# political influence on the jobsite



## joeyuk (Feb 27, 2008)

.25 % of my pay is withheld as a "voluntary" contribution used to support the candidates the local sees fit. The witholding is called C.O.P.E. . It is a problem but you can have this contribution stopped. As you go to a new contractor you must have it stopped again. I have never done this but a friend has. 

On the job everyone has always been free to voice their opinion or choose not to without retailiation of any kind.


----------



## daddymack (Jun 3, 2008)

> I made a comment to a JW I was with about the sticker on his hat and he said "Better get the sticker on, if you want to keep working."


I think he just meant that democrats benefit organized labor more and in turn increases the work outlook.



> Do I have to chose between one who supports my values vs. the one who supports unions more?


My values don't change in reguards to who the president is. Work is business to me and I vote for who fattens my wallet the most.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> I have always had the position that I do not discuss politics at work.


Good policy, you are not going to change their opinions and highly unlikely they'll change yours. Religion politics and the size of their wife tushie should be avoided in most cases.

Play low key and avoid the issue as you have. Legally they can't force your hand BUT I would avoid going there if long term employment is your goal.


During one of the electricians one of my employees made a comment that Clinton was going to stick it to the rich, I showed him an article that said anyone over $100,000.00 a year income, my guy had a FIT, he had made $105.000.00 that year. Several of my men have combined incomes in excess of $200,000.00 including the wife's income.

Avoiding the candidates one candidate says 250,000.00 a year is rich. Is that rich in New York City or San Fran? McCain does not know how many houses he owns? Is that really a big deal? I have no clue about how many vehicles I own. And I am sure my income is NO WHERE NEAR HIS.

Two candidates running to the middle.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

Obama doesn't want to take your guns away. He does want to do many things that will ensure us more work and strengthen all unions and the middle class. McCain is a follower, a follower of the dumbest guy ever elected president. Obama is a true leader and a visionary. Check out his views on his website barackobama.com. Please!


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

what good is having lots of work, and big paychecks, if the tax rate is 60%? figure out what you actually pay in all taxes (income, sales, property, etc) and you will quickly realize that you probably pay more than 60% in taxes....

also realize that the most any boon in work from the democrats is publicly funded (tax money), where most any boon in work is from private sector (you can choose to spend your money with the company or not)

here's another question to ask yourself - who really controls the country? the President? or Senate and Congress? 

Typically this country votes for opposite parties for both....The 1st 2 years of Clinton's Presidency, he had a Democratic Senate and House....and absolutely nothing got accomplished.....in 1994, the Republicans took over and the economy took a turn for the better.....

during most of Bush's Presidency, the democrats controlled enough of the house and senate to be able to stop the republicans...

you can make up your own mind who is right or wrong for you....but also look at who is really right or wrong for the country....

BTW - according to most Democratic initiatives, I'm rich, so they really want to tax the hell out of me...by most normal peoples POV, i'm lower middle class...the democrats should really want to help me......right?


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

Not worth a response!


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Not worth a response!


that's the beauty of this country....


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Not worth a response!


Good answer FROM A FIRST GRADER.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

Here is a funny little anecdote, that describes the difference between Conservatives (Republicans) and Liberals (Democrats)....

I was talking to a friend of mine's little girl the other day. I asked her what she wanted to be when she grew up and she replied, "I want to be President!" Both of her parents are liberal Democrats and were standing right there. So then I asked her, "If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?" 


She replied, "I'd give houses to all the homeless people." 

"Wow - what a worthy goal." I told her, "You don't have to wait until you're President to do that. You can come over to my house and mow, pull weeds, and sweep my yard, and I'll pay you $50. Then I'll take you over to the grocery store where this homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward a new house." 

Since she is only 6, she thought that over for a few seconds. While her Mom glared at me, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?" 

And I said, "Welcome to the Republican Party." 

Her folks still aren't talking to me.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

brian john said:


> Good answer FROM A FIRST GRADER.


Should I have said you have no business being in the union area when you are not in a union, a Republican and clearly anti-union? And what's your deal? You are always supporting non-union even though you own a union shop. Bush has f-d this country like no other for the vast majority of Americans, yet we've got support for a Bush follower in the union forum. Makes no sense at all to me, but then again I'm only in first grade.


----------



## village_electric (Jan 13, 2008)

Democrats took control of the house and senate in 11/06...the house was Republican controlled since 1994 and the senate since 2002


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

village_electric said:


> Democrats took control of the house and senate in 11/06...the house was Republican controlled since 1994 and the senate since 2002


in which of those years did the the republicans have a supermajority, and compare the economy of those years...i think you will be surprised...


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Should I have said you have no business being in the union area when you are not in a union, a Republican and clearly anti-union? And what's your deal? You are always supporting non-union even though you own a union shop. Bush has f-d this country like no other for the vast majority of Americans, yet we've got support for a Bush follower in the union forum. Makes no sense at all to me, but then again I'm only in first grade.


ok...what did Bush actually do to f--k this country? please, give examples...

BTW- don't know if you were talking to Brian John or me...but I personally grew up in a union household...my father is still a card carrying member of the IBEW and was a Union contractor for years...He's also an arch-conservative...


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

oldman said:


> ok...what did Bush actually do to f--k this country? please, give examples...
> 
> BTW- don't know if you were talking to Brian John or me...but I personally grew up in a union household...my father is still a card carrying member of the IBEW and was a Union contractor for years...He's also an arch-conservative...


1) His crew lied about Iraq having WMD, getting us into this war

2) They had us go into Iraq rather than Saudi, because Saudi had oil ties to the Bush family

3) His admin pushed forward the Office Of Homeland Security, taking away some Constitutional Rights of many Americans

4) Under any other administration Haliburton would not be thriving, the same goes for some of his other Texas cronies

5) He pushed to get into Iraq just to please his daddy

6) How much money has been diverted from social programs into the general fund under his admin???


and that list is at 0615 as I'm getting ready to leave for work...


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

but i wasn't asking you....i agree with you, but i wasn't asking you...point is, too many people don't stop and think for themselves....


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> Should I have said you have no business being in the union area when you are not in a union, a Republican and clearly anti-union? And what's your deal? You are always supporting non-union even though you own a union shop


Boy nothing like trying to stifle free speech. Until this thread is locked all forum members are free to comment.

Look the GOVERNMENT is SCREWED UP 40% of the workers carrying 60% of the dead beats. Ask any hard working government worker. We need less government, less taxes.

As for supporting open shops, I support free enterprise. I see little difference between open shop and union shops. Some are good some suck. Same with the workers.

The difference as I see it is I keep an open mind and attitude while you dance to the dance of a puppet master telling you how to move. I vote my conscience not some party line preached to me by some that think they know whats right.

But do me a favor ONLY RESOPND TO THIS



> You are always supporting non-union even though you own a union shop


WHATS IN IT FOR ME???????????????????????
As I have stated I like knowing my men have retirement and good bennies with a working wage that is TRANSFERABLE above this they get bonuses, vacation and holidays. If I was an open shop my men would make the same wages and have similar bennies and I would save money.

And do not offer training or better workers as most of my men were hired from open shops.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

brian john said:


> Boy nothing like trying to stifle free speech. Until this thread is locked all forum members are free to comment.
> 
> 
> The difference as I see it is I keep an open mind and attitude while you dance to the dance of a puppet master telling you how to move. I vote my conscience not some party line preached to me by some that think they know whats right.


We should all keep an open mind and do the right thing not just follow the herd.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

I have a free mind and always have, so don't insult me. I believe Obama is clearly the better choice for the majority of this country including myself. His energy plan will create tons of good paying jobs, lower pollution and get us off of our imported oil addiction which will alleviate all sorts of problems. What in the hell will McCain do?

As for you being union and you get no benefits from it, only your men do. Maybe so, but most union contractors benefit by using the union to man up quickly with skilled workers so they can bid the larger jobs and know they will have workers for those jobs. From reading your posts it seems you offer union wages and benefits + to non-union guys. Of course you probably get the very best non-union guys because you are offering way more than other non-union shops. They get in the union and have better security and of course they are better than those that sit on the books. If there are 5000 union brothers making $50 hr. full package with 50 on the book and you offer $50 hr, full package to 10,000 non-union guys who average $35 an hour, of course you will get the better pick. If you were not offering way above non-union scale you would not get the best. So why don't you offer union scale and benefits and be non-union. Seriously.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

oldman said:


> ok...what did Bush actually do to f--k this country? please, give examples...
> 
> BTW- don't know if you were talking to Brian John or me...but I personally grew up in a union household...my father is still a card carrying member of the IBEW and was a Union contractor for years...He's also an arch-conservative...


Do you know what happens when we have a deficit? We borrow money from countries like China and give them wonderful trade deals in order to do so, which has screwed millions and millions of factory workers etc.. This has happened because of Bush running up debt. When those factory workers no longer make good or any money they don't put it back in the economy further hurting more Americans. It's pretty simple. Bush has circumvented the Geneva Covention and made us more enemies than any president in my lifetime by far. I could go on and on, but what's the point.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Do you know what happens when we have a deficit? We borrow money from countries like China and give them wonderful trade deals in order to do so, which has screwed millions and millions of factory workers etc.. This has happened because of Bush running up debt. When those factory workers no longer make good or any money they don't put it back in the economy further hurting more Americans. It's pretty simple. Bush has circumvented the Geneva Covention and made us more enemies than any president in my lifetime by far. I could go on and on, but what's the point.


well, you convinced me...too bad it's the senate and the house who spend the money, not the president...but hey, why let a little bit of fact get in the way of a good opinion...carry on...

edit to add - the main thing that any president can do to screw this country is point Superior Court Justices that don't look out for the common good...I have my doubts that if Obama appoints any judges, they will look out for the common good...


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> As for you being union and you get no benefits from it, only your men do. Maybe so, but most union contractors benefit by using the union to man up quickly with skilled workers so they can bid the larger jobs and know they will have workers for those jobs. From reading your posts it seems you offer union wages and benefits + to non-union guys. Of course you probably get the very best non-union guys because you are offering way more than other non-union shops. They get in the union and have better security and of course they are better than those that sit on the books. If there are 5000 union brothers making $50 hr. full package with 50 on the book and you offer $50 hr, full package to 10,000 non-union guys who average $35 an hour, of course you will get the better pick. If you were not offering way above non-union scale you would not get the best. So why don't you offer union scale and benefits and be non-union. Seriously.


SERIOUSLY...Portability for the men, should they be laid off or I fold, retire or die, my men can move on to another shop and obtain at a minimum union scale and retirement is intact as is their insurance. I feel this is best for employees, even at the cost of more in my pocket.


Actually the reason I hired open shop men is the union COULD NOT SUPPLY THE MAN POWER. I would prefer to hire through the hall they just are not their.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

surfbh said:


> I have a free mind and always have, so don't insult me. I believe Obama is clearly the better choice for the majority of this country including myself. His energy plan will create tons of good paying jobs, lower pollution and get us off of our imported oil addiction which will alleviate all sorts of problems. What in the hell will McCain do?
> 
> 
> 
> > Read the book "obamanation" and then see if you still think he's a good choice. He's a die hard socialist - marxist that hasn't had a real job since he graduated college. Hell voting present rather than yes or no, what the hell is that about? To me it says I don't want to waste my energy reading something so I'll just avoid it.


----------



## blueon462 (Sep 4, 2008)

I've read Obamanation and Im not sure anybody should be basing their opinions for a presidential candidate on that particular book for a number of reasons. First, I wouldn't read a book on either candidate written by a potential rival (ok, so not a rival, but maybe a competitor). Secondly, almost every major media outlet including the New York Times (where it was a #1 bestseller) have decried it as 'historically inaccurate' at best and a 'politcal hatchet job' at worst. Thirdly, the same guy reported that "Muslim terrorist group with ties to criminal drug networks and al-Queda" has given "strong support" to John McCain. Fourth, after reading the Obama Campaign's, complete with actual sources (unlike Obamanation), response most people with any type of common sense will consider it to be perhaps abit off base (like your average Michael Moore movie). 

I understand the feeling of a 'liberal' leaning media but even the most conservative of us can recognise a nut case for what he is can't we?

P.S. he challenges the idea that Oil is a fossil fuel.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

Capitalism sounds great but when corporations take advantage and put profit before us, we all lose. Jobs go overseas, foreigners are given jobs here for much lower wages, illegals are allowed in the country. The middle class is undermined further and further. Today at school, the local head of the AFL-CIO told us that McCain wants to tax our health benefits which is now pretax income. So Brian John I hope you are prepared to pay unemployment, FICA and S.S. on top of your men's health benefits while the health coverage gets even more expensive. Of course this is a direct threat to unions. But since you all seem to be in favor of not voting for a half black guy so we can finish wiping out the middle class, I'm sure none of you care. All of you that are working union and are voting for McCain disgust me! You are screwing us all!!


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Capitalism sounds great but when corporations take advantage and put profit before us, we all lose. Jobs go overseas, foreigners are given jobs here for much lower wages, illegals are allowed in the country. The middle class is undermined further and further. *Today at school,* the local head of the AFL-CIO told us that McCain wants to tax our health benefits which is now pretax income. So Brian John I hope you are prepared to pay unemployment, FICA and S.S. on top of your men's health benefits while the health coverage gets even more expensive. Of course this is a direct threat to unions. But since you all seem to be in favor of not voting for a half black guy so we can finish wiping out the middle class, I'm sure none of you care. All of you that are working union and are voting for McCain disgust me! You are screwing us all!!


good luck


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Capitalism sounds great but when corporations take advantage and put profit before us, we all lose.


How did they take advantage of you? Do you know most business in America are small business, do you realize after inflation pay has continued to increase? America's middle class after inflation income continues to increase after Christmas sales of Ipods has been in excess on a 1,000,000 hardly something a person in a depression would purchase.

You pay sucks that bad? Because a businessman took a chance on operating a business. That capitalist pig. SHOOT HIM Mr. Marx.






> Jobs go overseas, foreigners are given jobs here for much lower wages, illegals are allowed in the country. The middle class is undermined further and further.


Jobs go overseas and illegals take jobs here for a variety of reasons, mainly young people are told they NEED to go to college, in my area if you become a tradesman parents shake their head and say poor family their son is such a loser SERIOUSLY. Additionally politicians (both parties) think all kids need college and that just ain't true. So no one wants to do factory work, pick apples and wire houses.

As for illegals both parties REFUSE to attack the issue for fear of upsetting certain voters.

And unless you are native American your relatives were most likely illegal or at the best UNWELCOMED by the natives, and those that proceeded you relatives. It is human nature.





> Today at school, the local head of the AFL-CIO told us that McCain wants to tax our health benefits which is now pretax income.


HORSE HOCKEY, I have searched for this and it shows up nowhere.

Someone with a political agenda lying who who figure that. Divide and conquer the simple minded.



> So Brian John I hope you are prepared to pay unemployment, FICA and S.S. on top of your men's health benefits while the health coverage


I pay this now, what are you trying to say? Do you thing you health insurance will be cheaper or better under socialism

[quote[not voting for a half black guy so we can finish wiping out the middle class.[/quote]

I think both candidate's lack what I'd like to see. But now do not insult me because I think Big "O" is not the right person for the job and this is not based on race. This is what the democrats are preparing for America should Big "O" lose. Well he was black and the bigots of America are too stupid.


There are issues with capitalism, BUT since cavemen barted with rocks it has been the primary economic system that seems to last, while socalism or what passed for socalism lasted a few decades and trhen fell on it ass.




> You are screwing us all


And now you show your total lack about this country and the people of this country we are resilient and have weathered worse that McCain, and Bush, hell we made it through Jimmy Carter, who with his Democratic Ideals damn near screwed us all. If you assume the economy is the fault of the President, which I feel it is not.

A Democratic Congress passed laws requiring Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to make loans to people that had no business buying houses.

Congress passed laws against drill for oil, and while this oil will not be a end to oil issues it will stop a transfer of wealth, and infuse our econmy with fuel till we finally get off out tushes and resolve this oil issue..

After the last oil crisis in the 70's Congress DID nothing towards resolving the oil issue.

There is more to what is happening than just trying to destroy unions which many did to themselves due to short sighted policies.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

Brian, you have the patience of a saint. My guess is surf doesn't remember the Carter administration.


----------



## Big R (Jan 10, 2008)

It is nice to see that not all union members are hard-core liberal democrats. It is tough being in a union that endorses 98% DFL candidates. If the union wants to capture more market share shouldn't they be "playing" both sides. Just seems like smart business sence.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

oldman said:


> good luck


Thanks, don't need it though, at the top of the class already. Also, I remember inflation was really bad and Reagan got elected because terrorists said something like 352 hostages will be killed if Carter is re-elected.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

brian john said:


> How did they take advantage of you? Do you know most business in America are small business, *do you realize after inflation pay has continued to increase? *America's middle class after inflation income continues to increase after Christmas sales of Ipods has been in excess on a 1,000,000 hardly something a person in a depression would purchase.
> 
> You must live in a different world than me
> 
> ...


I think both candidate's lack what I'd like to see. But now do not insult me because I think Big "O" is not the right person for the job and this is not based on race. This is what the democrats are preparing for America should Big "O" lose. Well he was black and the bigots of America are too stupid.

Who do you think is more intelligent, Obama or McCain. How about Clinton or Bush?


There are issues with capitalism, BUT since cavemen barted with rocks it has been the primary economic system that seems to last, while socalism or what passed for socalism lasted a few decades and trhen fell on it ass.




And now you show your total lack about this country and the people of this country we are resilient and have weathered worse that McCain, and Bush, hell we made it through Jimmy Carter, who with his Democratic Ideals damn near screwed us all. If you assume the economy is the fault of the President, which I feel it is not.

A Democratic Congress passed laws requiring Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to make loans to people that had no business buying houses.

Democrats make mistakes too.

Congress passed laws against drill for oil, and while this oil will not be a end to oil issues it will stop a transfer of wealth, and infuse our econmy with fuel till we finally get off out tushes and resolve this oil issue..

Oil is not the answer, money spent in Iraq towards new energy sources is. They are printing solar panels on plastic sheets now for $1 a watt, should go down to .10 cents a watt. Right now normal solar panels cost about $2.50 a watt. That's the future. Tesla motors makes a car that goes 150 and will run 250 miles on lithium batteries. That's the future. Wind turbines are going up all over the U.S., that's the future. Oil puts us in foreign countries where we don't belong and are not wanted, it raises the temp and melts the ice, it is not the solution!!

After the last oil crisis in the 70's Congress DID nothing towards resolving the oil issue.

Obama WILL at least try, nobody else ever has.

There is more to what is happening than just trying to destroy unions which many did to themselves due to short sighted policies.[/quote]

I know this but this is the union area!


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Thanks, don't need it though, at the top of the class already. Also, I remember inflation was really bad and Reagan got elected because terrorists said something like 352 hostages will be killed if Carter is re-elected.


 
Where do you get this BS? Hey let me know when the Clingons are going to attack star fleet.


----------



## paul d. (Jul 13, 2008)

The Klingons Are Coming????!!!! Somebody Call The USAF!! THEY'LL SAVE US!


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Where do you get this BS? Hey let me know when the Clingons are going to attack star fleet.


It was on the news every night and it was 52 hostages, hard to remember stuff when I was 8. The hostages were released shortly after Reagan took his oath of office. It was called the Iran hostage crisis. Hey, just because you have no clue about something does not make me crazy there Skippy.


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I would not argue with dvr he looks like he could kick your ass right through the computer. :whistling2: I am just sayin.


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

surfbh said:


> ...and Reagan got elected because terrorists said something like 352 _*hostages will be killed if Carter is re-elected*_.


I don't recall ever hearing this before...
And, didn't Carter work hard to get the hostages released...
And, weren't the hostages released on Carter's last day in official office?...

So, this thread has turned into exactly the discussion that I just avoid at work...nobody ever changes anyone elses mind. 

Even if someone is proven wrong, their mind is still made up.


----------



## paul d. (Jul 13, 2008)

What About The Klingons?????!!!!! Omg!!!!


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

So, it's terrorists who decide for us who we re-elect?

Who are they supporting this year?

...oh, wait...wait...I believe that I will get it...give me a few minutes...

I'm only an apprentice...give me time...


----------



## Big R (Jan 10, 2008)

Obviously, Barack Hussein Obama.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

BP_redbear said:


> I don't recall ever hearing this before...
> And, didn't Carter work hard to get the hostages released...
> And, weren't the hostages released on Carter's last day in official office?...
> 
> ...


Google works for those with bad memories! Truly intelligent people will often change their mind when proven wrong because they are smart enough to know that they don't know it all. That also seperates the excellent journeymen from the rest, from the one's I've worked with.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

BP_redbear said:


> So, it's terrorists who decide for us who we re-elect?
> 
> Who are they supporting this year?
> 
> ...


They helped decide Reagan!


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

I just don't recall hearing anything about the terrorists saying they would kill the hostages if Carter was re-elected.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

surfbh said:


> It was on the news every night and it was 52 hostages, hard to remember stuff when I was 8. The hostages were released shortly after Reagan took his oath of office. It was called the Iran hostage crisis. Hey, just because you have no clue about something does not make me crazy there Skippy.


 
"Skippy" ok. Well I wasn't 8 when the Iran crisis was going on and I do not recall the Iranians supporting Reagan. He was hated in the mideast in the worst way. As a matter of fact I was in Intell with the 24nd MEU in Beirut 1981-1983 and had a pretty good perspective on the mideast situation at the time. Carter was the best guy for lack of military intervention anywhere in the world. So if you really think anyone in this country gave a rats ass about what any terrorist nation wanted or who they wanted voted in back then you can ram your "skippy".


----------



## amptech (Sep 21, 2007)

Everyone has an opinion and they are absolutely entitled to it. As I believe someone here already said, most people are not going to change their minds about their political affiliation no matter how much you argue with them. I don't rubber stamp my approval of a candidate based on their party. I think that's very narrow minded. There are good people in both parties but there are also self-serving turds in both parties and the turds got there by riding the coat tails of their party because voters don't pay close attention to individual candidates. The main issues, in my opinion, in the coming presidential election are national security, taxes, energy, the economy, health care and immigration. Each one of these issues comes with a boatload of sub issues that branch out to even more issues. It is way more complicated than Democrat or Republican. I'll watch the debates, read each candidate's positions on these issues, keep track and vote for the one I disagree with less.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

amptech said:


> Everyone has an opinion and they are absolutely entitled to it. As I believe someone here already said, most people are not going to change their minds about their political affiliation no matter how much you argue with them. I don't rubber stamp my approval of a candidate based on their party. I think that's very narrow minded. There are good people in both parties but there are also self-serving turds in both parties and the turds got there by riding the coat tails of their party because voters don't pay close attention to individual candidates. The main issues, in my opinion, in the coming presidential election are national security, taxes, energy, the economy, health care and immigration. Each one of these issues comes with a boatload of sub issues that branch out to even more issues. It is way more complicated than Democrat or Republican. I'll watch the debates, read each candidate's positions on these issues, keep track and vote for the one I disagree with less.


Finally an open mind. I voted for our Republican governor because he was the best choice at the time. Everything in politics is not so black and white these days.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

MechanicalDVR said:


> "Skippy" ok. Well I wasn't 8 when the Iran crisis was going on and I do not recall the Iranians supporting Reagan. He was hated in the mideast in the worst way. As a matter of fact I was in Intell with the 24nd MEU in Beirut 1981-1983 and had a pretty good perspective on the mideast situation at the time. Carter was the best guy for lack of military intervention anywhere in the world. So if you really think anyone in this country gave a rats ass about what any terrorist nation wanted or who they wanted voted in back then you can ram your "skippy".


The hostage crisis was on the news for over a year and they demanded Carter out of office or else, you don't remember, I do. Why would I make this sh*t up?


----------



## amptech (Sep 21, 2007)

surfbh said:


> The hostage crisis was on the news for over a year and they demanded Carter out of office or else, you don't remember, I do. Why would I make this sh*t up?


Surf, You should check your facts on this one since you were only 8 when it happened. The Iranians loved Carter. He couldn't decide what to do and they controlled the situation for 444 days. Reagan scared the crap out of them because they knew he was just crazy enough to carpet bomb the whole country. I remember this all too well. I voted for Carter and regretted it. Needless to say I voted for Reagan and am still glad he won.


----------



## frank (Feb 6, 2007)

You folks talk about the same things we talk about. And agree and disagree to the same degree. One thing though we all seem to agree upon. The working man ( blue or white collar) is taxed 60% of his income - but the non working man is taxed NOTHING. Seems somewhat strange to me??????????


Frank


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

for anyone who cares, here's what Wikipedia says regarding the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis

In part, it says:

"The *Iran hostage crisis*...was a diplomatic crisis between Iran and the United States where 52 U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981, after a group of terrorists took over the American embassy in support of Iran's revolution.

The hostages were formally released into United States custody... just minutes after the new American president Ronald Reagan was sworn in.
In America, the crisis is thought by some political analysts to be the primary reason for U.S. President Jimmy Carter's defeat in the November 1980 presidential election.

The ordeal reached a climax when the United States military attempted a rescue operation, Operation Eagle Claw, on April 24, 1980, which resulted in an aborted mission and the deaths of eight American military men.

In Iran, the incident was seen by many as a blow against U.S. influence in Iran and its support of the recently fallen Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who had been restored to power by a CIA-funded coup in 1953...

For several decades, the United States had been an ally and backer of Iran’s Shah..."


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

[B said:


> amptech[/B];37874] _*The Iranians loved Carter*_. quote]
> 
> Obviously, some Iranians didn't love Carter, or anyone else. They (the hostage-takers) loved the Iatolah, and were pissed because of U.S. involvement in their affairs in installing the Shah in power.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

surfbh said:


> I have a free mind and always have, so don't insult me. I believe Obama is clearly the better choice for the majority of this country including myself. His energy plan will create tons of good paying jobs, lower pollution and get us off of our imported oil addiction which will alleviate all sorts of problems. What in the hell will McCain do?
> 
> .


So, tell me, just what is his energy plan?

Actually, what are any of his plans?

He talks a lot and says he is going to do a lot but please tell me how he expects to accomplish what he says he is going to do.


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

The Middle East is so messed up. Talk about not being able to change anyone's mind... with so many over there hating the West, and us (USA) in particular.

Do we really have any business being over there at all? (Except for trying to punish those who orchestrate terrorist attacks against the USA, like 9/11/2001)?

And for preventing more attacks...


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

oldman said:


> edit to add - the main thing that any president can do to screw this country is point Superior Court Justices that don't look out for the common good...I have my doubts that if Obama appoints any judges, they will look out for the common good...


Time out!!

The SCOTUS is not put in place to "look out for the common good". They are empowered to make decisions about the constitutionality of the laws the legistlative branches of the various governments have enacted. That in some ways can be looked at as looking out for the common good but that is not the truest intent of the SCOTUS.

these are the general actions the SCOTUS presides over:


> to resolve a conflict in the interpretation of a federal law or a provision of the federal constitution
> to correct an egregious departure from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings
> to resolve an important question of federal law, or to expressly review a decision of a lower court that conflicts directly with a previous decision of the Court.


 the SCOTUS does not make laws but interprets the laws written by others in terms of the constitution.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

> =brian john;37743]
> So no one wants to do factory work, pick apples and wire houses


Not true. They just don't want to spend he major portion of their life working theirs butts off and not being able to afford to have their teeth repaired when needed.



> As for illegals both parties REFUSE to attack the issue for fear of upsetting certain voters.


so true



> And unless you are native American your relatives were most likely illegal or at the best UNWELCOMED by the natives, and those that proceeded you relatives. It is human nature.


Really. My relatives came through Ellis Island and were accepted by the US government into this country. They were not illegals. As to not being welcomed by the natives? I am sure there were individuals that objected but since the government does speak for it consituants, in general, they were welcome to come. As to the native Americans. There were no immigration laws at the time so obviously those that came hear could not be illegals. to being unwelcome; maybe it has been romaticized a bit but wasn't Thanksgiving about the native Americans and the newcomers setting down together?


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

surfbh said:


> It was on the news every night and it was 52 hostages, hard to remember stuff when I was 8. The hostages were released shortly after Reagan took his oath of office. It was called the Iran hostage crisis. Hey, just because you have no clue about something does not make me crazy there Skippy.


let's see, what year was that? Nov '79 until Jan '81.

I was 21 when it started. Young, but not a kid. From what I remember, they were threatening to kill the hostages for any and every reason they could spew from their mouths. It was not anti-Carter. it was anti- America. The rebels took control of the country and any connections to the old government were the devil. It just happened Carter ran the country during that time so of course, just as Bush is now in middle eastern demonstrations, the focus of their ire. Most of the citizens have no real idea who the guy is on the poster they are showing the world. Dang, I would bet that most of them couldn't even read what the posters say. They are written in English so WE can read them.

Carter was merely a figurehead that represented the US. Those yahoos that perpetrated that illegal action simply wanted everybody to see them and see that they had taken what was considered to be sovereign American soil (the US embassy) and taunted us with it.

As to the timing of the release and Reagans swearing in; I suspect the discussions that resulted in that action had gone on far too long to credit Reagan with the release. Carter is a noble statesman and very accomplished diplomat. He has been tapped by several presidents since his time in office to negotiate on behalf of the US with foreign countries.

If you want to argue the point that if he was such a great diplomat, why did it take so long; I would simply suggest you look to see how long we have been in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Viet Nam and look at the results in each place. At least we can say the Iran situation was resolved and we came out a winner. Can you say that about any of the three I mentioned? Diplomacy takes time.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

Big R said:


> Obviously, Barack Hussein Obama.


Barack? I thought his name was Barry? Ohh wait, he changed it when he converted religions to Muslim. And WAIT, hold the phone, isn't it a requirement that to be President of The United States Of America that you are a natural born citizen of this country?? Hmmm, where was Barry Hussein I mean Barack Hussein born???.....wouldn't you know, KENYA. But then he was moved to Hawaii a week later where his birth cirtificate was created. 

He sure has lots of idea about how he thinks he'll help everyone out. What he never says is who's paying for all of his great "hope and change" plans. That might be because in his efforts to make people think they'll be getting all of this help from the almighty government and things will be all rosy and peachy he hides that he'll be stealing your money out of your hard earned paycheck (especially in our trade) to pay for everyone elses "help".


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

gilbequick said:


> Barack? I thought his name was Barry? Ohh wait, he changed it when he converted religions to Muslim. And WAIT, hold the phone, isn't it a requirement that to be President of The United States Of America that you are a natural born citizen of this country?? Hmmm, where was Barry Hussein I mean Barack Hussein born???.....wouldn't you know, KENYA. But then he was moved to Hawaii a week later where his birth cirtificate was created.
> 
> He sure has lots of idea about how he thinks he'll help everyone out. What he never says is who's paying for all of his great "hope and change" plans. That might be because in his efforts to make people think they'll be getting all of this help from the almighty government and things will be all rosy and peachy he hides that he'll be stealing your money out of your hard earned paycheck (especially in our trade) to pay for everyone elses "help".


 
Great point but that is only politically correct to use place of birth against guys such as Arnold, that could probably actually do the job well.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

People like him are the reason why certain groups are how they are today. Reliant on welfare and medicaid and housing "aid". It's all about expanding government to make it as large as possible: better explained as getting involved controlling your life as much as possible. Give people lots of "free" things, so why work hard for them when old B.O. will just hand it out, creating generations of governmental dependence, even worse than it is now. 

Hell, why even get married anymore? People can just shack up and have lots of kids and not work, and because they're not married they can file for welfare. Do you people realize that over 70% of black females that have babies aren't married?!?!?! 70%!!!!!!!!!! Why get married, there's no reason anymore! Good old Gov. Co. will give you "free money".

This is just one example in a whole list of them.

EVERY TIME a democrat gets into office we're one step closer to a socialist society. If B.O. gets into office we'll be ten steps closer. He's a socialist to the bone, have no doubts about it.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

I personally would never want Arnold into the presidential office either. He's a RINO all the way.


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

I remember hearing in Obama's acceptance speech at the DNC that he said "How are we going to pay for all these things?" And he said that he will go through the federal budget line by line, and get rid of programs that don't work and make the ones that do work even better, and cost less money. 
That's how he 'plans' to pay for all the 'help' that he will give us.

What would Obama like to see happen to bin Laden? I have only heard him say how he will pull us out of Iraq, but nothing of how he plans to fight terrorist groups that intend to kill us...

Personlly, I would like to see bin Laden look like my avatar. I don't know if Obama does or not...

Then again, I do believe Obama said more resources (American soldiers and marines no doubt) should be used in Afghanistan...


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

The hostages were formally released into United States custody... just minutes after the new American president Ronald Reagan was sworn in.
In America, the crisis is thought by some political analysts to be the primary reason for U.S. President Jimmy Carter's defeat in the November 1980 presidential election.

Why would the hostages be released minutes after Reagan becomes president if the hostage takers did not hate Carter and want him out. I remember the news saying that the hostages would be killed if Carter was re-elected. And yes I was 8, I watched the news and 60 Minutes all the time. It was a big deal and that's why I remember it.


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

BP_redbear said:


> I remember hearing in Obama's acceptance speech at the DNC that he said "How are we going to pay for all these things?" And he said that he will go through the federal budget line by line, and get rid of programs that don't work and make the ones that do work even better, and cost less money.
> That's how he 'plans' to pay for all the 'help' that he will give us.


So what you're saying is that he's saying that he'll get rid of wasteful spending in the budget and from "special interests" (isn't everything really a "special" interest?), just to add more TAXPAYER funded programs? Sounds counterproductive.... and yet another way to increase the size of Gov. Co.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

surfbh said:


> In America, the crisis is thought by some political analysts to be the primary reason for U.S. President Jimmy Carter's defeat in the November 1980 presidential election.
> 
> Why would the hostages be released minutes after Reagan becomes president if the hostage takers did not hate Carter and want him out. I remember the news saying that the hostages would be killed if Carter was re-elected. And yes I was 8, I watched the news and 60 Minutes all the time. It was a big deal and that's why I remember it.


How stupid can you really be? They released the hostages before they had to deal with the Reagan administration not because Carter wasn't re-elected. The reason people didn't vote for Carter is that they lost confidence in his leadership not because they were being blackmailed as you would believe. Wake up and smell the coffee and put the mind altering drugs away you have obviously had enough. I did many things at 8 years old too but damned if I can remember any of them now.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Why would the hostages be released minutes after Reagan becomes president if the hostage takers did not hate Carter and want him out. I remember the news saying that the hostages would be killed if Carter was re-elected. And yes I was 8, I watched the news and 60 Minutes all the time. It was a big deal and that's why I remember it.


And who was the spokesperson for the hostages when these threats were made? It sounds like a foolish threat seeing as we were not doing anything (overtly) to remedy the situation after operation desert claw or eagle claw or whatever it was called. You do not seem to understand why the yahoos like the Iranians that did this do things like this. They do it so you will take notice of them and fear them. Releasing the hostages obviously took all of that away from them. 

You state your version like the hostages were taken because Carter was prez and him leaving office is what it would take for them to be released. Since so many believe Carter was such an ineffective president, why in the world would they want a pres like that out of office and a president that they feared in office?

It makes no logical sense.

btw; wikipedia is great for some basic info but if you want anything of real substance, stay away from wiki. It's kind of like smelling the coffee and telling somebody whether it is good coffee or not compared to actually tasting it. You can often make a reasnable assumption by smelling the coffee but it is not reliable and in no way a complete analysis.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

nap said:


> And who was the spokesperson for the hostages when these threats were made? It sounds like a foolish threat seeing as we were not doing anything (overtly) to remedy the situation after operation desert claw or eagle claw or whatever it was called. You do not seem to understand why the yahoos like the Iranians that did this do things like this. They do it so you will take notice of them and fear them. Releasing the hostages obviously took all of that away from them.
> 
> You state your version like the hostages were taken because Carter was prez and him leaving office is what it would take for them to be released. Since so many believe Carter was such an ineffective president, why in the world would they want a pres like that out of office and a president that they feared in office?
> 
> ...


Come on man you used logical sense and surf in the same post, having a boring saturday?


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

here is an excerpt from a site (other than wiki) that describes some of the last actions that resulted in the release:http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825448.html



> In 1980, the death of the shah in Egypt and the invasion of Iran by Iraq (see Iran-Iraq War) made the Iranians more receptive to resolving the hostage crisis. In the United States, failure to resolve the crisis contributed to Ronald Reagan's defeat of Carter in the presidential election. After the election, with the assistance of Algerian intermediaries, successful negotiations began. On Jan. 20, 1981, the day of President Reagan's inauguration, the United States released almost $8 billion in Iranian assets and the hostages were freed after 444 days in Iranian detention; the agreement gave Iran immunity from lawsuits arising from the incident.


sounds more like internal strife coupled with buying the hostages was the cause for the release. One thing that makes great sense is; the Iranians had been negotiating with the Carter administration. They knew what Carter was willing to do to effect the release. Iran was in the midst of a very expensive war and needed funds, badly.

So, you have to ask yourself; is it better to accept what we know we can get from the current president or do we start all over tomorrow with a totally unkown entity where we have no idea where we are starting? We need money now and if we wait any longer, we may lose the chance to have that badly needed money.

here is all that I could find (to date) concerning demands from Iran:



> In February 1980, Iran issued a list of demands for the hostages' release. They included the Shah's return to Iran, a demand for an apology for American involvement in Iran, including the coup in 1953, and a promise to steer clear of Iranian affairs in the future.


Do you see Carter in there either by name or reference?

I see the fear of Reagan as a much lesser reason for the release as I do the fear of the financial problems they currently had losing a chance at a shot in the arm infusion of money.

then there is always this speculative point:



> Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages' release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration's defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.


Now, surfbh, I am working diligently to prove you have some idea of what you speak but I am just not able to show you have any clue as to what was really going on when you were 8. Sorry I could not rescue you from your own misconceptions.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

if you get around to it surf, I would still like to see what Obama has in mind (actual actions, not "I will find a way to pave the roads with gold" statements) concerning emmisions, oil dependancy, unemployment, (damn, if I start this list, it can go on forever without end and I will bet surf cannot come up with any concrete plans or even solid direction for Obama's intended actions), or any other hot topic.


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

nap said:


> btw; wikipedia is great for some basic info but if you want anything of real substance, stay away from wiki. It's kind of like smelling the coffee and telling somebody whether it is good coffee or not compared to actually tasting it. You can often make a reasnable assumption by smelling the coffee but it is not reliable and in no way a complete analysis.


SO... what information from wikipedia that i quoted is inaccurate? I believe what that site has in their record is accurate (I actually read it). From what I can recall, it is correct. Though, it is abbreviated, and certainly does not give the entire picture.

That's not exactly what wiki is intended to be anyway.
And, well-informed citizens get more accurate information from multiple sources, not from just one.

Instead of going from mymemory of the actual time, or from what I recall hearing on places like The History Channel, I looked the topic up on wikipedia, to give some factual context. (I was 9 in '79).

Have a good 'un.
BP


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

....


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

nap said:


> if you get around to it surf, I would still like to see what Obama has in mind (actual actions, not "I will find a way to pave the roads with gold" statements) concerning emmisions, oil dependancy, unemployment, (damn, if I start this list, it can go on forever without end and I will bet surf cannot come up with any concrete plans or even solid direction for Obama's intended actions), or any other hot topic.


Obama is the most ethical politician and best speaker of my lifetime, he takes no money from special-interests so he is not influenced like ALL other politicians. He graduated from Harvard Law and worked for the public instead of big $$. He gives people a sense of hope, because he comes from the bottom, he is half-black and has made his way to the very top, ETHICALLY. He is a leader the likes of Roosevelt and Kennedy. McCain is another puppet for special interests and has no plans to help our country. He is trying to get elected by ex-military because he was a POW and he is trying to get elected by bible-thumpers by being anti-abortion. The two most brainwashed groups in our society. As far as me letting you know what Obama's plans are you can find them yourself at BarackObama.com, there are videos if you don't feel like reading.


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

We're told as citizens that if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain about thepoliticians who represent you. What if neither candidate impresses you?

Do you vote party lines?
Do you vote for the candidate who appeals to you on 'your' most important issue?
Do you refrain from voting at all?


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Stupid bro? I went to a gifted school from 5th-9th grade then we moved across the state. My I.Q. was 130 minimum to get into that school. After which, school was so friggin easy, I didn't apply myself. I didn't know that you had to work hard to succeed if you were highly intelligent because I never had to. So now I am a 2nd year apprentice in 3rd year school working very hard in a sea of idiots.
> 
> How about you? What, you joined the Marines and learned to work hard from early on? Doesn't qualify you as intelligent; hard-worker yes, but not intelligent. Didn't they break you down and build you into what they wanted? Why do you think Marines are called jar heads? If you are dumb enough to join the Marines you are easy to brainwash. And obviously you are since you are in a union destroying it from the inside by voting Republican like most military and the brainwashed bible thumpers do. When Reagan took office, unions were destroyed in Florida and the IBEW took a huge pay cut. I know, I am third generation IBEW. You need to get a clue and off the mind-altering drugs.


Yes I became a Marine, I also went to college, I was always in the top 10% of every class I have ever been in. For your info, the term "jar head" as referring to a Marine comes from the same thing that gave them the nickname "leathernecks" -- the leather collars on some of their uniforms. "Dumb" enough to join the Corps, man you got some set, too bad your so ignorant. Did you ride the short bus going to that special school for "gifted" kids? 
I'm 53 and can stand toe to toe with you any day son, mentally or physically. You make some pretty stupid comments for such a supposedly intelligent individual.
Why is it that such a brain as yourself would be going into a physical trade rather than medicine or a more intellectual field of endeavor?


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

surfbh said:


> Obama is the most ethical politician and best speaker of my lifetime, he takes no money from special-interests so he is not influenced like ALL other politicians. He graduated from Harvard Law and worked for the public instead of big $$. He gives people a sense of hope, because he comes from the bottom, he is half-black and has made his way to the very top, ETHICALLY. He is a leader the likes of Roosevelt and Kennedy. McCain is another puppet for special interests and has no plans to help our country. He is trying to get elected by ex-military because he was a POW and he is trying to get elected by bible-thumpers by being anti-abortion. The two most brainwashed groups in our society. As far as me letting you know what Obama's plans are you can find them yourself at BarackObama.com, there are videos if you don't feel like reading.


 
Gee and here all this time I thought Obama lived off his grandmother's money and never did a damn thing for anyone but himself. Oh silly me. Funny anytime I have ever heard him speak he just says "change" and nothing of value.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

BP_redbear said:


> We're told as citizens that if you don't vote, you shouldn't complain about thepoliticians who represent you. What if neither candidate impresses you?
> 
> Do you vote party lines?
> Do you vote for the candidate who appeals to you on 'your' most important issue?
> Do you refrain from voting at all?


I vote for who I feel will do the most for the most people. This is usually a democrat, but not always.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

randomkiller said:


> Yes I became a Marine, I also went to college, I was always in the top 10% of every class I have ever been in. For your info, the term "jar head" as referring to a Marine comes from the same thing that gave them the nickname "leathernecks" -- the leather collars on some of their uniforms. "Dumb" enough to join the Corps, man you got some set, too bad your so ignorant. Did you ride the short bus going to that special school for "gifted" kids?
> 
> It was a regular bus for your info!
> 
> ...


Opportunity abounds in the IBEW for someone who is a very hardworker and very intelligent along with my wife who recently got Apprentice of The Year. And my father who is a Level 2 Instrument Tech, holds an unlimited masters license, has had his own successful small shop in the past and made it to Vice Pres of a large union shop. He will be retiring about the time we top out and he has offered to help us with our own biz. Plus, I love problem-solving which is what this trade is all about.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

randomkiller said:


> Gee and here all this time I thought Obama lived off his grandmother's money and never did a damn thing for anyone but himself. Oh silly me. Funny anytime I have ever heard him speak he just says "change" and nothing of value.


Where do you get your info Bush Limbaugh?


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

surfbh said:


> Stupid bro? So now I am a 2nd year apprentice in 3rd year school working very hard in a sea of idiots.
> 
> you are dumb enough to join the Marines you are easy to brainwash. And in a union destroying it from the inside by voting Republican like most military and the brainwashed bible thumpers do.


You insulted every IBEW member, every marine, republicans, and every religious person who reads the bible...

I had nothing against you surf, read your posts with an open mind, but since I can't kick your ass from here, maybe I'll just kick you out of my thread.

Think about what you have written before you click that 'submit reply' button.

But, on second thought, stick around. After all, it's America, and debate is good,keeps people thinking.

Just, please everyone lay off the insults.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

Random, this made me think of you right now...

A journalist assigned to the Jerusalem bureau takes an apartment overlooking the Wailing Wall. Every day when she looks out, she sees an old Jewish man praying vigorously. So, the journalist goes down and introduces herself to the old man.

She asks, "You come every day to the wall. How long have you done that and what are you praying for?"

The old man replies, "I have come here to pray every day for 25 years. In the morning I pray for world peace and then for the brotherhood of man. I go home have a cup of tea and I come back and pray for the eradication of illness and disease from the earth."

The journalist is amazed. "How does it make you feel to come here every day for 25 years and pray for these things?" she asks.

The old man looks at her sadly. "Like I'm talking to a wall."


----------



## BP_redbear (Jun 22, 2008)

One thing I don't like about McCain, is, as I listened to his acceptance speech at the RNC (which I recorded, and have not completely listened to yet)...

He said that he had "taken on union bosses"...

What does he mean by this?

And, what do I have to be concerned about with having a republican president? What do republicans generally do with regard to unions that makes many unions campaign for democrat candidates?


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

BP_redbear said:


> You insulted every IBEW member, every marine, republicans, and every religious person who reads the bible...
> 
> I had nothing against you surf, read your posts with an open mind, but since I can't kick your ass from here, maybe I'll just kick you out of my thread.
> 
> ...


I did not insult every IBEW member. I insulted every Republican, Marine and bible thumper. :thumbsup: I did not mean to insult EVERY Republican though, if you are rich my apologies, at least you have valid reasons for being a Republican. We are in the International BROOTHERHOOD Of Electrical Workers not the International BROTHERF**kers. Be a brother and vote Obama this election, at least spend some time on his site and see what he has to say and wants to do.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

BP_redbear said:


> One thing I don't like about McCain, is, as I listened to his acceptance speech at the RNC (which I recorded, and have not completely listened to yet)...
> 
> He said that he had "taken on union bosses"...
> 
> ...


Since you are in the apprenticeship now, ask your teacher(s) what Republicans have done.


----------



## paul d. (Jul 13, 2008)

surf, please tell me that part about the UNITED STATES MARINE CORP again. i missed it.


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

....


----------



## paul d. (Jul 13, 2008)

o.k. i understand. and i think the rest of the guys do too. have a pleasant evening.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

.....


----------



## surfbh (Jun 1, 2008)

.....


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

Guys, I let this go long enough. This is exactly what I thought would happen. Get a bunch of us together, start a topic even remotely political in nature and it becomes a huge pissing match. Happens EVERY time, without fail.

If you want to continue this go over the ContractorTalk.com and hit the Politics & Religion section.


----------

