|
|
02-08-2012, 08:12 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: central fla.
Posts: 4,874
|
A fairness quiz for Obama
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...068367936.html
just a sample...
""Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?
Is it fair that the three counties with America's highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?
Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is "subsidized"?""
__________________
got handed a lemon...make lemonade....add sugar or brown sugar or stevia or my personal favorite....miracle fruit....google it...thank me later...
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 08:25 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,429
|
all good questions that will never be asked by people like Matt Lauer or Diane Saywer or George Snuffleupagus no matter how many times they land interviews with the president.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 09:41 AM
|
#3
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,889
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArlJim78
all good questions that will never be asked by people like Matt Lauer or Diane Saywer or George Snuffleupagus no matter how many times they land interviews with the president.
|
Why would they ask?
It's not like they are reporters or journalists or anything like that.
Why, those knuckleheads actually think we added jobs last month!
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 10:50 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 23,770
|
as far as i'm concerned BARRACK OBAMA is nothing but a fraud starting from his nomination when he supposedly beat hillary. his promises have turned into being fraudulent, and re-election campaign is a fraud.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 11:36 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On The Bay
Posts: 9,857
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamboguy
as far as i'm concerned BARRACK OBAMA is nothing but a fraud starting from his nomination when he supposedly beat hillary. his promises have turned into being fraudulent, and re-election campaign is a fraud.
|
Are you really surprised ? He came into this with virtually no experience, a poor work ethic, a shady (at best) background, and little national exposure.
And he's from Chicago no less, the land of bilk and money.
We have reaped what we have sown.
__________________
I wouldn't say I drink too much but my mother did tell me that my first words were" when does happy hour start"?
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 12:02 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,884
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj's dad
Are you really surprised ? He came into this with virtually no experience, a poor work ethic, a shady (at best) background, and little national exposure.
And he's from Chicago no less, the land of bilk and money.
We have reaped what we have sown.
|
But despite of all these shortfalls, real or perceived, there is one thing against which Obama will be forever insulated: Character assassination. He'd have to get one first.
Boxcar
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 12:12 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 7,727
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammy the sage
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...068367936.html
just a sample...
""Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?
There is undoubtedly a multitude of good reasons for this statistic. That it is baffling to anybody is what surprises me.
Is it fair that the three counties with America's highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?
No. It should be the three most northeast counties of Wyoming. Everybody knows that.
Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is "subsidized"?""
|
Wind and solar subsidies are fine by me at this point in time.
__________________
One flew east, one flew west,
One flew over the cuckoo's nest.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 12:26 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,402
|
Can't you reply without using that mostpost style of answering within a quote so that your answers can't be quoted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkBug
There is undoubtedly a multitude of good reasons for this statistic
|
What kind of goofball way of answering is this? "Undoubtedly", "multitude"? - and then despite your overflowing confidence you leave it at that? Name a handful of the multitude of good reasons off since it is undoubtable.
__________________
"You make me feel like I am fun again."
-Robert James Smith, 1989
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 12:29 PM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MILWAUKEE
Posts: 5,285
|
GUYS AND GALS, I still maintain that if government got out of business and business got out of government the capitalistic market system would take care of itself.
The reason that it is failing is because government is getting rid of the idea that people should have to work to better themselves.
Remember the old addage, "it is far easier to tear down a city than to build one". You can only build a city if people want to work. Our government is not helping.
BO is only concerned with the 1% instead of the other 99%.
__________________
Never tell your problems to anyone because 20% flat don't care and 80% are glad they are yours.
No Balls.......No baby!
Have you ever noticed that those who do not have a pot to piss in nor a window to throw it out of always seem to know how to handle the money of those who do.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 01:14 PM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,884
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Stinks
Wind and solar subsidies are fine by me at this point in time.
|
These are not the answer and probably never will be. It takes more energy to produce this technology than the technology itself saves. Only a bona fide losing horse player would support or applaud a system of play that still produces small, slow but sure negative ROIs. This is what you're doing here.
Boxcar
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 01:25 PM
|
#11
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,889
|
It is pretty obvious that Obama supporters do so to maintain their free ride.
As long as he is going to fill gas tanks and pay rent from his "stash" his allegedly higher-intellect left-leaning supporters will choose hand outs over achievement every time.
Anchors tend to stay on the bottom.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 01:29 PM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,429
|
government subsidies of any kind are a bad idea. they are not cut out to be venture capitalists and will always end up giving the money to people for the wrong reasons. just look at the terrible waste of money by Obama on solar. the money went to campaign donors who didn't have a viable product and went belly up within two years after protecting themselves from any harm. this will never be the answer. if you aren't willing to invest your own money in these companies then why would you want the government to do it with your tax money? it's complete nonsense.
oil and gas will power us long into the future.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 01:44 PM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 77
|
Quote:
Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?
|
The snarky answer: Yes, it's fair. The Republicans get 12% of the impartial, and 100% of the ones who are obviously not.
The skeptical answer: I wonder how they came up with that 88% number? It sounds pretty fishy, kind of like some one made that up on the spot. Who owns the WSJ anyway?
The lefty answer: Sure it's fair, the truth has a liberal bias.
The righty answer: It's not fair and I'm mad as hell. People in the entertainment industry should not contribute money to politics.
The pragmatic answer: It's their money, what do I care? Personally, I would have thrown it away on hookers. But, I guess in a way they did.
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 02:31 PM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Riverside, Il.
Posts: 16,109
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammy the sage
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...068367936.html
just a sample...
""Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?
Yeah it's fair because that is where they want their money to go. Employees do not set a news organizations policies. can you point out where a reporter gave out false information that favored a particular party.
Is it fair that the three counties with America's highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?
It's interesting that only one of the nation's richest communities is located in one of those counties.
This stands to reason. Very few government employees live in Washington, DC. Most earn good salaries, which they take to their homes in the outlying suburbs. The poor stay in DC. In addition to government workers, Congressmen, cabinet officials and agency heads, you also have lobbyists which are very well paid and likely do not live on K street. Add to that diplomats and Pentagon officers and it is clear why this should be the case.
Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is "subsidized"?""
|
This is a good example of something a lot of you righties do. The author in speaking of the oil and gas industry says, "while the President complains it is subsidized". Leaving the impression that the President is unjustly accusing those industries of being subsidized when they are not. Then, if called on it, he will say "I never said they weren't." Oil and gas were subsidized when they were fledgling industries and they are still being subsidized.
Hey, JHS i answered between the lines.
Deal with it.
__________________
"When you come at the King, You'd best not miss." Omar Little
|
|
|
02-08-2012, 02:42 PM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 989
|
""Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?"
I'll assume it's true. The relevant question is: how much does this matter w/r/t the news that we get?
Answer: very little. The idea that "reporters, producers and other EMPLOYEES" (my emphasis) determine what news their companies produce is, in a word, silly. It's "Fair", because it's insignificant.
News is a product, like cars are a product. I imagine something like 88% of GM workers contributed democrat too, but yet no one thinks [rightly] that GM employees determine what kind of cars GM builds. News employees have a bit more latitude to shape their product than do GM employees, but not by very much. Owners control their companies, something even right-wingers should have no problem understanding.
If you're interested in the impact of political donations on the news, the obvious place to look is where news OWNERS donate their money.
Last edited by bks; 02-08-2012 at 02:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|