The GOP Raised $1,000,000 After Palin's Speech.... - GoFuckYourself.com

EmpireAutopilot · 09-04-2008, 03:14 PM

Obama raised $8,000,000.

Idiot Republicans.

IllTestYourGirls · 09-04-2008, 03:16 PM

like flushing a money down the drain.

EmpireAutopilot · 09-04-2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

like flushing a money down the drain.

I agree. Anyone donating 1 cent to the GOP doesn't deserve their money anyhow.

IllTestYourGirls · 09-04-2008, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

I agree. Anyone donating 1 cent to the GOP doesn't deserve their money anyhow.

I feel the same way about both parties

EmpireAutopilot · 09-04-2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

I feel the same way about both parties

In a perfect world you and the morons like you would get McCain, the rest of us would get Obama. That way your ignorant ass might finally wake up and realize that it does in fact matter who wins.

fatfoo · 09-04-2008, 04:49 PM

heh heh heh

TheDoc · 09-04-2008, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

In a perfect world you and the morons like you would get McCain, the rest of us would get Obama. That way your ignorant ass might finally wake up and realize that it does in fact matter who wins.

So everyone is a Moron that doesn't get one of the two guys? I'm confused.

So what is it that the Morons need to get about McCain or maybe Obama? I would like to hear how rational you are about such a subject that you feel so strong about.

Other than war, and guns-abortion which neither will change - can you actually name a difference in these two men, that will actually effect America?

Don't say taxes, every president has increased them. They simply move it from one place to another, morons think they get tax breaks from presidents.

So what is it that people need to get about either of these guys? Maybe I'm missing something important.

notoldschool · 09-04-2008, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

So everyone is a Moron that doesn't get one of the two guys? I'm confused.

So what is it that the Morons need to get about McCain or maybe Obama? I would like to hear how rational you are about such a subject that you feel so strong about.

Other than war, and guns-abortion which neither will change - can you actually name a difference in these two men, that will actually effect America?

Don't say taxes, every president has increased them. They simply move it from one place to another, morons think they get tax breaks from presidents.

So what is it that people need to get about either of these guys? Maybe I'm missing something important.

Only one thing matters on this board.

Net Neutraility

Mccain = Wants to end.

Obama = Wants to keep.

On the porn issue well just ask Romney how they want you to keep your job. That is if any of you really are adult webmasters.

TheDoc · 09-04-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notoldschool

Only one thing matters on this board.

Net Neutraility

Mccain = Wants to end.

Obama = Wants to keep.

On the porn issue well just ask Romney how they want you to keep your job. That is if any of you really are adult webmasters.

McCain wants net neutrality. We as an industry, do not want it. Obama may support it too, most politicians do. They are being lobbied hard.

And every president has done something to our Industry. The track record for both parties isn't very good.

TheDoc · 09-04-2008, 05:42 PM

Looking at the recent articles, McCain doesn't know what the Internet is, he doesn't like scammers, frauders.. The man doesn't even know what Net Neutrality is.

Obama, you are right - he supports it. That's very bad for our business. Much worse than 2257 regulations ever could be.

TheDoc · 09-04-2008, 05:49 PM

In short, the phone companies spent all the money the gov gave them years ago to upgrade the internet. They spent it on big ceo bonus checks, and now they are hurting.

The real deal is, the phone companies want to charge you more for what you use, in a tier system. Rather than making bandwidth cheaper, faster, for everyone, free if people want. It's masked under the idea of keeping the net, free of restrictions, but not free of account regulations based on the price you spend.

We want to go the direction of Japan, we are going the direction of a 3rd world country.

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

pr0 · 09-04-2008, 05:55 PM

TheDoc, you are one of the sharpest dudes on gfy

IllTestYourGirls · 09-04-2008, 05:59 PM

thanks doc, I did not feel like repeating myself.

EmpireAutopilot · 09-04-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Obama, you are right - he supports it. That's very bad for our business. Much worse than 2257 regulations ever could be.

What the fuck are you smoking? McCain doesn't know what the shit is but he is against it because he was told to be against it.

You are 100% fucking backwards in your statement above. Obama supports net neutrality. That means he does NOT want all the shit you listed in your idiot rant after that. You do know what "neutrality" means don't you?

BlackCrayon · 09-04-2008, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

You are 100% fucking backwards in your statement above. Obama supports net neutrality. That means he does NOT want all the shit you listed in your idiot rant after that. You do know what "neutrality" means don't you?

This is what I was going to post. Seems Doc has it backwards.

IllTestYourGirls · 09-04-2008, 06:23 PM

How does he have it backwards? He does not think Net Neutrality is good. For some good reasons he pointed out. Just because they name something "Net Neutrality" does not make it neutral. Or do you believe supporting the "Patriot Act" is patriotic?

EmpireAutopilot · 09-04-2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

How does he have it backwards? He does not think Net Neutrality is good. For some good reasons he pointed out. Just because they name something "Net Neutrality" does not make it neutral. Or do you believe supporting the "Patriot Act" is patriotic?

Uh, because he is 100% backwards on his argument. Read his followup post. He lists off the shit that those AGAINST net neutrality want but says it as if those than are FOR net neutrality want it. He's just another confused McCain sheep.

crockett · 09-04-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls

How does he have it backwards? He does not think Net Neutrality is good. For some good reasons he pointed out. Just because they name something "Net Neutrality" does not make it neutral. Or do you believe supporting the "Patriot Act" is patriotic?

Net Neutrality is what we already have now. It means we all have access to a equal playing field. Obama supports keeping it like it is already. The Net Neutrality movement isn't trying to change anything, it's trying to keep it like it already is.

McCain was for doing away with net neutrality which means all kinds of bad things for all of us.

robfantasy · 09-04-2008, 07:35 PM

obama supporters are also the ones who play the lottery

pocketkangaroo · 09-04-2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Looking at the recent articles, McCain doesn't know what the Internet is, he doesn't like scammers, frauders.. The man doesn't even know what Net Neutrality is.

For a guy who doesn't know what the internet is, he sure likes to propose laws to heavily regulate it.

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/06/37259

http://news.cnet.com/Senator-Illegal...3-6142332.html

But as you said, "he doesn't know what the Internet is". That seems like someone I wouldn't want in considering I make my living off the internet. McCain has routinely scored near the bottom of all Congressional rankings put out by tech groups, while Obama has scored high.

If I was a plumber, sure, I'd perhaps vote for McCain. But I'm in an industry that he has made a concerted effort to heavily regulate. I'm in an industry in which conservative judges haven't exactly been kind to (which he wants to appoint). If I see some evidence that Obama would be worse for technology and the industry, I'd love to see it. But so far, your argument seems to say "well McCain isn't good for us and doesn't know a lot about the internet, but maybe Obama will get lobbied hard or something".

TheDoc · 09-04-2008, 09:43 PM

Wow, holy shit some of you people are on crack, drugs, rock, pipe up the ass, something really fucked up either way.

First, I don't support McCain or Obama. Personally, I think we are totally screwed either way.

Network neutrality is a bad thing. So supporting it, is a bad thing. Meaning, I don't support it, I don't want it around. It's nothing more than words that sound like a good thing but really is a bad thing.

The GOV doesn't want to regulate the Internet with this idea. The Internet Providers do. So by supporting net neutrality, you support the idea of allowing phone companies to charge you based on the hours, minutes, seconds, downloads, locations, websites, time on a site, anything they wish anyway they seem fit. Like a long distance phone call, but on a tier system like cell phones.

"In a June 2007 report, America's Federal Trade Commission urged restraint with respect to the new regulations proposed by network neutrality advocates, noting the "broadband industry is a relatively young and evolving one," and given no "significant market failure or demonstrated consumer harm from conduct by broadband providers," such regulations "may well have adverse effects on consumer welfare, despite the good intentions of their proponents."[9] In turn, the FTC conclusions have been questioned in Congress, as in September 2007, when Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate interstate commerce, trade and tourism subcommittee, told FTC Chairwoman Deborah Platt Majoras that he feared new services as groundbreaking as Google could not get started in a system with price discrimination."

Even the FTC says .. hey wait, this is fucked.. First, "WE" aren't doing it, someone else is trying to do - and that's our job - so fuck off.

That doesn't mean the FTC doesn't want to regulate us, it just means they don't want the ISP's to regulate what you can and can't do and how much to charge us for it.

Ok, back to your regular moron programing.

tiger · 09-05-2008, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

In a perfect world you and the morons like you would get McCain, the rest of us would get Obama. That way your ignorant ass might finally wake up and realize that it does in fact matter who wins.

nation-x · 09-05-2008, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpireAutopilot

Obama raised $8,000,000.

Idiot Republicans.

Make that $10M

09-04-2008, 03:14 PM	#1
EmpireAutopilot Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: United States Posts: 404	The GOP Raised $1,000,000 After Palin's Speech.... Obama raised $8,000,000. Idiot Republicans.

09-04-2008, 03:16 PM	#2
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	like flushing a money down the drain. __________________

09-04-2008, 04:49 PM	#6
fatfoo ICQ:649699063 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 27,763	heh heh heh __________________ Send me an email: [email protected]

09-04-2008, 05:42 PM	#10
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	Looking at the recent articles, McCain doesn't know what the Internet is, he doesn't like scammers, frauders.. The man doesn't even know what Net Neutrality is. Obama, you are right - he supports it. That's very bad for our business. Much worse than 2257 regulations ever could be. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation

09-04-2008, 05:49 PM	#11
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	In short, the phone companies spent all the money the gov gave them years ago to upgrade the internet. They spent it on big ceo bonus checks, and now they are hurting. The real deal is, the phone companies want to charge you more for what you use, in a tier system. Rather than making bandwidth cheaper, faster, for everyone, free if people want. It's masked under the idea of keeping the net, free of restrictions, but not free of account regulations based on the price you spend. We want to go the direction of Japan, we are going the direction of a 3rd world country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation

09-04-2008, 05:55 PM	#12
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	TheDoc, you are one of the sharpest dudes on gfy __________________ __________ Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

09-04-2008, 05:59 PM	#13
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	thanks doc, I did not feel like repeating myself. __________________

09-04-2008, 06:23 PM	#16
IllTestYourGirls Ah My Balls Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Under the gold leaf ICQ 388-454-421 Posts: 14,311	How does he have it backwards? He does not think Net Neutrality is good. For some good reasons he pointed out. Just because they name something "Net Neutrality" does not make it neutral. Or do you believe supporting the "Patriot Act" is patriotic? __________________

09-04-2008, 07:35 PM	#19
robfantasy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Medellin, Colombia Posts: 6,445	obama supporters are also the ones who play the lottery __________________ Looking to speak w/ high volume nutra CPA affiliates or networks... msg me

09-04-2008, 09:43 PM	#21
TheDoc Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Currently Incognito Posts: 13,827	Wow, holy shit some of you people are on crack, drugs, rock, pipe up the ass, something really fucked up either way. First, I don't support McCain or Obama. Personally, I think we are totally screwed either way. Network neutrality is a bad thing. So supporting it, is a bad thing. Meaning, I don't support it, I don't want it around. It's nothing more than words that sound like a good thing but really is a bad thing. The GOV doesn't want to regulate the Internet with this idea. The Internet Providers do. So by supporting net neutrality, you support the idea of allowing phone companies to charge you based on the hours, minutes, seconds, downloads, locations, websites, time on a site, anything they wish anyway they seem fit. Like a long distance phone call, but on a tier system like cell phones. "In a June 2007 report, America's Federal Trade Commission urged restraint with respect to the new regulations proposed by network neutrality advocates, noting the "broadband industry is a relatively young and evolving one," and given no "significant market failure or demonstrated consumer harm from conduct by broadband providers," such regulations "may well have adverse effects on consumer welfare, despite the good intentions of their proponents."[9] In turn, the FTC conclusions have been questioned in Congress, as in September 2007, when Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate interstate commerce, trade and tourism subcommittee, told FTC Chairwoman Deborah Platt Majoras that he feared new services as groundbreaking as Google could not get started in a system with price discrimination." Even the FTC says .. hey wait, this is fucked.. First, "WE" aren't doing it, someone else is trying to do - and that's our job - so fuck off. That doesn't mean the FTC doesn't want to regulate us, it just means they don't want the ISP's to regulate what you can and can't do and how much to charge us for it. Ok, back to your regular moron programing. __________________ ~TheDoc - ICQ7765825 It's all disambiguation Last edited by TheDoc; 09-04-2008 at 09:45 PM..