Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (681726)	10/30/2012 5:11:35 PM
From: PROLIFE	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573092

why don't all you silly ignorant asswipes just take a breath and forget this....the story ain't going anywhere. What difference does it make whether fiat said CHina or Italy...it is still outsourcing.

To: combjelly who wrote (681726)	10/30/2012 5:20:49 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573092

>> onselectedindexchanged="cbox_SelectedIndexChanged" But it was never a lie. He did quote the Bloomberg article to begin with, before it was refuted. It isn't a lie when you quote a news article you believe to be factual -- and even then, he qualified it, as "I read a story" or something like that. When the story was refuted and the ad came out they were careful to make the ad coincide with the facts. That isn't lying, no matter what you want to call it. Obama has played fast and loose with the facts on the auto bailout for months, and particularly in OH recently -- where he has claimed "Romney was going to take the auto companies into bankruptcy". Well, WTF did OBAMA do? The difference, of course, is that Obama used a corrupt process where Romney would have respected the rule of law and not paid off the UAW in the process. >> Why does it matter to mention that Jeep is going to build cars in China in such ominous tones? I don't have a problem with the complaint, but in this firefight between the candidates, you can't expect Romney to stand back and allow Obama to push the limits. We all know negative advertising works, and for Romney not to fight back would be political malpractice. All in all, Romney has been far more positive than obama has, and far more truthful if you look at it objectively. The Romney campaign, however, has had to resort to tactics I'm quite certain he'd rather not have used. Obama forced him to do it or to just give up.