quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
I'm sure the potential Republican candidates are determining whether they can beat Hillary or not.


In reality, the RepubTEACons are investigating their fundraising capabilities. They need to know that they can raise $500million from corp donors or they wont get the $800million it will take to beat OBamas $1,000million.
Old Sea Story Parable

There's an old sea story about a ship's Captain who inspected his
sailors, and afterward told the first mate that his men smelled bad.

The Captain suggested perhaps it would help if the sailors
would change underwear occasionally.

The first mate responded, 'Aye,aye sir, I'll see to it immediately!"
The first mate went straight to the sailors berth deck and
announced, "The Captain thinks you guys smell bad and
wants you to change your underwear."

He continued,

"Leo you change with Jerry,
Tony you change with Bert and
Bob you change with Ed."

THE MORAL OF THE STORY:

Someone may come along
and promise "Change",
but
don't count on things
smelling any better.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
I'm sure the potential Republican candidates are determining whether they can beat Hillary or not.


In reality, the RepubTEACons are investigating their fundraising capabilities. They need to know that they can raise $500million from corp donors or they wont get the $800million it will take to beat OBamas $1,000million.


the sad part is the ammount of truth in this post....

is no one else depressed, distressed, and nauseated by the idea of people blowing a couple billion dollars on a job that pays 500k a year, whiel there are people who can't afford to feed their family in this country?

it's sickening, and neither party is any less culpable.
quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
I'm sure the potential Republican candidates are determining whether they can beat Hillary or not.


Yeah right, Ronnie P. you moron,

THE ONLY OFFICIAL CANDIDATES FOR THE RETHUGLITEACONS IN 2012:

FRED KARGER.............................

AND.....................................

JIMMY MCMILLAN THE RENT IS TOO **** HIGH!

The crazy has already started!!!!!!!!!!!! Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
quote:
Originally posted by Ronnie P.:
I'm sure the potential Republican candidates are determining whether they can beat Hillary or not.


In reality, the RepubTEACons are investigating their fundraising capabilities. They need to know that they can raise $500million from corp donors or they wont get the $800million it will take to beat OBamas $1,000million.


the sad part is the ammount of truth in this post....

is no one else depressed, distressed, and nauseated by the idea of people blowing a couple billion dollars on a job that pays 500k a year, whiel there are people who can't afford to feed their family in this country?

it's sickening, and neither party is any less culpable.


Spending the whole campaign cycle in 2012 will bump $6billllion. The Canadians spent about $300million on their last election. We r stoopid.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:

Spending the whole campaign cycle in 2012 will bump $6billllion. The Canadians spent about $300million on their last election. We r stoopid.


Oh frick. thanks for that. now i'm REALLY happy to be an american.

Stewart/Colbert 2012.
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?


Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not OUT TO GET YOU! If you start worrying about whether or not a shot is aimed at you, you will need to find a better way to waste your free time.
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?


Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not OUT TO GET YOU! If you start worrying about whether or not a shot is aimed at you, you will need to find a better way to waste your free time.


it was question for clarification...
i'm not paranoid, and i'm certainly not worried... i just wasn't clear on what you were saying..
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:

Spending the whole campaign cycle in 2012 will bump $6billllion. The Canadians spent about $300million on their last election. We r stoopid.


Oh frick. thanks for that. now i'm REALLY happy to be an american.

Stewart/Colbert 2012.


For the first time in your life?
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?


Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not OUT TO GET YOU! If you start worrying about whether or not a shot is aimed at you, you will need to find a better way to waste your free time.


it was question for clarification...
i'm not paranoid, and i'm certainly not worried... i just wasn't clear on what you were saying..


I'm never clear on what he's saying.
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?


Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not OUT TO GET YOU! If you start worrying about whether or not a shot is aimed at you, you will need to find a better way to waste your free time.


it was question for clarification...
i'm not paranoid, and i'm certainly not worried... i just wasn't clear on what you were saying..


I'm never clear on what he's saying.


OF course not. We have already established your reading disability.
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
The reason that elections cost so much is because the truth is no longer important to voters. Candidates have to sold just like soap and corn flakes. If the voters were intelligent and informed, there would no need for so much outrageous spending. The amount spent on the Presidential election is not the fault of those who are running. It is the fault of the voters, and, most probably, the very voters who will complain the most about how much it costs.


i think the fault lies in both places, more or less equally.
and since i was complaining about the cost, that reads liek a shot aimed at me... if not, never mind, but if so, how is it my fault? more so than, say, you?


Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not OUT TO GET YOU! If you start worrying about whether or not a shot is aimed at you, you will need to find a better way to waste your free time.


it was question for clarification...
i'm not paranoid, and i'm certainly not worried... i just wasn't clear on what you were saying..


I'm never clear on what he's saying.


OF course not. We have already established your reading disability.


We have also established your lying ability. I've learned how to tell when jimmy is lying. If his mouth is moving, he's lying. Are you a former politician?
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
They need to know that they can raise $500million from corp donors or they wont get the $800million it will take to beat OBamas $1,000million.


OBamas $1,000million, you say?

Wow, that much already? Appears to be a lot of support there for keeping him on for the next four years.
quote:
Originally posted by The Propagandist:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
They need to know that they can raise $500million from corp donors or they wont get the $800million it will take to beat OBamas $1,000million.


OBamas $1,000million, you say?

Wow, that much already? Appears to be a lot of support there for keeping him on for the next four years.


OBama has pledges for $600million. The campaign goal is for $1billion. And, he wont have any serious contenders for the nomination, which will save him at least a few hundred million.
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by Kenny Powers:
Wasn't Goldman Sachs Obama's largest donor in 2010? I find it comical that people get so worked up over the differences in the 2 major political parties when they are beholden to the same group of donors.


What gave you that idea?


Glen Beck disease. When you don't have facts to back up your side, just make some up.
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by Kenny Powers:
Wasn't Goldman Sachs Obama's largest donor in 2010? I find it comical that people get so worked up over the differences in the 2 major political parties when they are beholden to the same group of donors.


That's funny coming from you.

What gave you that idea?


Glen Beck disease. When you don't have facts to back up your side, just make some up.
quote:
Originally posted by JimiHendrix:
quote:
Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
quote:
Originally posted by Kenny Powers:
Wasn't Goldman Sachs Obama's largest donor in 2010? I find it comical that people get so worked up over the differences in the 2 major political parties when they are beholden to the same group of donors.


What gave you that idea?


Glen Beck disease. When you don't have facts to back up your side, just make some up.


My bad. Goldman was his second largest. Fyi, I don't listen to Glen Beck. Obama campaign donors

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×