TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Obama goes to India/3000 people, 40 airplanes, $200,000,000 a day!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama goes to India/3000 people, 40 airplanes, $200,000,000 a day! - Page 2

post #31 of 60
11/4/10 at 7:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
If President Bush had done the same trip two years ago, I'm sure it would have cost proportionately the same, adjusted for inflation.

And if President...whoever...does it two years from now, the same will be true.

And we have to keep in mind that the President is on the way to some summit meetings, etc., and is visiting India on the way.
Maybe not quite as much 2 years ago. If the 40 aircraft is correct, then they have added a couple. Another spare or perhaps additional security craft. All the ground vehicles, helicopters, maintenance crews, fuel and spare parts are loaded into "heavy lifters"and are sent along too. It's easily going to be in the millions per day just in transportation, but I've no idea how many.
Reply
post #32 of 60
11/4/10 at 8:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
So what exactly do you disagree with? That Pat Caddell is a Democratic pundit? Or that Pat Caddell uttered those very figures while in the presence of Lanny Davis, another Democratic operative, who didn't challenge Caddell's statement?
I was disagreeing with your statement to the effect of: since a democratic said it about Obama, it had to be true.
Reply
post #33 of 60
11/5/10 at 6:55am
Thread Starter 
Obama is going to India, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan. Ostensibly the purpose of the trip is to open up foreign markets for American products and reduce our balance of trade. This is a joke. India and Indonesia are poor countries who can't afford our high cost goods and what's more we already trade with these countries in products we can sell like almonds. Problem is that their import duties are high on American products which means we can't be competitive. I still say this is a very expensive boondoggle.
Reply
post #34 of 60
11/5/10 at 7:09am
CNN is talking about this story now. They hope to open up markets for trade, but also to negotiate defense contracts where they would build equipment in the U.S. and sell it to them. It would open up jobs in the U.S. and provide revenue within our country.
Reply
post #35 of 60
11/5/10 at 8:02am
Both those countries are major players in the new global economy - foolhardy for the US to stick its head in the ground and ignore them, either economically or politically, I think.

And, yeah, the cost would be the same whichever president would be going.
Reply
post #36 of 60
11/5/10 at 4:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by darlili View Post
Both those countries are major players in the new global economy - foolhardy for the US to stick its head in the ground and ignore them, either economically or politically, I think.

And, yeah, the cost would be the same whichever president would be going.
Exactly! Did anyone catch Cooper Anderson's show last evening? He was refuting this whole rumour and showed the costs of one of Clinton's trips that cost 2.5 million per day. How is this different?
Reply
post #37 of 60
11/5/10 at 4:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanietx View Post
I don't care how much money he's spending, it's a total waste of my tax money!
same here
Reply
post #38 of 60
11/5/10 at 6:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
The folks that don't like Obama are going to believe and propogate these rumours - that's just human nature. Those that want facts will go to the proper sources to get facts and not rumours and innuendos.

The same happened with Bush - those that didn't like him jumped on every opportunity to bash him. I notice it's even worse with Obama and can only think it's because he is black even though that is often denied.
You know, I was accused of being racist because I didn't vote for him in the election. I'm sorry, I'm conservative and proud of it, and I didn't like his platform or his ideas. I disagree with him even more now and I still don't like him. And it has nothing to do with the color of his skin. Seems like you are the one pulling out the race card now.

I am not commenting on the cost of the trip. I just wanted to make my opinion known about your post.
Reply
post #39 of 60
11/5/10 at 7:34pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite

The same happened with Bush - those that didn't like him jumped on every opportunity to bash him. I notice it's even worse with Obama and can only think it's because he is black even though that is often denied.
So what if we turn the tables and say that if you disagree with Allen West and Tim Scott, you must be a liberal racist. After all, they are conservative Black newly-elected Representatives from the South!

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/D...spx?id=1223540

And for the record, why does a Canadian care so much about American politics? You can't vote here, can you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by calico2222 View Post
You know, I was accused of being racist because I didn't vote for him in the election. I'm sorry, I'm conservative and proud of it, and I didn't like his platform or his ideas. I disagree with him even more now and I still don't like him. And it has nothing to do with the color of his skin. Seems like you are the one pulling out the race card now.

I am not commenting on the cost of the trip. I just wanted to make my opinion known about your post.
I agree. This race card crap seems to be all one directional.
Reply
post #40 of 60
11/5/10 at 9:17pm

The Cat Site is a family friendly environment and an international community of friends, with unfettered respectful exchange of opinions, ideas and experiences. Any subject matter posted to The Cat Site is open to discussion by any member of the Site's multi-national, multi-ethnic and multi-faith audience, who come to us from all walks of life, social standing and income levels, and each and every member is encouraged to participate. All threads and subjects in IMO are open for participation by all members that meet the minimum posting requirements.
Reply
post #41 of 60
11/6/10 at 7:17am
I'm wondering if any of the information that came out on the scope or cost of the visit to India was disinformation from the Secret Service to try to discourage terrorists from even making a try? I mean, some of the specifics given seem so high that it would make the security seem overwhelming.

And I wonder if that could backfire by making them want to try, just to show they could/would do it.

Just thinking out loud, here.
Reply
post #42 of 60
11/6/10 at 8:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
So what if we turn the tables and say that if you disagree with Allen West and Tim Scott, you must be a liberal racist. After all, they are conservative Black newly-elected Representatives from the South!

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/D...spx?id=1223540

And for the record, why does a Canadian care so much about American politics? You can't vote here, can you?



I agree. This race card crap seems to be all one directional.
I am only giving "my opinion" on what I perceive and from my own life experiences, especially given the fact that I am dating a black man and have come to see prejudice that I overlooked as a white person, i.e., when we walk into a room together. Having had long discussions with my SO, it's interesting to hear the "other side" of the issue.

For the record, as a Canadian I care very much about American politics even though, as you say, I do not vote there. I care because your politics and political agendas often directly affect our country which I thought most folks, both American and Canadian knew, and I care very much about my country just as you do yours.
Reply
post #43 of 60
11/6/10 at 3:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
I'm wondering if any of the information that came out on the scope or cost of the visit to India was disinformation from the Secret Service to try to discourage terrorists from even making a try? I mean, some of the specifics given seem so high that it would make the security seem overwhelming.

And I wonder if that could backfire by making them want to try, just to show they could/would do it.

Just thinking out loud, here.
Good question. It could also have been thrown out to the administrations opponents as an political orange peel.
Reply
post #44 of 60
11/6/10 at 5:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Good question. It could also have been thrown out to the administrations opponents as an political orange peel.
Sticking to Occam's Razor, my first bet would be that someone on the advance team mentioned the exaggerated figures in some off-handed way, perhaps to impress the Indians about how important they are to the U.S. But when it comes to security/intelligence agencies, Occam's Razor doesn't always apply.

Did you mean a political banana peel?
Reply
post #45 of 60
11/6/10 at 8:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
Wow! Just wow.

I was agreeing with you until the last sentence.

It is not worse with Obama, it just feels like it's worse to those who support him.

And I'm so very sorry to disappoint you but the majority of those who disagree with Obama do so because of his policies and politics not because of his skin color. I feel like I've just been called a racist and that feels about the same as getting a bucket of mud thrown on me - dirty.

As to the original post, I would have a problem with the size and cost of a trip like this no matter the president in a time like this. The people are broke; the government is even worse since they are just deficit spending. Is it necessary to bring 3,000 people? Or even 300 people?

I understand that the POTUS will need to make international visits, but the rest of the country (if not world!) has to tighten their belts and find ways to decrease spending. Then I hear about a trip like this, and it makes me wonder if there is any connection between the top of the ladder and those who are holding it upright.
Well said. I disagree with Obama and it has all to do with his policies and has nothing to do with the color of his skin. This trip is overspending. I wonder if the President got the message that was sent to Washington when Americans voted in this election?
Reply
post #46 of 60
11/7/10 at 4:36am
This looks like yet another right-wing-blogosphere-Fox-pseudonews game of telephone.

Fox picked it up from Michele Bachman, who claims she got it from an obscure news source in India, who claims to have gotten it from an anonymous source. I guess that's good enough for the right wing pundits who don't adhere to that little admonition against bearing false witness.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...ip-india-will/

Leave it to FOX to spread misinformation. Why does anyone even watch a network so disreputable?

Quote:
The numbers evidently originate with the Press Trust of India, whose report was linked on the Drudge Report and picked up by Fox News host Glenn Beck. The news agency also wrongly said that the White House had blocked off the entire Taj Mahal Palace hotel for Obama's visit and that the U.S. was stationing 34 warships—roughly 10 percent of the naval fleet--off the coast of Mumbai for security reasons.

The agency attributed the $200 million figure to an anonymous Indian government official. It didn't attribute the warships claim to any source.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell called the warship claim "absolutely absurd." "That's just comical," he said at Thursday's Pentagon news briefing. "Nothing close to that is being done."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...-trip-to-india
Reply
post #47 of 60
11/13/10 at 6:44am
Thread Starter 
So for whatever gazillions of dollars this trip cost, did Obama bring home the bacon? That would be a resounding NOPE! He couldn't get the "done deal" signed.

I'm thinking this means that whatever the cost of this boondoggle, it was money wasted........again.

http://www.wfrv.com/news/local/Presi...107619693.html

Quote:
President Obama gets zero response from South Korea on free-trade agreement
WFRV News
Story Created: Nov 12, 2010 at 9:29 PM CST
Story Updated: Nov 12, 2010 at 10:24 PM CST
(WFRV)--President Obama was confident he would walk away with a free-trade agreement that could create 70,000 jobs in the United States.

Instead, South Korea backed out of the deal. The President also failed to convince G-20 leaders to join him on cracking down on China's manipulation of its currency, which keeps prices of Chinese goods artificially low.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/ob...lows/19715160/

Quote:
Obama Fails To Win Agreement on Chinese Currency or Trade Flows

Despite a pledge to make his Asian trip about creating jobs back in the U.S., President Obama failed to achieve most of stated objectives: a trade pact with South Korea, agreement on limiting surpluses by large trading partners and getting China to allow its currency to appreciate more.
See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/bUk7Tm
Reply
post #48 of 60
11/13/10 at 12:35pm
On the good side, he didn't throw up on the Japanese Prime Minister, either.

You take your victories where you can, in the political world!
Reply
post #49 of 60
11/14/10 at 12:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
So for whatever gazillions of dollars this trip cost, did Obama bring home the bacon? That would be a resounding NOPE! He couldn't get the "done deal" signed.

I'm thinking this means that whatever the cost of this boondoggle, it was money wasted........again.
Does gazillion come after a billion? Or 200 million a day, or what? I'm getting confused with all these "facts" and figures you're throwing out.
Reply
post #50 of 60
11/14/10 at 12:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
On the good side, he didn't throw up on the Japanese Prime Minister, either.

You take your victories where you can, in the political world!
Well there is that.
Reply
post #51 of 60
11/14/10 at 7:07am
Here's the Snopes take on it:

Cost of the President's Trip
Reply
post #52 of 60
11/14/10 at 6:39pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by clixpix View Post
Does gazillion come after a billion? Or 200 million a day, or what? I'm getting confused with all these "facts" and figures you're throwing out.
My point is that it doesn't matter how much it did or didn't cost, it was wasted money if he couldn't bring home the "done deal" which he clearly did not.
Reply
post #53 of 60
11/14/10 at 10:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
My point is that it doesn't matter how much it did or didn't cost, it was wasted money if he couldn't bring home the "done deal" which he clearly did not.
Oh, now it doesn't matter what it cost? It seemed to matter quite a bit to you just a short while ago...in fact, that was the entire reason you started the thread. You called it a "boondoggle"...more than once...claiming he went just because he could. At least now you agree that he did have an agenda to go there, but now you're beside yourself because he didn't, as you've said twice, "bring home the 'done deal'". You also twice took the opportunity to state that you're sorry he's the one who broke the color barrier in the presidency. Seriously, if he had "brought home the 'done deal"', you probably would have figured out something else to be irate about.
Reply
post #54 of 60
11/15/10 at 7:50am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by clixpix View Post
Oh, now it doesn't matter what it cost? It seemed to matter quite a bit to you just a short while ago...in fact, that was the entire reason you started the thread. You called it a "boondoggle"...more than once...claiming he went just because he could. At least now you agree that he did have an agenda to go there, but now you're beside yourself because he didn't, as you've said twice, "bring home the 'done deal'". You also twice took the opportunity to state that you're sorry he's the one who broke the color barrier in the presidency. Seriously, if he had "brought home the 'done deal"', you probably would have figured out something else to be irate about.
You're right. I hate the bas***d. Is that what you want me to say? I admit it. I didn't post those numbers all over the internet, and I can't be responsible if a reputable news source had it wrong. Nonetheless, he's a disaster as a president. Funny thing is, even some die-hard Democrats are beginning to believe it. He's the most unpopular President since Nixon. I can only hope he is a one-term president. Never thought I would say it, but even Biden would be an improvement. I have every reason to believe that Hillary had the nomination stolen from her by Obama and his thieving operatives. She would have been a much better choice.
Reply
post #55 of 60
11/15/10 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
You're right. I hate the bas***d. Is that what you want me to say? I admit it. I didn't post those numbers all over the internet, and I can't be responsible if a reputable news source had it wrong. Nonetheless, he's a disaster as a president. Funny thing is, even some die-hard Democrats are beginning to believe it. He's the most unpopular President since Nixon. I can only hope he is a one-term president. Never thought I would say it, but even Biden would be an improvement. I have every reason to believe that Hillary had the nomination stolen from her by Obama and his thieving operatives. She would have been a much better choice.
You are not alone. More of us hope he is a one term president. While I have not lost a lot of love for Mrs. Clinton, I would rather have seen her in the White House.
Reply
post #56 of 60
11/15/10 at 9:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
You're right. I hate the bas***d. Is that what you want me to say? I admit it. I didn't post those numbers all over the internet, and I can't be responsible if a reputable news source had it wrong. Nonetheless, he's a disaster as a president. Funny thing is, even some die-hard Democrats are beginning to believe it. He's the most unpopular President since Nixon. I can only hope he is a one-term president. Never thought I would say it, but even Biden would be an improvement. I have every reason to believe that Hillary had the nomination stolen from her by Obama and his thieving operatives. She would have been a much better choice.
wow, hate sure is a strong word as is the other- so why do you hate him so much? what exactly has he done to ruin your life?

and as far him being the most umpopular president since Nixon, I'm not really sure where you're getting that from
For example, it appears that Bush's popularity ratings bounced around between 20 and 50% (mostly in the lower range) for the last 3 years of his presidency
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
as of TODAY:
Quote:
Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll
and Nixon looked had very good ratings until the Watergate scandal broke, and even he wasn't ever as low as Harry Truman
http://online.wsj.com/public/resourc...pp0605-31.html
(that last link is pretty nifty, you can see all the presidents from the last 60 yrs)

*disclaimer* I google things, so whether the site I linked to is GOP or Democrat I have absolutely no idea

As far as President Obama not having any luck with S. Korea in regards to China, wow, what a surprise. Most countries are not going to stand up to China at this point in time; as a country, China has the economic power to crush pretty much whomever they want, including us which is why we need help with these issues. How did the trip go in India? S. Korea wasn't the only place he visited
Reply
post #57 of 60
11/15/10 at 12:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemae1277 View Post
How did the trip go in India? S. Korea wasn't the only place he visited
It went pretty well, apparently.
Obama dances with India to bigger trade deals
Quote:
Business contracts worth US$10 billion (RM31 billion) were signed. They include private airliner Kingfisher buying 33 Boeings. The government bought 100 engines for its light combat aircraft from General Electric, ending a long search.

The relationship is no longer one-sided: India gives something in return for what it gets. For Obama, emerging from a political debacle back home, these contracts generate 54,000 jobs.

Indian outsourcing is costing American jobs.

The Obama administration believes a closer economic relationship will lead to greater orders of American products that should generate employment in the US.

Read more: Obama dances with India to bigger trade deals http://www.nst.com.my/articles/25mhi...#ixzz15NssUcIq

Obama Visit: Mega Defence Deals and Export Controls Lifted
Quote:
As per the White House statement, India and the US have finalised agreements on two lucrative defence deals worth nearly $5 billion. Firstly, US aviation major Boeing and the Indian Air Force (IAF) have reached a preliminary agreement on the purchase of ten C-17 Globemaster III military transport aircraft. The second major development is that India has also declared the lowest bidder and selected the US-based General Electric Company for a contract to provide the Indian Aeronautical Development Agency with 107 F414 engines to be installed on the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA). The defence deal related to ten C-17 Globemaster III military transport aircraft is valued at approximately $4.1 billion and the deal for General Electric engines for Tejas LCA is around $820 million.
The $4.1-billion for ten C-17 Globemaster-III giant strategic airlift aircraft is the biggest Indo-US defence deal and is expected to get even bigger since India may well order another six C-17s after the first ten aircraft. IAF chief Air Chief Marshal P V Naik has indicated that after evaluating the performance of the ten C-17s, a decision to order another six will be taken.


Obama wins India business

Quote:
President Barack Obama announced $10 billion in business deals on Saturday...The $10 billion in deals will support 54,000 jobs in the United States, White House aide Michael Froman said.
Reply
post #58 of 60
11/15/10 at 6:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
You're right. I hate the bas***d. Is that what you want me to say? I admit it. I didn't post those numbers all over the internet, and I can't be responsible if a reputable news source had it wrong. Nonetheless, he's a disaster as a president. Funny thing is, even some die-hard Democrats are beginning to believe it. He's the most unpopular President since Nixon. I can only hope he is a one-term president. Never thought I would say it, but even Biden would be an improvement. I have every reason to believe that Hillary had the nomination stolen from her by Obama and his thieving operatives. She would have been a much better choice.
My point is that where he is concerned, you aren't able to employ objectivity. You've "hated" him since the first, and the vitriol you use when talking about him, and the lack of objectivity diminishes (in my mind) the veracity of any argument you're trying to make. Also, you can be quite insulting to those who believe differently from you...I don't remember which thread, but I know I've addressed that before. When you use phrases like "thieving operatives", your I lose respect for whatever point you attempt to make. That is only my opinion, and take on your words and tone.

I do like Obama, and I don't think he can be categorized as a "disaster". However, I don't idolize him (as some would accuse anyone who voted for him), I do think he has made mistakes, as have all presidents, and far less than his predecessor IMO (whom I fervently prayed was going to be a one-termer, btw).
Reply
post #59 of 60
11/15/10 at 8:21pm
Thread Starter 
I didn't agree with everything Bush did either. But I'm willing and even anxious to read his book to get a better understanding of the world through his eyes. Whether or not you agree with him, I have no doubt that every decision he made was what he felt was in the best interests of the country, and based on the intelligence available at the time. I see him as likable and sincere.

It might surprise you to know that I voted for Clinton TWICE, and I also believe his decisions were made in what he felt were for the best interests of our country. I was HUGELY disappointed about the Lewensky fiasco, and felt that he dishonored his office and the house of the people (White House). But I never felt that his political decisions were clouded by ego and self-interest.

Unfortunately I can't say the same about Obama. I think he is an arrogant, egotistical, self-serving snob whose main concern is about his life after the White House and not about what is best for the American people. Interestingly I'm not alone in these beliefs which are shared by many Democrats, Doug Schoen being the most vocal about it. If you haven't read this, it is worth a few minutes of your time. Nothing this man reports surprises me in the least, and if his account is factual, many of his insiders will be leaving like rats deserting a sinking ship.
Reply
post #60 of 60
11/16/10 at 9:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
You're right. I hate the bas***d. Is that what you want me to say? I admit it. I didn't post those numbers all over the internet, and I can't be responsible if a reputable news source had it wrong.
If you hate him, you hate him, it's hard to argue with someting that subjective. But the fact is, you did post those numbers on the internet, right in the title you chose for the thread, thus contributing to the spread of misinformation. And I didn't see any "reputable news source" that had published those numbers, just another right wing blog accountable to no one..
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Obama goes to India/3000 people, 40 airplanes, $200,000,000 a day!