Posted by: Timothy Ellis (The Tim)

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.

200 responses to “Poll: For President, I am voting…”

These comments are paged! This is page 2. Navigate the pages here:
1 2
  1. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 77

    It just doesn’t matter.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  2. wreckingbull

    RE: Scotsman @ 99 – The notion that a ‘real’ Christian, whatever that means, would be more altruistic or humble in the white house is laughable and antiquated.

    I know the Bible pretty well, as I was raised in a hardcore Presbyterian family (yes, another Scotsman). Based on this knowledge, I would say the Obama presidency is closer to the ideals of Christianity than the Bush/Cheney presidency, by a long shot. I’m not saying he is a good president, but your logic is severely flawed.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  3. Pegasus

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 77 – Nonsense!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  4. Blurtman

    RE: Scotsman @ 99 – George W – he was a humble guy. Jerry Falwell, Biily Graham cracker. Oh, yes.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  5. Scotsman

    Wasn’t it Obama who claimed that “the earth will begin to heal” with his election? Seriously? Must be the new humility, kind of like the new math I suffered through as a student.

    Thinking is dead. Reactive emotion is the new program. Facts, reality, long term perspectives, all are on the junk heap of history.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  6. Scotsman

    RE: Blurtman @ 4

    See post #105 above. If you had any knowledge you would understand Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham don’t belong in the same sentence.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  7. Kary L. Krismer

    By Doug @ 94:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 87
    1 through 3: I’d really like to see any degree of cause and effect here. The markets sure don’t think Obama’s an idiot, or doing a bad job. Hurt feelings must not count for much.

    Businesses have complained a lot about possible tax increases and Obamacare. As noted, even President Obama has said at times that it was too early for a tax increase because it would hurt the economy. So President Obama believes there is an effect.

    You can’t judge what business thinks by the stock market. You’re confusing business with investors. Investors have moved into the stock market for other reasons, mainly falling interest rates, which makes bonds less attractive and more risky, and because US investments are seen as a safe harbor compared to other areas such as the Euro.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  8. Kary L. Krismer

    By Doug @ 94:

    4. This is why:
    http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Economic_Stimulus_House_Plan_012109.pdf
    (page 9)
    . . .
    The only ideas I hear out of Romney are his completely unworkable tax plan (revenue-neutral massive tax decreases by eliminating deductions, but not the popular ones that actually cost money), and mostly stuff we’re already doing (free trade!), plus a little drill-baby-drill. Not exactly stirring stuff.

    I don’t see what President Obama did when first entering office has to do with cutting the SS tax rate in 2011 and 2012.

    I would agree on the Romney tax plan being unworkable, and there are parts I don’t like (the territorial solution to off shore jobs). But where is President Obama on such matters? M.I.A.

    The main difference between President Obama and Romney is President Obama thinks everything, including jobs, is created as a result of government action, where Romney thinks government should create conditions which allows other things to be created by others.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  9. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: ChrisM @ 95 – The the new case on the 2nd amendment, gun control probably isn’t much of an issue, but I would note that the NRA hates President Obama more than they hate Romney.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  10. Kary L. Krismer

    By Doug @ 100:

    The country’s already recovering, slowly and steadily. It probably will continue to do so whichever man is voted in. I’m of the opinion that more people will enjoy the fruits of that recovery if Obama is elected.

    That’s probably true. The question is how fast.

    The one thing though that might make a difference is that President Obama’s spending could eventually turn us into Greece. I think that would take more than four years though, but in four years we could be past a tipping point.

    Connecting up to my prior third party comment, the Republicans weren’t much better on spending than the Democrats before them, but they weren’t as bad as President Obama. We need someone better than all of them, which is part of the reason I’d like a third party. Hopefully one without all the social policy nonsense.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  11. Kary L. Krismer

    By Pegasus @ 3:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 77 – Nonsense!

    BS. Everything I said there was 100% true and accurate. You’re just biased.

    I do agree with Losh though that it doesn’t matter.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  12. Doug

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 107 – A lot of people just don’t like Obama (or any Democratic president) businesses complaining doesn’t hold a lot of water with me, sorry. I want cause and effect.

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 108 -The document states that you get a large economic benefit from cutting payroll taxes, larger than extending the Bush tax cuts. You asked why Obama thought that cutting some taxes was better than others, and this is why.

    You’re ascribing emotional arguments to Obama that aren’t borne out by the facts. Private sector unemployment is down, and government employment (local and federal) is down since Obama took office.

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 110 -
    No. Did you read the part of my response that showed that total U.S. debt was increasing at a much slower rate during the Obama years than it did during the Bush years? It’s barely higher than inflation. Public and private entities and state governments have been deleveraging. We’re not in any danger of becoming Greece.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  13. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Doug @ 112 – If you want cause and effect, President Obama complains about businesses spending money in certain ways, particularly Las Vegas conventions and private jets. They cut spending in those ways. Fewer people are employed directly and indirectly by the company as a result, and less money is in the system. More people lose their jobs as a result.

    As to your last argument, in absolute numbers debt has increased by over $1T each of the last four years. It was about half that rate before then. That ignores what the Fed, Fannie, Freddie and FHA have been doing.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  14. Doug

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 113

    You’re looking at Federal debt. I’m looking at household, state government, and business debt, taken as a whole. Total U.S. debt.

    The federal government has been taking on the debt the rest of the US leveraged up during the Bush years. If it hadn’t, we’d still be in a deep recession as families and companies struggled to deleverage.

    I’ll again point you here: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/z1.pdf
    Page 2. Compare the Bush years to Obama years.

    ~4% debt growth ain’t bad with around 2% inflation, and an improving economy. Could Obama be doing more? Empirically, yes. In this political climate? Ha!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  15. Kary L. Krismer

    By Doug @ 114:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 113

    You’re looking at Federal debt. I’m looking at household, state government, and business debt, taken as a whole. Total U.S. debt.

    Why limit it that way? Consumer debt has been decreasing, but that’s not a good thing because it’s probably partly due to foreclosures. Business debt is not necessarily a bad thing, and often a good thing. That it’s growing slowly is part of the problem. Many states can’t incur debt, or can only do things in limited ways.

    The federal government has been taking on the debt the rest of the US leveraged up during the Bush years. If it hadn’t, we’d still be in a deep recession as families and companies struggled to deleverage.

    I buy that argument for the first two years of the Obama presidency. That’s why I said the stimulus should have been more concentrated in time. At some point though you need the regular economy to take off, and my position is President Obama has hindered that rather than helped that.

    I’ll again point you here: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/z1.pdf
    Page 2. Compare the Bush years to Obama years.

    ~4% debt growth ain’t bad with around 2% inflation, and an improving economy. Could Obama be doing more? Empirically, yes. In this political climate? Ha!

    You’re again just looking at total debt. It’s the federal debt which is the problem. Looking at the federal data from your source, the situation is hardly good during the Obama years compared to prior years. It is generally much worse.

    Also, you’re looking at percentage growth. If you borrow $1T year after year after year, the percentage growth will drop, indicating things were getting better. They would instead be getting worse. It’s the nominal growth in debt which is important.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  16. Doug

    “Why limit it that way?” Ha ha, looking at the big picture of total U.S. debt, rather than just federal debt is ‘limiting’ the analysis? That word… I do not think it means what you think it means!

    I think I’m getting the disconnect here. You’re applying business principles to the economy at large. This does not work as well as you think it does. Yeah, individual corporate debt can be a good thing if it’s part of a long-term strategy. But OVERALL corporate debt being lower is a GOOD thing, unless it’s so low that the economy simply isn’t growing. Same thing with personal debt. Sure you don’t want debt to be ZERO necessarily, but don’t tell me that during the bubble years businesses and households were underleveraged!

    Why is the national debt a problem if businesses, state governments and taxpayers are deleveraging? The government can raise more revenue, but it needs not at this time as bond rates are at historic lows. Better to take the burden of debt off of taxpayers and businesses to let the recovery continue.

    If homeowners, businesses and state governments are all deleveraging, whether that’s through foreclosures or not, that IS a good thing in the macroeconomic sense.

    And percentage growth is generally what matters, rather than absolute growth. That’s how you weigh it against inflation, which essentially reduces debt.

    Kary, you seem to want lower federal debt, lower taxes, lower consumer debt, lower corporate debt, a stronger stimulus, no inflation, and lower unemployment. Talk about some pink pony thinking!

    That Obama has delivered…

    -Lower taxes
    -Cut the rate of total debt growth in half
    -Lower unemployment
    -Great gains in private sector employment
    -Reduced total government employment
    -low levels of inflation
    -And all the above is holding steady or IMPROVING

    …seems to matter not one bit to you, and it seems to be due to some sort of emotional argument. Somehow President Obama personally hurt your feelings, and that’s not something I’m going to be able to remove or undo with logical arguments and statistics.

    But to argue that Obama is an economic idiot is just wrong, Kary. It is. Sure he’s made some bad choices. I don’t like the JOBS act’s IPO requirements loosening. But the economy’s doing quite well after taking a $16 trillion dollar hit.

    Here’s my emotional argument: A knew a TON of people who were unemployed and in dire straits about a half a year after the financial collapse. They are now all in work. They may not be doing perfectly, but they’re doing better.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  17. apartment boy

    RE: Ahau @ 88 -
    I once visited the Carthage jail, and then on to Nauvoo.
    We were on the 2nd story of a brick building, that was a dance hall for the Mormons. It was a large open wooden floor, and the curator looked at me and said ‘Some times when I’m up here, I feel the presence of Joseph Smith.’ That was 20 years ago and I still get a little freaked out by that.
    Still, I voted for Romney!
    hahaha

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  18. Kary L. Krismer

    By Doug @ 16:

    Kary, you seem to want lower federal debt, lower taxes, lower consumer debt, lower corporate debt, a stronger stimulus, no inflation, and lower unemployment. Talk about some pink pony thinking!

    Now you’re just totally making things up. I’ve not said I want lower taxes, but I am against tax increasee. I’ve not said I want lower consumer debt. I’ve not said I want lower corporate debt. I have said I wanted the stimulus to be more concentrated in time. What I mean by that is they should have spent the same amount of money faster. I’ve not mentioned inflation. Yes, I would like lower unemployment–shoot me for that.

    That Obama has delivered…

    -Lower taxes
    -Cut the rate of total debt growth in half
    -Lower unemployment
    -Great gains in private sector employment
    -Reduced total government employment
    -low levels of inflation
    -And all the above is holding steady or IMPROVING

    More making things up. The tax cuts have been insignificant, and IMHO relatively ineffective. The debt, again you’re talking total debt, not federal debt. President Obama doesn’t control the others. “Great gains” in private sector employment, nope, barely any gains since he took office. And real unemployment is horribly bad. I’ll give you lower levels of government employment and low inflation, but the latter is low due to bad things, not good things.

    …seems to matter not one bit to you, and it seems to be due to some sort of emotional argument. Somehow President Obama personally hurt your feelings, and that’s not something I’m going to be able to remove or undo with logical arguments and statistics.

    Again, more made up arguments. I don’t have any personal dislike for President Obama. I just don’t like him as president because he’s a proven failure and doesn’t have a clue on economic issues for the reasons mentioned. Anyone who cared a dime about unemployment would not have pushed through Obamacare.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  19. ChrisM

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 109 – Retired Supreme Court Justice Stevens disagrees with your position. But then, who cares what a *retired* supreme court justice says? :-)

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/16/us-usa-guns-stevens-idUSBRE89E1HE20121016

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  20. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: ChrisM @ 19 – If 30 years ago you’d told me that Democrats and liberal Supreme Court Justices would become the greatest threat to the Bill of Rights I would have laughed at you. It’s become a rather bizarro world.

    The Second Amendment issue wouldn’t have surprised me, but the rest does.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  21. WestSideBilly

    This would have been a more interesting poll if the options “enthusiastically AGAINST Obama” and “enthusiastically AGAINST Romney” were there.

    I suspect most of the enthusiastically for Romney votes are actually against Obama.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  22. Pegasus

    At least someone gets it right:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjrthOPLAKM

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  23. wreckingbull

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 120 – Strange days indeed.

    How about this quote from a Republican president, general, and war hero:

    “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

    Of course this was over a half century ago before the party went bat-poop crazy.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  24. Pegasus

    RE: wreckingbull @ 123 – Bat-poop? I like it!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  25. Ira Sacharoff

    RE: wreckingbull @ 123
    Einsenhower would be considered far too liberal to get anywhere in the Republican party today.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  26. ChrisM

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 125 – I doubt that at the time Eisenhower identified with the Republican party. He steadfastly refused to endorse his Vice President’s subsequent run for President.

    I like Ike.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  27. David Losh

    Did I mention that I think Obama is one of the best Presidents we have had in my life time.

    He’s up there with Reagan, and Clinton in my book.

    No one likes to admit that Clinton followed through on the Reagan promise of prosperity that neither Bush promoted or adhered to.

    Obama has shown himself to be much more in keeping of Reagan policies. Let’s not forget, any of us, that Reagan ran up a huge debt also.

    For the first ime, in a long time, I can see us at a point of world peace.

    Romney, like John McCain, keeps talking like our military can march into some place, any place, and fix something. Well, we can’t and that has been proved numerous times since the big one, WWII.

    Obama kills people. I like that. I like that Obama unapologetically kills people. He didn’t just kill bin Laden, he’s killed a lot of people, and toppled a lot of dictators. We’re just upset because Obama won’t march into Syria to get more of our troops killed.

    Revolution by militia is messy. We should know that, but we forgot. They haven’t forgotten that in the Middle East. They admire our rights to revolution.

    Obama’s doing good. Romney would be a tumble into a black hole of indecision, saber rattling, and gridlock. No one could ever allow a Romney Ryan to take control of our government. It wouldn’t be prudent.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  28. Maxwell

    If you are voting for Romney make sure you know you are getting the full package including his crazy beliefs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxMD02zU9SE

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  29. Kary L. Krismer

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 25:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 123
    Einsenhower would be considered far too liberal to get anywhere in the Republican party today.

    I wonder how Nancy Pelosi would have done as a Democrat in the 60s suggesting the First Amendment be amended?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  30. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 129

    It’s become extremely (pun intended) that you don’t follow the Conservative movement in the United States, and I’ll wager you don’t follow the Conservative movement globally.

    I’m a Conservative. I’m a guns, and gold Conservative.

    The problem the United States has with it’s neo con movement, like the Tea Party, is that it talks a lot, but never walks.

    We elected Ronald reagan because he delivered. We got rid of George Bush the first because he sold us out. His son George the second promised to get it right, but he is a profiteer, and that is extremely evident today.

    The fact we have the likes of a Shaun Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck shouting “We Hate America, and We Need to Change It” in a crowded theater is a very good indication of how far we have fallen in the name of Conservative ideals.

    The Supreme Court handed the neo cons the right to dictate United States policy by financial means. No Conservative would ever allow a corporation to have the rights of an individual. You can’t trade government control for that of a corporation.

    The Conservative movement today is what is under attack.

    Obama is far more Conservative than Romney, or Ryan. There are trade offs in any election, but Obama has outlined a clear picture of where we can go as individuals, where Romeny wants to put more control into the hands of corporations.

    To be more clear, trading the yoke of the government for the yoke of a corporation isn’t a choice. I’ll stick with the government. Conservatives, both nationally, and globally like the United States government. We’re a beacon of light in a very dark world.

    So, telling me that some corporation hates our government, and wants to get rid of it, or change it, for the purposes of profit, isn’t making any points.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  31. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 130 – The idea that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to corporations is complete nonsense. That’s why the McConnell decision was overturned so quickly.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  32. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 131

    That really doesn’t matter to anything. You are, again, attempting to give individual rights to a corporation.

    Now I could waste some of my morning explaining why a corporation that controls a group of people, and potential voters, should never have individual rights, but I feel it would wouldn’t be productive.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  33. corndogs

    RE: David Losh @ 127 – Reagan inspired confidence, Bush actually had the highest approval rating of any President. Clinton is/was a disgrace and an embarrassment….. The difference between Clinton and Obama is Clinton failed health care by one vote…. during Clintons admin the Republicans took the house and Senate and he begrudgingly submitted…and the financial policies of that era were those of Gingrich et al…. Obama actually passed the health care law….pissing off the American public again, during the midterms the Repubs took only the house… Obama remained stubborn and didn’t submit and now we are at gridlock…. the critical mass of minorities and brainwashed preteens and brain dead victims living on SSI like yourself are too great to overcome these days. 65% of whites are voting Republican… it isn’t enough, unfortunately….

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  34. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 132 – If you don’t think corporations have rights under the Bill of Rights, why does the government need a warrant to search corporate files?

    If you don’t think corporations have rights under the Bill of Rights, why can’t the government just shut down the Seattle Times?

    If you don’t think corporations have rights under the Bill of Rights, why can’t government control the content of video games made by Nintendo, or movies made by a corporate studio.

    If you don’t think corporations have rights under the Bill of Rights, why are there decisions under the First Amendment holding that commercial speech has fewer protections than political speech?

    Again, that corporations don’t have rights is total nonsense, pushed by politicians who want to protect themselves by passing laws that restrict critical speech about their activities.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  35. Doug

    RE: corndogs @ 133

    I think you’re leaving out the salient fact that Bush also left office with an approval rating bouncing around the high 20′s, and also boasted the highest disapproval rating measured, at 71. There may have just been some sort of event that boosted GW Bush’s approval rating and caused Americans to forget their politics for a while…

    Also: Darn those preteens for voting Obama in! *shakes fist*

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  36. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Doug @ 135 – That same stat you show indicates how the voters blamed Bush for what happened, leaving Congress apparently totally without fault. We really should have had about 80% turnover in the House in 2008, and 25% in the Senate.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  37. Ira Sacharoff

    RE: corndogs @ 133
    At the time of the 2008 election, after two terms in the White House, George W Bush had a 25% approval rating. At the time of the 2000 election, after two terms in the WHite House, Bill Clinton had a 57% approval rating. Gallup polls of recent Presidents suggest that ROnald Reagan and Bill Clinton are thought of as our best recent Presidents, and George W Bush only trails Richard Nixon as the worst.
    Also, while Obama might lead amongst “brain dead victims on SSI”, Romney clearly has the lead amongst uneducated ignorant white folk….And, last I read, Whites are not voting Republican at 65%, it’s less. 60% or something like that. I think McCain got 58% of the white vote. All that says is that there are a lot of white folks out there who wouldn’t vote for Ronald Reagan, Thomas Jefferson, or Abraham Lincoln if they reappeared today with black skin.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  38. corndogs

    RE: Doug @ 135 – “Also: Darn those preteens for voting Obama in! *shakes fist*”…. The pathetic thing is that the majority of them will become Republicans later in life…. it’s a mystery how people seem to get stupider as they get older, huh?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  39. Doug

    RE: corndogs @ 138

    My Point is that pre-teens cannot vote.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  40. wreckingbull

    By corndogs @ 133:

    RE: David Losh @ 127 Bush actually had the highest approval rating of any President**

    ** Right after 9/11. Anyone would have had a high rating then. Do you not recall the freedom-fries, proud-to-be-an-american, wispy-eyed sentiment of the day? At the end of his term, he was tied at the bottom with Carter, only beating Nixon. Oops.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  41. corndogs

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 37 – “Romney clearly has the lead amongst uneducated ignorant white folk”…”All that says is that there are a lot of white folks out there who wouldn’t vote for Ronald Reagan, Thomas Jefferson, or Abraham Lincoln if they reappeared today with black skin.”

    Ira, I think you’ve watched too many episodes of the Jeffersons. Sorry, Ira, minorities are not mentally superior to whites and white people are not largely racist at all. What’s funny is you can make a racist set of comments like you just did and no one will have a problem with it. I’m gonna call you out on it now and I’m going to get a bunch of thumbs down…65% of white men vote Republican…A majority of all whites educated or not, vote Republican. To the credit of white people, the percentage voting for Obama is almost identical to the percentage who voted for any other democratic president…. That shows that whites are amazingly not racist….. The only sh%t I hear about racism is coming from black or semi-black uneducated folks like yourself.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  42. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: wreckingbull @ 140 – The worst president was probably Ford. Whip Inflation Now! Although that was better than the price controls from Nixon.

    Why is it so many presidents don’t know squat about economics?

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  43. corndogs

    RE: Doug @ 39 – ooh well, let me be clear then, I’m talking about the pre-30 demographic…

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  44. corndogs

    RE: wreckingbull @ 40 – Im well aware what happened and the rise and fall of the mans popularity…. The fact is, he was the leader at that time and was the most popular president of all time… All Presidents popularity is obviously based on the happenings of the day…. Clinton should have had a much higher rating based on the happenings of the day…. he brought down his own rating by actions unbecoming of a President.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  45. corndogs

    Jimmy Carter is typically judged the worst president ever according to the polls I’ve seen.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  46. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 134

    Individual rights, are completely different from the laws we make governing corporations. You threw in the Seattle Times to see if you were on to something, but you aren’t.

    No Conservative globally thinks Corporations should share our individual rights, and no patriot in the United States thinks Corporations should share our individual rights.

    Obama made all of his points with Conservatives, by calling out the Supreme Court in front of the Nation, and Congress.

    That is free speech.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  47. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 146:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 134 Individual rights, are completely different from the laws we make governing corporations

    I gave you several examples where they are not different. You’re basing your opinion on nothing!

    Here is the text of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Only assembly and right of petition could possibly be interpreted to only include rights of individuals, because that is the only part that uses the term “people.”

    Obama made all of his points with Conservatives, by calling out the Supreme Court in front of the Nation, and Congress.

    Nonsense. It’s liberals who hate the Citizen’s United decision more than liberals, but most politicians hate it because it doesn’t allow them to protect themselves. And the Justices that were in the majority are generally seen as the conservative Justices. Yet another thing you have backwards in your mind.

    BTW, it’s actually worse than what I have stated. I had thought President Obama had called for an amendment of the First Amendment, but in the past I hadn’t been able to find a link. Here it is!

    http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/08/30/Obama-seeks-to-overturn-Citizens-United/UPI-46821346310000/

    President Obama is clearly anti-First Amendment. He wants to limit what is clearly political speech, the most sacred type of speech there is. I’ve said it before–the school where he taught Con Law should drag all their students back for remedial teaching so that they can be untaught the nonsense that he probably was teaching back then.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  48. Doug

    RE: corndogs @ 144

    I present your best, most popular president EVER!
    http://www.utahwildernessatlas.net/images/kos/bush_approval_graph.jpg

    “The only sh%t I hear about racism is coming from black or semi-black uneducated folks like yourself.”
    …corndog said without a shred of irony.

    Ira is uneducated? Coulda fooled me. Whether he is or is not, and whether I agree with him or not on a given topic, he’s one of the smartest people on SB.

    Since you put so much value on education, and seem to be implying that it correlates with intelligence, I’m sure you know that the more educated someone is, the more likely they are to support Obama:
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/154562/gender-gap-obama-approval-constant-term-began.aspx

    Lastly, a protip.
    Ellipses… are not a catch-all… that can be used as a substitute……… for all other punctuation……………………

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  49. wreckingbull

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 142:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 140
    Why is it so many presidents don’t know squat about economics?

    Because most of them were lawyers? Sorry Kary, could not resist that softball :)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  50. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: wreckingbull @ 49 – LOL–I liked it.

    Actually, in law school there were relatively few students with economics majors. They sort of stuck out, at least if their focus was microeconomics.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  51. ARDELL

    RE: Doug @ 148

    “Ira is uneducated?”

    Actually I was stuck at Ira being “semi-black” according to Corndogs. What the heck is “semi-black” and why is Ira whatever that is? Enquiring minds want to know. :)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  52. whatsmyname

    By corndogs @ 141:

    – To the credit of white people, the percentage voting for Obama is almost identical to the percentage who voted for any other democratic president…. That shows that whites are amazingly not racist…..

    That supports the notion that the percentage of whites that vote for a democratic president are not racist, or are at least not more racist than democrat.

    It says nothing about the percentage of whites that don’t vote for democratic presidents. We rely on on you and scotsman for amazing insights into that.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  53. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 147

    You only showed me examples of your opinions.

    The Bill of Rights are Amendments to the Constitution, which begins with We the People.

    You are so far out of touch you can’t see that Conservatives hate corporations.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  54. David Losh

    RE: ARDELL @ 51

    You are in the world of back water bubba speak. I think, Ira has said at times he may be of Israeli descent.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  55. Ira Sacharoff

    By ARDELL @ 151:

    RE: Doug @ 148

    “Ira is uneducated?”

    Actually I was stuck at Ira being “semi-black” according to Corndogs. What the heck is “semi-black” and why is Ira whatever that is? Enquiring minds want to know. :)

    I’ve got no idea why I’ve been labeled semi-black or what that means. I’m guessing that Corndogs sees everyone who is dark and swarthy, exotic and devilishly handsome as ” semi-black”.
    Mitt Romney might very well win this race, but the long term demographics may render the Republicans an underdog for years to come. In 1980, whites who did not attend college made up 63% of the electorate . In 2008, that number was 39%. This is the strongest demographic for Republicans. In 1980, blacks made up 8% of the electorate. In 2008, they made up 12%. In 1980, Hispanics made up 1% of the electorate, in 2008 they made up 8%, in 1980 Asians made up less than 1%, and in 2008 they were 2%. These are all groups who tend to overwhelmingly support Democrats. The Republicans can change their message, or they can risk becoming irrelevant.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  56. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 53:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 147

    You only showed me examples of your opinions.

    No, David. Those are examples of situations where corporations have rights under the Bill of Rights. There is case law to support those examples.

    Interesting bit of trivia: A corporate debtor in Chapter 7 bankruptcy has no 5th Amendment rights.

    In contrast, your position that corporations don’t have rights under the Bill of Rights–that’s an opinion. An opinion based on nothing but news reports by ignorant reporters.

    The Bill of Rights are Amendments to the Constitution, which begins with We the People.

    People drafted and enacted the Constitution. That’s all that means.

    You are so far out of touch you can’t see that Conservatives hate corporations.

    LOL. David, I wouldn’t describe you as out of touch. I would describe you as totally delusional. That sentence is a great example of that.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  57. Kary L. Krismer

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 155:

    The Republicans can change their message, or they can risk becoming irrelevant.

    I would love for them to become irrelevant, or perhaps for the Tea Party to become irrelevant. If the Tea Party became a real party, either the Republican Party or the Tea Party could shed all the right wing social policy BS and focus on economic issues.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  58. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 156

    So, let me get this straight, that after all this time you are equating Republicans with Conservatives. That’s a mistake.

    Second is that We the People means the people of the United States were to create a more perfect union.

    Your reliance on case law just shows how totally and completely out of touch you are.

    Laws come and go, that’s what makes the Constitution fluid, but it is also why Obama is asking for an Amendment.

    Once again you are in way over your head giving opinions about things you have no reason to be discussing.

    You’re flip flopping around just like a fish out of water.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  59. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 58:

    Second is that We the People means the people of the United States were to create a more perfect union.

    Your reliance on case law just shows how totally and completely out of touch you are.

    There should be a list of Loshisms. Those two would be near the top. David, this is yet another area you simply don’t know anything about. I really don’t know why anyone would describe Ira as uneducated, but you prove your lack of education daily.

    Laws come and go, that’s what makes the Constitution fluid, but it is also why Obama is asking for an Amendment.

    David, we’re talking about Freedom of Speech here. A very important right. The McConnell decision was probably the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court on the Bill of Rights as far as affecting the entire population (as opposed to only certain races). To suggest an amendment of the First Amendment, restricting it, is un-American. President Obama and Nancy Pelosi should be ashamed of themselves.

    Once again you are in way over your head giving opinions about things you have no reason to be discussing.

    You’re flip flopping around just like a fish out of water.

    Total nonsense David. What I’m discussing is way over your head. You have no legal training, and it shows.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  60. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 157 – Here’s an interesting opinion piece, critical of our two party system.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/03/breaking-twoparty-stranglehold-gary-johnson

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  61. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 158:

    <Second is that We the People means the people of the United States were to create a more perfect union.

    By the way David, have you ever been to the United States? Do you understand its history.

    Here’s a hint. “Articles of Confederation” does not refer to something that happened during the Civil War.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  62. ARDELL

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 155

    On the bright side…Honey Boo Boo is not old enough to vote. :)

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  63. Blurtman

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 155 – We’re all from Africa.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  64. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 159RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 160

    Like I said you are completely out of your depth, and desperately trying to relate this to some area you feel you know well.

    I’m talking about Conservatives.

    You keep throwing around terms without context, but you can deviate a little into case law.

    It’s typical.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  65. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 161

    Well then let me direct you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

    That’s from the French Revolution, from those who helped us with our own liberty.

    Maybe a little less reliance on your 1970s degree in law, and a little more reading.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  66. Ira Sacharoff

    RE: Blurtman @ 163
    I guess I should be grateful that Corndogs has evolved and only called me Semi Black. A few years ago he might’ve called me the n word (while proclaiming that racism on the part of white people no longer exists), or a moo latto( not a coffee drink).

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  67. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 165 – Yes, David, our forefathers were so enlightened that that based our Constitution, adopted in 1787, on something that was not adopted until 1789. And our Supreme Court regularly cites to that later document, because obviously our what our forefathers were thinking in 1787 is best determined by what the French were thinking two years later.

    Is there anything at all that you know about? I don’t know why I waste my time with you, other than the fact that your ignorance is rather entertaining.

    BTW, I graduated law school in the 80s. Yet another thing you got wrong.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  68. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 64:

    You keep throwing around terms without context,.

    LOL. Better than your throwing around terms without any understanding of the term (or anything else in the world).

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  69. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 167

    OK, 1980s.

    You threw out a link, and I threw one back at you.

    It has nothing to do with your opinions about something that is completely unrelated to Conservatives.

    You want corporations to have the same rigths as individuals, then threw in a little case law for drill, I guess, because again, it’s another smoke screen.

    Individual liberty is the main stay of the Conservative movement. That is why Conservatives carry the Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

    You can’t figure this out because you can’t give in on an opinion you have.

    So, you don’t get it that Conservatives like Obama. Conservatives like the fact Obama called out the Supreme Court Justices in front of Congress, and wants an Amendment.

    Now if you want to discuss something, or anything, you should stay on point, and stop throwing in strawman arguments.

    I’m a Conservative from way back.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  70. ChrisM

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 160 – Gary Johnson is an ass. Karl Denninger routinely blasts his candidacy. For instance, Johnson now wishes to limit the participants of a presidential debate (of the non R&D) to just the top two candidates!

    That said, I agree about the failings of a two party system. I wish we had a binding “none of the above” choice.

    Australia has a really interesting auction process:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_electoral_system

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  71. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 69 – Typical David Losh.

    1. Get involved in an argument by posting nonsense.
    2. Lose every argument decisively and then claim that the opponent is in over his head.
    3. Change the topic to something else.

    The issue is whether corporations have Free Speech rights under the First Amendment. Not whether you can craft some definition of conservative to suit your needs.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  72. Ira Sacharoff

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 171
    Corporations have free speech rights under the First Amendment. But that doesn’t mean that the SCOTUS made the correct decision in Citizen’s United. It altered 100 years of law, from the Tillman Act to Taft Hartley to FECA. Citizens United allows for corporations and unions to set up Super PACS and non profits, and these entities can spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigns, as long as their campaigns are not co-ordinated with the candidate’s campaign. Free speech is a good thing. Corporations should have the right of free speech. But they should not have the right to buy elections. Are you tired of these extremely negative attack ads on TV? Many of theses ads aren’t coming from the candidates themselves, but from these Super PACS and non profits that were spawned as a result of this Supreme Court decision:
    http://truth-out.org/news/item/11766-citizens-united-ruling-accounts-for-78-percent-of-campaign-spending

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  73. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 71

    Here’s your quote, “Nonsense. It’s liberals who hate the Citizen’s United decision” which is an opinion, like all of your opinions on this thread, lot’s of opinions.

    I said Conservatives hate corporations, and don’t think they should share in our individual rights.

    My conclusion, from all of the comments that you make here, all day, every day, is that you have a very narrow view of the world, and that the world needs to conform to your opinions.

    This thread is about who we like as President, and you want to change the subject to your own opinion about who has rights under the Constitution.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  74. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 172 – I would argue that Citizen’s United overturned about 4 years of law–the McConnell decision.

    Don’t assume that the Super-PAC money comes from corporations. There are both very rich individuals and normal individuals that contribute to Super-Pacs.

    Finally, the news reports I’ve seen indicated that the PACs had relatively little impact on total campaign spending. The concerns expressed after Citizen’s United was just hype.

    But let’s accept your premise that corporations only have limited rights, and then look at the facts in McConnell. There the law was used to limit the exposure of a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton just before the election. If they have Free Speech rights, how could you possibly limit it in such an important way?

    Finally, even referring to this as corporations is a falsehood. Most of it is spending by labor unions and entities like the NRA.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  75. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 73 – This tangent started in post 129 with a comment about Pelosi wanting to amend the First Amendment. Your the one who brought up the conservative nonsense in post 130.

    But nice try trying to re-write what happened here.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  76. Kary L. Krismer

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 172:

    But that doesn’t mean that the SCOTUS made the correct decision in Citizen’s United. It altered 100 years of law, from the Tillman Act to Taft Hartley to FECA.

    Here’s a case from 1990, which limited corporate contributions.

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3609582225306729508&q=austin+v.+michigan+chamber+of+commerce&hl=en&as_sdt=2,48&as_vis=1

    No where does it claim corporations don’t have First Amendment rights, as claimed by the commentators on Citizen’s United. In fact they recognize the rights, but allow limitations (the entity could not use general funds to contribute, but could use special political funds).

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  77. ARDELL

    I like to vote ON election day and I find myself wondering if anyone who voted early…too early…might be thinking they would have voted differently had they waited to the actual voting day.

    Not talking President necessarily, but the info that comes out on some of the smaller and more local issues and candidates tends to be more intense and expanded, due to monetary restrictions, closer to election day.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  78. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 175

    It’s interesting that this is a thread about the Presidential election, but instead we are discussing case law, or the First Amendment.

    Seems more like lawyer kind of stuff to me.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  79. ARDELL

    RE: David Losh @ 78

    I’m a street kid. When a bully wants to beat someone up…they always drag them into their own turf first. #justsayin :) You both should have stopped at Kary is voting for Romney and David is voting for Obama because all the rest of the crap boils down to just that.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  80. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 78:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 175

    It’s interesting that this is a thread about the Presidential election, but instead we are discussing case law, or the First Amendment.

    Seems more like lawyer kind of stuff to me.

    It came up because President Obama is very anti-Bill of Rights. Religion, Speech, Gun Rights, Due Process, States’ powers, you name it, the guy is against it. He’s more like Putin than the Democrats I grew up with. The Democrats I grew up with mocked the Republicans for wanting to amend the First Amendment over a flag burning decision. Now the Democrats are doing the same thing.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  81. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: ARDELL @ 77 – I would tend to agree, but with vote by mail you almost have to vote a day early.

    When you’re dealing with multiple elections, many things can happen, including in the big races.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  82. Kary L. Krismer

    By ARDELL @ 79:

    RE: David Losh @ 78 – I’m a street kid. When a bully wants to beat someone up…they always drag them into their own turf first. #justsayin :).

    I hardly drag Losh anywhere. He just won’t shut up and raises issues on which is doesn’t know squat. On the first page Doug brought up the issue of religious freedom, and Losh popped in with nonsense about how the cases were conflicting. No feces Sherlock. On this page it’s been speech, and again Losh pops in with nonsense.

    He’s sort of like the knight in the Monty Python movie. He just won’t quit, no matter how badly he’s beaten. But hey, maybe he’ll call it a draw!

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  83. David Losh

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 182:

    By ARDELL @ 79:
    RE: David Losh @ 78 – I’m a street kid. When a bully wants to beat someone up…they always drag them into their own turf first. #justsayin :).

    I hardly drag Losh anywhere. He just won’t shut up and raises issues on which is doesn’t know squat.

    That says it all, once again, from your own words. Your intention is to silence, not just me, but any one who has an opinion that differs from yours.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  84. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 83 – I’m respectful of other peoples’ opinions, if they have not insulted me.

    Quite some time ago, you made the claim I don’t understand real estate. You’ve also made claims that I shouldn’t represent buyers (or was it sellers?) and that I don’t understand short sales, the law, economics, etc. Rather ironic since you don’t know squat about any of these topics. But unfortunately your total and complete ignorance doesn’t stop you. You just keep on and on making one nonsense claim after another. It’s tiring.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  85. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 184

    Sorry Kary, but we are over here in a corner in the dark, and you can vent all you want.

    The fact is that you come to this site all day, every day, and insult, or bully people with your opinion, then shout them down.

    You sat down at a computer in 2008, or whenever, with no Real Estate experience, knowledge, or ability, and attacked Ardell. I was a fool to go along with it.

    Some one here pointed out you had no experience, and you said, they didn’t know what they were talking about because you were just helping your wife. Combined you both started in the business at the same time.

    Why do I even know that? Why do I even care? Because Kary, you haven’t progressed one bit in all of this time.

    The business of Real Estate is about adapting, and negotiation, that means giving a little. You don’t have that ability, so stop whining.

    You are fair game.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  86. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 185:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 184

    Sorry Kary, but we are over here in a corner in the dark, and you can vent all you want.

    The fact is that you come to this site all day, every day, and insult, or bully people with your opinion, then shout them down.

    BS. Find one example in the past week that doesn’t involve you. That should be easy, because you just said it happens every day.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  87. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 186

    Kary, I have spent a lot of my time with you, now you want more of my time, to suit you.

    Why? That’s the question. You are here all day every day demanding every one play your game.

    I think this week it was Doug, the week before some one else. I don’t care, it’s just exhausting to have a Kary Krismer marathon of opinion.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  88. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 185:

    You sat down at a computer in 2008, or whenever, with no Real Estate experience, knowledge, or ability, and attacked Ardell. I was a fool to go along with it.

    Yes, David, in the 20 years I practiced law, I never dealt with any real estate. You’ve got that exactly right–in your own mind. Like everything else you think though, you’re completely wrong.

    I knew more about real estate at 30 than you have ever known.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  89. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 87:

    I think this week it was Doug, the week before some one else. .

    BS. You can’t just through a name out there. Support your BS claim. Show where I shouted Doug down! Show where I insulted him.

    Doug and I debated the religion issue in a courteous way.

    Like everything else, you’re full of it on this claim.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  90. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 189RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 188

    You, see, you just don’t get it.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  91. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 88

    Baloney.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  92. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 191RE: David Losh @ 190 – I’ll take that to mean you can’t support your BS claim. Just like everything else you post–it’s nonsense.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  93. Kary L. Krismer

    Chris Rock on why white voters should vote Obama. ;-)

    http://ktar.com/158/1586570/Click-Chick-Chris-Rock-has-special-message-for-white-voters

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  94. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 188

    I’m not here to engage you with your circular arguments.

    I started work at 15 as a house painter working at the direction of some of the best Real Estate agents in Seattle. I became th gofer.

    In college my economics professor challenged me to a game of chess, which I accepted. During the game he asked me how much I made doing what I was doing, which was owning my own business, with a partner who was a bit older. I made $24K a year at the time, and I guess it was more than he made.

    By the time I was 33 I was retired, the first time. Of course my days were filled with charity work for the preceeding four years, you know how we do. My house was paid for, and my passive income was $2000 a month. Passive income is what it’s all about.

    If I remember correctly my stock portfolio was $250K with an income of 10%? That seems about right because a few years later Fidelity Magellan was paying 17%.

    But as you were told I bought a restaurant that we made into one of the top ten places in Seattle. The guy I sold it to still has it, and it still makes money. He became a client of mine later.

    It took me about five years to recover from that before I retired again.

    What I do, and how I do it is really pretty simple. I work in Real Estate.

    Now, you are an attorney, a bankruptcy attorney. Because I’m a Real Estate agent I am very familiar with the work of a bankruptcy attorney, what you do, and how much you make.

    You are like the thousands of attorneys in the world who are added to the thousands of attorneys who came before you, and are looking for work.

    Just by the things you say here on this blog, not counting the Trulia nonsense, it is clear that Real Estate sales is not what you do well. If you had some area of expertise in the Real Estate business then maybe you could share that.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  95. Kary L. Krismer

    By David Losh @ 94:

    Now, you are an attorney, a bankruptcy attorney. Because I’m a Real Estate agent I am very familiar with the work of a bankruptcy attorney, what you do, and how much you make.

    David, you don’t know squat. Quit pretending you do. Very few real estate agents know anything at all about bankruptcy, and if you were one of the few that did I would know about it. The bankruptcy world is a much smaller world than the real estate world.

    Just by the things you say here on this blog, not counting the Trulia nonsense, it is clear that Real Estate sales is not what you do well. If you had some area of expertise in the Real Estate business then maybe you could share that.

    I don’t know how many times I need to say this, but you’re in no position to judge me. Let me make this perfectly clear. You are too unintelligent, uneducated and inexperienced to judge me. I don’t know why you keep making claims you’re in no position to make, other than the fact that you’re really unintelligent and don’t know any better.

    As to my expertise in real estate, it’s over your head. You’re too unintelligent, uneducated and inexperienced to understand it. What I do on some transactions would make your head spin.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  96. Ira Sacharoff

    Kary said” I’m respectful of other peoples’ opinions, if they have not insulted me. ”

    But if you do perceive that you’ve been insulted, it doesn’t seem to me that you’re very good at shrugging things off or letting things go. Doesn’t matter what the thread is or who the other person is, whether it’s David or Ardell or Pegasus, it can just go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. It’s displaying something that I’ve been accused of more than once ” smart, but not necessarily mature”. And it doesn’t matter who’s reading or skipping past it, as long as you’ve made your point.
    How much does it really matter? Ever heard the expression ” pick your battles?”

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  97. David Losh

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 195

    Man, you are so funny.

    Read what you write, it’s all there.

    I’m not judging you at all.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  98. Kary L. Krismer

    RE: David Losh @ 97 – David, in the past I’ve said if you have a problem with something I wrote in a blog piece, point it out. Yesterday I said if you think I attack someone daily here, point it out. You’ve not responded to either request.

    Instead you just post a bunch of nonsense, because you don’t understand what I write and don’t understand the world in general.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  99. Kary L. Krismer

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 96:

    Kary said” Iâ��m respectful of other peoplesâ�� opinions, if they have not insulted me. ”

    But if you do perceive that you’ve been insulted, it doesn’t seem to me that you’re very good at shrugging things off or letting things go. Doesn’t matter what the thread is or who the other person is, whether it’s David or Ardell or Pegasus, it can just go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on.

    I do let it go. How long has it been since I’ve insulted Pegasus or Ardell? The answer is a long time. The reason? They have not insulted me for a long time.

    David just keeps up his clueless ignorant nonsense. That’s what goes on and on here–Losh’s nonsense. When he gets to the point of insulting me, I point out his shortcomings, which include things he agrees with, like that he’s an admitted failure as a real estate agent. Perhaps that’s because he thinks that being a real estate agent involves “sales” as he claimed yesterday. If you don’t understand the role, you’d be a failure at the role, but in any case you’d be in no position to judge other agents.

    The bottom line is Losh doesn’t understand squat about the world, but that doesn’t stop him from commenting on things he doesn’t understand or making claims about others which he is in no position to make.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

  100. ARDELL

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 99

    Kary,

    Offering this as an attempt to mediate a peace, as David has done for me many, many times.

    Your logic would suggest that God or God-like people have an inalienable right to call everyone else an idiot and not entitled to an opinion as in “What do you know? You come from the ghetto!” …as my ex-husband used to say when he was losing an argument. :)

    When David says your pieces are “self-promotional” it is largely due to the fact that he views ALL internet writings to be self promotional. A wise man will see that David is trying to grasp the concept of how technology has changed the world he knows, the real estate world he has loved for most of his life, and reluctantly letting go the the ways of the icons of his youth..

    A bit of compassion for his loss and understanding of his ongoing efforts to grasp the inevitability of this change, well…that would make you a bigger man in the eyes of…me. Not that what I think of you matters. But do please try to see where David is coming from and others as well, vs taking everything so personally.

    None of us is that important for what other people are saying…even about us, to really BE about us.

    At the brink of the light bulb going on…at the brink of change…there is much angst. Recognize that angst as a personal struggle with the speaker’s personal change, and not really venom direct at you personally.

    My $02 on this Election Day…Peace to All and Goodwill to (wo)Men and all that.

    Rate this comment: Thumb up 0

These comments are paged! This is page 2. Navigate the pages here:
1 2

Leave a Reply

Do you want a nifty avatar picture next to your name, instead of a photograph of Tim's dog? Just sign up with Gravatar, and make sure to use the same email address in the form below. It's that easy!

Please read the rules before posting a comment.

You have 5 comments remaining on this post.

Archives

Find us on Google+