Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sigh, the list is about people who obtained their wealth before entering politics not as a result. Therefore Chavez would not be included.
I don't know if Chavez is worth $2 billion. Yet you certainly haven't disproved it with your silly thread.
The bold part of your comment is 100% correct. It seems like you guys have an excuse for every list Forbes buts out. First list doesn't include politicians, second list doesn't include politicians who made their money after 2005, third list doesn't include guys named Hugo.
Well at least now you're using the right list. At any rate this was 7 years ago. Her collection of art is probably worth a billion alone of course she can't sell them so it is moot.
I don't imagine Forbes is counting monies illegally obtained from drug cartels to allow cocaine to flow through Venezuela's borders in the equation. Caracas is the most dangerous city in the world outside a designated war zone because of all the trafficking taking place there.
Forbes is an estimation based solely on what they can dig up in public record.
If Forbes can't dig up Chavez's value (and Forbes has the resources and connections to do a lot of digging), how did these conservative media journalists get the information? Or did someone make a random guess, and then the rest of them picked it up and ran with it?
If Forbes can't dig up Chavez's value (and Forbes has the resources and connections to do a lot of digging), how did these conservative media journalists get the information? Or did someone make a random guess, and then the rest of them picked it up and ran with it?
Forbes is part of the LIEberal media.
I trust Godfather politics, the Blaze, Alex Jones, and WND.
I don't doubt that he's worth nowhere near that much money, and even if he is, why is that so important to Americans? Not like he'd be the first politicians to steal.
Hey, I thought I was being fairly nice in asking you to post up the methodology for your initial list because I recalled that they would exclude various political types, drug dealers etc.
Instead, you insult me and then produced a DIFFERENT list in some bizarre handwaving attempt because yes....my memory was correct and you were in too big of a hurry making a fool of yourself to check your own lists methodology.
Takes a lot of class to attack and blow smoke instead of retract and correct.
I don't doubt that he's worth nowhere near that much money, and even if he is, why is that so important to Americans? Not like he'd be the first politicians to steal.
Because he has long stated he is for the poor and a man of the people and he has been the modern face of socialism.
If it turns out to be true then it's extremely offensive to the people of Venezuela and he was just another tinpot embezzeling dictator.
To be honest, I hope for the sake of the people of venezuela that it's not true.
The poor and downtrodden really do love the guy there.
Okay, so what group of people do you think he was talking about? Democrats?
He said exactly who he was talking about. He said people sitting when remarks about equality were made while other people stood and cheered. If he was talking about Republicans then he would have said "Republicans". That's a lot easier than "people at the inauguration who were sitting when other people stood and cheered at remarks about racial equality".
It was the website who wrote the story, and liberals eager to bash conservatives, who decided that meant Republicans.
"The majority of people who sat through those remarks are probably Republicans, therefore Cosby's remarks were about Republicans" was the reasoning used, and it is entirely and completely without merit.
The actual remark was not in any way, shape, or form political. It merely used a political event as an example. It's just willful partisan misinterpretation to force what he said into being an anti-Republican statement. Any rational and objective view of the statement would conclude that Cosby was referring to racists. Not Republicans or "Republicans as racists". Just racists.
He said the fact that people wouldn't cheer a remark about equal rights indicates that racism still exists.
That is the sum total of what he said. The spin given to it is simply another variation of the "you only oppose Obama because he's black" argument.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
