HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » SoutherDem » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

SoutherDem

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Jan 22, 2011, 12:32 PM
Number of posts: 2,306

About Me

I am not an English Major. I do and will from time to time make grammatical and spelling errors. It would be appreciated if those errors are pointed out using DU mail, but if you must show your superior ability to use the English language by posting on the forum, do not be offended if I choose to point out your need to show that superiority on the public forum also.

Journal Archives

14 saved during Vacation Bible School

That is what the marque said at the local Community Church.

This Vacation Bible School was for pre-teen youth, age 3 to grade 6.

I know they are excited about this and have no problem with them telling the community.

My question is this;

If a 16 year old comes out as gay many will say they are too young to make that type of decision*.

If a 10 year old gets saved no one questions how someone that young can make such a decision.

*I personally do not think sexual orientation is a decision but won't argue that point for this discussion.

Where was Mitten the Tax Dodger speaking from today

Saw Mittens in typical lying mode earlier telling how great he is and how bad the President is and as usual noticed the people behind him. All white with the excepting of one Asian American, who looked both bored and hot (he fanned himself the entire time) no real surprise there. Also, to no surprise those who looked like they were wage and hour also looked bored and either did not clap or clapped because they knew they were told to. The only one who looked excited to be there was dressed in a tie, I assume a manager, who most likely is getting screwed too but believe Mittens BS.

OK I am not a tax attorney but I don't understand

One of the new Rethug talking points is if you consider his charitable donations he actually paid 35% or 40%. I understand how charitable donations are tax deductible but how much would those donations have to be to get his taxes up 20 to 25%? Also, I have a question is it good to skip taxes to a church which clearly has a political agenda and will/do mobilize their members to control the vote, remember California's gay marriage vote?

Chris Hayes almost asked the question I want answered, ALMOST

Chris started asking Ed Conrad what if Bain wanted to support something while he was in Utah could he have stepped in and stopped it. But, the way he started the question I thought he was going to ask what if something unethical/illegal happened would Romney be held responsible.

But in general Conrad said the 3 years were spent negotiating his separation deal which he said was both complicated, would set the set the standard for when other partners left. Sounds reasonable right? Well, if that is the case why hasn't that been the explanation from the beginning? Also, from what I am reading on DU the Romney campaigns explanation of the hour being spun on the Sunday morning talk shows is he was planning on going back and the retirement was "retroactive" when he chose not to.

There could have been a good explanation which may have put this to bed on day one, but Romney doesn't think he has to live by the same standards as everyone else. He feels he doesn't owe anyone an explanation. He want the American electorate to "trust" him. He wants to run on his Bain experience except for the closings and outsourcing which they did. He wants us to accept his lame answers. He wants us to simply accept, "I have a plan" even if that plan is just a rough outline. He want us to accept "I am going to fix ______" without telling how he will do it.

One last thing and this may be my not understanding how a business partnership like Bain works. But, if you start a company and you are considered the owner. Specifically, CEO, President, Managing Director, and Sole Owner are some of the various titles I have seen on the SEC filling when referring to Mittens. If Romney was all of that why was his separation so complicated? Was he the Sole Owner of just one of several partners? Should he have given up the CEO, President, and Managing Director titles if he wasn't doing theses jobs? Wasn't he taking a risk if something went wrong at the business?

When will these type of questions be asked of Mittens or anyone who can really answer the question?

Tomorrow Chris Hayes will interview a past associate of Romney

The commercial seems to allude to it being a "tell all" interview as if in he will confirm that Romney was in control in some form or another.

I don't know about this. If within 24 hours there was someone who was going to drop a bomb wouldn't the Romney campaign be parading their own list of people who would agree with Romney?

The interview is being played as big but I think that is advertising.

What do you all think?

Did any of the 5 Networks challenge Romney

It seems he just repeated the same thing over and over.

So if your signature on a SEC document stating you are CEO and Managing Director doesn't mean

you are in charge and confirm the truth of the document, why do they need to sign the document?

Factcheck.org will not back off their claim that Romney had nothing to do with the company since 1999. They are claiming it is reasonable that he could "technically" be the CEO, have absolutely nothing to do with the company except to sign these documents without reading.

If 25 years of service is really 22 years of service isn't that a lie in and of itself? Or really bad math skills. Plus it is really odd 25 years of service is the number of years he signed document for Bain as CEO.

I thought the purpose of the these SEC documents were to put the CEO on the chopping block if the document was falsified. When I sign financial documents I am swearing they are true and would be held responsible if they are not.

Romney wants to be given credit for anything good but take no blame for anything bad. Typical Romney.

Romney VP choice bigger than ever, for us.

Let face the facts. There is not a crime or sin Romney could commit that would make many people vote against him. As long as he isn't Obama.
If Romney won, I think there is a good chance he won't make it all 4 years of his term without scandals. The Bain issue may not catch up with him till after he is were in office.
The VP has a very good chance to be POTUS.

Just when did Mittens leave Bain?

Romney says he left in 1999.
Washington Post says it was one or two years later.
Factcheck.org says this isn't true.
Washington Post says it won't back off and now several SEC fillings have been releases which show Willard M. Romney was CEO of Bain Capital.
Factcheck.org won't back off its claims that it is false.
Today the Boston Globe extends his years of involvement to 2002.

So what are the possible options;

1. Romney left in 1999 and continued to sign SEC documents falsifying those documents.

2. Romney remained until 2002 and is lying about not being involved making him responsible for the companies actions.

3. Romney remained in name only technically being in charge but not in control, which once again would be falsifying SEC documents because they clearly say Romney is in charge.

Isn't it a felony to falsify SEC documents?

Why won't Factcheck.org revisit its decision? Do we now need a fact check organization to fact check the fact check organizations?

Citizens United Reality Check - Corporations are Super People

Last night I went to the Obama website and purchased a few items and made a small donation.

I am not looking for any "at-a-boys" from anyone.

I am not going to do a NPR pledge drive "challenge" for others to do the same.

And, I really hope there are not a lot of replies of "he had my support in 2008 but he hasn't fulfilled by expectations so I will vote for him but not support him".

This is about Citizens United.

This is not the first time I have donated to a presidential campaign so I know the process but with Citizens United, 501 (c) (4)s and other soft money in the news these days I had forgotten something. I forgot that when you make a donation to a candidate you must give your name, address, phone number, employer and occupation. I had forgotten you must confirm that you are a U.S. Citizen, that you are not part of some groups of people and that you would not be reimbursed for the donation and that there was a limit to the amount you can donate.

We allow corporations to use their money in campaigns without restrictions add to that the 501 (c) (4)s allowing donations under the ruse of Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees in total secrecy. But, when I want to make a donation I have to make it very public.

I understand Obama has both types of originations but I feel the way to donate to a campaign is to donate it to the candidate or the party not use one of these groups which have a feeling of making a drug deal in a dark alley or making an illegal bet on a horse.

I don't have a problem have my information disclosed or limits, I just feel everyone should have to disclose and have limits.

Since Citizens United I feel not only are corporations now considered "people". I feel we have been demoted to "non-people".
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next »