Can we start working on some of the ugly men then? I know a few who could use some help!Spending money to make women look better is a legitimate government function.
Can we start working on some of the ugly men then? I know a few who could use some help!Spending money to make women look better is a legitimate government function.
Oh, dear gawd I love you! I have a cyber crush on your humor!It would be cheaper to ensure every adult male was kept in a constant state of drunkenness.
I spent the last 30 days watching TV adds of politicians telling the most obvious boneheaded lies that even a third rate moron could see through.....the only thing I can surmize it that there must be a lot of third rate morons out there. Cause the most of the politicans on my ballot who were telling the biggest whoopers got elected/re-eleced.We all know this is ridiculous, but the right will continue to tell us how Obama was going to spend 2 billion to go to India. Beck, Rush and Bachman have been reporting this for days, shit Bachman was on 360 last night spouting it again, and it's not true.
True. I'm just curious. I don't believe that the G20 is something we should ignore because it costs money, but is there ways to cut corners? How much do we spend on this kind of thing? I honestly don't know.Better question, is the trip worth the cost? They won't disclose the cost or the operation till after the fact because of the security needed, they don't tell what kind of guns they will have at the ready! and they probably don't need as much security as when Bush traveled aboard, but this is just my speculation and nothing more.
Oh come one Damo, I mean you do have a point about the cost but what about the glaring hypocricy here? Where were these same loud mouths when Bush took his trips abroud that, undoubtably, cost just as much, actually more, as he was President for 8 years, not just two, not that I begrudge Bush those trips. My point being, this is just more partisan mud slinging we can do with out.A bit of transparency would resolve this. However, I laughed when I read that 34 warships were going there... I mean, come on. That's a bit over 10% of our entire Navy's resources in that area...
It certainly wouldn't put the President in danger to know the actual accounting for the cost of such a trip.
I agree that we should know more, but when it comes to the DoD, well, you know as well as I that they get to hide a lot of things! I think it is the most corrupt department in our government.True. I'm just curious. I don't believe that the G20 is something we should ignore because it costs money, but is there ways to cut corners? How much do we spend on this kind of thing? I honestly don't know.
Giving people a good average on what was spent in the past certainly wouldn't endanger Obama now.
How much were the cost of Bush's trips? Clintons? Bush I? Reagans? etc. Why is it now all of a sudden important that Obama go out of his way to be transparent about the cost of said trip when there has been no expectation of such from his predecesors?However it still doesn't answer the question, how much is the full price of the trip?
Disco! What's next? A Special Prosecutor to investigate illicit blow jobs?"Transparency" doesn't require the White House to give out every piece of irrelevant information requested by a bunch of knownothing jackasses. In all my years I have never heard of anyone questioning the cost of a president's diplomatic trips abroad. Not once.
Fixed that for you.Spending money ON BEER to make women look better is a legitimate government function.
Beck at 5:25 p.m.: "Some people say that it is up to $2 billion for 10 days. Is that true? I don't know." From the November 4 edition of Glenn Beck:
BECK: A report came out that has made the rounds on the Internet about the high cost of this trip. Some people say that it is up to $2billion for 10 days. Is that true? I don't know. The media is bickering back and forth about what the real cost is and how many ships will be there. Thirty-four warships, possibly. I don't know. Two hundred million dollars a day while in India. I don't know. president has blocked off eight hundred hotel rooms. Do we even know if he's traveling with 3,000 people? Do we know if that's true? No one knows any of the details of this trip, the real cost of the trip. One thing we can say for certain is it's going to be quite expensive.
They existed, but your memory tends to have a bit of relapse where Bush is concerned.Oh come one Damo, I mean you do have a point about the cost but what about the glaring hypocricy here? Where were these same loud mouths when Bush took his trips abroud that, undoubtably, cost just as much, actually more, as he was President for 8 years, not just two, not that I begrudge Bush those trips. My point being, this is just more partisan mud slinging we can do with out.
So who are the "some people" that Beck continues to quote?
Where did this supposed "report" originate?
How about you find some answers to THOSE questions BEFORE you swallow what Beck sells you hook, line and sinker?
Beck admits he doesn't know anything, his comments are total speculation with no basis in truth or fact, yet you take his word as gospel like the bleating, naive sheep you truly are.
If you read the story you'd know who the source was, well generally so, and where the story originated. However, I listened to Beck just to see if what you were saying was true (we get him on delay here). He did notice that the other reporters laughed at the guy asking the questions, but he never reported the "truth" of 200 Million per day rubbish. I suspect you are going off of a report from an unnamed source on liberalblogspotsrus.dem and not actual information of something that you actually heard.So who are the "some people" that Beck continues to quote?
Where did this supposed "report" originate?
How about you find some answers to THOSE questions BEFORE you swallow what Beck sells you hook, line and sinker?
Beck admits he doesn't know anything, his comments are total speculation with no basis in truth or fact, yet you take his word as gospel like the bleating, naive sheep you truly are.
They existed, but your memory tends to have a bit of relapse where Bush is concerned.
My, my Zappapatoot-skies. We're in a bit of a huff today aren't we?
Wassamatter? Is this delayed foot stamping from yesterday?
Most of Beck's comments are opinions hardly based in fact!So who are the "some people" that Beck continues to quote?
Where did this supposed "report" originate?
How about you find some answers to THOSE questions BEFORE you swallow what Beck sells you hook, line and sinker?
Beck admits he doesn't know anything, his comments are total speculation with no basis in truth or fact, yet you take his word as gospel like the bleating, naive sheep you truly are.
Yeah, Beck leaves a lot out of his reporting and just hints at things or suggests, that is real good reporting...I'm just saying, ahahahahahahaIf you read the story you'd know who the source was, well generally so, and where the story originated. However, I listened to Beck just to see if what you were saying was true (we get him on delay here). He did notice that the other reporters laughed at the guy asking the questions, but he never reported the "truth" of 200 Million per day rubbish. I suspect you are going off of a report from an unnamed source on liberalblogspotsrus.dem and not actual information of something that you actually heard.