Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, Pres. Obama isn't against capitalism. He's against vulture capitalism -- and an opponent who claims to be a job creator who essentially robbed people of money using crafty legal means.
This is what Bain did; they bought companies and borrowed money on the company's name; then dispersed that money to the owners and then drove the company into bankruptcy -- and in some cases, raiding the employee's pension funds.
The result was lots of money for the owners and unemployment for the employees.
Just keep on spewing that nonsense. All it does is show how little you actually understand.
He likes people whom inherited money; he dislikes entrepreneurs.
Eastern liberals with inherited money all love Obama and liberalism because they don't have to produce anything. They are jealous of success.
You make a lot of assertions but how do you arrive at that conclusion? Give examples.
I see no evidence that he prefers inheritors of money to entrepreneurs. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, neither of whom have inherited their money, are on Obama's side on polices like taxes. Obama makes speeches at new tech plants.
Essentially, you are creating a narrative of Obama, from your own head, that isn't true.
Just keep on spewing that nonsense. All it does is show how little you actually understand.
Then prove me wrong. Calling what I say "nonsense," without anything behind it, doesn't make it so nor convince anyone else.
Your lack of debating skills is astounding. I provide supporting examples, evidence and facts. Try it sometime.
===========
This thread is another Obama bashing party. The OP makes a few baseless assertions and provides not a shred of evidence supporting the claim he/she is making. The assertions are so baseless that it's fun countering the merit-less claims with actual counter-examples.
Obama talkng about real, close-to-the-street capitalism is an oxymoron because his own background includes very little exposure to it.
Might as well have the Pope talk about sex or Madonna talk about chastity.
Self-made??? Please don't insult our intelligence; he is the ultimate media-oriented product of a gang of schlockmeisters who seek to fine-tune hia appeal to the slowest and most short-sighted at the back of the room.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 05-24-2012 at 02:57 PM..
Top donors, as of right now, to each campaign: Obama
1-Microsoft Corp $347,916
2- DLA Piper $297,027
3- University of California $261,846
4- Sidley Austin LLP $240,846
5- Google Inc $211,769
Romney
1- Goldman Sachs $573,080
2- Bank of America $398,850
3- JPMorgan Chase & Co $393,825
4- Morgan Stanley $373,850
5- Credit Suisse Group $317,410
I guess the former group represents stupid and poor, the latter group... capitalists.
I find it an interesting note that a University system funded partially by the state of California is the third highest donor to president obamans campaign
The state is a financial bind yet is OK for the Cal to give money to a election
I find it an interesting note that a University system funded partially by the state of California is the third highest donor to president obamans campaign The state is a financial bind yet is OK for the Cal to give money to a election
You don't know (or cared to learn about) how it works, do you? (Hint: US Army is Ron Paul's top contributor). And if you look at that short list, you'd think Romney is ahead of Obama with contributions because bigger money is with him. However, Obama is way ahead, and has smaller contributions from more people.
You don't know (or cared to learn about) how it works, do you? (Hint: US Army is Ron Paul's top contributor). And if you look at that short list, you'd think Romney is ahead of Obama with contributions because bigger money is with him. However, Obama is way ahead, and has smaller contributions from more people.
I find it an interesting note that a University system funded partially by the state of California is the third highest donor to president obamans campaign
The state is a financial bind yet is OK for the Cal to give money to a election
Well, you've gotten the wrong idea. According to Politifact, "The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families."
I don't see anything wrong with employees of the university donating money. Do you?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
