Lady Gaga leads SECOND night of partying at private White House soiree...

page: 2
62
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by sealing
Why do I get the feeling people wouldn't raise an eyebrow and
ask whose paying if it were Toby Keith at Romney's ?


Sure they would. It would just be different people.
The political divide and all.




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Complaining about parties at the whitehouse and stuff like this is pointless. its drops in the bucket when compared to other things. if your going to be disgusted at something direct it at insider trading laws not applying to people in congress. they make millions and millions of dollars from that.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Whille I'm glad that the taxpayers aren't footing the bill, I still don't think it's appropriate for the POTUS to be partying like this (given the state of the country).

Out President should lead by example. In a time where a large chunk of Americans are cutting back and rolling up their sleeves, Obama should be right along with them leading the charge.


If that was the case, no politician would ever have a moment of happiness.

But here is the thing. I am going to wager you didn't vote for Obama.

But they did
And they said go have a drink.

So, the sour grapes of the fringe right doesn't really set the social calendar for the administration no matter how much they don't like him smiling.

Frankly, if every town across the nation held a few partys like the one going on..there would be plenty of work and money for all..and maybe a few less grumpy people online.

Remember when the economy was tanking in 2002 and GWB just told everyone to go shopping? Meh...many on the left thought that was inappropriate. I thought it was a good idea frankly. The more you point out and pick at a sore, the longer it stays open.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by sealing
Why do I get the feeling people wouldn't raise an eyebrow and
ask whose paying if it were Toby Keith at Romney's ?


Sure they would. It would just be different people.
The political divide and all.


Your absolutely right.
The left would be all "billionare out of touch Rmoney throwing a fancy party while the economy dies" and the right would be all football spiking.

This thread should be in chit chat as its so unremarkable frankly...or I guess political madness is sort of chit chat.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by SaturnFX
 





Corporations mostly are flipping the bill this go around. So you can stop complaining about how all you have is a moldy crust of bread and the rest went to Obama's finger sandwiches through taxes.


Right so you guys hate corporate shills, and people bought out by big capitalist........and lobbyist and special interests groups.....

Unless its Obama.........

Got it........

boy you OWS folks sure do change your tune a lot
edit on 23-1-2013 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)


Did I say I approve?
Just pointed out its fairly low on the tax dollars being spent part.

Personally, I would rather it have been tax dollars. Less people wanting favors. Reminds me of roman politics..buy your way to favor (well, I guess some things will always remain the same).

But ya, just setting the record straight. It is a far more valid complaint about how he is now kneeling to big corporations due to this event...however, both sides are, do, and have been given the seal of approval by the scotus.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


No, I voted for Gary Johnson (the ULTIMATE cop-out)


He's the leader of the free world, I get that. Our president has an image to maintain, but there is a time and a place for everything.

To be an effective leader one needs the respect of the people he/she intends to lead. This isn't the military, so respect has to actually be earned (and not just given). Truly great leaders take the reins and lead by example.

Any leader remembered favorably was never made by using the old "do as I say, not as I do" ideology.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


I think this is a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't." These parties are part of the electoral process. 2 choices. Keep to the status quo or rein things in. What message does that send? "Oh he's a great leader." Not likely. It would probably be spun to something like, "Obama sends message to the world that the US economy stinks." That's more likely imo. No win situation.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack
It's all private donations, so rest easy citizens.


www.cbsnews.com...



Yeah.... and the people providing security are volunteers, right?



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


This.

And all of your little my party / your party BS is just a distraction while the real prestidigitation occurs behind the scenes -- when the money tells the puppet politician of either stripe which way the wind is going to blow.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Unless it is an official state event, the Obamas pay for it.

But really, who cares.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Best post of the day.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Did we just pay for this ?.. oh wait... I think the Chinese did
edit on 23-1-2013 by R3KR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   
This sounds almost like the Warren G. Harding administration as far as partying is concerned. At least there aren't any hookers or illegal gambling.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by R3KR
Did we just pay for this ?.. oh wait... I think the Chinese did
edit on 23-1-2013 by R3KR because: (no reason given)


Indirectly you can make the argument
Now go buy windows 8



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Pocket change. Bush's 2nd cost 40 million. Let's take inflation into account and say it's 25% more. That 50 million. Hell, do corporations even cut a cheque for an amount that small?


You do make an excellent point on that and it isn't much. After all, we've been running deficits of 1-1.5 trillion over budget amount since 2009. A few million on a party isn't worth commenting on...if commenting about pure dollar amounts.

I can't help but think though, it's letting the little stuff slide and write off as 'too small' to matter which leads us to a point of... well... trillions being spent on so much little stuff, no one can even keep proper track to correct it anymore.

This one just stands out because it's parties in the "People's House" in a time of great economic struggle and hardship. So dollars aside, it's a principle thing for me. After all, Bush was slammed pretty hard for his first obnoxious scenes of having a great time with vacations during a time of shooting wars he initiated. He stopped that public display of excess ... for the most part. I'm sure it didn't actually stop in private but the public display did. Obama could at least give a little concern for appearances. I'd really love that, as a citizen.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   
An impromptu rendition of "signed, sealed, delivered"?. I would git DOWN on that slick floor with some slippery dress socks and show Usher how lacking YObama is in the urban swag department trying to bust in some dad jeans or his standard blue suit. Power to the people. Lets boogie naaoowww......... JAYYYMES BROWWN????............JAMES BRAAAHHHWWNNN!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Is he not allowed to party and celebrate his success?

If it is being funded by corporations, heck, make the most of it, looked like an awesome party.

Good on Obama



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I am looking forward to the next republican inauguration, so I can watch the left toot different horns, should be interesting.




When GOP President George W. Bush celebrated his second inauguration in January of 2005, reporters in the political press hammered away at the cost of the event -- about $140 million -- by stating that the money could have been put to better use in the Iraq war and as aid for those caught in the earthquake and tsunami that struck southern Asia a month earlier.

Eight years later, the people in the media could barely contain their glee while covering “Party Time,” Democratic president Barack Obama's second inauguration, with little interest in the cost of the events (about $180 million) even though the nation's unemployment rate is hovering near eight percent and another battle over federal government spending looms on the horizon.

Back in January of 2005, some reporters bashed the expense of Bush's inauguration before the event even got started.

Will Lester of the Associated Press wrote that the money spent on the celebration could instead be used to purchase “200 armored Humvees with the best armor for troops in Iraq” or “vaccinations and preventive health care for 22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami.”

Read more: newsbusters.org...




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Heisenberg59
 


Man. this is obnoxious. Are there people that eat this up and think this makes the president hip?
I wish someone had cut the heat on them, let them enjoy the ball with 30 degree drafts, remind them whats outside.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


What success? You mean his personal success I guess? Not success at his job?

Just because there's an argument to be made, doesn't mean you look particularly smart making it.
edit on 23-1-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
62
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join