Carleton Fiorina For Senate(?)! (Did We Miss. . . .Well!)

mascale

Gold Member
Feb 22, 2009
6,836
800
130
So the Republicans nominated a stand-in for a pack of smokes for Senate in California(?)!

At the website, at least, anyone is struck by the Ravioli in Tomato Sauce motif! The views on where Holy Father's should come from: Is left un-stated!

Carly Fiorina for Senate | CarlyForCA.com

Notice under health care that the plan is to repeal it. The idea is apprently to get something far more tedious to read: Back into the logjam of the two federal legislatures! There is no plan offered, but vague generalities are offered. There is a problem with costs? There no specific costs to contain that are listed, as the 'burbs of Washington, D. C., where lobbyists live, well-know!

Cut taxes and balance the budget: That's at the website! Conservatives want more people in a reduced Total Credit Market so that nobody gets to have any money!!

No Keynesian Public Works programs are proposed. Some woman down the street who owns a cigar store: Gets all the money!

There is "Fiscal Accountability" proposed, as thought the forklifts need fo the multiple line items of the federal budget: Themselves do not exist.

And then there is the problem of "secure borders," apparently not including to giant oceans!

Senator Robert Kennedy's concept of "Enterprise Zones" is re-hashed: As though it had worked for Prime Minister Thatcher, or Jack Kemp, or offered any understanding of the concept of an"economy." Carleton(?), recall, made here money in the "Deficit Zones," of the fantasy "Twilight Zones" of the TV series. When the Rich Get Richer, and the Pooer Get Poorer: Actually the whole thing bombs! The Carleton experience is of all of that, and all of that, and that over there, and even more where that came from!

Ivy League, at least, is not on the resume. So the. . . .lower Ivy league is on it, instead.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!'
(Clearly for some people: The Civil Right to a Pittance exists! Mega-Rich people seem to understand it best--if not how to void it out!)
 
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.
 
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.

so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....
 
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.

so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....

Don't be so sure.
 
The Federal Deficits of Bush II, Terms I & II, were of the same pattern of Reagan I, Ters I & II, and including the GOP, Paulson's Revenge.

The Management classes of USA are of the same skill as BP preventing and oil spill blast and crisis. "It can't happen here," so they make it does!

Carleton(?) and Meg(?) may at any rate need to make a full disclosure. Politicians make strage bedfellows, but they don't seem to want to be so regarded. What they did instead was to keep a lot of the deficit money from the wars for themselves. Other families had their murders murdered or dismembered.

Neither candidate is able to so-state that they accepted the deficit money, in all of those years. They oppose it, but still they kept it!

So they tend to support the contention that other people shouldn't have any of it at all! Especially the Senate candidate is not on the side of credit market expansion. The Senate candidate seems to want the federal government to take it all back, keep a lot more, and then provide little or nothing in return!

The business of Washington, D. C., is log-jams!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Maybe Smoke-Woman give Meg-Not-Mega-Woman spray for the garden(?)!)
 
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.

so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....

Don't be so sure.

im pretty sure...
 
The Federal Deficits of Bush II, Terms I & II, were of the same pattern of Reagan I, Ters I & II, and including the GOP, Paulson's Revenge.

The Management classes of USA are of the same skill as BP preventing and oil spill blast and crisis. "It can't happen here," so they make it does!

Carleton(?) and Meg(?) may at any rate need to make a full disclosure. Politicians make strage bedfellows, but they don't seem to want to be so regarded. What they did instead was to keep a lot of the deficit money from the wars for themselves. Other families had their murders murdered or dismembered.

Neither candidate is able to so-state that they accepted the deficit money, in all of those years. They oppose it, but still they kept it!

So they tend to support the contention that other people shouldn't have any of it at all! Especially the Senate candidate is not on the side of credit market expansion. The Senate candidate seems to want the federal government to take it all back, keep a lot more, and then provide little or nothing in return!

The business of Washington, D. C., is log-jams!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Maybe Smoke-Woman give Meg-Not-Mega-Woman spray for the garden(?)!)

yea like Boxer would somehow have higher ethics..........
 
Paulson's Revenge, TARP, is even more loathed by the Tea Party GOP than by the mainstream U. S. voting public in general. One notable example of the success is that TARP now has taken in more than is still outstanding. The GM investment is sound--not entirely supported by Paulson originally, but then included.

Paulson's possible aim was to create federal support for the bonus payments to the Wall Street Bankers. The Socialist Credit Market was sufficiently large to famously, "take care of itself!"

There is a void in the Fiorina legacy(?), similar to the Great Black Hole in the Universe of Presidential Administrations: Wherein after the retreat to the various undisclosed locations--nothing was ever to be seen or done coherently again.

It was the Bush GOP Administration. Subsequent rebates, which had worked: Paulson did TARP, which clearly didn't--until modified into a bail-out of other industrial sectors.

All of that is about support of credit, and support of economies. The Stimulus devoted only 1/3 of its spending to Public Works. 1/3 did make it into tax cuts and refundable credits.

Anyone notices that GOP generally opposed the stimulus, in the sense of the re-write apparently wanted, for tax cuts alone. Then there is the re-write wanted, for Health Care Alone.

Who needs a re-play of Obama Year One, even now--after Bush year 8, of Fiorina's Party?

A large central government, skilled in the new specialist areas, is not what the world is seeing in the Gulf at this time. There has not been a genuine liberal legacy in office for some years, and Fiorina even missed the original Brown legacy of UC, road, water, and on and on: Even then(?)!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Great Confederacy of Many Nations: Model of Democracy For The Non-Bankrupt World!)
 
Paulson's Revenge, TARP, is even more loathed by the Tea Party GOP than by the mainstream U. S. voting public in general. One notable example of the success is that TARP now has taken in more than is still outstanding. The GM investment is sound--not entirely supported by Paulson originally, but then included.

Paulson's possible aim was to create federal support for the bonus payments to the Wall Street Bankers. The Socialist Credit Market was sufficiently large to famously, "take care of itself!"

There is a void in the Fiorina legacy(?), similar to the Great Black Hole in the Universe of Presidential Administrations: Wherein after the retreat to the various undisclosed locations--nothing was ever to be seen or done coherently again.

It was the Bush GOP Administration. Subsequent rebates, which had worked: Paulson did TARP, which clearly didn't--until modified into a bail-out of other industrial sectors.

All of that is about support of credit, and support of economies. The Stimulus devoted only 1/3 of its spending to Public Works. 1/3 did make it into tax cuts and refundable credits.

Anyone notices that GOP generally opposed the stimulus, in the sense of the re-write apparently wanted, for tax cuts alone. Then there is the re-write wanted, for Health Care Alone.

Who needs a re-play of Obama Year One, even now--after Bush year 8, of Fiorina's Party?

A large central government, skilled in the new specialist areas, is not what the world is seeing in the Gulf at this time. There has not been a genuine liberal legacy in office for some years, and Fiorina even missed the original Brown legacy of UC, road, water, and on and on: Even then(?)!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Great Confederacy of Many Nations: Model of Democracy For The Non-Bankrupt World!)

ok....you showed us how fucked the Republicans are.....now what have ya got on the other slimeballs?....
 
So the Republicans nominated a stand-in for a pack of smokes for Senate in California(?)!

At the website, at least, anyone is struck by the Ravioli in Tomato Sauce motif! The views on where Holy Father's should come from: Is left un-stated!

Carly Fiorina for Senate | CarlyForCA.com

Notice under health care that the plan is to repeal it. The idea is apprently to get something far more tedious to read: Back into the logjam of the two federal legislatures! There is no plan offered, but vague generalities are offered. There is a problem with costs? There no specific costs to contain that are listed, as the 'burbs of Washington, D. C., where lobbyists live, well-know!

Cut taxes and balance the budget: That's at the website! Conservatives want more people in a reduced Total Credit Market so that nobody gets to have any money!!

No Keynesian Public Works programs are proposed. Some woman down the street who owns a cigar store: Gets all the money!

There is "Fiscal Accountability" proposed, as thought the forklifts need fo the multiple line items of the federal budget: Themselves do not exist.

And then there is the problem of "secure borders," apparently not including to giant oceans!

Senator Robert Kennedy's concept of "Enterprise Zones" is re-hashed: As though it had worked for Prime Minister Thatcher, or Jack Kemp, or offered any understanding of the concept of an"economy." Carleton(?), recall, made here money in the "Deficit Zones," of the fantasy "Twilight Zones" of the TV series. When the Rich Get Richer, and the Pooer Get Poorer: Actually the whole thing bombs! The Carleton experience is of all of that, and all of that, and that over there, and even more where that came from!

Ivy League, at least, is not on the resume. So the. . . .lower Ivy league is on it, instead.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!'
(Clearly for some people: The Civil Right to a Pittance exists! Mega-Rich people seem to understand it best--if not how to void it out!)

demonize demonize demonize.
 
Meg Whitman, and Carleton, both have the outsourcing model dilemma to contend with. In the current BP Gulf Crisis, BP had outsourced, and now has to fix it. Even GOP Administration had outsourced the Coastal Security function, and now the GOP version of Security is unable to Fix It.

So where was the specialized, specialist, regulatory administration to fix it?

The GOP contention for a smaller federal presence is not met with the need for understanding of even the whereabouts of the $50.0 tril. Total Credit Market. The GOP mantra is to "Have Someone Else Fix It, Whatever 'It' may be(?)"

Even Liberal Administration has to identify just exactly what "it" is: To Fix It.

The GOP mantra is for profits galore. How that happens is not of concern. Historically, that is why there are Liberal Administrations.

Now the planet is socialist, except where it is not. The GOP advocacy for a Haiti-level, or East Africa-Level, laissez-faire and relatively non-existent credit market is no longer relevant. The Global Economy requires the Giant Global Total Credit Market.

Or again, others may say it. Surely, it's the Party of Lincoln? Lincoln even wanted "others" sent away!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Give Stanford GOP woman shiny gold trinket! Bring Back Manhattan(?)!)
 
Last edited:
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.

so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....

Don't be so sure.

How is she really doing out there anyway bode? I saw her talking like a bitch about Boxer's hair the other day but nothing substantive.
 
Meg Whitman, and Carleton, both have the outsourcing model dilemma to contend with. In the current BP Gulf Crisis, BP had outsourced, and now has to fix it. Even GOP Administration had outsourced the Coastal Security function, and now the GOP version of Security is unable to Fix It.

So where was the specialized, specialist, regulatory administration to fix it?

The GOP contention for a smaller federal presence is not met with the need for understanding of even the whereabouts of the $50.0 tril. Total Credit Market. The GOP mantra is to "Have Someone Else Fix It, Whatever 'It' may be(?)"

Even Liberal Administration has to identify just exactly what "it" is: To Fix It.

The GOP mantra is for profits galore. How that happens is not of concern. Historically, that is why there are Liberal Administrations.

Now the planet is socialist, except where it is not. The GOP advocacy for a Haiti-level, or East Africa-Level, laissez-faire and relatively non-existent credit market is no longer relevant. The Global Economy requires the Giant Global Total Credit Market.

Or again, others may say it. Surely, it's the Party of Lincoln? Lincoln even wanted "others" sent away!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Give Stanford GOP woman shiny gold trinket! Bring Back Manhattan(?)!)

hey Mascara....you going to answer my question i asked above?.....or were you sent here by Rdean because he could not make it himself?...
 
so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....

Don't be so sure.

How is she really doing out there anyway bode? I saw her talking like a bitch about Boxer's hair the other day but nothing substantive.

gee Sarah come on.....you never seen Boxer talking like a bitch about someone?....wait until this thing gets going.....
 
She was a really mediocre CEO of HP, and that's being kind. She presided over the disastrous Compaq purchase. The stock did nothing when she was head of the company. When she was fired, the stock popped. And six months after HP hired Mark Hurd, the stock price was much higher.

so basically its two lumps of shit facing off for the Senate...what a choice....but she cant be any worse than Boxer....

sure she can. i don't know that i want a corporatist, expecially one who did a terrible job, making decisions about regulation of industry.
 
The criticisms of Carly Fiorina's record as CEO are more than fair. She didn't have a very good tenure at HP and that's undoubtedly going to come up a lot during the race.

It's kind of interesting though that those of you who voted for Obama are suddenly concerned about someone's experience.
 
Don't be so sure.

How is she really doing out there anyway bode? I saw her talking like a bitch about Boxer's hair the other day but nothing substantive.

gee Sarah come on.....you never seen Boxer talking like a bitch about someone?....wait until this thing gets going.....

Oh no, she can be a huge bitch if she wants to it's just that her hair makes her look like a little rat. If you're gonna be nasty about someone elses looks, you should be sure you are bringing something better otherwise, you just look stupid.
 

Forum List

Back
Top