TheServantCharles
Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2010
- Messages
- 116
- Reaction score
- 15
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
This is likely true, though I was and still am in favor of the bailouts... less so of the bank bailouts, more so of the auto bailouts.
I would much rather we saved our car manufacturers here in the U.S. than see all those sales go to overseas companies, thus reducing our GDP (by how much I couldn't say) and sending more of our money to foreign companies.
you're misinformed. american made cars have been ramping up their quality for some time now, and while they may not always beat foreign cars, they are damnded close, and also cheaper to repair. we drive a 2002 and 2004 chevy, and they both have been pretty damned good cars. 125k on the 2004, and 160k on the 2002. maybe 2 grand in repairs over the life, including normal maintenance.Or American car companies can stop making crap cars. My friend bought a Ford Focus five years ago, brand new, and he's been having issues with the car. I ask him about it and he says to me, "well, it has got over 100,000 miles on it so it's just breaking down towards the end of it's life." My immediate response was, "Really? Because my family has owned several Hondas which all have over 100,000 miles, one of which has 200,000 miles, and my dad's put close to 300,000 miles on his Camry (Toyota) before it stopped working."
The difference I want to point out is, his perspective that 100,000 miles is the life expectancy of a car because he's owned an American made car. Whereas I've never owned an American car (I do drive a Chrysler Crossfire now, but this was when Mercedes was partnered with Chrysler and essentially designed/made everything but the frame, so I still insist that I have not ever owned an American made car) and I have no such expectations.
wow...looks like a whole bunch of non member **************** voted in this poll.I wonder what people actually believe? How much mis-information is out there, how gullible are people?
I listen to talk radio every day at work but rather than thinkin its gospel i understand its just comedy and entertainment but listening to them, and the same people on Faox News, Hannity, Beck, Rush Id really like to know what fallacies people still believe?
Most recently on talk radio they said people just need to realize that Obama "Hates all white people" and "wants payback" and "has a chip on his shoulder hates this country, will do nothing for whites wants it all to go to minorities, wants to bring america down and he wants the terrorist to win? LMAO
Wow, do people actually believe this? A while ago harris polls stated this for republicans:
* Is a socialist (67%)
* Wants to take away Americans' right to own guns (61%)
* Is a Muslim (57%)
* Wants to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to a one world government (51%); and
* Has done many things that are unconstitutional (55%).
Also large numbers of Republicans also believe that President Obama:
* Resents America's heritage (47%)
* Does what Wall Street and the bankers tell him to do (40%)
* Was not born in the United States and so is not eligible to be president (45%)
* Is the "domestic enemy that the U.S. Constitution speaks of" (45%)
* Is a racist (42%)
* Want to use an economic collapse or terrorist attack as an excuse to take dictatorial powers (41%)
* Is doing many of the things that Hitler did (38%).
Even more remarkable perhaps, fully 24% of Republicans believe that "he may be the Anti-Christ" and 22% believe "he wants the terrorists to win."
total people believe this:
# He is a socialist (40%)
# He wants to take away Americans' right to own guns (38%)
# He is a Muslim (32%)
# He wants to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to a one world government (29%)
# He has done many things that are unconstitutional (29%)
# He resents America's heritage (27%)
# He does what Wall Street and the bankers tell him to do (27%)
# He was not born in the United States and so is not eligible to be president (25%)
# He is a domestic enemy that the U.S. Constitutions speaks of (25%)
# He is a racist (23%)
# He is anti-American (23%)
# He wants to use an economic collapse or terrorist attack as an excuse to take dictatorial powers (23%)
# He is doing many of the things that Hitler did (20%)
# He may be the Anti-Christ (14%)
# He wants the terrorists to win (13%)
so what do YOU believe check all that you find true
you're misinformed. american made cars have been ramping up their quality for some time now, and while they may not always beat foreign cars, they are damnded close, and also cheaper to repair. we drive a 2002 and 2004 chevy, and they both have been pretty damned good cars. 125k on the 2004, and 160k on the 2002. maybe 2 grand in repairs over the life, including normal maintenance.
disdain all you wish....but don't mislead people about why.I'm not misinformed, merely biased. As for repairs and up keep, my father happens to work for Honda, so not so much an issue for our family. I am fully willing to apologize for the false assumption of the crappy nature of American cars and acknowledge that less and less is this the case. However, I cannot deny I still disdain the idea of buying a car from an American manufacture because...of the United Auto Workers union. But we're going on a tangent now.
disdain all you wish....but don't mislead people about why.
To be fair, I wonder what many liberals believe(d) about Bush.
I believe he is a small glimpse of the disaster of what a Palin presidency would look like.
To be fair, I wonder what many liberals believe(d) about Bush.
I can agree somewhat, but I was mainly thinking things like "Bush is the devil, ?Bush did 9/11, Bush went to war for oil..." And all those crazy things that were said and people actually believed.
On a side note, I like what Palin believes and I agree with her on several things, but she isn't presidential material (nor do I think she has the intelligence to run the country).
I don't think Bush was purposefully evil, but I do think he was (and still is) blinded by his own perceived ideological brilliance and sense of destiny. His main problem is that he assumed that his schemes would work without a hitch and never had a backup plan.
His sense of "nothing can go wrong because I have God and good morals on my side" is amplified many times over in Palin and that is why I think she would be a disaster. Like Bush, she lacks the mental bandwidth to be able to bend with circumstance.
I'm sorry are we back to talking about Obama again?
I do think Obama suffers from that some as well, but not to the degree of the last president.
I certainly would not accuse Obama of believing God was on his side...at least not the same God Bush believes in. As for the degree...I've yet to hear of (partially because I don't listen, and can't stand to hear) Obama apologizing for breaking campaign promises, or forcing his agenda upon the American people.
My reason for why I don't much care for listening to Obama speak? His state of the Union address where he went on to talk about how those in the armed forces deserve, and I would assume have his, respect; without for one moment acknowledging and apologizing to those who serve and have served at GITMO. I don't know the full scale of what is happening there, but I do know that our military does not deserve to be slandered and smeared as the men and women who serve there have been.
I guess I need to ask which campaign promises you speak of. Also, do you consider him trying to follow through, but not being where he wants to be to be the same as breaking them?
I do not recall where he called out those who served at Gitmo specifically in a disrespectful manner. I know of many occasions where he did state that the whole enterprise was a mistake though.
Staying with the GITMO example, he promised to close it down within 6 months of coming into office I believe?
The other promises (please correct me if I'm wrong, and he did not make any of these promises, as I obviously never followed his campaign) involve his promise of bipartisanship
and an administration where all the policy decisions would be available for review by the public for 72 hours before it gets decided on. I consider failure to follow through on a set (by him) timeline a failure; whether it is actually breaking a promise...
Allow me the use of this analogy. I apply for a job (and somehow have no clue where the job site is located) and I am hired on; during my interview I'm asked if I am punctual. I tell the interviewer that I am. I arrive late my first day on the job, because I failed to plan for the two hour drive to the job site and instead only allotted myself thirty minutes to get to work. Am I still a punctual person at this point?
I apologize, my emotions tend to get the better of me when the issue involves veterans and those who serve in the armed forces. That said, I am not sure we will agree, but I will certainly try to explain my perspective on this matter. Having been elected President, Mr. Obama has inherited a number of titles; amongst them is Commander in Chief, meaning he is the literal (though in practice, often figurative) head of our armed forces. While I have no objection to anyone holding the opinion the whole enterprise our nation undertook at GITMO was a mistake; I think for him to say it, given his status as the Commander-in-Chief, that may not have been the most diplomatic thing to say about an enterprise in which those under his charge are undertaking.
Megaprogman, I would say we're mostly in agreement, and I appreciate the civil nature of this discourse and the opportunity to have it. I will point out where we disagree entirely though, is that Obama could not have known how complex the situation at GITMO is; under your premise that much of what was going on there was classified. Correct me please if my memory fails in this matter, the reason the mainstream media has the opinion in regards to what takes place in GITMO is because several people had the opportunity to go observe and report on what took place there. I assure you if any of that was classified information, with the exception of members of Congress, no civilian would have been allowed to witness AND report on any of what took place. The military is not at all lax when it comes to trying (and failing in humorous ways) to protect classified information. I believe the information had to have been available to him, but he and/or his staff failed to do their due dilligence.
I certainly would not accuse Obama of believing God was on his side...at least not the same God Bush believes in. As for the degree...I've yet to hear of (partially because I don't listen, and can't stand to hear) Obama apologizing for breaking campaign promises, or forcing his agenda upon the American people.
My reason for why I don't much care for listening to Obama speak? His state of the Union address where he went on to talk about how those in the armed forces deserve, and I would assume have his, respect; without for one moment acknowledging and apologizing to those who serve and have served at GITMO. I don't know the full scale of what is happening there, but I do know that our military does not deserve to be slandered and smeared as the men and women who serve there have been.
Perhaps you are right. I guess the reason I made this assumption is because of the Bush administrations zealousness in keeping information and not being transparent, coupled with Obama's relatively quick change in tune about Gitmo when he became president.
It lead me to believe that he found out something that he did not know before as I believe his sentiment about trying to close it is sincere.
And you are welcome. It is always a nice day at DP when I am not being called an idiot or other name for being honest about what I believe. I try to extend the same courtesy to others unless they prove themselves incapable of understanding or appreciating the respect.
Or American car companies can stop making crap cars. My friend bought a Ford Focus five years ago, brand new, and he's been having issues with the car. I ask him about it and he says to me, "well, it has got over 100,000 miles on it so it's just breaking down towards the end of it's life." My immediate response was, "Really? Because my family has owned several Hondas which all have over 100,000 miles, one of which has 200,000 miles, and my dad's put close to 300,000 miles on his Camry (Toyota) before it stopped working."
The difference I want to point out is, his perspective that 100,000 miles is the life expectancy of a car because he's owned an American made car. Whereas I've never owned an American car (I do drive a Chrysler Crossfire now, but this was when Mercedes was partnered with Chrysler and essentially designed/made everything but the frame, so I still insist that I have not ever owned an American made car) and I have no such expectations.
wow...looks like a whole bunch of non member **************** voted in this poll.
To be fair, I wonder what many liberals believe(d) about Bush.
I do not recall where he called out those who served at Gitmo specifically in a disrespectful manner. I know of many occasions where he did state that the whole enterprise was a mistake though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?