Conservatives will have a candidate in 2016.

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
If Obama had known that those 2 years were the only chance he had of getting anything passed, before the incoming wave of Tea Partiers [featuring Ted Cruz] established the practice of rejecting anything & everything Obama proposed, and refusing to negotiate, he probably would have tried harder. You can hardly blame him for not anticipating the unprecedented behavior of the opposition.
Democrats voted for a war they were misled into supporting, BTW. You know: "Bush lied, people died"? Maybe Bush was misled as well, but it was his screwup that got us into war, twice. We're still paying for that, and for rebuilding Iraq.
I agree that big money has corrupted both parties, but seriously, you think either "green technology" or the unions have even 1/100th the power of banks & the oil industry? Hollywood? Really?!
Democrats are prone to corruption, true, but Republicans are prone to hypocrisy, and that's much worse, IMO, because they won't - no, can't admit it, even when it's proven. And just for giggles, exactly how many anti hypocrisy laws are there?


Lot of money in the "green business". Why do you think Al Gore jumped into it? I did say Republicans got money from the banks, but a greater number of those dollars goes to democrats. Talk about hypocrisy. Just ask Hillary who recently got 300k for a half hour speech from Goldmans. As for Hollywood. Sure, ever notice when the dems have a fundraiser. You guessed it, they run out to LA most of the time. They get all kinds of money from Hollywood and other associated media. Don't think you see any of the network media giving money to Republicans.
Bottom line is they both are corrupt.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
And then there is Google.
Article:
A former Google officer is the president’s chief technology adviser. Google employees contributed more to President Obama’s re-election than did employees of any other company except Microsoft. Google lobbyists met with Obama White House officials 230 times. By comparison, lobbyists from rival Comcast have been admitted to the inner sanctum a mere 20 or so times in the same period.

google2.jpg

Google’s Executive Chairman Eric SchmidtPhoto: Getty Images

Oh, and on Election Night 2012, guess where Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt was? Working for the president. In the president’s campaign office. On a voter-turnout system designed to help the president get re-elected.

Obama lieutenant David Plouffe boasts: “On Election Night [Schmidt] was in our boiler room in Chicago,” he told Bloomberg News, in a story that revealed that for the campaign Schmidt “helped recruit talent, choose technology and coach the campaign manager, Jim Messina, on the finer points of leading a large organization.”

Schmidt was especially fond of a madcap corner of the Obama campaign office known as “the Cave,” where, at 4:30 every day, staffers would dance madly under a disco ball to the tune of a mashup of Psy’s “Gangnam Style” and an automated campaign phone call made to prospective voters.

Favors beget favors. And hey, presto, the FTC, in 2012, ignored the recommendations of its own staffers, which accused Google of abusive trade practices for burying competitors in their search results and recommended a lawsuit.

google.jpg

Google headquarters in Mountain View, Calif.Photo: AP

Instead, the FTC dropped its inquiry. Google enjoys 67 percent market share, 83 percent in mobile. No biggie, declared the FTC.

Google lobbyists have been pushing for implementation of “net neutrality” regulations, particularly a “Title II” provision that would benefit Google. President Obama helpfully came out in support of the plan, including Title II, which was slightly embarrassing because Obama’s FCC chair, Tom Wheeler, had favored a different approach. Wheeler promptly reversed course and backed the Obama-Google plan.

Right before the FCC report was due, but before it was made public, the FCC pulled another odd reversal, removing 15 pages of policy Google apparently found out about but didn’t like.

GOOGLE HAS THE POWER TO BUMP AN ARTICLE IT DOESN’T LIKE OFF THE TABLE AND UNDER THE RUG.
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai said that the changes came about after “a last-minute submission from a major California based company.” I wonder which company he’s talking about. In-N-Out Burger?

It’s not like Google is ungrateful for all of this special attention. When the newly launched ObamaCare website was plagued by evil spirits, guess which company was sent to fix it?

Google’s proton packs helped kill off the ObamaCare site’s goblins, but the country got slimed.

Still, all of this is easily forgiven compared to what’s coming next: politically filtered information.

obama4.jpg

Photo: Getty Images

Google says that in the future, its determinations about what is true and what is untrue will play a role in how search-engine rankings are configured.

Google has the power to bump an article it doesn’t like off the table and under the rug. Even moving information off the first page of search results would effectively neutralize it: According to a 2013 study, 91.5 percent of Google search users click through on a first-page result.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/28/google-controls-what-we-buy-the-news-we-read-and-obamas-policies/
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
It's tough when the truth comes out that the left is rich and evil like the right, maybe even moreso.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Lot of money in the "green business". Why do you think Al Gore jumped into it? I did say Republicans got money from the banks, but a greater number of those dollars goes to democrats. Talk about hypocrisy. Just ask Hillary who recently got 300k for a half hour speech from Goldmans. As for Hollywood. Sure, ever notice when the dems have a fundraiser. You guessed it, they run out to LA most of the time. They get all kinds of money from Hollywood and other associated media. Don't think you see any of the network media giving money to Republicans.
Bottom line is they both are corrupt.


Sure they are, but the banks [and Wall St and insurance companies] have a far greater effect on the policies that matter to me. Hollywood is 'Tinseltown', not known for its' grip on reality, lol. In broad terms, the banks represent the profit motive, while Hollywood stands for creativity, and we need both in our lives. The profit motive has come to be far more important, especially to politicians, and that's not good.
PS Did I ever mention I really, really don't like Hillary? Your comment is one reason why.
 
Top