Thread: This Is Not A CraigsList Notice

Tweet

It does not matter who is the POTUS, they all do or did the same thing.

My issue is why does the POTUS get to use our money for his protection, transportation, ect. while he is campaigning.
Even if he is paying for everything thru campaign contributions (which I don’t think so), we are paying him to be the POTUS, not for him to be campaigning for a job.

Being from Illinois, when HE was running for the US Senate, the republican candidate was Allen Keyes??? who even wasn't from Illinois(Delaware I think) so OBama was guaranteed to be elected ---------even I voted for him as HE was from Illinois-----Keyes wasn't-----

Soooooooooo, he campaigned for President for 2 years, got elected and now I feel that the 6 years I helped send him to Washington is OVER-------he can go back to being an usher for Wright

Originally Posted by stovens

Just because we don't like the current POTUS, doesn't mean he doesn't need protection. If he decided to forego Air Force one, and use a suburban, it would make it a bit easier for all the nut jobs out there to take him out. I think we'd all agree that if any POTUS was shot or killed it would not help our current economic situation, and as much as it PAINS ME to say this, anybody holding this office deserves protection for themselves and their families. I agree the costs are obsurd, but in order to do his job, he does need to travel.(maybe not so often, though! )

Regardless of who the President is, the same travelling circus goes with him everywhere he goes. The Secret Service is bound by law with the protection of the President, Vice President, visiting dignitaries from other countries, etc. It costs the taxpayers a fortune, and I doubt any President likes having to travel this way everywhere he goes!!!! It's just another case of government spending being totally out of control. The Secret Service, Department of Defense, and all the rest of the programs that were originally designed with a purpose have fell victim to some bureaucrat going crazy with his own authority and making plans and programs without any consideration to the cost to the taxpayer!!!! The President can not travel without the Secret Service. Period. Just another version of attacking the messenger instead of the message!!!!

Dave, it isn't about the secret service who guard him, his family, etc----

Its about the over abundance of traveling all around in zig zag patterns causing total disruption of ALL other air travel so he can go direct, point to point while everybody else is grounded, delayed, rerouted so they can fly in helos, suburmans, ambulance, etc---------it costs $3000 per minute to operate the B747 AF1---------plus the C-17s, helos, etc-----------

Once nominated The Secret service is required to protect the opposing nominee also, So its not just the potus .

Yeah, and it's been that way for years!!! This trip to Chicago certainly wasn't any first time deal!!! I heard when President Reagan flew into the NASCAR race way back when Petty was finishing his career that air traffic up and down the East Coast was shut down and or delayed for the entire day!!!!! As I said, the President doesn't set this stuff up, some silly bureaucrat that has zero consideration of the costs does it all.... Certainly not the only nor the biggest example of fraud, waste, and abuse of our tax dollars that we get jammed down our throats every day.... I agree that it's a money wasting bunch of bs.....but who out in Washington wants to do ANYTHING to curtail any forms of fraud, waste, and abuse??? Heck, the Oversight committees higher outside consultants to do their investigating and write reports on how much money is wasted on various projects and programs....

How many government salaries and jobs have been created with the only result being more of our tax dollars wasted??? None of this has been a first time deal just since President Obama was elected...

Map: Presidential Election Winners by County | Election 2008 | washingtonpost.com

Did any of you see how the 2008 election broke down by county????take a look----------

Yep, but I guess the most dense population is always the highest welfare recipient, therefore strongest democrat support.

Originally Posted by johnboy

...
Your country's going broke...running huge budget deficits.

Wouldn't it seem like a good idea for the politicians to practice what they preach?

And sell those 'corporate jets'?
...

You give us way too much credit

Originally Posted by firebird77clone

Yep, but I guess the most dense population is always the highest welfare recipient, therefore strongest democrat support.

That's called buying votes.

“…..Yep, but I guess the most dense population is always the highest welfare recipient, therefore strongest democrat support……”

In all fairness it wasn’t/isn’t necessarily always that way. Your population centers USED to have a concentration of industry which in the majority of cases are/were unionized. Union workers are traditionally a large
democratic voting bloc, something that has been passed down from generation to generation.

When the factories started shutting down or relocating the unemployment/welfare rate soared. So you NOW have a traditionally Democratic areas that are dependent on the party that promises to give them the most…..in the form government assistance.

The real long term key and what is especially important for this election is who the people believe can REALLY bring jobs back to these areas.


.

Absolutely, Mike!!! People do not go on welfare because they prefer it to making a decent wage. People don't live in the projects because they prefer it to a nice house in the country. The industries and plants shut down in the inner cities and the people stayed. Would a Republican choose to live in the street and let his family starve vs. taking a welfare check? I doubt it.... There is no one or no plan that is going to put all these folks back to work tomorrow, no matter who's President it's going to take a long time to recover from this financial catastrophe.

Sounds to me like some folks still have nothing positive to say about anything, and are already considering President Obama the winner of the election.... Better hope the Romney campaign hasn't adopted this same mindset or the election will be little more then a formality!!! Most people are just completely fed up with all the negative bs, and the one's who had not yet decided who to vote for will probably vote for the candidate offering something positive as a solution rather then the candidate spewing the most negative about the other guy....

Oh well, maybe the election is already over??? Let the childish name calling continue, and "enjoy" President Obama's next 4 years in office!!! Maybe complaining about everything folks view as bad is just easier then doing something positive to change things? Perhaps the vote by county map for 2012 will be the same as 2008? It's my opinion that the candidate who wins this election will be the candidate who has the most folks out saying good things about him and his plan to bring this country out of the present debacle and not the one spreading all the doom and gloom and bad mouthing the opposition!

Dave a common thread in a lot of your posts has been the negativity that has been so prevalent during this campaign season. I thank you for that, it has given me something to reflect on and you are absolutely right. During any presidential election with an incumbent you have a record that can be pointed to by the opposition. Of course the challenger has never held the office so it’s only best guess if he is going to make good on his campaign promises.

I personally feel that in large part that has been brought on/done by the politicians themselves and ends up as simple “trickle down” to the voting public. The reason it’s been sooo effective this year is that the majority of people on both sides do not like the direction the country is headed. I honestly feel that on both sides there are way too many people who are reading the headlines and not the article, or if they do read the article, do not search out an opposing view point…….and of course the truth normally fall somewhere in the middle.

My daughter and I had a very good conversation last week on a subject my wife had declared taboo in our house……politics (Missy and I occasionally do stuff like that just to keep her mom on her toes LOL).

Politically Missy and I are on opposite sides of the fence. We discussed the issues that are important to us and why we thought who we were voting for would be a better choice to fix them. At the end of it turns out that Missy is a lot more conservative than I thought, and I’m a lot more liberal than she gave me credit for. We actually agreed on more things than we disagreed about. There were no raised voices and in the end no hurt feelings. I didn’t change her mind, just as she didn’t change mine but in the end we better understood why.

Bottom line……..both sides also have to LISTEN…….something I wish our politicians were better at.


.

Originally Posted by herbet99

You give us way too much credit

that has to be my "Quote of the Week !" - - - - short but brilliant !

If elected president I will begin bussing unemployed/welfare receiving work age people out of the cities into the rural areas of the country---some for agriculture and some for energy and some for road/transportation routes/pipelines---

The first group will do concrete/foundation work for SIMPLE housing that the second group will build houses which of course will include electricians, plumbers, painters,roofers,etc--also within this work group event will be the construction of schools, simple places of worship, and a system of general stores for food, clothing, shoes(just like the stores back home when I was young)

When the community is pretty much complete, we will send in the resident groups that will have under going training for the jobs in the area---farming, mining, oil drilling, etc-------

We will build a road system for light traffic(no 80,000 lb trucks) for scheduled BUS service which will connect to major transport routes.

These initial jobs will all be paid about the same $$$$$ with oppertunities to move up in the skill sets---(electrician/plumber get more pay than the guy with a shovel)
People are going to be issued hard toed work boots and gloves-----------

The idea is to spread out the mountains of total ************* that these cities have become , get folks to work, kids in school,people learn some skills that aren't video games---------

But , I probably won't have enough votes to be elected---