- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
Absolutely not.
Thread to have Barack Up as the NT Banner on Tuesday!
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by pianoman52,
- Start date
- 1,850
- 25
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
nah, she's white too.
- 9,092
- 7,285
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2008
- 2,483
- 351
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
That would be ill.
sick ik 23
Banned
- 2,130
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- 13,523
- 12,460
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
Originally Posted by FlyNY
It's not being salty, as much as it's true though. I'm far from a Bush fan, but this a true fact. And anyone who doesn't see it is justblinded. This country can be hypocritical very quickly. This is one prime example.
- 8,025
- 216
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2001
If you honestly think that is a great question, you need to pick up a history book.
- 179
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
I approve!
- 3,807
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
Yes, because NT's banner variety is in the history books in the chapter following the landing at Plymouth Rock.
I say, go for it. It's just our message board, what's it going to hurt? Now, if we were to suddenly put him on the one dollar bill or something,that'd be worth arguing over.
I say, go for it. It's just our message board, what's it going to hurt? Now, if we were to suddenly put him on the one dollar bill or something,that'd be worth arguing over.
- 1,566
- 198
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2002
agreed
- 8,025
- 216
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2001
Yes, because NT's banner variety is in the history books in the chapter following the landing at Plymouth Rock.
Was this in reference to me?
- 1,941
- 297
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
What a joke. No.
- 6,709
- 103
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
Let's do it!
- 4,011
- 51
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2006
- 3,807
- 11
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
Was this in reference to me?
Yeah, but it was just sarcasm.
- 514
- 370
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2005
Is the exact swearing in at 12 o clock sharp?
- 8,025
- 216
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2001
Originally Posted by Russ tha G
Was this in reference to me?
Yeah, but it was just sarcasm.
I was about to say...comparing Bush's election victory and its relevance to history to Obama's election victory is ridiculous.
- 2,804
- 82
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
This is just a banner. You guys are acting like he is getting his face placed on Mount Rushmore or the one dollar bill (which has the first president). Thisman becoming the first black president is pretty momentous we celebrated the first white president why not the first black one?
- 152
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
I think that celebration about the first president had a lot more to do with finally being a free country and having a democratically elected leader, than thecolor of his skin. Just my guess though.
- 2,804
- 82
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
Yea you are right but there are three more presidents on that mountain but I know you get what I am trying to say
- 36,536
- 11,264
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
http://mediamatters.org/items/200901190004?f=h_tophttp://mediamatters.org/items/200901190004?f=h_top
LEARN TO LOOK UP YOUR FACTS
[h1]http://Media make false comparison of inauguration costs[/h1]
[h4]Summary: Leading up to President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in ceremony, several media outlets have advanced the claim that Obama's inauguration will cost significantly more than President Bush's 2005 inauguration. Citing "estimates" ranging from $150 million to $170 million in total costs for Obama's inaugural events, the outlets have compared the purported total costs in 2009 to the approximately $42 million in private funds spent on Bush's 2005 inauguration. However, these outlets omit the additional costs of security, transportation, and other expenses incurred by federal, state, and local governments in conjunction with the events in 2005 while including them in the projections for the 2009 events.[/h4]
Leading up to President-elect Barack Obama's January 20 swearing-in ceremony, several media outlets have advanced the claim that Obama'sinauguration will cost significantly more than President Bush's 2005 inauguration. Citing "estimates" ranging from $150 million (MSNBC) to $170million (ABC News) in total costs for Obama's inaugural events, the outlets have compared the purported total costs in 2009 to the approximately $42million in private funds spent on Bush's 2005 inauguration. However, as Media Matters for America has noted, these outlets omit the additional costs ofsecurity, transportation, and other expenses incurred by federal, state, and local governments in conjunction with the events in 2005 -- which reportedlyreached $115.5 million -- while including them in the projections for the 2009 events. Further, Media Matters senior fellow Eric Boehlert noted that many media outlets have failed to show any evidence to support their estimates.
For example, MSNBC anchor David Shuster ignored the cost of transportation and security in Bush's 2005 inauguration and provided no source for his"estimates" when he asserted during the January 19 edition of MSNBC Live: "Some estimates put the price tag [for Obama'sinauguration] as high as $150 million. That dwarfs the record $42 million spent on President Bush's celebration in 2005." During the segment, MSNBCpresented on-screen text titled "Inauguration Price Tag" that read, "2005: $42 million" and "2009: $150 million (ESTIMATE)."
A January 19 ABCNews.com article headlined "WhatRecession? The $170 Million Inauguration" detailed the costs of the 2009 inauguration:
The actual swearing-in ceremony will cost $1.24 million, according to Carole Florman, spokeswoman for the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies.
It's the security, parties and countless Porta-a-Potty rentals that really run up the bill.
The federal government estimates that it will spend roughly $49 million on the inaugural weekend. Washington, D.C., Virginia and Maryland have requested another $75 million from the federal government to help pay for their share of police, fire and medical services.
The article's author, ABC News business writer Scott Mayerowitz, compared the "roughly $45 million" in private funds raised by Obama'sinaugural committee to previous inaugurations' private funding: "That's more than the $42.3 million in private funds spent by President Bush'scommittee in 2005 or the $33 million spent for Bill Clinton's first inaugural in 1993." However, in making the comparison of privately funded costs,Mayerowitz did not compare the total cost of Bush's 2005 inauguration -- including public funds -- despite highlighting those expenses for Obama'sinauguration.
Media Matters has http://mediamatters.org/items/200901180003?f=h_tophref="http://mediamatters.org/items/200901180003?f=h_top">noted that when the costs incurred by the federal government and the District ofColumbia are factored in, the total cost of Bush's 2005 inauguration was reportedly around $157 million. The Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost...les/A22427-2005Jan19.htmlhref="http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22427-2005Jan19.html">reported in January 2005 thatthe cost of Bush's second inauguration, which the Post reported to be $40 million, "does not include the cost of a web of security, includingeverything from 7,000 troops to volunteer police officers from far away, to some of the most sophisticated detection and protection equipment." Further,The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/20...us/politics/06donors.htmlhref="http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/us/politics/06donors.html">reported on January 5 that in2005, "the federal government and the District of Columbia spent a combined $115.5 million, most of it for security, the swearing-in ceremony, cleanup andfor a holiday for federal workers."
The ABCNews.com article was featured by the conservativewebsite the Drudge Report with the headline: "WHAT RECESSION? THE $170 MILLION INAUGURATION."
From the January 19 ABCNews.com article:
- 1,635
- 47
- Joined
- May 31, 2007
1
- 11,451
- 952
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2006
doesnt matter to me either way...even though i like Obama (no lance bass)
- 2,052
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
i like that
yes let's do it.
this is history in the making rather it be good or bad.
only time will tell...
- 1,424
- 173
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
i started this thread.
hypothetically speaking, if McCain won, I think it would probably be appropriate to put a banner of him as well. NOT because it's McCain, but more becausewe should celebrate the fact that George W. Bush will no longer run this country.
That in itself is a victory for all of America.
hypothetically speaking, if McCain won, I think it would probably be appropriate to put a banner of him as well. NOT because it's McCain, but more becausewe should celebrate the fact that George W. Bush will no longer run this country.
That in itself is a victory for all of America.
Similar threads
