All Categories:
People Saved
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Go Back   MyCoupons.com Shopping Boards > My ShoppingBoards Community > Friendly Political Discussions - 'POL'
 


Friendly Political Discussions - 'POL' Left, Right, or Center ~ You are All Welcome Here! So let’s hear your comments and opinions… Please be respectful to everybody . Political discussions tend to get heated and that is just fine, however, please remember to treat everybody with the same respect you expect.

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 10:17 AM
mycouponsgreg's Avatar
MC Prez
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 400
Blog Entries: 5
Angry Wonderful Clinton call on our toll-free number

I hate SPAM in my email box.
I hate calls from telemarketers.

I really, REALLY, REALLY hate when 8:15 long messages get left on my business phone, especially when I have to pay for the darn call because it came in via our toll-free number.

I just got a loooong message with a Clinton recording. Has anybody else gotten these calls? I wouldn't vote for her even if it was the choice of Hillary or Satan, but a call like this really makes me angry.

A quick google search on the phone number revealed:
(616) 980-2604

Evidently candidates from both parties have engaged this telemarketing firm. Nobody who engages in this kind of crap, whichever side of the aisle they are on, is qualified to be President of the United States of America. Period. From reading through the thread posted above quickly, it looks like Clinton, Edwards and Romney have all used this firm. They are pretty stupid to do so, because I bet it makes everybody who gets one of these calls as POed as I am.
__________________
After all these years, I see that I was mistaken about Eve in the beginning; it is better to live outside the Garden with her than inside it without her.
Mark Twain
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 11:18 AM
IrishBlonde's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,706
https://esupport.fcc.gov/form1088/1088hform.do

complain to the FCC
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 11:42 AM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,670
I expect the candidates themselves don't have a clue that this type of stuff is going on and probably won't know until someone high up in their campaign staff either gets a call on one of their personal phones or enough people complain directly to the candidate's staff. If I got a call on my home phone in the middle of the night, as apparently some people have, I would be beyond furious and the campaign staff would know about it.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 12:39 PM
truble2301's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 14,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by mycouponsgreg View Post
I wouldn't vote for her even if it was the choice of Hillary or Satan, but a call like this really makes me angry.

Gosh, too bad Satan is currently serving as Vice President and says he won't be running for president.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 12:42 PM
mycouponsgreg's Avatar
MC Prez
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 400
Blog Entries: 5
Good one. I'm kinda surprised you didn't say something like, too bad he is currently already serving his second term and isn't eligible to run again.
__________________
After all these years, I see that I was mistaken about Eve in the beginning; it is better to live outside the Garden with her than inside it without her.
Mark Twain
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 01:33 PM
marilynk's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 7,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by mycouponsgreg View Post
I wouldn't vote for her even if it was the choice of Hillary or Satan, but a call like this really makes me angry.

They are pretty stupid to do so, because I bet it makes everybody who gets one of these calls as POed as I am.
And for some reason--we get not only calls from the Republican party, we get mail (yes, actual physical paper mail in our mailbox!), and SPAM in our email accounts.

There are no Republicans that I feel are capable of running this country (except maybe running further and further into the ground)--but, I just laugh and laugh when I get the stuff from the Republicans as their campaigns dollars are being wasted when the use them to advertise to me. You have to put crap in perspective. In the grand scheme of things, this kind of stuff isn't something that tinkles me off....

The 10 o'clock at night automated call to get me to buy a satellite? That's annoying
__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 02:32 PM
mom2twins2's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: VA
Posts: 4,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by mycouponsgreg View Post
I wouldn't vote for her even if it was the choice of Hillary or Satan, but a call like this really makes me angry.

I thought they were the same person!! Or at least brother and sister!!

It is annoying to get these calls and just think -- it's just the beginning! We get them from both sides (mail and phone calls) and it's just a waste of money. I just rip the mail up when it's from a Democrat and know they're wasting their money on me! If it's a Republican I'll look it over to see what it says. I still haven't made up my mind yet as for the Republican to vote for. McCain is looking pretty good right now.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 02:57 PM
truble2301's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 14,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by mycouponsgreg View Post
Good one. I'm kinda surprised you didn't say something like, too bad he is currently already serving his second term and isn't eligible to run again.
Nah, Bush is just Satan's little helper. Cheney is the devil himself.
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 04:04 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
Pope John Paul thought that Bush was the Antichrist. I think that it does look more and more like it's Cheney.

As far as money goes, the RNC has received very few contributions and will probably only be able to help out in a few races for Congress. Of the GOP, only Romney has the means to continue after Florida. He also has the fortunes to do so.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 05:46 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
Of the GOP, only Romney has the means to continue after Florida. He also has the fortunes to do so.
Just a little info.
Ron Paul has on hand more funds then any other GOP candidate. With over $1.2million(and counting) donated today from average citizens..not big companies. He has not taken the GOP matching funds.He has several million left over from last quarter. Ron Paul has the means to keep going, because new donors are always donating.

Romey has so far has put in $17 million +of his own money into his own campaign. I wonder how much he is willing to spend of his wealth. Supposely he is just loaning it to his campaign, so when funds do come in he gets paid back.

I just saw an article that 70% of people do not watch the debates, they do not listen to any speeches.
People do not like the phone calls, or the things sent in the mail.

So just what type of "campaging" do people like? TV ads, newspaper ads, billboards,mailing, etc.
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:01 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestlayne View Post
Just a little info.

So just what type of "campaging" do people like? TV ads, newspaper ads, billboards,mailing, etc.
1.2 million isn't going to go far. Hillary has over 20 million and they say she has to be careful spending. And she, too, is still receiving money from supporters.
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:14 PM
sharkiz1's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Land of the Sky
Posts: 2,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
1.2 million isn't going to go far. Hillary has over 20 million and they say she has to be careful spending. And she, too, is still receiving money from supporters.

I agree 1.2 million isnt much. I heard that John Edwards has spent 2 million just in the last few weeks on TV ads in South Carolina. I can totally believe this. I am in NC but 2 of the major network stations I get are out of S.C. and I probably see 10-15 of his ads every day. Also was seeing Fred Thompson ads just about as much. I think they said Clinton has spent around $800,000 so far in SC and Obama around $1 million. And I definitely expect the frequency of the Clinton and Obama ads to pick up this week. Ron Paul is little league compared to Clinton and Obama. Thank goodness.
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2008, 06:20 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
1.2 million isn't going to go far. Hillary has over 20 million and they say she has to be careful spending. And she, too, is still receiving money from supporters.
That is just what he has got donated today..he still has millions on hand. These donations today are from people mainly donate $10 and up.
Plus Ron Paul grassroots (not the campaign) pays for the other advertising such as the blimp, billboards, newspaper ads. The grassroots..have different things you can donate to that does not go to the campaign. Very interesting that so many average people are funding the efforts to get him elected.
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 08:08 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 163
the klintoons are already at their dirty tricks again, i like when huckabee plays the guitar, we do the dance around the house.
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 11:22 AM
truble2301's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 14,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProudUSAMama View Post
the klintoons are already at their dirty tricks again, i like when huckabee plays the guitar, we do the dance around the house.
At least the Clintons can spell.
Sponsored Links
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 11:25 AM
usnamom's Avatar
Premium Member - Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by truble2301 View Post
At least the Clintons can spell.

LOLOLOL nice, truble, nice!
__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 02:57 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestlayne View Post
That is just what he has got donated today..he still has millions on hand. These donations today are from people mainly donate $10 and up.
Plus Ron Paul grassroots (not the campaign) pays for the other advertising such as the blimp, billboards, newspaper ads. The grassroots..have different things you can donate to that does not go to the campaign. Very interesting that so many average people are funding the efforts to get him elected.
Obama has gotten a lot of support from $10 donors as well. I'm in SC and have seen a ton of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama ads. I have seen Huckabee and McCain ads, but not one for Paul.

It's a pity really that it takes so much money to run for president.

Edwards will be broke after SC. Huckabee and Giuliani are almost broke. McCain hasn't got much money left. Romney has a lot and could afford to fund his own campaign. Thompson has dropped out.

I won't call white supremacists average folks.
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 03:12 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
Obama has gotten a lot of support from $10 donors as well. I'm in SC and have seen a ton of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama ads. I have seen Huckabee and McCain ads, but not one for Paul.

It's a pity really that it takes so much money to run for president.

Edwards will be broke after SC. Huckabee and Giuliani are almost broke. McCain hasn't got much money left. Romney has a lot and could afford to fund his own campaign. Thompson has dropped out.

I won't call white supremacists average folks.
Well, I made a $100 donation to Ron Paul last night and I am NOT a white supremacist.
Over 40,553 people have donation to his campaign since 01/01/2008.

Once again are you trying to say ONLY white supremacist would vote for him, blacks only for obama, women only for Clinton. Come on we all know better than that.
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 03:25 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
I certainly do know better. But, I also know why white sepremacists are so supportive of Paul.

I don't really think that Paul is running to win. I think he's just trying to bring issues into the forum much like Nader has.
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 03:49 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
I certainly do know better. But, I also know why white sepremacists are so supportive of Paul.

I don't really think that Paul is running to win. I think he's just trying to bring issues into the forum much like Nader has.
And I guess you know why the black people are so supportive of Obama. You can't have it both ways.
I am glad Ron Paul is bringing out the issues..otherwise nothing would ever been said about the economy.

Everybody is way to focused on the race, gender question..America is going downhill fast and we need someone that will try to fix the problem. Not add more problems by promising more ...the US is going bankrupt.

YouTube - US_Government_Immorality_Will_Lead_to_Bankruptcy
"David M. Walker is the current Comptroller General of the United States, and as such heads the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) and is in effect the USA's chief accountability officer"
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 04:27 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
I do agree that the country is on the brink of a downhill slide that we may not recover from any time soon. The economy would still be in the spotlight. We haven't begun to see the tip of the mortgage mess yet. Look for that around the fall of this year.

I am quite familiar with why we are in this financial hole. All contracts have been steered to party loyalists. Most of the contracts were awarded on a cost plus basis and no bids taken to boot. That's how we overspent so badly in Iraq as well as in Katrina.

I don't support Paul. I don't want to get rid of public education, or put every aspect of our lives in the hands of private firms,and he has a racist history. As you have already pointed out, most people do not watch the debates. They will make uninformed decisions based on 15 second soundbites and commercials. Paul simply doesn't have vast amounts of cash required to be heard.
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 05:13 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
I do agree that the country is on the brink of a downhill slide that we may not recover from any time soon. The economy would still be in the spotlight. We haven't begun to see the tip of the mortgage mess yet. Look for that around the fall of this year.

I am quite familiar with why we are in this financial hole. All contracts have been steered to party loyalists. Most of the contracts were awarded on a cost plus basis and no bids taken to boot. That's how we overspent so badly in Iraq as well as in Katrina.

I don't support Paul. I don't want to get rid of public education, or put every aspect of our lives in the hands of private firms,and he has a racist history. As you have already pointed out, most people do not watch the debates. They will make uninformed decisions based on 15 second soundbites and commercials. Paul simply doesn't have vast amounts of cash required to be heard.
Ron Paul's position on Education
Ron Paul 2008 Issues Education
"The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources."
"Many parents have already shown their desire to be free of federal control by either enrolling their children in private schools or homeschooling them. And students enrolled in these alternatives have consistently performed better and tested higher than those in state-run schools."

I do not want every aspect of our lives run by the Federal government. That certainly is not freedom!
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2008, 06:00 PM
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,236
I think if you're willing to turn everything over to the private sector, then Ron Paul is your man. He has no chance of winning, however.
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2008, 05:45 PM
Penny's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by forrestlayne View Post
Ron Paul's position on Education
Ron Paul 2008 Issues Education
"The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources."
"Many parents have already shown their desire to be free of federal control by either enrolling their children in private schools or homeschooling them. And students enrolled in these alternatives have consistently performed better and tested higher than those in state-run schools."

I do not want every aspect of our lives run by the Federal government. That certainly is not freedom!
I know very little about Ron Paul, I did click on your link and read the information. Correct me if I am wrong, but he wants no federal subsidies for schools? I would think that if everything was left to the state to pay for then all our local and state taxes would be much higher and our teachers pay would be lower without the federal subsidies Also, subsidized programs like free breakfast and lunch programs would be cut out, which would raise the price of school meals and cut out free meals for the kids that rely on those meals and the fact that might be all they get for the day. (Now I am not a big fan of public assistance programs, etc, but I have worked in the DHS system and Mental Health System and know for a fact that there are many kids who rely on these type programs and I would not want to see any kid go hungry, they get to do that enough at home). Our local schools also get goverment funding on the amount of miltary personels childrens who attend, which we live in a huge miltary community, so our funding would go down more. We also get government funding for American Indian students that attend our school, so we would lose that also. In addition to many federal grants for the arts, extra curricular learning programs, summer funded programs, we could lose all those too. I just see taking the federal subsidies out as a bad thing. I would probably have to home school at that point, because our school system wouldn't be able to afford anything, I think our teachers are already ranked the 48th or something like that as far as worst paid.

I cannot believe I am even posting here, I said I wasn't coming here to this board and here I am, LOL.
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2008, 07:56 PM
forrestlayne's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penny View Post
I know very little about Ron Paul, I did click on your link and read the information. Correct me if I am wrong, but he wants no federal subsidies for schools? I would think that if everything was left to the state to pay for then all our local and state taxes would be much higher and our teachers pay would be lower without the federal subsidies Also, subsidized programs like free breakfast and lunch programs would be cut out, which would raise the price of school meals and cut out free meals for the kids that rely on those meals and the fact that might be all they get for the day. (Now I am not a big fan of public assistance programs, etc, but I have worked in the DHS system and Mental Health System and know for a fact that there are many kids who rely on these type programs and I would not want to see any kid go hungry, they get to do that enough at home). Our local schools also get goverment funding on the amount of miltary personels childrens who attend, which we live in a huge miltary community, so our funding would go down more. We also get government funding for American Indian students that attend our school, so we would lose that also. In addition to many federal grants for the arts, extra curricular learning programs, summer funded programs, we could lose all those too. I just see taking the federal subsidies out as a bad thing. I would probably have to home school at that point, because our school system wouldn't be able to afford anything, I think our teachers are already ranked the 48th or something like that as far as worst paid.

I cannot believe I am even posting here, I said I wasn't coming here to this board and here I am, LOL.
It would be a gradual thing. He does not want to immediately do away with the Dept of education. What he wants to do is cut it back.
It really is not that new of an idea.
This is been a platform that the Republican party has ran on during the 80's (Ronald Regan time)" and 90's "In 1996, the Republican Party made abolition of the Department a cornerstone of their campaign promises, calling it an inappropriate federal intrusion into local, state, and family affairs. The GOP platform read: "The Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning."


Free luches are not from the Dept of Education.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, through its Food and Nutrition Service (formerly the Food and Consumer Service), administers the program at the Federal level. At the State level, the NSLP is usually administered by State education agencies, which operate the program through agreements with local school districts.

It would probably cost less if the states had more control over their schools. With most things when the Federal government gets involved it costs more and more. The bugets keep getting bigger but with less good results. I have never understood why the government thinks the more money you spend on something the better it will be.

I do homeschool my children so I do have a different perspective on issues concerning schools.
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2008, 08:08 PM
Penny's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 6,105
Thank you for the response. We live in a small town (pop. 1200) and we have a great school, but as far as local taxes coming from our own small town, we would be doomed if we had to totally support our one school (grade, junior high, high). I would be worried that the state would not have that kind of money. Already in towns nearby, there have been some schools that have had to close or incorporate with other districts for lack of funds. If we lived in a large city or even if my child (last one at home) had to attend school in the town I work in 25 miles away, I would homeschool her myself. My 2 older children did attend larger schools and if I had to do it over again I would have taught them at home, one did well, the gifted and talented one did not do well, both did attend college though so I guess it worked out ok.
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2008, 07:04 PM
kathytheshopper's Avatar
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvmj View Post
Pope John Paul thought that Bush was the Antichrist. I think that it does look more and more like it's Cheney.

As far as money goes, the RNC has received very few contributions and will probably only be able to help out in a few races for Congress. Of the GOP, only Romney has the means to continue after Florida. He also has the fortunes to do so.
I just did a google search on this. It seems there are more articles on the late Pope John Paul II BEING the antichrist than George Bush or Dick Cheney. Some even think he is coming back to be the next pope after Pope Benedict but it will really be Satan! There are lots of weird thoughts out there....... Stop the dissing and move ahead.. Thanks!
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 AM.



Ad Management by RedTyger