake up. I'd like to inform you that it is now 2011.

Mike

[TrifectaMike]

Warning!!! Do not buy a used car from this man. He's a charlatan and a smooth talker, but there is no there there. The whole seven minutes and fifty four seconds is nothing but a series of strung together sound bites. Never does he provide proof of his assertions. Never does he do anything but put words together in what he obviously thinks is such a clever way.

On the other hand this guy is the perfect spokesman for Sarah Palin. No substance.

Permit me to explain something here. Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

There is a very good reason I don't like Sarah Palin. She slanders me. Me and everyone else who espouses a liberal philosophy. To Sarah we are not just people who disagree with her. We are evil people who are bent on destroying the United States of America. We are corrupt and immoral. We are lazy and selfish. Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?

All that from a helpless hot old lady from Alaska.

Mike

[JustRalph]

There is a very good reason I don't like Sarah Palin. She slanders me. Me and everyone else who espouses a liberal philosophy. To Sarah we are not just people who disagree with her. We are evil people who are bent on destroying the United States of America. We are corrupt and immoral. We are lazy and selfish. Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?

Ok, now I agree with her more than ever..........next year send those taxes you openly give to the government for you to hold, to SARAHPAC. They will do something much more valuable than they are doing now.

[boxcar]

Warning!!! Do not buy a used car from this man. He's a charlatan and a smooth talker, but there is no there there. The whole seven minutes and fifty four seconds is nothing but a series of strung together sound bites. Never does he provide proof of his assertions. Never does he do anything but put words together in what he obviously thinks is such a clever way.

On the other hand this guy is the perfect spokesman for Sarah Palin. No substance.

Permit me to explain something here. Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

There is a very good reason I don't like Sarah Palin. She slanders me. Me and everyone else who espouses a liberal philosophy. To Sarah we are not just people who disagree with her. We are evil people who are bent on destroying the United States of America. We are corrupt and immoral. We are lazy and selfish. Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?

Two things: How should he prove the Left is not insane?

Secondly, you complain about "slander"? What about all liberal elected officials who have slandered the dissenting voices on the Right? Or what about the LameStream media and how they constantly slander, belittle, ridicule and attack the Right viciously? Do I really need to provide proof of this?

And furthermore, your complaint is totally unjustified -- at least from a Christian perspective. The radicals on the Left are bent on destroying the U.S. (once again, listen to Soros' own words in Beck's 3-vid expose). Or for that matter, listen to BO and how he wants to radically transform the face of America. Do you understand what he meant by this? Do you have any inkling?

As far as "lazy and selfish", very many are. And you know why this is? Because they don't view life through the prism of God's word and they are hostile toward God. (Of course, most on the Right don't either and if it weren't for God's grace they would be just as much in the dark as Liberals.) And because Man is not basically good as you naively and falsely believe. Man is fallen. Man is corrupt. Man is born for trouble (Job 5:7). In sin, man was conceived and brought forth in iniquity. (Ps 51:5) From birth man has been rebelling against God (Isa 48:8).

Liberalism finds it ground in Human Secularism, and this alone makes it inherently evil; for the State has usurped the role of God entirely in the governance of the world and this nation. The State has become god and promises to the masses to make life so much easier and better and fairer, etc., etc. It makes promises that it cannot and will never be able to make delivery.

And if you think Palin was "malicious" on how she "paints" the Left, you really don't know your bible; for scripture does not paint a very pretty picture of Man. You want' "malicious"?

Isa 1:5-6
5 Where will you be stricken again,
As you continue in your rebellion?
The whole head is sick,
And the whole heart is faint.
6 From the sole of the foot even to the head
There is nothing sound in it,
Only bruises, welts, and raw wounds,
Not pressed out or bandaged,
Nor softened with oil.
NASB

And again,

Jer 17:9
"The heart is more deceitful than all else
And is desperately sick;
Who can understand it?
NASB


Sara girl is light stuff compared to scripture, wouldn't you say? Yet, assuming she's an unbeliever, I have to say that her take on liberalism in particular, as an ideology, is far, far closer to the biblical mark than yours is, Mr. Mosty. There's simply nothing spiritually sound in spiritually dead people, most especially people who elevate Man (the State) to the position of God. Liberalism, Progressivism, Socialism -- any of these are as godless a systems of governance you can get. It's no wonder that Communism, in one of these forms, is so popular worldwide. It makes perfectly good sense that one of these would appeal to fallen men.

So, quit your juvenile whining about Sarah. From a humanistic perspective, she's a real saint compared to various writers of scripture. :D

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

Permit me to explain something here. Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.



So, are you comfortable with Joe Biden being in a position to succeed Bo in the event of his failure to complete his term in office ??

[fast4522]

I feel Joe Biden has had his 15 minutes of fame and nothing but good health will befall Barack Hussein Obama or Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr during the next 23 months. All such talk of other scenarios are from deep seated hate born from a true lack if ideas. Further to suggest Sara Palin has a lack of knowledge and makes someone laugh signals to me lies that cover up true hate and fear. I have nothing but admiration for a lady who strikes fear in little men across this country. Just as in horse racing, may all involved be safe but let the race begin.

[cj's dad]

I feel Joe Biden has had his 15 minutes of fame and nothing but good health will befall Barack Hussein Obama or Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr during the next 23 months. All such talk of other scenarios are from deep seated hate born from a true lack if ideas. Further to suggest Sara Palin has a lack of knowledge and makes someone laugh signals to me lies that cover up true hate and fear. I have nothing but admiration for a lady who strikes fear in little men across this country. Just as in horse racing, may all involved be safe but let the race begin.

Ireally have no idea what this means. Certainly, there are scenarios which could cause this President, or any other President to not complete his term. The possibility of Biden becoming the POTUS is real indeed and has zero to do with hate or lack of ideas.

[delayjf]

Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

That's because the left perceives that it is the superior intellect, and all those Ivy League educations need validation, they could not possibly agree with anyone who graduated from Montana U. Yet for all that supposed intellectual superiority, liberals / progressives support a political structure whose achievements pales in comparison to the democracy of the US. Palin’s message is simple, understanding freedom does not require a Harvard Degree - and this drives the left crazy.

We are corrupt and immoral.
Generally speaking, you are. Who gave us the sexual revolution of the 60's, whose promiscuous life styles lead to the aids epidemic? Who supports abortion on demand, gay rights? Who celebrates the decedent life of the rich and famous in Hollywood? The left hates religion because they place judgments on their "life without limits"

We are lazy and selfish.
Who are the biggest supporters of union labors - which are now more than willing to bankrupt several states as long as they get what was promised to them.

Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?
Probably because the shoe fits and you don’t like the shoes.

[boxcar]

Generally speaking, you are. Who gave us the sexual revolution of the 60's, whose promiscuous life styles lead to the aids epidemic? Who supports abortion on demand, gay rights? Who celebrates the decedent life of the rich and famous in Hollywood? The left hates religion because they place judgments on their "life without limits"

And who is giving abortions to young teens without parents' knowledge? And whose public laws/conflict with those in the private sector, thereby always engendering in our society one Double Standard after another? And who promotes and encourages premarital sex to grammar school-aged kids with its "sex education" curricula? And who promotes the gay lifestyle among very young children in schools, all in the name of "diversity" and "tolerance"? And who is in favor of euthanasia out of its love for money? And who is in favor of late term abortions? In general, the Left's ungodliness far surpasses that of the unbelieving Right's -- and those on the Right are certainly no angels!

Boxcar

[fast4522]

CJ's Dad
No disrespect but these two guys are going no place no time soon. The majority of the voting public has had their fill of this administration. Instead of the Presidents reelection bid being his to lose, currently it is his to win or he must reverse how he is viewed. This is why established left wing folk have so much hate, once Joe six pack figures out he will in the end be stuck paying for what the current office holder has done, it does not matter what party he belongs to. I will suggest to you that this has occurred. There are no more great ideas to confuse the voting public. A tsunami hitting the east coast is more likely to occur than Joe Biden ever taking the oath of office as President.

[boxcar]

CJ's Dad
No disrespect but these two guys are going no place no time soon. The majority of the voting public has had their fill of this administration. Instead of the Presidents reelection bid being his to lose, currently it is his to win or he must reverse how he is viewed. This is why established left wing folk have so much hate, once Joe six pack figures out he will in the end be stuck paying for what the current office holder has done, it does not matter what party he belongs to. I will suggest to you that this has occurred. There are no more great ideas to confuse the voting public. A tsunami hitting the east coast is more likely to occur than Joe Biden ever taking the oath of office as President.

I wouldn't be too sure of that; for as much as the TP movement dislikes Progressive policies, I think very many of that mindset would also find RINOism as equally repulsive. So, unless the Party of Stupid can put forth a really solid conservative this next election, many conservatives will probably sit out the election. No TP member that I know of would get very enthused over voting for any establishment retreads.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

Must be a dud. :cool:

[cj's dad]

CJ's Dad
No disrespect but these two guys are going no place no time soon. The majority of the voting public has had their fill of this administration. Instead of the Presidents reelection bid being his to lose, currently it is his to win or he must reverse how he is viewed. This is why established left wing folk have so much hate, once Joe six pack figures out he will in the end be stuck paying for what the current office holder has done, it does not matter what party he belongs to. I will suggest to you that this has occurred. There are no more great ideas to confuse the voting public. A tsunami hitting the east coast is more likely to occur than Joe Biden ever taking the oath of office as President.

I am posting that my point is that Joe Biden becoming POTUS no matter the reason is just as scary as Sarah (had Mc Cain won) becoming POTUS, No more no less. As a matter of opinion, I would rather have a former Governor of the great state of Alaska assume the presidency than a Senator from the inconsequential state of Delaware.

[mostpost]

That's because the left perceives that it is the superior intellect, and all those Ivy League educations need validation, they could not possibly agree with anyone who graduated from Montana U. Yet for all that supposed intellectual superiority, liberals / progressives support a political structure whose achievements pales in comparison to the democracy of the US. Palin’s message is simple, understanding freedom does not require a Harvard Degree - and this drives the left crazy.

Ivy League education vs. Montana U. education. How many U.S. presidents are graduates of Ivy League Universities? How many are graduates of Montana U? (oh, feel free to include Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Alaska. People pay big money to go to Ivy League schools and they do so because it is the best education around. You can't just walk into an Ivy League school. As a result only the brightest and the best get in.

Your second sentence shows that you don't understand two things. You don't understand the difference between a political system and an economic system. You think that a particular economic system (Socialism) has to be connected to an undemocratic political system. It does not. Many democratic countries have economic systems that are at least partially socialist.

The second thing is you don't have a clue what people on the left believe employer. If the government passes a law requiring a company to provide reasonable safety features on an assembly line, that government is taking away that companies freedom.

You lack a sense of proportion. There is unfettered unregulated capitalism. That is a disaster. There is communism. That is a disaster. In the middle ground between those two extremes lies the best option. Imagining a scale from minus five to plus five with zero as the midpoint, minus five being absolute communism and plus five being absolute capitalism, the optimum point would probably be between plus one and plus two.


Generally speaking, you are. Who gave us the sexual revolution of the 60's, whose promiscuous life styles lead to the aids epidemic? Who supports abortion on demand, gay rights? Who celebrates the decedent life of the rich and famous in Hollywood? The left hates religion because they place judgments on their "life without limits"
The aids epidemic was caused by a virus. Blaming the epidemic on a lifestyle is as stupid as saying tuberculosis was caused because people breathe. Did only liberals contract aids? Are only liberals gay? Is everyone of the rich and famous in Hollywood a liberal? You know the answers to those questions as well as I do.

You need to proofread your posts. Maybe then you would not make stupid statements like: The left hates religion I know a lot of people at my church. Many of them are lefties; many of them voted for Obama. None of them hate religion.

.
Who are the biggest supporters of union labors - which are now more than willing to bankrupt several states as long as they get what was promised to them.

"What was promised to them." Apparently the right is okay with breaking promises. :rolleyes: Unions have negotiated givebacks in many states (Maybe in all), but what do we hear? No matter how much the unions agree to give back we just hear that it was not enough, that they are to blame for all the problems. We don't hear about the companies that moved out of the state because they did not want to pay taxes. We don't hear about the companies that cut their payroll thereby taking workers off the tax rolls.
Cling to the fantasy that all union workers are lazy. Keep believing that the Banks and the insurance companies and the corporate giants are in the smallest way concerned about the country. Keep doing that and when the country goes in the toilet it will be easy for you to find who to blame. If you own a mirror


Probably because the shoe fits and you don’t like the shoes.

I am not one of Cinderella's sisty uglers. :eek:

[bigmack]

Blaming the epidemic on a lifestyle is as stupid as saying tuberculosis was caused because people breathe.
Saying lifestyle had nothing to do with contracting AIDS is equally as pudden-headed.

[fast4522]

I am posting that my point is that Joe Biden becoming POTUS no matter the reason is just as scary as Sarah (had Mc Cain won) becoming POTUS, No more no less. As a matter of opinion, I would rather have a former Governor of the great state of Alaska assume the presidency than a Senator from the inconsequential state of Delaware.

Regardless of how one defines the word "scary" to borrow from a Clinton phrase, we as Americans participate in a process. I guess we would have to agree that we are thankful Americans eagerly participate in this process of the American politic. For your review the following copy and paste.

The duties and powers of the POTUS are laid out in Article Two of the United States Constitution, which details how the POTUS will be elected, what he or she can do while in office, and the duties that the POTUS is expected to fulfill while elected. The requirements to hold the office include a stipulation that the POTUS must be a natural born American citizen of age 35 or older, although some lawmakers have tried to change these requirements to allow naturalized citizens to run for office as well. A Presidential term lasts for four years, and a President may be in office for two terms only. A President can be removed from office through a process called Impeachment if he or she commits and act of treason, bribery, or another serious crime.

[cj's dad]

You are completely missing my point. You stated that you were afraid that Sarah would assume the POTUS. My question to you to which you or anyone else on this thread have yet to respond is whether you all are equally concerned about Uncle Joe assuming the Presidency. Joe is an idiot IMO. His statements have proven that to prove me correct IMO. Were something to happen to BO, I am scared to death of this jerk-off becoming President.

I was also afraid of BO assumng the top office in the land and my fears were well founded.

[fast4522]

You are completely missing my point. You stated that you were afraid that Sarah would assume the POTUS. My question to you to which you or anyone else on this thread have yet to respond is whether you all are equally concerned about Uncle Joe assuming the Presidency. Joe is an idiot IMO. His statements have proven that to prove me correct IMO. Were something to happen to BO, I am scared to death of this jerk-off becoming President.

I was also afraid of BO assumng the top office in the land and my fears were well founded.

Dear Sir,

I am not afraid of Sara Palin to assume the POTUS, I like that gal. Do not tell anyone but I think John Mccain would have been a much better President than the one we have, at least the man served. But here we are and we look at things in todays light and not 2008. Often we get mixed in our posts and I have been wrong before and I apologize and should buy you a beer if I can make it to the spa this summer.
Steve

[cj's dad]

Bigmacks reply to Mostie:

bigmack[/b]]Saying lifestyle had nothing to do with contracting AIDS is equally as pudden-headed.


The aids epidemic was caused by a virus. Blaming the epidemic on a lifestyle is as stupid as saying tuberculosis was caused because people breathe. Did only liberals contract aids? Are only liberals gay? Is everyone of the rich and famous in Hollywood a liberal? You know the answers to those questions as well as I do.

My reply to Mostie:

Yes that's how it began. It continued by people doing the following:

1) - Having unprotected, sex ,both male and female.
2) - Passing around drug paraphernalia.
3) - Exchanging bodily fluids

try moving into this century Mostie !

[Sericm]

Warning!!! Do not buy a used car from this man. He's a charlatan and a smooth talker, but there is no there there. The whole seven minutes and fifty four seconds is nothing but a series of strung together sound bites. Never does he provide proof of his assertions. Never does he do anything but put words together in what he obviously thinks is such a clever way.

On the other hand this guy is the perfect spokesman for Sarah Palin. No substance.

Permit me to explain something here. Sarah Palin does not make my head explode. Her lack of knowledge makes me laugh. Her simplistic views make me cringe. Her popularity among some makes me scratch my head. But nothing about her makes my head explode.

There is a very good reason I don't like Sarah Palin. She slanders me. Me and everyone else who espouses a liberal philosophy. To Sarah we are not just people who disagree with her. We are evil people who are bent on destroying the United States of America. We are corrupt and immoral. We are lazy and selfish. Why would I like someone who paints me in such a malicious, and false, light?

Becaus she's Right!!!!

[newtothegame]

More liberal media bashing of Palin......lol. This has become funny from the left!

Whoops! Us Weekly Publishes Sarah Palin/Christina Aguilera Spoof as Fact

This is really bad.

Us Weekly has published what it claims are comments made by Sarah Palin (http://gossipcop.com/tag/sarah-palin), in which the former vice presidential candidate blasts Christina Aguilera (http://gossipcop.com/tag/christina-aguilera)’s performance of the national anthem (http://www.gossipcop.com/christina-aguilera-national-anthem-super-bowl-video/) at Super Bowl XLV.

Except the over-the-top “quotes,” which Us Weekly attributes to a Monday radio interview with Sean Hannity (http://gossipcop.com/tag/sean-hannity), were actually written for a satire website.

Again: Palin’s Aguilera comments are fabricated.

They come from a satire piece (http://www.supertuesdaynews.com/1/post/2011/02/palin-says-shed-deport-christina-aguilera-for-botching-national-anthem.html).

Only Us Weekly posted the “Palin” comments as real.

http://www.gossipcop.com/sarah-palin-christina-aguilera-super-bowl-national-anthem-sean-hannity-deport-deporting/

The left is sure quick to try and demonize her.....
Their hatred is really bordering obsession...lol

[Tom]

Blaming the epidemic on a lifestyle is as stupid as saying tuberculosis was caused because people breathe.

Aids is 99% life-style related.
The "cure" has been known for decades.
You don't "catch" AIDS.

[Tom]

They come from a satire piece (http://www.supertuesdaynews.com/1/post/2011/02/palin-says-shed-deport-christina-aguilera-for-botching-national-anthem.html).

So does mostie!

[NJ Stinks]

Generally speaking, you are. Who gave us the sexual revolution of the 60's, whose promiscuous life styles lead to the aids epidemic? Who supports abortion on demand, gay rights? Who celebrates the decedent life of the rich and famous in Hollywood? The left hates religion because they place judgments on their "life without limits".

First, some truths about the sexual revolution.

UF study: sexual revolution began with ‘silent generation’ of ‘40s and ‘50s

Filed under Family (http://news.ufl.edu/research/family/), Research (http://news.ufl.edu/research/) on Monday, November 29, 2004.
GAINESVILLE, Fla. — The sexual revolution did not start in the free-loving 1960s as is commonly thought, a University of Florida researcher says. It began with the “silent generation” of the 1940s and ‘50s, which as its moniker implies, didn’t talk much about sex.

U.S. Census Bureau statistics on premarital pregnancy and vital statistics on single motherhood between 1940 and 1960 point to the unexpected conclusion that there was much more sexual activity during those decades than Americans were willing to admit, said Alan Petigny, a UF history professor whose research is published in the fall issue of the Journal of Social History.

“People didn’t start having sex because Elvis Presley was shaking his hips or because Hugh Hefner came out with ‘Playboy,’” said Petigny, who said he is the first historian to use census data focusing on premarital pregnancies. “After 15 years of Depression and war, there was also a desire on the part of Americans to live in the moment and enjoy life, and they were accordingly less likely to defer to traditional restraints on their behavior.”

http://news.ufl.edu/2004/11/29/sexual-revolution/

___________________________________________

Secondly, I support a woman's right to choose an abortion. I hope she doesn't choose to have one but it's none of my business.

Third, gay rights is going to be one of those issues people look back at in 100 years and say what the hell was all the fuss about? Too bad we have to wait at all but apparently we do.

The Hollywood comment deserves no response at all unless you believe righties don't go to the movies or watch TV.

And finally, the religion shot is wishful thinking. As in "I want to believe this because believing this somehow makes me a superior human being." Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

More liberal media bashing of Palin......lol. This has become funny from the left!

Whoops! Us Weekly Publishes Sarah Palin/Christina Aguilera Spoof as Fact

This is really bad.

Us Weekly has published what it claims are comments made by Sarah Palin (http://gossipcop.com/tag/sarah-palin), in which the former vice presidential candidate blasts Christina Aguilera (http://gossipcop.com/tag/christina-aguilera)’s performance of the national anthem (http://www.gossipcop.com/christina-aguilera-national-anthem-super-bowl-video/) at Super Bowl XLV.

Except the over-the-top “quotes,” which Us Weekly attributes to a Monday radio interview with Sean Hannity (http://gossipcop.com/tag/sean-hannity), were actually written for a satire website.

Again: Palin’s Aguilera comments are fabricated.

They come from a satire piece (http://www.supertuesdaynews.com/1/post/2011/02/palin-says-shed-deport-christina-aguilera-for-botching-national-anthem.html).

Only Us Weekly posted the “Palin” comments as real.

http://www.gossipcop.com/sarah-palin-christina-aguilera-super-bowl-national-anthem-sean-hannity-deport-deporting/

The left is sure quick to try and demonize her.....
Their hatred is really bordering obsession...lol



US Weekly? This is your idea of a leftist publication. When has US Weekly expressed an opinion on any political issue? I have to admit I don't read US Weekly, but I do see it on the news stands. Maybe those pictures of Justin Bieber and those stories about American Idol are just camouflage. Maybe US Weekly donates half its profit to ACORN.
Is it stupid that US Weekly can't tell satire from reality? Yes. Are they leftists? NO.

[mostpost]

And finally, the religion shot is wishful thinking. As in "I want to believe this because believing this somehow makes me a superior human being." Good luck with that.

Most of us can realize our value without putting other people down. Sadly, some folks need to make others feel small in order to make themselves feel big......Hey, that's not true. I never said Boxcar. :mad: :mad: I never did. :mad: :mad: :mad: Stop putting words in my mouth! :mad: :mad:

[delayjf]

Ivy League education vs. Montana U. education. How many U.S. presidents are graduates of Ivy League Universities? How many are graduates of Montana U? (oh, feel free to include Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Alaska
Like the saying goes, you can educate a fool. If you choose to put your faith in Presidents like Wilson, Roosevelt, Clinton, Bush I and II - be my guest. I will put my faith in the Founding fathers, almost half of which did not even go to college. For that matter, neither did Abe Lincoln. A lot of these Ivy League Presidents came from influential families who contributed a lot of money to the schools assuring their kids a spot in a class room. From what I’ve been able to read Obama did not graduate undergrad with honors, so just how was he able to get into Harvard Law?

Your second sentence shows that you don't understand two things. You don't understand the difference between a political system and an economic system. You think that a particular economic system (Socialism) has to be connected to an undemocratic political system. It does not. Many democratic countries have economic systems that are at least partially socialist.
What you fail to see is that they are connected and the countries you are alluding to pale in comparison to the US and what we have accomplished in our short existence.

The second thing is you don't have a clue what people on the left believe employer.
And you think I should proof read??

If the government passes a law requiring a company to provide reasonable safety features on an assembly line, that government is taking away that companies freedom.
This is a red-herring, nobody objects to safety rules like the use of seat belts or air bags etc. Regulations like Cap and Trade are the real issues. You want a fine example about regulations, come out to CA. You can’t legally replace your sink, or put a new rail on your balcony without getting a building permit. There is good regulation and bad regulation – the subject probably deserves its own thread.

The aids epidemic was caused by a virus.
And I thought you were going to blame Reagan.

You lack insight – do you really think I meant EVERY Hollywood celeb is a liberal or EVERY Christian is a conservative? But, as I sit here, only two hollywood conservatives come to mind – Dennis Miller and Tom Selleck. It is no mystery which way Hollywood leans.
"What was promised to them." Apparently the right is okay with breaking promises
Can I conclude from the above that you feel the pensions should be paid – even if it bankrupts the state? I don’t recall this concern about breaking promises when the shareholders and investors of GM were getting hosed in favor of the UAW.

Unions have negotiated givebacks in many states (Maybe in all), but what do we hear?
Please enlighten me, just what have some of these Unions “giving back”? So far the only concessions I’ve heard Unions agree to were wage freezes and agreeing to pay a small portion of their health insurance.

Cling to the fantasy that all union workers are lazy. Keep believing that the Banks and the insurance companies and the corporate giants are in the smallest way concerned about the country. Keep doing that and when the country goes in the toilet it will be easy for you to find who to blame. If you own a mirror
I would say Unions are no less greedy than the banks, insurance companies or giant corporations.

First, some truths about the sexual revolution.
There are also studies that show increases in premarital sex between 1965 – 1975. I think he under plays the effect of the pill nor does he mention any other form of contraception available in the 60’s and 70’s and he makes no mention of the increase in abortions in that same time period.

[boxcar]

Most of us can realize our value without putting other people down. Sadly, some folks need to make others feel small in order to make themselves feel big......Hey, that's not true. I never said Boxcar. :mad: :mad: I never did. :mad: :mad: :mad: Stop putting words in my mouth! :mad: :mad:

Well, well, well....all of a sudden you can realize your "value"? Just what "value" would that be? You recall when you put down Jim and how terrible he was for not wanting to share his wealth through higher taxation, and how I repeatedly asked you what made your opinion on the matter so morally superior to his, or to mine, or to anyone else's matter? I asked you several times to what or to whom did you attribute your moral superiority whenever you start telling people what is fair and what isn't, or what they should be paying in taxes, etc.? You never did answer me. But now since you say that you can recognize your own "value" (whatever that means), maybe you'd like to share with us the source to your moral superiority whenever you start waxing holier-than-thou. I'm still curious to know... :)

Boxcar

[boxcar]

“People didn’t start having sex because Elvis Presley was shaking his hips or because Hugh Hefner came out with ‘Playboy,’” said Petigny, who said he is the first historian to use census data focusing on premarital pregnancies. “After 15 years of Depression and war, there was also a desire on the part of Americans to live in the moment and enjoy life, and they were accordingly less likely to defer to traditional restraints on their behavior.”

Yeah, and the Left's legacy to society is that they sure will make certain that society's promiscuity and sexual perversions not only continue but will increase exponentially with each succeeding generation. The Left's goal is to make the entire nation into Sodom and Gomorrah.

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

Most of us can realize our value without putting other people down. Sadly, some folks need to make others feel small in order to make themselves feel big......Hey, that's not true. I never said Boxcar. :mad: :mad: I never did. :mad: :mad: :mad: Stop putting words in my mouth! :mad: :mad:

So, that's what all the Sarah bashing is about??? Thanks for being honest..!

[boxcar]

So, that's what all the Sarah bashing is about??? Thanks for being honest..!

:lol: :lol: Yeah, Mosty doesn't bash me because Sarah can't answer back. :lol: :lol:

Hey, Mosty, with all those red faces in your post, when are you going to sign up for Anger Management classes? Please look after that. High blood pressure can be detrimental to your health.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Like the saying goes, you can educate a fool. If you choose to put your faith in Presidents like Wilson, Roosevelt, Clinton, Bush I and II - be my guest. I will put my faith in the Founding fathers, almost half of which did not even go to college. For that matter, neither did Abe Lincoln. A lot of these Ivy League Presidents came from influential families who contributed a lot of money to the schools assuring their kids a spot in a class room. From what I’ve been able to read Obama did not graduate undergrad with honors, so just how was he able to get into Harvard Law?

Actually of the fifty six signers of the Declaration of Independence, twenty nine attended College. Most of those graduated and some had degrees in several fields. There were also thirteen who studied law privately and became lawyers and two physicians. All this should be taken in the context of the times when very people could even read or write. I do put my faith in Presidents like Wilson, Roosevelt and Clinton. Bush I and II not so much, speaking of presidents whose father got them into an Ivy League school.



What you fail to see is that they are connected and the countries you are alluding to pale in comparison to the US and what we have accomplished in our short existence.
Maybe the fact that we are a very large country with incredible natural resources has something to do with our success. Maybe that is more important than some American exceptionalism or some moral superiority that we alone possess.


And you think I should proof read??
Where did that "employer" come from. :blush:

This is a red-herring, nobody objects to safety rules like the use of seat belts or air bags etc. Regulations like Cap and Trade are the real issues. You want a fine example about regulations, come out to CA. You can’t legally replace your sink, or put a new rail on your balcony without getting a building permit. There is good regulation and bad regulation – the subject probably deserves its own thread.

We have had several cases here in Chicago where porches or railings collapsed. One of them killed 23 people. That's why you need a permit to put a railing on your balcony.


And I thought you were going to blame Reagan.
OK. It's Reagan's fault

You lack insight – do you really think I meant EVERY Hollywood celeb is a liberal or EVERY Christian is a conservative? But, as I sit here, only two hollywood conservatives come to mind – Dennis Miller and Tom Selleck. It is no mystery which way Hollywood leans.

http://www.ranker.com/list/actors-republican-actor-and-conservative-actors-list/famous-conservatives
The above is a list of 146 conservative hollywood actors. OK I admit Adolph Menjue will not be doing a lot of fund raising for Republican candidates in 2012, but there a lot of conservative movie stars who are alive and kicking.

Can I conclude from the above that you feel the pensions should be paid – even if it bankrupts the state? I don’t recall this concern about breaking promises when the shareholders and investors of GM were getting hosed in favor of the UAW.

Why are these pensions underfunded? The president of the International Fire Fighters Association was on Ed Schultz (radio) today. He was talking about New Jersey. He said that the New Jersey fire fighters pension fund had a surplus until Christine Whitman raided it to pay off New Jersey's debt. He also said that the firefighters have never failed to make their contribution to the fund. He also said that the state of New Jersey has failed to make any contribution in 13 of the last 15 years.


Please enlighten me, just what have some of these Unions “giving back”? So far the only concessions I’ve heard Unions agree to were wage freezes and agreeing to pay a small portion of their health insurance.


I would say Unions are no less greedy than the banks, insurance companies or giant corporations.




There are also studies that show increases in premarital sex between 1965 – 1975. I think he under plays the effect of the pill nor does he mention any other form of contraception available in the 60’s and 70’s and he makes no mention of the increase in abortions in that same time period.

Giving credit where credit is due, the comment about the sexual revolution was made by NJ.

[bigmack]

The president of the International Fire Fighters Association was on Ed Schultz (radio) today. He was talking about New Jersey. He said that the New Jersey fire fighters pension fund had a surplus until Christine Whitman raided it to pay off New Jersey's debt.
Who was it...Oh yeah, that nerd Sugar Ron who said you take people to the woodshed. :lol:

Do you actually sit and think you win ANY of these little battles?

You listen to Eddie on the radio? Wow!

Drink this in:
http://www.northjersey.com/recap/87610287_N_J__TAXPAYERS_OWE_PENSION_FUND.html

[mostpost]

I would say Unions are no less greedy than the banks, insurance companies or giant corporations.
I would say they are much less greedy. In fact I would say they are not greedy at all. The bankers, the insurance companies and the giant corporations have millions, no they have billions. they want billions more. Workers, union and otherwise, have thousands, maybe. In many cases they are living paycheck to paycheck. They want a little more.

You are going to spout a lot of nonsense about how you love the poor worker and are just trying to protect him from the evil union bosses. Save it. The average national union boss earns $122,000 a year. The CEO of a major American corporation earns between $32M and $400m year.

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/06/29/biz_biz2labor.html
Those figures are from the Associated Press.
There are other figures which claim much higher salaries, but I will trust the Associated Press before I will trust something called the Center For Union "Facts"

[bigmack]

The CEO of a major American corporation earns between $32M and $400m year.

I will trust the Associated Press before I will trust something called the Center For Union "Facts"
Would you trust the AP if the figure is from 2004 as your link is? Gawd, if you did research work, you'd be fired in an hour.

A CEO of a major corp earns 'tween 32-400 mil? :lol:

[mostpost]

So, that's what all the Sarah bashing is about??? Thanks for being honest..!
When I say, "Most of us can realize our value without putting other people down.", the us in that sentence indicates that I am including myself in that group. The group that does not need to put people down.
When I say, "Sadly, some folks need to make others feel small in order to make themselves feel big" the words "some folks" are a clue that I am not talking about me.

In any event I was not talking about my opinion of Sarah Palin or your opinion of Barack Obama. I was talking about certain posters here who can't express an opinion without putting down those with a different opinion. Or without denigrating a class of people.

[mostpost]

Would you trust the AP if the figure is from 2004 as your link is? Gawd, if you did research work, you'd be fired in an hour.

A CEO of a major corp earns 'tween 32-400 mil? :lol:

Sorry $32M-$147M

The link is from 2004. The comparison is still valid.

[newtothegame]

I would say they are much less greedy. In fact I would say they are not greedy at all. The bankers, the insurance companies and the giant corporations have millions, no they have billions. they want billions more. Workers, union and otherwise, have thousands, maybe. In many cases they are living paycheck to paycheck. They want a little more.

You are going to spout a lot of nonsense about how you love the poor worker and are just trying to protect him from the evil union bosses. Save it. The average national union boss earns $122,000 a year. The CEO of a major American corporation earns between $32M and $400m year.

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/06/29/biz_biz2labor.html
Those figures are from the Associated Press.
There are other figures which claim much higher salaries, but I will trust the Associated Press before I will trust something called the Center For Union "Facts"

you sure have the ability to take things out of context and twist them as you see fit....
He wasn't talking about INDIVIDUALS as part of unions when he asked about greed. He was talking about unions as a whole.....
And for you to say they 'have thousands maybe"...is just an out right lie. If they (unions) have only thousands maybe, how do they contribute MILLIONS to presidential and congressional campaigns???

[bigmack]

Sorry $32M-$147M

The link is from 2004. The comparison is still valid.
I'm left with the impression you walk as if you're know what you're talking about and "kick butt" on folk with 'facts' here.

You always run from me when we debate. Would you like to go a couple rounds?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Speaking of Founding Fathers - I was checking out this old currency today, most of it from the Confederate States, and there was one really old one in the mix. It was a neat old fractional note - 2/3 of a dollar - from the Continental Congress of 1775 (I think). It is in pretty good shape, but tought to read the print (it's only about the size of four postage stamps).

I stared and stared and stared... finally I put it all together...

... some word in Latin, I assume, followed simply by the words "Mind Your Own Business".

Right there on the currency. Maybe they should have been so concise when they put that "meaningless" document together shortly thereafter.





Sorry Mosite, commercial break over, back to the battle.

[bigmack]

Mostie gone AWOL again.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/CoolClips_wb028585.gif

[HUSKER55]

NONSENSE BIGMACK, WHAT WE NEED IS MORE FUEL


RUN SARAH RUN :D

[boxcar]

I would say they are much less greedy. In fact I would say they are not greedy at all. The bankers, the insurance companies and the giant corporations have millions, no they have billions. they want billions more. Workers, union and otherwise, have thousands, maybe. In many cases they are living paycheck to paycheck. They want a little more.

You are going to spout a lot of nonsense about how you love the poor worker and are just trying to protect him from the evil union bosses. Save it. The average national union boss earns $122,000 a year. The CEO of a major American corporation earns between $32M and $400m year.

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/06/29/biz_biz2labor.html
Those figures are from the Associated Press.
There are other figures which claim much higher salaries, but I will trust the Associated Press before I will trust something called the Center For Union "Facts"

A couple of things: You forget about the nearly 23 Mil in donations the SEIU made to Obama to get him elected. And that's just from the SEIU. So poor are these unions. :rolleyes:

And, of course, you would favor the AP, since they're in the tank for BO. :rolleyes: In fact, I'd be willing to bet the farm that the "average national union boss" who works tirelessly night and day to promoting and lobbying for Marxist labor ideals gets paid considerably more than a mere 122K annually.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

you sure have the ability to take things out of context and twist them as you see fit....
He wasn't talking about INDIVIDUALS as part of unions when he asked about greed. He was talking about unions as a whole.....
And for you to say they 'have thousands maybe"...is just an out right lie. If they (unions) have only thousands maybe, how do they contribute MILLIONS to presidential and congressional campaigns???
Are you guys really this dense? Must I explain everything in words of one syllable? Unions are made up of individuals. Like all organizations they have leaders which carry out the work of the organization. Unions have millions. They need those millions to carry out their mission.

The members of the unions don't have millions, but what they do have they have because they are members of the union. Non union workers make less than union workers in the same industry. Salaries in right to work states are on average lower than comparable salaries in union states.

You seem to believe that when a union negotiates with an employer, the money they negotiate for goes directly into the union coffers. The money they negotiate goes to the workers. Of course some of it goes to the union as an organization. I am happy to pay union dues because that union gives me power in negotiations with my employer. If some of the executives of my union earn high salaries, I am good with that as long as they do their job and earn that money. In any case, the compensation of those executives is much lower than that of comparable executives in the business world.

[mostpost]

I'm left with the impression you walk as if you're know what you're talking about and "kick butt" on folk with 'facts' here.

You always run from me when we debate. Would you like to go a couple rounds?
Debate?? All you ever do is make insulting remarks and post what you think are clever pictures.

[mostpost]

A couple of things: You forget about the nearly 23 Mil in donations the SEIU made to Obama to get him elected. And that's just from the SEIU. So poor are these unions. :rolleyes:

And, of course, you would favor the AP, since they're in the tank for BO. :rolleyes: In fact, I'd be willing to bet the farm that the "average national union boss" who works tirelessly night and day to promoting and lobbying for Marxist labor ideals gets paid considerably more than a mere 122K annually.

Boxcar
I'm only sorry that SEIU did not contribute more.

AP = a trusted news organization that espouses traditonal newsgathering methods.

Center for Union Facts = a secretive advocacy group which refuses to disclose the source of its funding, and publishes nothing but negative reports on unions without proof.

Some labor leaders get paid more than $122K. That was a lower limit.

[boxcar]

I'm only sorry that SEIU did not contribute more.

AP = a trusted news organization that espouses traditonal newsgathering methods.

Center for Union Facts = a secretive advocacy group which refuses to disclose the source of its funding, and publishes nothing but negative reports on unions without proof.

Some labor leaders get paid more than $122K. That was a lower limit.

Yes, AP is trusted by all the blind sheeple. Won't get an argument from me.

As far as CUF goes, I doubt they're more secretive than BO; so I'm not worried.

And why are you sorry the SEIU didn't contribute more? I mean...you did hear that BO got elected, didn't you? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Sorry $32M-$147M
OK. Ya ready?

[delayjf]

In any case, the compensation of those executives is much lower than that of comparable executives in the business world.

When you consider that Unions don't do anything that produces a profit, then perhaps that's as it should be.

Personally I could care less what any Union negotiates with a private corporation. If the union gets higher wages for its members fine, if they ultimately put a business under because it can no longer stay competitive due to Union pensions, healthcare costs, wage, etc - again that's your business. But when Gov Unions put States and other municipalities in a financial ruin because some politician seeking union support in an upcoming election caves into Union demands – which now requires that the tax payers have to shoulder the burden, now I have a problem.

I don’t know about NJ, but here in CA Gov Davis signed the Union contracts stating that they would pay for themselves from the profits from their investments in, wait for it – real-estate. What a great deal for the pension fund managers, they can go out and get involved in risky investments if they go belly up – hey, the tax payers get to pick up the tab.

Recently in Long Beach, they laid of 75 police and fireman because the Unions would not accept a pay freeze. Didn’t NJ recently offer a similar deal to its teachers and I think they also wanted them to pay 10% of their healthcare cost. I wish I’d been given that offer before I was laid off two years ago.

[bigmack]

Bring on the Federal Workers Union. Get a load of these big brains:'

Yr54UdXPpsA

Yo, Mostly, let's do this. Much to discuss.

A CEO of a major corp earns 'tween 32-147 mil?
Start rattling off the Co's and show your source.

[dartman51]

I'm only sorry that SEIU did not contribute more.

AP = a trusted news organization that espouses traditonal newsgathering methods.

Center for Union Facts = a secretive advocacy group which refuses to disclose the source of its funding, and publishes nothing but negative reports on unions without proof.

Some labor leaders get paid more than $122K. That was a lower limit.


1.08.2004

20 Top Union Leaders Averaged $223,000



LaborTalk for January 7, 2003 By Harry Kelber

20 Top Union Leaders Averaged $223,000 In Pay In 2000-2002, New Survey Reveals

Robert Chase, president of the independent National Education Assn., the largest union in the United States with 2.7 million members, was paid almost $223,000 in 2002, while Sandra Feldman, president of the rival American Federation of Teachers, with one-million members, received $328,941. How do you explain the $100,000 salary difference?

Chase says that his salary, as well as those of other NEA officers, was set by a 159-member board of directors made up of union representatives from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Incidentally, Chase maintains a comfortable home in a well-to-do neighborhood in Washington, D.C.

Why does Doug Dority, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers, deserve to receive $329,792 a year, the highest salary of any of the AFL-CIO's 64 international union presidents? The UFCW is only the fifth largest in the labor movement. But Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the largest within the federation, earns only $210,000. :eek:

[delayjf]

We have had several cases here in Chicago where porches or railings collapsed. One of them killed 23 people. That's why you need a permit to put a railing on your balcony.

In CA you need a building permit to put up a new fence on your first floor patio, a new sink in your home, or even new siding on your house. There was recently a story in the paper about a guy who wanted to expand his business which meant building a new building to house the extra equipment. He lived near the CA /NV border. So when he got the estimate to build the building, due to regulatory costs it cost about 100k more to build the bldg in CA than to build it in NV – guess which state he relocated to.

[mostpost]

Bring on the Federal Workers Union. Get a load of these big brains:'

Yr54UdXPpsA

Yo, Mostly, let's do this. Much to discuss.


Start rattling off the Co's and show your source.
NAME COMPANY PAY ($MIL) 5-YR PAY ($MIL) SHARES OWNED ($MIL) AGE
1 Steven P Jobs Apple 646.60 650.17 500.2 52 36
2 Ray R Irani Occidental Petroleum 321.64 509.53 222.5 72 111
3 Barry Diller IAC/InterActiveCorp 295.14 5 512.27 209.0 65 177
4 William P Foley II Fidelity National Finl 179.56 NA 219.8 62 NA
5 Terry S Semel Yahoo 174.20 5 432.49 57.0 64 NA
6 Michael S Dell Dell 153.23 5,6 NA 5,367.3 42 NA
7 Angelo R Mozilo Countrywide Financial 141.98 5 295.73 43.3 68 107
8 Michael S Jeffries Abercrombie & Fitch 114.64 5 193.30 32.2 62 84
9 Kenneth D Lewis Bank of America 99.80 155.00 145.0 60 NA
10 Henry C Duques First Data 98.21 NA 36.2 63 NA
11 Harold M Messmer Jr Robert Half Intl 74.25 178.71 67.2 61 145
12 Lawrence J Ellison Oracle 72.42 235.72 22,800.4 62 157
13 Bob R Simpson XTO Energy 72.27 215.28 398.2 58 38
14 Richard M Kovacevich Wells Fargo 72.04 188.31 134.9 63 146
15 John T Chambers Cisco Systems 71.33 174.50 90.6 57 116
16 Gregg L Engles Dean Foods 66.08 103.00 94.4 49 44
17 Lew Frankfort Coach 65.86 265.20 227.1 61 29
18 Joseph H Moglia TD Ameritrade Holding 62.24 81.19 0.1 57 71
19 James Dimon JPMorgan Chase 57.17 NA 182.6 51 NA
20 William R Berkley WR Berkley 54.60 97.28 765.7 61 66
21 Richard S Fuld Jr Lehman Bros Holdings 51.65 311.88 753.9 61 151
22 Edward E Whitacre Jr AT&T 49.01 111.63 72.0 65 136
23 Robert J Ulrich Target 48.09 175.00 120.3 64 156
24 L Patrick Hassey Allegheny Technologies 44.24 58.41 2 33.9 61 NA
25 Edward H Linde Boston Properties 42.25 81.08 901.6 67 44
It is clearer if you go to the link.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/12/lead_07ceos_CEO-Compensation_Rank.html

Forbes.com another liberal mouthpiece. :rolleyes:
You have to go down to the 481st. position on the list to find an exec earning less than $1m a year.
Your move.

[johnhannibalsmith]

When you consider that Unions don't do anything that produces a profit, then perhaps that's as it should be.

Personally I could care less what any Union negotiates with a private corporation. If the union gets higher wages for its members fine, if they ultimately put a business under because it can no longer stay competitive due to Union pensions, healthcare costs, wage, etc - again that's your business. But when Gov Unions put States and other municipalities in a financial ruin because some politician seeking union support in an upcoming election caves into Union demands – which now requires that the tax payers have to shoulder the burden, now I have a problem.

...

Excellent post. Even those that will take you to task by default ought to grasp the simple wisdom of this message.

[bigmack]

Oh. A "top Corp" is 25?

Does your Google go past 2007?

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/ceo.png

[ArlJim78]

In any case, the compensation of those executives is much lower than that of comparable executives in the business world.
their pay is much lower because they don't have the same skills as executives in the business world. what skills does it take to be a union leader? experience in racketeering, shakedowns and intimidation mainly. these people like Stern come across as common thugs. two or three hundred grand for a guy like that is quite a coup. they'd be laughed out of any executive position in private industry.

[mostpost]

Hey Mack,
Dartman51 posted this:
1.08.2004

20 Top Union Leaders Averaged $223,000



LaborTalk for January 7, 2003 By Harry Kelber

20 Top Union Leaders Averaged $223,000 In Pay In 2000-2002, New Survey Reveals

Robert Chase, president of the independent National Education Assn., the largest union in the United States with 2.7 million members, was paid almost $223,000 in 2002, while Sandra Feldman, president of the rival American Federation of Teachers, with one-million members, received $328,941. How do you explain the $100,000 salary difference?

Chase says that his salary, as well as those of other NEA officers, was set by a 159-member board of directors made up of union representatives from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Incidentally, Chase maintains a comfortable home in a well-to-do neighborhood in Washington, D.C.

Why does Doug Dority, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers, deserve to receive $329,792 a year, the highest salary of any of the AFL-CIO's 64 international union presidents? The UFCW is only the fifth largest in the labor movement. But Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the largest within the federation, earns only $210,000.

Yes the figures for the labor leaders are from 2002-2003 and the figures for the execs are from 2007. Still, the average compensation for the top twenty execs is $140M. That is a long, long, long way from the $223K average for the union leaders.

[Tom]

Reason why, mostie......the unions boys are leeches, the execs are stake holders and they are the ones who actually do the work of running the
companies. Unions are basically the old mob protection scheme.

Who is more important to the health of a business? Duh?