or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › President Obama points to Steve Jobs' ingenuity in State of the Union address
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

President Obama points to Steve Jobs' ingenuity in State of the Union address - Page 2

post #41 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by tru_canuk View Post

Anybody who cleans up a messy or a trashed house with a flame thrower doesn't deserve to be 2nd worst president. They deserve to be the worst president.

Besides Obama didn't clean up anything let alone take a flame thrower to anything. Most of the policies Bush enacted during his time Obama just kept going and even added a few of his lousy ones such his health care act, and the signing of the NDAA on New Year's Eve. Nevermind the fact he prolonged the war in Afghanistan when during his 2008 campaign he promised to release the troops from there within his first year. Plus the fact he went to war with Syria & Libya without Congressional Approval. Add to that there's talk of war with Iran. China & Russia have already warned they will take it as a national security threat if the USA or Israel attacks Iran. That's a recipe for WWIII. For what? Nuclear weapons that may or may not exist? Right. Just like there were WMD's in Iraq....NOT!

Don't forget the trillions in bailouts for Wall Street AND foreign banks which taxpayers are now responsible for. He promises to get lobbyists out of Washington but what happens...his top advisor picks are either Big Finance, Big Pharma, Big Agri lobbyists.

Same shit. Different year. And the Republican choices are just as bad. The only difference between the Republicans & Dems is one party wants to destroy us quickly and the other wants to destroy us slowly. Pick your poison.

I can't remember off hand which president it was who said but the quote was good;

When you see a continuity of an agenda from one government to the next, you know you're living in a tyranny.

Since the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, this is exactly what's been happening.

Even UN said that there where WMD in Iraq.
The problem was that US gave Iraq a 6 month deadline before the attack. Iraq had plenty of time to destroy their WMD.

Iraq is one of the few countries in the world history that have used WMD, so they had them. That is fact. They killed over 5000 Kurds with gas.

Bookmark this post, and you will see that I am right.

Iraq is exactly like Germany in 1945. In 1945 almost all countries in Europe where run by dictators. The democratization of Germany lead to a domino effect that 50 years later lead to that every country in Europe is democratic. We are seeing the same thing happen in the Arab world. Who would have believed just a couple a years ago that Libya and Egypt would rise up and try to become democratic?

For humanity the Iraq innovation was great. It saved 100000 of Iraqi lives and will lead to democratization of the arab world.


BTW. Israel bombed the Syria nuclear reactor. A brilliant operation that was so good that even the Syrians does not dare to complain about it. The Israelis turned of the Syrian air defense with computers. They landed Sayeret Matkal that raided the nuclear plant and gathered evidence. Then the Sayeret Matkal laser pointed the reactor and blew it up. Perfect operation.

Israel also stopped Iran from starting its nuclear plant last year by uploading virus to the Siemens stuff they had. One year later Iran still haven't managed to restart the plant.
post #42 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Personally, I think your comparison speaks volumes to your lack of differentiating between parties, but then again this isn't a damn Political Forum or it could get ugly, real fast.

It's bad enough with the crap of Android vs. Apple.

*hint* The whole party system is wrong. There is no party in the world that are right. They are just about power, and money.

All parties need to away. Every single question should be answered by fact and evidene. Not by parties or belief.

The problem is that almost all people make their deceptions on belief and feelings.

Intelligent people like me make my deceptions on fact. If someone can prove that I am wrong, I will change my opinion. That is something 90%+ of all people lacks
= the reason why the western world is falling.
post #43 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

So profit = greed?

Apparently that's what some people think. I wasn't saying I agree with it, but "excessive corporate profits" is one of the current hot button issues. And I was just pointing out that oil companies (as just one example) are criticized for excessive profits, and yet they have nowhere near the profits Apple does. So it's hypocritical of folks to single out one company as making too much money and then praise another which makes even more. And yes, I'm saying Obama was being a hypocrite. But it's not the first time a politician took a single, convenient fact and then ignored the whole story. And it won't be the last.

I wasn't so much criticizing Apple as pointing out the irony of his name being used in the way it was by a politician. It's like when Obama compared the Post Office to UPS, demonstrating that he didn't have a clue how the Post Office operated.

Sorry for the confusion.
post #44 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

So he was the second worst president by default and with his own crap, he managed to jump far to the end of the list...

I didn't realize this was huffingtonpost - lol

Bush is by far the worst, and under Obama things have turned around.

Are things perfect, no. Are they better then 4 years ago, hell yes!

Are the current crop of GOP candidates any good, hell no!
post #45 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

There's so much drivel here. You're entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.

- He never promised to get out of Afghanistan within a year. You're thinking of Iraq
- Went to war with Syria? When? Did I miss something? That's a pretty big mistake of you to make, and shows exactly how out of touch and confused you are. But hey, Syria's in the Middle-East so it's all the same shit, right?
- Libya was a NATO operation, and the US contributed. We got out of there damn fast, without a single injury or casualty,I'd hardly consider it a 'war'. It was absolutely the right thing to do, considering Gaddafi basically stated he planned to slaughter all the resistance, street by street. I'm generally against foreign interventions, but this is an exception I was for, and it was an incredibly quick and clean operation by US standards.
- What does 'talk of war with Iran' mean? This is coming mostly from the right, who are attacking Obama on being 'soft' on Iran. There's no evidence he plans to attack Iran, and most of the tough talk is political and meant to appease those accusing him of not standing up to Iran. You can't accuse him of anything based on 'talk', especially when he's not behind the talk.
- I agree with you that an attack on Iran would be a disaster, and trust me when I say I have absolutely no love for Israel, and believe they are the most dangerous country in the region. Still, Israel has been drumming up war with Iran for a long time, this has nothing to do with Obama.
- The bailouts were a necessary evil to prevent the utter meltdown of this country and devastation of the entire economic system, not to mention tens of millions of people. If you knew a bit about the economics of the situation you would see this. I'm against bailouts in general, but this was an extreme case where the consequences of doing nothing would have been insanely disastrous.

SO yeah.. stop lumping everything together in a desperate attempt to make a point. Most of what you said is flat out false, or heavily distorted by your own subjectivity and ignorance.

That's the really sad thing about American politics for at least the last 30-40 years. At one time, people could disagree without making up blatant lies and completely ignoring facts. Lately, it seems that both sides feel free to make things up and act like it's the truth.

I had a discussion with a kid yesterday on the State of the Union Address. Now, I would not expect anyone to agree with every word of the SOU Address. In fact, I could see someone disagreeing with much (or even most) of it. But this kid said "I didn't hear one word that I didn't consider to be bs". That indicates a closed mind which is not interested in hearing and processing any opinions different than its own. If you couldn't find one thing that you agreed with in the entire speech (which covered a wide range of topics and had a surprisingly broad political perspective), then you weren't listening. Your mind was made up before you even turned on the TV - so why bother?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by jca666us View Post

I didn't realize this was huffingtonpost - lol

Bush is by far the worst, and under Obama things have turned around.

Are things perfect, no. Are they better then 4 years ago, hell yes!

Sort of.

What people fail to realize is that there's a lag time between the moment a President does something and the results. The first year of Obama's Presidency was pretty abysmal - and things were clearly worse 6 months into his Presidency than when he started. But most of that was obviously the fall-out of the last year or so of Bush's Presidency. Things seem to have bottomed out somewhere in the 2nd year and have been slowly improving since then in most respects. And thank goodness he finally got us out of a $3,000,000,000,000 war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jca666us View Post

Are the current crop of GOP candidates any good, hell no!


That's what the Republicans I know don't seem to get. Obama could be beaten this fall - if the Republicans came up with a good candidate and fully supported him. Instead, the party has become so fragmented that their chances are miniscule. And the structure of the party along with the fragmentation is such that they're likely to choose a radical fringe candidate with no chance of getting elected.

Had they chosen someone like Huntsman, they might have had a chance. Gingrich or Perry? No way.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #47 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by axual View Post

Too bad we can't get people like Steve Jobs in in government ... Steve would do the following:

1. Immediately eliminate a few big departments which do mostly nothing except employ government employees and pay their benefits, followed by eliminating most all of the waste.

2. Implement technology across the entire government that actually works making the government 40% more efficient.

Just how long are we going to borrow $1 of every $3 spent and how long are we going to keep spending like there is no tomorrow?

Business and government are not the same thing at all and comparing the two are not apple vs oranges but apples vs steam engines. A CEO's job is nothing like what a president has to do. Making money is not the same as governing a country and if you learned anything in school you should know that. Selling services and products is what companies do, maintaining social services, diplomacy, infrastructure, a fair legal system, a safe and clean environment, etc... is what governments do. Companies will do none of the above unless government tells them they must. A CEO like Jobs would make a terrible president, Obama has an understanding of what a government should do for this country. And for all of you Obama haters that think he's the worst president ever, who on earth do you think would have had the steady hand to keep the economy, banks and motor industry from completely collapsing?
post #48 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

Unfortunately Iraq war was morally right, but put financial heart attack on US economy.

Iraq'a Weapons of Ass Destruction were a threat to the entire region.


/s
post #49 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Even UN said that there where WMD in Iraq.
The problem was that US gave Iraq a 6 month deadline before the attack. Iraq had plenty of time to destroy their WMD.

Iraq is one of the few countries in the world history that have used WMD, so they had them. That is fact. They killed over 5000 Kurds with gas.



.

one of the others being the USA. they used WMD on Japan. How many died?

the usa had no right whatsoever to invade iraq the second time. if another country did what usa did then the UN and usa would be screaming to heaven about how wrong it was. hypocrites and liars and dummies.
post #50 of 73
Quote:
Right. Just like there were WMD's in Iraq....NOT!

As Shompa stated, this is not entirely true. It is true that none were found in 2003, and of course if there was any Al Qaeda involvement in Iraq there wasn't enough to really start a war there. IMO Bush was mostly just grasping at straws as a means of getting in there so he could oust Hussein.

However, prior to the '91 Gulf War, Hussein was using all kinds of WMDs on Kurds and Iranians. This is fact. It is also fact that after that war, the UN went in several times to try and clean house with some success. Often it seemed more like Iraq would cooperate in some instances only as a means of moving WMDs around or giving themselves more time to dismantle/destroy other stockpiles so as to appear clean.

As for Israel bombing the Syrian nuclear plant, it is believed that both Shaldag and Sayeret Matkal were involved...if so...it was probably a cleaner operation than anything the US has ever done. Those units are serious business.

Samsung Galaxy series: Faster on a benchmark, not in your hand.

Reply

Samsung Galaxy series: Faster on a benchmark, not in your hand.

Reply
post #51 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I had a discussion with a kid yesterday on the State of the Union Address. Now, I would not expect anyone to agree with every word of the SOU Address. In fact, I could see someone disagreeing with much (or even most) of it. But this kid said "I didn't hear one word that I didn't consider to be bs". That indicates a closed mind which is not interested in hearing and processing any opinions different than its own. If you couldn't find one thing that you agreed with in the entire speech (which covered a wide range of topics and had a surprisingly broad political perspective), then you weren't listening. Your mind was made up before you even turned on the TV - so why bother?

Now there's a kid with great intellectual promise. Get him registered to AI and posting on this thread. He'll be in good company.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #52 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by jca666us View Post

I didn't realize this was huffingtonpost - lol

Bush is by far the worst, and under Obama things have turned around.

Are things perfect, no. Are they better then 4 years ago, hell yes!

Are the current crop of GOP candidates any good, hell no!

You forget about this gentleman named Ron Paul.

Could he win? Zero chance.

Is he better- in my opinion, absolutely. The only non-politician (has his own beliefs and appears unswayed because of the lack of large contributions) of any of them.


Just my opinion, but I find him refreshing. It just seems Obama is Gingrich is Romney is Santorum. Say the right things, then do whatever your political interests are.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #53 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Intelligent people like me make my deceptions on fact. If someone can prove that I am wrong, I will change my opinion. That is something 90%+ of all people lacks
= the reason why the western world is falling.

Some people don't like facts. Facts can change.

Opinion can be better, because they can stay the same no matter how the facts might change.


--My apologies to Stephen Colbert for misquoting him
post #54 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa View Post

Even UN said that there where WMD in Iraq.
The problem was that US gave Iraq a 6 month deadline before the attack. Iraq had plenty of time to destroy their WMD.

Iraq is one of the few countries in the world history that have used WMD, so they had them. That is fact. They killed over 5000 Kurds with gas.

Iraq didn't have the technical knowledge to manfuacture these when it is cheaper to buy them. Where do you think they got them from and why do you think the US was so hot and bothered to find and destroy those weapon depots?
post #55 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

You forget about this gentleman named Ron Paul.



Just my opinion, but I find him refreshing. It just seems Obama is Gingrich is Romney is Santorum. Say the right things, then do whatever your political interests are.


Do you agree with his plan to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior? How about selling off Federal Lands to the highest bidders? Yellowstone Park owned by Exxon? Canyonlands National Park sold off to the coal and uranium industries? Is that a good plan?
post #56 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by axual View Post

Too bad we can't get people like Steve Jobs in in government ... Steve would do the following:

1. Immediately eliminate a few big departments which do mostly nothing except employ government employees and pay their benefits, followed by eliminating most all of the waste.

2. Implement technology across the entire government that actually works making the government 40% more efficient.

Just how long are we going to borrow $1 of every $3 spent and how long are we going to keep spending like there is no tomorrow?

Totally wrong. Business leaders make lousy politicans. There's this myth that Government should be run like a business but only a dictatorship can be run like a business. And the reason why is that in our political system, everything is a compromise and execs like Steve don't compromise. A business executive dictates from the top. The President's ability to do that is very limited to the edicts he can execute via executive order. Everything else has to go through Congress.

A decision like, "The plastic scratches and is terrible - I want it changed to glass and we need it overnight" could never happen in Government. Saying to government employees, "let's work around the clock for the next two weeks to make this happen - I know you can do it" can never happen either. Government and business are two completely different beasts.

It's Congress that passes spending bills (although the President submits a budget as well). So in actuality, the President has relatively little power to reduce spending. And remember that when the Government does reduce spending, while that potentially can reduce the debt and borrowing costs, it also puts government employees out of work and government contractors out of business. That has negative impact on the economy as well.

Obama wants to consolidate some government departments, but he has no power to do so - he has to get Congress' approval.

I'm not going to get into debates over borrowing and spending. There are good economists on both sides of that issue.
post #57 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Or just MAYBE, she actually wanted to go, and was honoured to be invited to the State of the Union. There's worse things in the world than your husband who has passed away getting a shout-out by the President of the United States, in the most important and most watched address of the year.

Maybe, just maybe, Powell is an intelligent, normal, sane human being, which is why she showed up, and not some vindictive, irrational partisan. I watched the speech, and the thought never even occurred to me that she's being 'used', nor do I see how exactly Obama exploited her or her husband simply by taking a couple seconds to acknowledge his ingenuity in the context of what he was talking about.

Some of you need to keep your politics out of these threads, because you make utter fools out of yourselves. Not even a fan of Obama, but some of the stuff in this tread is despicable. Still, looking at the clowns running against him on the other side, not sure what rational person can't see he's still the better pick.


+ 1,000,000 Thank you.
post #58 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

one of the others being the USA. they used WMD on Japan. How many died?

the usa had no right whatsoever to invade iraq the second time. if another country did what usa did then the UN and usa would be screaming to heaven about how wrong it was. hypocrites and liars and dummies.

Hello! Japan attacked us first! And on top of that, they were refusing to surrender near the end when they'd clearly lost. The simple fact is that we'd have killed a lot more Japanese citizens if we'd invaded. Goodness gracious you are dumb.
post #59 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I hesitate to mention that Steve once told Obama that he was headed for a "one term presidency", and the reasons that might happen are still in play. I personally think he's been one of the worst presidents we've had... right up there with Bush.

(typical Obama lover retort) - He's just cleaning up Bush's mess and by the way you're a racist.
post #60 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post

Hello! Japan attacked us first! And on top of that, they were refusing to surrender near the end when they'd clearly lost. The simple fact is that we'd have killed a lot more Japanese citizens if we'd invaded. Goodness gracious you are dumb.

Japan attacked first because they had no choice. The US had imposed an oil embargo on them - gee, kinda like what they're doing with Iran.
post #61 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freshmaker View Post

Hello! Japan attacked us first! And on top of that, they were refusing to surrender near the end when they'd clearly lost. The simple fact is that we'd have killed a lot more Japanese citizens if we'd invaded. Goodness gracious you are dumb.

you are a fool if you still believe that old propaganda. educate yourself to the facts regarding the bombing of Japan.
post #62 of 73
President Obama added, "And Steve Jobs exemplifies what a determined individual can do, even without a formal college eduction. Thus, I would like to introduce my "College? Not For Me" program, in which we'll pay current college students a stipend to dropout, take calligraphy classes, and smoke hashish to ponder the next world-changing invention."
post #63 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

There's so much drivel here. You're entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.

- He never promised to get out of Afghanistan within a year. You're thinking of Iraq
- Went to war with Syria? When? Did I miss something? That's a pretty big mistake of you to make, and shows exactly how out of touch and confused you are. But hey, Syria's in the Middle-East so it's all the same shit, right?
- Libya was a NATO operation, and the US contributed. We got out of there damn fast, without a single injury or casualty,I'd hardly consider it a 'war'. It was absolutely the right thing to do, considering Gaddafi basically stated he planned to slaughter all the resistance, street by street. I'm generally against foreign interventions, but this is an exception I was for, and it was an incredibly quick and clean operation by US standards.
- What does 'talk of war with Iran' mean? This is coming mostly from the right, who are attacking Obama on being 'soft' on Iran. There's no evidence he plans to attack Iran, and most of the tough talk is political and meant to appease those accusing him of not standing up to Iran. You can't accuse him of anything based on 'talk', especially when he's not behind the talk.
- I agree with you that an attack on Iran would be a disaster, and trust me when I say I have absolutely no love for Israel, and believe they are the most dangerous country in the region. Still, Israel has been drumming up war with Iran for a long time, this has nothing to do with Obama.
- The bailouts were a necessary evil to prevent the utter meltdown of this country and devastation of the entire economic system, not to mention tens of millions of people. If you knew a bit about the economics of the situation you would see this. I'm against bailouts in general, but this was an extreme case where the consequences of doing nothing would have been insanely disastrous.

SO yeah.. stop lumping everything together in a desperate attempt to make a point. Most of what you said is flat out false, or heavily distorted by your own subjectivity and ignorance.

Agreed. And although I'm not a huge Obama fan in general, he's looking a million times better than any one of the complete douchebags running in the Republican party. Seriously the GOP are complete and utter joke, all at the expense of most Americans.
post #64 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I hesitate to mention that Steve once told Obama that he was headed for a "one term presidency", and the reasons that might happen are still in play. I personally think he's been one of the worst presidents we've had... right up there with Bush.

Actually, you don't hesitate to say it at all.

"Just like Bush"? Like withdrawing from Iraq, and from Afghanistan over the next two years? Oh, yeah, that's like Bush.
post #65 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift View Post

Actually, you don't hesitate to say it at all.

"Just like Bush"? Like withdrawing from Iraq, and from Afghanistan over the next two years? Oh, yeah, that's like Bush.

You forgot to mention actually catching Bin Laden rather than creating a war that cost $3 trillion and thousands of American lives (plus hundreds of thousands of others).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #66 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift View Post

Actually, you don't hesitate to say it at all.

"Just like Bush"? Like withdrawing from Iraq, and from Afghanistan over the next two years? Oh, yeah, that's like Bush.

Like invading Libya on the same BS pretense used to invade Iraq?

Like repealing the ban on assassination that had been in place since the 70's?

Like authorizing legislation giving him the sole power to arrest anyone, US citizen or not, anywhere in the world and hold them indefinitely without trial?

Like renewing the Patriot act?

Like breaking his promise to close Guantanamo Bay?
post #67 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You forgot to mention actually catching Bin Laden rather than creating a war that cost $3 trillion and thousands of American lives (plus hundreds of thousands of others).

All of which wouldn't have happened to begin with had Bill Clinton the balls to pull the trigger during his reign.......and conveniently neglecting that all the intelligence apparatus put in place to catch Bin Laden was initiated while Bush was in power.
post #68 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

Do you agree with his plan to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior? How about selling off Federal Lands to the highest bidders? Yellowstone Park owned by Exxon? Canyonlands National Park sold off to the coal and uranium industries? Is that a good plan?

Yes.


Seriously though, the majority of his policies wouldn't be approved regardless, but it would send a message that we are tired of the federal government ruling our lives and bring things back to the state and local levels as our constitution states.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #69 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

And ironically, Apple is one of the greediest companies on the planet. Think about it. They have a profit margin that would a Big Oil executive blush.

Apple's last quarter: 13.06 billion profit on 46.33 billion revenue = 28.2% profit
ExxonMobil 3Q11 (couldn't find 4Q11): 10.3 billion profit on 125.3 billion revenue = 8.2% profit

And Exxon's profits are inflated by the tax breaks they get (which should be taken away).

So why is Exxon evil and Apple the golden child?

Edit: Not meaning to take away from all the great things Steve and Apple accomplished. Just providing a point of perspective because "excessive" oil company (or any other company) profits are a popular rallying cry for some folks.


Really asking? Apple innovates, creates product we never knew we would love so much. Poor people gladly save their shillings for ONE NICE THING that does many things, an Apple device.
Apple is a leader. You watch. See them bring jobs home soon.

EXXon? Rape and pillage the earth, bribery and influence to prevent competing tech which humanity must have soon...because billions of Chinese and Indians idling their automobiles will leave the air unfit to breathe...soon. Bribery and influence taking money out of the pocket of hard working people in th form of price fixing gasoline? Etc etc. Oil spills,,,no matter how much we drill baby drill the price of oil is set on the spot market and ANYBODY can buy it, imagine American oil for the Chinese!
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #70 of 73
You got it right!
post #71 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

(typical Obama lover retort) - He's just cleaning up Bush's mess and by the way you're a racist.

You are a racist if you defend Obama just because he is black or cream colored or whatever he is. If his mother was white, why isn't he half white?
Post racial president, my rear end.
post #72 of 73
Why are you posting here???
post #73 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by palomine View Post

Really asking? Apple innovates, creates product we never knew we would love so much. Poor people gladly save their shillings for ONE NICE THING that does many things, an Apple device.
Apple is a leader. You watch. See them bring jobs home soon.

EXXon? Rape and pillage the earth, bribery and influence to prevent competing tech which humanity must have soon...because billions of Chinese and Indians idling their automobiles will leave the air unfit to breathe...soon. Bribery and influence taking money out of the pocket of hard working people in th form of price fixing gasoline? Etc etc. Oil spills,,,no matter how much we drill baby drill the price of oil is set on the spot market and ANYBODY can buy it, imagine American oil for the Chinese!

To say Exxon wasn't innovative, or create things we love is a pretty ignorant thing. You can dislike what they do currently, or whatever you want to complain about, but I'm sure when Exxon was 30 years old, people thought it was amazing stuff as well.
I would say drilling the first oil well ever, creating gasoline and motor oil for automobiles AND for the first plane, creating the first oil lubricant ever, creating the first generating station (i.e. to power hospitals during natural disasters), make the first kerosene lights (before electricity), rubbing and isopropyl alcohol, butyl (artificial rubber), etc, etc, etc.

What happens when we find out the massive tons of landfills that are filled with disposable electronics that Apple wants you to replace every 1-2 years?

Im not trying to argue about what is right or wrong, and who is environmentally conscience or has better business practices, I'm just saying- put it in perspective. Wars were won and lost because of what Exxon innovated, I can fly to Europe or visit Hawaii because of what Exxon innovated. I'd say there is no contest who was more innovative- standard oil or Apple.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › President Obama points to Steve Jobs' ingenuity in State of the Union address