Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic

wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
I think the point was that, for the President and his family, life seems to be one vacation after another.  The point could also probably be made for most of our national elected officials.  Why do they take the whole month of August off every year?  It is not like they are in session that much the other 11 months . . .

Now - I am certainly not agreeing with this point, as it pertains to the President - and I did not with Bush either.  The president is always on the job, no matter where he (or she) is.
8/9/2010 1:12 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
So let me ask a serious question, that some people will say is a Republican talking point....

Did Bush get more flack from the Media for vacations than Obama has.

Media as a whole, not just Rush and Beck.
8/9/2010 1:55 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Posted by wrmiller13 on 8/9/2010 1:12:00 PM:
I think the point was that, for the President and his family, life seems to be one vacation after another.

1) The First Lady doesn't run the country, her husband does. I really don't give two ***** what her vacation itinerary is, and neither should anyone else beyond her Secret Service detail. What she does and where she goes does not reflect in any way, shape or form on the job the President is doing.

2) Anyone who thinks Obama's life since taking office has been "one vacation after another" is being willfully retarded, e.g. Maureen Dowd.
8/9/2010 2:02 PM
creilmann
Posts: 582 (0)
Hall of Famer
134 4
Prospect
Posted by swamphawk22 on 8/9/2010 1:55:00 PM (view original):
So let me ask a serious question, that some people will say is a Republican talking point....

Did Bush get more flack from the Media for vacations than Obama has.

Media as a whole, not just Rush and Beck.
We can't count Rush and Beck?  So you're not going to count the liberal blogs and radio shows when doing this comparison?  If that's the case, then I think you'll find little coverage about either President's vacation.  Rarely is it the corporate media that is criticizing these things.  They just report what Dems and Pubs are criticizing in an effort to flame partisanship for ratings.  If the Democrats never complained about Bush's vacations, and the Republicans never complained about Obama's vacations, you'd never hear a peep about it in the press.  It's what the corporate media is these days; a forum for both sides to spew talking points with little journalistic effort from the news outlets themselves.  It's the Jerry Springer model for journalism and a great distractor from real news.


8/9/2010 2:16 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
I'd say Bush got more flak, sure. He was also in office for eight years, and thus had more opportunity to take flak over it than Obama has so far.

Michelle's already taken more flak for her vacation time than Laura ever did though, if we're tallying up partisan fucktardedness. And that's an order of magnitude more fucktarded than complaining about the President's vacations.
8/9/2010 2:22 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
I did a simple check of the NY times during the Bush presidency. Multiple stories on Bush vacations and how they had to be cut short and how much time he spends on vacation.

Similar check for Obama shows only a few pieces that are defending Obama's vacations.

I want it to be known that this guy isnt playing on the same field. Rush and Beck attacks are portrayed as mainstream, but in reality Obama is getting defended by the mainstream media.
8/9/2010 2:31 PM
creilmann
Posts: 582 (0)
Hall of Famer
134 4
Prospect
Could you provide the link?  Or just tell what words you used to check for it.
8/9/2010 2:49 PM
raucous
Posts: 8605 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 8 133 151 120
Prospect
If you put in that they work 7 days a week,  Bush's and probably Obama's "vacation time" is equivalent of 2 weeks vacation for us and all weekends off.  Whoop-de-doo!
8/9/2010 2:50 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
Posted by antonsirius on 8/9/2010 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wrmiller13 on 8/9/2010 1:12:00 PM:
I think the point was that, for the President and his family, life seems to be one vacation after another.

1) The First Lady doesn't run the country, her husband does. I really don't give two ***** what her vacation itinerary is, and neither should anyone else beyond her Secret Service detail. What she does and where she goes does not reflect in any way, shape or form on the job the President is doing.

2) Anyone who thinks Obama's life since taking office has been "one vacation after another" is being willfully retarded, e.g. Maureen Dowd.

Remember - I said I had no beef with his travel.  At least not much of one.  He does seem to travel more than Bush did, to make appearances.  Now this could be that I did not pay that much attention to Bush' travel plans.  But Obama seems to be out of the White House more than he is in it.

As for Mrs. Obama, you should care, at least minimally, about her travel plans, because they require such a security detail, which we have to pay for.

My problem here is the mixed messages being sent.  On one hand they are saying times are tough, and we all have to tighten up.  On the hand they are saying, if you have the money, and can go really cool places (or throw extravagent weddings), have at it.

For the record - I do not really care how much of their own money the Obamas or the Clintons spend on their leaisure.  But when it comes to our tax dollars being spent, we should all care.

 

8/9/2010 2:55 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
And now you're referencing Chelsea's wedding, which is incredibly even less relevant to the job the President is doing than Michelle's travels.

The amount of money spent on the First Lady and her SS detail is a pitifully small fraction of the federal budget. If you really want to care about each millionth of a percent of government expenditures, even minimally, your brain is going to be too busy to remember to breathe.

Every second the media spends covering TMZ-level bullshit like this instead of something -- anything! -- of substance, they are driving another tiny little nail into the country's coffin.

What's the latest on Brad and Angelina? What's next for Ali? Where's Michelle going next? If this is what passes for political discussion in this country, we're already doomed.
8/9/2010 3:39 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect

You are becoming quite the Obama apologist. Seems he can do no wrong.

This was a pr nightmare. If you are telling America that times are tough and your wife is spending big bucks on the taxpayer Credit Card we have a problem.

Why wouldnt she pull back, even for show?

If you have to cover news 24/7 not all of it is going to be epic in nature. And people dont want to see all serious news. They want fluff. Not 100% but at least 15%.

 

8/9/2010 4:12 PM
wrmiller13
Posts: 260 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 86
Prospect
As I said above:

For the record - I do not really care how much of their own money the Obamas or the Clintons spend on their leaisure.  But when it comes to our tax dollars being spent, we should all care.

8/9/2010 4:19 PM
bagchucker
Posts: 18640 (0)
Hall of Famer
415 1 1 2 12
Prospect
Lord Keynes says in a depression/recession, spend. Which Oblama is doing. God forbid a man should use science to dictate his moves.

Lord Keynes says in an inflation, save for a rainy day. Why did not Bush save for a rainy day. Clinton did. We called it a surplus.

Republicans are minions of the underworld.
8/9/2010 4:27 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Posted by wrmiller13 on 8/9/2010 4:19:00 PM (view original):
As I said above:

For the record - I do not really care how much of their own money the Obamas or the Clintons spend on their leaisure.  But when it comes to our tax dollars being spent, we should all care.

My frustration is far more directed at the corporate media, who are ******* away a public trust wasting air time and column inches on things like this, than it is at you or anybody else here. Everything we post on this board falls more or less in the "time wasting" category.
8/9/2010 4:36 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by bagchucker on 8/9/2010 4:27:00 PM (view original):
Lord Keynes says in a depression/recession, spend. Which Oblama is doing. God forbid a man should use science to dictate his moves.

Lord Keynes says in an inflation, save for a rainy day. Why did not Bush save for a rainy day. Clinton did. We called it a surplus.

Republicans are minions of the underworld.
We are not attacking the idea of spending, just how he is spending.

The stimulus should have been focused on reviving the economy, not supporting a social agenda. What needs to be done is give business money so they can hire. The waste of the federal government means that any dollar they spend will return about half of what the private sector could get from the same amount.

What if we took the trillion dollar stimulus and gave any business that hired a person over their current staff a 50% credit on their payroll. How many jobs would be created?
8/9/2010 6:23 PM
◂ Prev 1...52|53|54|55|56...133 Next ▸
Tea Party 4-18-11 Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.