On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Vivec wrote:
> I disagree.
> Your lives have already changed for the better having elected Obama just by
> way of that act.
Well, we sure THINK it has, because we THINK we elected the right
person...so far so good, in my opinion, but only time will tell.
You
> gMoney wrote:
> Peoples' daily lives will change very little between today and
> tomorrowand I hope they understand that.
>
I think it was FDR that said that Americans could "take it right on
the chin" as long as you told them like it is, didn't lie, and told
them what they had to do.
So fa
I disagree.
Your lives have already changed for the better having elected Obama just by
way of that act.
You have started the little rock down the snow bank, and it will begin to
pick up speed and hopefully turn into an avalanche that will crash through
a lot of the racism and bigotry which you say
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> I'm having a hard time being cynical about people who are so excited
> about their country.
>
> If any of this drives more people to serve (I know I will be) then
> it's all for the good.
>
A certain level of excitement is definitely warrant
> Scott wrote:
> What is priceless is the interviews CNN is doing with people down at the
> mall in DC. Comedy gold.
>
I'm having a hard time being cynical about people who are so excited
about their country.
If any of this drives more people to serve (I know I will be) then
it's all for the good
What is priceless is the interviews CNN is doing with people down at the
mall in DC. Comedy gold.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Vivec wrote:
> I think Americans should be happy it didn't cost more, and would be remiss
> not to capitalise fully on this historic occasion.
> This moment is price
Not as priceless as this:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=VZR1O-eio8Y
-Original message-
From: Vivec gel21...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:58:17 -0500
To: cf-community cf-community@houseoffusion.com
Subject: Re: Why Obama's inauguration costs so much more than Bush's
I think Americans should be happy it didn't cost more, and would be remiss
not to capitalise fully on this historic occasion.
This moment is priceless.
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release
Isn't it more like comparing a handful of apples to a crate full of apples?
>
>
> It is really a rather simple case of comparing apples and oranges.
>
>
--
Scott Stroz
Some people are like slinkies...not really good for anything but they bring
a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs.
As has everyone in the national media for the last week, big deal. Like you
took the time to pour through the budgets and come up with the tallies on
your own. The irony is that even similar money would be spent on the Obama
inauguration after Democrats complained so bitterly about the costs in 200
> Judah wrote:
> The major point of the article was a quite simple one. The numbers
> that are being floated originating from "conservative" circles
Dude. Number management from conservative circles brought us to the
brink of systemic economic collapse so why would trust any numbers
that come fro
Hmm..No, you seem to be utterly and completely wrong. Or you've been
taking reading lessons from Sam. No, that's just rude, I shouldn't say
things like that, I apologize.
The article does mention that the costs for the Obama inauguration are
not entirely known. That fact, in and of itself, would s
No one knows what Obama's inauguration is going to cost until the books are
settled. The article, such as it is, is not an exploration of facts but a
rant about how awful those darn conservatives are. I agree that if we are
going to make comparisons, we need to compare the same things. I'll wait fo
a) I don't actually consider myself a liberal
b) I don't know what thread you are talking about so I apparently wasn't in it.
Just the facts, ma'am is there something erroneous or
misrepresented in what Judah is talking about? On the other post..
well. One thing at a time.
On Mon, Jan 19, 200
You liberals crack me up.
In another thread some information was posted form an organization whose
'About Us' page said something about fighting the liberla bias in the media
and you all claimed the site could not be trusted as fact because of that.
But I guess its only factual when it supports y
um are we not looking at a case of conservative
misinformation? Perhaps I amnot seeing something here, so please feel
free to explain.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> Facts? From a site whose 'About Us' page states the following:
>
> *Media Matters for America* is a
Facts? From a site whose 'About Us' page states the following:
*Media Matters for America* is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3)
progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively
monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the
U.S. media.
You w
> Which is probably why our
> friends at Fox and Drudge go for $160 million instead.
Damn it Judah, stop confusing the issue with FACTS!!!
LOL
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher
~~~
The real reason why it costs so much more? Surprise! It..err...doesn't
actually cost much more. Probably just inflation really.
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200901170003?f=h_top
Turns out that it is a wonderful media case of apples vs oranges. The
numbers being cited for Bush are about 42 mill
19 matches
Mail list logo
