[TheRealVille]

You said that Obama is doing a lot of work that gets blocked by the Republican party, and I answered you. Certainly you would want to respond and not be embarrassed by the facts?

He only had a "bullet proof" majority the first 12 months.

[WideRight05]

He only had a "bullet proof" majority the first 12 months.

You're wrong, but I will go along with you. Let's say he did. What about the points on Reagan and Clinton that I mentioned? I would really like to see what you have to say about the facts since you continue to dodge....

I bet you were the captain of your dodgeball team back in the day.

[Hoot Gibson]

He only had a "bullet proof" majority the first 12 months.

So, your answer is that Obama needs 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to get legislation passed? That is quite an admission on your part. :biglmao:

There is no good response to the facts that WR05 posted. Obama has shown no interest in real bipartisanship. He is a would-be ruler who is easily frustrated by the constraints placed upon him by our democratic legislative process. Yet you voted for the clown twice. At least you recognize him for what he is.

[Hoot Gibson]

Don't just about all previous Presidential kids go on big vacations? Obama is paying for their vacation.

Suppose the First Lady took the Obama girls on what was supposed to be an official business trip. Also assume that on her expense report, the Obama girls were listed as "Senior Staff." Would that be wrong and if so, would it warrant some sort of investigation? Or would you just write it off as a clerical error and ask the Obamas to reimburse Uncle Sam for their expenses?

[SKINNYPIG]

Obama works hard at campaigning/smearing those that oppose him and his agenda. He does not work hard at governing. Reagan and Clinton had a clue as how to govern with leadership. Obama can't get bipartisan results because he can't be bipartisan himself. I've seen teenagers with better leadership skills.

[TheRealVille]

So, your answer is that Obama needs 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to get legislation passed? That is quite an admission on your part. :biglmao:

There is no good response to the facts that WR05 posted. Obama has shown no interest in real bipartisanship. He is a would-be ruler who is easily frustrated by the constraints placed upon him by our democratic legislative process. Yet you voted for the clown twice. At least you recognize him for what he is.

That wasn't what I said.

[WideRight05]

That wasn't what I said.

:biglmao: You're still yet to try to debate my points!

[Hoot Gibson]

That wasn't what I said.

It is what you implied. As WR05 pointed out, Obama has been very fortunate not having to work with both a Republican-controlled House and Senate. Good presidents find common ground with the opposing party and get done what is possible. Obama is anything but a good president and he has the results to prove it.

[Hoot Gibson]

You said that Obama is doing a lot of work that gets blocked by the Republican party, and I answered you. Certainly you would want to respond and not be embarrassed by the facts?

Don't feel bad, WR5, he withdrew from the debate on the Obama girls' vacations too. BTW, the "hypothetical" scenario was not hypothetical at all. The expense report filed for Michelle's African safari trip listed the Obama daughters as "Senior Staff." So much for the Obamas paying for their own vacations. Can you imagine what the media would be reporting if Laura Bush had pulled such a stunt?

[Hoot Gibson]

Suppose the First Lady took the Obama girls on what was supposed to be an official business trip. Also assume that on her expense report, the Obama girls were listed as "Senior Staff." Would that be wrong and if so, would it warrant some sort of investigation? Or would you just write it off as a clerical error and ask the Obamas to reimburse Uncle Sam for their expenses?

It took a Freedom of Information Act request followed up with a lawsuit to pry the expense report for Michelle Obama's African safari junket, on which her daughters accompanied her as "Senior Staff" members, but Judicial Watch was finally successful. So, tell us again how Obama pays for his family's vacations, RV. How much of the tab for the First Family's vacation expenses have been picked up by taxpayers?

Unfortunately, we will probably not know the answer to that question for years, if we ever learn the truth.

[TheRealVille]

It took a Freedom of Information Act request followed up with a lawsuit to pry the expense report for Michelle Obama's African safari junket, on which her daughters accompanied her as "Senior Staff" members, but Judicial Watch was finally successful. So, tell us again how Obama pays for his family's vacations, RV. How much of the tab for the First Family's vacation expenses have been picked up by taxpayers?

Unfortunately, we will probably not know the answer to that question for years, if we ever learn the truth.

Simple. They are senior staff because they are the President's daughters. It's a simple manifest for their Presidential aircraft. Mountain or mole hill?

[Hoot Gibson]

Simple. They are senior staff because they are the President's daughters. It's a simple manifest for their Presidential aircraft. Mountain or mole hill?

So as Senior Staffers, it is appropriate for the First Daughters to have their travel expenses to an African safari paid for by the American taxpayers? Is that your position? Do you have a theory about why the administration refused to comply with a FOIA request and only provided a redacted copy of the expense report for the trip after becoming the target of a lawsuit?

The Obamas are not a royal family. The Obama children are not princesses who derive any authority from the election of the head of the family to the Oval Office. It is going to be interesting to see whether anybody will question Jake Carney about who pays for the Obamas' vacations and the African junket in particular. My guess is that it will be explained away as a "clerical error" for which the Obama family has reimbursed the federal government. OTOH, this excuse will not fly if it has been the standard practice of the Obama traveling road show.

[TheRealVille]

So as Senior Staffers, it is appropriate for the First Daughters to have their travel expenses to an African safari paid for by the American taxpayers? Is that your position? Do you have a theory about why the administration refused to comply with a FOIA request and only provided a redacted copy of the expense report for the trip after becoming the target of a lawsuit?

Does it say they were paid for, or just listed as senior staff on a Presidential aircraft? I could care less if taxpayers pay for it or not. I'm sure I paid for a bunch of Bush stuff I didn't approve of. It's how President and their family are treated.

[Hoot Gibson]

Does it say they were paid for, or just listed as senior staff on a Presidential aircraft? I could care less if taxpayers pay for it or not. I'm sure I paid for a bunch of Bush stuff I didn't approve of. It's how President and their family are treated.

I know that you could care less how much money the Obama family fleeces from American taxpayers - but you said that the Obamas personally pay for their own vacation expenses but I have proven that is not always the case. You were wrong, so instead of admitting it, you say it is no big deal. Besides, you assume (with no evidence or proof) that Bush did the same kind of thing. nicker:

[WideRight05]

Does it say they were paid for, or just listed as senior staff on a Presidential aircraft? I could care less if taxpayers pay for it or not. I'm sure I paid for a bunch of Bush stuff I didn't approve of. It's how President and their family are treated.

Come on TRV, I'm so eager for you to respond to my points earlier! You don't want to get schooled again by this Junior again, do you? :biglmao:

[TheRealVille]

I know that you could care less how much money the Obama family fleeces from American taxpayers - but you said that the Obamas personally pay for their own vacation expenses but I have proven that is not always the case. You were wrong, so instead of admitting it, you say it is no big deal. Besides, you assume (with no evidence or proof) that Bush did the same kind of thing. nicker:

Again, were they just listed as senior staff on an aircraft manifest? Does that prove that their vacations were paid for?

[TheRealVille]

So, your answer is that Obama needs 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to get legislation passed? That is quite an admission on your part. :biglmao:

There is no good response to the facts that WR05 posted. Obama has shown no interest in real bipartisanship. He is a would-be ruler who is easily frustrated by the constraints placed upon him by our democratic legislative process. Yet you voted for the clown twice. At least you recognize him for what he is.

I said he only had a super majority for 12 months.

[Hoot Gibson]

Again, were they just listed as senior staff on an aircraft manifest? Does that prove that their vacations were paid for?

They are listed in an expense report, which also includes items such as "bulk food costs." Michelle's parents were also on the "official" trip but they are listed as "Guests." You have no reasonable explanation of why the Obamas' daughters were listed as "Senior Staff," nor can you explain why the federal government resisted providing a copy of the expense report under the Freedom of Information Act. Sometimes the simplest explanations are the correct ones. The Obamas see themselves as royalty, whose actions are not subject to the laws that govern the rest of us.

[TheRealVille]

They are listed in an expense report, which also includes items such as "bulk food costs." Michelle's parents were also on the "official" trip but they are listed as "Guests." You have no reasonable explanation of why the Obamas' daughters were listed as "Senior Staff," nor can you explain why the federal government resisted providing a copy of the expense report under the Freedom of Information Act. Sometimes the simplest explanations are the correct ones. The Obamas see themselves as royalty, whose actions are not subject to the laws that govern the rest of us.

Like I said, I don't care. I paid for a bunch of Bush's kids stuff also. It's how the Presidencies work, we pay for the President's family in ALL administrations. I'll take Obama's family's vacation days money over Bush 2's any day. Did you bitch about the money Bush's kids got from you?

[WideRight05]

Like I said, I don't care. I paid for a bunch of Bush's kids stuff also. It's how the Presidencies work, we pay for the President's family in ALL administrations. I'll take Obama's family's vacation days money over Bush 2's any day. Did you bitch about the money Bush's kids got from you?

You sure about that? You'd be forking out a lot more for it.

nicker:

Answer my previous points TRV....I'm going to keep heckling you until you do. :biglmao:

[TheRealVille]

They are listed in an expense report, which also includes items such as "bulk food costs." Michelle's parents were also on the "official" trip but they are listed as "Guests." You have no reasonable explanation of why the Obamas' daughters were listed as "Senior Staff," nor can you explain why the federal government resisted providing a copy of the expense report under the Freedom of Information Act. Sometimes the simplest explanations are the correct ones. The Obamas see themselves as royalty, whose actions are not subject to the laws that govern the rest of us.

^ Show me facts about what was spent on Obama's kids. Let's hear the numbers. While you're at it, get us the Bush numbers for his family. I'll vote for any democrat for a national office before I vote republican. What's new?

[Hoot Gibson]

Like I said, I don't care. I paid for a bunch of Bush's kids stuff also. It's how the Presidencies work, we pay for the President's family in ALL administrations. I'll take Obama's family's vacation days money over Bush 2's any day. Did you bitch about the money Bush's kids got from you?

Once again, let's revisit your statement. You said that the Obamas pay for the cost of their vacations. I proved you wrong. Bush has nothing to do with the bogus entries on Michelle Obama's expense reports. Continue to dodge if you want, but you are already out of this game. nicker:

[TheRealVille]

Once again, let's revisit your statement. You said that the Obamas pay for the cost of their vacations. I proved you wrong. Bush has nothing to do with the bogus entries on Michelle Obama's expense reports. Continue to dodge if you want, but you are already out of this game. nicker:

No you didn't. You posted a picture that had them listed as senior staff on an aircraft. No proof of any money that was spent on them. Show numbers.

[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/att...1364776305]

[Hoot Gibson]

^ Show me facts about what was spent on Obama's kids. Let's hear the numbers. While you're at it, get us the Bush numbers for his family. I'll vote for any democrat for a national office before I vote republican. What's new?

Yes, and I could point you to the PDF file containing the entire travel expense report for Michelle Obama's trip to Africa, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Why should I waste more of my time?

I posted the portion of the report relevant to my point and if you want to download the PDF, then it is available on Judicial Watch's web site. You are nothing but an echo of Obama's talking points. It will surprise nobody that you could not care less about how much the Obamas bilk from taxpayers.

[Hoot Gibson]

No you didn't. You posted a picture that had them listed as senior staff on an aircraft. No proof of any money that was spent on them. Show numbers.

[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/att...1364776305]

I'll tell you what RV, if you are too lazy to download the file from Judicial Watch yourself, which I have already done, then you provide proof that President Bush charged taxpayers for vacation expenses incurred by his daughters and I will provide a link to the rest of the Obamas expense report. Fair enough?

[TheRealVille]

Yes, and I could point you to the PDF file containing the entire travel expense report for Michelle Obama's trip to Africa, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Why should I waste more of my time?

I posted the portion of the report relevant to my point and if you want to download the PDF, then it is available on Judicial Watch's web site. You are nothing but an echo of Obama's talking points. It will surprise nobody that you could not care less about how much the Obamas bilk from taxpayers.

Like I said, Bush cost taxpayers a ton that I didn't approve of. You didn't bitch about him. Obama is a lot better for America than he was. I'll take the expense.

[WideMiddle03]

Like I said, Bush cost taxpayers a ton that I didn't approve of. You didn't bitch about him. Obama is a lot better for America than he was. I'll take the expense.

da prove that obama is better 4 america then bush2

[Hoot Gibson]

Like I said, Bush cost taxpayers a ton that I didn't approve of. You didn't bitch about him. Obama is a lot better for America than he was. I'll take the expense.

I must have missed any evidence that the Bushes ever misrepresented their daughters as Senior Staffers in an expense report.

I never get tired hearing that "It's Bush's fault!" (and its close cousin, "Bush did it too!") refrain from you Obama apologists. nicker:

When that is all you've got left, then you know or should know that you have lost another debate.

Now, why don't you scamper on over to Media Matters or the White House's web site to update your explanation? They have had plenty of time to concoct a cover story by now. Surely, they have come up with something better than, "Bush did it too!"

[TheRealThing]

Yes, and I could point you to the PDF file containing the entire travel expense report for Michelle Obama's trip to Africa, but you don't even read the articles that you post yourself. Why should I waste more of my time?

I posted the portion of the report relevant to my point and if you want to download the PDF, then it is available on Judicial Watch's web site. You are nothing but an echo of Obama's talking points. It will surprise nobody that you could not care less about how much the Obamas bilk from taxpayers.

Liberals don't care about truth. They care about the contempt they have for traditional America. They'd much rather see the well poisoned for everybody than to ever allow a republican to drink. They don't care if Americans were cut loose last 9/11. They don't care if the empirical data which purports to support the theory that man made hydrocarbons cause scientifically verifiable global warming is cooked. They don't care if Mexico carries every last dollar we have back across the border. They don't care how many trillions we owe. And they don't care if maintaining our sovereignty is down into the seconds range.

All they care about is staying in power at any cost and denying republicans and conservatives the least shred of civility.

alute: 2014

[vector]

just the FACTS

http://www.politicususa.com/gop-owes-tax...ravel.html



http://whitehousetransitionproject.org/r...f%20WH.pdf




[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=554]




[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=566]