by Jack Lee
Normally I have a reasonable comprehension of political moves, but this one leaves me clueless and I was hoping someone out here could explain it to me. Why is it so important for Obama to take 3000 people along with him to Mumbai, India, as at cost of $200,000,000 per day? Do we have that much disposable cash, I thought we were broke? Would $900,000,000 pumped into the California school system or to law enforcement help us more than his 4 days in India?
The President always has a certain amount of cash at his personal disposal…it would be interesting to know what accounts have been used for these expenditures. He can excuse the expense as attributable to security concerns but that’s a bit thin if you ask me…I think it’s a great excape and another opportunity to vacation.
I’m personally glad the money won’t be used to bale out California…the sooner we collapse the better!
Jack, the question is easy to answer when you take into consideration who our president is. An individual who is a mega narcissist egomaniac has a sense of entitlement beyond a normal persons level of understanding. Therefore, taking 3,000 people on vacation is owed to him because of who he is no matter what it cost and who pays for it.
Tina, I too hope the House turns Moonbeam away when he goes, tin cup in hand, begging Big Daddy BO for the money to bail out Calif. Just like a child, its time to learn to live on our own. Cant afford it, cant have it. Period!
Question Answer: Because he can.
On a separate note: Frankly, I am very disappointed with the poor showing by Colgan Sharma, and Herrera. So it goes.
“I’m personally glad the money won’t be used to bale out California…the sooner we collapse the better!”
May I ask what you mean by this statement, Tina? Surely it isn’t meant to be serious, right? I can tolerate wanting the president to fail, but hoping California as a whole fails? Why would you want that?
Yes, Peggy, CA probably won’t get much if any bailout from the feds. Our credit rating is not going to be very good and that will only make it worse when we try to borrow.
Next: As much as I hate passing any new laws I think we need to pass a law that says the President does not have a blank check to use. I can’t believe he is about to spend $200 million a day for a trip! This is beyond comprehension.
Chris, Don’t know about Tina, but for myself I am dead serious. Why should other states pay to bail us out? Why should those states that have lived within their budgets by doing without be required to pay our bills?
If you think it’s ok, how about we go to dinner and I order the most expensive item on the menu, without your consent, and walk out leaving you to pick up the tab. Fair? Of course not.
Fool.
Chris: ” I can tolerate wanting the president to fail, but hoping California as a whole fails? Why would you want that?”
The sentiment is the same and is based in the same reasoning. Democrat policies DON’T WORK!
I want California to fail quickly (something I see as inevitable if the Dems follow through with all of their plans) so that we can sweep them out and a real recovery can begin.
“I can’t believe he is about to spend $200 million a day for a trip!”
It’s a drop in the bucket. Dems have been spreading the wealth for decades to little or no effect. What’s a few mil for this trip.
“This is beyond comprehension”
For me it’s comprehensible (see Peggy above) but entirely reprehensible, especially given the state of our nation!
Chris, of course you know I would agree with Tina on this one. I’ve advocated this idea for a long time.
My reasoning is logical and simple: The Democrat administration in this state has been so far left that it’s ruined the economy.
Look at our legislative history and you will find case after case where they’ve imposed unrealistic regulations and restraints on businesses to the point of causing huge numbers of employers to flee this state. Even those long established and heavily invested in infrastructure found it necessary to leave and of course take a lot of good paying jobs with them. The democrats have allowed generous welfare entitlements that have been like a magnet to those able, but won’t work. We’ve seen democrats go from legislator to committee person when their terms are up, thus protecting their income, which explains why none of the 900 boards and committees could be cut or suspended during this recession. Our far left democrats have repeatedly acted contrary to the public good and a rational person at this point in the game would have to say, then let them bring it all down to a crushing failure. And sooner the better, dying a slow death is not preferable.
“how about we go to dinner and I order the most expensive item on the menu, without your consent” that reminds me of my social life…happens to me all the time! lol
Justify it however you like; I want California to succeed. And it’s got a better chance under Brown than Whitman.
As for the $200 million number, it’s impossible to believe, unless of course you are looking for things to hate Obama for. From FactCheck.org:
Q: Is President Obamas trip to India going to cost $200 million per day?
A: This highly doubtful claim originated with one Indian news agency quoting an anonymous source in Mumbai. The White House says it is “wildly exaggerated,” and theres no evidence to support such a huge figure.
FULL QUESTION
There are reports all over that Obamas India trip will cost $200 million per day. I havent been able to find a credible rebuttal to this but I cant believe it could be true.
FULL ANSWER
This story has spread rapidly among the presidents critics, but there is simply no evidence to support it. And common sense should lead anyone to doubt it. For example, the entire U.S. war effort in Afghanistan currently costs less than that about $5.7 billion per month, according to the Congressional Research Service, or roughly $190 million per day. How could a peaceful state visit cost more than a war?
What else can you get for $200 million? Try the New Jersey Nets basketball team or possibly the Hope diamond if only the Smithsonian were selling it.
The hard-to-swallow claim originated with a Nov. 2 Press Trust of India article quoting an unnamed “top official” in the government of Maharashtra (one of Indias states). The source was quoted as saying that Obamas upcoming trip to Mumbai will cost $200 million per day for security and living arrangements, among other things. The story claimed that the president would be accompanied by about 3,000 people, including Secret Service agents, government officials and journalists, and will stay at the Taj Mahal Hotel the scene of a 2008 terrorist attack.
We find stories based on anonymous sources always deserve special caution, especially when they come from only one news organization. In this case, the anonymous official is not even in the U.S. government, and any information about costs would necessarily have come second-hand at best, an added reason for caution.
Nevertheless, the story was widely repeated without any additional reporting. Soon after the article was released, The Drudge Report a news aggregation website linked to the Press Trust of India article, with the headline “REPORT: US to spend $200 million per day on Obamas Mumbai visit” Later that day, Rush Limbaugh claimed on his radio show that “Five hundred seven rooms at the Taj Mahal, 40 airplanes, $200 million a day this nation will spend on Obamas trip to India.” He repeats the “$200 million a day” claim several times throughout the show without specifying its source.
The allegation has generated a great deal of Internet discourse over the past few days, including a Washington Times post that claims Obamas entourage on the trip “will spend enough to bankrupt a small nation.” According to the Economic Times and The Daily Mail, Obama will take over the entire 570-room Taj Mahal Hotel for the trip. A Google search for the exact words of the original Press Trust article returned about 11,000 results. And we received about two dozen queries about it.
The White House is always reluctant to discuss cost figures about presidential trips, since the bulk of the expense is for Secret Service security. Not this time. The White House press office, which said it had been flooded with queries, gave us the following statement:
Matt Lehrich, White House Office of Media Affairs: The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality. Due to security concerns, we are unable to outline details associated with security procedures and costs, but its safe to say these numbers are wildly inflated.
It is always costly to move a U.S. president around the world. And in this case, the president is attending a G-20 meeting and will be accompanied by several cabinet officials. But given the dubious source of this assertion, the fact that the claimed cost exceeds the cost of a war, the flat denial by the White House and the lack of any evidence to support the claim, well classify this one as false.
Lara Seligman
http://factcheck.org/2010/11/ask-factcheck-trip-to-mumbai/
We all want CA to succeed Chris, but we see the shortest distance to success being through the gates of failure. The sooner democrats fail because of poor fiscal policies, the sooner people will wake up to the slow death we are all enduring and then we can get on with the business of making us all prosper.
Chris: “unless of course you are looking for things to hate Obama for…”
Chris this is one reason it’s impossible to discuss such things with you. This isn’t about anyone “hating” Obama. Your constantly turning evey discussion into hate as a motive is tiring…and patently false!
Making it personal allows you to avoid the particulars about the issue but it certainly doesn’t change the way this looks or the way it demonstrates the elitist qualities that mark this administration. When the country is hurting, when millions are in grave financial distress and out of work, this exravagance, no matter what the actual dollar amount, is unseemly.
Room rates at the Taj start at $306 per night and go up to $7000.00 for the Presidential suite. I cant begin to imagine the cost for the restaurants and banquet rooms that will also be closed to the public during his visit. Jet fuel aint cheap! Feeding all of those people won’t be cheap either.
And what big return can America expect for this expense? If this article is only partially accurate I would think that this is a groundwork trip that might better have been accomplished by Hillary Clinton. Certainly the President wouldnt need to travel with such a huge entourage in any case.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/india/101101/barack-obama-US-india-relations-manmohan-singh?page=0,0
Your source’s only explanation, “we won’t (can’t) tell you means nothing. There are ways to estimate the costs as I demonstrated with little effort above.
The timing and size of this trip are what makes it a target for criticism. (Last summers numerous golf games and vacations don’t help either). The left would be all over the Bush administration for a less extravagant trip…you really have no defense.
“How could a peaceful state visit cost more than a war?”
Well the President won’t be sleeping in a tent in the middle of the hot desert ;D
Gotta go…back later.
“The timing and size of this trip are what makes it a target for criticism.”
You don’t know anything about the size of the trip because ALL of the information comes from an Indian newspaper which relied on an “anonymous source” that is not part of the administration.
I have just shown you that this entire story is based on speculation and rumor, yet you still act as if it were true.
Like I said: you will believe what you want to believe, facts be damned.
Chris, facts be damned indeed.
1. Nobody has denied that 3000 White House and security will travel to Mumbai with Obama.
2. Nobody has denied that 34 US warships will be used to provide naval security.
3. Nobody has denied that all three Presidential helicopters will be taken apart and flown in air force transports to India.
4. Nobody has denied that the entire 570-room Taj Mahal has been rented out by Obama.
5. The White House has ONLY said that the $200 million a day expenditure is “wildly exaggerated”.
Well tell us then how wild it was….really, how wild? Is it twice over, three times over? Just how much are we spending to send Obama to India for two days and why is it a secret?
Don’t we desrve to know? We’re paying for it.
NOBODY in the WH is ready to say how much Chris…doesn’t that tick you off?
So, if the WH won’t tell we’re left to speculate and that means you really don’t know either do you?
But, here you are, ready to get all over Tina and dismiss these alleged costs reported as meaningless dribble. I find that very interesting.
So lets do our own estimates Chris, alright? Whats it cost to rent out 34 warships with full personnel for 10 days? What would a movie studio be asked to pay? But, remember, you have to get them there and bring them back and the very least that time is about 10 days, but honestly its more like 15-18 days.
Would you beleive it averages out to about $1 million per ship, per day? If you think that is too high then ou come up with your own figures. But, lets consider that one Nimitz class carrier with 85 planes costs about $444 million a year in operational and support costs. plus amortized life expectancy For now let’s use my estimates…that is $34 million times 10 days or $334 million spent to cover two days or about $167 million per day just for the NAVY. Now figuring the 3000 people in support, the aircraft involved, the setup time and takedown time, the advance time, how hard do you think it would be to come up with another $30-40 million in costs?
What if it was only $100 million per day for the whole gig? Does that matter to you? Because you are coming off like a liberal nutcase trying defend such gross spending that is completely out of step with the financial troubles of your average American taxpayer. That its an insult to us Chris! And I take great offense to such spending and so should you. You’re smart, you’re logical what happened to your thinking process?
Instead of trying to find fault with Tina who is only trying her best to educate you to a problem you should be protesting Obama’s gross abuse of power.
“Just how much are we spending to send Obama to India for two days and why is it a secret?
Don’t we desrve to know? We’re paying for it.”
And I’m sure you asked the same questions about every overseas trip that every other president has taken. Right?
“Just how much are we spending to send Obama to India for two days and why is it a secret? Don’t we deserve to know? We’re paying for it.” And I’m sure you asked the same questions about every overseas trip that every other president has taken. Right? ”
No I don’t ask that question very often Chris… In fact I have only asked this question twice in my entire life. First, when Bill Clinton took 1500 people to Africa and then again when Obama decided to take 3000 people to India. But, #@$% does that have to do with the fact I consider this an outrageous waste of the taxpayers money? Do you think this is a wise choice to spend that kind of money and for what great purpose? You have all the answers Chris, please tell me why this spending is justifiied?
The Pentagon denies sending 34 ships to India. The spokesman says that would represent 10 percent of the active fleet.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/india.asp
Thanks Ryan, the exact number of warships may not be known, but the one major point is we think this trip is way too expensive, with too many people going and we are at a loss to see how it will be justified from a cost ;perspective.
That being said we also know that snopes has not always been 100% right, although we use them, we do so with the knowledge we’ve been burned before.
International news sources are still reporting: “The heart of the White House will move to India though the building of the White House will continue to stay in Washington when President Barack ObamaBarack Obama lands in Mumbai on Saturday. The majority of the White House staff with their communications set-up, nuclear button, a fleet of limousines and will be in India accompanying the President on his three-day visit to Mumbai and Delhi.
A fleet of 34 warships, including an aircraft carrier, which will patrol the sea lanes off the Mumbai coast during his two-day stay there beginning Saturday will be in India to protect the President, particularly in view of the Mumbai attack in 2008 carried out by Pakistani terrorists from the sea.
Arrangements have been made for emergency evacuation, if needed.
Obama will fly by a helicopter — Marine One — from the city airport to the Indian Navy’s helibase INS Shikra at Colaba in south Mumbai.
From there, he will be taken to the nearby the Taj Hotel.
Two jets, armed with advanced communication and security systems, and a fleet of over 40 cars will be part of Obama’s convoy.
Around 800 rooms have been booked for the President and his entourage in Taj Hotel and Hyatt.
The President will have a security ring of American elite Secret Service, along with the India’s National Security Guards (NSG) and personnel from central paramilitary forces and local police in Mumbai and Delhi.
Similar arrangements are being made in Delhi, with the Air Force One to be kept in all readiness throughout Obama’s stay here from Sunday afternoon to Tuesday morning.
Maurya Hotel, where the President will be accommodated has already been swarmed by American and Indian security personnel and protective measures have been put in place.”
Chris: “You don’t know anything about the size of the trip because ALL of the information comes from an Indian newspaper which relied on an “anonymous source”
The anonymous source could be someone in the Indian government who knows these things and in fact would need to know exactly what to expect so arrangements could be made in India!
With Bush the big gripe was time away from the WHas if Camp David and the ranch in Texas were on some distant planet where communications didnt exist and the ability to work nonexistant:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-4728085-503544.html
Oh my!
Anyhooo….I don’t know whether this $2oo Mil amount is accurate or not. I do know that the extravagance of the current occupants of the WH has been obvious from day one. The trip to NY, the numerous vacations, the parties, the golf games, the expensive steak and lobster dinners all look bad in this economy.
It’s one thing for a president to travel and entertain when the country is doing exceedingly well and another when people are losing homes, are out of work, and are filing for bankruptsy.
Bush was a war president. He realized that his public profile should be subdued, not only because of the expense but because of the troops who were bleeding, dying, and suffering in extreme cold and heat.
Obama is a war president too…does this ever cross his mind? He is also presiding over an extreme and extended recession (some would say depression). Whatever he does is going to be viewed with all of this in mind.
BC was similarly extravagant. Does anyone recall the time he kept all the planes in the air for a couple of hours at the LA airport so he could get his haircut aboard AF-One…couldn’t he have done that before he left DC? He was also always late for events; was he so oblivious to the lives and schedules of of others.
Some Presidents are attuned to circumstances and the mood of the people…some are not. Democrats seem to have a built-in sense of entitlement, especially about the presidency…it’s probably just another facet of that spread the wealth philosophy.
The bottom line for many of us right now is that this administration has spent…and spent…and spent. They have borrowed and printed money to little effect. They have created another expensive entitlement. They have done nothing for the mainstreet economy. They have chosen winners and losers rewarding “winners” with big chunks of cash. I think the American people are justified in feeling a little bitter and I think they are justified in expecting better. If a story like this takes flight without being properly sourced you can bet it isn’t about the story. It is about the recklessness and callousness with which this President and his cohorts have steered this American ship.
It’s more than an email or blog story now:
Washington Times
Tina and Jack, Great Job!
Obama is guilty of doing just what all the “fat cat” CEO’s do and have done. He drags the Country into the dirt then takes a huge pay out. I guess we will be asked to bail out the US government next.
What happened to “It’s not what you can prove, it’s the seriousness of the charges”? You liberals are really worthless pieces of $hit.
Jack: “Thanks Ryan, the exact number of warships may not be known, but the one major point is wer think this trip is way too expensive, too many people going”
How expensive is it?
How many people are going?
You don’t know, so I don’t know how you can make this judgment.
Tina: “If a story like this takes flight without being properly sourced you can bet it isn’t about the story. It is about the recklessness and callousness with which this President and his cohorts have steered this American ship.”
So it doesn’t matter if the story is true, as long as it fits the narrative?
Sounds like Limbaugh after Obama’s “socialism” thesis turned out to be a piece of political satire. Rush said he didn’t care if Obama really wrote it; “I know he thinks it.”
“Indian newspapers say the president and his party of 3,000 will spend $200 million a day in India alone (tips extra), including for things like stripping the coconuts from coconut palms in the president’s path so he won’t get a nasty bump on the head from a falling coconut.”
OK, this has GOT to be satire. I mean, you realize how ridiculous this sounds, right? It simply can’t be true.
It’s not satire, it’s been reported numerous times that they were actually removing the coconuts, but so what? Chris you keep striving for perfection in knowing was it 34 warships or was it 24 warships, was it 200 million or 150 million or 100 million, was it 47 jets or 37 jets, was it 3000 cronies and staffers or was it 2750? IT DOESN’T FREAKIN MATTER, WHAT MATTERS IS WE KNOW IT’S AN OUTRAGEOUS NUMBER OF PEOPLE, SUPPORT STAFF AND EQUIPMENT AND WE KNOW ITS ALL DAMNED EXPENSIVE and we think this dog and pony show is a frivilous waste of taxpayer’s money! We also know the White House has the cost, but they are NOT talking!!! How high handed and outrageous when we are still reeling from a recession. We hate that kind of self serving secrecy, it’s our money and we deserve to know how its being spent. What rational, sane, responsible citizen wouldn’t?
Chris instead of attacking everything we say why don’t you do your research, read the stories about the costs, read up on the cocomut story and then come back for a discussion, but going on like you are is boring.
Toby: “What happened to “It’s not what you can prove, it’s the seriousness of the charges”?”
I’ve never said this, and I never would. I’m guessing you bring this up because some liberal politician or pundit said it at some point, in which case, I’ll say it’s an obviously immoral philosophy.
“You liberals are really worthless pieces of $hit.”
Always a pleasure to have a civil debate with you, Toby.
Jack, I’m sorry if you find my skepticism and desire to have all the facts before I make a judgment “boring.” I understand that scary, wildly inflated numbers are more sensational and entertaining. But they aren’t truthful.
You ask me to “do my research.” What research? The only actual sources so far are the anonymous one listed in the Indian newspaper, and U.S. government and military officials who have denied the newspaper’s claims. Every other story about this has been second-hand and has not cited a more credible source.
I do not always believe the U.S. government, but when a claim this ridiculous against them comes out, with no evidence behind it whatsoever, I have no logical reason to doubt them.
There is no reason the Obama administration needs to spend $60,000 per day on each of 3,000 individual people for this trip. It defies logic and common sense. Therefore, I will not believe it until you give me a good reason to.
You do not “know it’s an outrageous number of people, support staff and equipment” being used for the G20 summit, and no matter how many times you repeat this, it doesn’t make it true. Not even if you abuse Caps Lock.
“34 warships or was it 24 warships, was it 200 million or 150 million or 100 million, was it 47 jets or 37 jets, was it 3000 cronies and staffers or was it 2750”
I’m sure it’s nowhere close to even the lowest numbers you listed, but nice try.
Liberals being worthless pieces of $XXt really isn’t open to debate they prove it each and everyday.
Toby, you’ve made it clear that you are not open to debate. How you think you can possibly add anything to the discussion with that kind of $XXty attitude is beyond me.
It says “leave a comment” that is what I did that is what I do. Why don’t you just tell me to get to the back of the bus and shut up?
Chris the story is believable, or at least worth considering because of the pattern of extravagance that follows this man and his wife! Here’s an excerpt from a blog about another trip…to Russia:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/11/027635.php
Jack posted about something being discussed from the news, a current event story. Whether it was exagerated or not it does speak to the president’s lack of spending restraint! I admit some of it is necessary for security reasons…that isn’t the point, however. the point is his total disregard for the money being spent and whose money he is spending.
You don’t seem to either.
Toby, even I did tell you that it still wouldn’t be as offensive as you calling me a “worthless piece of $hit,” so I really don’t know what you’re complaining about. I have no power to silence you, nor have I tried.
Tina and Jack, this story has been proven baseless. Why not show a little humility and just say “I was wrong?” I did it on the coconut article, you should do it here.
Chris: “Tina and Jack, this story has been proven baseless. Why not show a little humility and just say “I was wrong?” I did it on the coconut article, you should do it here.”
The story has not been proven to be true but it is not entirely baseless as you claim either. Accounting is a funny thing. Depending on what is included in the price tag and what is not the number we are looking for could be vastly different. Obama would want to downplay the number, especially now that it’s become a news item. The right is righteously outraged by the reported number because of the Presidents record of extravagant spending.
I just reread through this post and my comments, Chris. I don’t believe there is any need to humbly admit error. In fact I feel very strongly about two things:
1. Jacks original questions constitute the topic he intended for this post, “Do we have that much disposable cash, I thought we were broke? Would $900,000,000 pumped into the California school system or to law enforcement help us more than his 4 days in India?
2. That the essence of my outrage should be repreated:
“The right is righteously outraged by the reported number”
You cannot be “righteously” outraged by a fake number.
‘The Left would be all over President Bush if he spent this much money.’
And you criticized the Left for doing so.
Why do you engage in the same behavior?
I thought the Right was better than the left.
Chris: “‘The right is righteously outraged by the reported number’ ** You cannot be ‘righteously’ outraged by a fake number.”
Finish the sentence! “…BECAUSE”! It’s a powerful word in this sentence! It acknowledges the number may not be acurate and asserts it is representative of “…the Presidents record of extravagant spending.” As I said the actual number is irrelevant.
Here is a question for you. How could the President have conducted this business in a manner more in keeping with the debt and future debt he has piled on the nation with fixes for the economy that haven’t worked and added entitlement programs that are unsustainable from the get go?
The President put this trip off on two prior occassions. The purpose of the trip. including the diplomatic purpose, may be important. The extravagance is not!
Asking: “‘The Left would be all over President Bush if he spent this much money.’ ** And you criticized the Left for doing so. Why do you engage in the same behavior? I thought the Right was better than the left.”
I don’t come from the point of view that the right is “better” than the left; I come from the point of view that our values and policies work and are more consistant with a workable society, the Constitution, and our republican form of government.
My remarks here reflect an opinion that this administrations extravagance in general is unseemly and that this story only seemed credible because of the fancy dancy way Obama conducts himself in his personal life as well as in his duties as president. I think those charges are accurate but there is a larger point to the charge.
If Obama seemed truly to be interested in the plight of the American people or the men and women fighting and dying for us I might have had a different take. But that hasn’t been the case. Instead he and the Reid/Pelosi team put their own private agenda of socializing America ahead of everything and everyone else. Instead he has engaged in living large at a time of great economic stress for the American people. If he had chosen to entertain less and have peanut butter for lunch, as President Bush did, and if he had kept a selfless profile he might have garnered more respect.
In short I don’t consider what I have said here as the “same behavior”. I don’t say the things I say to harm Obama and the Democrats in order to ensure that Republicans can win or retain power. I say the things I say to make the much larger point that the American people are not being well served. When the left engages in smear tactics against Republicans it is always about power and control. Take for instance the charges I mentioned above that Bush was spending too much time at Camp David and his Ranch. He was not spending. He was not unable to work from those locations. He was not partying extravagantly at those locations. He was resting and “getting away” in a responsible manner given the situation and circumstance of his Presidency. there was no “larger point” to their criticism. They were just engaging in nasty smear politics.
I hope that clarifies the ijntention and purpose of my comments, if not please don’t hesitate to challenge me…and thanks for asking, asking!
I think President Obama and several key advisors from his cabinet, a few staffers and aides, 60-70 Secret Service agents and his plane, his limo and that would have been enough. The rest of the people are just free loaders out for a good time. Anything beyond that is a shameful disregard for the plight of the nation while in recession. IMHO.
Tina, you’re right that this story is not an isolated one, and that it exists as part of a larger pattern. But that pattern is one of extremely illogical and patently false “scandal” stories aggressively promoted by the right wing.
The birth certificate. The madrassa. The phony ACORN scandal manufactured by pervert/liar extraordinaire James O’Keefe. Death panels. Obama’s ban on sports fishing. The many lies pushed about Imam Rauf and Park51. Shirley Sherrod. FEMA camps. The “Praise Obama” video that turned out to just be church members saying “Praise God.” And now the India story. I could go on and on about the many lies pushed by your side of the aisle in order to discredit this president and the Democratic Party, but this meager list alone does the job quite well.
When you have been complicit in the promotion of so many of these shameful stories, and apologized for so few of them, your opinions on ANYTHING regarding Obama’s performance as president become suspect at best.
I’m not saying you don’t have any valid concerns or complaints about this president or the Democrats. But I am saying that those concerns are drowned out by the paranoid, over-the-top and demonstrably false stories you publish so often. Don’t be “The Conservative Who Cried Wolf.” Credibility matters. Check your facts. See if stories pass the smell test before you post them. Then maybe when you do present valid arguments, you’ll have a better chance at reaching people who aren’t already committed to being anti-Obama.
Chris: “When you have been complicit in the promotion of so many of these shameful stories, and apologized for so few of them, your opinions on ANYTHING regarding Obama’s performance as president become suspect at best.”
You’re right…I’m guilty of discussion and self- expression about current events and items of interest in the news. That is a terrible thing to do on a discussion blog. We should all just pull up our tents, slap duct tape across our mouths and take to our beds!
But seriously….
You keep forgetting…I have been around the block more than a few times. Politics is not a game for sissies. The right played fair and silent for most of my life and guess what…we lost on too many issues! We have a lot of ground to make up and unfortunatley the left NEVER stops.
I have defended the right of the people to question and investigate on any issue that comes up. I have found guilt and pointed fingers only when I thought there was reason to do so. I realize you disagree quite often, that is your right. But let’s look at the issues you bring up:
The birth certificate: All I said was there was sufficient reason to question. this is a constitutional issue and the Presidents secretiveness about his past only adds to the suspicion.
The madrassa: I don’t recall commenting on this at all.
The phony ACORN scandal manufactured by pervert/liar extraordinaire James O’Keefe: Your excuse for an organization receiving government funding where workers were suggesting unlawful activities and behaviors, including how to avoid paying taxes, puts a rather large hole in your personal and nasty objection. Pot calls kettle!
Death panels: I don’t recall specifically weighing in on this either. The name “death panel” is shocking I admit…but the actual outcome of the legislation will, in fact, cause some people’s lives to be shortened. I don’t know what else you call it when medications and treatments will be denied (because as the czar suggested old people have lived their lives…aren’t important anymore…and the money should be spent on the young instead). Come on Chris…you’re smart enough to get this one!
Obama’s ban on sports fishing: Never heard of it.
The many lies pushed about Imam Rauf and Park51: What I had to say wasn’t a lie…sorry!
Shirley Sherrod: Shirley was treated badly by the NAACP and the WH. Take it up with them.
FEMA camps: Didn’t comment on this either.
The “Praise Obama” video that turned out to just be church members saying “Praise God.”: It’s possible but i don’t recall commenting on this.
And now the India story…
Yes, it’s really terrible to say things like:
or…
I appreciate the position you’re in Chris. I have defended many presidents from outrageous and invalid claims. I have watched as the left leadership made a mockery of official hearings just to publically discredit and demean a candidate for the Supreme Court and I have watched as celebrities, pundits, politicians and ordinary citizens like Libby and Quentin smear the names of Ronald Reagan and his wife, Nancy.
I try to be civil and fair in my own evaluations and I do try to get my facts straight. that said we are all capable of quick posting before we have all the fact. Please try to keep in mind this is a hobby, not a job.