- This topic has 570 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 14 years ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 4, 2010 at 12:28 PM #613392October 4, 2010 at 1:43 PM #612345
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]I actually know quite a few folks who are vociferously anti-immigration but choose to look away and ignore the facts because it’s convenient for them.[/quote]
Brian: What about those folks that pay lip service to unionization, proper immigration policies and environmental regulation, but completely ignore them in their personal business dealings? Like Nancy Pelosi.
I noticed you never answered my post about Pelosi, and her obvious (and well-documented) hypocrisy. Any reason? Other than her being a Dem, of course.
October 4, 2010 at 1:43 PM #612432Participant[quote=briansd1]I actually know quite a few folks who are vociferously anti-immigration but choose to look away and ignore the facts because it’s convenient for them.[/quote]
Brian: What about those folks that pay lip service to unionization, proper immigration policies and environmental regulation, but completely ignore them in their personal business dealings? Like Nancy Pelosi.
I noticed you never answered my post about Pelosi, and her obvious (and well-documented) hypocrisy. Any reason? Other than her being a Dem, of course.
October 4, 2010 at 1:43 PM #612983Participant[quote=briansd1]I actually know quite a few folks who are vociferously anti-immigration but choose to look away and ignore the facts because it’s convenient for them.[/quote]
Brian: What about those folks that pay lip service to unionization, proper immigration policies and environmental regulation, but completely ignore them in their personal business dealings? Like Nancy Pelosi.
I noticed you never answered my post about Pelosi, and her obvious (and well-documented) hypocrisy. Any reason? Other than her being a Dem, of course.
October 4, 2010 at 1:43 PM #613099Participant[quote=briansd1]I actually know quite a few folks who are vociferously anti-immigration but choose to look away and ignore the facts because it’s convenient for them.[/quote]
Brian: What about those folks that pay lip service to unionization, proper immigration policies and environmental regulation, but completely ignore them in their personal business dealings? Like Nancy Pelosi.
I noticed you never answered my post about Pelosi, and her obvious (and well-documented) hypocrisy. Any reason? Other than her being a Dem, of course.
October 4, 2010 at 1:43 PM #613412Participant[quote=briansd1]I actually know quite a few folks who are vociferously anti-immigration but choose to look away and ignore the facts because it’s convenient for them.[/quote]
Brian: What about those folks that pay lip service to unionization, proper immigration policies and environmental regulation, but completely ignore them in their personal business dealings? Like Nancy Pelosi.
I noticed you never answered my post about Pelosi, and her obvious (and well-documented) hypocrisy. Any reason? Other than her being a Dem, of course.
October 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM #612365briansd1
GuestI think that there is a qualitative difference between Whitman and Pelosi.
In Pelosi’s case, her husband is the business person. He’s not running for office.
In Whitman’s case, she’s the business person. She’s running for office. Whitman’s fortune is many multiples that of Pelosi’s; so Whitman’s business dealings are more relevant to her political positions.
October 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM #612451GuestI think that there is a qualitative difference between Whitman and Pelosi.
In Pelosi’s case, her husband is the business person. He’s not running for office.
In Whitman’s case, she’s the business person. She’s running for office. Whitman’s fortune is many multiples that of Pelosi’s; so Whitman’s business dealings are more relevant to her political positions.
October 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM #613003GuestI think that there is a qualitative difference between Whitman and Pelosi.
In Pelosi’s case, her husband is the business person. He’s not running for office.
In Whitman’s case, she’s the business person. She’s running for office. Whitman’s fortune is many multiples that of Pelosi’s; so Whitman’s business dealings are more relevant to her political positions.
October 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM #613118GuestI think that there is a qualitative difference between Whitman and Pelosi.
In Pelosi’s case, her husband is the business person. He’s not running for office.
In Whitman’s case, she’s the business person. She’s running for office. Whitman’s fortune is many multiples that of Pelosi’s; so Whitman’s business dealings are more relevant to her political positions.
October 4, 2010 at 2:14 PM #613432GuestI think that there is a qualitative difference between Whitman and Pelosi.
In Pelosi’s case, her husband is the business person. He’s not running for office.
In Whitman’s case, she’s the business person. She’s running for office. Whitman’s fortune is many multiples that of Pelosi’s; so Whitman’s business dealings are more relevant to her political positions.
October 4, 2010 at 2:21 PM #612380enron_by_the_sea
ParticipantDoes anyone know if those paid sign holders holding signs that say “Shame on XYZ” unionized?
October 4, 2010 at 2:21 PM #612464ParticipantDoes anyone know if those paid sign holders holding signs that say “Shame on XYZ” unionized?
October 4, 2010 at 2:21 PM #613018ParticipantDoes anyone know if those paid sign holders holding signs that say “Shame on XYZ” unionized?
October 4, 2010 at 2:21 PM #613133ParticipantDoes anyone know if those paid sign holders holding signs that say “Shame on XYZ” unionized?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.