Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Obama Trip - $200 million per day, 34 warships

Dan T.

By Dan T.
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

Dan T.

Dan T.

Posted
Posted

Not.

Not anywhere close. But that didn't stop Fox hack commentators Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Dave Gallagher and others for widely reporting those numbers, multimple times. One of them even reported that the Obama contingent "rented out every room of the Taj Mahal" (as if the Taj Mahal was some kind of resort hotel :ols: ).

Turns out some Indian newspaper quoted an anonymoussource who made up those absurdly inflated numbers. (The cost of the ENTIRE war in Afghanistan is less than $200 million per day). A Fox producer saw the quote, and the on-camera Fox idiots reported it as fact all fricking weekend. :ols:

At least one Fox employee - Chris Wallace - saw how stupid the reporting was. He was being interviewed by Fox host Dave Gallagher and called him "an idiot" for repeating the moronic claim.

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/chris-wallace-calls-fox-news-co-worker-an-idiot-for-believing-india-trip-rumor

A Pentagon spokesman felt the need to address the wild claim about the Naval support of the trip:

"We obviously have some support role for presidential travel ... but I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd, this notion that somehow we are deploying 10 percent of the Navy, some 34 ships and an aircraft carrier in support of the president's trip to Asia -- that's just comical."

Fox's Mike Huckabee and Congresswoman Michelle Bachman also blindly repeated the $200 million figure without bothering to actually check facts.

Way to go Fox! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jpyaks3

jpyaks3

Posted
Posted
What were the actual numbers for the trip? No one has said that yet from what I can find. I'd be interested in it. $200 million per day sounded way too high so I didn't believe it the first time I read it.

They won't give actual numbers for security reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duckus

Duckus

Posted
Posted

Have you seen Druge recently? If he is not making up numbers on how much President Obama's trip to India costs it is about such policy driven issues as what Michelle Obama is wearing. :ols::ols:

BREAKING NEWS: Michelle Obama is wearing a red dress - SLUT

BREAKING NEWS: Michelle Obama wears green shoes - TERRORIST?

In fact, I went to Drudge just now to see if he has anything . . . and yup right near the top a post on what Michelle Obama wore yesterday. :ols:

The bloggers on the right are obsessed with this trip and what Michelle Obama wears on a daily basis.

****ing amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Homercles82

Homercles82

Posted
Posted
Have you seen Druge recently? If he is not making up numbers on how much President Obama's trip to India costs it is about such policy driven issues as what Michelle Obama is wearing. :ols::ols:

BREAKING NEWS: Michelle Obama is wearing a red dress - SLUT

BREAKING NEWS: Michelle Obama wears green shoes - TERRORIST?

In fact, I went to Drudge just now to see if he has anything . . . and yup right near the top a post on what Michelle Obama wore yesterday. :ols:

The bloggers on the right are obsessed with this trip and what Michelle Obama wears on a daily basis.

****ing amazing.

To be fair Duckus other media outlets were obsessed with the type and cost of Palin and Cindy McCain's outfits in 2008.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted

Interesting, I was about to laughingly reminisce about how the left used to post these stories about wasteful spending during the last go around. I remember actually defending Laura Bush for spending 20 million dollars on new dinner plates once (or something like that), but then it turns out that these numbers are fraudulent or as ASF would say fraught with FAUX statisitics and now I just don't know whether to tsk about how this spending is normal extravagance or shake my fingers at those intentionally artificially embellishing or inventing numbers to create outrage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SKOALSKIN

SKOALSKIN

Posted
Posted

If you want to ***** about his policies thats one thing. But complaining that our president has too large of a security detail is absurd. With a 24 hr news cycle these talking heads need somehting to stir the pot. I'm sure Bachman wouldn't know the difference between the Taj Mahal India and the Taj Mahal in Atlantic City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
.

And yet, the damage is done. The dittoheads and loyalists who listen to the drivel on Fox without questioning what they are being preached are already convinced.

.

That's what propaganda relies on. even if it's patently false, as long as they plant the seed (and then retract at 3 AM if they even do) that's all that matters.

They do this stuff so much it's amazing anyone still can tune in and believe anything they say.

Frankly, even if they did present the news "from my point of view" the very fact that they don't even hide their manipulations of the audience would insult my intelligence enough to get me to never tune in again.

Cue ASF and the "Faux" squad.

And here's a prime example of their core audience. He doesn't care if they lied, he'll chalk it up to more "errors" if it is proven beyond nine shades of doubt that is what they did , or he'll just ignore it and try to focus on things the left does that he doesn't like.

Chicken, maybe if you looked up "Faux" and then looked at how that network does this time and time again, maybe you'd understand why people see it as bad.

Because the way you react to their constant malfeasance and manipulation is to blame the people who show you how they're doing it.

I can guarantee you this,, if Fox didn't make things up, if they didn't constantly have "errors" to paint their enemies badly, you'd never hear the term "faux news" once. If they were a responsible news organization, an impartial news organization out to present the truth, you'd never hear one credible complaint.

But they aren't. And that is why people like ASF continually rail against them.

Propaganda is bad business, historically it's been used to disastrous effect, and it should not be acceptable to any American, whether they pander to one side or another.

This country has forgotten much in a relatively short period of time. the difference between right and wrong is usually very clear. But we don't care about that anymore. We care about right and left, and whatever they do doesn't matter. the same people will defend them to the death, even though they'd never do the same for you.

We gladly line up for the slaughterhouse and naively wonder why everything is going to hell.

Until we demand the propaganda stop, hell is our destination.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
Well, where is the outrage that my insurance plan is going up $400 in 2011? I thought it was supposed to get cheaper? Wasn't that reported by CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/The President? Where is the outrage?

There's plenty of outrage over it, you can be sure. But the fact is, who the hell didn't know that the insurance companies would use every single excuse to raise rates that they can find?

Seriously, if there is one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that our health "industry" milks this country for all it's worth, and gives substandard care at much higher prices than practically anywhere else in the free world.

You have every reason to be outraged over it, but you shouldn't be surprsed by it. this is why there need to be some sort of regulation, because left to it's own devices, the market won't correct it.

Health insurance never loses money, ever. Rates don't come down, and never will unless forced to do so.

The outrage over this should not be political in nature. It should be fronted towards the greedy ****s who run these companies. There's no reason why it should cost so much here for medicine, when it costs hundreds of percentages less in much of the rest of the world. The only reason it does is because here they CAN charge this much, so they do, whether anyone can afford it reasonably or not. And since we must have their product, it's not like any competition will change it. It's too good of a golden goose to compete with each other.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duckus

Duckus

Posted
Posted
Maybe I will call and try to get an answer. What reasons do you have for why it is a security risk?

I have zero experience in anything regarding the subject. All I know is that it has always been the policy of the Secret Service to not release the financial cost of security measures.

The cost to keep the President, the leader of the free world, and the most important person in the world safe is one of those things that I don't mind not knowing. The Secretive Service can spend as much as they want in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted
Well, where is the outrage that my insurance plan is going up $400 in 2011? I thought it was supposed to get cheaper? Wasn't that reported by CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/The President? Where is the outrage?

And that was why we needed a single payer system with the government having the right negotiate. You reap what you sew. This is what the conservatives wanted by fighting against the "socialist" aspects of the reform. We have health reform now that helps a little, but allows the insurers to be just as monstrous if not moreso than before.

You didn't get the liberal health reform. You got the democratic one which was riddled with compromises to try to seduce the conservative blue dogs and the Republicans.... but failed in that effort too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted
And that was why we needed a single payer system with the government having the right negotiate. You reap what you sew. This is what the conservatives wanted by fighting against the "socialist" aspects of the reform. We have health reform now that helps a little, but allows the insurers to be just as monstrous if not moreso than before.

You didn't get the liberal health reform. You got the democratic one which was riddled with compromises to try to seduce the conservative blue dogs and the Republicans.... but failed in that effort too.

I dint want either.

The Dems had the votes to pass whatever they wanted. This is what we got. And the Dems paid the price last week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...