View Full Version : Linda McMahon
Spindrift
2nd March 2010, 04:58 PM
Linda McMahon, former CEO of WWE and husband of Vince McMahon, is running for the Republican nomination for Senator in Connecticut. (Motto: Minnesota elected Jesse Ventura and Al Franken, I gotta have a shot.)
Her is a quote from her press releases announcing her candidacy:
http://www.linda2010.com/press-releases/2009/09/release-linda-mcmahon-enters-gop-primary-for-u-s-senate/
Linda is a fiscal conservative who believes in America and its free market, free enterprise system. She believes government ought to incentivize job creators, and that small businesses need access to capital and credit in order to create jobs.
First I'm glad she has distinguished herself from the other candidates by declaring her belief in America publically, that was courageous of her. One candidate thinks America might exist but doesn't think it cares about people on a day to day basis. Another candidate doesn't believe America exists until he turns 62 and needs Medicare.
But back to Mrs. McMahon. She believes in free market, free enterprise, but wants the government to incentivize job creators? If free market and free enterprise are so perfect why would job incentives be necessary?
She also goes out on a limb and states that small businesses need money to run their businesses. I hope she doesn't keep that a secret.
Cleon
2nd March 2010, 05:16 PM
Please don't vote for her.
I don't really care about her politics, but the use of pseudo-words like "incentivize" really needs to stop.
corplinx
2nd March 2010, 05:17 PM
But back to Mrs. McMahon. She believes in free market, free enterprise, but wants the government to incentivize job creators? If free market and free enterprise are so perfect why would job incentives be necessary?
To get elected in New England.
She also goes out on a limb and states that small businesses need money to run their businesses. I hope she doesn't keep that a secret.
The SBA has been pouring government money into small businesses now for.... a long time. Results are poor. The program has been a failure from day 1. Not only is what she said silly-sounding on the surface, but government attempts to offer small business loans are already there and failing.
You will never see it repealed since the spin writes itself. "Senator Doe voted to take away money from small businesses...."
Spindrift
2nd March 2010, 05:42 PM
To get elected in New England.
The SBA has been pouring government money into small businesses now for.... a long time. Results are poor. The program has been a failure from day 1. Not only is what she said silly-sounding on the surface, but government attempts to offer small business loans are already there and failing.
You will never see it repealed since the spin writes itself. "Senator Doe voted to take away money from small businesses...."
You're right the SBA has not worked out the way people think it should. But you're wrong about the SBA pouring money into small businesses. The SBA is only a facilitator and guarantor. It does not loan the money, banks do and the banks aren't loaning the money right now even with the SBA guarantee. The SBA wants to directly loan money which would streamline the process, but that would cut into the banks business and they don't want to compete with the SBA, because then they'd have to loan to small businesses.
Spindrift
2nd March 2010, 05:47 PM
Please don't vote for her.
I don't really care about her politics, but the use of pseudo-words like "incentivize" really needs to stop.
I don't have any intention of voting for someone who's attempting to buy the election. She's pouring $50 million into the campaign. I get something in the mail every other day or so and she's all over the TV and radio. Given that's she got a chance. She does have the problem with the steroids and wrestling connection, which I'm sure her opponents are saving up as the primary gets closer.
corplinx
2nd March 2010, 05:50 PM
The SBA wants to directly loan money which would streamline the process, but that would cut into the banks business and they don't want to compete with the SBA, because then they'd have to loan to small businesses.
Remove the profit motive from providing loans will just mean more lost money. Right now banks can "bet" more on riskier small businesses since the SBA provides a slight hedge.
In a recession environment, I would expect the SBA not lay out as much money, since banks would _avoid_ riskier loans during a slowdown.
Magyar
2nd March 2010, 06:12 PM
Remove the profit motive from providing loans will just mean more lost money. Right now banks can "bet" more on riskier small businesses since the SBA provides a slight hedge.
In a recession environment, I would expect the SBA not lay out as much money, since banks would _avoid_ riskier loans during a slowdown.
The problem I see with this assessment is that, well it's just wrong!
First, banks are making RECORD profits on loans right now, and since they got done with bending over all the people with poor credit and got bailed out they think that now they can move on to people with good credit.
Credit card companies are/have increased their rates by often double digits to "cover the loses" they suffered for giving credit cards to my dog and any one with a pulse at the expense of people who HAVE good credit - cause those people are the only ones left who can still afford to get a credit card.
Every flipping day I hear about "mortgage rates are at a record low" Yet my mortgage on my home that I took out 9 years ago is only an 8th higher than current rates
YET - when I got that loan prime was around 3.5-4.
What's prime today? basically ZERO percent and according to Bernanki it will stay that way for a significant time. So bank are making about 5% markup which is the kind of margins they used to charge people with SUB 600 credit scores.
So they can afford to not loan as much because they are again bending over the people who need the money and our politician are tripping over each other to help them.
ARubberChickenWithAPulley
2nd March 2010, 06:23 PM
Linda McMahon, former CEO of WWE and husband of Vince McMahon, is running for the Republican nomination for Senator in Connecticut.
Are you trying to start a fake fight with Vince McMahon???
tyr_13
2nd March 2010, 06:31 PM
Are you trying to start a fake fight with Vince McMahon???
Nope, with Shane. 'Yo mama' jokes always work.
leftysergeant
2nd March 2010, 06:50 PM
To get elected in New England.
The SBA has been pouring government money into small businesses now for.... a long time. Results are poor. The program has been a failure from day 1.
No. It actually helped until the Reagan revolution and massive subsidies to the Walton larvae and their ilk who drove the mom-and-pops into the toilet.
ARubberChickenWithAPulley
2nd March 2010, 06:50 PM
Nope, with Shane. 'Yo mama' jokes always work.
He's gonna totally suplex Spindrift through a table.
Whiplash
2nd March 2010, 06:51 PM
That time she caught Vince in suspicious activities with Trish Stratus I was like LOLZ.
But I miss the Corporate Ministry. Shane + Undertaker = ratings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZZLwl6zZSI
ARubberChickenWithAPulley
2nd March 2010, 06:52 PM
Okay, I have to post it. It just seems too appropriate:
Vince McMahon's X-SPAN Promises Bone-Crunching Legislative Coverage (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28666)
Beerina
3rd March 2010, 07:14 AM
the use of pseudo-words like "incentivize" really needs to stop.
Glad I'm not the only one who felt a choking reflex reaction to this.
Even taken at face value, "incentivize" usually just means get the hell out of the way by reducing taxes, so is a misleading description. "We will encourage you to run faster and hire more people by removing 50 of the 2,000 pounds we have piled on your back. Praise us!"
Cobalt
3rd March 2010, 08:40 AM
That time she caught Vince in suspicious activities with Trish Stratus I was like LOLZ.
But I miss the Corporate Ministry. Shane + Undertaker = ratings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZZLwl6zZSI
I miss when I found something entertaining in their shows.
The Central Scrutinizer
3rd March 2010, 11:30 AM
Please don't vote for her.
I don't really care about her politics, but the use of pseudo-words like "incentivize" really needs to stop.
Mr. Webster considers it a real word http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentivize
Whatcha gonna do when Hulkamania and Merriam-Webster run wild on you? :)
Drudgewire
3rd March 2010, 11:41 AM
She's got NO CHANCE... NO CHANCE IN HELL!!
Cobalt
3rd March 2010, 11:51 AM
She's got NO CHANCE... NO CHANCE IN HELL!!
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn64/cb8673/yo-dawg-at-first-i-was-like.jpg
Cleon
3rd March 2010, 11:54 AM
Mr. Webster considers it a real word http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentivize
Whatcha gonna do when Hulkamania and Merriam-Webster run wild on you? :)
Condemn them for adding psuedo-words like "incentivize" to their previously respectable compendiums. :p
tyr_13
3rd March 2010, 07:46 PM
She's got NO CHANCE... NO CHANCE IN HELL!!
Well played sir.
Spindrift
3rd March 2010, 07:58 PM
Condemn them for adding psuedo-words like "incentivize" to their previously respectable compendiums. :p
or pseudo-word, which is a recursively defined word. :p
Whiplash
3rd March 2010, 08:01 PM
I miss when I found something entertaining in their shows.
I was still fairly well entertained by the WWF at that point (Corporate Ministry). But I realize now that this is a serious discussion. I thought it was a new angle for the WWE. So I won't derail any further> :)
real american
6th March 2010, 02:04 PM
As an active Republican I can say that a lot of Republicans, not exactly me, want to rid the party of those deemed RINOs. Rob Simmons is a considerd RINO were Linda is considerd a Rockefeller Republican. Also in AZ a lot of talk saying John McCain has to go because he is too liberal. But lets face it, the major parties in America are no longer moderate and are heading more and more to the extremes in beliefs. The Democratic Party is not the Party of JFK anymore and the Republicans are not the party of Reagan anymore. Anyways, enough with my rantings, Linda McMahon has a very good chance on beating Simmons but both have a uphill battle ahead. However if Dodd was still going to run they would have had an easy victory but the Democrats are being smart and are putting in damage control.
technoextreme
7th March 2010, 07:17 AM
Linda McMahon has a very good chance on beating Simmons but both have a uphill battle ahead. However if Dodd was still going to run they would have had an easy victory but the Democrats are being smart and are putting in damage control.
Do you honestly think the social conservatives won't be creeped out by some of the crap that has gone in the WWE? Hell even I am creeped out and I'm not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. The issues of rampant drug abuse. The weird and mysoginistic story lines that she was a part. Memorializing someone before knowing how he died.
real american
8th March 2010, 05:52 AM
technoextreme, I believe that the social conservative in CT would rather her than Simmons, who is considerd a full out "RINO". And as a follower of wrestling I can say that yes the storylines she was part of we out there but at the time they were trying what they could to get ahead of Ted Turner's wrestling company, which was beating them in the raitings. Also on the Benoit issue, the WWE had to act fast and "if" benoit and his family were all victims then they would have seem like uncairing people not to have, no matter what they did they would have gotten blamed. Lastly, Steroids are a problem in Wrestling. Since the Benoit double murder and suicide, the WWE has set in aprogram that if found having steroids in your system twice your fired and on that note they have fired many wrestlers for that reason.
Drudgewire
8th March 2010, 06:03 AM
Since the Benoit double murder and suicide, the WWE has set in aprogram that if found having steroids in your system twice your fired and on that note they have fired many wrestlers for that reason.
Except her husband considers himself exempt from this policy. He had been using the excuse that he wasn't a performer, but now that he's scheduled to wrestle Bret Hart at Wrestlemania I'm curious if that's still his stance.
real american
8th March 2010, 07:46 AM
I don't know about Vince McMahon partacing in steroids. What I do know is that all hired performers if found more than twice with steroids in their system are released from the WWE.
EDIT: I thought it would also be interesting to add to the topic that Jesse Ventura may run for President as an independent in 2012. Also that not only are wrestlers getting into the field but singers; Hank Williams Jr. is planning on running for U.S. Senate against incumbent Bob Corker for the Republican primary in 2012.
Drudgewire
8th March 2010, 07:56 AM
I don't know about Vince McMahon partacing in steroids. What I do know is that all hired performers if found more than twice with steroids in their system are released from the WWE.
It's one of the 10 Questions (http://thewrestlingdaily.com/?p=9773) being posed to her by her opponent:
6. . Vince McMahon himself has admitted to using steroids in the past, but in his interview with the House’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, McMahon said that he had not been subject to WWE’s Wellness Policy. Why is McMahon not subject to testing? And are other McMahon family members, such as Triple H, given the same treatment?
The part about Triple H is dumb, but as it relates to Vince it's legitimate since he definitely still looks ripped.
EDIT: I thought it would also be interesting to add to the topic that Jesse Ventura may run for President as an independent in 2012.
lol. For conspiracy theorists who think Ron Paul is too mainstream.
technoextreme
8th March 2010, 08:00 AM
technoextreme, I believe that the social conservative in CT would rather her than Simmons, who is considerd a full out "RINO". And as a follower of wrestling I can say that yes the storylines she was part of we out there but at the time they were trying what they could to get ahead of Ted Turner's wrestling company, which was beating them in the raitings.
Well that is nice but I was referring to the crap going that happened after Turner went belly up.
real american
8th March 2010, 08:03 AM
Well that is nice but I was referring to the crap going that happened after Turner went belly up.
Ok, sorry 'bout that. From what was told to me from people I know in the Industry they said that the raitings were very good so they decided to push the envelope as much as they could. Also that Vince enjoyed "taking the world on."
Drudgewire
8th March 2010, 08:04 AM
Well that is nice but I was referring to the crap going that happened after Turner went belly up.
In fairness, they've been toning down the product to become more "family friendly" the last several years.
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.