Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Time for Jeff Bridges to dump Hyundai
- This topic has 2,580 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by
Coronita.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 31, 2011 at 6:44 PM #735290December 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM #735291
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=paddyoh]
Keep drivin’ American soldier.
;>][/quote]
Always. And driving American.
Here’s to a Happy New Year and even more Jeff Bridges Hyundai commercials. I especially like the ones he’s doing for the various colleges participating in the FBS bowls. Good stuff. Tremendously talented actor and it really shows in those commercials.
Freedom of choice and the right to work. Now THAT’S American and worth fighting for!
December 31, 2011 at 7:07 PM #735293scaredyclassic
ParticipantI’m Jewish not German and the alcohol won’t work. I get a little drunk and then I’m useless the next day. I’m just not a drinking lineman. I’m a delicate flower.
December 31, 2011 at 8:34 PM #735294Participant[quote=paddyoh]
Keep drivin’ American soldier.
;>][/quote]
Always. And driving American.
Here’s to a Happy New Year and even more Jeff Bridges Hyundai commercials. I especially like the ones he’s doing for the various colleges participating in the FBS bowls. Good stuff. Tremendously talented actor and it really shows in those commercials.
Freedom of choice and the right to work. Now THAT’S American and worth fighting for!
December 31, 2011 at 10:08 PM #735295Participant[quote=walterwhite]I’m Jewish not German and the alcohol won’t work. I get a little drunk and then I’m useless the next day. I’m just not a drinking lineman. I’m a delicate flower.[/quote]
Scaredy: Yeah, that whole German-Jewish thing is a little fraught. Maybe you go for the hulking Slovak look instead? As you gain mass, you seek to increase your tolerance for beer. Nothing says virility like quaffing massive quantities of ale whilst flexing your biceps. Or, in your case, your glutes!
January 1, 2012 at 7:36 AM #735297ParticipantOk. Once I hit 200 lbs I’ll resume the alcohol thing
January 1, 2012 at 10:04 AM #735300paddyoh
ParticipantHappy New Year……
Let’s hope 2012 is the year that Jeff
Bridges dumps the Hyundai advertising campaign.Although he has every right to shill for any company he pleases, let’s hope someone of his stature can become more sensitive to how his stardom helps tip the scales against an already ailing American Auto Industry.
It is a make or break period for all American industries and blue collar workers right now.
They can use all the help they can get.
It’s called philanthropy……
and it just might be making a come-back.;>]
February 7, 2012 at 1:38 PM #737432ParticipantIt’s half-time in America……
In case you missed the Super Bowl….
What more can I say.
Clint Eastwood + Chrysler = ClassJeff Bridges plus Hyundai equals Crass…..
It’s time for The Dude to let go of the HIE-YUN-DIE ads….
It’s beneath him.
Click here to help persuade Jeff Bridges to junk the Walmart car voice-overs.
February 8, 2012 at 3:43 PM #737587Participant[quote=paddyoh]
Clint Eastwood + Chrysler = ClassJeff Bridges plus Hyundai equals Crass…..
[/quote]
Patty O’Furniture: Shit, I can’t help himself.
Uh, dude, you do realize that Chrysler is owned by Fiat, right? You also realize that Fiat is Italian? So, um, how does that help America and American workers again?
Just curious.
February 8, 2012 at 4:03 PM #737589briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=paddyoh]
Clint Eastwood + Chrysler = ClassJeff Bridges plus Hyundai equals Crass…..
[/quote]
Patty O’Furniture: Shit, I can’t help himself.
Uh, dude, you do realize that Chrysler is owned by Fiat, right? You also realize that Fiat is Italian? So, um, how does that help America and American workers again?
Just curious.[/quote]
The shares are owned by Fiat but Chrysler is based in USA and employs Americans.
The Clint Eastwood ad is good. I love it.
Fiat has revenue of under $50 billion whereas Chrysler has revenue of $55 billion. I think that it’s a merger of equals. It gives Chrysler and Fiat global reach. It’s a win-win deal.
February 8, 2012 at 4:48 PM #737590Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=paddyoh]
Clint Eastwood + Chrysler = ClassJeff Bridges plus Hyundai equals Crass…..
[/quote]
Patty O’Furniture: Shit, I can’t help himself.
Uh, dude, you do realize that Chrysler is owned by Fiat, right? You also realize that Fiat is Italian? So, um, how does that help America and American workers again?
Just curious.[/quote]
The shares are owned by Fiat but Chrysler is based in USA and employs Americans.
The Clint Eastwood ad is good. I love it.
Fiat has revenue of under $50 billion whereas Chrysler has revenue of $55 billion. I think that it’s a merger of equals. It gives Chrysler and Fiat global reach. It’s a win-win deal.[/quote]
Brian: Uh, gotta call bullshit on that one. Cerberus Capital essentially handed the keys to Sergio Marchionne and Fiat in exchange for waiver of liabilities and the ability to walk away from their obligations at Chrysler. As you pointed out in your first sentence (which stands in direct contradiction to your last paragraph), Fiat CONTROLS Chrysler. No merger whatsoever. Cerberus was in a horrible position and couldn’t sell Chrysler to save their respective lives, hence the walk-away deal with Fiat.
Which puts Patty O’Furniture in the unfortunate position of explaining how Bridges/Hyundai is any different from Eastwood/Chrysler (cuz they’re NOT). This is gonna be some tortured logic coming up here.
Kind of like you explaining how a “Progressive” who’s all about “rights” has such a love affair with China (abysmal human rights record) and the British Royal Family (abysmal human rights record, including 800+ yrs of subjugating Ireland and Scotland and over 300+ yrs of colonialism and neo-colonialism).
February 9, 2012 at 1:43 PM #737641GuestAllan, I didn’t say that Clint Eastwood is any better than Jeff Bridges.
But I do think that Chrysler is more American than Hyundai. They produce cars in America and employ many more American workers. Even when Mercedes owned, Chrysler, it run by Americans.
As to China, I admire what China achieved since 1971, but that doesn’t mean I admire everything about China. In fact, China, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, followed an Asian model that worked very well for them and was appropriate to their cultures and time in history.
Contrast that to the Philippines that followed an American model. That turned the richest country in Asia following WWII into an economic basket case thanks in part to religious based reproductive policies.
On the British royals, my previous comments were in regard to right-wing Americans, such as Rush Limbaugh who are outraged that the Obamas broke protocol and “offended the Queen.” (Allan, this is where you should be focusing your hypocrisy argument)
Well, the Queen is the ultimate arbiter of who offended her. And since the Queen is the apogee of polite society, people who aspire to such milieu should defer to her.
The Queen extended the Obamas unprecedented invitations to stay with her at Buckingham palace. The Queen and Michelle exchanged private correspondence. They are friends. The Queen, inspired by Michelle, installed a vegetable garden at Buckingham. The whole royal family warmly welcomed the Obamas on separate occasions; so it’s not just strictly protocol and photo ops.
The Tea Party might be enraged that the Obamas came up so far, so fast. The Obamas may have been parvenus but they certainly have arrived to stay. It’s not for people living downstairs, such as Rush Limbaugh and his Tea Party minions, to comment on what goes on upstairs.
February 9, 2012 at 2:45 PM #737646ParticipantBrian: So, your argument essentially boils down to this: “I like Bob. Bob is classy, well-off and well turned out. Yes, I know that Bob beats his wife and abuses his children, but Bob manages to keep that within his four walls and, on the outside, Bob is witty, urbane and the very epitome of how a successful person should behave. Most important, Bob is NOT fat.”.
Your previous arguments on the Royals centered on their “class” and you know refer to the Queen as the “apogee of polite society”. Really? So “the apogee of polite society” has people murdered? You do know how (former Princess) Diana met her end, right? The “apogee of polite society” comes from a brutal, blood-soaked line of succession. It is interesting that you disdain certain behaviors in the US that you quite willingly accept from the Brits, mainly because they’re soaked in a patina of “class”.
As to the Chinese: Sorry, dude, that’s a completely specious argument, akin to saying you admire Mussolini because he made the Italian trains run on time. The Chinese are an autocratic, oppressive and repressive regime with absolutely nothing to admire because its been built on the backs of the 30 million dead from Mao’s Great Leap Forward.
Things are what they are, no matter how much lipstick you try to put on the pig.
February 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM #737657GuestAllan, you read too much into what I said.
I wasn’t showing admiration for the British royals, but I was defending the Obamas against their detractors who try to make make them into idiots savages that can’t survive in polite company. In fact, it’s the other way around.
The Reagans, especially Nancy who was a big society sycophant, took much longer to build a rapport with the royals. If I recall, the Reagans didn’t get to sleep at Buckingham, but Ronnie did get an honorary knighthood after his term. Overally, I believe Reagan belonged more at the Maggie Thatcher level, even after 8 years at the White House.
Maybe the Queen is softer in her old age. Either that, or she does really like the Obamas.
February 9, 2012 at 5:44 PM #737661Participant[quote=briansd1]
Maybe the Queen is softer in her old age. Either that, or she does really like the Obamas.[/quote]Brian: I bet it’s white (Royal) guilt over British treatment of the Fuzzie-Wuzzies for all those hundreds of years.
Either that, or she thought they were the help.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.