New GM Chairman declares: 'I don't know anything about cars'...

[JBond]

New GM Chairman declares: 'I don't know anything about cars'... (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aQ._YJhEj_Jo)


June 10 (Bloomberg) -- Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry.

The 6-foot-4-inch Texan nicknamed “Big Ed” said steering the nation’s largest automaker after bankruptcy is “a public service.” People who know him say he can meet GM’s need for the type of transformation he orchestrated at Dallas-based AT&T.

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Whitacre’s selection bucks more than a half-century of tradition at GM, where the only non-executives to lead the board since 1937 were interim Chairman Kent Kresa and John Smale, who held the job from 1992 through 1995. Whitacre will take the post when Detroit-based GM exits Chapter 11, perhaps by Aug. 31.

A bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering and record in shaping a “monolithic” AT&T into a diversified enterprise make Whitacre “a good choice,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics auto-consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

“He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn’t so dependent on land-line phone service,” said Hall, a former GM engineer. “There’s a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It’s about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM.”

Talking With Rattner

The U.S. Treasury, which is backing GM’s restructuring with about $65 billion, reached out “some weeks ago,” Whitacre said, enticing him out of retirement to help oversee a company that has lost almost $88 billion since 2004.

“Lots of conversations” followed with Steven Rattner, the Wall Street dealmaker running President Barack Obama’s car task force, said Whitacre, adding that Treasury’s message was: “We need your help. It’s a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM.”

Whitacre is “well qualified” for the GM post, the Treasury said in a statement.

In addition to Kresa, the automaker’s new, 13-member board will include five holdovers -- CEO Fritz Henderson and directors Philip A. Laskawy, Kathryn V. Marinello, Erroll B. Davis Jr. and E. Neville Isdell. Six others will retire, including all four who were appointed in the 1990s.

Rattner asked former CEO Rick Wagoner to cede his job to Henderson and named Kresa interim chairman in March after rejecting GM’s plan to return to profit.

Treasury, Congress

Whitacre will have to contend with Treasury’s oversight, as the biggest equity holder in the so-called New GM, and pressure from Congress. He has faced lawmakers and investors before.

In 2006, while defending AT&T’s customer-privacy policy at a hearing where U.S. senators pressed him about the alleged sharing of data with a spy agency, Whitacre was rebuked by then- Chairman Arlen Specter for “contemptuous answers.”

A year later, AT&T management prevailed on a shareholder proposal seeking an advisory role in executive pay, which got 44 percent of the vote. Whitacre announced his retirement at that meeting, leaving with compensation valued at $158.5 million, according to the Corporate Library in Portland, Maine.

GM’s directors are now working for $1 a year. The automaker plans to disclose board compensation terms when it announces the rest of the new members, said Julie Gibson, a spokeswoman.

No Sitting Around

James Kahan, 61, a former AT&T executive who worked with Whitacre for 20 years and talked to him about the job the night before it was announced, predicted his old boss will probably be heavily involved in GM’s restructuring.

“He’s not one to sit idly by,” Kahan said.

After graduating from Texas Tech University in Lubbock in 1964, Whitacre joined AT&T’s Southwestern Bell unit just as the touch-tone phone was being introduced. He worked his way up to CEO in 1990 and bought Pacific Telesis Group in California for $16 billion in 1997.

That was the first link-up among the eight Baby Bells, created in 1984 after then-AT&T Corp. agreed to cede local phone operations, and started a buying spree that totaled almost $200 billion and helped create the largest U.S. phone company.

“He started the whole telecom consolidation because he recognized that scale was going to be important,” said Jim Ellis, 66, a former general counsel at AT&T, who worked with Whitacre for about 30 years. “He had a vision to build the company, to increase the sales and the size, the efficiency.”

Building a Bell

SBC, the smallest of the local Bells, changed its name to AT&T Inc. after it bought AT&T Corp. in 2005 for $16.5 billion and in 2006 had its first annual share-price gain in eight years. A year after Whitacre retired, AT&T relocated to Dallas, near his hometown of Ennis, from San Antonio.

The ability to sustain a “global enterprise” and set clear lines of responsibility is pivotal to GM’s future, said Michael Robinet, an automotive analyst at CSM Worldwide Inc. in Northville, Michigan.

“Let’s face it: The chairman is not necessarily operational,” Robinet said. “The chairman is about ensuring a strategy is followed.”

GM is proposing to sell its best assets to create a new company around its Chevrolet, Cadillac, GMC and Buick brands within 90 days. The remaining assets will be liquidated in bankruptcy to help pay off creditors.

Whitacre, a resident of San Antonio, a South Texas city of 1.2 million, will set a different cultural and geographic tone at GM, said Kahan and Ellis, the former AT&T executives.

Detroit is 1,237 miles to the northeast, almost twice as far as to Mexico City. While GM’s only Texas assembly plant is in Arlington, a five-hour drive, San Antonio is home to a pickup factory for Toyota Motor Corp., which ended GM’s 77-year reign as the world’s largest automaker in 2008 and beat GM in adopting new models such as hybrids.

As a “man of action,” Whitacre won’t sit still, Kahan said. “He doesn’t like long meetings,” Kahan said. “He’ll be fresh air.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Amy Thomson in New York at athomson6@bloomberg.net; Katie Merx in Southfield, Michigan, at kmerx@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: June 10, 2009 00:01 EDT

[Doomsday101]

And why would he? He has no back ground in the industry. Only question I have with this Obama selection is did Edward E. Whitacre Jr. his taxes?

[CowboyWay]

I'd venture to bet that most high level CEOs know very little about the products thier company's build. They have people for that. CEO's are numbers guys. Sad but true.

[ninja]

Only an idiot would buy a government/UAW-owned, bankrupt GM car with a CEO who knows nothing about cars.

And, I'll bet the next head of the soon-to-be government run healthcare will know nothing about healthcare.

[Temo]

GM's greatest problems have nothing to do with its cars, marketing, or engineering or any of that stuff the media spews.

[iceberg]

Only an idiot would buy a government/UAW-owned, bankrupt GM car with a CEO who knows nothing about cars.

And, I'll bet the next head of the soon-to-be government run healthcare will know nothing about healthcare.

on one hand i agree. on the other, business is business and it's also a huge part in having people you trust help make those decisions.

in the 80s we had bean counters building cars. they sucked.

i have no idea if we're about to repeat that process but the 80s are coming back musically so who knows, maybe it's time for cars to suck again.

[Doomsday101]

on one hand i agree. on the other, business is business and it's also a huge part in having people you trust help make those decisions.

in the 80s we had bean counters building cars. they sucked.

i have no idea if we're about to repeat that process but the 80s are coming back musically so who knows, maybe it's time for cars to suck again.

I don't think US car manufactures can afford that because the outside competition is not going to produce poor cars which is why they surpassed us. I think you have to produce what the consumer wants not what Obama wants or any other politician. However considering the car companies sold their soul to the devil they will have to do as he wants

[vta]

on one hand i agree. on the other, business is business and it's also a huge part in having people you trust help make those decisions.

in the 80s we had bean counters building cars. they sucked.

i have no idea if we're about to repeat that process but the 80s are coming back musically so who knows, maybe it's time for cars to suck again.

But it's worth considering, isn't 'business is business' what got us here in the first place? People under the impression they can apply general swatches of wisdom on any product and it'll simply work?

I know it's not a popular refrain, but American cars have been less than spectacular for years, because 'business is business'. Make parts that wear out quicker and you can sell the replacement. Cheap parts, high prices, it's a no lose situation, for a while. Until the industry is on it's face gasping for air and looking for government handouts.

Maybe if the people who knew cars were in control from top to bottom, there'd be something worth buying and a company worth returning to for your next car or for your kid's car or your wife's car.

I have no empty a bias. I bought a new Acura because my last one performed well past all expectations of a car, with a pretty flippant routine maintenance attitude. That's customer return, based on performance. My American car buying days died long ago with bad experiences.

[theogt]

I'd venture to bet that most high level CEOs know very little about the products thier company's build. They have people for that. CEO's are numbers guys. Sad but true.Not true at all. Most CEOs can spit out every little fact about their company at the drop of a hat.

[TheCount]

Yeah, cause the people that knew so much about the auto industry did so well before him.

[vta]

Yeah, cause the people that knew so much about the auto industry did so well before him.

Did they? I honestly don't know, were they businessmen or were they specific to the industry? If so, it wouldn't be surprising that they would be influenced by a system regardless. A system of money making that relies heavily on the current buyer just as much if not more than the new buyer.

The Computer industry is doing a bang up job of following this system right now.

[iceberg]

I don't think US car manufactures can afford that because the outside competition is not going to produce poor cars which is why they surpassed us. I think you have to produce what the consumer wants not what Obama wants or any other politician. However considering the car companies sold their soul to the devil they will have to do as he wants

then why is obama telling the car companies what to make?

does obama know about cars? he's doing more in all this than the at*t exec we're ragging on.

[iceberg]

But it's worth considering, isn't 'business is business' what got us here in the first place? People under the impression they can apply general swatches of wisdom on any product and it'll simply work?

I know it's not a popular refrain, but American cars have been less than spectacular for years, because 'business is business'. Make parts that wear out quicker and you can sell the replacement. Cheap parts, high prices, it's a no lose situation, for a while. Until the industry is on it's face gasping for air and looking for government handouts.

Maybe if the people who knew cars were in control from top to bottom, there'd be something worth buying and a company worth returning to for your next car or for your kid's car or your wife's car.

I have no empty a bias. I bought a new Acura because my last one performed well past all expectations of a car, with a pretty flippant routine maintenance attitude. That's customer return, based on performance. My American car buying days died long ago with bad experiences.

no, i agree. that's why i said in the 80s bean counters made cars and they sucked. i don't see putting someone in charge who doesn't know any better as a valid move for this time we're in.

that said, if no car experience can keep someone out of running the show, why is obama in it?

[iceberg]

Yeah, cause the people that knew so much about the auto industry did so well before him.

can you tell me who made this argument? well, that they did? i don't see that being the case.

[Doomsday101]

then why is obama telling the car companies what to make?

does obama know about cars? he's doing more in all this than the at*t exec we're ragging on.

I agree it is a mistake but once they took the cash they fell at to the mercy of Obama. Seems the unions made out well after all you had the head of the union claiming GM could not go bankrupt because who would buy a car from a company in bankrupcy now the same guy is say GM is strong enough to make it. My how his tune changed when they got the deal they wanted in the meantime the stockholders are told to suck eggs and are the loser in this.

[vta]

that said, if no car experience can keep someone out of running the show, why is obama in it?

:laugh2:
That's another whole topic right there, what is he doing running the show?
But I don't think we've had any worthy politicians for quite some time, so that's just par for the course of an apathetic generation.

[Aikbach]

You'd be surprised how many studio executives don't know anything about movies...well maybe you wouldn't, you'd be alarmed how many officers are dumb as posts, macabrely their kind are weeded out by the natural course of events if you catch my drift; a dumb second lieutenant does not have a long combat life.

[vta]

You'd be surprised how many studio executives don't know anything about movies...well maybe you wouldn't, you'd be alarmed how many officers are dumb as posts, macabrely their kind are weeded out by the natural course of events if you catch my drift; a dumb second lieutenant does not have a long combat life.

Oh it's written pretty clearly just how bad 'business' has infected the art of movie making. If one in ten are worth watching, that's a high number.

[TheCount]

can you tell me who made this argument? well, that they did? i don't see that being the case.

I don't even understand what you're asking me...

[burmafrd]

I'd venture to bet that most high level CEOs know very little about the products thier company's build. They have people for that. CEO's are numbers guys. Sad but true.

That is what you said count.
So back it up or admit you were talking out your butt.

[iceberg]

Yeah, cause the people that knew so much about the auto industry did so well before him.

can you tell me who made this argument? well, that they did? i don't see that being the case.

I don't even understand what you're asking me...

someone made a post saying the new GM CEO knows nothing about cars and the convo ensues that the industry is in deeper trouble or not around that.

you say "well the guys before had no idea"

i'm asking who's saying they did to bring this point up? it may have been just a comment like the rest of us but it sounded like you were trying to address a point and since no one i know of said the previous mgt knew anything any better, i'm not sure where you were going with the statement.

i had to make it complex it sounds like when it wasn't intended to be. : )

[Dallas]

someone made a post saying the new GM CEO knows nothing about cars and the convo ensues that the industry is in deeper trouble or not around that.

you say "well the guys before had no idea"

i'm asking who's saying they did to bring this point up? it may have been just a comment like the rest of us but it sounded like you were trying to address a point and since no one i know of said the previous mgt knew anything any better, i'm not sure where you were going with the statement.

i had to make it complex it sounds like when it wasn't intended to be. : )


For the record I would like to say I knew exactly what ib was talking about when he posted it.

It sucks being an Al Gore clone. :(

[burmafrd]

Just maybe the Auto industry went down the toilet because there were no AUTO guys in charge. No Iacocca or the like.

[MetalHead]

Just maybe the Auto industry went down the toilet because there were no AUTO guys in charge. No Iacocca or the like.

Or maybe,it was the environazi lobbysts paying their way into stupid rules forcing the auto industries to retool and force them to build vehicles we don't want to drive.
The same gang now runs GM,and will give you $4500 in rebates for you to trade your cluncker for a new envirofriendly car.

GO BUY A FORD.

F GM.

[theogt]

I'd venture to bet that most high level CEOs know very little about the products thier company's build. They have people for that. CEO's are numbers guys. Sad but true.

That is what you said count.
So back it up or admit you were talking out your butt.You = confused.

[TheCount]

I'd venture to bet that most high level CEOs know very little about the products thier company's build. They have people for that. CEO's are numbers guys. Sad but true.

That is what you said count.
So back it up or admit you were talking out your butt.

No. Actually I didn't, Einstein.

someone made a post saying the new GM CEO knows nothing about cars and the convo ensues that the industry is in deeper trouble or not around that.

you say "well the guys before had no idea"

i'm asking who's saying they did to bring this point up? it may have been just a comment like the rest of us but it sounded like you were trying to address a point and since no one i know of said the previous mgt knew anything any better, i'm not sure where you were going with the statement.

i had to make it complex it sounds like when it wasn't intended to be. : )

I was responding to the title of the article/thread which was obviously meant to suggest the new guy was clueless.

You = confused.

When he actually starts making sense is when we should be worried.

[Hoofbite]

No. Actually I didn't, Einstein.



I was responding to the title of the article/thread which was obviously meant to suggest the new guy was clueless.



When he actually starts making sense is when we should be worried.

:laugh2:

[CowboyWay]

Not true at all. Most CEOs can spit out every little fact about their company at the drop of a hat.

I Disagree. They seem to have a strong overview, but their knowledge is in numbers, making short and long term decisions, and trying to save the company money.

I'm certainly not saying that all CEOs don't know the ins and outs of thier businesses, but there is a very large majority that don't know half as much as you would think.

[burmafrd]

I took that quote in its entirety from your POST Count. Lying about it does not help. As for OGT he is so far up the Admins rear end on this it is pathetic.

[Sam I Am]

When it comes to steering a big company, you don't exactly have to know the product. You just need two things. You need a fundamental understand advanced business principles and have a lot of smart people specialized in the different areas of the specific business you're running.

He can get any specific information from his staff to make any decisions. All he needs to do is apply the business principles.

[SuspectCorner]

U.S. needs better industrial policy (http://www.suntimes.com/news/jackson/1612977,CST-EDT-jesse09.article#)

BY JESSE JACKSON / Commentary / Chicago Sun Times / June 9, 2009

'The fight for American manufacturing is the fight for America's future," President Barack Obama declared as he pledged billions to help save and reorganize Chrysler and General Motors. Yet, he also says he doesn't want to manage the car companies.

"The sooner we can get out of that business, the better off we're going to be." But that sentiment -- widely praised by editorials across the country -- contradicts the commitment needed to revive American manufacturing.

Clearly, the future of an America that makes things will center on what happens to America's automotive industry. The auto industry still accounts for one-fourth of U.S. manufacturing output and provides jobs for about one of every 10 manufacturing workers. It is, in the words of AFL-CIO economist Ron Blackwell, "the spine of the country's manufacturing capacity."

The auto companies are battered by massive overcapacity in the industry across the globe and burdened with pensions and health care promised to retirees while competitors are free of such costs. Auto companies in Korea, Japan, France and Germany get significant government protection and subsidies. The U.S. companies have suffered without that help.

Obama has boldly pointed to a new American economy, one where finance is the servant of the real economy, not the master. In this economy, America builds the future -- making fuel-efficient cars, windmills and batteries and solar panels vital to the next economy. The skilled workers and high technology of the Midwest will produce the products that will dominate the global green markets of the future.

That transition will require planning, an industrial policy and government commitment. If Obama simply lends money to Chrysler and GM, forces their bankruptcy and downsizing and then walks away, the result is likely to be failure. We've seen plans by Chrysler and GM to expand production abroad while eliminating U.S. plants at home.

We did not provide taxpayer money to save the brand General Motors. We provided it to save highly skilled U.S. jobs and U.S. manufacturing capacity.

Last week, I attended a Senate hearing on Chrysler and GM's bankruptcies. Not once did I hear anybody speak about health insurance, credit, trade policy or the price of oil and gas or about the need to link the bank bailout to stemming the tide of home foreclosures and stimulating jobs and business.

We need an industrial plan that helps forge new industry and new markets. Public investment in mass transit -- buses, subways, fast rail -- and subsidies for fuel-efficient cars help generate the market. Significant investment in research and development for the next generation of products helps capture the future. Resources to retool factories and retrain workers are needed to build the new generation of fuel-efficient cars or renewable energy sources.

We need an industrial policy that bridges the gap between the old manufacturing sector and the emerging "green economy." Republicans don't get this. They would let GM and Chrysler go belly up rather than try to restructure them.

Obama has stepped up to help the companies restructure, but has yet to detail an industrial policy that will ensure that U.S. workers benefit. The restructuring has been done almost in a vacuum, as if it were a commercial deal, with most of the discussion focused on how to slash work forces, close dealers, shut down plants and cut obligations to current and retired workers.

No doubt GM and Chrysler have been mismanaged. Reductions in the work force and dealerships are inevitable. But to revive U.S. manufacturing, the re- organization must focus on what will be built, on new markets and new technologies -- not only on what gets cut. And that requires the commitment and engagement of the federal government.

Crisis creates opportunity. In this crisis, it is time for America to put aside the failed ideas of the past and step up boldly to ensure that America once more builds the future.

[Doomsday101]

Green Economy? This has become nothing but a joke and in the end it is going to cost America in terms of power and jobs and this idiot Obama is going to lead us down this path to nowhere. Great going Bama

[SuspectCorner]

Green Economy? This has become nothing but a joke and in the end it is going to cost America in terms of power and jobs and this idiot Obama is going to lead us down this path to nowhere. Great going Bama

Excerpt:

We need an industrial policy that bridges the gap between the old manufacturing sector and the emerging "green economy." Republicans don't get this. They would let GM and Chrysler go belly up rather than try to restructure them.

[Doomsday101]

We need an industrial policy that bridges the gap between the old manufacturing sector and the emerging "green economy." Republicans don't get this. They would let GM and Chrysler go belly up rather than try to restructure them.

Government job is not to operate and run private business the liberals do not get that. Nowhere in the constitution of the United States does it say that Government has the right to run and operate private business.

[iceberg]

Excerpt:


We need an industrial policy that bridges the gap between the old manufacturing sector and the emerging "green economy." Republicans don't get this. They would let GM and Chrysler go belly up rather than try to restructure them.

what we get, is that "green" is a fad. while you can go "neener neener" at it now cause you're kneedeep in the fad, you're gonna be one in trouble business if you cater to the fad.

bought a mood ring lately?
how's the bell bottoms?
break out any disco lately?
wanna see my mullet?
look i'm green!!!

[Doomsday101]

what we get, is that "green" is a fad. while you can go "neener neener" at it now cause you're kneedeep in the fad, you're gonna be one in trouble business if you cater to the fad.

bought a mood ring lately?
how's the bell bottoms?
break out any disco lately?
wanna see my mullet?
look i'm green!!!

Do you have a pet rock? :lmao:

[burmafrd]

To run a company you need to know about its products- or have people on your staff you listen to that do. To me it looked like GM and FOrd and Chrysler frankly have not had that for years. Certainly their CEO's were pretty incompetent.

[PullMyFinger]

Sounds like the GM of the Cowboys. "I know nothing about football".

[Sam I Am]

To run a company you need to know about its products- or have people on your staff you listen to that do. To me it looked like GM and FOrd and Chrysler frankly have not had that for years. Certainly their CEO's were pretty incompetent.

Nah, they just built ugly cars that nobody wanted. If anything, they were completely clueless to what a good looking car looks like.

I mean, what the hell is this?!?!?!

http://blog.costpricecars.com.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/800px-oldsmobile_achieva_sedan.jpg

Yeah, I want one of those! :rolleyes:

[Doomsday101]

Nah, they just built ugly cars that nobody wanted. If anything, they were completely clueless to what a good looking car looks like.

I mean, what the hell is this?!?!?!

http://blog.costpricecars.com.au/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/800px-oldsmobile_achieva_sedan.jpg

Yeah, I want one of those! :rolleyes:

Are you with the Government? Why are you taking pictures of my car? :laugh2: It is a real chick magnet

[Phrozen Phil]

on one hand i agree. on the other, business is business and it's also a huge part in having people you trust help make those decisions.

in the 80s we had bean counters building cars. they sucked.

i have no idea if we're about to repeat that process but the 80s are coming back musically so who knows, maybe it's time for cars to suck again.

Please say it isn't so. The late 70's and early 80's were bloody awful with regards to music. While there were exceptions, Big Hair Bands were virtually interchangeable. Yuck :thumbdo:

[TheCount]

I took that quote in its entirety from your POST Count. Lying about it does not help. As for OGT he is so far up the Admins rear end on this it is pathetic.

Learn to read. I never posted that. CowboyWay did. I know sanity is a second language to you, but try to keep up.

[burmafrd]

sorry cowboy I got you mixed up with the other extreme lib here. BUT you do seem to be able to control yourself a lot better.

[TheCount]

sorry cowboy I got you mixed up with the other extreme lib here. BUT you do seem to be able to control yourself a lot better.

Yeah, it sucks when you get called out for your boneheaded mistakes, doesn't it? Especially when you're calling people liars and accusing them of speaking out of their butts when you can't even read properly.

[burmafrd]

Actually I was busy and did not take the time to carefully look. Which is when you make mistakes. What is your excuse count for the hundreds that you have made?

[TheCount]

Actually I was busy and did not take the time to carefully look. Which is when you make mistakes. What is your excuse count for the hundreds that you have made?

You had plenty of opportunities to correct your mistake, instead you choose to call me names, so don't bother trying to cover up your inequities with lies.

Your, "I know you are, but what am I" act you're trying to pull isn't going to work.

[burmafrd]

I was at work which happens to be more important then your poor little hurt feelings. I had to do this during breaks. I know working hard is probably something you have not much experience at but then....

[TheCount]

I was at work which happens to be more important then your poor little hurt feelings. I had to do this during breaks. I know working hard is probably something you have not much experience at but then....

Hahaha, you think you could hurt my feelings? You give yourself too much credit. The only emotion you elicit from me is humor.

[burmafrd]

ANd you think I care what you feel? Mostly I just have contempt for you.

[TheCount]

ANd you think I care what you feel? Mostly I just have contempt for you.

:lmao2::lmao2::lmao2:

Why contempt? I think you're hilarious.

[iceberg]

Please say it isn't so. The late 70's and early 80's were bloody awful with regards to music. While there were exceptions, Big Hair Bands were virtually interchangeable. Yuck :thumbdo:

most bands/music of the times are interchangable. they just swing for what either sells at that time or cycles back to "new" for those who weren't there before.

look up bands like "the answer" and "the last vegas" and even "burn halo" and you'll see the 80s coming back.

[burmafrd]

comtempt for someone who so ridiculously believes in what he posts.

[TheCount]

comtempt for someone who so ridiculously believes in what he posts.

:lmao2::lmao2::lmao2:

See, that's what I'm talking about. The idea of feeling contempt for someone because they believe in what they say is the height of hilarity.

[Sam I Am]

What I find ridiculous is the fact that you guys keep bickering even though you're no longer debating anything.

Let it go and move along! :whip:

[TheCount]

What I find ridiculous is the fact that you guys keep bickering even though you're no longer debating anything.

Let it go and move along! :whip:

You don't want no part of this, buddy. :lmao2:

[burmafrd]

lets whup his arse count!!!

[Sam I Am]

DIE YOU MOTHER ****ERS!

:shoot3: :shoot1: :horse: :whip: :chainsaw: :chop: :yousuck: :bang3: :disseags: :draw: :damn: :madden: