Group Seeks to Fund Anti-Obama Inaugural Ad

Is this necessary?

How absurd of these right wing fanatics. Obama is our president…the country is in a mess…what possible good is going to come out of such a move!

wastage of money and time…

these losers are really interested in doing what they can for the country.
It is a group backed by crooks who are worried they may have to stop robbing the American people to fill their own pockets.

What will this ad accomplish?
Spread the word that a bunch of whiners can’t accept a loss like adults.

“What will this ad accomplish?
Spread the word that a bunch of whiners can’t accept a loss like adults.”
You mean like the actions of the liberals during the 2000 and 2004 inaugurations?? Supposed “adults” booing, throwing eggs and tomatoes at the Presidential limo, spitting on Bush supporters, throwing urine on Bush supporters, holding massive “jail to the thief” signs in front of Bush supporters, thus blocking the view (and to hell with THEIR right to support their choice of President), blocking the parade route with their infantile protests, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Good to know that the libs know how to act like adults!!
/extreme sarcasm!

Bush wins 51% of the popular vote and the nation is divided with many stating Bush is “not their President.”
Obama wins with 52% of the popular vote (which cost him over $600 MILLION DOLLARS by the way) and the nation is some how united and everyone should come together for THEIR PRESIDENT.
I cannot tell if these people are brainwashed, stupid, ignorant, or some how a combination of all three.

GOP “lady” – Bush deserved it. He’s a crook, a liar, and a stupid, stupid man who is responsible for murdering our kids in Iraq as well as the tens or is it now hundreds? of thousands of Iraqis to serve his infantile fantasies. Bush deserved it.

Excuse me, Muslim jihadists and their allies killed our kids in Iraq. Knowing several fellows personally who have volunteered for extra tours of duty in Iraq, nothing could be further from the truth about “who’s killing who”. These brave soldiers know their mission and have the greatest respect for President Bush as their commander-in-chief. Counting Crows doesn’t know what he is talking about.
Nobama will go down as the most hyped-up president ever—the guy who couldn’t even produce a legitimate birth certificate, keeps his kin in poverty, his hometown of Chicago has had the highest murder rate in the last two years for the whole country, he has the most questionable of associations—Rezko, Rev. Wright, Ayers, etc., and outright lied about what he has done (of significance as a “community organizer”). The list of his missteps and lack of judgment have well been documented by British and American press that haven’t been involved with Nobama’s love-fest–and the dude isn’t even president yet. Without a teleprompter or speech in front of him, he stumbles all over himself. Um, um, um…
He makes Hillary, and even Bill Clinton look good. And now he’s using OUR money for his inaugural-fest to the tune of over 140 million. Now is that what he meant by “spreading the wealth around”?! He is the real loser, and time is going to prove it once and for all.

Obama is spending 150 BILLION dollars on his inauguration. This is an insult to every American that is struggling to feed their families. Irresponsible doesn’t come close to describing the waste. Why not show leadership and use the money to feed the homeless? Maybe we can use the money to fund healthcare for those without it.
Obama should be judged harshly for his insensitivity and arrogance. In no way can this collossal waste of money be justified. Change we can believe in? I think not…
$150,000,000,000 – Insane

Alicia, is it really 150 billion?? Boy, I’m sorry I stated it as “millions”.
I guess Nobama thinks “a billion there, a billion there, it doesn’t matter, I’m in charge of my own party.” Or, “It’s my party and I’ll spend if I want to,…”

Eventhough Im a democrat, If these groups wants money I will gladly donate if they chase every member of congress from every ingugural ball watch how much they drink and party then come to the capitol not the next day but later that morning hung over and try to legislate nothing against them partying but like us regular if you come into work the next day hung over chances are you wont have job by noon lunch rush.

“Obama is spending 150 BILLION dollars on his inauguration.”
Lol!
Inaugurations are tradition in this country. And none have ever been symbolically important than this one. Find something better to whine about, this is ridiculous.

Silky: Yeah because running for President of the United States is a “relatively low stakes” affair. /s
-You are either a liar yourself or an abject moron. Juding from your commment, I believe you to be a healthy mix of both.
“Bush lied, people died.”
That seals it; you are a liar and a moron. Simpltic slogans which are LIES in and of themselves speak volumes. Bush did not lie about the war in Iraq and has been vindicated (although you do not know this because your education comes from people who are as ignorant as you are).
I suggest you rifle through the THOUSANDS of documents found and released in the last two years found in Iraq. Not only was Bush RIGHT in his action, so was BILL CLINTON, HILLARY CLINTON, and dozens of other Democrats as well as damn near every World Leader who said the same thing at the time.
-When BUSH held his inauguration, he was CRUCIFIED by the mass media as wasting money during a time of hardship and difficulty for ordinary citizens and soldiers. Now Obama is spending a hell of a lot more money and nobody is saying a damn thing.
These people (you included) are not only liars, they are hypocrites of the highest order.
I suggest you grow a brain and learn to use it. Is that enough nuance for you or are complex sentences too difficult for you to muster?
I am willing to wager you are just another ignorant college kid. I hope this is the case as Congressman Rangel is again trying to re-institute the Draft. Have fun kid.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rangel-to-reintroduce-military-draft-measure-2009-01-14.html

“When BUSH held his inauguration, he was CRUCIFIED by the mass media as wasting money during a time of hardship and difficulty for ordinary citizens and soldiers. Now Obama is spending a hell of a lot more money and nobody is saying a damn thing.”
I defended Bush on this point at the time. Inauguration is something that will always be. I have no problem with that.
“I am willing to wager you are just another ignorant college kid. I hope this is the case as Congressman Rangel is again trying to re-institute the Draft. Have fun kid.”
36 year old college-educated professional who was 1.5 miles from the WTC on 9/11 and who was born two miles from the Pentagon. So, a draft would not effect me. Although, that would be yet another fantastic item in Bush’s legacy…creating the need for a draft. Outstanding!

Hmm…disappeared, then reappeared. Mods rock! Tattlers are still lame.

“You are either a liar yourself or an abject moron. Juding from your commment, I believe you to be a healthy mix of both.”
—Why?—
I do not dare to presume the resons for your lies but I can surmize such lies stem from your categorical ignorance on the matters at hand.
—Again, I say if you can’t tell the difference, you are a fricking clown. Which, clearly, you are.—
Clearly any person who CANNOT see into a persons brain to demonstrate they are lying beyond any shadow of a doubt is a clown eh? /s
Speaking of clowns, I hired one for my kid’s birthday once. He knew there were 50 states in the union. Does this make him more or less qualified than obama for the office of President (seeing as Obama stated there were 60 states in the Union)?
—I said “relatively” low stakes. I’d say Obama’s “lies” were campaign speak.—
Running the most powerful office in the world, which gives you the keys to the most powerful Military machine the world has ever known is never an affair with “relatively low stakes.”
I thought my sarcasm was clear enough but I suppose you lack the ability to see that for yourself. Pity.
—Bush’s lies (allowing evidence which you know to be FALSE to be sold to Congress and the world as true is lying by any reasonable analysis…sorry)–
Here are your LIES. First, Bush did no such thing and you cannot prove otherwise. Secondly, the report that Saddam was in breach of UNSCR 687 all the way up to UNSCR 1441 is prima facie evidence that Bush was not lying. Once more, I suggest you acquire an education on the matter before commenting further. Further more, I suggest you delve through the documents released by the Pentagon and DOD and other sources (released via FOI) that number in the thousands of pages with state exactly what Bush stated prior to invasion: Saddam was in breach of the UNSCR and, as such, by law, he had every right to remove him from power.
I have the links to each of these resolutions if you would like to read them (I suggest you do so immediately).
An education is key here as is the part where logical thinking comes into play. Thus the part about you being an abject moron.
—killed 4000+ Americans and countless hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.—
That was Saddam and his failure to comply with the contract he agreed to follow; not Bush.
—But please, keep defending what everybody else under the sun recognizes now as a mistake of epic proportions.—
Consensus does not make fact. Hitler marched on Europe and Mao starved tens of millions to death with the consensus of native peoples.
—Bullsh*t. He even admitted it himself last week when doing the final accounting on his presidency with the press.—
Liar. Bush said mistakes were made but he never admitted to what you claim here. Bush’s largest mistake was not defending himself with the hard evidence he had in his hands to ignorant children such as yourself.
Tell me something, how you reconcile the fact that Bill Clinton had a standing presidential policy to remove Saddam as well as his wife, many Congressional Democrats, the UNSC, and just about every major intelligence agency on earth? So much for consensus eh?
—And I don’t speak in slogans. I did not say what I said to be cute or make a rhyme…it just rhymed.—
No, you just took an ignorant slogan created by ignorant people and pushed it off to make an ignorant and fallacious statement.

In the ABC interview last month he said that he “regretted” the “intelligence failure” regarding WMDs in Iraq. So, you can argue semantics if you want, but this is flat out an admission of error.
“Further more, I suggest you delve through the documents released by the Pentagon and DOD and other sources (released via FOI) that number in the thousands of pages with state exactly what Bush stated prior to invasion: Saddam was in breach of the UNSCR and, as such, by law, he had every right to remove him from power.”
Irrelevant. The pitch to Congress and the world was WMDs. The evidence was solely testimony of “Curveball.” “Curveball’s” history of bs was not referenced at any point in the ramp up. Nice try.
My God, you are deluded. Yeah…Bush needed to be MORE arrogant. That’s the ticket. You obviously don’t know anybody who came back from Iraq physically or psychologically maimed or in a body bag. Consider yourself fortunate.
And calling me a child is rich there, huckleberry. 36, been paying taxes since I was 14, spent more than half of my adult life working for non-profits helping people who need it. How does you karmic accounting board look, Grandpa? It’s never too late to become a decent person, y’know. Santa Jesus might just reconsider.
What would Santa Jesus Bomb?

I think you might be in the wrong country, Plato.

I heard Michelle’s mom is moving into the white house. Has any other president’s wife’s MOTHER moved into the white house??? Unbelievable and who is flipping the bill for good old mom? The tax payer, you and me. Who’s next from the nobama family to move in? Give me a break. It may sound sweet now but just wait until it unfolds. You will regret your vote.

It really drives you nuts that you’re a 60 year old virgin, doesn’t it?
If you haven’t yet, see “The Dark Side” and “Bush’s War.” Then get back to me. They’re Frontline productions…non-partisan.

The bottom line is that going into Iraq was a bad idea and the evidence that sold Congress was bogus and they knew it, but Congress wasn’t privy to that fact. Cheney was not going to be satisfied until somebody said what he wanted to hear and Valarie Plame served as a very clear shot across the bow of the CIA. They manipulated Congress, and then tried to play the “intelligence failure” card. It would be laughable if not for all the fatalities. And now that the case has been proven bogus, everybody wants to justify it via other means. “We removed a dictator!” “They’re free!” NO. That was not what it was about. Never was. There are plenty of dictators in the world who we’re not risking the lives of our kids to deal with. See the Frontline series I mentioned.

Silky,
These right wing dittoheads will always be in denial. It is also a fact that right after 9/11, when Bush summoned his cabinet members to discuss a military strategy in Afghanistan, Wolfowitz brought up Iraq. From then on, they tied Iraq to Al Qaeda as ONE of their reasons to attack Iraq.
Plato’s claim that Congress also went for the war is true, but his dishonesty and his ala Hannity type of argument is beyond idiotic and simplistic. While it’s true that Congress voted for the war, it is also true that they were not privy to classified documents. The people who voted for the war was deliberately DECEIVED by this president, and the Vice President!
Right wing moronic ignorant self-righteous dittoheads are just that, lol. Although I will say that the left wing looney tunes are no better than their right wing moronic counterpart :-)

Alicia said:
Obama is spending 150 BILLION dollars on his inauguration. This is an insult to every American that is struggling to feed their families. Irresponsible doesn’t come close to describing the waste. Why not show leadership and use the money to feed the homeless? Maybe we can use the money to fund healthcare for those without it.
Obama should be judged harshly for his insensitivity and arrogance. In no way can this collossal waste of money be justified. Change we can believe in? I think not…
$150,000,000,000 – Insane
—————————————-
Feed the homeless, and this coming from a far right wing lunatic? I thought you hypocritical compassionate conservatives do not believe in handouts? Remember the likes of O’Reilly and Hannity unsympathetic to the homeless and hungry people? They keep saying that it is their fault that they are homeless/hungry.
The $600 billion dollars that Bush spent on the war, based on lies, in Iraq is nothing compare to Obama’s $150 million inaugauration. By they way, it’s million.. not billion, ya moronic turd, lol!
Bush should have spent that $600 billion to feed the poor in the US, modernizing schools, bridges, infrastructure instead of having over 4,000 US soldiers killed and thousands of Iraqi civilians.
You condemn Obama with a $150 millions spending on his inaugauration (without anybody getting killed) yet you turn the other eye on Bush’s $600 billion spending in the Iraq war which killed thousands of Americans and Iraqi civilians. Oh, by the way, you moronic dimwits never mention Iraqi civilian casualties because to them they do not count. Your hypocrisy and sheer stupidity/ignorance knows no bounds.
Posted by: alicia | Jan 14, 2009 11:57:01 PM

—Feed the homeless, and this coming from a far right wing lunatic?—
Check the charitable donations given by “right wingers” compared to “left wingers.” Which group consistently give more? I’ll give you a hint; it is not the “left wing.”
—I thought you hypocritical compassionate conservatives do not believe in handouts? Remember the likes of O’Reilly and Hannity unsympathetic to the homeless and hungry people? They keep saying that it is their fault that they are homeless/hungry.—
Somebody else made them homeless? Nobody gave me my home. Nobody gives me food. I have to EARN WHAT I HAVE. What makes them different than me?! If they
—The $600 billion dollars that Bush spent on the war, based on lies, in Iraq is nothing compare to Obama’s $150 million inaugauration. By they way, it’s million.. not billion, ya moronic turd, lol!—
What about the DEMOCRAT Congressmen who approved that money YEAR AFTER YEAR? Congress, NOT THE PRESIDENT, appropriates MONEY. It is ILLEGAL for the President to appropriate MONEY. What say you to that eh? The Democrats have controlled the congress for a few years now and the war still goes on. They still keep appropriating the money. Why is that?
—Bush should have spent that $600 billion to feed the poor in the US, modernizing schools, bridges, infrastructure instead of having over 4,000 US soldiers killed and thousands of Iraqi civilians.—
More soldiers died from George H. Bush to Bill Clinton than the ENTIRE 8 years of the Bush presidency. Do those soldiers lives not matter worth a damn because they died in places other than Iraq?
—You condemn Obama with a $150 millions spending on his inaugauration (without anybody getting killed) yet you turn the other eye on Bush’s $600 billion spending in the Iraq war which killed thousands of Americans and Iraqi civilians. Oh, by the way, you moronic dimwits never mention Iraqi civilian casualties because to them they do not count. Your hypocrisy and sheer stupidity/ignorance knows no bounds.—
Take a civics class and get an education on how money flows through the federal government.

—Although you did not link Obama’s inaugauration costs to americans losing their jobs—
Really, so now you admit this to be true despite the fact your previous post ASSUMED that I had done EXACTLY THAT. So, where you being disingenuous or were you simply ignorant?
—you said “This during a time where record numbers of Americans are losing their jobs and their homes. What a guy eh?” What were you trying to imply then?—
Well, the man says all of us need to gird our loans and do our part, pay our share to get out of this economic crisis and yet he asks for MORE money to celebrate parties to himself. He already has an example of what a President should do during a time of economic hardship (which would at least be consistent with the attacks against BUSH) in the example of F.D.R.
Quote:—New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Democrat, suggested inaugural parties should be scaled back, citing as a precedent Roosevelt’s inauguration during World War II.
“President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake,” according to a letter from Weiner and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. “During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified.”…—
Is this really so difficult to understand? Must I hold your hand the entire way?
— I was just try to follow your logic which, in this case, was a complete fallacy.—
Really? You failed to understand what I said and now you claim my logic to be fallacious? Did you think before you posted that?
Furthermore, you stated, explicitly, that I was using logical fallacies in my arguments. I asked you a simple question: which logical fallacies were used? Why have you failed to answer this SIMPLE question?
—As for your last question, as to why would Obama need $600 million to win the election if Bush and the republicans were hated. You thought you’re pretty clever, eh? I can guarantee you that the right wing dittoheads will imitate your talking points, lol.—
I would rather they imitate the Left wing talking points: Lie, lie some more, lie even more, and then at the end of the day, lie again. Judging from the comments of the previous posters (yourself included) I would say this strategy has proved immensely successful.
— People contributed $600 million to the Obama Campaign because millions of people had gotten sick of the Bush and Republicans policies —
…but why? If they really hated Bush and did not want Bush’s third term (McSame) then why donate money at all? You do not need to spend money to inform people of something they already know (no more Bush).
—(Before you start blaming congress, please remember that the Republicans were the majority of the firstsix years; and the Democrats within the past two years only),—
Who was the senate majority leader in Decenber of 2001?
When the Democrats took their “official” majorities in the Congress, why did the funding for the war continue if the people truly wanted it halted?
–and they wanted change so much hence, every single person who donated, rich and poor alike, wanted to make sure that they beat the Republican money machines and their big corporate donors.—
Have you looked at the official accounting of OBama’s reported donations?
–I do ,however, admit that I am a vitriolic liberal but at least I am not a right wing, self-righteous, idiotic, hypocritical neothug, lol.—
You are an ignorant pawn. You parrot the ideas of other people with out understanding what you say or why you say what you say and, whats more, you are actually proud of this fact.
Well this age of ignorance is going to come crashing down very soon and the reality you will be exposed to will not be pleasant. Mark my words on that boyo.

The sexual repression in this guy is frightening.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

“—See “The Dark Side” and “Bush’s War” then report back to the class. Reading the transcripts will suffice—.
UNSCR 687: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
UNSCR 1441: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2002/SC7564.doc.htm
Read up boyo and enjoy the free education.”
Congress would not have authorized the invasion based on those alone. No way.

See “The Dark Side” and “Bush’s War.” Principles go on the record. It’s the closest look you’ll find so far at what was going on. In the words of people who were in room, and if not, were in the bullpen.

“You are welcome to think that all you like but the reality of the situation is simple: THEY DID.”
Yeah, after being led to believe that there was an imminent threat of Saddam’s aquisition of nuclear weapons. These mobile labs were known to have been bogus PRIOR TO THE VOTE!

“What, exactly, do you think “final opportunity” means?”
If you’re going to reference security council resolutions, you need to consider the position of the security council. They were, for good reason, firmly against going in at the time.
And Congress still has to okay it. And we all know they were duped into okaying it. The resolution violations alone weren’t nearly enough for them.

There is really no reason for this he is going to our President and there is nothing we can do about it and that is a fact.
Collect your money to help people that really need the help not for something that will make out Country bad in the eyes of the World.
He will fall on his face all by himself without raising money.

As for those “bogus” mobile labs and other WMD programs, go here:
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/UNMOVIC%20UDI%20Working%20Document%206%20March%2003.pdf

—Doesn’t matter. It’s a security council resolution—
You obviously did not read the resolution.
You obviously do not understand the ramifications of that resolution.
Do you even know what a cease-fire agreement is and what can happen if the agreement is violated?
Oh and it does matter because the U.S. Congress used it, as well as Bush, as further justification to support the war. Yes, the Congress did support the war and Yes, the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS STILL SUPPORTS THE WAR. I don’t care what they say when they continue to FUND the action they are supporting it.
When the Congress wanted to end the Vietnam War, a war escalated by a Democrat and ended by a Republican, they cut off funds to Saigon. It did not take long for the NVA to overtake the SVA.
— The security council was firmly against going in. They had more information than when the resolution was drafted.—
ANSWER THE QUESTION PLEASE: what does “one final opportunity” mean?!
—That Congress was duped?—
The Congress had the same intel the UNSC had which was the same intel the CIA had which was the same intel the Bush admin had… were they “duped” or did they lie?
—Doesn’t matter. They weren’t voting on whether he was in violation of UNSCR 687.—
YES THEY WERE. That is the POINT OF THE WAR. The war was fought because Saddam was in violation of the cease fire which was 687. 1441 was a final opportunity for compliance from Saddam. Do you understand? Did you even bother to even ask these questions before you made up your mind on this matter or did you merely believe what somebody else told you?
—No, it wasn’t—
So how exactly are the soldiers in Iraq fighting with bullets and gas when they lack the funds to buy such things? Oh wait; they have the funds because the Congress continues to provide funds.
If they FUND it they SUPPORT it. It really is that simple.
—The bogus Curveball testimony was what made them vote the way they did. It was EVERYTHING. Everything. Nobody cared about the resolutions.—
YOU, CNN, and other people who prefer to ignore the reality of the situation.
Why do you refuse to answer my questions!?
Is it because you cannot or because you refuse to do so?
Once more, did Saddam have ZERO WMD or did he have 0>x>y WMD?

“—Doesn’t matter. They weren’t voting on whether he was in violation of UNSCR 687.—
YES THEY WERE.”
NO THEY WEREN’T. He WAS in violation. Nobody disputed that. They were voting on whether or not to actually invade. HUGE difference. Having the justification via a UN resolution does not mean it’s the right thing to do. They were voting on whether it was the right thing to do.

The “right thing to do” is YOUR OPINION and both Republicans and Democrats (including Bill Clinton and the UNSC) decided that enforcement of the UNSC Resolutions was the “right thing to do”.
The vote on whether or not to invade was the vote on Saddam’s compliance or non-compliance with the UNSCR and the Cease Fire.
Did the Congress vote to go to war.
YES or NO?
If your answer is YES, then by the very nature of declaring war, they Congress was agreeing that Saddam was in violation of the UNSCR which was the mechanism which gave them the legal right to do so.
This is not difficult.
This is not rocket science.
What about this concept is so difficult for you to grasp?

Yah, anybody opposed to the commander ‘n chief should keep their mouths shut, just like they did with Bush… I get it! Hypocrites the lot of ya. Chris Matthews one of the loudest voices against Bush now stated “It’s my job to make sure the Obama presidency goes smoothly.” So far his picks are infantile and filled with folks who have public and personal wrongdoing in their backgrounds.. What’s wrong with you?

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Sarah
http://www.craigslistpostingonline.info