What's Up with This?

[M&K's Retrievers]

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]

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]

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/ob...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]

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/ob...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]

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]

so yardley - where is this wrong?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/34...ma-visit-64459


http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ob...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]

so yardley - where is this wrong?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/34...ma-visit-64459


http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ob...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]

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]

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]

[


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.