The 1% embraces their inner Gordon Gekko

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
romney-bull.gi.top.jpg


Love is in the air on Wall Street


Deep-pocketed financiers have abandoned President Obama and are flocking to Mitt Romney in droves, providing more donations to his campaign than any other industry...


"They have basically ditched Obama," said John Dunbar, the managing editor for politics at the Center for Public Integrity. "Romney is just a much friendlier candidate if you are a banker."


http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/29/news/economy/romney-obama-wall-street/
​
 
Greed is not Good!

greed-is-gecko-good.JPG


bd120518.jpg


Ngvbd_PIakWYYV5ftqhUxw2.jpg

Mitt Romney reminds me of the guy in the commercial that buys his wife a Lexus for Christmas with the big bow on it. – Jimmy Kimmel

Greed will/is destroying this country and will be it's downfall too!
 
Isn't it amazing how many of the 99% support their continuing fiscal rape by the 1%?
 
LOL

The absence of Wall Street love is a departure from the norm for the Obama campaign. In 2008, then-Senator Obama raised almost $16 million from Wall Street.

On the same day that the Obama launched its campaign against Mitt Romney and Bain Capital, the president attended a fundraiser at the Manhattan home of Tony James, the president of private equity firm Blackstone.
 
I think the Democrats should totally run against Capitalism. That will work and stuff with the US citizens, everybody here hates that stuff. I mean, what good is something that created the richest nation on earth? Where even the poorest have tvs and phones where a ton of people in third world nations have never seen a toilet let alone a phone...

We should totally get rid of that. I mean, being rich compared to other nations is bad.
 
Damocles said:
I think the Democrats should totally run against Capitalism. That will work and stuff with the US citizens, everybody here hates that stuff. I mean, what good is something that created the richest nation on earth? Where even the poorest have tvs and phones where a ton of people in third world nations have never seen a toilet let alone a phone...

We should totally get rid of that. I mean, being rich compared to other nations is bad.
Click to expand...


I get it. It's a troll thread so you're just joining in the fun.
 
Damocles said:
I think the Democrats should totally run against Capitalism. That will work and stuff with the US citizens, everybody here hates that stuff. I mean, what good is something that created the richest nation on earth? Where even the poorest have tvs and phones where a ton of people in third world nations have never seen a toilet let alone a phone...

We should totally get rid of that. I mean, being rich compared to other nations is bad.
Click to expand...

Cite where democrats are against capitalism.
Do you claim that wall street in not unbalanced, that the actions of wall street have been good for the economy, the country as a whole?
 
\\()// said:
romney-bull.gi.top.jpg


Love is in the air on Wall Street


Deep-pocketed financiers have abandoned President Obama and are flocking to Mitt Romney in droves, providing more donations to his campaign than any other industry...


"They have basically ditched Obama," said John Dunbar, the managing editor for politics at the Center for Public Integrity. "Romney is just a much friendlier candidate if you are a banker."


http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/29/news/economy/romney-obama-wall-street/
​
Click to expand...
where in the article do they refer to romney as 'gordon gekko'?
 
I don't know, someone said to me last night that they thought Romney would do well with women because he's handsome. This was a man who said this. He didn't mean it in a sexist way, and he did point out just how far Palin's looks brought her. So let's say it's true and a portion of the electorate are swayed by looks. I just don't see it. Is it me? I have never been moved by conventionally handsome men I guess. Don't people know anything about sexy? Hotness? He's not hot, sorry. He's about as sexy as Archie Bunker to me.
 
Darla said:
I don't know, someone said to me last night that they thought Romney would do well with women because he's handsome. This was a man who said this. He didn't mean it in a sexist way, and he did point out just how far Palin's looks brought her. So let's say it's true and a portion of the electorate are swayed by looks. I just don't see it. Is it me? I have never been moved by conventionally handsome men I guess. Don't people know anything about sexy? Hotness? He's not hot, sorry. He's about as sexy as Archie Bunker to me.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way, sexy, good looking goes deeper than looks.
 
Damocles said:
I think the Democrats should totally run against Capitalism. That will work and stuff with the US citizens, everybody here hates that stuff. I mean, what good is something that created the richest nation on earth? Where even the poorest have tvs and phones where a ton of people in third world nations have never seen a toilet let alone a phone...

We should totally get rid of that. I mean, being rich compared to other nations is bad.
Click to expand...

Venture capitalism did not create the USA.
 
Rolling Stone had a pretty chilling article this past week on the donations of the mega-rich to Romney, and the things they expect in return (deregulation, tax shelters, the ability to pollute unfettered, etc.).

Now, I freely acknowledge that RS is a liberal rag, but the details of the article were factual, and something everyone should know. Anyone who thinks "money is speech" is cracked.

The rich & the corporations effectively run the country at this point. It's pretty sad.
 
Onceler said:
Rolling Stone had a pretty chilling article this past week on the donations of the mega-rich to Romney, and the things they expect in return (deregulation, tax shelters, the ability to pollute unfettered, etc.).

Now, I freely acknowledge that RS is a liberal rag, but the details of the article were factual, and something everyone should know. Anyone who thinks "money is speech" is cracked.

The rich & the corporations effectively run the country at this point. It's pretty sad.
Click to expand...

Thanks, it might be a liberal rag, but their articles are well done.
 
Onceler said:
Rolling Stone had a pretty chilling article this past week on the donations of the mega-rich to Romney, and the things they expect in return (deregulation, tax shelters, the ability to pollute unfettered, etc.).

Now, I freely acknowledge that RS is a liberal rag, but the details of the article were factual, and something everyone should know. Anyone who thinks "money is speech" is cracked.

The rich & the corporations effectively run the country at this point. It's pretty sad.
Click to expand...

It really is, and saddest is that the Democratic party is really just as bought and paid for. They prefer a Republican IMO because the Republican doesn't even have to throw bones to his base as the R base is on an insane mission to destroy the country and even the planet just to piss off liberals. But they'll buy a democrat if an R isn't available at the time.
 
Darla said:
It really is, and saddest is that the Democratic party is really just as bought and paid for. They prefer a Republican IMO because the Republican doesn't even have to throw bones to his base as the R base is on an insane mission to destroy the country and even the planet just to piss off liberals. But they'll buy a democrat if an R isn't available at the time.
Click to expand...

Agreed - both parties are a part of it now, and have been for years. I scoffed when Nader said both parties are essentially the same 12 years ago, but he was right.
 
Onceler said:
Agreed - both parties are a part of it now, and have been for years. I scoffed when Nader said both parties are essentially the same 12 years ago, but he was right.
Click to expand...


No, he wasn't. If your take away from the past three years is that the Democrats and Republicans are the same, then I really question your perception of reality.

This isn't to say that they don't both represent corporate interests generally and the interests of the financial services sector more specifically. They do. But one party represents only those interests while the other has other constituencies as well.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
No, he wasn't. If your take away from the past three years is that the Democrats and Republicans are the same, then I really question your perception of reality.

This isn't to say that they don't both represent corporate interests generally and the interests of the financial services sector more specifically. They do. But one party represents only those interests while the other has other constituencies as well.
Click to expand...

They have grown much closer even since Nadar made that comment. I think that we would live in a different country today if Gore had taken the office he won. I don't believe we'll live in a different country if Romney wins instead of Obama...there is one exception and that is the Supreme Court. IT's enough for me to vote for Obama, but frankly, I don't think it's unrealistic to say these guys have grown very close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top