pBills

Hell at least give them a discount.

Funny.

No worries.

I have liked other candidates in the past that never became the main candidate for the party. Usually dropping out early in the race.

I am all for trying. And will agree that for years the candidates have sucked. I actually like Obama so I got lucky with that one. However, I could and still can't stand Hillary or some other democrats. And I am not what's wrong. I like the democratic party. I was just being honest about the third party concept.

And then nothing will happen with the third party idea and people will again be upset.

No help required. Great she's doing some fundraising work. That is great to help out those charities. Other than that she still sucks. So I have to like her because she did those things? Ummmmm, no. Oh and I HOPE that she is the republican nominee next go around. You bet cha!!

In the joke didn't Letterman say Bristol though? Isn't Bristol being looked at now as the poster child for abstinence? And doing People magazine, etc. isn't necessarily staying out of the spotlight. Was his jokes a bit to much, yes. I still find him funny though. Also, I don't think it's just a matter of liberals not liking her. I believe it's a bigger crowd than that.

Ok, I'll admit. I would too. As long as she didn't speak unless she called me a Maverick in bed.

God this woman just sucks. I wish that she would just go away!!! Most annoying person in the world. Damn McCain for making her popular.

Wasn't the joke about her LEGAL aged daughter?

Corrupt union system.. ok. I love how every union is corrupt in your mind. I feel for ya I really do. I am sure you believe that people in management are not corrupt too.

I have always said that. Some people, union or non-union waste money and time. Still doesn't mean that a whole group can blamed for their actions or lack of action.

From 2007: General Motors reported a $39 billion third quarter loss yesterday, the largest in the company’s history. The huge loss was the result of GM taking $38.6 billion non-cash charge, indicating a higher risk of a slow turn around that could prevent the automaker from claiming expected future tax credits. GM stated that it took the charge due to losses in the United States and Canada over the last three years, as well as Germany through the most recent quarter. The automaker also blamed the charge on “ongoing weakness” at finance company and former subsidiary GMAC. According to Automotive News, companies are allowed to keep credit on their balance sheets to offset future tax liabilities if they are found to have overpaid past taxes. But U.S. accounting rules state that companies expecting to keep losing money cannot carry the the tax credits indefinitely, and must claim them at some point. GM Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said that he doesn’t expect the loss to affect the day-to-day activities at GM. “It doesn’t have any impact at all,” he said. “I would encourage people not to overreact in a negative way to it.” GM’s losses in North America totaled $247 million last quarter — not including the charge — up from a $667 million loss the year before. “We continue to implement the key elements of our North America turnaround strategy, and these initiatives are driving steady improvement in our financial results, despite challenging North America market conditions,” Wagoner said. GM’s 49% stake in GMAC lost the automaker a reported $757 million last quarter. GM failed to mention when it expects to turn a profit. ---------------- DETROIT (Reuters) - General Motors Corp (GM.N) on Wednesday posted a record loss for the third quarter, reflecting a $39-billion charge related to unclaimed tax credits and a loss at its former finance subsidiary GMAC. The largest U.S. automaker posted a net loss of $39 billion, or $68.85 per share, compared with a loss of $147 million, or 26 cents per share a year earlier. <end quote> Of that $39 billion, however, only a small part was really an operating loss; that same news article states:

Zing.

Just one person moron. Add up the other bloated salaries. You think he was the only getting a huge raise?

Negative. Interesting fact: In 2007, G. Richard Wagoner raked in $19,761,874 in total compensation.* In the previous year the CEO of this company made $11,041,656. Total CEO compensation has increased by 79%. Damn I was I could a 79% raise.

Yes, some people work with great companies. Yet there are many of people who don't, who would be run over by management if it wasn't for their union representation. Oh and... SUPPORT THE EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT!!! Many businesses do.

I know you meant what you said. Good for you. There is no question that cost of labor comes into this. Is it the main reason, no. What about bloated CEO and management salaries? I wonder how workers would be covered with one year of the CEO's salary?

My bad. I equated you stating the BIGGEST reason is because of the union as it's all the unions fault. You clearly meant the majority. And you are wrong. Let me add to this: I will agree that some union workers do take advantage of situations and are lazy. However, the majority I know and respect are great, not just good, but great hard working people who earn their money. Now if some of you would like to blame the union for fair salaries and benefits you must also blame management. They agreed to each and every contract.

GG how does changing of the design relate to the union workers except they are ones that will eventually place that new technology in the vehicle? The lack of design change comes from above. Those decisions are not made by the workers on the line. Now in regards to the product line... I firmly believe that GM became to crazy. GMC, Chevy, Saturn, Buick, Pontiac, Hummer, Saab, Cadillac. Just to many. They could of and should of scaled back the brands years ago when the decline began.

So much for blaming bad management or bad designs or extending car lines out to far (with bad designs). No, but you are right... it's ALL the unions fault. Damn those union members for giving back more and more and even more to help out.

Here we go... damn those Unions!! Broken record. And shouldn't the banks have been regulated better or more? Maybe they wouldn't have been in their situation.

So the one-time creation of the $700 billion TARP fund came under Bush's watch?

One does not have to listen to a show to know whether the person is ranting lunatic. Sound bites can be found anywhere on the internet.