Automotive Deals BOTYSFKT Shop Women's Clothing Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Pink Floyd Fire TV Stick Happy Belly Coffee Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer harmonquest_s1 harmonquest_s1 harmonquest_s1  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis STEM Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > Music forum

Here's the list: Musicians Backing Mitt Romney...and Those Supporting Barack Obama. Wild guess whose got the better list....


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-125 of 466 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 6:26:12 PM PDT
doodah man says:
It Doesn't Matter. It's all nice-to-know information, but... the popular vote means nothing, who supports who means nothing. All of this blustering means nothing (try visiting the Political Forum- what a hornet's nest!). Remember, WE do not elect our president, the electoral college does (even though the electoral college is supposed to vote the popular vote of it's constituents). Think Gore/Bush.

But, those ARE some nice bands. Maybe if each convention had a concert by all of the supporting bands, well then, that would be something.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 8:51:33 PM PDT
Fischman says:
yep ... follow the money . . . right to Solyndra.

Like most knives, that one cuts both ways.

Posted on Nov 1, 2012 9:08:39 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 1, 2012 9:10:01 PM PDT
The governor of New Jersey was calling Obama a hack politician last week...This week the President gets off the jet in that now very wet state and that same governor is worshiping at the master's feet...Where was Rodney? Off in Ohio telling folks he will support them when the asteroid strikes Cleveland with vouchers and his selected private contractors will fix everything at an reasonable price $$$....Oh, yeah Jeeps are not gonna be manufactured in China anytime soon!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 10:47:05 PM PDT
E. Dill says:
@Fishchman:

<<Not sure who could neg vote that one. Well thought out AND Hilarious>>

Yeah, it had me crying with laughter. Especially that part of wanting to keep the welfare gravy train rolling. A knee slapper for sure.

Those people on welfare have it made, huh?

ed.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 1, 2012 11:54:36 PM PDT
stevign says:
re: "and that same governor is worshiping at the master's feet"

Worshiping at the master's feet? That's a pretty lame attempt to spin the situation and proves you know nothing at all about Gov. Christie's character. Christie doesn't kiss ass like most politicians and he's not afraid to tell people who he disagrees with politically that they did something right when they do. That's rare in politics and it should be applauded by people on both sides.

Of course the Kool-Aid drinking Liberals would have condemned him either way. If he hadn't had said anything, they would have said he didn't even have the decency to acknowledge what the President was doing. It's a no win situation when you're dealing with those kinds of losers.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 2:54:09 AM PDT
70s Soul says:
If that claim was completely meritous, then:

* These people wouldn't be spending so much trying to persuade you to vote the way they want,
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance/independent-expenditures/totals

* Employers like this wouldn't be donning the OVERLORD persona while ignoring his own culpability,
http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/14/14429803-exclusive-ceo-suggests-employees-jobs-may-be-at-stake-if-romney-doesnt-win?lite

* States and other groups wouldn't be spending so much and exerting so much energy trying to suppress your vote,
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/12_threats_to_your_vote/

* And these people wouldn't have committed their lives for the right to vote,
- http://www.greatdreams.com/political/voting-rights-wilson.jpg
- http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-B4A6ayMwjEY/T0g0kJFATFI/AAAAAAAAAKQ/5WUx4s9mwws/s1600/mlk1.jpg

Stand!

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 5:22:34 AM PDT
B L T says:
Tired of Bronco Bamma and Mitt Romney...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjrthOPLAKM

...me too

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 6:37:41 AM PDT
Fischman says:
ED
Lighten up! I thought it was funny not becuase there are people in need, but becuase of the statement's relationship to the character from South Park. "He never met a cult he didn't like" is no less offensive as cults also tend to have a very detrimental effect on the people who belong to them. What makes the post so effective is that it simultaneously pokes fun at both sides, the middle, and the nonparticipant.

It's called satire and some think it's amusing. If not, we may as well scrap the likes of South Park (of which I'm not a real big fan btw) along with SNL, Modern Family, and 90% of the stand up comics out there.

Good satire has some kernel of truth at its core. Here's an anecdote that lays the foundation for the satire above that so offends you. At one time I managed a pizza restaurant. I had an absolutely stellar 17 year old employee from the projects. He was smart, talented and hardworking and I looked forward to losing him to college or some other higher pursuit as he build an outstanding work history. However, as he brought more money into his home, his Mother realized her welfare payment was decreasing in a corresponding fashion. She made him quit, saying "Why work for that money when we can get it for free?" The real tragedy here isn't even the Mom-it's that young man, who had so much to offer. I'm not saying this is the norm, but it does exist, and it exists in large enough numbers to lend enough truth to give that crack you find so horribly offensive, just the right satirical bite.

Now, I'm not sitting here with my knickers all in a twist because the hard-earned fruits of my labor are going to fund the likes of she mentioned above. Sometimes, the best way to deal with such evils is to make light. I may even vote in such a manner so as to Hope to effect a Change to the above, but I may still lose. You know what-I pick up and move on, making the best of the situation, no matter how unfair it may be, and I enjoy what I can in the process.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 7:01:04 AM PDT
stevign says:
lolol....Pretty cute.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 7:04:23 AM PDT
stevign says:
Excellent post Fischman.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 8:09:44 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 8:10:59 AM PDT
vivazappa says:
Looking at the "No" votes on this thread it's easy to see that there are more rockers who are R's not D's.
Humm I wonder what happened along the way...
In the late 60's and early 70's it was all D's!
I blame disco...punk and Ted Nugent ;)

Plus just mention liberal Bruuuce and the "no's" come out of the woodwork!!!
BRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 8:12:32 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 8:21:37 AM PDT
E. Dill says:
@Fischman:

What I find difficult about your story is how easily people will embrace it as the norm. They won't even let themselves think about people working TWO jobs at minimum wage and STILL being unable to support their family and then being lumped, perhaps, in that 47% slackers that Mitt was talking about because their wages are so meager they don't pay income tax. Another gravy trainer for sure.

But why is it much easier to get middle classers so riled up about a welfare scam for $300 a month and not care much about the elite from Goldman Sachs and the other 4 or 5 major financial institutions who systematically created the housing bubble, made a personal fortune in the process and walked away unscathed. They were surely guilty of fraud, duplicity and yet got bonuses and mostly are still at the helm of their respective institutions with their billions in tact. We respect them, don't we? And we want that mother put in jail for teaching her son about the realities of living on minimum wage.

I pay taxes too and I pay for those welfare receipients. If anyone wants to get on that "gravy train", quit your job tommorrow and go down to the welfare office and see how wonderful it is.

ed.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 8:55:57 AM PDT
Fischman says:
Again, there are two sides to most man-made catastrophes. There were a few duplicitous bankers, but there were millions of greedy homebuyers--who willingly leapt into risk levels far beyond what they could afford--nobody forced anybody to buy a house in the first place, let alone one that was way beyond their means. The government itself was contributory by compelling lenders to make loans to unqualified candidates for fear of being prosecuted for bias. I'm no fan of banks in general--in fact when I was a young teen, my family suffered greatly due to a bad experience with a bank, which drove our family into deep poverty. Even then, we asked for assistance from nobody and we learned how important it is to be careful what you sign.

I bought a house, but I didn't do so until I had worked many years and saved enough for a huge downpayment and got a monthly payment I could sustian even in the event of the loss of my primary income. Nobody compelled me to assube debt I couldn't handle (yet I am compelled to keep contributing to a debt the US can't handle). It's easier to get riled up about the leeches because we HAVE to pay while we choose which businesses we want to deal with.

While your hypothetical two income hardworking poor may exist, its equally difficult to see why people embrace that as the norm. My personal experience admittedly may not a statistically significant sample, but the vast majority of the poor I know are that way through their own lack of industry and/or incompetence. If you're a pack-a-day smoker, do you know how much you could save in a year on cigarettes alone? What about the $1,00 wheels on that POS "street rod." I've seen children running around shoeless while dad downs a six-pack a night and there's a Caddy on the curb. Most welfare folks have pretty nice TVs and cell phones. Despite making a good living, I still have a 15 year old, 100lb monstrosity for a TV with scarcely a 27" tube taking up a large corner of my basement. I didn't get a personal cell phone until a year ago, even though I could have afforded one much sooner. I'm not needy because I make good decisions. And on those occasions when I've failed, I've never asked anybody else to foot the bill for my incompetence.

I've lived on minimum wage and did just fine--even could afford to pay some taxes. At the 47% mark, you're many times greater than the minimum wage. Making that kind of money, I would find it unconscionable to not contribute to the country that had provided me that kind of opoortunity.

It's so easy just to blame "the rich" or some other boogeyman than to take responsibility for your own failures. I'm not saying there are no "unfortunate," just that there are far too many who falsely see themselves as unfortunate or simply think they are entitled to the support of others. If the leeches weren't so prevalent, it'd be a lot easier to sen the needed $$ to the folks who actually need it.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:02:35 AM PDT
70s Soul says:
Explain this please: http://www.caymanai.com/

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:07:40 AM PDT
Fischman says:
Looks like a forum for a bunch of rich folk to get together at some posh resort and chat about ways to make more money--your point?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:16:03 AM PDT
70s Soul says:
I suppose you can't explain why a former US President engages in "alternative" investments/tax havens when you only see the pretty pictures.

Foolish Fool

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:26:38 AM PDT
Fischman says:
Nor do I need to.

Nobody wants to pay more taxes then they have to. I really can't, nor will I ever be able to, afford those types of investments, but that doesn't make me jealous of those who can. Apparently Romney (who I'm not a huge fan of) has some similar havens, but that doesn't bother me a bit. Ironically, upon release of his tax returns, we learned that in one year Romney actually did pay more in tax than was required!

When people get to keep and decide what to do with their own money, they make far better use of it than filtering it through some nonresponsive, inefficient, unaccountable, bloated government bureaucracy. Ironically, upon release of his tax returns, we learned that Have you seen how much Romney gives to charity? It would shame Obama, who is supposedly the one who cares--he just wants to be generous with other people's money.

BTW, if you look at my other posts, you'll see I've not spent any time lauding GW Bush either.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:28:29 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 9:31:36 AM PDT
Hinch says:
A good plan would be to find a way to get people off welfare instead of putting more people on, but then you can't Increase the base of the Democratic party by making people less dependent on the government. Then there's corporate welfare to failing companies like the GM and 'green' energy while raising taxes on those evil successful and profitable companies. Btw, bankruptcy doesn't mean going out of business.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:34:47 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 9:37:10 AM PDT
A. Strong says:
Yeah, Romney altered his taxes from 11.8% up to 14% to show how wonderful and overtaxed he is and in December after he loses the election he will change em' right back down to 11.8 (it's called a tax-adjustment you sorry 47%ers!) He cannot adjust being undertaxed on previous years tax forms (pesky tax deadlines!) so he hides that paper in an underground bunker in Germany with Hitler's heart and other keepsakes you are not gonna find in the Hallmark store.

"She's a little bit country!"

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:37:27 AM PDT
70s Soul says:
No. Bankruptcy just means getting away with not paying your bills. Yes, the failing business can restructure, but it's vendors and suppliers suffer.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:37:58 AM PDT
Fischman says:
Wow!

Words of wisdom. I may have to go back and reconsider what you said on those Beatle threads!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:40:16 AM PDT
Fischman says:
As did GMs creditors when the government strongarmed them into taking pennies on the dollar for the loans GM couldn't pay.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:48:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2012 9:55:55 AM PDT
E. Dill says:
@Fischman:

<<It's so easy to blame the rich...>>

Evidently, it's NOT. Even with facts, there will be hundreds of people like yourself who, if not yet rich, want desperately to be so or, at least, have been trained to respect money more than charity. People who need help from their government are intrinsicly bad and people who cut a few corners on the way to the top are "clever" and "independent".

So even in times of crisis, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. Why is that? Cleverness vs. laziness? That must be it.

I still find it hard to understand how the welfare mom makes you so much angrier than the billionaire who keeps money in an off shore account in the Cayman's and some in a Swiss bank account is doing what is clever....keeping it from the government.

Had the Jeffersonians of yesteryear had gotten the type of decentralized government they seem to want back in the beginning, we wouldn't be having this conversation about the bad Federal Government (BTW, I used to believe that the gun nuts only wanted to protect themselves from criminals and to keep their rifles for hunting....it took me years to realize they were still living in the 1700's. They want them to protect themselves against the Federal Government.). I'm guessing a weak Federal government with 50 almost autonomous feifdoms (there were only 13 back then and we'd probably have never gotten much higher than that as a nation) would have guaranteed our Nation's destruction.

Since it is clear that white males are decidely concerned about their future here, instead of red states and blue states, we should be thinking "white" states and "non-white" states. What is that year when it is predicted that the majority of Americans will be non-white? If Romney doesn't send me to Canada, that surely will. I don't want to see first hand how white America will react to becoming a minority race here. Big money is mostly white here so there could be a real blood bath.

ed.

Posted on Nov 2, 2012 9:49:53 AM PDT
70s Soul says:
Prior to Obama taking office, how many died in Iraq all for the sake of oil? If you respond, please include in your number not only US military, but the ally coalition, Iraqi fighters, and Iraqi civilians blown up and caught in the crossfire.

Oil, like all other carbon fuels, do not have reproductive capabilities. There is not an infinite supply. Granted, there may still be untapped resources, but what is the point of getting it, when the oil that's flowing is not secured? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_spills

There is a serious need for investment in green energy. Our lives are dependent upon it.

Diesel And Dust

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2012 9:51:17 AM PDT
Fischman says:
He doesn't need to hide his goodies in a German bunker. Have you ever been to the Wasatch Mts above Salt Lake? There's a NORAD style entrance into the mountain where the LDS keep all their sacred documents and only the top dogs get to go in there!

Okay, even at 11.8% he's still paying a helluva lot more than me or, I suspect, you.

BTW, part of the reason the rate is so low is how much he gives to charity--lowers his tax rate--but not by as much as he's giving, so he's still paying more.

The other reason it's so low is almost all his income came from capital gains which are quite rightly taxed at a lower rate. That's because the profit you make by selling an investment you made years ago is diluted by inflation. Taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income would be a death knell to investment--and to jobs as well. HIstory shows that increases in capital gains tax rates actually lead to a decrease in revenues from capital gains as people stop making/selling those types of investments--and it's the worker who ultimately suffers.

Look, I'm not saying all this is wonder and glory--I just know that everybody tries to lower thier own libility and the only reason most people complain is 1. they can't do the same and 2. they look for anything to denigrate the other side.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Johnny Thunders wants to know what you've been listening to. 4369 17 minutes ago
What are you listening right now? 2990 19 minutes ago
What's the first word you think of when you hear "Tony Iommi"? 36 23 minutes ago
Anyone else hate Aerosmith? 151 30 minutes ago
While You are looking for something to Post in this Forum, what are you listening to??? 5010 31 minutes ago
Song Game - Part III 9098 41 minutes ago
★The Music of Our Lives 6.3★ 7511 1 hour ago
Anyone else think Frank Zappa is overrated? 32 1 hour ago
What is one of the craziest stories you've ever heard about a musician? It can be fact or fiction 141 1 hour ago
Since you all want positive, boring threads...Name a song that always make you happy 48 1 hour ago
If Jethro Tull was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame... 90 1 hour ago
Name an artist or band that has remained consistently in your top 5 (the longest) throughout your life 567 2 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  57
Total posts:  466
Initial post:  Oct 25, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 14, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions