PDA

View Full Version : What's Up with This?



M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 04:15 PM
According to NDTV.com, Obama's trip to Mumbai will cost $200 Million per day. About 3,000 people will accompany him including Secret Service, US Officials and journalists. Why in the heck is he even going there other than to hide for a few days? $200 Million per day. Unfriggin believable! With any luck, maybe he will just stay there.

YardleyLabs
11-02-2010, 04:48 PM
I call BS. If you believe that number, which would amount to $130,000 for each of the reported 3000 people (a questionable number given the 800 hotel room reportedly booked) traveling over the course of the two day presidential visit, you are also probably a good candidate for some over-water real estate.;-)

$200 million x 2 days = $400 million. Full rate at the Taj Mahal Hotel is $360/night (substantial discounts available). 800 rooms x $360/day x 2 days = $576,000. I have no doubt that the trip will cost several million, not $400 million. For reference, total US aid to India is less than $100 million per year and has declined steadily over the last decade.

dnf777
11-02-2010, 05:13 PM
According to NDTV.com, Obama's trip to Mumbai will cost $200 Million per day. About 3,000 people will accompany him including Secret Service, US Officials and journalists. Why in the heck is he even going there other than to hide for a few days? $200 Million per day. Unfriggin believable! With any luck, maybe he will just stay there.

I heard it cost a kazillion-jillion!

starjack
11-02-2010, 05:44 PM
I call BS. If you believe that number, which would amount to $130,000 for each of the reported 3000 people (a questionable number given the 800 hotel room reportedly booked) traveling over the course of the two day presidential visit, you are also probably a good candidate for some over-water real estate.;-)

$200 million x 2 days = $400 million. Full rate at the Taj Mahal Hotel is $360/night (substantial discounts available). 800 rooms x $360/day x 2 days = $576,000. I have no doubt that the trip will cost several million, not $400 million. For reference, total US aid to India is less than $100 million per year and has declined steadily over the last decade.

Im with mk on this. why is he going with that many AND HOPE HE STAYS THERE!!!

subroc
11-02-2010, 05:45 PM
I call BS...

Me too........

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 06:01 PM
I call BS. If you believe that number, which would amount to $130,000 for each of the reported 3000 people (a questionable number given the 800 hotel room reportedly booked) traveling over the course of the two day presidential visit, you are also probably a good candidate for some over-water real estate.;-)

$200 million x 2 days = $400 million. Full rate at the Taj Mahal Hotel is $360/night (substantial discounts available). 800 rooms x $360/day x 2 days = $576,000. I have no doubt that the trip will cost several million, not $400 million. For reference, total US aid to India is less than $100 million per year and has declined steadily over the last decade.

Jeff, you left out a few minor expenses:

!. The trip is 3 days I think
2. 570 rooms at the Taj Mahal Hotel, 90 rooms each at the Grand Hyatt and Oberoi Hotels plus all the restaurants and banquet rooms are reserved
3. Three Marine Helicopters
4. 39 transport planes plus fighter escorts
5. US and India navel ships patrolling the Mumbai waterfront
6. Pres Limo plus 45 cars
7. How many advance people have been there and for how long?

I don't care if the trip was free, why is he wasting the POTUS time going there?

Training in the rain regards,

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 06:05 PM
I heard it cost a kazillion-jillion!

What? No smiley face or is that a new medical term? I don't care what it cost, it is a blatant waste of tax payer funds and POTUS time. On the other hand, while he is there he can't accomplish anything.

dnf777
11-02-2010, 06:10 PM
What? No smiley face or is that a new medical term? I don't care what it cost, it is a blatant waste of tax payer funds and POTUS time. On the other hand, while he is there he can't accomplish anything.

No, its making fun of a totally bogus pile of horse-crap!

I don't know what the actual numbers are. Its very high to be sure. But guess what? That's life in the 21st century!

The POTUS is chief ambassador, and that involves foreign state visits. It always has been, and always will, be expensive.

By the way, it was a republican who transformed AirForce One from a Boeing 707 to a Boeing 747 wide-body jumbo jet. Do you want to express outrage at that, while you're ranting about wasting tax-payer dollars?

YardleyLabs
11-02-2010, 06:31 PM
Jeff, you left out a few minor expenses:

!. The trip is 3 days I think
2. 570 rooms at the Taj Mahal Hotel, 90 rooms each at the Grand Hyatt and Oberoi Hotels plus all the restaurants and banquet rooms are reserved
3. Three Marine Helicopters
4. 39 transport planes plus fighter escorts
5. US and India navel ships patrolling the Mumbai waterfront
6. Pres Limo plus 45 cars
7. How many advance people have been there and for how long?

I don't care if the trip was free, why is he wasting the POTUS time going there?

Training in the rain regards,
If three days, then $200 million/day would add up to $600 million. You couldn't spend that unless you were involving 30,000 people, not 3,000. I agree, the real question is why is he going at all. The answer is pretty straightforward. India in ne of our most important trading partners today and has a good chance of becoming or most important partner in Asia over the next 10+ years. As we find our world increasingly influenced by China, India has the potential to be a decisive ally. This trip has already been postponed repeatedly. India has been visited by US Presidents five times since its independence: Eisenhower in 1959, Nixon in 1969, Carter in 1978, Clinton in 2000, and Bush in 2006. Obama's early relations with India have not been strong, in contrast to the good relations that existed with Bush, Clinton and Reagan. If we wish to remain a significant force in Asia, we will need that relationship to be strong.

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 06:37 PM
No, its making fun of a totally bogus pile of horse-crap!

I don't know what the actual numbers are. Its very high to be sure. But guess what? That's life in the 21st century!

The POTUS is chief ambassador, and that involves foreign state visits. It always has been, and always will, be expensive.

By the way, it was a republican who transformed AirForce One from a Boeing 707 to a Boeing 747 wide-body jumbo jet. Do you want to express outrage at that, while you're ranting about wasting tax-payer dollars?

Perhaps you should read post #6. I hope it's BS but if it's $100 million a day, it's too much. I'm not talking about who's taking the trip. It's the trip and it's cost.

I have no problem with the POTUS (any POTUS) traveling in style but when I'm strapped for cash, I don't go. Maybe he should stay at home as well and set a good example. Remember he told people to stay away from Vegas.

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 06:50 PM
If three days, then $200 million/day would add up to $600 million. You couldn't spend that unless you were involving 30,000 people, not 3,000. I agree, the real question is why is he going at all. The answer is pretty straightforward. India in ne of our most important trading partners today and has a good chance of becoming or most important partner in Asia over the next 10+ years. As we find our world increasingly influenced by China, India has the potential to be a decisive ally. This trip has already been postponed repeatedly. India has been visited by US Presidents five times since its independence: Eisenhower in 1959, Nixon in 1969, Carter in 1978, Clinton in 2000, and Bush in 2006. Obama's early relations with India have not been strong, in contrast to the good relations that existed with Bush, Clinton and Reagan. If we wish to remain a significant force in Asia, we will need that relationship to be strong.

You failed to figure your estimates for anything but the rooms. I suggest the items I mention are substantially more than the hotel bill.

YardleyLabs
11-02-2010, 07:01 PM
You failed to figure your estimates for anything but the rooms. I suggest the items I mention are substantially more than the hotel bill.
You can add the numbers any way you want. You will never come within an order of magnitude of $200 or $400 or $600 million. The numbers are complete BS. Even if you assumed that every plane flown there cost as much to operate as as Air Force 1, and even if you assumed the the 45 vehicles there were purchased for the occasion and would be junked at the end of the trip, you still could not come close on the numbers. Divide those numbers by ten and I suspect that they would still be too high.

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 07:10 PM
You can add the numbers any way you want. You will never come within an order of magnitude of $200 or $400 or $600 million. The numbers are complete BS. Even if you assumed that every plane flown there cost as much to operate as as Air Force 1, and even if you assumed the the 45 vehicles there were purchased for the occasion and would be junked at the end of the trip, you still could not come close on the numbers. Divide those numbers by ten and I suspect that they would still be too high.

So what, in your expert opinion, is your guess for the cost of this trip and is it a good deal for the tax payers?

YardleyLabs
11-02-2010, 07:43 PM
So what, in your expert opinion, is your guess for the cost of this trip and is it a good deal for the tax payers?
I suspect that you would need to look at the cost of the full, four nation trip (India, Indonesia, Korea, and Japan). The full cost will never be known since most of the costs would have still been there had everyone stayed in Washington (e.g., almost all of the staff are on the payroll for security and diplomatic purposes whether they are in India of the US). I would be surprised if the incremental cost of the trip is as large as $20 million, which, by the way, was about the cost, adjusted for inflation, of the last partners' meeting I attended at Ernst & Young where the 4,000 partners booked almost all of Epcot Center for four days. The primary focus of the trip is on counter terrorism and trade. A number of corporate CEOs from US companies will be pitching for greater access to the Indian market. I suspect that a lot of time will also be spent on issues related to Pakistan and China. Indonesia offers an opportunity fo an alternate path of communication with Muslim nations. Korea and Japan will focus largely on trade and issues related to North Korea. A side benefit of the trip will be that it will undoubtedly irritate China at least a little. They would love nothing more than to see the US pulling back on its engagement in Asia.

depittydawg
11-02-2010, 07:47 PM
According to NDTV.com, Obama's trip to Mumbai will cost $200 Million per day. About 3,000 people will accompany him including Secret Service, US Officials and journalists. Why in the heck is he even going there other than to hide for a few days? $200 Million per day. Unfriggin believable! With any luck, maybe he will just stay there.

Sounds like you're confusing dollars with Yen.

david gibson
11-02-2010, 11:13 PM
MK you are a fool - dont you realize it is worth every penny of any kazillion trillion that they spend to have obama continue his apology tour? where have you been?? ;-)

after the whipping he and his party are taking today, he now has to go on tour to apologize for apologizing.

but of course, its bush who did it first so its ok. although bush never apologized, did he?....hmmmmmm

half the man going overseas regards

depittydawg
11-02-2010, 11:16 PM
MK you are a fool



And David hit's one out of the park! By far the most intelligent thing you've said in a very long time. ;)

M&K's Retrievers
11-02-2010, 11:26 PM
I suspect that you would need to look at the cost of the full, four nation trip (India, Indonesia, Korea, and Japan). The full cost will never be known since most of the costs would have still been there had everyone stayed in Washington (e.g., almost all of the staff are on the payroll for security and diplomatic purposes whether they are in India of the US). I would be surprised if the incremental cost of the trip is as large as $20 million, which, by the way, was about the cost, adjusted for inflation, of the last partners' meeting I attended at Ernst & Young where the 4,000 partners booked almost all of Epcot Center for four days. The primary focus of the trip is on counter terrorism and trade. A number of corporate CEOs from US companies will be pitching for greater access to the Indian market. I suspect that a lot of time will also be spent on issues related to Pakistan and China. Indonesia offers an opportunity fo an alternate path of communication with Muslim nations. Korea and Japan will focus largely on trade and issues related to North Korea. A side benefit of the trip will be that it will undoubtedly irritate China at least a little. They would love nothing more than to see the US pulling back on its engagement in Asia.

Since you didn't answer my question, I assume you don't know how much it will actually cost.

Mike Huckabee just quoted the $200 Million a day figure. You will excuse me if I take his word over you, dnf and especially that doofus ds.

JDogger
11-03-2010, 01:05 AM
Since you didn't answer my question, I assume you don't know how much it will actually cost.

Mike Huckabee just quoted the $200 Million a day figure. You will excuse me if I take his word over you, dnf and especially that doofus ds.

Who is the doofus ds?

dnf777
11-03-2010, 04:48 AM
Since you didn't answer my question, I assume you don't know how much it will actually cost.

Mike Huckabee just quoted the $200 Million a day figure. You will excuse me if I take his word over you, dnf and especially that doofus ds.

Believe whatever you want to believe. This is America.

I'm just surprised we still have a national debt. I'm sure the House would have had it eliminated by now (0548 11/3) if not for the obstructionist white house!

david gibson
11-03-2010, 07:01 AM
And David hit's one out of the park! By far the most intelligent thing you've said in a very long time. ;)

and you quoted out of context like a pro! i guess the comedy channel is educational for you after all

YardleyLabs
11-03-2010, 07:23 AM
Since you didn't answer my question, I assume you don't know how much it will actually cost.

Mike Huckabee just quoted the $200 Million a day figure. You will excuse me if I take his word over you, dnf and especially that doofus ds.
Showing, yet again, that hate is both blind and dumb.

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 08:31 AM
Showing, yet again, that hate is both blind and dumb.

And you have no idea how much it will cost. Can't you admit just once when you don't know the answer to something rather than saying "'cause I said so"? The cost has been reported -right or wrong- by several different places on the net and quoted by Huckabee as well. No one but you has disputed the reports. Doesn't it make sense that someone in the know other than you would have disputed the reports?

So sayith Yardley regards,

YardleyLabs
11-03-2010, 08:52 AM
And you have no idea how much it will cost. Can't you admit just once when you don't know the answer to something rather than saying "'cause I said so"? The cost has been reported -right or wrong- by several different places on the net and quoted by Huckabee as well. No one but you has disputed the reports. Doesn't it make sense that someone in the know other than you would have disputed the reports?

So sayith Yardley regards,
As I noted in post 14, it is unlikely that anyone will know the true cost because most of those costs would have been paid even if no trip had been made.

There have been many reports of the $200 million per day number throughout the right wing blogosphere -- all with one source: an unnamed, unofficial source in the local Indian government as reported on New Delhi television, where it is not even clear what currency is being quoted or whether the costs are those of the US or also costs being incurred by the Indian government.

What I pointed out is that we have brains for a reason. If I show you a picture of my house and tell you that it cost $50 million to build, you use you brain and your experience and quickly call BS, or at least ask how many hundred acres of land I have to go with the house. Simply figure out how much you have to be spending to spend $200 million per day. As a point of reference, at its peak, the entire US involvement in the Iraq war cost $280 million per day in current costs (i.e. excluding the long term costs of caring for the wounded.) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/21/AR2007092102074.html). Of course, that estimate came from opponents of the war who were trying to exaggerate the cost.:rolleyes:

But then, you are free to believe what you want, no matter how absurd.

EDIT: RS 200 million/day would be the equivalent of about $4.5 million per day. I suspect (but do not know) that is the number that was being cited on New Delhi television. The cost estimates that I have seen out of India also include the cost of 5,000 Indian police and soldiers assigned specifically to security for the Presidential party. That cost is not being paid by the US.

Jason Glavich
11-03-2010, 08:58 AM
200 million a day is possible, think about it this way. If the US Govt pays 25.00 for a 5.00 Hammer what percent is the increase?
Ok now that you have that increase in your head do the same for Jet fuel, cars, rooms, per diem( yes they all get it while on travel), Wages of the people on staff(comp time+travel comp time), So add all those costs up and overpay 5 times or 400% increase for each service and it may come close to that.

Although there is a grain of seriousness in my post please don't take it to bank just a view.

And Yes if you think that is a joke, they also pay 19.99 for a pack of Bic Clik-stic pens. About 4.00 at Wal-Mart. Just food for thought.

gman0046
11-03-2010, 09:05 AM
Obongolo leaving the country is actually good news. He could actually cost us more money staying here. Sad, sad for a failed presidency.

BrianW
11-03-2010, 09:12 AM
IThe primary focus of the trip is on counter terrorism and trade. A number of corporate CEOs from US companies will be pitching for greater access to the Indian market. I suspect that a lot of time will also be spent on issues related to Pakistan and China. Indonesia offers an opportunity fo an alternate path of communication with Muslim nations. Korea and Japan will focus largely on trade and issues related to North Korea. A side benefit of the trip will be that it will undoubtedly irritate China at least a little. They would love nothing more than to see the US pulling back on its engagement in Asia.
Actually, I think it's the primary "justification".
Here's what the BBC said
'No big' outcomes expected from Obama's India trip

India is not expecting any "big bang" results from the forthcoming visit of US President Barack Obama, India's Foreign Secretary has said http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11681532said

So what's the real reason? With his supposed concern for healing the planet of climate change of carbon emissions, putting science in it's rightful place, promoting technology etc: Why not utilize a REAL "alternate path of communication with Muslim nations"? Just get PBO & the boys on "GoToMeeting.com save bunch of jet fuel & time traveling?

Besides because you can't party like a rock star with your bizness buds on AF1 after such a tough time of traveling around the US campaigning for the last couple months. :rolleyes:

So we're sending "the top 200 evil, greedy capitalist CEO's" who have "colonialized the Third World" (in PBO's views) out to plunder again? Highly doubtful.
Are we really thinking we're going to get more Indian companies to invest in the US? Not so much. More likely more technology trades like the Clinton/China campaign in the 90's but on energy & space this time. Remember how THAT was all just for peaceful purposes?

In 2008, the two countries signed a deal for civil nuclear co-operation. India gained access to US nuclear technology and fuel in return for inspections of its civilian, but not military, nuclear facilities.



We can't utilize our resources for our own energy dependent country but we'll send it to one of our largest competitors?!?
"We will see concrete and significant steps in wide range of areas that will expand the long-term strategic framework in a way that we can create productive partnership for the mutual benefit and [will be] equally important to give substantive content and shape to the global strategic partnership," she said.

Anyone want to bet that along for the ride aerospace major corp United Technologies tries to develop more space tech transfers with Indonesia since Obama's past NASA talk and the upcoming last shuttle flight? We give up a leadership role in space concurrent with a trip to one of the largest Musilim countries where the President just recently proposed developing their space program.

Nope, no ironic symbolism there! :rolleyes:

Buzz
11-03-2010, 09:15 AM
It doesn't matter what he does, you guys will be outraged at every move he makes and every word he utters. Unbelievable. You guys believe that it is possible to spend over a half billion dollars on a 3 day trip. At 3000 people that would come to $67k/person/day. You guys will believe anything. :rolleyes:

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 09:25 AM
As I noted in post 14, it is unlikely that anyone will know the true cost because most of those costs would have been paid even if no trip had been made. I'm sure you are familiar with the term "cost accounting". The war ships they will use to patrol the coast would be doing something else so we don't count that nor do we count the cost associated with all those planes and vehicles for surely they would be doing something else. Oh, and the cost to send those ships from Pearl and the their return doesn't count since they would just be floating around anyway.:rolleyes:

There have been many reports of the $200 million per day number throughout the right wing blogosphere -- all with one source: an unnamed, unofficial source in the local Indian government as reported on New Delhi television, where it is not even clear what currency What part of $200 Million don't you understand? It doesn't say Rupees or Euros. is being quoted or whether the costs are those of the US or also costs being incurred by the Indian government.

What I pointed out is that we have brains for a reason. If I show you a picture of my house and tell you that it cost $50 million to build, you use you brain and your experience and quickly call BS, or at least ask how many hundred acres of land I have to go with the house. Simply figure out how much you have to be spending to spend $200 million per day. As a point of reference, at its peak, the entire US involvement in the Iraq war cost $280 million per day in current costs (i.e. excluding the long term costs of caring for the wounded.) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/21/AR2007092102074.html). Of course, that estimate came from opponents of the war who were trying to exaggerate the cost.:rolleyes:

But then, you are free to believe what you want, no matter how absurd.

EDIT: RS 200 million/day would be the equivalent of about $4.5 million per day. I suspect (but do not know) that is the number that was being cited on New Delhi television. The cost estimates that I have seen out of India also include the cost of 5,000 Indian police and soldiers assigned specifically to security for the Presidential party. That cost is not being paid by the US.

A couple of comments in bold above. Jeff, $4.5 Million a day would be too much to send this clown anywhere but home for good. That would be a bargain.

I get my haircut on company time 'cause it grows on company time regards,

Goose
11-03-2010, 09:32 AM
I always figured the Imam Obama would build his Presidential library in Kenya but maybe India's in play, too which is the real reason for the Imam's trip there. Lots of countries would love to have his library and he needs to decide soon. I think he's going to Cuba next month.

gman0046
11-03-2010, 09:35 AM
Goose, you said the Obongolo Library? Do you think his countrymen in Kenya can read?

Gerry Clinchy
11-03-2010, 09:59 AM
Yardley:

I would be surprised if the incremental cost of the trip is as large as $20 million, which, by the way, was about the cost, adjusted for inflation, of the last partners' meeting I attended at Ernst & Young where the 4,000 partners booked almost all of Epcot Center for four days.

Jeff, using your figures ... $20 million/4,000 people/4 days = $1,250 per day per
person.

I have to believe that the cost per person for a Presidential jaunt like this is going to be more than $1250/day/person. The cost of flying the POTUS just about anywhere is a whole lot more.

I might question $200 million/day ... but it's certainly more than the $20 million. $200 million for the entire trip would work out to $16,666 for 3000 people for 4 days. If the trip is 5 days the cost/day is down to $13,333/day. That doesn't seem like it could be out of the realm of possibility.

That is a feasible number considering the advance personnel who will be in the field for more than the length of a 4-day trip. I believe they also fly the POTUS limo to the locations in a separate aircraft (documentary on TV is the source for that). I believe they also put two Air Force 1 planes in the air, so that one is a "decoy". I don't think we can assume that all other aircraft that might be involved would be in the air if the trip were not occurring. We might still be paying wages, but those planes might very likely be sitting on the ground if they did not have a mission to guard the POTUS.

I don't dispute that India is an important ally in Asia, worthy of a visit from the POTUS. I might dispute that he has to take 2999 other people along with him on the taxpayer's dime.

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 10:00 AM
It doesn't matter what he does, you guys will be outraged at every move he makes and every word he utters. Unbelievable. You guys believe that it is possible to spend over a half billion dollars on a 3 day trip. At 3000 people that would come to $67k/person/day. You guys will believe anything. :rolleyes:

I've said repeatedly, it's about the cost associated with the trip not the person.

Sundown49 aka Otey B
11-03-2010, 05:18 PM
Think they would just keep him??? be cheaper on US......

depittydawg
11-03-2010, 08:00 PM
I've said repeatedly, it's about the cost associated with the trip not the person.

But then you also said......

M&K's Retrievers;699422]A couple of comments in bold above. Jeff, $4.5 Million a day would be too much to send this clown anywhere but home for good.

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 08:22 PM
But then you also said......

M&K's Retrievers;699422]A couple of comments in bold above. Jeff, $4.5 Million a day would be too much to send this clown anywhere but home for good.

And your point is? The point of the thread is the cost and usefulness of the trip. My comment above to Jeff was an opinion of BHO's worthlessness regardless the subject.

Buzz
11-03-2010, 08:30 PM
And your point is? The point of the thread is the cost and usefulness of the trip. My comment above to Jeff was an opinion of BHO's worthlessness regardless the subject.

I think his point is that in the context of that statement, it appears that it is largely about the person.

But I shouldn't speak for him. I have a hard time picking up on stuff sometimes.

depittydawg
11-03-2010, 08:55 PM
I think his point is that in the context of that statement, it appears that it is largely about the person.

But I shouldn't speak for him. I have a hard time picking up on stuff sometimes.

Well said. The context is that without the contempt for the MAN in the White House, the 200 million dollar figure, as Yardley pointed out, would be challenged and quickly disregarded as impossible. The motivating force of this thread seems to be about the Man, not the money.

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 09:36 PM
I don't care if the trip was free, why is he wasting the POTUS time going there?



What? No smiley face or is that a new medical term? I don't care what it cost, it is a blatant waste of tax payer funds and POTUS time.




I have no problem with the POTUS (any POTUS) traveling in style but when I'm strapped for cash, I don't go. Maybe he should stay at home as well and set a good example. Remember he told people to stay away from Vegas.


I've said repeatedly, it's about the cost associated with the trip not the person.


And your point is? The point of the thread is the cost and usefulness of the trip. My comment above to Jeff was an opinion of BHO's worthlessness regardless the subject.

I guess youse guys can't read.

YardleyLabs
11-03-2010, 09:43 PM
I guess youse guys can't read.
Mike,

The problem is that you contradict yourself. On one had you say it is about the cost of the trip. On the other you say it is about BHO's worthlessness regardless of the subject. I suspect that the latter explains your willingness to accept and pass on absurd cost quotes (coming from an anonymous provincial official in India) without any assessment of the reasonableness of the information involved. You really don't care about the facts, only about having another stick to beat the drum.

M&K's Retrievers
11-03-2010, 10:01 PM
Mike,

The problem is that you contradict yourself. On one had you say it is about the cost of the trip. On the other you say it is about BHO's worthlessness regardless of the subject. I suspect that the latter explains your willingness to accept and pass on absurd cost quotes (coming from an anonymous provincial official in India) without any assessment of the reasonableness of the information involved. You really don't care about the facts, only about having another stick to beat the drum.

Where are you getting this anonymous official from India stuff and why after this has been reported for the last two days have their been no denials from the White House? Why can't you come up with a reasonable cost estimate since you are so sure it couldn't possibly cost this much? I'll answer that one for you. You can't possibly know.

This isn't a corporate retreat to Disneyland taken 20 years ago when you were high rolling and you know it

david gibson
11-04-2010, 03:32 AM
pretty clear to me why he is taking this trip - he has to travel far and wide to get some adoration from the muslim world cause he sure aint getting it here! he knew all along he was going to get pummeled this week and planned this trip in the aftermath accordingly.

YardleyLabs
11-04-2010, 05:41 AM
Where are you getting this anonymous official from India stuff and why after this has been reported for the last two days have their been no denials from the White House? Why can't you come up with a reasonable cost estimate since you are so sure it couldn't possibly cost this much? I'll answer that one for you. You can't possibly know.

This isn't a corporate retreat to Disneyland taken 20 years ago when you were high rolling and you know it
My information comes from the "horse's mouth" -- the New Delhi TV web site that was the original source of every single report.


A top official of the Maharashtra government privy to the arrangements for the high-profile visit has reckoned that a whopping $ 200 million (Rs. 900 crore approx) per day would be spent by various teams coming from the US in connection with Obama's two-day stay in the city.

"A huge amount of around $ 200 million would be spent on security, stay and other aspects of the Presidential visit," the official said in Mumbai. (http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/obamas-india-visit-slammed-for-over-the-top-spending-64405?pfrom=Namaste,-Obama)

Every single story that you have read originated from this single report. There is no other source. You would have to ask Obama why they haven't replied. Maybe because no legitimate news source has even carried the story except for a couple of English scandal rags that very carefully say only "it has been reported...." This, of course, was the Breitbart defense when he went around the world with a fraudulently edited tape of Shirley Sherrod. If you are not familiar with it, Maharashtra is one of the states in India. This is equivalent to saying that an anonymous NY state official estimated the cost of Sarcozy's visit to Washington at a billion dollars.

road kill
11-04-2010, 07:07 AM
My information comes from the "horse's mouth" -- the New Delhi TV web site that was the original source of every single report.


A top official of the Maharashtra government privy to the arrangements for the high-profile visit has reckoned that a whopping $ 200 million (Rs. 900 crore approx) per day would be spent by various teams coming from the US in connection with Obama's two-day stay in the city.

"A huge amount of around $ 200 million would be spent on security, stay and other aspects of the Presidential visit," the official said in Mumbai. (http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/obamas-india-visit-slammed-for-over-the-top-spending-64405?pfrom=Namaste,-Obama)

Every single story that you have read originated from this single report. There is no other source. You would have to ask Obama why they haven't replied. Maybe because no legitimate news source has even carried the story except for a couple of English scandal rags that very carefully say only "it has been reported...." This, of course, was the Breitbart defense when he went around the world with a fraudulently edited tape of Shirley Sherrod. If you are not familiar with it, Maharashtra is one of the states in India. This is equivalent to saying that an anonymous NY state official estimated the cost of Sarcozy's visit to Washington at a billion dollars.

So, it's all made up?

Is Obama even going?
Is he driving a Prius??



RK

david gibson
11-04-2010, 07:32 AM
So, it's all made up?

Is Obama even going?
Is he driving a Prius??



RK

are you kidding? queen Michele would never allow herself to be seen is something so bourgeois

david gibson
11-05-2010, 12:41 AM
so yardley - where is this wrong?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/34-warships-sent-from-us-for-obama-visit-64459


http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/obamas-india-visit-slammed-for-over-the-top-spending-64405


so the cost of the warships can be partly a wash since the warships would be operating somewhere anyway, but its still a joke.

lame duck failure of a president with 2 years to go. he doesnt even have the respect of the muslim brethren he has tried so hard to appease. what a waste of money for him to go on another apology tour to 3rd world countries.

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 06:26 AM
so yardley - where is this wrong?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/34-warships-sent-from-us-for-obama-visit-64459


http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/obamas-india-visit-slammed-for-over-the-top-spending-64405


so the cost of the warships can be partly a wash since the warships would be operating somewhere anyway, but its still a joke.

lame duck failure of a president with 2 years to go. he doesnt even have the respect of the muslim brethren he has tried so hard to appease. what a waste of money for him to go on another apology tour to 3rd world countries.
The actions taken to maintain presidential communications in the event of crisis (the subject of the first story) is done whenever the President travels anywhere. It has been done since the time of the Cold War and is not likely to change even if the President is someone you dislike. The second story is the one I provided a link to in my post. It is actually a follow up story. Their first announced their estimate of the cost at $200 million per day for the three day trip ($600 million in total), while this story focuses on the "outrage" being expressed by other about the costs that they reported. None of that changes either of two facts:
there is no support for the cost estimate beyond the anonymous provincial official
the cost estimate is irrational when compared with the descriptions of anything being done. I will point out, again, that the $200 million/day number would need to be compared with the $280 million/day cost of supporting the entire war in Iraq at its peak in 2007 (150,000 troops plus contractors and naval assets).Repeating a lie over and over does not make it true.

david gibson
11-05-2010, 07:35 AM
The actions taken to maintain presidential communications in the event of crisis (the subject of the first story) is done whenever the President travels anywhere. It has been done since the time of the Cold War and is not likely to change even if the President is someone you dislike. The second story is the one I provided a link to in my post. It is actually a follow up story. Their first announced their estimate of the cost at $200 million per day for the three day trip ($600 million in total), while this story focuses on the "outrage" being expressed by other about the costs that they reported. None of that changes either of two facts:
there is no support for the cost estimate beyond the anonymous provincial official
the cost estimate is irrational when compared with the descriptions of anything being done. I will point out, again, that the $200 million/day number would need to be compared with the $280 million/day cost of supporting the entire war in Iraq at its peak in 2007 (150,000 troops plus contractors and naval assets).Repeating a lie over and over does not make it true.

sigh...RK, whats the page number?

M&K's Retrievers
11-05-2010, 08:08 AM
The actions taken to maintain presidential communications in the event of crisis (the subject of the first story) is done whenever the President travels anywhere. It has been done since the time of the Cold War and is not likely to change even if the President is someone you dislike. The second story is the one I provided a link to in my post. It is actually a follow up story. Their first announced their estimate of the cost at $200 million per day for the three day trip ($600 million in total), while this story focuses on the "outrage" being expressed by other about the costs that they reported. None of that changes either of two facts:
there is no support for the cost estimate beyond the anonymous provincial official
the cost estimate is irrational when compared with the descriptions of anything being done. I will point out, again, that the $200 million/day number would need to be compared with the $280 million/day cost of supporting the entire war in Iraq at its peak in 2007 (150,000 troops plus contractors and naval assets).Repeating a lie over and over does not make it true.

Exactly how much would be OK with you?

M&K's Retrievers
11-05-2010, 08:10 AM
[


so the cost of the warships can be partly a wash since the warships would be operating somewhere anyway, but its still a joke.

.

It still has a cost associated with it and should be allocated to this endeavor.

BrianW
11-05-2010, 09:05 AM
This is all razzle-dazzle designed to divert us from the real reason for the tour/trip.
To help PBO make SOME kind of a political statement in the 3rd World/developing nations. This is Obama remember, it's not just a vacation.

He's going to what was one of the world's largest colonies and visiting (& likely speaking) at the Gandhi Museum. It's pretty plain by now what he's been taught & feels abot "colonialism". There's got to be acknowledgment and then reparations and we've already had the "apology tour". Is THAT what the CEO's are for? A Demacorp commitment to "sharing the wealth" instead of exploitation this time around?

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 09:20 AM
I mentioned the reasons for the trip right at the beginning. Anyone who thinks that the US can survive well over the next 20 years without strengthening our relationship with India should take their head out of the sand. The President, no matter who occupies the office, needs to paying attention. Our 25 year position as the world's one and only super power has already effectively ended.

duckheads
11-05-2010, 09:41 AM
Our 25 year position as the world's one and only super power has already effectively ended.

That probably sends tingles down your leg as well as all of the other independant left wing liberals on here.

Once we have a leader that will stand with his head tall and be proud to be an american instead of bowing and apologizing we will be the only super power in the worlds view again! That and quit spending us into ablivian (sp) and stop the federal reserve from making moves that tank the dollar.

Jason Glavich
11-05-2010, 09:43 AM
I mentioned the reasons for the trip right at the beginning. Anyone who thinks that the US can survive well over the next 20 years without strengthening our relationship with India should take their head out of the sand. The President, no matter who occupies the office, needs to paying attention. Our 25 year position as the world's one and only super power has already effectively ended.

I agree with the bold part. I finally had to believe it when someone started apologizing to every country for us and our actions. Other than that I find it so funny to read these posts, you defend these knuckleheads no matter what. I am not saying anyone could do better but c'mon the country is worse now then ever,(stop breathe, don't blame bush, been there done that)

At some point this administration needs to be held accountable for all the money it is spending billions on a failed stimulus and CEO bonuses, and even at 200 million for the whole trip is stupid. Invite them here, put them up in the Lincoln bedroom or motel 6 or a 7/11 store room...and for once save the tax payer a freaking penny for once. I know every president spends money on these trips but enough is enough, at least admit we are continuing to waste money daily.

I was typing at the same time as duckheads I guess...

mwk56
11-05-2010, 10:35 AM
You all need to get your facts straight. The whole story is bogus. See this link:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/05/obama.asia.cost/index.html?hpt=C1

david gibson
11-05-2010, 11:47 AM
You all need to get your facts straight. The whole story is bogus. See this link:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/05/obama.asia.cost/index.html?hpt=C1

not a matter of getting facts straight - more a matter of a decent white house response. until very lately the only word out was that from india, and they reported what they reported until the denial from the staff of The Apologist.

they are also shaking down coconuts and building a 1km tunnel for The Apologist to be safe.

dnf777
11-05-2010, 02:00 PM
I mentioned the reasons for the trip right at the beginning. Anyone who thinks that the US can survive well over the next 20 years without strengthening our relationship with India should take their head out of the sand. The President, no matter who occupies the office, needs to paying attention. Our 25 year position as the world's one and only super power has already effectively ended.

Sand? Their heads are clearly somewhere else that the sun don't shine!

Now that this absurd rumor has been thoroughly debunked by official releases, we see the hate-right backpeddling and changing the tune quickly. Same old tactic. Its not even worth pointing out the truth to those who refuse to see it. Not when ideologic rumor spreading accomplishes their goals.

As it was said already, "there's plenty of things to criticize this administration for, without making stuff up!" Making stuff up just destroys whatever shred of legitimacy they ever had at this point.

paul young
11-05-2010, 02:06 PM
ahhh. Michelle Bachman......

we'll be hearing a lot from her. none of it factual, unfortunately.

WTH were the people of Minnesota thinking when they elected her?-Paul

duckheads
11-05-2010, 02:43 PM
they were thinking just like the idiots that put franken in office. So tell me Paul, what do you think of Mr. Franken? Haven't heard any negative comments about the idiots that sit on the left side of the isle. What about Graysen in FLA. Haven't heard any of you independants rip on that idiot!

Buzz
11-05-2010, 03:05 PM
You all need to get your facts straight. The whole story is bogus. See this link:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/05/obama.asia.cost/index.html?hpt=C1

Facts don't matter to the right wing noise machine.

Maddow did a great story on this. I'm not making his up, it's been reported, it's on the internet! Here's the clip.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#40018314

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 03:44 PM
Facts don't matter to the right wing noise machine.

Maddow did a great story on this. I'm not making his up, it's been reported, it's on the internet! Here's the clip.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#40018314
Thanks for the link. It was an excellent piece. During the Vietnam war, conspiracy theory rumors were rampant on the left. It was small wonder given that the entire escalation began with a deliberately manufactured (i.e. fictional) incident in the Gulf of Tonkin. Every time someone would argue for the use of reason they were drowned out by claims that they were supporting the "establishment" by questioning the claims being made. The fact that the FBI actually went out of its way to create some of the paranoia (e.g., according to files that were declassified, an activist at Princeton was deliberately followed by FBI agents simply so that he would appear paranoid when he complained) didn't make it easier to be rational.

This thread is a perfect example of the contagion of stupidity. Until people from both left and right are willing to engage their brains to demand facts in support of opinions, there is no hope for democracy. Unfortunately, those powering the right today, including Rupert Murdoch and Fox, have no interest in democracy unless they get to pick the voters. That is the same attitude that drove the left in the 1960's and it has not improved with age.

david gibson
11-05-2010, 04:13 PM
Facts don't matter to the right wing noise machine.
Maddow did a great story on this. I'm not making his up, it's been reported, it's on the internet! Here's the clip.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#40018314

please provide proof that the left wing noise machine deals only with facts and you might have an ounce of credibility.

good luck with that one.

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 04:19 PM
please provide proof that the left wing noise machine deals only with facts and you might have an ounce of credibility.

good luck with that one.
I think I generally try to make it clear that honesty, or lack thereof, is a cross party issue. However, the right seems to be elevating dishonesty into a virtue as long as the story is good for the cause. Why don't you point to a story where biased left wing politicians and news media have been as far off base as with this story concerning the cost of the trip? You might find some support in your assessment if the "facts" are similarly distorted. (Out of fairness, try to stay within the last decade)

Buzz
11-05-2010, 05:07 PM
However, the right seems to be elevating dishonesty into a virtue as long as the story is good for the cause.


Any piece of mud, true or not, gets slung with gusto.

david gibson
11-05-2010, 06:37 PM
Any piece of mud, true or not, gets slung with gusto.

really? and the left is pure as snow?


is it any wonder why you lefties are the minority? not to me anyway.......

david gibson
11-05-2010, 06:38 PM
I think I generally try to make it clear that honesty, or lack thereof, is a cross party issue. However, the right seems to be elevating dishonesty into a virtue as long as the story is good for the cause. Why don't you point to a story where biased left wing politicians and news media have been as far off base as with this story concerning the cost of the trip? You might find some support in your assessment if the "facts" are similarly distorted. (Out of fairness, try to stay within the last decade)

you really HAVE to be joking......

the story about the high costs were generated by the Indians ignatz. sure - Drudge repeated it, but please, cnn never does that do they.... there was no vast right wing conspiracy.


tingle up my leg regards.......followed by :barf:

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 06:39 PM
I think I generally try to make it clear that honesty, or lack thereof, is a cross party issue. However, the right seems to be elevating dishonesty into a virtue as long as the story is good for the cause. Why don't you point to a story where biased left wing politicians and news media have been as far off base as with this story concerning the cost of the trip? You might find some support in your assessment if the "facts" are similarly distorted. (Out of fairness, try to stay within the last decade)


really? and the left is pure as snow?


is it any wonder why you lefties are the minority? not to me anyway.......
Still waiting for your example.;-):rolleyes:

david gibson
11-05-2010, 06:50 PM
Still waiting for your example.;-):rolleyes:

example of what? the left distorting the truth?

oh man, you got me there, i admit, the left us always accurate and honest, wow - how could you be so good as to trap me like this????? oberman has been so honest as to his political support, hasnt he?


puuuuhhhhleeeeeeze

you are so right yardly. even though your side just got shown the toilet door by the american majority you still claim to have a monopoly on the "truth"

it must be so painful to know you are right but no one will listen.....(becuase you are really wrong). i feel bad for The Apologist. it must suck that you are so smart that you cant dumb down the message for the masses to understand. the masses you depend on for their vote. isnt that funny? you uber-mensa people depend on the useful idiots to carry your cause, yet you are too smart OR they are too dumb to be able to communicate with them.



yeah - the events of this week happened only because The Apologist couldnt "communicate"

i am getting a sidestitch from laughing so hard!

svenelvis
11-05-2010, 07:01 PM
example of what? the left distorting the truth?

oh man, you got me there, i admit, the left us always accurate and honest, wow - how could you be so good as to trap me like this????? oberman has been so honest as to his political support, hasnt he?


puuuuhhhhleeeeeeze

you are so right yardly. even though your side just got shown the toilet door by the american majority you still claim to have a monopoly on the "truth"

it must be so painful to know you are right but no one will listen.....(becuase you are really wrong). i feel bad for The Apologist. it must suck that you are so smart that you cant dumb down the message for the masses to understand. the masses you depend on for their vote. isnt that funny? you uber-mensa people depend on the useful idiots to carry your cause, yet you are too smart OR they are too dumb to be able to communicate with them.



yeah - the events of this week happened only because The Apologist couldnt "communicate"

i am getting a sidestitch from laughing so hard!

Allow me to translate:

Bark, insult, growl, insult, bark, bark, insult, growl......

Um - I guess I don't have an example

Buzz
11-05-2010, 07:08 PM
Allow me to translate:

Bark, insult, growl, insult, bark, bark, insult, growl......

Um - I guess I don't have an example

I just read that to my dogs, and they understood perfectly! LOL:p

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 07:11 PM
example of what? the left distorting the truth?

oh man, you got me there, i admit, the left us always accurate and honest, wow - how could you be so good as to trap me like this????? oberman has been so honest as to his political support, hasnt he?


puuuuhhhhleeeeeeze

you are so right yardly. even though your side just got shown the toilet door by the american majority you still claim to have a monopoly on the "truth"

it must be so painful to know you are right but no one will listen.....(becuase you are really wrong). i feel bad for The Apologist. it must suck that you are so smart that you cant dumb down the message for the masses to understand. the masses you depend on for their vote. isnt that funny? you uber-mensa people depend on the useful idiots to carry your cause, yet you are too smart OR they are too dumb to be able to communicate with them.



yeah - the events of this week happened only because The Apologist couldnt "communicate"

i am getting a sidestitch from laughing so hard!
Actually, you made the statement challenging Buzz to "please provide proof that the left wing noise machine deals only with facts and you might have an ounce of credibility."

Needless to say, the challenge was ridiculous. No one has ever made such a claim.

However, on a far too frequent basis, we find the "Big Lie" being pitched by the full range of Fox assets, right wing blogdom, and then brain dead boo-boos like the Minnesota moron, the Delaware witch, and Arizona's contribution for winner of the award for person most likely to get stuck in the door of the short yellow bus.

My challenge to you, as the most outspoken proponent on this forum for absurd distortion and innuendo, is to identify a comparable lefty story within the last 10 years that was similarly absurd, similarly played in the press and pushed by congressional leaders, and had similarly little factual basis. I can't think of one but, it seems you have no such problem. Help us out with details. Of course, you need to be specific abot which facts you are stating are absurd and the basis for the statement. I believe I was pretty specific when I said the entire story posted by the OP was BS and said why I believed that.

david gibson
11-05-2010, 07:28 PM
Actually, you made the statement challenging Buzz to "please provide proof that the left wing noise machine deals only with facts and you might have an ounce of credibility."

Needless to say, the challenge was ridiculous. No one has ever made such a claim. well then dont place the opposite claim on the other side!

However, on a far too frequent basis, we find the "Big Lie" being pitched by the full range of Fox assets, right wing blogdom, and then brain dead boo-boos like the Minnesota moron, the Delaware witch, and Arizona's contribution for winner of the award for person most likely to get stuck in the door of the short yellow bus.

My challenge to you, as the most outspoken proponent on this forum for absurd distortion and innuendo, is to identify a comparable ty story within the last 10 years that was similarly absurd, similarly played in the press and pushed by congressional leaders, and had similarly little factual basis. I can't think of one but, it seems you have no such problem. Help us out with details. Of course, you need to be specific abot which facts you are stating are absurd and the basis for the statement. I believe I was pretty specific when I said the entire story posted by the OP was BS and said why I believed that.


\oh well i guess you got me now! i have a dog to train and a puppy to assimilate and a business trip to san fransicko monday. so you are right yardley, the left is the only media to be 100% factual.....

thats the 3rd vomit tonight....

ok, my challenge to you is to show how the left media is so perfect compared to the right media. please be specific, and cite actual cases. not just one, but at least 20. hey, i can throw an irrelevant challange at you just the same. while you are doing that i will be playing with dogs.

i have never seen such a bunch of sore losers. after The Apologist got elected you didnt see us freaking out, rather we circled our wagons and got control back a mere 2 yrs later. good luck doing the same!

the longer you whine the less time you have to do real work....tick tock - LOL!

Buzz
11-05-2010, 07:36 PM
Needless to say, the challenge was ridiculous. No one has ever made such a claim.




No, I didn't make the claim, but the challenge is utterly ridiculous. To "prove" the LWM deals only in facts, I would have to dig up every story within a reasonable time frame and show that they were correct. And regardless of the documentation I rounded up, it would be impossible to satisfy him. Wheres, for David to make good on your challenge to him only has to find one single case, yet he has yet to take you up on it.

Buzz
11-05-2010, 07:37 PM
\oh well i guess you got me now! i have a dog to train and a puppy to assimilate and a business trip to san fransicko monday. so you are right yardley, the left is the only media to be 100% factual.....



So, are you saying you're too busy? The time you've spent in this thread in the bark, bark, insult, growl, you could have had it covered.

Cody Covey
11-05-2010, 08:40 PM
So, are you saying you're too busy? The time you've spent in this thread in the bark, bark, insult, growl, you could have had it covered.

Try their demonizing Bush on Katrina for starts. Or that he had anything to do with 9/11.

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 09:20 PM
\oh well i guess you got me now! i have a dog to train and a puppy to assimilate and a business trip to san fransicko monday. so you are right yardley, the left is the only media to be 100% factual.....

thats the 3rd vomit tonight....

ok, my challenge to you is to show how the left media is so perfect compared to the right media. please be specific, and cite actual cases. not just one, but at least 20. hey, i can throw an irrelevant challange at you just the same. while you are doing that i will be playing with dogs.

i have never seen such a bunch of sore losers. after The Apologist got elected you didnt see us freaking out, rather we circled our wagons and got control back a mere 2 yrs later. good luck doing the same!

the longer you whine the less time you have to do real work....tick tock - LOL!
Actually, after Obama was elected what spewed forth was some of the most venomous, frequently bigoted and almost always hateful speech I have ever heard. Every person who voted for him was denounced as either a socialist/communist or a social leech whose vote was purchased with welfare checks. The fact that as high a percentage of blacks voted for Obama as voted for Gore and Clinton before him was taken as proof of black racism. Enjoy your weekend and you trip to SF. It is one of my favorite cities. If you find a story that you think has legs, feel free to post it whenever you have time. Who knows, you might find I agree.

What you have heard on this forum has included none of that. Rather, virtually everyone has made clear their own frustrations with the administration and breathed a sigh of relief that the worst candidates put forth by the tea party managed to lose. Maybe you should take a lesson for the next time those you support lose. Instead, you express surprise that the President has simply decided to move out of the WH and turn the reins of power over to future speaker Boehner. I guess if Boehner really wants the WH he will need to earn it the way Obama did -- by winning the votes of a majority of Americans from across all demographic groups.

david gibson
11-05-2010, 09:24 PM
So, are you saying you're too busy? The time you've spent in this thread in the bark, bark, insult, growl, you could have had it covered.

yep! thats it, i am too busy.

no bark, insult, or growl - but i can see how you LOSERS see it that way. i'd feel as bad as you do if my party got beat by reality like yours did - oh i forgot, you only got beat because the masses are too dumb to understand The Apologist's higher intellect....the same masses that followed him blindly in 2008. that little dream of 2 yrs ago aint quite the same, is it? what a joke.
live by the sword die by the sword. funny how the american people's ignorance worked for Him then, but now he uses it as blame. you cant make this stuff up people!

i have dogs to train and play with and only 2 days to enjoy it.
those that can, do. those that cant hire a pro to do it for them.

just sayin'

YardleyLabs
11-05-2010, 09:45 PM
Try their demonizing Bush on Katrina for starts. Or that he had anything to do with 9/11.
I'd love to see your story of these with examples of the lying stories posted by the liberal press, your basis for calling them lies, and you evidence that the lies were repeated and promoted by Democrat congressional leaders. I think I must have missed these stories myself.:rolleyes: I do remember idle talk about slow, inadequate, and incompetent support following Katrina. Maybe you have some examples of grotesque lies and distortions in those ciriticisms. I don't remember anything suggesting Bush caused 9/11, although I do remember some pretty senior intelligence officers indicating that little attention was given to warnings about the possibility of attack, including the possibility of an attack using airplanes as weapons. Whether paying better attention early in the administration would have made it more likely that the attack would have been stopped is a different question altogether. Personally, I doubt it. You could talk about whether or not the possibility of launching a preemptive war against Iraq was discussed at a cabinet level even before 9/11. After all, the treasury secretary was the only person present who stated publicly that such discussions occurred from the first months of the new administration.

We get multiple posts concerning outrageous left wing conspiracies every time a new rumor hits the blogosphere. No fact checking is done, simply a post. When facts are challenged, the challenges are routinely dismissed as left wing propaganda no matter how much conflicting evidence is produced. Evidence to support the lies is almost never produced.

Even when the evidence is overwhelming, the lie is considered to be justified because it reinforces the belief. My own view is that beliefs that cannot survive based on evidentiary support deserve to be abandoned, or at least to be understood as matters of personal faith, not reason. Two people looking at the same facts can disagree completely on the implications of those facts. There are even cases in the real world where facts are ambiguous, and people can legitimately disagree on how to address that ambiguity. However, people who are not willing to test their beliefs against facts have simply surrendered their minds. That is everyone's privilege in a free society, but don't blame it on our forefathers, because they were committed to the law of reason.

Buzz
11-05-2010, 09:49 PM
Try their demonizing Bush on Katrina for starts. Or that he had anything to do with 9/11.


You mean these two guys???:rolleyes:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPswpqB73SA



I'd love to see your story of these with examples of the lying stories posted by the liberal press, your basis for calling them lies, and you evidence that the lies were repeated and promoted by Democrat congressional leaders. I think I must have missed these stories myself.:rolleyes: I do remember idle talk about slow, inadequate, and incompetent support following Katrina. Maybe you have some examples of grotesque lies and distortions in those ciriticisms. I don't remember anything suggesting Bush caused 9/11, although I do remember some pretty senior intelligence officers indicating that little attention was given to warnings about the possibility of attack, including the possibility of an attack using airplanes as weapons.



He doesn't have them. All he'll be able to come up with are conspiracies concocted by some deluded extremists and posted on the internets.

depittydawg
11-05-2010, 10:05 PM
This thread is a perfect example of the contagion of stupidity. Until people from both left and right are willing to engage their brains to demand facts in support of opinions, there is no hope for democracy. Unfortunately, those powering the right today, including Rupert Murdoch and Fox, have no interest in democracy unless they get to pick the voters. That is the same attitude that drove the left in the 1960's and it has not improved with age.

All you have to do is look at this kind of nonsense, then it's easy to understand how America got to the place we are at today. Democracy in America is indeed in deep shit.

Cody Covey
11-06-2010, 12:14 AM
I'd love to see your story of these with examples of the lying stories posted by the liberal press, your basis for calling them lies, and you evidence that the lies were repeated and promoted by Democrat congressional leaders. I think I must have missed these stories myself.:rolleyes: I do remember idle talk about slow, inadequate, and incompetent support following Katrina. Maybe you have some examples of grotesque lies and distortions in those ciriticisms. I don't remember anything suggesting Bush caused 9/11, although I do remember some pretty senior intelligence officers indicating that little attention was given to warnings about the possibility of attack, including the possibility of an attack using airplanes as weapons. Whether paying better attention early in the administration would have made it more likely that the attack would have been stopped is a different question altogether. Personally, I doubt it. You could talk about whether or not the possibility of launching a preemptive war against Iraq was discussed at a cabinet level even before 9/11. After all, the treasury secretary was the only person present who stated publicly that such discussions occurred from the first months of the new administration.

We get multiple posts concerning outrageous left wing conspiracies every time a new rumor hits the blogosphere. No fact checking is done, simply a post. When facts are challenged, the challenges are routinely dismissed as left wing propaganda no matter how much conflicting evidence is produced. Evidence to support the lies is almost never produced.

Even when the evidence is overwhelming, the lie is considered to be justified because it reinforces the belief. My own view is that beliefs that cannot survive based on evidentiary support deserve to be abandoned, or at least to be understood as matters of personal faith, not reason. Two people looking at the same facts can disagree completely on the implications of those facts. There are even cases in the real world where facts are ambiguous, and people can legitimately disagree on how to address that ambiguity. However, people who are not willing to test their beliefs against facts have simply surrendered their minds. That is everyone's privilege in a free society, but don't blame it on our forefathers, because they were committed to the law of reason.First off you are always complaining about the right wing blogdom and are now saying they aren't a viable media outlet? Secondly during Katrina people were saying that Bush didn't respond quickly enough because he hated black people (He actually responded very quickly the governor and mayor turned down help) That Bush didn't respond was a lie and the left wing media cried at the top of their lungs. Also they said Bush bombed the levies so he could drown all innocent black people! Just because you don't think it matters doesn't make them not lies~

YardleyLabs
11-06-2010, 06:53 AM
First off you are always complaining about the right wing blogdom and are now saying they aren't a viable media outlet? Secondly during Katrina people were saying that Bush didn't respond quickly enough because he hated black people (He actually responded very quickly the governor and mayor turned down help) That Bush didn't respond was a lie and the left wing media cried at the top of their lungs. Also they said Bush bombed the levies so he could drown all innocent black people! Just because you don't think it matters doesn't make them not lies~
Where did I say the RW blogdom wasn't a viable media outlet? It has proven to be one of the best propaganda machines the world has seen in 70 years. I would say it is not a responsible source of news.

On the charge that Bush did not respond quickly enough because the victims were black, I never heard that from any established media or from any democratic leaders.

What I did hear was that the response was incompetent and that the fact that the victims being left with no assistance for so long were predominantly black was not simply a coincidence. Do you disagree? Do you think the the victims in the Coloseum would have been prevented from walking across the bridge to obtain food, walter and shelter if they had been white?

Are you suggesting that Fox News, which reported the failure of assistance in New Orleans in tearful detail, is part of the left wing media? You've got to be kidding. The government of New Orleans, for all intents and purposes, ceased to exist when the hurricane struck. Its infrastructure was gone. The turf battles between the Governor and the WH over who would control the army reserve forces, including the demand that control of all reserves be relinquished by the Governor, was ridiculous and unnecessary.

The disaster of Katrina has no shortage of people to blame. It represented a catastrophic failure of all government segments to respond to a major disaster. Ultimately, the President bore the brunt of the criticism because the FEMA structure had been created for just this purpose and it failed miserably in the eyes of the American people. No left wing media had to create that impression. The incompetence spoke for itself on a daily basis. The fact that one of the reasons for the failure of FEMA was the manner in which it had been restructured under Homeland Security, and its leadership by a patronage hack also spoke for itself.

dnf777
11-06-2010, 07:36 AM
i have dogs to train and play with and only 2 days to enjoy it.
those that can, do. those that cant hire a pro to do it for them.

just sayin'


Real nice. I don't use a pro either, but would never denounce those who make the decision otherwise. (Those who CAN'T hire a pro to do it for them) As long as their dogs are well cared for, I don't make it my business what others do with them. Maybe some people here have full time jobs and family obligations, and choose to use a pro for THAT reason, not merely because they CAN'T? But then again, none of us are perfect in every way like you are.

Buzz
11-06-2010, 06:18 PM
Real nice. I don't use a pro either, but would never denounce those who make the decision otherwise. (Those who CAN'T hire a pro to do it for them) As long as their dogs are well cared for, I don't make it my business what others do with them. Maybe some people here have full time jobs and family obligations, and choose to use a pro for THAT reason, not merely because they CAN'T? But then again, none of us are perfect in every way like you are.

No, David is absolutely right. I don't have the slightest idea how to train a dog to do parlor tricks, let alone how to seat on a duck.

Eric Johnson
11-06-2010, 10:20 PM
in re Katrina:

The failure was the failure by the City of New Orleans to plan and then to act in a prudent manner. All...repeat all....plans for assistance in time of emergency are predicated on one parameter....that the locals will provide all services for 72 hours. Federal assistance will try and may arrive before the 72 hour timeframe but this is a bonus. Until then, the local response is required to provide 100% of the needs of the citizenry. The City of New Orleans didn't do this. They didn't push the evacuation before Katrina struck and then afterwards didn't have any way to provide essential services. They were just plain unprepared. If their plan was to use the stadium for shelter, they should have figured the number of folks it would house and then computed the beds, food, water, clothing, etc, etc. They did none of this.

I was in the Alabama Emergency Management Agency during Katrina and we were very busy. In the aftermath, we were busy working to provide housing, medical care, and other essential services to the citizens of NO. The failure wasn't President Bush's. The failure was Mayor Ray Nagin's.

in re the trip to India:

Why on earth would anyone believe that a source in India would know what the cost was, that somehow the multiple US agencies involved would all reveal the costs to an Indian ... what? It's completely assinine.

Eric

YardleyLabs
11-07-2010, 07:26 AM
in re Katrina:

The failure was the failure by the City of New Orleans to plan and then to act in a prudent manner. All...repeat all....plans for assistance in time of emergency are predicated on one parameter....that the locals will provide all services for 72 hours. Federal assistance will try and may arrive before the 72 hour timeframe but this is a bonus. Until then, the local response is required to provide 100% of the needs of the citizenry. The City of New Orleans didn't do this. They didn't push the evacuation before Katrina struck and then afterwards didn't have any way to provide essential services. They were just plain unprepared. If their plan was to use the stadium for shelter, they should have figured the number of folks it would house and then computed the beds, food, water, clothing, etc, etc. They did none of this.

I was in the Alabama Emergency Management Agency during Katrina and we were very busy. In the aftermath, we were busy working to provide housing, medical care, and other essential services to the citizens of NO. The failure wasn't President Bush's. The failure was Mayor Ray Nagin's.

in re the trip to India:

Why on earth would anyone believe that a source in India would know what the cost was, that somehow the multiple US agencies involved would all reveal the costs to an Indian ... what? It's completely assinine.

Eric
The absurdity of assuming that the local government can manage on its own for 72 hours was one of the many planning failures evident in Katrina. The New Orleans government collapsed at every level. Even in the best run government, that is not a reasonable assumption in the face of a major disaster, be it hurricane, flood, earthquake, or a combination as hit NO with Katrina followed by the failure of the levees resulting from Corps of Engineer failures

It was known in advance of the landfall that all contingency plans were based on a maximum force 3 hurricane and that the levees could fail in anything worse. For three days before, everyone watched as if seeing a train wreck in slow motion. The lack of support in the aftermath was appalling. At every level of disaster planning, there are two levels of planning that need to be addressed. The first is to identify likely sources of emergencies and to develop contingencies for management. The second level is to define what level of disaster cannot be managed. As you move from twon to county to state to Federal levels, that same focus is needed.

By any measure, the Katrina disaster, including the collapse of the levees, exceeded the capabilities of both local and state governments. That is understandable given the magnitude of the devastation. I suspect that most cities and states in the country would have failed if put to the same test.

FEMA should not have failed. It was developed specifically to provide a backstop for disasters beyond the capabilities of local ad state governments. The movement of FEMA into Homeland Security seemed to make sense since that agency was supposed to deal with even bigger disasters -- things like 9/11. Instead, FEMA lost access to the highest levels of decision making with the new organization. Its functions became more of a PR function, making appearances at local disasters so everyone would know that the government cared. They were great in responding to even minor flooding in my town.

However, FEMA was totally overwhelmed when faced with exactly the magnitude of disaster which should have been its specialty. With 3-4 days warning of the potential for disaster, and full knowledge that the magnitude of the threat had a good possibility of overwhelming all local contingency plans, they watched in slow motion with the rest of us when they should have been getting mobilized. 5, 6, and 7 days after the disaster, chaos continued to reign. The reaction of the public was visceral and justified.

Obviously those involved in providing assistance were working hard against impossible odds. That is the essence of failure in management. The resources, organization and leadership needed to make things better were missing and those on the front line -- both flood victims and primary responders -- were left on their own for too long.

Franco
11-07-2010, 08:22 AM
Since we are talking Katrina again, let me interject since I was a resident of New Orleans.


* There was failure from all levels of government. FEMA was geared to handle disasters from terrorist and not acts of nature. FEMA was aware of the people stranded at the Super Dome and on bridges but not the thousands and the Convention Center. FEMA was not informed about those at the Convention Center until nearly four days after.

*The bogus news stories coming from all the national media outlets was inaccurate. They made thier viewers believe that the city was under siege by snipers. This slowed down the Fed response of aide because they felt that had to secure the city first before the brought in relief.

* The city has NO plan for evacuating the poor though the Mayor called for a mandatory evacuation 72 hours prior to landfall.

* The Mayor fled to Dallas just ahead of landfall and the Gov was completely flustered by the pressure of the impending landfall and fell apart emotionally after landfall. Her decissions were that of someone that could not think clearly.

* Thanks to the Gretna Police Dept for stopping those wanting to cross the bridge for it saved hundreds fo homes on the westbank from being broken into. What wasn't reported in the news was the young blacks that were burning the Oakwood Mall at the foot of the bridge on the westside. They had to get that situation under control first. Though the mall was burned down by looters, it took all available police on the westbank for getting the situation under control. They did so by shooting many of them. The Gretan Police Dept did an outstanding job of protecting the westbank of the city and a statue of the police chief is being erected at the foot of the bridge on the westside paid for by citizens!

* Mayor Nagim violate the people's rights under the Second Amendment by disarming citizens. Mobs of blacks were stopped from further looting by folks standing in front of thier homes with guns in hand. When the NOPD saw them, they confiscated thier weapons. Yet, in the hours after landfall, it was the armed citizenry that not only protected themselves, family and property but was the only functioning law!

M&K's Retrievers
11-07-2010, 08:43 AM
Since we are talking Katrina again, let me interject since I was a resident of New Orleans.


* There was failure from all levels of government. FEMA was geared to handle disasters from terrorist and not acts of nature. FEMA was aware of the people stranded at the Super Dome and on bridges but not the thousands and the Convention Center. FEMA was not informed about those at the Convention Center until nearly four days after.

*The bogus news stories coming from all the national media outlets was inaccurate. They made thier viewers believe that the city was under siege by snipers. This slowed down the Fed response of aide because they felt that had to secure the city first before the brought in relief.

* The city has NO plan for evacuating the poor though the Mayor called for a mandatory evacuation 72 hours prior to landfall.

* The Mayor fled to Dallas just ahead of landfall and the Gov was completely flustered by the pressure of the impending landfall and fell apart emotionally after landfall. Her decissions were that of someone that could not think clearly.

* Thanks to the Gretna Police Dept for stopping those wanting to cross the bridge for it saved hundreds fo homes on the westbank from being broken into. What wasn't reported in the news was the young blacks that were burning the Oakwood Mall at the foot of the bridge on the westside. They had to get that situation under control first. Though the mall was burned down by looters, it took all available police on the westbank for getting the situation under control. They did so by shooting many of them. The Gretan Police Dept did an outstanding job of protecting the westbank of the city and a statue of the police chief is being erected at the foot of the bridge on the westside paid for by citizens!

* Mayor Nagim violate the people's rights under the Second Amendment by disarming citizens. Mobs of blacks were stopped from further looting by folks standing in front of thier homes with guns in hand. When the NOPD saw them, they confiscated thier weapons. Yet, in the hours after landfall, it was the armed citizenry that not only protected themselves, family and property but was the only functioning law!

Franco, don't go confusing things with facts. You know how that upsets some people around here.

depittydawg
11-07-2010, 09:27 AM
Obviously those involved in providing assistance were working hard against impossible odds. That is the essence of failure in management. The resources, organization and leadership needed to make things better were missing and those on the front line -- both flood victims and primary responders -- were left on their own for too long.

And "Brownie did a heck of a job".

Eric Johnson
11-07-2010, 09:41 AM
Jeff-

My point was that NO should have been evacuated to the maximum extent possible. The photos of the buses underwater in the aftermath tell a horrible story of the lack of prep and action. Every busload of people out would have been a help. The trains leaving essentially empty 2-3 days in advance tell a horrible story.

The 72 hour rule is perfectly valid as long as the local folks recognize what it means and plan for it. If NO could not shelter in place for 72 hours, they needed to evacuate ... and they didn't. They didn't because of indecision by the local and state authorities. Seventy two hours is a standard used across the country and is in all the literature on the subject. For some reason, NO chose to ignore it. Shoot, we used a similar rule in case of war in Europe only we used 10 days rather than 3.

Jeff, you argue both sides of the issue. On one hand, you say that it was a failure at every level of government. On the other hand, you argue it was all the fault of FEMA. NO should have been better prepared. However, they weren't so this means that the primary responsibility is theirs. No one is arguing that there weren't flaws in the FEMA pre-positioning plans or the FEMA initial moves. However, first and foremost, if the folks had been evacuated, they wouldn't have been at risk.

I'll match your expertise in contingency logistics planning, any time, any day.

Eric

Franco
11-07-2010, 11:11 AM
I'll never forget Mayor Ray Nagim telling the folks not to go the the Super Dome in the mandatory evacuation annoucement. That there was no food there and there would be no security. Yet, it was the only place for the poor and those whose houses were underwater to go to.

The biggest blame needs to be placed on the Mayor! Not only did be flee the city prior to the hurricane, he had NOTHING in place to handle a worse case senario. Next in line for blame is the Gov Blanco who was completely dysfunctional in the two days after landfall. She insisted on having control over the Fed responce.

With the mandatory evacuation 72 hours prior to landfall, why was the La. Nat'l Guard not called in at the same time? I'll tell you why. At the time the plans were in the hands of two softminded Democrats, that thought they were capable of handling things! Then, tried to blame Bush and FEMA. Then there was the idiot Kanye West telling the nation on national TV that Bush didn't like black people and the press loved it!

depittydawg
11-07-2010, 08:15 PM
I'll never forget Mayor Ray Nagim telling the folks not to go the the Super Dome in the mandatory evacuation annoucement. That there was no food there and there would be no security. Yet, it was the only place for the poor and those whose houses were underwater to go to.

The biggest blame needs to be placed on the Mayor! Not only did be flee the city prior to the hurricane, he had NOTHING in place to handle a worse case senario. Next in line for blame is the Gov Blanco who was completely dysfunctional in the two days after landfall. She insisted on having control over the Fed responce.

With the mandatory evacuation 72 hours prior to landfall, why was the La. Nat'l Guard not called in at the same time? I'll tell you why. At the time the plans were in the hands of two softminded Democrats, that thought they were capable of handling things! Then, tried to blame Bush and FEMA. Then there was the idiot Kanye West telling the nation on national TV that Bush didn't like black people and the press loved it!

I'd say the biggest blame for loss of life lies with the people who refused to evacuate. From what I've heard, there was ample opportunity to leave and a few people chose not to.
That has nothing to do with the lack of preparation and response from FEMA. In the disasters up to this one, and all since, FEMA has been on their game. The Mayor had nothing to do with FEMA. Much of the fault for lingering response lies with FEMA management. Turned out the horse trader ran a pretty sloppy show. Bush fired him. End of story.

Franco
11-08-2010, 10:41 AM
I'd say the biggest blame for loss of life lies with the people who refused to evacuate. From what I've heard, there was ample opportunity to leave and a few people chose not to.
That has nothing to do with the lack of preparation and response from FEMA. In the disasters up to this one, and all since, FEMA has been on their game. The Mayor had nothing to do with FEMA. Much of the fault for lingering response lies with FEMA management. Turned out the horse trader ran a pretty sloppy show. Bush fired him. End of story.

Most that stayed had no transportation and couldn't afford to stay in motels.

Emergency shelters were not in place until after the hurricane hit thanks to FEMA. Hundreds of buses flooded due to no plans for evacuating the poor. It was a "let them eat cake" attitude by the mayor. Yet these are the same people that voted him back in via absentee ballots following the disaster. They were taken off the rolls for the last election since many of them have not returned to the city.

FEMA learned a vital lesson with Katrina. As I said before, FEMA was geared for an act of terrorism and not an act of nature.

The real culprit is the U S Army Corp Of Engineers. Between the dredging of MRGO and other dredging in the protective marshes and faulty levee construction, what would have been a normal hurricane turned into a major disaster.

Katrina was NOT the "big one". Had a Cat5 approached the city from the southeast, deaths would have been in the hundreds of thousands.

depittydawg
11-08-2010, 08:13 PM
Most that stayed had no transportation and couldn't afford to stay in motels.

Emergency shelters were not in place until after the hurricane hit thanks to FEMA. Hundreds of buses flooded due to no plans for evacuating the poor. It was a "let them eat cake" attitude by the mayor. Yet these are the same people that voted him back in via absentee ballots following the disaster. They were taken off the rolls for the last election since many of them have not returned to the city.

FEMA learned a vital lesson with Katrina. As I said before, FEMA was geared for an act of terrorism and not an act of nature.

The real culprit is the U S Army Corp Of Engineers. Between the dredging of MRGO and other dredging in the protective marshes and faulty levee construction, what would have been a normal hurricane turned into a major disaster.

Katrina was NOT the "big one". Had a Cat5 approached the city from the southeast, deaths would have been in the hundreds of thousands.

I'll yield to you on this Franco. You're a lot closer to it than I was. All I know is what I heard and read.

luvmylabs23139
11-09-2010, 08:32 AM
Most that stayed had no transportation and couldn't afford to stay in motels.

Emergency shelters were not in place until after the hurricane hit thanks to FEMA. .

In reality it is up to local gov't to plan for an emergency in their location.
NO is fully at fault for not having a plan for a hurricane.
Why should those that do not live in Hurricane zones have to pay for those who choose to do so.
Most large cities have disaster plans in place. NO screwed up.

dnf777
11-09-2010, 08:53 AM
In reality it is up to local gov't to plan for an emergency in their location.
NO is fully at fault for not having a plan for a hurricane.
Why should those that do not live in Hurricane zones have to pay for those who choose to do so.
Most large cities have disaster plans in place. NO screwed up.

There will always be valid debate as to who screwed up in NOLA, but the fact remains: The federal gov't has the most resources to call upon in times of catastrophic disaster. Once it was determined that SOMEBODY screwed up, and there were thousands who needed help, no matter who's "fault" it was, the fed should have been deployed with clean water, shelter, and medical assistance, just like it was during the tsunami and other disasters. Bush could have had another 911 Megaphone moment, instead he got a "flyover" moment and forever damaged his legacy.

david gibson
11-09-2010, 09:32 AM
There will always be valid debate as to who screwed up in NOLA, but the fact remains: The federal gov't has the most resources to call upon in times of catastrophic disaster. Once it was determined that SOMEBODY screwed up, and there were thousands who needed help, no matter who's "fault" it was, the fed should have been deployed with clean water, shelter, and medical assistance, just like it was during the tsunami and other disasters. Bush could have had another 911 Megaphone moment, instead he got a "flyover" moment and forever damaged his legacy.

and obama did such a wonderful job with the oil spill.....and forever damaged his legacy, not that it was so polished to begin with.....

dnf777
11-09-2010, 10:24 AM
and obama did such a wonderful job with the oil spill.....and forever damaged his legacy, not that it was so polished to begin with.....

Last I heard, the well was capped and the environmental impact was minimal. Short of donning a wet suit and some JBWeld, what did you want him to do?

ducknwork
11-09-2010, 11:05 AM
Last I heard, the well was capped and the environmental impact was minimal. Short of donning a wet suit and some JBWeld, what did you want him to do?

Hmmmm....Perhaps....

Kick someone's ass?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yghFBt-fXmw&feature=related:D:D

menmon
11-09-2010, 11:13 AM
What? No smiley face or is that a new medical term? I don't care what it cost, it is a blatant waste of tax payer funds and POTUS time. On the other hand, while he is there he can't accomplish anything.

Bullshit on the cost....first of all I've stayed in those type of hotels on ML nickel and the rate is about $250 per night but a tourist pays about 3x for them.

The G20 is hugely important and a way of paving jobs...I thought that what you wanted

dnf777
11-09-2010, 11:14 AM
Hmmmm....Perhaps....

Kick someone's ass?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yghFBt-fXmw&feature=related:D:D



Heckuva job, Duckie! ;)

menmon
11-09-2010, 11:20 AM
Why all the hate man. You just won the house and these republican are going to fix everything for you. Obama doesn't matter anymore...the republican are back in town. The boys are back in town...the boys are back in town!!!! bum bum bum!!!

Buzz
11-09-2010, 11:28 AM
Why all the hate man. You just won the house and these republican are going to fix everything for you. Obama doesn't matter anymore...the republican are back in town. The boys are back in town...the boys are back in town!!!! bum bum bum!!!


It's been good for me so far. I think in the last week my IRA has earned about an additional year of retirement funds!

ducknwork
11-09-2010, 11:30 AM
Why all the hate man. You just won the house and these republican are going to fix everything for you. Obama doesn't matter anymore...the republican are back in town. The boys are back in town...the boys are back in town!!!! bum bum bum!!!

What hate? I though it was a funny video.

But thanks for reminding me why I am not coming here much anymore.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 12:43 PM
I'll yield to you on this Franco. You're a lot closer to it than I was. All I know is what I heard and read.

Hey Yardley and Co.,

Seems that de' pitty dawg may have let this one slip out!.....Covey was right on in providing your request....not to mention Franco’s enlightening perspective. The main stream media chose what to put on the air and how to spin it....including Shep from Fox and his tear filled reports....and if you don't think the implied message was to suggest a certain degree of racism from the right, you're not nearly as intelligent as your typing would suggest. This same media group has never indicted the mayor or Governor over this tragedy...just Bush!....the same President that takes the entire blame for that photo op that caught him looking down over NO during the fly over rather than landing to say he cares......the President that also has taken all the crap from the current disgrace to the Presidency, only to sit silent and let him serve. He takes responsibility for his mistakes and even the perceptions of what were mistakes. I'll stand with this kind of man any day. Speaking of standing up, my Country is still the greatest, most powerful, most giving Country in the world! Any of you defeatist that proclaim otherwise...shame on you!

menmon
11-09-2010, 02:18 PM
It's been good for me so far. I think in the last week my IRA has earned about an additional year of retirement funds!

Yea...but that is really because of the antcipated QE

menmon
11-09-2010, 02:31 PM
Hey Yardley and Co.,

Seems that de' pitty dawg may have let this one slip out!.....Covey was right on in providing your request....not to mention Franco’s enlightening perspective. The main stream media chose what to put on the air and how to spin it....including Shep from Fox and his tear filled reports....and if you don't think the implied message was to suggest a certain degree of racism from the right, you're not nearly as intelligent as your typing would suggest. This same media group has never indicted the mayor or Governor over this tragedy...just Bush!....the same President that takes the entire blame for that photo op that caught him looking down over NO during the fly over rather than landing to say he cares......the President that also has taken all the crap from the current disgrace to the Presidency, only to sit silent and let him serve. He takes responsibility for his mistakes and even the perceptions of what were mistakes. I'll stand with this kind of man any day. Speaking of standing up, my Country is still the greatest, most powerful, most giving Country in the world! Any of you defeatist that proclaim otherwise...shame on you!

I watched some of that. There is much to admire in the man. I think he thinks his policies were good for the country and he did what his continuants asked him to do, and you can give him credit for taking care of the people who brought him. On the other hand, I think his continuants lead him down a very dark path and the media sold it to the people, and history will tell us the cost 20 years from now.

I'm sure I have more in common with W than I do in O, but I don't agree with wornout ideals that don't apply where the world is now.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 02:35 PM
sambo....what "ideals" are you referring to? I'm looking to maybe find some common ground.

YardleyLabs
11-09-2010, 03:31 PM
Hey Yardley and Co.,

Seems that de' pitty dawg may have let this one slip out!.....Covey was right on in providing your request....not to mention Franco’s enlightening perspective. The main stream media chose what to put on the air and how to spin it....including Shep from Fox and his tear filled reports....and if you don't think the implied message was to suggest a certain degree of racism from the right, you're not nearly as intelligent as your typing would suggest. This same media group has never indicted the mayor or Governor over this tragedy...just Bush!....the same President that takes the entire blame for that photo op that caught him looking down over NO during the fly over rather than landing to say he cares......the President that also has taken all the crap from the current disgrace to the Presidency, only to sit silent and let him serve. He takes responsibility for his mistakes and even the perceptions of what were mistakes. I'll stand with this kind of man any day. Speaking of standing up, my Country is still the greatest, most powerful, most giving Country in the world! Any of you defeatist that proclaim otherwise...shame on you!
If you are referring back to the original challenge, which was to come up with a single instance in which a totally unfounded lie was repeated across a broad spectrum of press and repeated by members of the Democratic congressional leadership, this one doesn't even come close.

First, Kanye West's comment that the Bush administration did not care about black people was a departure for the approved script for a televised, live broadcast telethon sponsored by NBC to raise funds to support New Orleans victims. As soon as Kanye West made his unscripted atatment that Bush did not care about black people, the cameras cut away to other NBC executives while you could still hear West talking in the background, unaware that he had been cut off. The network quickly distanced itself from his comments. When the show was rebroadcast for the west coast, his comments were deleted altogether.

Second, Kanye West's comment reflected the beliefs of many people just as comments about Obama following the oil spill reflected a lot of people's beliefs, and was definitely news in its own right -- West was not an anonymous provincial official in India as quoted on a local Indian television station. That was at a time when Bush and Cheney had spent the prior week on vacations that continued for days after the disaster struck. Bush had just praised Brown's performance in the face of the disaster. The New York Times had just published a story about a Rove directed effort to portray the failure as being attributable solely to inaction by state and local governments. The New York Post had published a story quoting administration sources as saying that the response had been delayed because the governor failed to declare a state of emergency, only to be forced to retract the story when it was pointed out that a state of emergency was declared four days before the hurricane struck. While one can argue forever about who was to blame (and I agree with Franco that there was a lot of blame to share), there was a lot of evidence to suggest that Kanye West's comments were not completely without foundation. However, his comments were not simply repeated through the media and by Democratic political leaders. Instead he was censored and criticized for his comments. However, there was also strong criticism of the performance of the administration in the face of the disaster from both sides of the aisle -- that criticism had a lot of justification.

menmon
11-09-2010, 03:55 PM
sambo....what "ideals" are you referring to? I'm looking to maybe find some common ground.

Two very costly wars that cost lives and money coupled with tax cuts we could not afford. Bad diplomicy that hurt us. That is pretty much it. I voted for him twice though.

What common ground we have is I think I'd like to hunt and fish with him.

dnf777
11-09-2010, 04:13 PM
What common ground we have is I think I'd like to hunt and fish with him.

Hopefully Cheney won't be there! :snipersmile:

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 05:05 PM
If you are referring back to the original challenge, which was to come up with a single instance in which a totally unfounded lie was repeated across a broad spectrum of press and repeated by members of the Democratic congressional leadership, this one doesn't even come close.

First, Kanye West's comment that the Bush administration did not care about black people was a departure for the approved script for a televised, live broadcast telethon sponsored by NBC to raise funds to support New Orleans victims. As soon as Kanye West made his unscripted atatment that Bush did not care about black people, the cameras cut away to other NBC executives while you could still hear West talking in the background, unaware that he had been cut off. The network quickly distanced itself from his comments. When the show was rebroadcast for the west coast, his comments were deleted altogether.



Second, Kanye West's comment reflected the beliefs of many people just as comments about Obama following the oil spill reflected a lot of people's beliefs, and was definitely news in its own right -- West was not an anonymous provincial official in India as quoted on a local Indian television station. That was at a time when Bush and Cheney had spent the prior week on vacations that continued for days after the disaster struck. Bush had just praised Brown's performance in the face of the disaster. The New York Times had just published a story about a Rove directed effort to portray the failure as being attributable solely to inaction by state and local governments. The New York Post had published a story quoting administration sources as saying that the response had been delayed because the governor failed to declare a state of emergency, only to be forced to retract the story when it was pointed out that a state of emergency was declared four days before the hurricane struck. While one can argue forever about who was to blame (and I agree with Franco that there was a lot of blame to share), there was a lot of evidence to suggest that Kanye West's comments were not completely without foundation. However, his comments were not simply repeated through the media and by Democratic political leaders. Instead he was censored and criticized for his comments. However, there was also strong criticism of the performance of the administration in the face of the disaster from both sides of the aisle -- that criticism had a lot of justification.

Again, very eloquently, you fill a page with content supposedly in reply to my content that flat out has nothing to do with my point. I never mentioned Kanye, nor did I ever see his apparent remarks. What I referred to is the main stream medias initial and continued inference that Bush was solely responsible for the lack of response and planning, and their chosen coverage of the tragedy and it's implications of racism. I would think someone like yourself, even through the eyes you inherently look through, could see that. The fact that the Dems supported and subsequently campaigned on these premises is certainly a distortion of the truth, and the timeline of how long they've whipped this dead horse certainly exceeds the timeline of the exaggerations of O's India trip expenses. Again, you're handicapped with your limited "vision"...so, never mind.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 05:08 PM
Two very costly wars that cost lives and money coupled with tax cuts we could not afford. Bad diplomicy that hurt us. That is pretty much it. I voted for him twice though.

What common ground we have is I think I'd like to hunt and fish with him.

Man.....and I thought we could find common ground. Well, that hunting/fishing option doesn't sound bad!

YardleyLabs
11-09-2010, 05:47 PM
Again, very eloquently, you fill a page with content supposedly in reply to my content that flat out has nothing to do with my point. I never mentioned Kanye, nor did I ever see his apparent remarks. What I referred to is the main stream medias initial and continued inference that Bush was solely responsible for the lack of response and planning, and their chosen coverage of the tragedy and it's implications of racism. I would think someone like yourself, even through the eyes you inherently look through, could see that. The fact that the Dems supported and subsequently campaigned on these premises is certainly a distortion of the truth, and the timeline of how long they've whipped this dead horse certainly exceeds the timeline of the exaggerations of O's India trip expenses. Again, you're handicapped with your limited "vision"...so, never mind.Go back and read the press at the time. It was full of criticism of all three levels of government. Some of that criticism was planted by the administration. For example, comments were made by members of the administration that aid was delayed by Gov Blanco's failure to declare a state of emergency and request Federal assistance. However, the record showed that the state of emergency and request for assistance had been done on August 26.

The administration declared that all required federal assistance would be mobilized. However, when the first workers were mobilized it was not until the storm had made landfall and they were given two days to arrive.

The administration repeatedly excused the inadequacy of the response by noting that no one had predicted the severity of the storm or that the levees might fail. In fact, that was completely false as evidenced by statements before and after the storm. A trial run of emergency procedures 13 months earlier included predictions that the levees would be over-topped in a category 3 storm, that most of the city would be underwater, and that the majority of residents would be unable to evacuate. In the reports leading up to landfall, the likelihood of a levee failure and wide-scale flooding was repeatedly emphasized. Unfortunately, some of the early reports following landfall indicated that the levees had held. A lot of people stoppped paying attention and, unfortunately, some of them were at the top of FEMA. The levees broke and more than 80% of the city was underwater with tens of thousands trapped. It was a dire emergency demanding immediate action at an unprecedented level. It ultimately got the attention it needed, but not until more than a week had passed.

See http://www.factcheck.org/article348.html, http://www.brookings.edu/fp/projects/homeland/katrinatimeline.pdf, http://www.rense.com/general67/katlies.htm, http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/06/brinkley_excerpt200606.

Brown set the stage for disaster right at the beginning. Despite declarations of emergency, despite repeated requests for help, despite dire forecasts of a storm that would destroy the city, his first action to provide assistance following landfall was simple:

At noon on Monday, Brown, adopting caution as his leitmotif, made an incredible announcement, actually directing emergency responders outside the region to stay home until specifically summoned by local authorities. “The response to Hurricane Katrina must be well coordinated between federal, state and local officials to most effectively protect life and property,” he said in the statement. “It is critical that fire and emergency departments across the country remain in their jurisdictions until such time as the affected states request assistance.” (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/06/brinkley_excerpt200606)

This particular story is devastatingly critical of all the principals, but saves its greatest scorn for Nagin and Brown. It was a full week before buses first began arriving at the SuperDome to evacuate those trapped inside.

Franco
11-09-2010, 06:16 PM
Go back and read the press at the time. It was full of criticism of all three levels of government. Some of that criticism was planted by the administration. For example, comments were made by members of the administration that aid was delayed by Gov Blanco's failure to declare a state of emergency and request Federal assistance. However, the record showed that the state of emergency and request for assistance had been done on August 26.

The administration declared that all required federal assistance would be mobilized. However, when the first workers were mobilized it was not until the storm had made landfall and they were given two days to arrive.

The administration repeatedly excused the inadequacy of the response by noting that no one had predicted the severity of the storm or that the levees might fail. In fact, that was completely false as evidenced by statements before and after the storm. A trial run of emergency procedures 13 months earlier included predictions that the levees would be over-topped in a category 3 storm, that most of the city would be underwater, and that the majority of residents would be unable to evacuate. In the reports leading up to landfall, the likelihood of a levee failure and wide-scale flooding was repeatedly emphasized. Unfortunately, some of the early reports following landfall indicated that the levees had held. A lot of people stoppped paying attention and, unfortunately, some of them were at the top of FEMA. The levees broke and more than 80% of the city was underwater with tens of thousands trapped. It was a dire emergency demanding immediate action at an unprecedented level. It ultimately got the attention it needed, but not until more than a week had passed.

See http://www.factcheck.org/article348.html, http://www.brookings.edu/fp/projects/homeland/katrinatimeline.pdf, http://www.rense.com/general67/katlies.htm, http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/06/brinkley_excerpt200606.





Brown set the stage for disaster right at the beginning. Despite declarations of emergency, despite repeated requests for help, despite dire forecasts of a storm that would destroy the city, his first action to provide assistance following landfall was simple:

At noon on Monday, Brown, adopting caution as his leitmotif, made an incredible announcement, actually directing emergency responders outside the region to stay home until specifically summoned by local authorities. “The response to Hurricane Katrina must be well coordinated between federal, state and local officials to most effectively protect life and property,” he said in the statement. “It is critical that fire and emergency departments across the country remain in their jurisdictions until such time as the affected states request assistance.” (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/06/brinkley_excerpt200606)


This particular story is devastatingly critical of all the principals, but saves its greatest scorn for Nagin and Brown. It was a full week before buses first began arriving at the SuperDome to evacuate those trapped inside.



Katrina hit at daybreak the morning of the 29th of August. Coast Guard rescue began immediatly for those trapped at thier homes. Joining the CG in resure were locals with boats bringing folks to extration points in the city. Relief arrived at the Super Dome on Sept 1st. No one informed FEMA of the thousands that took shelter at the Convention Center that were dying from heat and thirst. They got relief on Sept 2nd. Media attention was on the dome.

News reports out of the city after the storm passed was that New Orleans Dodged a Bullet. At about 10am, the four levees started crumbling in the city.

No one even reported on St Bernard Parish which was completely under water due to MRGO (channel dredging that gave the storm surge an avenue to enter St Bernard).

The information coming out of the city was mixed. Nagin didn't return from Dallas till noon on the 29th.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 06:59 PM
Yardley

More than likely you and I will never agree on all the issues related to Katrina, or anything for that matter.....how you and I take Bush's comment to Brown or whose lap the bulk of the responsibility for action/inaction lies are enough representation of that. I look at it this way...local government was the best positioned entity to plan, inform, act, deploy and respond...all of which they did poorly. To expect the Fed's to be more capable is and was ridiculous at the personal, much less the local and state levels. To be honest, I can't imagine reaching the point that I feel the need for any government entity to bail me out. It is my responsibility to plan, stay informed, act or react....and ultimately take responsibility for any deficits in the results.

YardleyLabs
11-09-2010, 07:48 PM
Yardley

More than likely you and I will never agree on all the issues related to Katrina, or anything for that matter.....how you and I take Bush's comment to Brown or whose lap the bulk of the responsibility for action/inaction lies are enough representation of that. I look at it this way...local government was the best positioned entity to plan, inform, act, deploy and respond...all of which they did poorly. To expect the Fed's to be more capable is and was ridiculous at the personal, much less the local and state levels. To be honest, I can't imagine reaching the point that I feel the need for any government entity to bail me out. It is my responsibility to plan, stay informed, act or react....and ultimately take responsibility for any deficits in the results.
New York City is, with few exceptions, only several feet above sea level, In the event of a cat 4 hurricane the city's governmental infrastructure will fail, no matter how much planning is done. Most of Long Island will be in the same condition, leaving about 12 million people displaced. If you think any local or state government is capable of handling that, you are dreaming.

FEMA was formed specifically for the purpose of bringing the full power of our nation to address problems that could not reasonably be handled by local authorities. Katrina was the greatest such disaster the nation has faced (I am including 9/11 n that statement) since it was formed. The agency failed miserably. It failed because of the lack of effective leadership. It failed because it allowed its mission to be defined around trivial exercises in political showmanship. Others failed as well. But FEMA was the final line of defense.

The irony is that the same people defending the Federal ineptness with Katrina are at the head of the line attacking Obama's handling of the BP disaster. There is no comparison ins the levels of disaster involved, and as a matter of policy, the Federal government has never had a substantive role in responding to oil drilling failures. Those have always been left in the hands of the oil companies. A little consistency please.

The fact is that most natural disasters are highly predictable and manageable. I include the three times I have been flooded out of my house in that pot. For each of those, politicians are eager to become involved because success is assured and there will be credit to be claimed. Responding to heavy rainfalls, or the every third year flooding along the Mississippi, and the biennial hurricane strikes in Florida have become routine.

Katrina, by contrast, was one of the most severe storms to hit a populated area in the history of our country and the damage it caused -- much of which was directly attributable to engineering failures by the Corps of Engineers -- was the greatest of any natural disaster in our history. If there was any time when Federal assistance should have been there, Katrina was it. It got there eventually, but not fast enough. The failure was not a failure of planning or a failure of imagination. What happened with Katrina was almost exactly what was predicted in FEMA's own test exercises 13 months earlier. But when it came time to act for real, it simply failed to take the situation as seriously as its own studies indicated was essential. Nothing about Katrina was a surprise except the lack of public response.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 08:16 PM
New York City is, with few exceptions, only several feet above sea level, In the event of a cat 4 hurricane the city's governmental infrastructure will fail, no matter how much planning is done. Most of Long Island will be in the same condition, leaving about 12 million people displaced. If you think any local or state government is capable of handling that, you are dreaming.

FEMA was formed specifically for the purpose of bringing the full power of our nation to address problems that could not reasonably be handled by local authorities. Katrina was the greatest such disaster the nation has faced (I am including 9/11 n that statement) since it was formed. The agency failed miserably. It failed because of the lack of effective leadership. It failed because it allowed its mission to be defined around trivial exercises in political showmanship. Others failed as well. But FEMA was the final line of defense.

The irony is that the same people defending the Federal ineptness with Katrina are at the head of the line attacking Obama's handling of the BP disaster. There is no comparison ins the levels of disaster involved, and as a matter of policy, the Federal government has never had a substantive role in responding to oil drilling failures. Those have always been left in the hands of the oil companies. A little consistency please.

The fact is that most natural disasters are highly predictable and manageable. I include the three times I have been flooded out of my house in that pot. For each of those, politicians are eager to become involved because success is assured and there will be credit to be claimed. Responding to heavy rainfalls, or the every third year flooding along the Mississippi, and the biennial hurricane strikes in Florida have become routine.

Katrina, by contrast, was one of the most severe storms to hit a populated area in the history of our country and the damage it caused -- much of which was directly attributable to engineering failures by the Corps of Engineers -- was the greatest of any natural disaster in our history. If there was any time when Federal assistance should have been there, Katrina was it. It got there eventually, but not fast enough. The failure was not a failure of planning or a failure of imagination. What happened with Katrina was almost exactly what was predicted in FEMA's own test exercises 13 months earlier. But when it came time to act for real, it simply failed to take the situation as seriously as its own studies indicated was essential. Nothing about Katrina was a surprise except the lack of public response.

I'm not arguing the vastness of the tragedy or the ineptness of those strapped with the responsibility to "save" everyone. Consider this....what if Nagin had done what he should have done to plan, inform, act, deploy and respond? Do you think that possibly the number of those needing rescue would be less?...and subsequently less Federal intervention would have been needed? I know it's elementary, but this is exactly my point. The ultimate responsibility lies with the individual, then, God forbid, the local and state government....and finally the Fed's.....not the reverse....but, this is how the media and Dem's spun it. Like you suggested with BP's spill, the Fed's have no experience with that type of response, but rather should be there to assist....not assume control and responsibility. Honestly, since when has the Federal Government done anything well....still waiting....

dnf777
11-09-2010, 08:19 PM
Yardley

To be honest, I can't imagine reaching the point that I feel the need for any government entity to bail me out. It is my responsibility to plan, stay informed, act or react....and ultimately take responsibility for any deficits in the results.

Does that apply to military threats also? So NYC should have sent its police force to attack al-qaeda, rather than the federal government's army and air force? And rather than have a US Navy, USCG, and US Air Force to protect our shores, we should just let local beach patrols monitor their own locales?

This anti-government tea-party mentality is getting so old! Isn't it funny how not one tea party rally has ever had medicare card burnings or social security check burning parties??

sandyg
11-09-2010, 08:41 PM
Does that apply to military threats also? So NYC should have sent its police force to attack al-qaeda, rather than the federal government's army and air force? And rather than have a US Navy, USCG, and US Air Force to protect our shores, we should just let local beach patrols monitor their own locales?

This anti-government tea-party mentality is getting so old! Isn't it funny how not one tea party rally has ever had medicare card burnings or social security check burning parties??

What a ridiculous leap! 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Buzz
11-09-2010, 08:43 PM
What a ridiculous leap! 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.


Too bad you didn't think a bit more before speaking.

Tim Thomas
11-09-2010, 08:43 PM
Does that apply to military threats also? So NYC should have sent its police force to attack al-qaeda, rather than the federal government's army and air force? And rather than have a US Navy, USCG, and US Air Force to protect our shores, we should just let local beach patrols monitor their own locales?

This anti-government tea-party mentality is getting so old! Isn't it funny how not one tea party rally has ever had medicare card burnings or social security check burning parties??

Really...this is what you come back with. Has there been any part of this conversation discussing an attack to this Country or its citizens and the Fed's responsibility in the event??????? What's old is your rhetoric about the tea party folks. I would suspect you're one of those that hangs a handicap tag for a bad knee from your rearview...just because you deserve it!

Buzz
11-09-2010, 08:45 PM
Does that apply to military threats also? So NYC should have sent its police force to attack al-qaeda, rather than the federal government's army and air force? And rather than have a US Navy, USCG, and US Air Force to protect our shores, we should just let local beach patrols monitor their own locales?

This anti-government tea-party mentality is getting so old! Isn't it funny how not one tea party rally has ever had medicare card burnings or social security check burning parties??

Some serious bluster huh?

JDogger
11-09-2010, 09:19 PM
What a ridiculous leap! 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.


"I give myself very good advice...but I very seldom follow it. That explains the trouble I'm always in." -Alice in Wonderland

Sandyg, please keep posting. I for one, find your posts to be very amusing.
I'm sure that the conservative mainstream here also appreciates your posts, as it speaks to their philosophy so well.

Mike, Joe M., Stan, Bill S., DG, gman...et al, encourage him, he speaks so well for your cause.

JD

dnf777
11-10-2010, 04:45 AM
Really...this is what you come back with. Has there been any part of this conversation discussing an attack to this Country or its citizens and the Fed's responsibility in the event??????? What's old is your rhetoric about the tea party folks. I would suspect you're one of those that hangs a handicap tag for a bad knee from your rearview...just because you deserve it!

Read my post again...slowly, and maybe you'll understand. You said you don't feel the need for ANY GOVERNMENT ENTITY. YOU said that, not me. (in case you didn't know, the military is a government entity. If you served, you might have picked up that little tidbid from the flag on your shoulder. They don't let you pull it off and put a tea-party flag on instead)

And why the personal attack about handicap stickers? Did you run out of constructive things to say? FYI, I'm nursing a fractured tarsal bone in my punting foot after coaching this years junior league, and am hobbling along just fine w/o a sticker. Now, are you going to attack me for coaching kids football too? Is that un-American since I'm doing it?

LMAO

Tim Thomas
11-10-2010, 03:04 PM
Read my post again...slowly, and maybe you'll understand. You said you don't feel the need for ANY GOVERNMENT ENTITY. YOU said that, not me. (in case you didn't know, the military is a government entity. If you served, you might have picked up that little tidbid from the flag on your shoulder. They don't let you pull it off and put a tea-party flag on instead)

And why the personal attack about handicap stickers? Did you run out of constructive things to say? FYI, I'm nursing a fractured tarsal bone in my punting foot after coaching this years junior league, and am hobbling along just fine w/o a sticker. Now, are you going to attack me for coaching kids football too? Is that un-American since I'm doing it?

LMAO

Why don't you read my post again....slowly. I said to bail me out. I never said anything about protecting the country. BTW, you also don't have a clue what I have done or continue to do for a living and to serve. Concerning the tag, I didn't say you did have one, just that I suspected you did...it seemed like a good fit from what I've read from you....if I'm wrong in my observations, shake it off. Enjoy coaching the kids and nursing your foot.....next time maybe you can "punt" as opposed to trying to run with it. ;-)

dnf777
11-10-2010, 03:52 PM
Why don't you read my post again....slowly. I said to bail me out. I never said anything about protecting the country. BTW, you also don't have a clue what I have done or continue to do for a living and to serve. Concerning the tag, I didn't say you did have one, just that I suspected you did...it seemed like a good fit from what I've read from you....if I'm wrong in my observations, shake it off. Enjoy coaching the kids and nursing your foot.....next time maybe you can "punt" as opposed to trying to run with it. ;-)

That's cool. If you served, I thank you.

Like many others on this list, I pay my taxes so that others don't have to work, and it sort of pisses me off to have someone imply I'm a slacker.

I can assure you that the tiny WIC payments that I took when working two jobs in college (shoe salesman and airport lineman) have been repaid many, many, many fold. I am only hopeful that the republican congress will forestall any tax increase, so that I may enjoy some of the fruits of my labor, now that at 42 I can finally practice my trade.

Have a good one...hope you're getting the Indian Summer we are. Dog's lovin it.

Hew
11-10-2010, 04:45 PM
FYI, I'm nursing a fractured tarsal bone in my punting foot after coaching this years junior league,...
I've got this one locked in the mental vault for the next time you call anyone a pencil-neck. Breaking one's foot kicking a football should only happen on an episode of "Fraiser" or "Will and Grace." ;-)

dnf777
11-10-2010, 04:52 PM
I've got this one locked in the mental vault for the next time you call anyone a pencil-neck. Breaking one's foot kicking a football should only happen on an episode of "Fraiser" or "Will and Grace." ;-)

Never seen either show. Tried Frazier, couldn't stand more than 5 minutes.
I actually hooked a tractor rut and hyperextended my ankle and avulsed my first metatarsal. Didn't realize it at the time and kept playing, until a week later, damn near needed a cane to walk. Figured an x-ray was in order at that point.

I chatted with our HS QB on facebook, and asked if he still tosses the pigskin around. He informed me he's on his second knee replacement at 43!

Sucks getting old.

Tim Thomas
11-10-2010, 06:33 PM
That's cool. If you served, I thank you.

To be upfront....certainly not ashamed....my service has been in the form of an Firefighter/Officer in the Houston Fire Department for 30+ years. Just didn't want to give a false impression. Good luck to you and your foot!

dnf777
11-10-2010, 06:46 PM
To be upfront....certainly not ashamed....my service has been in the form of an Firefighter/Officer in the Houston Fire Department for 30+ years. Just didn't want to give a false impression. Good luck to you and your foot!

Good friend of mine in nearing retirement from the Baytown FD. That also is a strong "Band of Brothers" from what I've seen. Thanks for your service!

Hew
11-11-2010, 05:21 AM
Never seen either show. Tried Frazier, couldn't stand more than 5 minutes.
I actually hooked a tractor rut and hyperextended my ankle and avulsed my first metatarsal. Didn't realize it at the time and kept playing, until a week later, damn near needed a cane to walk. Figured an x-ray was in order at that point. I can't make too much fun of you...I once broke an ankle dancing. :oops:

I chatted with our HS QB on facebook, and asked if he still tosses the pigskin around. He informed me he's on his second knee replacement at 43! Is that where they essentially amputate the leg and insert a plastic/titanium knee between the two sawed off bones? A friend had that done, too. Played college football and a cup of coffee in the NFL. He'll probably need to have the other one done soon.

Sucks getting old. I wouldn't know. ;-)
....................

dnf777
11-11-2010, 07:57 AM
Sucks getting old. I wouldn't know.


There's only one other alternative....and it ain't any better.
Getting old is better than the other side of the sod. ;)

Ken Bora
11-11-2010, 09:21 AM
My challenge to you, as the most outspoken proponent on this forum for absurd distortion and innuendo, is to identify a comparable lefty story within the last 10 years that was similarly absurd, similarly played in the press and pushed by congressional leaders, and had similarly little factual basis. I can't think of one......


......the original challenge, which was to come up with a single instance in which a totally unfounded lie was repeated across a broad spectrum of press and repeated by members of the Democratic congressional leadership,.......



OOO OOOO OOOOOOOOO (In my best Arnold Horshack Voice J ) Can I play????
So sorry to jump in late guys I thought this was just a government spending and the accuracies of it thread.
Gosh we been complaining about that since George Washington haven’t we. Had I known there was a challenge
I would have been on it like a Hobo on a Ham sandwich! Now I am not David G ;-)
but instantly what pooped into my head, like instantly!
So simple…… Gore and the global warming fiasco. And as my family has sugarin’ notes from as far back as 41 I know of what I speak.
Heck they even made a movie!!!!!!
Do I win anything Jeff!!!!??????




.

YardleyLabs
11-11-2010, 10:20 AM
OOO OOOO OOOOOOOOO (In my best Arnold Horshack Voice J ) Can I play????
So sorry to jump in late guys I thought this was just a government spending and the accuracies of it thread.
Gosh we been complaining about that since George Washington haven’t we. Had I known there was a challenge
I would have been on it like a Hobo on a Ham sandwich! Now I am not David G ;-)
but instantly what pooped into my head, like instantly!
So simple…… Gore and the global warming fiasco. And as my family has sugarin’ notes from as far back as 41 I know of what I speak.
Heck they even made a movie!!!!!!
Do I win anything Jeff!!!!??????




.

Ahhh. But there is a slight distinction. There is absolutely no evidence at all supporting the $200 million per day number (the anonymous statement by a provincial official in India can hardly be called evidence) and the number defies all tests of logic.

For global warming, there is a huge body of evidence both that the warming is occurring (about which there is no significant scientific disagreement) and that the warming is most likely caused in significant part by human activity (about which there is more disagreement). While one may disagree with the interpretation of the science, and one may disagree about what actions are appropriate even if one accepts that global warming is real, I have yet to see a single fact based argument that the science is without foundation. Virtually every attack has been ideological or religious, focusing more on rejecting the scientific conclusions because of the perceived cost of changing behavior rather than on whether or not climate change is actually happening. They are two separate questions.

Ken Bora
11-11-2010, 10:25 AM
Now don’t get persnickety,
All you asked for was a comparative story…… POOF!
Ask and ye shall receive.

YardleyLabs
11-11-2010, 11:16 AM
Now don’t get persnickety,
All you asked for was a comparative story…… POOF!
Ask and ye shall receive.

Obviously, I need to be clearer on the challenge (originally directed at DG, but open to all)...


...

My challenge to you, as the most outspoken proponent on this forum for absurd distortion and innuendo, is to identify a comparable lefty story within the last 10 years that was similarly absurd, similarly played in the press and pushed by congressional leaders, and had similarly little factual basis. I can't think of one but, it seems you have no such problem. Help us out with details. Of course, you need to be specific about which facts you are stating are absurd and the basis for the statement. I believe I was pretty specific when I said the entire story posted by the OP was BS and said why I believed that.

It seems to me that my time frame (ten years) provided ample opportunity to bring up every unjustified left wing assault on the integrity of the Bush/Cheney administration, which must provide fertile ground for stories. I restricted it since I knew I didn't want to try to explain anything that happened under LBJ:-x (whom I actually admired in many ways, but never, ever trusted). Why, I can think of several incidents that must be similarly outrageous....

suggestions that Cheney relied primarily on oil industry representatives in developing his energy policy and blocked access to meeting records to avoid having that come to light
suggestions that there were close family ties between the Bush family and Saudi officials and organizations
claims that the Bush administration was focused on the possibilities of initiating a war with Iraq even before 9/11 as a vehicle for proving the danger for any nations wanting to challenge American power.
suggestions that members of the Bush administration decided to "out" a CIA agent in an effort to deflect attention from her husband's statements that US claims that Iraq was seeking to buy nuclear materials in Africa were based on intelligence that was known to be false.Well, maybe not those specific stories, but there must be a lot of examples based on the number of times people have complained about left wing lies and the media's support for those lies.:) I continue to reserve my right to agree completely once a story is posted. I would offer my unopened, 33 year old bottle of Jim Bean in the black Labrador decanter bottle, but I don't want to deal with the difficulty of shipping.;-)

Ken Bora
11-11-2010, 11:21 AM
Obviously, I need to be clearer on the challenge (originally directed at DG, but open to all)...

Your sayin' I am not gettin a prize. I can tell:cool:

Gerry Clinchy
11-17-2010, 11:31 AM
From the NY Times


Cooper also pointed out that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the entire war effort in Afghanistan was costing about $190 million a day and that President Bill Clinton’s 1998 trip to Africa — with 1,300 people and of roughly similar duration, cost, according to the Government Accountability Office and adjusted for inflation, “about $5.2 million a day.”


Based on this, it might be safe to say that O's trip was costing about $11 million a day. Interestingly, though, the govt would not give an approximation, but would only deny that it was costing $200 million/day.

Buzz
11-17-2010, 11:46 AM
From the NY Times


Based on this, it might be safe to say that O's trip was costing about $11 million a day. Interestingly, though, the govt would not give an approximation, but would only deny that it was costing $200 million/day.


They claim that giving out any details about presidential trips would be a security risk.

Gerry Clinchy
11-17-2010, 12:34 PM
They claim that giving out any details about presidential trips would be a security risk.

They can tell us where he's going, where he's staying, who he's seeing, for how long, & many other details ... but it would be a security risk to release an approximate the cost of the trip? Doesn't quite make sense to me.

dnf777
11-17-2010, 12:41 PM
I don't know why all the uproar all the sudden. All presidents take foreign trips....that are expensive as hell...and the SS has NEVER been keen on allowing any information to be released, except for official press releases. This has been true of every president in modern history, not just Barak Obama. This is just typical partisan attacks, no different from the attacks levied against Bush when he travelled, or the next republican president, when he or she travels.