QOTW

Wow. No excrement, Einstein!

Most Liberals owe their success to others and are very strained in the ways of common sense, that's just a fact of life.

What a croc of lies!

That is controlling the spin of the facts. Typical liberal and MSM bias. Putting out news that is not based in fact but on perception and emotion.

Read the facts!

http://politicalvelcraft.org/2011/11/26/forbes-top-20-richest-1-living-in-america-17-of-the-top-20-are-democrats-surprised-they-are-the-big-liars-the-party-of-wall-street-the-party-of-ge-the-party-of-communism-and-the-p/

and most liebrals make their living taking the successful person's money and giving it to themselves...what they fail to realize is that when we run out of successful businesses, they'll be going broke too, but the concept of 'killing the goose that lays the golden eggs' is lost on them'...they'd rather send it away than provide for it.

You can be certain that Obama has no problems understanding successful people who shovel money his way. What he has trouble understanding is how someone can be successful without being a crony.

Rush says he sees a Romney landslide in the cards, Levin thinks Obama is going to win. Who's right? I hope Levin is wrong but his argument is that Rove's electoral projection map shows Obama ahead.

I think Daley just called Democrats losers.

"They think he's like Marx or something,"

We talking Groucho or Harpo?

Rabbit ..... yer right.

glacierman@3:52

The data at your link, and the Bill Daley quote aren't really in conflict. Your link refers to the ultra-rich, people like $oro$ and Buffet, and the high-rollers on Wall Street. These people have really ceased to be businessmen, and have become rent-seekers, cronies of the government, who get money-making opportunities handed to them because they fund the Democratic Party. No different from the Power Corp. cabal here in Canada.

Real businessmen, and real people who are successful don't want to kiss political butt to get money handed to them; they just want the government to get out of the way. And there are one hell of lot more modestly successful business people out there than there are the super-rich.

The difference in wealth makes an informative contrast with obozo and Romney.
A lot of Republicans are already rich when they turn to government service, which is fine by me because I don't think not having money makes you more noble or smarter. For Democrats, on the other hand, it's their only chance to "make their bones" and get rich during and afterward. And don't you dare point that out!!!!

gordinkneehill at April 27, 2012 5:47 PM

Gordo,

The secret to the success of those "ultra-rich" is that they use other peoples money to derive more wealth for themselves. They don't spend their own money unless they get a tax write-off or write-down which offsets the capital expenditure.

They also never give any of their money away, they just accumulate other people's money. They set up foundations and tax shelters, then solicit public money to support their foundations. You and I give to those because they are helping the needy and poor because it is the right thing to do, but they only "pledge" money. Or else they build the infrastructure for said foundations and get tax receipts for those charities.

And by the way, those on the list are not the wealthiest, they are just the listed wealthiest. There are far wealthier, they just are more stealth about their profiles in the world.

"The president has a very difficult time with the business community."

You don't suppose this is because Obama has been blaming and demonizing the business community from the moment he took office, do you?

Gee, so Mr Daley laments that people who make decisions, using accurate data, about how to invest their own money don't trust someone who makes all his economic decisions using the failed fairytales of Marxism as a guide?

What a surprise!

Lets face facts,Obama has a difficult time understanding why successful business people can t see the world with the same logic and expertise as an experienced community organizer does.These people have a duty to accept superior intellect when confronted with it.The entitlement crowd and the rest of the democrats have been blessed with the insight to see the truth,the rest of you will soon be re-educated.

Rush says he sees a Romney landslide in the cards, Levin thinks Obama is going to win. Who's right? I hope Levin is wrong but his argument is that Rove's electoral projection map shows Obama ahead.
Posted by: james at April 27, 2012 4:35 PM

As a certain recent election should tell you,james, the msm is never ever to be trusted; especially their so called polls!

What the msm does not tell you is that the only man running in the American election that can win for the American people (against left/right big gument) is Dr. Ron Paul. Romney and Oh bama are the same dish served on a different plate.

Tangentially related: Mark Steyn pens an absolutely awesome column on Obama's dog-eating and other unsavoury habits, with shout-outs to Jim Treacher and also to Kate! Check it out:

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/dog-351332-romney-obama.html

Jema, polls often underestimate the size of the Republican turnout.

Second, it's only the end of April. There's an enormous amount of campaign between now and November. And from the financial results from the 1st quarter and what looks like its happening in this quarter, there's no joy in Donkeyville for jobs and growth numbers for most of this year. The consumer spending boom over the last two quarters has mostly been in durable goods, and that's about over.

Weak as they are, if the jobs numbers slip or even stagnate, Obama is done.
If interest rates surge during the third quarter because of difficult government bond sales, he's done. And right now you couldn't pay me enough to touch any 10 year bond, even Canadian ones.
If Iran blows up on him, he's done. Think this guy is ever going to win a national security argument?

If "O"wins, gold will hit $1,000 an ounce.

Did I say ounce?
I meant gram.