Thread: Obama camp furious!

Now are you guys aware of the Clinton estate in New York?
It's my understanding, from several different sources that The Clintons are renting out their guest house to the secret service. As a former presidential family, they are entitled to have secret service protection for the rest of their lives... If my information is correct, they are charging the secret service $8,000.00 a month for the right to use the guest house on their estate... in order to protect them...
The secret service doesn't have a right to negotiate or argue the price, or refuse them protection, they are entitled to this protection. It seems to me that the Clintons should be grateful for this protection, and would not feel the need to charge our government for this service.
There's a twist to this though, Why would Bill and Hillary need an extra $8000 a month? Is it a coincidence that their house payment is around $8000/ month?

It looks to me like the Clintons are using our tax dollars to buy their New York estate. Legal? yes... Ethical? I say no

Fallout, what happened to your post? I was going to reply to it, but it just disappeared!

Originally Posted by JMS

Fallout, what happened to your post? I was going to reply to it, but it just disappeared!

It's a vast democratic conspiracy

Originally Posted by Mike_ratliff

Now are you guys aware of the Clinton estate in New York?
It's my understanding, from several different sources that The Clintons are renting out their guest house to the secret service. As a former presidential family, they are entitled to have secret service protection for the rest of their lives... If my information is correct, they are charging the secret service $8,000.00 a month for the right to use the guest house on their estate... in order to protect them...
The secret service doesn't have a right to negotiate or argue the price, or refuse them protection, they are entitled to this protection. It seems to me that the Clintons should be grateful for this protection, and would not feel the need to charge our government for this service.
There's a twist to this though, Why would Bill and Hillary need an extra $8000 a month? Is it a coincidence that their house payment is around $8000/ month?

It looks to me like the Clintons are using our tax dollars to buy their New York estate. Legal? yes... Ethical? I say no

Two seconds of fact-checking would have determined that you're wrong. The Clintons haven't accepted a dime from Secret Service. Their arrangement is no different than any other (surviving) previous POTUS.

Believe what you want, but make sure your "facts" aren't just politically-motivated garbage. People on all sides need to take the hate-blinders off. I find it sad that many American's entire political beliefs are determined solely by email chain letters, costumes, and the all-important middle name. Chill out, relax. Go get a massage.

Originally Posted by jaegerhund

So where do you draw the line? Are we voting for a leader of a nation or just some robot who manages things without addressing his personal inclinations and beliefs? I don't know where to draw the line on this one. If I see that a presidential candidate has a poster of Karl Marx, or some Communist revolutionary on his office wall -- I might think a little ----If I see a presidential candidate attend white supremacist organizations or has Hitler posters on his wall, I might think a little ------- Is it the total package or do you think a person can be a president without being affected by his religious beliefs, personal life, etc ------ where do you draw the line.

Justin

I see your point, but you don't see these things.
Anything 'personal' you see about the candidates has been professionally groomed and evaluated to determine in advance how they will influence the voter.

When I vote for someone, my vote is based on a) if they give me the impression of being honest and b)how they will do their job.
I don't care about their beliefs, nor do I care about their marital status, or even if they are gay or not, or smoked pot as a teen.

Originally Posted by Bruno

I see your point, but you don't see these things.
Anything 'personal' you see about the candidates has been professionally groomed and evaluated to determine in advance how they will influence the voter.

When I vote for someone, my vote is based on a) if they give me the impression of being honest and b)how they will do their job.
I don't care about their beliefs, nor do I care about their marital status, or even if they are gay or not, or smoked pot as a teen.

You should listen to some of what that alleged "pastor" has said. If he was white and said that about blacks he would be in jail for inciting racial hatred, and threatening insurrection against the government. If Obama believes even a fraction of what he has heard his judgment is seriously flawed and his honesty is right out the window.

Why we put up with this behavior just because someone is a "minority" is beyond me.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

You should listen to some of what that alleged "pastor" has said. If he was white and said that about blacks he would be in jail for inciting racial hatred, and threatening insurrection against the government. If Obama believes even a fraction of what he has heard his judgment is seriously flawed and his honesty is right out the window.

Why we put up with this behavior just because someone is a "minority" is beyond me.

Moreover, while I was watching the video, I was wondering what if "rich white man (men)" was changed to "rich Jewish men" or "the Zionist" ----- I know that white guys can be made the scapegoat of anything without much of a flinch by the media, but if such a substitution was made, I think the racism and bigotry in his statements would be much more obvious. Let a white candidate have a white pastor (that he considers a mentor) say such a thing, i.e., the Jewish money owners with their greedy little hands are responsible for the sorry situation of white people and see how long his race for presidency would last --- not very long and rightly so. I don't know what Obama's true feeling are --- and all of this makes me wonder ---- he screwed up by being associated with this guy for sure.

Today, there was plenty of news coverage on this and Obama's speech to explain himself and this situation. First of all, initially, he claimed he was not aware of such sermons by his pastor --- now he's saying he knew about them but did not agree with them. Hmm.

Juan Williams said something interesting about how Obama couldn't separate himself from this preacher because it was his only tie to the "black community" ---that is Obama, being a very privileged fellow, went to private schools in Hawaii (no real association with the "black community" there), went to Columbia and Harvard (considered fairly white bread stuff by most) and joined this church as a somewhat superficial connection to the supposed black community --- if he disconnects himself from this guy, he thinks he might disconnect himself from all of black America --- as if all black folks think this preacher is right --hmm ------interesting --- maybe, maybe not ---but interesting.

Justin

Originally Posted by Alexander

Two seconds of fact-checking would have determined that you're wrong. The Clintons haven't accepted a dime from Secret Service. Their arrangement is no different than any other (surviving) previous POTUS.

Believe what you want, but make sure your "facts" aren't just politically-motivated garbage. People on all sides need to take the hate-blinders off. I find it sad that many American's entire political beliefs are determined solely by email chain letters, costumes, and the all-important middle name. Chill out, relax. Go get a massage.

Okay, i'll concede to that one... the place I read it seemed reputable enough... It doesn't change the fact that Hillary is 1 a lawyer... 2 has been involved in numerous scandals She is the only First Lady ever called to testify before a Grand Jury inquiry... 3 she voted for the Iraq war... she now says as president she wouldn't have started this war, but she voted for it... 4 The clintons both Bill and Hillary have a long documented habit of obstructing justice. I think the word that fits here is "dishonesty"
I can't find it in my heart to trust Hillary any more than Bill "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Clinton.

if you still have questions about Hillary, read this...

Originally Posted by Wildtim

What does it say about a guy when ... staff that managed to piss off the Canadian government.

Oh now you know you're in trouble if you've pissed of the Canucks.

X

i just happened to check in on this forum.
Funny--my impression of folks from reading their posts on just the shave-related topics is one thing; and then when I see the same folks posting their strongly-held political views on this part of the board, if they are from a different political point of view than me, I can't but help feeling a little less "warm and fuzzy" about them. That's why I'm not a big proponent of including this type of political discussion on what I think should be a board devoted to shaving and non-political topics. Sorry--but if you're posting some really strong rhetoric that rankles me, I not going to feel the same way about you, on a gut level, than if I think you're "with me".