What the 2012 election taught us

Nov 6, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Washington Post

We've been scouring the data for clues as to what we should learn from what happened tonight as President Obama relatively easily claimed a second term.

Comments
8,281 - 8,300 of 10,324 Comments Last updated Oct 1, 2013
conservative crapola

Reading, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9038
Feb 28, 2013
 
au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>
gopeepee still stunned at their insignificance.

Why the shock?

Since: Oct 08

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9039
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked: are you still downloading child pornography or did the police take away your computer?
are you still sniffing little girls bicycle seats, or have you learned your lesson?

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9040
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

conservative crapola wrote:
<quoted text>
gopeepee still stunned at their insignificance.
Why the shock?
Woodward at war
Bob Woodward called a senior White House official last week to tell him that in a piece in that weekend’s Washington Post, he was going to question President Barack Obama’s account of how sequestration came about — and got a major-league brushback. The Obama aide “yelled at me for about a half-hour,” Woodward told us in an hourlong interview yesterday around the Georgetown dining room table where so many generations of Washington’s powerful have spilled their secrets.
Digging into one of his famous folders, Woodward said the tirade was followed by a page-long email from the aide, one of the four or five administration officials most closely involved in the fiscal negotiations with the Hill.“I apologize for raising my voice in our conversation today,” the official typed.“You’re focusing on a few specific trees that give a very wrong impression of the forest. But perhaps we will just not see eye to eye here.… I think you will regret staking out that claim.”
Woodward repeated the last sentence, making clear he saw it as a veiled threat.“‘You’ll regret.’ Come on,” he said.“I think if Obama himself saw the way they’re dealing with some of this, he would say,‘Whoa, we don’t tell any reporter ‘you’re going to regret challenging us.’”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/woodwar...

WMAL EXCLUSIVE: Woodward's Not Alone - Fmr. Clinton Aide Davis Says He Received White House Threat Also…..
conservative crapola

Reading, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9041
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>
Ashley Judd 2014: How the Tea Party Could Propel Her Into the Senate

Liberal activists and donors are joining forces with Tea Party groups hoping to make McConnell vulnerable enough prior to the primaries that another candidate is able to take his seat.

hahahahahahahahahaha

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9042
Feb 28, 2013
 
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
You've yet to provide something other than a left wing blog to support your argument. I'm sure, with all the propaganda party line bullshit coming out of the White House about subsidies to oil companies, you can come up with a definition of these subsidies. How about using Obama as a source? He supposedly knows what's going on in government. Or, how about using Pelosi, or Reid, or any other Democrat in Congress that will actually write the bill to eliminate these "subsidies" that don't actually exist? How about using something from them as a source? Or, how about something from the Department of Energy? Or, how about something from the Department of Commerce?
Or, how about something from the actual source, you know, the people that actually count the money and cut the goddam check? What numbers does the Department of Treasury give?
The bottom line is, you don't have anything from any reputable source, you don't have anything.
So, we're back at what subsidies are you talking about? What does the Treasury Department say about the amount of checks the send to oil companies? Or, any source in government? How much money did the government pay Exxon, for example?
So far, you haven't answered this question.
Actually, it wasn't a blog, and it is only your assertion that it was left wing. The fat remains, I HAVE provided something, while you have provided NOTHING to support your assertion.

Congratulations, you appear to be utterly incompetent.

Did Bank of America, Exxon Mobile, Facebook, and numerous other corporations pay no federal taxes? Yes or no?

It appears that what the election taught me is that there are a number of clueless twits in this country to whom facts are irrelevant. You may count yourself among their numbers.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9043
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

au contraire wrote:
Can you list the company's, the amounts paid and to who to?
I could, but I have already provided links, and I am not in the habit of doing scut work for slackers.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9044
Feb 28, 2013
 
Wondering wrote:
Just you, and in a big way!
Aww the mental midget show up in defense of their fellows.

Hey Wonderbread, your tax assessment isn't specific. the topic is federal income taxes.
"– Exxon pays a lower tax rate than the average American. Between 2008-2010, Exxon Mobil registered an average 17.6 percent federal effective corporate tax rate, while the average American paid a higher rate of 20.4 percent.
– The company paid no taxes to the U.S. federal government in 2009, despite 45.2 billion record profits. It paid $15 billion in taxes, but none in federal income tax.
– The oil giant uses offshore subsidiaries in the Caribbean to avoid paying taxes in the United States."
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/31/4...

Do learn a little reading comprehension, Wonderbread. I find it hysterical that you are stalking again. Just couldn't stay away, could you? Apparently you also haven't learned to read or support your argument with facts. No where have I said Exxon Mobile doesn't pay taxes, the topic has been Federal tax. A distinction which is apparently lost upon the clueless.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9045
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

inbred Genius wrote:
<quoted text>
are you still sniffing little girls bicycle seats, or have you learned your lesson?
Him and wooddick take turns sniffing each other's seats.......if you know what I mean.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9047
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Aww the mental midget show up in defense of their fellows.
Hey Wonderbread, your tax assessment isn't specific. the topic is federal income taxes.
"– Exxon pays a lower tax rate than the average American. Between 2008-2010, Exxon Mobil registered an average 17.6 percent federal effective corporate tax rate, while the average American paid a higher rate of 20.4 percent.
– The company paid no taxes to the U.S. federal government in 2009, despite 45.2 billion record profits. It paid $15 billion in taxes, but none in federal income tax.
– The oil giant uses offshore subsidiaries in the Caribbean to avoid paying taxes in the United States."
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/31/4...
Do learn a little reading comprehension, Wonderbread. I find it hysterical that you are stalking again. Just couldn't stay away, could you? Apparently you also haven't learned to read or support your argument with facts. No where have I said Exxon Mobile doesn't pay taxes, the topic has been Federal tax. A distinction which is apparently lost upon the clueless.
Using a George Soros site to prove something is meaningless.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9049
Feb 28, 2013
 
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Wonderbread, your tax assessment isn't specific. the topic is federal income taxes.
That annual report isn't mine, it's Exxon Mobil's. It listed the income tax paid, I labeled it "income tax" so you would understand. No surprise that you still don't get it.

Show me a document from the SEC (they're all there) to prove the annual report was false. You should still to coloring books and alphabet blocks.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9050
Feb 28, 2013
 
Justice Dumbass (lides), just for you, you couldn't find it all by yourself:
http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9051
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

lides wrote:
I find it hysterical that you are stalking again. Just couldn't stay away, could you?
You give yourself far too much credit. I try to fight stupidity wherever I find it. When I see your name I know I've hit the mother load. Dumbest troll I've ever encountered.

“Bullsh*% Detector Enabled”

Since: Dec 08

Brooklyn, New York

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9052
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Did Obama win?

I missed the election.
conservative crapola

Bethlehem, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9053
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

au contraire wrote:
<quoted text>Using a George Soros site to prove something is meaningless.
Like when you link to fux?

hahahahahahahahahahaha
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9054
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The comment that Exxon Mobil paid no income taxes and got a big tax credit was made by Sen. Sanders, investigated by Politifact, and found to be false.

Since: Oct 08

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9055
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Black Rhino wrote:
Did Obama win?
I missed the election.
he squeaked by with a win, the 47% class of welfare non taxpayers voting for him definately helped.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9056
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it wasn't a blog, and it is only your assertion that it was left wing. The fat remains, I HAVE provided something, while you have provided NOTHING to support your assertion.
Congratulations, you appear to be utterly incompetent.
Did Bank of America, Exxon Mobile, Facebook, and numerous other corporations pay no federal taxes? Yes or no?
It appears that what the election taught me is that there are a number of clueless twits in this country to whom facts are irrelevant. You may count yourself among their numbers.
Look at you rlink again, dufus. The word "blog" is even in the goddam link.

So, just what was the check amount for when the government paid money to Exxon?

Did you ever find anything to back the information you found in that blog?

Like the Forbes article said, ExxonMobil is taxed at a 35 percent rate.
Do you have something more credible than Forbes?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9057
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Aww the mental midget show up in defense of their fellows.
Hey Wonderbread, your tax assessment isn't specific. the topic is federal income taxes.
"– Exxon pays a lower tax rate than the average American. Between 2008-2010, Exxon Mobil registered an average 17.6 percent federal effective corporate tax rate, while the average American paid a higher rate of 20.4 percent.
– The company paid no taxes to the U.S. federal government in 2009, despite 45.2 billion record profits. It paid $15 billion in taxes, but none in federal income tax.
– The oil giant uses offshore subsidiaries in the Caribbean to avoid paying taxes in the United States."
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/01/31/4...
Do learn a little reading comprehension, Wonderbread. I find it hysterical that you are stalking again. Just couldn't stay away, could you? Apparently you also haven't learned to read or support your argument with facts. No where have I said Exxon Mobile doesn't pay taxes, the topic has been Federal tax. A distinction which is apparently lost upon the clueless.
Again, you come with a left wing site, dufus. How about backing up that left wing party line with some actual numbers. I'll help you:

Here's a link that says ExxonMobil pays more in taxes here than they earn.
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/about_iss...
Let's see what ExxonMobil has to say for themselves:
"Over the past five years, ExxonMobil incurred a total U.S. tax expense of almost $59 billion, which is $18 billion more than the company earned in the U.S. during the same period."

And, "The U.S. corporate tax rate is the second highest among developed nations. In 2010, the effective income tax rate for oil and natural gas industry averaged 41.1 percent, compared to 26.5 percent for other S&P Industrial companies."

So, ExxonMobil is actually paying more in taxes here than they are earning from investment, and the oil industry as a whole pays almost double the tax rate of all other industries.

How about this gem:
"While the oil and natural gas industry employs only 6% deduction, nearly every other industry employs a 9% deduction."

http://atr.org/fact-checking-caps-characteriz...

And,

A new Tax Justice report which explains,“Over the past two years, ExxonMobil reported $9,910 million in pretax U.S. profits, but it enjoyed so many tax subsidies that its federal income tax bill was only $39 million -- a tax rate of only 0.4 percent.” Claims ExxonMobil paid no taxes at all in 2009 on profits of nearly $2.6 billion.
"This is an example of how CAP uses data out of context, leading to distortions. The reason Exxon’s rate was only .4 percent is because they’d overpaid in prior years. Specifically, ExxonMobil’s income tax expense related to 2009 activities was approximately $500 million – and over the past five years, they incurred a total U.S. tax expense of almost $59 billion."

Kind of blows your propaganda bullshit out of the water, doesn't it?

Yes, your blog is left wing, and anything with "progress" in the title is radical left.
Billy Ringo

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9058
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

inbred Genius wrote:
<quoted text>
he squeaked by with a win, the 47% class of welfare non taxpayers voting for him definately helped.
He squeaked by with a margin of 3.5 million votes. A real nail-biter.

Polls closed at 11PM EST, and by 11:10PM we had a winner.
Billy Ringo

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9059
Feb 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at you rlink again, dufus. The word "blog" is even in the goddam link.
So, just what was the check amount for when the government paid money to Exxon?
Did you ever find anything to back the information you found in that blog?
Like the Forbes article said, ExxonMobil is taxed at a 35 percent rate.
Do you have something more credible than Forbes?
LOL - my neice's coloring book is more credible than reich-winger teabagger rag Forbes, owned by teabagger Malcolm -

EXXON paid about 17%.5160

You're such a mark.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••