Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-07-2004, 12:15 AM   #1 (permalink)
Comment or else!!
 
KellyC's Avatar
 
Location: Home sweet home
Bush's campaign ad against Kerry, a new low?

So, I was watching MSNBC this morning and I saw another one of Bush's ad against Kerry. Opening is the same, "I'm President Bush, and I approved this message" Then the ad suddenly go black and white. Attacking Kerry and his vote to raise tax on gasoline. The ad showed a long bicycle with about 10-15 guys paddling the bike, then switched to a guy pushing the car, and to a guy emptying his pockets inside because the have no more money to pay for gas (chronologically incorrect). During the whole ad, stupid music you'd hear in black and white movies plays in the background and the animation is presented in a cartoon-like manner.

This really piss me off. Of all the campaign ads I see, this has got to be the worst one, its not even political any more, its just plain petty.
KellyC is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 01:30 AM   #2 (permalink)
Too Awesome for Aardvarks
 
stevie667's Avatar
 
Location: Angloland
you have to love americans and the way they do their whole election thing, to be honest, why can't they take a leaf from our book, find some random whore, pay her a fiver to tell the tabloid she slept with the PM/other party leader, and bam, all the work done for you.

everyone loves politics
stevie667 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 02:35 AM   #3 (permalink)
Dubya
 
Location: VA
Quote:
Originally posted by stevie667
you have to love americans and the way they do their whole election thing, to be honest, why can't they take a leaf from our book, find some random whore, pay her a fiver to tell the tabloid she slept with the PM/other party leader, and bam, all the work done for you.

everyone loves politics
Been there, done that.
__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."
Sparhawk is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 03:48 AM   #4 (permalink)
Illusionary
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Kerry did support a gasoline tax.....TEN years ago. Bush of course was busy destroying the Texas public schools and environment at that time.
__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha
tecoyah is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 03:59 AM   #5 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
I'm getting sick of the garbage Bush is putting out as well. So I started a game of it. For every Bush ad I see, I contribute another 5 bucks to kerry or Joe Hoeffel for US Senate (Pa) Or a number of other candidates I want to support.
I just gave Kerry another 50 yesterday.
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 04:02 AM   #6 (permalink)
Devoted
 
Redlemon's Avatar
 
Donor
Location: New England
FactCheck.org Bush's Gas Attack: Does Good Policy Make Bad Politics?

Factcheck.org is non-partisan, and their main page critiques every attack ad from either side and researches the statements made. Their summary of this ad:
Quote:
Kerry once voiced support for a 50-cent increase in the gasoline tax. Bush calls that "wacky," but Bush's chief economist praised the idea.
and later,
Quote:
By saying that Kerry "supported higher gasoline taxes 11 times" this ad could give you the idea that Kerry voted for 11 different tax increases, which isn't true. Actually, a close look at the Bush campaign's own count shows that nine of the eleven were about a single increase. Five of those votes came in the manuevering that led to a single 4.3-cent-per-gallon increase in 1993, as part of President Clinton's economic package. Four more votes for "higher" taxes were actually cast against Republican attempts to repeal that same 4.3-cent increase in 1996, 1998 and 2000. (On one of those votes most Republicans voted against repeal, too.) The Bush campaign also counts a vote in 2000 against a proposal to suspend the federal gasoline tax entirely for six months -- which left gasoline taxes unchanged, not "higher." The 11th instance cited by the Bush campaign wasn't a vote at all -- just that Kerry quote from 1994 that he'd once supported a 50-cent increase.
A new low? No, just a continued low. And I'm sure it will drop further from here.
__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.
Redlemon is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 04:30 AM   #7 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: NJ
How about calling for factual accuracy from everyone involved?

Bush's ads are no lower than the ads Kerry and the "independent" organizations opposing Bush are running.

FactCheck.org says that both sides have been less than completely honest in their ads. According to an article in yesterday's USA Today, they also haven't gotten around to the ads from places such as Moveon et al.

Until people call both sides on their inaccuracies the status quo will remain.
__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.
onetime2 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 05:27 AM   #8 (permalink)
Winner
 
No, Bush's 9-11 ads were the lowest thus far. These ads are just normal attack ads.
maximusveritas is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:01 AM   #9 (permalink)
Devoted
 
Redlemon's Avatar
 
Donor
Location: New England
Quote:
Originally posted by onetime2
How about calling for factual accuracy from everyone involved?

Bush's ads are no lower than the ads Kerry and the "independent" organizations opposing Bush are running.

FactCheck.org says that both sides have been less than completely honest in their ads. According to an article in yesterday's USA Today, they also haven't gotten around to the ads from places such as Moveon et al.

Until people call both sides on their inaccuracies the status quo will remain.
I've been thinking the same thing. What if every political ad had to be reviewed by someone like FactCheck prior to general release? I'm sure some people would have free speech issues with this, but I think that it would be a necessary compromise.
Redlemon is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:03 AM   #10 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
Let's get the whole answer.
Quote:
Q: Yago: Well, we know that you were into rock and roll when you were in high school, and we know that you play the guitar now. Are there any trends out there in music, or even in popular culture in general, that have piqued your interest?

K: Oh sure. I follow and I'm interested. I don't always like, but I'm interested. I mean, I never was into heavy metal. I didn't really like it. I'm fascinated by rap and by hip-hop. I think there's a lot of poetry in it. There's a lot of anger, a lot of social energy in it. And I think you'd better listen to it pretty carefully, 'cause it's important. I still find the musicians of our generation are appreciated and extraordinarily relevant to most of the young people I talk to today. When I go to a Bruce Springsteen concert or when I did go to the Grateful Dead, when Jerry Garcia was still alive, or when I'd go to the Rolling Stones, for instance, it's all gens — there's a lot of people there of all generations. And I think that young people are still growing up appreciating an awful lot of the music that came out of our generation, '60s and '70s. But I love to play guitar and hack around. I was in a band when I was in high school. I never learned to play very well, but I enjoyed it. And we had fun. So I try to stay up with it. But I still think if you wanted me to choose the greatest ... the bands from the '60s and '70s, that's still where my head is.
Slight pandering, sure. But how else is he supposed to answer a vapid question to the MTV crowd? Bush will do it too when he gets on MTV. But he is pretty much saying what he feels here. He admits that it isn't his bag, that he likes the rock from the 60's and 70's. But he acknowledges the messages that can be in legitimate rap and hip-hop and knows that you can't just take that for granted, or blow it off the way Bill O'Reilly does.

I still fail to understand how this could even be in the same ballpark as Bush's blatant misuse of 9/11 and firemen in his campaign ads though. Or the outright lying and misleading to hurt someone else.

Last edited by Superbelt; 04-07-2004 at 06:06 AM..
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:14 AM   #11 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
I wil admit, Rush's staff has improved in their photoshop ability in the past year or so.

This one almost looks real. The hand can be overlooked, but the hat and $ are just out of phase.

Maybe Rush's guys are the ones who did that picture of Kerry and Fonda standing at the podium together....
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:14 AM   #12 (permalink)
paranoid
 
Silvy's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally posted by redlemon
I've been thinking the same thing. What if every political ad had to be reviewed by someone like FactCheck prior to general release? I'm sure some people would have free speech issues with this, but I think that it would be a necessary compromise.
That would put too much strain and power into a single organisation.
If you would split it up into multiple organisations you'll get difference between them and Guy A will know he needs to submit his ad to Organisation Z because Organisation Y won't accept it.

The only way you'll keep it independent is to not make it too important. Sad, but true.
Do we believe "indendent analysts"? I don't. They're paid for their research usually by the company that comes out on the positive side of the conclusions. I believe regular people that do their research because they hold a grudge against someone or somecorp (or some 'way of (political) life). Their results are questioned and therefore need to be more accurate. Give them authority status and their credibility diminishes (IMHO).
__________________
"Do not kill. Do not rape. Do not steal. These are principles which every man of every faith can embrace. "
- Murphy MacManus (Boondock Saints)
Silvy is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:18 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally posted by redlemon
I've been thinking the same thing. What if every political ad had to be reviewed by someone like FactCheck prior to general release? I'm sure some people would have free speech issues with this, but I think that it would be a necessary compromise.
While an interesting idea, it raises lots of questions as well. I wouldn't care so much about the free speech implications (because it's only limiting a candidate's ability to say untruthful things in their campaign ads) but more about who the members of the "judgement panel" would be. Certainly it would be difficult to keep it independent and neutral.

Unfortunately it still wouldn't solve the cultural problem of the American voter. People are all too happy to shout against the other guy and believe what "their" guy is saying. The process you propose would probably help to clean up the crap in the short term (until the process is coerced by the parties) but their speeches would still be full of half truths.

Ideally I'd love to see people holding all elected officials responsible for the things they say and stop going the partisan route of "The Republicans" (or Democrats) are so bad because they made an ad that exaggerated the truth or used too liberal a definition of what a tax increase is. The first step toward that end is the press really challenging the assertions made rather than playing off them for ratings.
__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.
onetime2 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:28 AM   #14 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Re: Bush's campaign ad against Kerry, a new low?

Quote:
Originally posted by KellyC
So, I was watching MSNBC this morning and I saw another one of Bush's ad against Kerry. Opening is the same, "I'm President Bush, and I approved this message" Then the ad suddenly go black and white. Attacking Kerry and his vote to raise tax on gasoline. The ad showed a long bicycle with about 10-15 guys paddling the bike, then switched to a guy pushing the car, and to a guy emptying his pockets inside because the have no more money to pay for gas (chronologically incorrect). During the whole ad, stupid music you'd hear in black and white movies plays in the background and the animation is presented in a cartoon-like manner.

This really piss me off. Of all the campaign ads I see, this has got to be the worst one, its not even political any more, its just plain petty.
So the problem is the imagery?

Did you have a big problem with the add in 2000 which blamed Bush for the murder of the black man dragged by the pickup truck?

The FACTS of the add are true. Kerry is out there whining about the price of gas when Kerry himself tried to artificially raise the price of gas. The president doesn't control oil prices, but he can tax it.

This isn't a negative add, its the truth about a liberal taxer. Suck it up, the democrats nominated him, now they gotta live with his record.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:45 AM   #15 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
How about Cheney's record of support for artificially inflating the price of crude oil? Cheney is an intrinsicate part of the ticket.

Besides Congress, the republicans et all want to increase our gas tax. They know we need to to keep improving and maintaining our road infrastructure. Bush is telling them to hold off until after the election to do it. Obviously because he is using it as a campaign issue.

I have regular contact with my US Congress Rep Todd Platts (R), as a transportation planner. Todd, who is on the House Transportation Committee, told us specifically that Bush will not accept a gas tax increase until AFTER the election. They want to do it now because of the Transportation Equity Act bill that is in the process of reauthorization. They are coming up short for money but BUSH DOESN'T CARE. He wants his election issue.

Last edited by Superbelt; 04-07-2004 at 06:48 AM..
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:57 AM   #16 (permalink)
Devoted
 
Redlemon's Avatar
 
Donor
Location: New England
Re: Re: Bush's campaign ad against Kerry, a new low?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ustwo
The FACTS of the add are true.
"The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

The advertisement conveniently leaves out the "whole truth". Context is everything, and lack of context turns the "facts" of this ad into lies. See the factcheck.org discussion above.
__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.
Redlemon is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 07:26 AM   #17 (permalink)
paranoid
 
Silvy's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally posted by redlemon
"The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

The advertisement conveniently leaves out the "whole truth". Context is everything, and lack of context turns the "facts" of this ad into lies.
That's why I hate politics! (corporate or otherwise).
I can see through a lot of those "facts", but seeing people mindlessly act on them makes me despise the people who state these "facts".
Though in all honesty I should despise the general public for not educating themselves.
__________________
"Do not kill. Do not rape. Do not steal. These are principles which every man of every faith can embrace. "
- Murphy MacManus (Boondock Saints)
Silvy is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 07:46 AM   #18 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Re: Re: Re: Bush's campaign ad against Kerry, a new low?

Quote:
Originally posted by redlemon
"The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

The advertisement conveniently leaves out the "whole truth". Context is everything, and lack of context turns the "facts" of this ad into lies. See the factcheck.org discussion above.
After reading that site, I haven’t really changed my opinion on the add. I can see how they used Kerry’s votes on gas taxes in a way which makes it look worse then it was in terms of numbers, but it is not a lie.

Also while they attack the use of the term ‘wacky’ on Kerry’s gas taxing, Kerry would NEVER EVER EVER go for a 10% decrease in the income tax across the board they cite, so I have no idea why they even mentioned it in their fact check. I think every Republican would happily support a .50 gas tax if it meant a 10%, fair to all, tax reduction. You know and I know the democrats would never allow that.

As for the 657 vrs 598, that’s just who’s numbers are correct. It’s a minor amount in my book and not as if it were 657 vrs 200 or something of that nature.

Finally the quote about higher gas taxes meaning less traffic, safe roads, and less global warming is laughable at best. Banning cars would do even more for it. It is a stupid point to bring up. It also smacks of socialist social engineering which is the last thing I want to see happen in the US.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 07:51 AM   #19 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Actually to be honest Bush's ad hurts Bush in my eyes.

Every other country out there pays more in gas than the US. Most tax gas far higher than we do because they have better environmental policies. My worry is that we are supposedly the greatest nation on Earth and we are showing people having a hard time affording gas because of a tax? Tells me more about the wages paid in this country and the economic situation as a whole.

What should be called into question, more than any gas tax is, why can corporations ship jobs overseas and still be allowed tax breaks? Why are we showing that paying less than everybody else for gas is such an economic burden on us? If Bush wants to play the economy card then he should answer why he refuses to raise minimum wage from $5.25 an hour to a liveable wage, he should answer why in these days of "patriotism" he allows jobs to be shipped overseas while he gives massive tax breaks to those very corporations, and he should answer why he chooses to spend more and more on military but cuts veterans benefits drastically.

To those that say Bush has to go by what Congress votes and therefore it is not all his fault, are blind and ignorant to the fact that Congress is controlled by the right and he has pretty much a blank check right now to do whatever he pleases. Which make no mistake, he does get whatever he wants, but for his own gain not for the gain of the country and the citizens and certainly not for future generations.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 08:16 AM   #20 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by pan6467
If Bush wants to play the economy card then he should answer why he refuses to raise minimum wage from $5.25 an hour to a liveable wage,
You obviously are missing some basic ideas about the minimum wage.

#1 The minimum wage is NOT meant to be lived off of. Its for basic entry level unskilled jobs. You can't afford to pay every teenager working for you a 'living wage'.

#2 As such if you made it a living wage, jobs would be lost. This would be first in the cost, second in the economy as a whole as productivity goes down. Many small business would fail, such as my brother in laws. He has a small pizza place and employs a lot of local kids there part time. Prices would HAVE to go up if the wage were raised, and at his current margins he would go under. He wouldn't be making more money per pizza, but he would have to charge more, if the price is higher less people will be able to buy said pizzas, hence bye bye pizza place.

#3 Unions always push the democrats to raise the minimum wage, but only because they get to base their wages off the minimum. If the minimum is X dollars for UNSKILLED labor, they can argue their skilled labor is worth more.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 09:30 AM   #21 (permalink)
Muffled
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Location: Camazotz
Quote:
Originally posted by Superbelt
I'm getting sick of the garbage Bush is putting out as well. So I started a game of it. For every Bush ad I see, I contribute another 5 bucks to kerry or Joe Hoeffel for US Senate (Pa) Or a number of other candidates I want to support.
I just gave Kerry another 50 yesterday.

My sister's volunteering for Hoeffel. I haven't seen the ad, but my friend described it to me in between bouts of laughter. It just seems badly designed. Maybe the Republicans are trying to load the expectations game.

Oh, and Ustwo, I see you couldn't stay away. Welcome back.
__________________
it's quiet in here

Last edited by Kadath; 04-07-2004 at 12:14 PM..
Kadath is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 09:44 AM   #22 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
Welcome back Ustwo


Anyway,

I catagorically am against any campaign ad that twists and distorts facts, since rational decisions on who to support NEED solid facts.

But if you Kerry supporters think your side is immune to this nonsense, then you have your heads in the sand.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 10:51 AM   #23 (permalink)
Baltimoron
 
djtestudo's Avatar
 
Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD
I saw the ad twice this afternoon...and laughed my ass off twice this afternoon. Definately a creative way of doing it other then dramatic music, deep voices and grainy photographs.
__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun
djtestudo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 01:38 PM   #24 (permalink)
mml
Adrift
 
Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life
YES CAMPAIGN ADS SUCK!

But you know what? THEY WORK! The Bush Campaign has produced some of the finest political ads I have ever seen. (It is much easier to do when you have more money than God) This one, however, drives me crazy. AZ has been determined to be "in play", so that add has been on t.v. every other break for at least a week. I am sure it plays well to its audience, but everyone I know thinks it is "amateurish" (that may not be the best word to describe it.)

Both sides are going to water down the truth no matter how much I would like it to be different. I do like the fact that there are resources out there to help guide us to the truth. I do, however, think that the Bush Campaign has stretched the truth and twisted the facts to a much greater degree than the Kerry Campaign(so far). With a voting record as long as Kerry's, there is more than enough material to spin things the way the Bush Campaign would like us to see them.
__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams
mml is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 01:46 PM   #25 (permalink)
can't help but laugh
 
irateplatypus's Avatar
 
Location: dar al-harb
Re: Re: Bush's campaign ad against Kerry, a new low?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ustwo
The president doesn't control oil prices, but he can tax it.
the President may set the agenda for tax cuts or increases... but only congress can formally propose or implement any form of taxation.
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill
irateplatypus is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 02:36 PM   #26 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally posted by Ustwo
You obviously are missing some basic ideas about the minimum wage.

#1 The minimum wage is NOT meant to be lived off of. Its for basic entry level unskilled jobs. You can't afford to pay every teenager working for you a 'living wage'.

#2 As such if you made it a living wage, jobs would be lost. This would be first in the cost, second in the economy as a whole as productivity goes down. Many small business would fail, such as my brother in laws. He has a small pizza place and employs a lot of local kids there part time. Prices would HAVE to go up if the wage were raised, and at his current margins he would go under. He wouldn't be making more money per pizza, but he would have to charge more, if the price is higher less people will be able to buy said pizzas, hence bye bye pizza place.

#3 Unions always push the democrats to raise the minimum wage, but only because they get to base their wages off the minimum. If the minimum is X dollars for UNSKILLED labor, they can argue their skilled labor is worth more.
I'll cover your #2 first, because I owned a pizza shop from 1995-97. I paid my workers $7.50 an hour and gave benefits. Yes, it hit me in my pocket but it maintained a good crew and the best and most reasonably priced product in the town and I still made a very comfortable living. If I had been like many places and paid minimum wage I would have had the turnover many places do today and I would have been spending more than what I saved in the continous training and extra hours I would have been there. Unfortunately my 1 mistake was not my wages but the fact I gambled it away and trusted the wrong people to run the place, but such is life.

As for Minimum Wage, many companies are paying just barely above it and calling it "competitive wage". As the manufacturing jobs are leaving more and more people are having to turn to these "basic entry level unskilled jobs". With College grants and loans being reduced and fewer being able to afford college these jobs are about all there are if these people can find them. Then these people have to pay for their own insurance and get very few benefits. Raises of 25 cents a year, if they are lucky just doesn't cut it.

And no minimum wages do not affect places with fewer than 15 employees or making less than I believe $150,000. I have no problem with teens making minimum wage.

Here's a link to a nice stat sheet to read over. http://www.adaction.org/mwbook.html

The biggest problem in the USA right now is the fact that businesses complain they can't find good loyal help, so they pay crap. The laborers feel they get paid crap with no benefits so they show no loyalty.

Henry Ford, the most anti-unionite ever, said, "pay your workers enough to buy your product and live in comfort and you will always have customers." Big Business has gotten away from that idea.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 02:41 PM   #27 (permalink)
Baltimoron
 
djtestudo's Avatar
 
Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD
Henry Ford also fired any man he found coming to work in a non-Ford car.
__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun
djtestudo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 02:45 PM   #28 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
And he funded and contracted for Hitler.

Living Wage is for Nazi lib's!
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 03:03 PM   #29 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo
Henry Ford also fired any man he found coming to work in a non-Ford car.
Well, if you work for a company, they pay you well and take care of you, then you should have pride enough to own the product.
Like working for Dell yet having an Apple Mac on your desk. Sure at home where noone cares you can have anything you want but not on company property because you are showing you support a competitor and that's not good business.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 04:40 PM   #30 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
Quote:
Originally posted by Ustwo
You obviously are missing some basic ideas about the minimum wage.

#1 The minimum wage is NOT meant to be lived off of. Its for basic entry level unskilled jobs. You can't afford to pay every teenager working for you a 'living wage'.
You are absolutely wrong on this point.

Quote:
Minimum Wage

The minimum wage was first enacted in 1938 as part of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Initially just 25 cents per hour, it has been raised several times in the decades since. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the minimum wage reached its peak in 1968, when it was worth $6.92 in 1998 dollars.

Despite increases in the minimum wage during the 1990s, the buying power of the federal minimum wage has declined by nearly 25 percent over the last 20 years. In fact, the prevailing minimum wage is not high enough to afford a two-bedroom home at fair-market rent anywhere in America.

The federal minimum wage is $5.15 per hour. The Fair Minimum Wage Act would raise the minimum wage to $5.90 per hour 60 days after enactment and to $6.65 per hour one year after that. This measure would put money into the hands of 10-12 million low-wage workers, bolstering consumer income and spending for workers who do not receive income tax cuts.
-- http://www.chn.org/issues/issue.asp?iss=18

Quote:
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (referred to as "the Act" or "FLSA"), is published in law in sections 201-219 of title 29, United States Code. The Act provides for minimum standards for both wages and overtime entitlement, and spells out administrative procedures by which covered worktime must be compensated. Included in the Act are provisions related to child labor, equal pay, and portal-to-portal activities. In addition, the Act exempts specified employees or groups of employees from the application of certain of its provisions.
-- http://www.opm.gov/flsa/overview.asp
smooth is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:37 PM   #31 (permalink)
Baltimoron
 
djtestudo's Avatar
 
Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD


How is he wrong? Looks to me like your evidence supports his view more then yours.

Quote:
Despite increases in the minimum wage during the 1990s, the buying power of the federal minimum wage has declined by nearly 25 percent over the last 20 years. In fact, the prevailing minimum wage is not high enough to afford a two-bedroom home at fair-market rent anywhere in America.
From your first source.
__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun
djtestudo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:46 PM   #32 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Yes I fail to see how I am wrong as well based on what was posted.

Ah well.

I am also correct on the other points.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 06:47 PM   #33 (permalink)
Dubya
 
Location: VA
smooth,
Hmmmm, it seems Ustwo is talking about the intent of the law, and you are talking about the effect. It's true that the modern federal minimum wage is not a liveable salary, but I'm not convinced yet that that is the intention of the FSLA (mostly because I know diddley about it).
__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."
Sparhawk is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 09:14 PM   #34 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
Actually, the intent was to make a living wage. The evidence points to the fact that the effect of the law hasn't been to create a living wage.

I understand Ustwo to be claiming that the intent wasn't to create a living wage. I merely gave the websites for someone to get the correct terminology. Anyone interested can run searches on the fair labor movements, I'm not going to waste my time since ustwo and others aren't going to change their minds about anything I post anyway.

Case in point, the actual legislation speaks to securing wages for skilled labor provisions. It makes exceptions for unskilled labor positions--what ustwo claims minimum wages are referring to.

That is, if minimum wages are securing sub-living wages for unskilled laborers, then it wouldn't include provisions to pay unskilled laborers less money than mininum wage.

Upon reading the provisions in the law, one realizes that it is referring to skilled labor positions, not entry workers. The entire legislation was geared toward securing fair and equitable wages for industry positions for middle-class workers--not transitory ones.

In short, my post was for people who actually care about researching the intent behind movements that led to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Mininum wage legislation came out of those movements, but no one can google it if they don't have the terminology. I couldn't care less what Ustwo thinks about the matter, he's already demonstrated to me that he doesn't give a shit about what I have to say about enough topics and I won't engage in arguing with him. For those who care, you now have the tools to plug into a search engine and determine for yourself whether ustwo's interpretation is correct or not.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

Last edited by smooth; 04-07-2004 at 09:30 PM..
smooth is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 09:30 PM   #35 (permalink)
Comment or else!!
 
KellyC's Avatar
 
Location: Home sweet home
Quote:
Originally posted by mml
YES CAMPAIGN ADS SUCK!

But you know what? THEY WORK! The Bush Campaign has produced some of the finest political ads I have ever seen. (It is much easier to do when you have more money than God) This one, however, drives me crazy. AZ has been determined to be "in play", so that add has been on t.v. every other break for at least a week. I am sure it plays well to its audience, but everyone I know thinks it is "amateurish" (that may not be the best word to describe it.)

Both sides are going to water down the truth no matter how much I would like it to be different. I do like the fact that there are resources out there to help guide us to the truth. I do, however, think that the Bush Campaign has stretched the truth and twisted the facts to a much greater degree than the Kerry Campaign(so far). With a voting record as long as Kerry's, there is more than enough material to spin things the way the Bush Campaign would like us to see them.
"Immature-ish" is the word I'm thinking too. I don't get how the a president of the United State can approve such a "message."
__________________
Him: Ok, I have to ask, what do you believe?
Me: Shit happens.
KellyC is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 09:40 PM   #36 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo


How is he wrong? Looks to me like your evidence supports his view more then yours.



From your first source.
Run a search and read the act.

It's pretty explicit that it doesn't refer to "teenagers" or other unskilled workers.

How can we induce this?

By the fact that minimum wage laws don't encompass unskilled laborers. That is, one can pay unskilled workers and entry positions less than the minimum wage. The rest of the act delineates who is subjected to the legislation--and it refers to skilled laborer positions.

The buying power of the minimum wage speaks to the effect of making more than $5 dollars per hour. It doesn't address what the writers intended the act to protect--liveable wages. ustwo claimed that minimum wages were never intended to protect liveable wages. He's historically wrong--it's a fact one can google, not something I inferred from those two sources.
smooth is offline  
Old 04-08-2004, 03:49 AM   #37 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews...4_20040407.htm
Quote:
"Ford Motor Co. chairman and chief executive Bill Ford Jr. reiterated his support Wednesday for government incentives and a larger tax on fuel to spur consumer interest in gas-electric hybrid vehicles, in which his company is investing heavily.

Ford, speaking to automotive journalists at the New York International Auto Show, said he thought incentives like tax breaks or government rebates of, say, $3,000 would be most effective. He also mentioned his past support of an additional 50-cent tax on gas, which he said would make fuel economy "a purchase motivation for the customer."

But Ford acknowledged such a tax "doesn't have legs" in the political arena.

"I'd like to get either federal or state and local help ... and I think it's the responsible thing to do," he said. "If the federal government really wants to encourage this kind of behavior -- and they should -- then that's a way they can clearly help."
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-08-2004, 03:52 AM   #38 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: NJ
Getting away from the minimum wage argument and back to campaign ads. Has anyone seen the one produced by MoveOn which impersonates Bush's voice? Utterly fascinating to me that any group can think this is going to convince anyone (beyond those who are already convinced) to join their camp.
__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.
onetime2 is offline  
Old 04-08-2004, 04:02 AM   #39 (permalink)
This vexes me. I am terribly vexed.
 
Superbelt's Avatar
 
Location: Grantville, Pa
Have you seen anything produced by Club for Growth?
Their breakout was the Howard Dean "Latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, NYT-Reading, Body Piercing, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show."
The most ludicrous incendary ad's devised.
CFG ad's consist of nothing but personal attacks, never have substance. They just spout the weirdest stream of crap imaginable. It's like it's written by someone with Tourettes of the hand.

MoveOn is almost as bad, but at least MoveOn comes with data and usually contains an alternative policy.

Club for Growth was created specifically to destroy all non-hard right candidates and nothing else.
Superbelt is offline  
Old 04-08-2004, 04:11 AM   #40 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally posted by Superbelt
Have you seen anything produced by Club for Growth?
Their breakout was the Howard Dean "Latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, NYT-Reading, Body Piercing, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show."
The most ludicrous incendary ad's devised.
CFG ad's consist of nothing but personal attacks, never have substance. They just spout the weirdest stream of crap imaginable. It's like it's written by someone with Tourettes of the hand.

MoveOn is almost as bad, but at least MoveOn comes with data and usually contains an alternative policy.

Club for Growth was created specifically to destroy all non-hard right candidates and nothing else.
No I haven't seen them. New Jersey isn't really a hotly contested state so it doesn't surprise me that they aren't being run (or aren't being run frequently) here. This ad that I'm talking about is far from providing an alternative policy or any real data. Just an example of how not to do a campaign ad. I can't possibly imagine anyone being swayed by it. Of course, there's something to be said for ads that will mobilize your base and I suspect that's what both of these groups' goals were.
__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.
onetime2 is offline  
 

Tags
bush, campaign, kerry, low

Thread Tools

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 -8. The time now is 08:09 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360