View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 21st, 2014, 6:15 pm



Reply to topic  [ 458 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31
 Obama Bashing Thread 
Author Message
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention:
Fox News wrote:
Report finds spike in earmarks to Democratic lawmakers during controversial votes
By Jim Angle

Published February 21, 2012 FoxNews.com

The Heritage Foundation has issued a new report that charges the Obama administration sent presidential earmarks, taxpayer dollars, to Democratic lawmakers to help convince them to vote for controversial proposals such as cap and trade and the health care bill.

"When you examine the recipients of those grants, there were at least 32 vulnerable house Democrats who received significant federal grant money during the run-up or directly after the votes on those pieces of legislation," says Lachlan Markay, one of the authors of the report.

The amount of earmarks spiked around the time of difficult votes such as cap and trade, then dropped, only to spike again around controversial financial regulations known as Dodd/Frank, and spiked the most just before the vote on the health care bill.

Cap and trade was tough for many Democrats, especially in the Midwest, because even the president acknowledged it would, as he put it, cause energy prices to "skyrocket."

The health care law remains controversial even today, with many polls showing majority of Americans oppose to it.

On their websites, lawmakers didn't advertise their votes, but did tout at length the money they'd gotten for various local projects.

"As a way to counteract the negative voter sentiment that would come from voting for unpopular legislation," says Markay. "These were attempts to make sure that constituents knew they were bringing money home to their district."

Nevertheless, the White House argued today nothing was amiss.

"The president's opposition to earmarks is well known. The fact of the matter is I'm confident the issuance of grants from agencies are done ... in a merit based way," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

President Obama didn't invent the practice. FDR used it to great effect and President Nixon is reported to have used earmarks to help win support for re-election by sending funds to key states or voting blocs.

But President Obama has vastly expanded the practice.

Numbers from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service show that the value of administration earmarks under President Obama increased by a 126 percent in his first two years in office and the actual number of administrative earmarks increased by 54 percent.

Those are dramatic increases that are 11 times more than Congress itself increased earmarks, which the White House did not explain today.

It also does not square with statements the president is against earmarks, which he and his administration appear to have used to great effect and with increasing frequency.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02 ... z1n51VVCcP


It's the Chicago Way. I saw a report this weekend that said that Chicago is the most corrupt city in America, but I think we already knew that. Over the past 30+ years, over 1500 public officials have been convicted of crimes in the windy city. Since half of Obama's inner circle is from Chicago, the amount of corruption in this regime shouldn't be a surprise.

_________________
Image


February 22nd, 2012, 12:14 am
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
It looks like the Food Nazis are at it again:
New York Slimes wrote:
New Guidelines Planned on School Vending Machines By RON NIXON
Published: February 20, 2012

WASHINGTON — The government’s attempt to reduce childhood obesity is moving from the school cafeteria to the vending machines.

The Obama administration is working on setting nutritional standards for foods that children can buy outside the cafeteria. With students eating 19 percent to 50 percent of their daily food at school, the administration says it wants to ensure that what they eat contributes to good health and smaller waistlines. The proposed rules are expected within the next few weeks.

Efforts to restrict the food that schoolchildren eat outside the lunchroom have long been controversial.

Representatives of the food and beverage industries argue that many of their products contribute to good nutrition and should not be banned. Schools say that overly restrictive rules, which could include banning the candy sold for school fund-raisers, risk the loss of substantial revenue that helps pay for sports, music and arts programs. A study by the National Academy of Sciences estimates that about $2.3 billion worth of snack foods and beverages are sold annually in schools nationwide.

Nutritionists say that school vending machines stocked with potato chips, cookies and sugary soft drinks contribute to childhood obesity, which has more than tripled in the past 30 years. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that about one in every five children are obese.

No details of the proposed guidelines have been released, but health advocates and snack food and soft drink industry representatives predict that the rules will be similar to those for the government’s school lunch program, which reduced amounts of sugar, salt and fat.

Those rules set off a fight between parents and health advocates on one side, who praised the standards, and the food industry, which argued that some of the proposals went too far. Members of Congress stepped in to block the administration from limiting the amount of potatoes children could be served and to allow schools to continue to count tomato paste on a pizza as a serving of vegetables.

Nancy Huehnergarth, executive director of the New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance in Millwood, N.Y., said she expected a similar fight over the vending machine rules.

“I think the food and beverage industry is going to fight tooth and nail over these rules,” Ms. Huehnergarth said.

But representatives of the food and beverage industry say they generally support selling healthier snacks and drinks in schools.

“But we are a little concerned that they might make the rules too stringent,” said James A. McCarthy, president of the Snack Food Association, a trade group in Washington.

Mr. McCarthy said the industry supported nutritional snacks and was working with the American Heart Association and the William J. Clinton Foundation, headed by the former president, in an initiative called the Alliance for a Healthier Generation to establish voluntary guidelines for healthier foods in schools.

The foods include baked rather than fried potato chips, dry-roasted nuts and low-sodium pretzels, Mr. McCarthy said.

Christopher Gindlesperger, director of communications for the American Beverage Association, whose members include Coca-Cola and Pepsi, said his industry had also worked with schools to reduce or eliminate sugary drinks and replace them with healthier alternatives.

“Our members have voluntarily reduced the calories in drinks shipped to schools by 88 percent and stopped offering full-calorie soft drinks in school vending machines,” Mr. Gindlesperger said.

But a study in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine released this month shows that despite industry efforts and those of others, snacking behavior among children remains largely unchanged. One reason is that healthier snacks were being offered alongside less nutritious offerings.

Between 2006 and 2010, the study found, about half of the schools had vending machines, stores and cafeterias that offered unhealthy foods.

The availability of high-fat foods in schools followed regional patterns. In the South, where rates of childhood obesity are the highest, less nutritious food was more prevalent. In the West, where childhood obesity rates are lower, high-fat food was not as common, the study found.

Health advocates say the study points to the need for national standards.

Jessica Donze Black, director of the Kids’ Safe and Healthful Foods Project at the Pew Charitable Trusts in Washington, gave the food industry credit for trying to reduce sugary drinks and fatty snacks, but said the voluntary guidelines did not go far enough.

“What we have is a fragmented system where some schools do a good job of limiting access to junk food and others don’t,” she said. “We need a national standard that ensures that all schools meet some minimum guidelines.”

Still, some school districts question whether students would buy healthy foods offered in vending machines and school stores. Frequently vending machines with healthy alternative snacks are ignored, and children bring snacks from home or buy them at local stores off-campus during lunch periods. Roger Kipp, food service director for the Norwood school district in Ohio, said children could be persuaded to eat healthy foods and schools could still make a profit.

Two years ago, Mr. Kipp eliminated vending machines and school stores in his district and replaced them with an area in the lunchroom where they could buy wraps, fruit or yogurt. Children ate better, and the schools made some money.

“It took a while, but it caught on,” Mr. Kipp said. “You have to give the kids time. You can’t replace 16 years of bad eating habits overnight.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/us/politics/new-rules-planned-on-school-vending-machines.html?_r=2&ref=politics

It's obvious that The First Wookie is behind this, but that beached whale needs to look in the mirror first before telling people what they should or shouldn't eat. And if my above comment offended someone, good!

_________________
Image


February 22nd, 2012, 12:21 am
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
Bumbling Joe Biden strikes again:
The Blaze wrote:
Off to ‘Road Island’: Biden Camp Misspells State in Press Release
Posted on February 21, 2012 at 7:33am by Jonathon M. Seidl

We’ve all made errors.* But this one is just too ironic to ignore. In a press release announcing Vice President Joe Biden’s schedule for the week, the name of the great state of Rhode Island was misspelled to note the gaffe-prone VP would be campaigning in “Road Island” on Thursday.

“On Thursday, the Vice President will travel to Boston, Massachusetts, Manchester, New Hampshire and Providence, Road Island to attend campaign events,” the memo sent out to journalists said. WPRI-TV was able to track down a copy:


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/off-to-road-island-biden-camp-misspells-state-in-press-release/
I just wonder if "Road Island" is one of Obama's 57 states or if it's an entirely new one.

_________________
Image


February 22nd, 2012, 12:29 am
Profile
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
slybri19 wrote:
Bumbling Joe Biden strikes again:
The Blaze wrote:
Off to ‘Road Island’: Biden Camp Misspells State in Press Release
Posted on February 21, 2012 at 7:33am by Jonathon M. Seidl

We’ve all made errors.* But this one is just too ironic to ignore. In a press release announcing Vice President Joe Biden’s schedule for the week, the name of the great state of Rhode Island was misspelled to note the gaffe-prone VP would be campaigning in “Road Island” on Thursday.

“On Thursday, the Vice President will travel to Boston, Massachusetts, Manchester, New Hampshire and Providence, Road Island to attend campaign events,” the memo sent out to journalists said. WPRI-TV was able to track down a copy:


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/off-to-road-island-biden-camp-misspells-state-in-press-release/
I just wonder if "Road Island" is one of Obama's 57 states or if it's an entirely new one.


Perhaps the bigger gaffe us explaining why his schedule says that he will be "campaigning" on the tax payer dollar, instead of Obama's campaign fund...


February 22nd, 2012, 2:39 am
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
I suppose that I could post a million links, but I'm not gonna do it. This pathetic piece of fecal matter occupying the White House pisses me off more and more by the day. And the worst part is that the lamesteam media won't call him out on his bullshit. He actually said that he was the most pro-Israel President in history with a straight face, then his WH operatives threatened Israel about getting involved in the election by saying anything negative about Obama. I don't recall any other president saying that Israel should go back to the 1967 borders or stop building settlements or else. Or leaving Bibi stranded in a wing of the WH without courtesy or respect. In Obama's bizarro world, our enemies are our friends and our friends are our enemies.

Today, that cumstain gave a speech in North Carolina that made me blow chunks. First, he said that his new fuel mileage standards would save the average family $8K per year down the road. Since when does the average family spend $167 per week in fuel costs (to get to that magical $8K number in total costs, not savings)? They don't, so it was a lie.

Then dipshit says that he's expediting a pipeline between Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast to bring more oil to the country. The truth is that it's being done by the keystone XL pipeline after Obama cancelled the full Canada to US pipeline route. They don't need his approval to do it since it doesn't cross international borders, but he's trying to take credit for it. They did it in spite of him, not because of him. But, we still get crickets from the lamestream media about this. Sometimes, I've just got to laugh at the ignorance of the American people.

_________________
Image


March 8th, 2012, 2:40 am
Profile
3rd Round Selection

Joined: October 19th, 2005, 1:24 pm
Posts: 1146
Location: Nottingham, England
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
slybri19 wrote:
Today, that cumstain gave a speech in North Carolina that made me blow chunks. First, he said that his new fuel mileage standards would save the average family $8K per year down the road. Since when does the average family spend $167 per week in fuel costs (to get to that magical $8K number in total costs, not savings)? They don't, so it was a lie.

He meant to say $8,000 over the life of a car. He didn't, so it was a mistake.

You should be as charitable to Obama's slips as you were to Fox News :)


March 8th, 2012, 8:15 am
Profile
Commissioner of the NFL – Roger Goodell
User avatar

Joined: August 7th, 2004, 4:47 am
Posts: 10943
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
UK Lion, I'm sure that's what he probably meant, but where's the retraction? If the President makes a false statement, don't you think the American people deserve an apology and/or a clarification? Where is it? He'll gladly apologize to the Muslims for soldiers burning the Koran, but not for either lying or mispeaking to the American people? Where's the justice? He'll apologize to a slut for being called a slut by one of his detractors, but not to the American people for making a false statement for political gain? Doesn't the truth matter any more? And don't the American people deserve better?

_________________
Image


March 10th, 2012, 10:24 pm
Profile
Post Re: Obama Bashing Thread
UK Lion wrote:
slybri19 wrote:
Today, that cumstain gave a speech in North Carolina that made me blow chunks. First, he said that his new fuel mileage standards would save the average family $8K per year down the road. Since when does the average family spend $167 per week in fuel costs (to get to that magical $8K number in total costs, not savings)? They don't, so it was a lie.

He meant to say $8,000 over the life of a car. He didn't, so it was a mistake.

You should be as charitable to Obama's slips as you were to Fox News :)


If it were an "accident" and not a fraudulent misrepresentation it should have been disclaimed later in as public of a forum and with the same fan-fair that the initial statement was made. I bet it bites him later.

However, I don't know why you would ever want to say that it ONLY saves $8k over the life of the car... That's kind of the point that the other side is making... That it ONLY saves $8k over the entire life of the car.


March 19th, 2012, 11:25 am
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 458 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.