79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased July 12th, 2012 http://pushbacknow.net/2012/07/12/79-of-gms-sales-last-month-was-government-purchased/government-motors/Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased. GM’s sales figures for last month were the best since 2008 , up 16% for the month of June. YIPPEE! Well, wait just a minute. It seems that those rosy sales figures are due primarily to a 79% increase in fleet sales to the U.S. government in June. That’s right. Our tax dollars are being used to pump up GM’s sales figures ahead of next month’s quarterly report so that Dear Leader can point to Government Motors as a huge success. The incestuous relationship between GM, the UAW and the Regime has never been more glaringly apparent. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. GM is unsustainable without government subsidies and will ultimately go bust again, taking billions of taxpayer dollars down with it. We bailed out General Motors to the tune of $50 billion. $30 billion of this is effectively a loss, mostly sunk into fattening the United Auto Workers union—fierce Obama supporters—while the actual bondholders were shown the elevator shaft.
Meanwhile, as News Busters reports, “We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500+ million shares of GM stock. Which we need to sell at $53 per. Which debuted post-bankruptcy at $33 per. And which is currently trading at just over $20 per. Meaning we’ll lose about $15 billion.” But it gets better. Despite the overwhelming negatives, the tiny bright spot of positive June sales numbers is being heralded by Obama and the leftist press as proof the auto bailout was a “success.” Obama is now campaigning on the “success” of – the government buying cars from…the government’s car company. With our money. Americanvision says That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids. You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself. The pressure is on Government Motors to appear financially strong as this may be the last earnings report before November elections and sets the stage for how “successful” GM is. One of GM’s past tricks to help fudge earnings numbers has been to stuff truck inventory channels. Old habits die hard at GM. According to a Bloomberg report, “GM said inventory of its full-size pickups, which will be refreshed next year, climbed to 238,194 at the end of June, a 135 days’ supply, up from 116 days at the end of May.” 135 days’ supply is huge, the accepted norm is a 60 day supply. The trick here is that GM records revenue when vehicles go into dealership
My rebuttal taken from a comment below an article about this
GM’s FLEET SALES, not ALL SALES…FLEET SALES…INCREASED BY 79%. To translate for folks who care about the truth: some percentage of their sales go to “government fleet”. For the month, the number of sales to “government fleet” was 79% higher than the month before. People, this does NOT mean that 79% of their sales are government sales!!!! It means if they sold 1000 cars to the government the month before, then they sold 1790 cars that month, for a “79% increase in government fleet sales”. I am sure some government entity placed a large order. Check the numbers, and I bet the next month “fleet sales were down 40%”.
So, if someone asks you what the main difference is between most of the Obama supporters, and Romney supporters, instead of stammering, and stuttering, and looking for an answer, just tell them that the Romney supporters sign their checks on the front, and the Obama supporters sign their checks on the back.
Sent to me by someone on unemployment and another on Social Security...
PLEASE FORWARD, IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO STOP THIS TRAINWRECK
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS... At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment. See page 272. What Nancy Pelosi didn't want us to know until after the healthcare bill was passed. Remember she said, "Pass it and then read it!!" Here it is!______________________________ Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number THE CARE BILL HB 3200
JUDGE KITHIL IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL. Judge Kithil of Marble Falls, TX - highlighted the most egregious pages of HB3200
Please read this........ especially the reference to pages 58 & 59
JUDGE KITHIL wrote:
** Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally.
** Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts.
** Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN).
** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax.
** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.
** Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.
** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception.
** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. (Death counseling..)
** Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.
HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:
"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."
- Honorable David Kithil of Marble Falls , Texas
All of the above should give you the ammo you need to support your opposition to Obamacare. Please send this information on to all of your email contacts.
It's scary to me that a older generation is trusting things in their E-mail more then stuff written by well researched articles. I mean, is this a by product of spam filters, have they made us too lazy at realizing that a majority of our E-mail is crap. It's amazing how many baby boomers fall for this shit.
It's scary to me that a older generation is trusting things in their E-mail more then stuff written by well researched articles. I mean, is this a by product of spam filters, have they made us too lazy at realizing that a majority of our E-mail is crap. It's amazing how many baby boomers fall for this shit.
It's because it confirms their views that they're under assault by the younger generation. Email just made it easier to pass on.
Trolling local comment threads on patch.com the statement that drives me nuts is "Liberals don't pay taxes so of course they want other people to pay them". FUCK YOU DUDE, I PAY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20% to 30% of my income in taxes.
I don't think you can pay that little in Norway.
Ok, I looked it up. The lowest amount is 28%. Interestingly, no one here seems to make nearly as big of a deal about it. Sure, no one likes hearing more taxes during elections, but at the same time, I don't really hear people complain about how much they pay in taxes.
FactCheck.org is a Democratic (leftist) site. I need an unbiased interpretation of these items before I'll believe that this email is not correct.
George Moravek
I'm sure the Annenbergs, who were close personal friends of President Reagan and who established the institute that funds FactCheck.org, would love to hear they are "leftists."
Actually, my favorite thing about FactCheck.org is that both sides seem to hate them. They pretty much always call it right down the middle on "just the facts."
FactCheck.org is a Democratic (leftist) site. I need an unbiased interpretation of these items before I'll believe that this email is not correct.
George Moravek
I'm sure the Annenbergs, who were close personal friends of President Reagan and who established the institute that funds FactCheck.org, would love to hear they are "leftists."
Actually, my favorite thing about FactCheck.org is that both sides seem to hate them. They pretty much always call it right down the middle on "just the facts."
It's nice how the right-leaning are so concerned with bias but think that FOX News is an impeccable source.
Really - as you know, I unfortunately live right now in a bastion of conservative dumbassitude (that will most likely change in January). So, I generally keep my feelings to myself. However, sometimes things are so stupid that I have to speak up - like this whole "Obamaphone" deal that they're all worked up about now. So, I said, "Well, you know that this sort of thing can be traced back to 1934, but Reagan expanded the service under the Lifelines Act in 1984, and Clinton expanded it to include cell phones in 1996." Of course, what I just said was "biased". How? The New York Times, the paper of record, is apparently biased. Of course, the little local paper is okay, mostly because they only print obituaries and church news, and FOX is okay. Sometimes they'll believe the WSJ, if what it says is not "biased".
Basically, "liberal bias" is any fact, no matter how concretely proven, that conflicts with the Randian/Christian (there's an odd combination) dreamworld they've built for themselves. The world is more than 6,000 years old? Bias. Jesus didn't ride a dinosaur? Bias. The earth revolves around the sun? Even more bias.
Liberal bias is the over attention directed at Republicans and the lack of attention directed at Democrats (and vice versa).
Media bias is the media spending more time on a Romney gaffe than they do an Obama failure such as the recent successful terrorist attack that killed our ambassador to Libya. Hate to sound like an old record but if a republican was president would coverage be the same?
The "liberal" side of the American media has not been nearly as critical of our president as they would be if he were a Republican. I'm not talking about BS partisan crap but real shit involving loss of civil liberties, secret trade treaties (SOPA, PIPA, etc), the deaths of American service members by 'partner' Afghanis, spying on Americans under the guise of counterterrorism. That's the bias that pisses me off.
Liberal bias is the over attention directed at Republicans and the lack of attention directed at Democrats (and vice versa).
Media bias is the media spending more time on a Romney gaffe than they do an Obama failure such as the recent successful terrorist attack that killed our ambassador to Libya. Hate to sound like an old record but if a republican was president would coverage be the same?
The "liberal" side of the American media has not been nearly as critical of our president as they would be if he were a Republican. I'm not talking about BS partisan crap but real shit involving loss of civil liberties, secret trade treaties (SOPA, PIPA, etc), the deaths of American service members by 'partner' Afghanis, spying on Americans under the guise of counterterrorism. That's the bias that pisses me off.
Except we don't have SOPA or PIPA mainly due to the veto threat of Obama, The whole Afghanistan thing is getting a lot of talk but at this point the country looks at that mess stoically, no one is sure what can be done other then leaving at this point... The left has been bashing Obama left and right for the civil liberty stuff, but when the alternative is the republicans on civil liberties, we are sorta happy to not be torturing people anymore if you catch my angle.
An important reelection message from our President to all of his supporters!
نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش
ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيستنور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خير ه ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش دي وار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوا و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت
سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پي دا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور
اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوا و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي
دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ن نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر
Don not light if the light went out. There was not the shadow of a wall and staring eyes, our If you can not find the light went shadow shadow role again dan Nnvr If no shadow was found We stare at the wall and not the eye shadow role again dan not light if the light went out. The There was not a shadow of eyes staring at the wall and we can not wait to don the shades of light If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr you will not find in the wall of the eye We can not wait to don dazzling shade of light if the light went out. The shadow was not found We can not wait to don the shadow of the wall and staring eyes light shade if you find out You will not find in shadow is Nnvr
We can not wait to don the shadow of the wall and staring eyes light if the light went out. The shadow moved Not finding staring us in the eye wall and another shade of light if it was not Don If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr Nystnvr find if there was not a shadow No other eye shadows in the wall and the role we don not light if the light went out. The left There is no shadow of eyes staring at us like dey don not another shade of light if If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr was not found in our wall-eyed stare If the light does not go down again in the shadow of a shadow. The shadow was not found and the Diva We can not wait to don the role of light striking the eye shadow shades you will find
You will not find in shadow Nnvr is staring us in the shadow of the wall and the other Don not light if the light went out. There was not the shadow of a wall and staring eyes, our If you can not find the light went shadow shadow role again dan Nnvr If no shadow was found We stare at the wall and not the eye shadow role again dan not light if the light went out. The There was not a shadow of eyes staring at the wall and we can not wait to don the shades of light If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr you will not find in the wall of the eye Our striking shadow role again dan do not find the light if the light went out of the shadows We stare at the wall and another shade of light if it was not Don
If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr not finding staring us in the eye wall If you don not go another shade light shade. There was not the shadow of the wall and We can not wait to don the role of a shadow staring eyes light up if the light was not da Nnvr if There was not a shadow of eyes staring at the wall and we can not wait to don the shades of light If the light went out. There was not the shadow of a wall and staring us in the eye shadow If you can not find the light went shadow don not Wait Nnvr if he does not find in shadow We stare at the wall and another shade of light if you don not go out at shadow's shadow Not finding staring us in the eye wall and not another shade of light Dunn
If you can not find the light went shadow Nnvr you will not find in the wall of the eye We can not wait to don dazzling shade of light if the light went out. The shadow was not found We can not wait to don the shadow of the wall and staring eyes light shade if you find out You will not find in shadow Nnvr is staring us in the shadow of the wall and the other Don not light if the light went out. The shadow was not detected in our Diva and staring eyes If you can not find the light went shadow shadow role again dan Nnvr If no shadow was found We stare at the wall and not the eye shadow role again dan not light if the light went out. The There was not a shadow of the wall and staring us in the eye shadow not Wait
If you can not find the light went shadow down the light if there was not a shadow of the wall We can not wait to don the role of gaze and eye shadow if the light went shadow. Find out the shadows We stare at the wall and not the shadow of the Cross
Comments
79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased
July 12th, 2012
http://pushbacknow.net/2012/07/12/79-of-gms-sales-last-month-was-government-purchased/government-motors/Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better, it seems the car company he bought is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased.
GM’s sales figures for last month were the best since 2008 , up 16% for the month of June. YIPPEE! Well, wait just a minute. It seems that those rosy sales figures are due primarily to a 79% increase in fleet sales to the U.S. government in June. That’s right. Our tax dollars are being used to pump up GM’s sales figures ahead of next month’s quarterly report so that Dear Leader can point to Government Motors as a huge success. The incestuous relationship between GM, the UAW and the Regime has never been more glaringly apparent. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. GM is unsustainable without government subsidies and will ultimately go bust again, taking billions of taxpayer dollars down with it.
We bailed out General Motors to the tune of $50 billion. $30 billion of this is effectively a loss, mostly sunk into fattening the United Auto Workers union—fierce Obama supporters—while the actual bondholders were shown the elevator shaft.
Meanwhile, as News Busters reports, “We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500+ million shares of GM stock. Which we need to sell at $53 per. Which debuted post-bankruptcy at $33 per. And which is currently trading at just over $20 per. Meaning we’ll lose about $15 billion.”
But it gets better. Despite the overwhelming negatives, the tiny bright spot of positive June sales numbers is being heralded by Obama and the leftist press as proof the auto bailout was a “success.”
Obama is now campaigning on the “success” of – the government buying cars from…the government’s car company. With our money.
Americanvision says That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids. You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself.
The pressure is on Government Motors to appear financially strong as this may be the last earnings report before November elections and sets the stage for how “successful” GM is. One of GM’s past tricks to help fudge earnings numbers has been to stuff truck inventory channels. Old habits die hard at GM. According to a Bloomberg report, “GM said inventory of its full-size pickups, which will be refreshed next year, climbed to 238,194 at the end of June, a 135 days’ supply, up from 116 days at the end of May.” 135 days’ supply is huge, the accepted norm is a 60 day supply. The trick here is that GM records revenue when vehicles go into dealership
My rebuttal taken from a comment below an article about this
That's not even true, that headline.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-03/auto-sales-in-june-provided-bright-spot-for-u-dot-s-dot-economy
GM’s FLEET SALES, not ALL SALES…FLEET SALES…INCREASED BY 79%. To translate for folks who care about the truth: some percentage of their sales go to “government fleet”. For the month, the number of sales to “government fleet” was 79% higher than the month before. People, this does NOT mean that 79% of their sales are government sales!!!! It means if they sold 1000 cars to the government the month before, then they sold 1790 cars that month, for a “79% increase in government fleet sales”. I am sure some government entity placed a large order. Check the numbers, and I bet the next month “fleet sales were down 40%”.
Sent to me by someone on unemployment and another on Social Security...
YOU ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THIS...
At age 76 when you most need it, you are not eligible for cancer treatment.
See page 272. What Nancy Pelosi didn't want us to know until after the healthcare bill was passed. Remember she said, "Pass it and then read it!!" Here it is!______________________________
Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number
THE CARE BILL HB 3200
JUDGE KITHIL IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL.
Judge Kithil of Marble Falls, TX - highlighted the
most egregious pages
of HB3200
Please read this........ especially
the reference to pages 58 & 59
JUDGE KITHIL wrote:
**
Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to
all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally.
**
Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an
individual's bank account and will have the authority to make
electronic fund transfers from those accounts.
**
Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the
government) for all union members, union retirees and for
community organizations (such as the Association
of Community Organizations for Reform Now -
ACORN).
**
Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section
will not be treated as a tax.
**
Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same
regardless of specialty, and the government will set all
doctors' fees.
**
Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care
according to the patient's age.
**
Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on
hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an
exception.
**
Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care
planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be
required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five
years. (Death counseling..)
**
Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify
which doctors can write an end-of-life order.
HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:
"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not apply to
members of Congress. Members of Congress are already
exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded
private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on
our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick
'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."
- Honorable
David Kithil of Marble Falls , Texas
All of the above should
give you the ammo you need to support your opposition to
Obamacare. Please send this information on to all of your email
contacts.
So many questions about what exactly they intend for this to mean...
Scott:
FactCheck.org is a Democratic (leftist) site. I need an unbiased interpretation of these items before I'll believe that this email is not correct.
George Moravek
Ok, I looked it up. The lowest amount is 28%. Interestingly, no one here seems to make nearly as big of a deal about it. Sure, no one likes hearing more taxes during elections, but at the same time, I don't really hear people complain about how much they pay in taxes.
EDIT: I looked it up. Once you count deductions things look like this:
Actually, my favorite thing about FactCheck.org is that both sides seem to hate them. They pretty much always call it right down the middle on "just the facts."
Really - as you know, I unfortunately live right now in a bastion of conservative dumbassitude (that will most likely change in January). So, I generally keep my feelings to myself. However, sometimes things are so stupid that I have to speak up - like this whole "Obamaphone" deal that they're all worked up about now. So, I said, "Well, you know that this sort of thing can be traced back to 1934, but Reagan expanded the service under the Lifelines Act in 1984, and Clinton expanded it to include cell phones in 1996." Of course, what I just said was "biased". How? The New York Times, the paper of record, is apparently biased. Of course, the little local paper is okay, mostly because they only print obituaries and church news, and FOX is okay. Sometimes they'll believe the WSJ, if what it says is not "biased".
Basically, "liberal bias" is any fact, no matter how concretely proven, that conflicts with the Randian/Christian (there's an odd combination) dreamworld they've built for themselves. The world is more than 6,000 years old? Bias. Jesus didn't ride a dinosaur? Bias. The earth revolves around the sun? Even more bias.
Media bias is the media spending more time on a Romney gaffe than they do an Obama failure such as the recent successful terrorist attack that killed our ambassador to Libya. Hate to sound like an old record but if a republican was president would coverage be the same?
The "liberal" side of the American media has not been nearly as critical of our president as they would be if he were a Republican. I'm not talking about BS partisan crap but real shit involving loss of civil liberties, secret trade treaties (SOPA, PIPA, etc), the deaths of American service members by 'partner' Afghanis, spying on Americans under the guise of counterterrorism. That's the bias that pisses me off.
Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring
OBAMAPHONE
Beats the rest
Is what Steve wrote actually evidence of bias or is it more likely just anecdotal evidence of a vague feeling of paranoia and mistrust?
"Subject: An Important Memo
An important reelection message from our President to all of his supporters!
نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما
نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر
رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور
اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم
خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست
نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش
ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه
پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت
سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيستنور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست
نقش ديوار و چشم خير ه ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت
سايه پيدا نيست نقش دي وار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر
رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما
نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوا و
چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر
نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما
نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر
رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور
اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم
خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش
ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت
سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش
سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و
چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پي دا نيست ننور اگر
رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور
اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه
دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش
ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه ر رفت سايه
پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور
اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم
خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست
نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر
نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوا و چشم خيره ما
نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ننور اگر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر
رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي
دان نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست ن نور اگر رفت سايه پيدا نيست نقش ديوار
و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر نمي دان نور اگر رفت سايه. ر رفت سايه پيدا
نيست نقش ديوار و چشم خيره ما نقش سايه دگر
If I hear more, I'll let you know"
Wasn't sure what this was about?