Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #32 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
why do people criticize romney for having alot of money? he earned every bit of it and knows way more about managing money than obama.
#76 to #32 - satchamo (11/09/2012) [-]
Neither of those idiots belong in the white house. Both political parties are full of **** . Before this country can even start to gain back what it has lost those need to be dealt with.
User avatar #72 to #32 - deerbeer (11/09/2012) [-]
He would probably use his managing money skills to gain more money for himself and his busyness partners. He doesn't give a **** about America and neither does Obama.
#68 to #32 - shazain (11/09/2012) [-]
The crticism is not about his money. It's about how he claims he can improve the economy and he backs it up by telling people he's a successful businessman. Being a businessman has nothing to do with running the economy of a country. It's an entirely different ball game. On the country level, it's macroeconomics, not microeconomics. And that's the only thing he had under his belt backing him up for running for president. Obama has a lot more like killing Bin Laden, etc.
#65 to #32 - lamaswithhats (11/09/2012) [-]
I agree 100% John Mcain was even wealthier than Romney becuase his second wife was an heir to the Heinz company. The liberals had not dirt on Romney so they critisized him for being sucessful! He ran a muliti-million dollar company(Bain Capital) and he could've run a country. It's shame he lost the election now it's four more years of **** . I probably got a sea of red thumbs for saying something conservative on FJ. I love FJ the only problem is most people are Liberals.
#94 to #65 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Yeah, a company that made a fortune for him buying American owned companies that employed Americans and moving the jobs to China and India and selling them to the highest bidder.   
   
He did the same thing with government contracts as Governor.   
   
Yeah, such a great guy.
Yeah, a company that made a fortune for him buying American owned companies that employed Americans and moving the jobs to China and India and selling them to the highest bidder.

He did the same thing with government contracts as Governor.

Yeah, such a great guy.
User avatar #129 to #94 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Under Romney, Bain actually created more jobs than what it shipped overseas.

It's far worse if a company goes under completely and all jobs are lost. Bain reinvested in failing companies and turned them into healthy companies that could expand and create more jobs in the process.

But it's not like he did this out of the goodness of his heart, he obviously made money in the process. The job creation was largely a byproduct of Bain's work.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303292204577519293959381060.html
#134 to #129 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Yeah, only most of those jobs where in India and China.   
   
So yeah, doesn't count.   
   
And buying an American owned company and selling it to Foreign nationals doesn't matter either does it?   
   
I guess it doesn't matter that he moved GOVERNMENT JOBS to China and India either, does it?   
   
Or that he was one of the pioneers of the outsourcing movement in the 90's which sent most of our manufacturing (you know, the bread and butter of the middle class and what made the American Economy the powerhouse that it was) to other countries, but that doesn't count either, just that he wouldn't let those gays marry or serve in our military.
Yeah, only most of those jobs where in India and China.

So yeah, doesn't count.

And buying an American owned company and selling it to Foreign nationals doesn't matter either does it?

I guess it doesn't matter that he moved GOVERNMENT JOBS to China and India either, does it?

Or that he was one of the pioneers of the outsourcing movement in the 90's which sent most of our manufacturing (you know, the bread and butter of the middle class and what made the American Economy the powerhouse that it was) to other countries, but that doesn't count either, just that he wouldn't let those gays marry or serve in our military.
#135 to #134 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
No, those jobs were here in the US. The article does a fair job of examining the roles of a private equity firm and how it effects job growth.

He balanced the budget of a state that is solidly to the left. What he did has governor WORKED and was done in a bipartisan manner. The same cannot be said of the president.

Outsourcing is a result of economics. The jobs go where they can be done cheapest. An exodus of manufacturing jobs occurs whenever the government (usually via taxes) or economic conditions drive up the cost of manufacturing in the US.

You are looking at only a portion of the picture and insist that's all there is to see. I can't decide if this narrow-mindedness is borne out of ignorance or active denial.

As for your statement about gays in the military, I literally have no idea what you're talking about.
#136 to #135 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Part of his platform was to make it illegal to serve in the military if you are gay.

And try again, the reason he pioneered outsourcing is because some stupid Chinese villager who's never worked for money will take home the equivalent of three dollars a day for a job that an American will do for a living wage.

In other words, he (and others like him) moved jobs overseas because they are greedy bastards who want to get away with paying people less to do the same job.

And think again about his record as Governor, the state that he was in charge of VOTED AGAINST HIM in the election. Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because they are worse off than they were when he got in office?



Never mind the voter fraud that Republicans were a part of in almost every swing state, or Jim Crow styled voting laws targeted at keeping the poor and minorities from voting passed by Republican governors (with the stated goal of helping Mitt steal the Whitehouse).

Lets not touch on a completely ******** economic plan (defined as such, using cleaner language, by several independent firms that did studies on what he said), or the FACT that he gave GOVERNMENT contracts to foreigners while Governor.

Naw, he made money being a venture capitalist and buying companies and dismantling them, but he made money, which means he MUST know how to make our country better!

Stop drinking the Fox Noise koolaid man.
User avatar #137 to #136 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
You really are much more close minded than I initially thought.

You really do not understand how private equity firms work, do you? They're hired by businesses to keep those businesses from going under.

Litterally everything else you stated is wrong:

In December, 2011, Romney told the Des Moines Register that now that the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy has been repealed, "I’m not planning on reversing that at this stage. I was not comfortable making the change during a period of conflict, due to the complicating features of a new program in the middle of two wars going on, but those wars are winding down, and moving in that direction at this stage no longer presents that problem.”

Vote fraud? Jim Crow laws? Are you crazy? Did you watch the election results. NONE of this happened.

Romney's economic plan was based of the Paul Ryan plan, a plan which would eliminate the federal debt and deficit and stabilize social security and medicare (as verified by the CBO).

Romney knows economics. He fixed the budget in a state that votes heavily Democratic. He understands why businesses leave the country and what it takes to get them to make jobs.

I get my information from a variety of sources as to filter out any bias. You obviously don't and live in a narrow minded world that is probably dominated by MSNBC and the daily show. You see everything through blue-tinted glasses and it's quite sad.
#139 to #137 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
And Bain wasn't an equity firm, they are a Venture Capitalist firm, only a step above the hostile takeover firms of the late 80's and early 90's, which means they buy stock in a company that they think they can take over and manage differently, or just own, and make money from it, or (more often) they purchase ownership of a company then dismantle it, or change something about the business plan, and sell it for a profit.

Or in the Bain Capitol way, buy a company, outsource jobs, sell to foreign nationals, start over with the next company.
#141 to #139 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Bain Capital is an American alternative asset management and financial services company based in Boston, Massachusetts. It specializes in private equity, venture capital, credit and public market investments. Bain invests across a broad range of industry sectors and geographic regions. As of early 2012, the firm managed approximately $66 billion of investor capital across its various investment platforms.   
   
Again, you only see half the picture because it suits your viewpoint. Welcome to the real world. I encourage you to learn a little economics so that you might understands the implications of a growing business.
Bain Capital is an American alternative asset management and financial services company based in Boston, Massachusetts. It specializes in private equity, venture capital, credit and public market investments. Bain invests across a broad range of industry sectors and geographic regions. As of early 2012, the firm managed approximately $66 billion of investor capital across its various investment platforms.

Again, you only see half the picture because it suits your viewpoint. Welcome to the real world. I encourage you to learn a little economics so that you might understands the implications of a growing business.
#144 to #141 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Ah, so the little girl who wrote Mitt a letter asking him not to outsource her mother's job during the election, that was made up?

How about having people arrested for protesting their jobs being sent overseas by Bain?

Try looking at the whole picture yourself sometime.
User avatar #146 to #144 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Never said it didn't happen, it's a part of a much larger picture you continue to ignore.

it's only a small part of what Bain did, fool.
#151 to #146 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
A small part?

How small? Like 22% of all investments made by Bain going bankrupt under bain management?

Gee, I bet you didn't know that about your hero.
User avatar #153 to #151 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Not my hero, just speaking the truth.

The uneducated filth that spews from your mouth seems to indicate that you think ALL Bain does is ship jobs overseas.

I did in fact know that some investments went bad, thats the nature of investing. I even know they profited off some of the failures.
#155 to #153 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
I never said that was all he did, or all bain did, but its a fact that Bain with Mitt Romney (at the time) as sole owner, president of the company, and entire board of directors (yes, he was the entire board, not a member of, not the head of, the entire board), was one of the first companies to start the outsourcing movement, a fact you can't refute.

You also can't (and haven't) argued with the FACT that he sent GOVERNMENT jobs overseas.

But yet again, I love the fantasy world you've made for yourself.

Is Regan still alive in your world? Is he the Pope now? Do pigs fly in this mystical world you've made for yourself?
#138 to #137 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
really, did you not see any of the articles about "voter fraud laws", which required people to buy id's, something that is unconstitutional, which governors (who passed such laws) admitted were targeted at lowering turn out from those who were more likely to vote for Obama?

Yet he promised Teabaggers time and again that not only would he work on a marriage amendment, but that he would put back into place laws against gays serving our country, but would also refuse any sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

As for their economic plan, it boiled down to "Everyone gets a 20% tax break, and the military gets billions (that they said they didn't need), and it'll balance with my Mormon Magic!" The only cuts he offered were to medicare/medicaid, which he wanted to turn into privet voucher programs (because letting people who's first concern is profit decide if I can receive medicine or surgery needed to save my life is a great idea!), or foodstamps and other aid programs.

As for News Channels, all of them are biased and anyone who thinks otherwise is retarded.

As for Paul Ryan, the guy who cosponsored exactly two bills, one of which was to redefine rape, so that date rape or any kind of non violent rape (part of the law were defining it as "forcible rape" which including the woman having to receive some significant injury) wouldn't be considered illegal any more, and didn't sponsor a single bill on his own, the same guy who wants to ax ANY and ALL funds to aid college students with their tuition and books, well, I think that about covers that ******* .

And he promised that his plan will balance the books by 2025, where as Obama's will balance by 2018.

Never mind that Trickle Down was what got us into this situation in the first place, and every single one of Romney's economic advisers worked with the Bush kim jongistration (you know, the guy your party likes to pretend doesn't exist, who was prez when everything went to **** ).
User avatar #140 to #138 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
There is nothing unconstitutional about being required to to show that you meet the requirements to vote. Nearly every proposed Voter ID law has included a mechanism to get IDs to the citizens who don't already have one (though most do).

I quoted you his policy on DADT, but you're trying to refute it. That shows the extent of how partisan and willfully blind you really are.

Economic plan: Taxes stay at SAME rates as they are now. I'm much more closer to the military than you are, and it's fairly obvious the funding isn't "unneeded". Social programs take up the largest part of the federal budget, so by law of probability, they'd be subject to the most cuts. The medicare plan wasn't voucher, and even then switching to it is OPTIONAL.

Paul Ryan: Paul Ryan has sponsored his budget plan year after year. You probably don't know a damn thing his budget does, so you're hardly qualified to offer any sort of critique on him.

Obama balancing the budget by 2018?! He hasn't even HAD a budget for at least THREE YEARS. Congress has simply passed continuing resolutions to use the same budget from a previous year (2009 I believe). He's increased the deficit AND the debt (by nearly DOUBLE). He's done NOTHING to fix the debt or balance the budget, both have only grown larger.

What got us into this mess was the housing market, nothing to do with trickle down.

At least under Bush we didn't have a 16 trillion dollar debt, $4 gasoline, 8% unemployment, and more people on welfare than ever before. He wasn't a very good president, but Obama makes him look extremely competent.

The amount of ignorance you display is astounding. Don't be a pawn in this two party game.
#143 to #140 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
oh, and something I missed;

It is unconstitutional to require people to spend money to vote, and when you get an ID from any state agency that fits the requirements of the laws (picture, state issued, ect) it costs money.

There for, having to BUY an id to vote=being required to spend money to vote= unconstitutional.

Try knowing a bit more about the subject before you debate it.
User avatar #147 to #143 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
They were free ID programs. And still; no state has in a required ID program as of now. The closest is PA, which asked to see them, but did not require it to vote.
#150 to #147 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Really? where is the sauce for that, because every state ID I've seen requires you to purchase it.

You bitch about me not giving sources, but you haven't been on everything either and have spouted more than your fair share of ******** and lies.
User avatar #156 to #150 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Variety of ways states are ensuring citizens who cannot get an id can vote.

You need to login to view this link
http://tnsos.org/Press/story.php?item=305
You need to login to view this link
#157 to #156 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Which require IDs that one has to purchase, or proof of employment, or other items that someone who has the right to vote, might not have.

Which would require them to purchase a state ID.

HERP DA DERP!
#142 to #140 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
So I quote what he told his supporters, and I'm fully of **** ?

Seriously dude, I present you with fact after fact, what he has said, and yeah, you ignore it.

Try not being so retarded.

And Romney said in the first debate that EVERYONE would get a 20% tax deduction.

Of course with him flip flopping on every issue, I understand how hard it is for you to keep track of what he was going to do.

And by the way, the debt was over 10 trillion before Obama got into office, then he spent a couple years trying not to be a partisan jack ass just cause dems controlled the house and senate, then had to deal with another two years of republicans voting against everything he tried to do, to make him look bad.

Gee, try learning some facts behind your statistics.
User avatar #148 to #142 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
I made a small mistake: When I stated he doubled the debt, I actually meant the deficit.
User avatar #145 to #142 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
No you make up something, provide no source, and are full of **** .

The tax deduction is based on the debate surrounding the Bush tax cuts. Obama wanted to keep them for all but the upper class, Romney wanted to keep them for everyone.

6 trillion in new debt in under 4 years is inexcusable.

And a lot of the extra debt was borne from the partisan stimulus bills he passed. He spent the first two years passing whatever he desired, and the next two complaining about how he couldn't do that anymore.

Consistently mistakes positions and facts
Lectures me about learning facts.
Get your head out of your ass and look around.
#149 to #145 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Lmao! I love the fantasy world you built for yourself.

Tell me, is Rush Limbaugh a thoughtful, bleeding heart, gentle man who spends his free time working at a soup kitchen in your little world?

And, while I haven't provided source (I can admit that) simply because I don't care to put the time in to look up every little fact, I'm sorry, it doesn't change that they are facts.

and 6 trillion in debt, while fighting two wars, and an economic disaster the likes of which we haven't seen sense the great depression (two convenient facts you've left out time and again), well that isn't good, but its not as bad as you make it out.

Also, its closer to five trillion, sense the debt was at 10.5 Trillion when Obama took office.

Also, in the debate he was quite clear about everyone "Getting a 20% tax cut".

He didn't say "bush era tax cuts", no, he said a 20% tax cut.

Herp da derp!
User avatar #152 to #149 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Whatever drivel you choose to sputter does not equate to fact. I gave you the official position, THAT is the fact.

#154 to #152 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Really, so Romney telling his supporters that he wants to make a marriage amendment, outlaw abortion, axe the federal college aid system, turn over social security to privet investment firms, and turn medicare/medicaid into voucher systems (which means you get a voucher and get to take it to a company who then gets to give you insurance, that all doesn't matter.

Ok, I get your logic now, it doesn't matter what a candidate says during a debate, or to his supporters, just as long as its something you don't want to hear about.

herp da derp!
User avatar #69 to #65 - Marker (11/09/2012) [-]
He wanted to raise taxes on the middle class so he could pay less. You call that good business?
#88 to #69 - anon (11/09/2012) [-]
once again I'm probably gonna get a lot of red thumbs butttt
he didn't want to raise taxes on the middle class? that was bull **** from the advertising of obama, fact check it. Obama actually wanted to raise taxes on small businesses, how do you think thats gonna go for the economy?


..sorry i live in a very liberal town and I've been keeping political opinion to myself for the past ever.
User avatar #64 to #32 - popkornking (11/09/2012) [-]
Not all of it, he inherited his company from his father. But he still earned most of it through actually being good a t business
User avatar #70 to #64 - Marker (11/09/2012) [-]
Mitt Romney spent 800 million dollars to not become president. I spent nothing and got the same result. Who's the better businessman now?
User avatar #78 to #70 - theaveragejoe (11/09/2012) [-]
NIce copying of content for your argument.
User avatar #47 to #32 - reican (11/09/2012) [-]
Because he knows how to get it, but not how to use it wisely. Sure the US would get more money, but hardly any of it would be used right.

He's like a non-jewish Jew.
User avatar #58 to #47 - PartyPanda (11/09/2012) [-]
Isn't that why the president have a cabinet of advisors?
Because there hasn't been a president that knows how to do everything?
User avatar #60 to #58 - reican (11/09/2012) [-]
Well let's see.. Romney would be for economy as Bush was for peace.

Yes a bit of warfare is always necessary, but not to overdo it and pretend to be the world sheriff.
User avatar #53 to #47 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
he doesnt know how to use it? thats obviously why he is an extremely succesful multi-millionaire
User avatar #54 to #53 - reican (11/09/2012) [-]
Because he only know how to earn money, doesn't mean he know how to spend it well.

Like me, I earn money, but do I spend it wisely for the future? no, but I know how to make my money into more money.
#62 to #54 - iluvharrypotter (11/09/2012) [-]
>He doesn't know how to spend it well
>Mitt is rich from a successful investment firm which boomed under his leadership which has been a model for private equity ever since the 90's and owns a bunch of well known worldwide brands
>Obama's 2012 Campaign team is a few million dollars in debt while Romney's isn't.
User avatar #133 to #62 - reican (11/09/2012) [-]
What did you expect? when you got a Jew disguised as a mormon
User avatar #55 to #54 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
and how do you know he doesnt know how to spend it well? what has he done to examplify any signs of poor money management?
#71 to #55 - kerplunking (11/09/2012) [-]
Romney's economic plan made no sense. How can you pay off the debt when you are both cutting taxes and raising spending (on the military at least)?
User avatar #131 to #71 - durkadurka (11/09/2012) [-]
Significant spending cuts in other areas of government along with fixing social security/medicare. The Paul Ryan (which you can find online easily) outlines specifics and demonstrates how it's doable.
User avatar #59 to #55 - reican (11/09/2012) [-]
lets see... 800m$ down the drainer? VS. Obama's saved jobs which will increase the money for the US? hmm...
#73 to #59 - anon (11/09/2012) [-]
When people stop looking for jobs and drop out of the work force, they are no longer counted in unemployment percentages. Obama also thinks that you can tax the rich indefinitely without consequence, while in reality, taxing more means that they have less money to produce more wealth and jobs, meaning even less tax revenue to fund his unnecessary programs and slower job growth.
#66 to #59 - anon (11/09/2012) [-]
you are aware he barely dropped unemployment below 8%, yet with his "Obamacare" coming out, hes cutting about two trillion from the military..companies that, like at my town in green-ville, is dropping a couple hundred people or more with layoffs. And thats just a small town. Hes going to bounce unemployment back up above 8% or more just to pay for it....but yea, hes investing wisely.
User avatar #46 to #32 - Chuckaholic (11/09/2012) [-]
People don't criticize him for having a lot of money. People criticize him because he was born on 3rd base but acts like he hit a triple.
User avatar #48 to #46 - iloverapingmen (11/09/2012) [-]
This is the best comment ever.
User avatar #37 to #32 - iloverapingmen (11/09/2012) [-]
No, he did not 'earn' it. He never had to work in his life.
#39 to #37 - zenethe (11/09/2012) [-]
except he has worked...
User avatar #38 to #37 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
where did you get that? CNN? you dont even know what the **** you are talking about you are just saying what you hear from others. yes he did earn his money he was and is an extremely good invester and knows how to manage money well.
User avatar #42 to #38 - iloverapingmen (11/09/2012) [-]
He live off his inheritance from his father. He was SMART admittedly, because he started Bain Capital that invested in international companies and outsourced jobs. He STILL gets money from Bain Capital.
User avatar #44 to #42 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
so yes he does earn his money and no he doesnt get inheritance possibly a little but he still earns his money. its okay though you probably are one of the many who voted for obama because you are too stupid to realize what he did to us the first 4 years.
#98 to #44 - blahdudeblah (11/09/2012) [-]
Lets see, unemployment is down, stock market is up, we're producing more oil, enough that we are now an oil exporting nation, instead of an importing nation...

oh yeah, killed Bin Laden

Saved the American Auto industry (who has now paid back almost all of the bail out money, plus interest).

Yeah, he really didn't do anything for us. Herp da derp!
User avatar #56 to #44 - iloverapingmen (11/09/2012) [-]
I voted for Gary Johnson actually. What do you mean a 'little' inheritance? His dad George Romney was ******* loaded, and left him with a huge stock portfolio.
User avatar #57 to #56 - jonfootpenis (11/09/2012) [-]
and thats a bad thing? either way he earned himself millions
#36 to #32 - anon (11/09/2012) [-]
why dont you shut the **** up
 Friends (0)