Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,258 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Jun 12

Detroit City

#25747 Jul 9, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Face it, this is the language of a liberal that can't stand on the merits of the socialistic Democratic party so he/she resorts to name calling and personal degredation. I will go toe to toe with you on any political issue, and I'll win because your whole party is based on lies, smoke screens, and propoganda designed to sway uninformed voters. You can't win a debate of ideas with that platform but I would welcome the challenge for you to try. So if you want to step off of the playground, get away from the "yo mama" arguments, and have a substantive debate then bring it on. If not, then you don't deserve the time of day because your just wasting everyone's time with your misplaced anger.
"misplaced anger", you do that well too.

President Obama put in place new rules of the road that refocus the financial sector on getting capital to entrepreneurs and small and mid-sized businesses who create jobs.

And what happen in JUNE 2013-

THIS

Private payrolls added 202K new jobs.

Last month saw a big upward revisions, to 207K jobs, from 178K.

Meanwhile stocks are up (Dow up 188), the dollar is up, and gold is getting crushed.

The full report can be downloaded here.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/june-non-farm-...
new mayor

Jonesboro, AR

#25748 Jul 9, 2013
will we get a new mayor?
What

United States

#25749 Jul 9, 2013
Who cares
House

United States

#25750 Jul 9, 2013
It's all a matter of personal choice
Twofer

Jonesboro, AR

#25751 Jul 9, 2013
Oneford wrote:
<quoted text>
Hero, before you can expect me to take you seriously, or anyone else with a half of brain you should refrain such post as above.
Let me point something out to you,
"socialistic Democratic party".
Those are your words, and then you make this remark,
"so he/she resorts to name calling and personal degrAdation"
WTF did you mean by,
"socialistic Democratic party"
if it was not an attempt at name calling and personal degradation"
Is that, "toe to toe", enough for you?
The Democratic Party has gotten so bad they wish they were only called Socialists
boo

Euless, TX

#25752 Jul 9, 2013
Give ne
boo

Euless, TX

#25753 Jul 9, 2013
Yes
boo

Euless, TX

#25754 Jul 9, 2013
Get with it
boo

Euless, TX

#25755 Jul 9, 2013
Ha
boo

Euless, TX

#25756 Jul 9, 2013
No
boo

Euless, TX

#25757 Jul 9, 2013
Nope
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#25758 Jul 9, 2013
Oneford wrote:
<quoted text>
Hero, before you can expect me to take you seriously, or anyone else with a half of brain you should refrain such post as above.
Let me point something out to you,
"socialistic Democratic party".
Those are your words, and then you make this remark,
"so he/she resorts to name calling and personal degrAdation"
WTF did you mean by,
"socialistic Democratic party"
if it was not an attempt at name calling and personal degradation"
Is that, "toe to toe", enough for you?
As much as you don't want to admit it, today's Democratic party's policies ARE socialistic. Surely you don't disagree. Do you think that's degrading? If you do disagree, I would like to know just what isn't socialistic about taxing the rich so the "less fortunate" can have more benefits? What isn't socialistic about a government that wants to be in control of every aspect of it's citizens lives for "the common good"? If all of these things about our government are true (and they are) then how can they be degrading?
Twofer

Jonesboro, AR

#25759 Jul 9, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
As much as you don't want to admit it, today's Democratic party's policies ARE socialistic. Surely you don't disagree. Do you think that's degrading? If you do disagree, I would like to know just what isn't socialistic about taxing the rich so the "less fortunate" can have more benefits? What isn't socialistic about a government that wants to be in control of every aspect of it's citizens lives for "the common good"? If all of these things about our government are true (and they are) then how can they be degrading?
. If the Party tells him to disagree, he will disagree, they aren't allowed to think for themselves.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#25760 Jul 9, 2013
Oneford wrote:
All three of America's biggest auto manufacturersóChrysler, GM, and Fordóare stronger today because of President Obama's decisive leadership. GM and Chrysler have repaid their outstanding loans years ahead of schedule, new American cars are inspiring pride, and the auto industry added more than 200,000 jobs in the last three years.
What about the 1.6 billion we loaned to the old Chrysler which is now in bankruptcy? With the U.S. Government still owning 1/3 of GM and an outstanding balance of $850 million on a $1 Billion loan yet to be repaid, I wouldn't get too excited yet. Lastly, both GM and Chrysler went through restructuring bankruptcy. Why would they have needed to do that if the bailouts were so great? I can tell you one thing, if I was given billions of dollars, my business would be healthy too.
storyteller

Ashburn, VA

#25761 Jul 9, 2013
Oneford wrote:
<quoted text>
Princes, before those panties get in any bigger wad, let me enlighten you to the obvious. "END OF STORY" was a opinion, and you hardly need a "crystal ball" to tell you what the person wrote in post
#25692, QUOTE-Social issues certainly constitute the largest percentage of my discontent with Obama.
Ummm...okay?
(Take a little time with the next post, or I may need a crystal ball to figure out your odd and jumbled post)
Hakawati

London, UK

#25762 Jul 9, 2013
Why? They are not talking to the people. The people are not talking to them. Why vote on any bill unless you have read it? Why vote "yes" on one if you haven't read it? The person lies to get elected than is not punished for spending your social security and medicare money on anything you were not asked about. Vote? For what? It doesn't mean anything at all.
Knows

United States

#25763 Jul 10, 2013
No I don't vote

Since: Jun 12

Detroit City

#25764 Jul 10, 2013
storyteller wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm...okay?
(Take a little time with the next post, or I may need a crystal ball to figure out your odd and jumbled post)
Better get yourself a crystal ball, this is the second post in a row you have not understood.

Since: Jun 12

Detroit City

#25765 Jul 10, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the 1.6 billion we loaned to the old Chrysler which is now in bankruptcy? With the U.S. Government still owning 1/3 of GM and an outstanding balance of $850 million on a $1 Billion loan yet to be repaid, I wouldn't get too excited yet. Lastly, both GM and Chrysler went through restructuring bankruptcy. Why would they have needed to do that if the bailouts were so great? I can tell you one thing, if I was given billions of dollars, my business would be healthy too.

"GM and Chrysler went through restructuring bankruptcy. Why would they have needed to do that if the bailouts were so great"

MAYBE-JUST MAYBE those companies going through restructuring bankruptcy was one of the condition to get a government loan.

and Chrysler is not in BK.

But, a valuation of $2.5 billion for four-tenths of the company would essentially make all of Chrysler worth a shade more than $6 billion. The revival of the smallest Detroit automaker is stunning, considering that many analysts thought it might disappear from the market at the beginning of the Obama administration.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/...
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#25766 Jul 10, 2013
Oneford wrote:
<quoted text>
"GM and Chrysler went through restructuring bankruptcy. Why would they have needed to do that if the bailouts were so great"
MAYBE-JUST MAYBE those companies going through restructuring bankruptcy was one of the condition to get a government loan.
and Chrysler is not in BK.
But, a valuation of $2.5 billion for four-tenths of the company would essentially make all of Chrysler worth a shade more than $6 billion. The revival of the smallest Detroit automaker is stunning, considering that many analysts thought it might disappear from the market at the beginning of the Obama administration.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/...
If you gave my company billions it would be worth billions as well. If my company got in trouble, would there be a bailout for me? NO. I would have to go through restructuring bankruptcy (Chapter 11) or out of business bankruptcy (Chapter 7). Either way, there would be no help for me. Why are 2 of the big 3 any different? Because they employ so many people? There have been many large corporations go out of business without help. Bear Stearns had contracts of $13 billion and 15,000 employees world wide. Certainly a larger financial stake than GM and Chrysler combined and 15,000 lost jobs is nothing to sneeze at. They conducted shady business and there was no one there to help when they got in trouble. Circuit City had $1.6 billion in annual revenue, 567 superstores, and employed over 20,000 people. Why didn't they get any help? Freidman's Jewlers had over 600 locations and millions in sales. Where was the help for them? All of these companies went out of business because of bad business practices. Is that any different than GM and Chrysler letting the unions gouge them and run their business in the ground? No, it's not. The bailouts to GM and Chrysler were no more than a political gift to the large auto unions that was hyped as a country saving necessity. It wasn't. GM and Chrysler should have gone under. Bailing them out all but insures that they will get in trouble again sometime in the future knowing there will be some politician out there crying gloom and doom for America if we don't "save those jobs". Ford was the only one smart enough to realize the trap of government handouts so they paid their bailout back before they used much if any because they weren't in trouble in the first place.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
mandy dollins 43 min kelter 1
Strawberry Poultry 1 hr Bulldog 1
aarons girl 1 hr biker guy 3
is Pocahontas a nice place 7 hr small town 10
jessie holdner 14 hr cat 3
financial abuse of parent 15 hr happened to us 7
heather d Tue auntie 6
More from around the web

Pocahontas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]