Those Republicans Can Complain About Anything, Can't They? : The Rantings of an Aging Armed Pinko Chick

I like Colt, its a good brand.

Did Colt file for chapter 13, did Colt have the majority of republicans call for its demise?

No they would have screamed second amendment rights and found a way help them out, probably through DoD.

Colt was not, to my knowledge, bailed out. I was just trying to say that complaining about commercials for political reasons is not limited to Republicans.

Listen, I was presenting a hypothetical situation in which people from the left would likely complain about the content of a superbowl ad. For instance, many on the left do not like firearms, and they would therefore be annoyed by a Colt Firearms ad enough to complain. I was using Colt as an hypothetical example. I am sure that a pro-life commercial would have been equally railed against. I am merely trying to make the point the Republicans do not have the market on complaining about ads for political reasons cornered. I know I should have just posted the typical Newsvine echo.

I know I am going to get beat up for this, but I wonder how the left would have responded if the ad was for a different American company, say Colt Firearms.

Well, we all have to suffer through the complete horsesh*t propaganda from anga re how safe fracking is.

Well, we all have to suffer through the complete horsesh*t propaganda from anga re how safe fracking is.

This is what I am talking about, I am sure that somewhere, there is an article from someone who is not a Republican complaining about these fracking ads.

You need to be educated Alpha, most liberals are not against ordinary firearms, what we are against are some of the assault weapons and accessories ie 33 round clips.

Are background checks, and a waiting period too much to ask.

As for rove and his stupid rantings, he runs a PAC called American crossroads a dirt bag organization, funded by the crotch brothers, not to mention he should be in prison. I have never seen this fat head anywhere but Fox.

I give up, go Obama.

How would it have been perceived if the Conservatives put up a Swift Boat type counter ad condemning the bailout of the auto industry? Like say using...Hmm, er, Mitt (Son of former AMC, CEO) Romney. I would have loved to see the vote count for that commercial.

That ad had nothing to do with politics. It was simply an ad to shine some hope for this country. We were there once, we can get there again.

Republican heads exploded because they must never acknowledge anything good is happening. They must guarantee they can convince enough people to doubt the President has any hand in the progress being made and the job growth. They will even lie to achieve their lock step assault against this country.

The ad was very good and sent a great message to the country as a whole. Only the a-holes find fault with it.

Also, it should be clearly stated - Democrats (by and large) aren't "anti-gun" no matter what the NRA and Fox say.....MOST of us (we are not a collective consciousness) want RESPONSIBLE gun ownership and REASONABLE government regulation.....so that YOU nor I can simply go buy a tank or line our lawns with Claymore mines.

It's no different with the pro-life/pro-abortion meme.....just because MANY of us (again, not all) believe a woman has the right to choose and protect HER body and HER rights doesn't mean we support abortions or desire abortions, or want to mandate abortions, or make YOU have one.

If you wish to have an argument/debate on such matters, at least learn the facts first.

Listen very carefully. I wasn't saying that all Democrats want to take away all guns. I wasn't saying that all democrats want to slaughter all unborn children. I wasn't blasting democrats or Obama or anything. I wasn't lumping all Democrats into a collective conscious. I wasn't even trying to argue. I was simply pointing out the possibility that there might somewhere be some obscure ad where a person from the left complained about something.

Thank you all for your condescension. The article itself lumps all Republicans into one throng of unwashed idiots, yet you ALL get outraged if I DARE say that some liberals might have an issue with guns. This is a beautiful example of why the country is so divided.

AlphaTrion, I understood what you were getting at. And you should've known better from the get-go. Your defeated 'go Obama' comment made me snicker.

It's worse than a sewing circle around here, these days. There is no such thing as news on Newsvine anymore. This certainly isn't news. This is celebrity gossip.

The most important question in contemporary American political discourse;

'What news channel do you watch?'

@!$%# that.

(Also, don't you dolts realize that the right complaining about an ad is only about half as insane as the left wing... complaining about the right wing... complaining about an ad? Food for thought.)

Joseph,

Thank you. I was beginning to think that my posts were somehow being translated into Klingon. I guess I should have known that anything less than absolute compliance with the marching orders around here would lead to a dogpile.

Alpha Trion,

I will accept your question and point my thoughts at it. If Colt was going down the tubes and ran an ad during the superbowl with some awesome cool democratic actor talking about how it's time during our half time as a country to get back in the game, with inspiring video clips of people working again, I would still react the same way. Because I am rooting for this country to get back on it's feet.

I do take exception to your comment on one particular party not liking guns. I am an owner and operator of firearms. Always will be and generally would be labled in said group. I would like to note I speak only for myself. I hope that gives you a fair shake to your question as my answer has no intent on malice, just an honest answer to your question.

warm regards.

I said:

many on the left do not like firearms

Apparently this reads as:

"All Democrats hate and detest all guns and wish that anyone possessing, thinking about, looking at, or even drawing a gun should be imprisoned for the rest of their life as a psychopath."

If I were disarming a bomb from an insane, evil super criminal and his riddle was "cut the wire that corresponds to the political party least amiable to guns to disarm the bomb" and there was a wire labelled Democrats and a wire labelled Republicans, I would cut the one labelled Democrats without a second thought.

Again, the above is a hypothetical situation, I do not need you all to scold me about how I need to educate myself on evil super-criminals and tell me that Karl Rove is bad for some reason. I know that the word is shades of gray, and I humbly apologize for having an opinion.

how dare you use the truth

Depressing, ain't it?

david.....kkkarl and/or his lemming have already TRIED the solyndra crap and those of us who pay attention have actually looked at the TIMELINE and see kkkarl and/or as the lying tools they really are. I'd wager a guess that f&f is probably more of the same. The gNOP sooooooooo like to complain about sins that BOTH parties do. It's the Orwelian misdirection and those of us who actually pay attention, do the research and see the truth know it!

all you have to do is look at the seeds from the dems here, they are either all whines(but then what else do they do?) or seeds on how everyone in the world supports "The One"

#14. "Like it or not, everyone has a right to their opinion. If "democrat complaints" bother you,"

And I gave my opinion so if it bothers you take your own advice and move on.

Rove and the Bush administration bailed out the car Companies to begin with. Most of the money lost is from that initial bailout. Now Rove, of all people, gripes about an ad regarding the bailouts? If the truth bothers you take your own advice and move on.

Most of the money lost is from that initial bailout.

Not exactly. We won't know the full extent of the damage done until the government sells our remaining shares in GM.

From factcheck.org (may 2010)

"As for Treasury’s equity stake, worth $40 billion-plus, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said the Treasury won’t fully recoup that money. The total automaker bailout, including TARP money given to Chrysler, CBO estimates, will cost taxpayers about $34 billion

From factcheck.org (may 2010)

You're kidding, right? GM Stock has gone up quite a bit since then. And, as I stated, the initial Bush bailout money will probably never be re-payed. Bush's bailout had no strings attached.

anyone ever listen to airbag sean hannity....got that is the biggest liar in the radio talk show biz

Not to put too fine a point on it, but if the TOTAL TARP money given to Chrysler amounts to ONLY $34 billion, what are you really complaining about? We blew about that much in a MONTH in Iraq, and much more giving tax cuts to billionaires and subsidies to oil companies? Meanwhile, Chrysler is still around, still employing people and still making cars....and will continue to do so.....SO, as an investment strategy, it worked - compared to the other flubs of the Bush admin.

And as pointed out, GM's stock has gone up quite a bit in 2 years.....so you're STILL wrong buckeye.

borncorn,

"GM Stock has gone up quite a bit since then"

"General Motors Company announced pricing of the public offering of common stock of $33.00 per share on November 17, 2010" (6 months AFTER the article mentioned was written which would appear to mean there was no New GM stock prior to the IPO to me.)

Stock price as of right now- $25.56

If up is down then you are absolutely right. So you know, we need to see the stock price at near $50 per share to break even " analysts listed a payback figure in the low $50 range" ( from a politifact piece)

Webslinger,

You posted WAY TO SOON

IPO $33 per share, today 25.56

Again if way up is down 7.44 then you too are absolutely right.

Come on! this is too easy.

While we're at it, name one subsidy the oil companies get. Before you do, look up the definition of the term subsidy to make sure you're on the right track.

webslinger,

Who is still wrong? 33 at IPO and 25.56 today. Who is still wrong about GM Stock? Come on.

A little more for you "To break even on the bailout, the Treasury would have to average near $52 per share on its remaining stock sales" (from Reuters)

" initial Bush bailout money will probably never be re-payed"

According to A GM commercial and the Obama administration "all loans to GM have been repaid"

wow, 3 posts to say I was wrong about ONE sentence.....and totally ignoring the other, finer, more important point.

Sheesh, there's trolling and then there's trolling.

Oh and while we're at it, note that it is trending back UP - so while it is down from the IPO, it's not exactly in the can now is it? It's still a good investment. AND, it was still saved by the Obama admin at a time when the GOP wanted it to fail....so, it's A GOOD INVESTMENT (and was in 2010).

Your finer point has nothing to do with GM. It's all a diversion from the truth about GM. If your "finer point" is we wasted a lot of money in Iraq, my finer point would have to be NO SHI.

BTW wrong again 1/1/11 stock price 38.75 vs 1/1/2012 21.25 current 25.56

So yes it's really on an upward trend for about 30 days vs. a nosedive for 52 weeks.

Quick question,

Why is it so many democrats when defending the bailouts point to Iraq like for some reason I don't like the bailouts but I loved the money spent in Iraq? Is my keyboard putting words in my posts that I can't see? Can't you point to something else?

Loretta,

Exactly.

I don't mind having a heated debate with someone as long as the other person isn't trying to put words in that I never wrote or insinuated. I have no problem using a direct qoute from someone posting against them but I don't put my words in their post.

November 17, 2010" (6 months AFTER the article mentioned was written which would appear to mean there was no New GM stock prior to the IPO to me.)

Yes, the stock was worthless at the date you gave. So, why did you change the date?

initial Bush bailout money will probably never be re-payed"

According to A GM commercial and the Obama administration "all loans to GM have been repaid"

You do understand what happens to debt during a bankruptcy don't you?

I found an article on the GM price in May, 2010. This would be the actual date you initially used prior to changing it to November for some reason.

GM Bankruptcy Watch: The Stock Price

May 27, 2009

General Motors seems almost certain to file for Chapter 11 protection within days (or hours), yet somebody is still buying the company's stock—even though it would essentially be wiped out the moment GM declares bankruptcy.

Sure, the share price has steadily fallen for months, to pitiful levels barely above a dollar. But as most shareholders have been selling, buyers have been on the other end of those trades. Just look at the stock chart for a given day, and notice the upward squiggles disrupting the stock's downward movement; each of those upticks represents buyers temporarily driving up the price, if only by a penny or two, before the stock resumes its sad spiral.

Next time a lot of those people go to buy a car, I can guarantee you they will look at Chryslers.

Nope, I'm still buying Ford. The only American car company that took no bailout. Ford earned my loyalty.

"Yeah, but don't you think the commercial does help remind people to buy American"

It might but I don't think it will sway the toyota fanboys or the others who will now like me buy Ford for the reason stated. Still nothing wrong with reminding people to buy American.

Honestly, I only heard the commercial and didn't see it. I had no idea what the commercial was about until my wife explained it to me. She didn't know until the end of the commercial.

I'll state this, If I ever find myself dissatisfied with the quality of Ford, I will buy foreign before I buy Chrysler or GM.

Here you go buckeyenut

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,528409,00.html

Same song but different verse

Don,

Thanks, I was just reading about that. I believe this is part of the energy policy of the administration and these are low cost loans. Not the same song or even the same notes.

"The loans were designed to help auto manufacturers meet new fuel-efficiency standards of at least 35 mpg by 2020"

I have no problem with Ford getting money to cover costs of mandates by the government. This isn't the US taxpayer saving ford's butt.

The hell it wasn't spin it any way you want. A loan is a loan.

Don,

I'm not trying to spin this. I'm looking at it as apples to apples and this is apples to onions. Not even the same category on the food chain.

GM and Chrysler came to the government asking us to save their ass.s. Ford came to the government to get money made available to defray the cost of mandates. That's not spin, it's the truth.

Nice "intelligent" response tho. Next time don't put so much thought into your post.

Next time look at the truth and try not to spin it.

What you call spin I call the truth. We've lost 1.3 billion to Chrysler and projected 14 billion (stock price depending) on GM. We haven't lost anything to ford since this is a low interest loan which means we will make a small profit for forcing them to increase fuel economy as part of the "green initiative"

Steven Chu (energy secretary)

"Dozens of auto companies, suppliers and battery makers have sought a total of $38 billion from the loan program, which was created last year to provide low-interest loans to car companies and suppliers retool their facilities to develop green vehicles and components such as advanced batteries."

Next time try to put more than one sentence of thought into a reply.

Don,

I'm going to just go ahead and make your reply for you.

" blah blah hell, blah blah spin, blah blah.

Hope I saved you some stress on the brain cells.

Cute Buckeye, but oh so typical.

Bull@!$%# Ron Paul never advocated the invasion of Iran.

Who said Ron Paul?

"Who said Ron Paul"

"He supports any GOP Presidential candidate even though they have all advocated for the invasion of Iran,"

Ron Paul is a GOP presidential candidate and you stated "they have all advocated for the invasion of Iran" So you said Ron Paul when you said they all when referencing the GOP candidates who advocated invading Iran.