President Obama Again Criticizes Trips to Las Vegas

[Xenophon]

What about those that spend 200 on sneakers? Do you not see that as a more serious concern?

Jesus freaking Christ..

Obama talks about fiscal responsibility for those who can't afford it and Corporate junkets which get charged to the taxpayers...

He mentions Vegas, the SuperBowl and boats as an example

And you whine...."He should have included $200 sneakers, ipods, DisneyWorld......" How many freaking examples do you need? He could have listed Lexus, Rolex, Gucci and a hundred other luxuries. Who the hell cares?

He went after Corporate Junkets paid by taxpayers?

Good for him. The reason we can't afford to see the SuperBowl or other major sporting event is that Corporations bid up the prices and then write them off. Hell yes we shouldn't pay for Corporate junkets.

Come on Conservatives...show your true colors here.

Explain why taxpayers should foot the bill for Corporations to attend the Super Bowl

Show one iota of proof that 'corporations' are right now using 'taxpayer dollars' for Junkets as barry intimated in New Hamshire.

 

[rightwinger]

What about those that spend 200 on sneakers? Do you not see that as a more serious concern?

Jesus freaking Christ..

Obama talks about fiscal responsibility for those who can't afford it and Corporate junkets which get charged to the taxpayers...

He mentions Vegas, the SuperBowl and boats as an example

And you whine...."He should have included $200 sneakers, ipods, DisneyWorld......" How many freaking examples do you need? He could have listed Lexus, Rolex, Gucci and a hundred other luxuries. Who the hell cares?

He went after Corporate Junkets paid by taxpayers?

Good for him. The reason we can't afford to see the SuperBowl or other major sporting event is that Corporations bid up the prices and then write them off. Hell yes we shouldn't pay for Corporate junkets.

Come on Conservatives...show your true colors here.

Explain why taxpayers should foot the bill for Corporations to attend the Super Bowl

So tell me.....I notice you divert ...so I will make it simple....

Do you feel that more of those without money buy boats and fly to vegas...or do you feel that more without money buy 200 dollar sneakers?

Do you feel that those that have no money and buy 200 dollar sneakers believe he was talking to them or do you feel that they simply said "yeah, stop showing off your money"

First off...who gives a FUCK?

Second, since you ask. I think more Americans spend money they can't afford on Vegas (and the lottery) than $200 sneakers. I also think your obsession with $200 sneakers is directed against the poor and black. More kids waste money on video games than sneakers.

Obama was making the exact same observation about wasteful spending as you repeatedly do. He said you should spend money on the essentials before you spend money on luxuries. Vegas is a luxury, boats are a luxury. I'm sorry that he did not make a list of 12,000 luxuries so you could find the one you like

 

[Oldandtired]

When are the Obama supporters gonna get it.

He blamed the banks when people lied about their incomes and job history on their mortgage applications. Yes, I blame the banks for trusting people with NINJA loans....but where was his criticism for those that lied? Instead he called the victims.

He blamed credit card companies when people signed agreements without reading them. Yes, the companies counted on them not reading them and they deserve to be criticized...but where was the criticism for not reading the contract? Instead, they were vioctims.

And now he criticizes those that buy boats and go to vegas....you know...the ones that can afford to do those things. But where is his criticism for those that buy 200 dollar sneakers while collecting from government programs?

Seems he puts all of the onus on the responsible to act responsibly and none on the irresponsible to act responsibly

And yes, RW.....we ALL agreed with him when he criticized those that usedf tax payer dollars for their junkets....BUT THAT STOPPED MONTHS AGO.

It seems apparent to me that he refuses to criticize the irresponsible.....and will divert it and instead those that cirticize those that capitalize on the irresponsibel.

Well....he SHOULD criticize those that cpaitalize on the irrespponsible....but he MUST THEN criticize the irresponsible.

Basic logic....

ONE CANNOT CAPITALIZE ON THE IRRESPONSIBLE IF PEOPLE DO NOT ACT IRRESPONSIBLY.

 

[Oldandtired]

Jesus freaking Christ..

Obama talks about fiscal responsibility for those who can't afford it and Corporate junkets which get charged to the taxpayers...

He mentions Vegas, the SuperBowl and boats as an example

And you whine...."He should have included $200 sneakers, ipods, DisneyWorld......" How many freaking examples do you need? He could have listed Lexus, Rolex, Gucci and a hundred other luxuries. Who the hell cares?

He went after Corporate Junkets paid by taxpayers?

Good for him. The reason we can't afford to see the SuperBowl or other major sporting event is that Corporations bid up the prices and then write them off. Hell yes we shouldn't pay for Corporate junkets.

Come on Conservatives...show your true colors here.

Explain why taxpayers should foot the bill for Corporations to attend the Super Bowl

So tell me.....I notice you divert ...so I will make it simple....

Do you feel that more of those without money buy boats and fly to vegas...or do you feel that more without money buy 200 dollar sneakers?

Do you feel that those that have no money and buy 200 dollar sneakers believe he was talking to them or do you feel that they simply said "yeah, stop showing off your money"

First off...who gives a FUCK?

Second, since you ask. I think more Americans spend money they can't afford on Vegas (and the lottery) than $200 sneakers. I also think your obsession with $200 sneakers is directed against the poor and black. More kids waste money on video games than sneakers.

Obama was making the exact same observation about wasteful spending as you repeatedly do. He said you should spend money on the essentials before you spend money on luxuries. Vegas is a luxury, boats are a luxury. I'm sorry thet he did not make a list of 12,000 luxuries so you could find the one you like

Those with money buy boats
Thoise with money go to vegas
The poor buy sneakers for 200 when they can buy them for 30.
Talk to the poor. There are ways they can get out of being poor. If they spent 30 on sneakers, they would have 170 left for essentials.

Stop educating those that do not need to be taught to be responsible.\

Stop calling the irresponsible victims and start teaching them to be responsible.\

To tell a poor person not to buy a boat is a waste. they will never see it as him speaking to them. Speak to themn about what THEY buy.....it will hit home.
Basic logic RW......

 

[beowolfe]

However, the previous presidents didn't waste $250,000 just to see a play in another city.

Bush Made 77 Trips to Crawford TX at $226,072 a Pop - Democratic Underground

Bush was not pulpit pounding for people to tighten their belts either. Big difference.

He should have been. If he had, we would have a trillion dollar annual deficit. You people are amazing!! It's like Obama got elected and whatever rational thinking abilities you had took flight!!

 

[Sinatra]

Even Obama's own Democrat Party members are starting to push away from Obama's repeated inteptitude and utter lack of economic comprehension and uncertain, flaccid leadership.

We have a president, upon sending to Congress the single most irresponsible proposed federal budget in our lifetime, returning to his oft-repeated lecture mode on how Americans need to "tighten their belts" and not waste money on things like boats and Las Vegas.

Ladies and Gentlemen - and Liberals, this president is descending into full on political parody right before our eyes.

Harry Reid all but tells Obama to shut the fu-k up regarding the president's most recent anti-Vegas mumblings.
____

His statement Tuesday drew sharp criticism from Nevada lawmakers. "The President needs to lay off Las Vegas and stop making it the poster child for where people shouldn't be spending their money," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat.

President Obama Again Criticizes Trips to Las Vegas - Las Vegas Now
____

How can a president who is proposing TRILLIONS in deficit spending lecture America about spending within their own means??? Kettle meet pot, pot meet kettle...

There is true Dissorder in America's House, and so, in honor of President Obama's astounding inability to now even satisfy the leaders within his own Democrat Party, we bring you the following video from one of the too-soon-gone masters of the understated...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siqJq-8Sr6U]YouTube - Warren Zevon-Disorder in the House[/ame]

 

[Oldandtired]

Bush Made 77 Trips to Crawford TX at $226,072 a Pop - Democratic Underground

Bush was not pulpit pounding for people to tighten their belts either. Big difference.

He should have been. If he had, we would have a trillion dollar annual deficit. You people are amazing!! It's like Obama got elected and whatever rational thinking abilities you had took flight!!

People spending during a time of prosperity was a bad thing?

And if we spent less creating less tax revenue it would have helped the tax revenue/government spending ratio (known as the deficit)?

Please explain.....this is going to be quite entertaining.....wait...let me pop some corn first.

 

[beowolfe]

When are the Obama supporters gonna get it.

He blamed the banks when people lied about their incomes and job history on their mortgage applications. Yes, I blame the banks for trusting people with NINJA loans....but where was his criticism for those that lied? Instead he called the victims.

He blamed credit card companies when people signed agreements without reading them. Yes, the companies counted on them not reading them and they deserve to be criticized...but where was the criticism for not reading the contract? Instead, they were vioctims.

And now he criticizes those that buy boats and go to vegas....you know...the ones that can afford to do those things. But where is his criticism for those that buy 200 dollar sneakers while collecting from government programs?

Seems he puts all of the onus on the responsible to act responsibly and none on the irresponsible to act responsibly

And yes, RW.....we ALL agreed with him when he criticized those that usedf tax payer dollars for their junkets....BUT THAT STOPPED MONTHS AGO.

It seems apparent to me that he refuses to criticize the irresponsible.....and will divert it and instead those that cirticize those that capitalize on the irresponsibel.

Well....he SHOULD criticize those that cpaitalize on the irrespponsible....but he MUST THEN criticize the irresponsible.

Basic logic....

ONE CANNOT CAPITALIZE ON THE IRRESPONSIBLE IF PEOPLE DO NOT ACT IRRESPONSIBLY.

No one blamed the banks for people lying on loan applications. You cannot provide one quote from this administration (let alone Obama) saying this. What the banks WERE blamed for is excessive risk taking with other peoples money.

To be honest, in looking for a 'rational' basis for all of this hand wringing over every word that comes out of his mouth, I'm beginning to think that Jimmy Carter is right.

 

[Zona]

Did you guys really read what he said? Seriously...come at him with real issues, not this crap.

"You don't go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don't blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you're trying to save for college."

How can you dispute what he said? Does he have to apologize to boating industry as well?

 

[del]

Did you guys really read what he said? Seriously...come at him with real issues, not this crap.

"You don't go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don't blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you're trying to save for college."

How can you dispute what he said? Does he have to apologize to boating industry as well?

i have an idea.

how about if he shuts the fuck up and stops campaigning and starts governing?

you know, running the country instead of running for office.

 

[beowolfe]

Bush was not pulpit pounding for people to tighten their belts either. Big difference.

He should have been. If he had, we would have a trillion dollar annual deficit. You people are amazing!! It's like Obama got elected and whatever rational thinking abilities you had took flight!!

People spending during a time of prosperity was a bad thing?

And if we spent less creating less tax revenue it would have helped the tax revenue/government spending ratio (known as the deficit)?

Please explain.....this is going to be quite entertaining.....wait...let me pop some corn first.

Let me see if I can put this in terms simple enough for you to understand. The fiscal restraint Obama is urging has two points.

1. People not using monies designed for things like student loans to go to places like Vegas. He's saying use the money for it's intended purposes. If Bush would have been urging individual fiscal restraint rather than urging people to take on more debt than they could afford, the individual consumer would have been in much better shape to handle the financial crash.

2. He's trying (too early in my opinion) to deal with the deficit.

Now, if Bush, instead of creating a brand new deficit, would have practiced fiscal restraint, when the crash came, the government would have had far more resources to deal with the fallout.

Do you understand now?

 

[Oldandtired]

When are the Obama supporters gonna get it.

He blamed the banks when people lied about their incomes and job history on their mortgage applications. Yes, I blame the banks for trusting people with NINJA loans....but where was his criticism for those that lied? Instead he called the victims.

He blamed credit card companies when people signed agreements without reading them. Yes, the companies counted on them not reading them and they deserve to be criticized...but where was the criticism for not reading the contract? Instead, they were vioctims.

And now he criticizes those that buy boats and go to vegas....you know...the ones that can afford to do those things. But where is his criticism for those that buy 200 dollar sneakers while collecting from government programs?

Seems he puts all of the onus on the responsible to act responsibly and none on the irresponsible to act responsibly

And yes, RW.....we ALL agreed with him when he criticized those that usedf tax payer dollars for their junkets....BUT THAT STOPPED MONTHS AGO.

It seems apparent to me that he refuses to criticize the irresponsible.....and will divert it and instead those that cirticize those that capitalize on the irresponsibel.

Well....he SHOULD criticize those that cpaitalize on the irrespponsible....but he MUST THEN criticize the irresponsible.

Basic logic....

ONE CANNOT CAPITALIZE ON THE IRRESPONSIBLE IF PEOPLE DO NOT ACT IRRESPONSIBLY.

No one blamed the banks for people lying on loan applications. You cannot provide one quote from this administration (let alone Obama) saying this. What the banks WERE blamed for is excessive risk taking with other peoples money.

To be honest, in looking for a 'rational' basis for all of this hand wringing over every word that comes out of his mouth, I'm beginning to think that Jimmy Carter is right.

The fact that you say I can not provide one quote is enough for me to realize I am trying to debate someone who is not well informed.

A good majority of the said "risk taking" was the accepting of the NINJA loans.

You do realize that an underwriter uses a basic formula to determine the viability of a loan...and the data is taken directly off the application and the credit reports....as well as the appraisal.

The error made was it was found that people lied on the mortgage applications about job history and salary....and many of the banks did not spend the tiem and the money to investigate the validity of the information the people offered....so the underwriters approved loans basedd on inaccurate information....and yes, it was foolish of the banks.......but the liars are victims? Or are they co-culprits?

Like I said earlier.....

Those that capitalize on the irresponsible cannot capitalize if no one is irresponsible.

Address the need for people to be responsible.....it will work.

How many people touch a hot stove a second time? WHat if when they touched it the first time, they were told they were a victim of the hot stove and told that they will be protected from hot stoves fromhere on in. Think they may touch another one? Why not? I was told I did nothing wrong and no ohter stove will ever hurt me again!

 

[del]

He should have been. If he had, we would have a trillion dollar annual deficit. You people are amazing!! It's like Obama got elected and whatever rational thinking abilities you had took flight!!

People spending during a time of prosperity was a bad thing?

And if we spent less creating less tax revenue it would have helped the tax revenue/government spending ratio (known as the deficit)?

Please explain.....this is going to be quite entertaining.....wait...let me pop some corn first.

Let me see if I can put this in terms simple enough for you to understand. The fiscal restraint Obama is urging has two points.

1. People not using monies designed for things like student loans to go to places like Vegas. He's saying use the money for it's intended purposes. If Bush would have been urging individual fiscal restraint rather than urging people to take on more debt than they could afford, the individual consumer would have been in much better shape to handle the financial crash.

2. He's trying (too early in my opinion) to deal with the deficit.

Now, if Bush, instead of creating a brand new deficit, would have practiced fiscal restraint, when the crash came, the government would have had far more resources to deal with the fallout.

Do you understand now?

i understand you're a hack with a prediliction for revisionist history.

does that help?

 

[Oldandtired]

He should have been. If he had, we would have a trillion dollar annual deficit. You people are amazing!! It's like Obama got elected and whatever rational thinking abilities you had took flight!!

People spending during a time of prosperity was a bad thing?

And if we spent less creating less tax revenue it would have helped the tax revenue/government spending ratio (known as the deficit)?

Please explain.....this is going to be quite entertaining.....wait...let me pop some corn first.

Let me see if I can put this in terms simple enough for you to understand. The fiscal restraint Obama is urging has two points.

1. People not using monies designed for things like student loans to go to places like Vegas. He's saying use the money for it's intended purposes. If Bush would have been urging individual fiscal restraint rather than urging people to take on more debt than they could afford, the individual consumer would have been in much better shape to handle the financial crash.

2. He's trying (too early in my opinion) to deal with the deficit.

Now, if Bush, instead of creating a brand new deficit, would have practiced fiscal restraint, when the crash came, the government would have had far more resources to deal with the fallout.

Do you understand now?

Oh...I see...

Instead of saying "yeah, I see where what I said sounded foolish...I should have thrown in other things to help it make sense"....

You say "let me make this simple for you".....PUTTING THE ONUS ON ME

ANd then you add in all of the things that support what you MEANT to say but make WHAT YOU SAID meaningless without them.

So you may be right based on your second post....I do not necessarily agree with it...but it is a valid argument that warrants credibility...

But to say that is exactly what you said the first time is an outright lie.

It is what you MEANT to say....but not even close to what you said.

 

[Maple]

The people who run and work in those casino's and hotels need to work too. I don't think that this President gets that. Goodbye Reid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Should we be upset by Obama's latest remarks on Las Vegas? - Wednesday, Feb. 3, 2010 | 2 a.m. - Las Vegas Sun

we go again — time to crank up the outrage machine.

For the second time in less than a year, President Barack Obama made an offhand swipe at Las Vegas.

Last time, he said there should be no Vegas junkets for banks that had received government bailout money.

 

[Stephanie]

It is if they took a government bailout.

And blaming him for the bad economy in Vegas, is about the stupidiest thing I have read on this board in a long time.

Stephanie was gone from the board for some time. Think of her as the 2004-2007 version of WillowTree (in fact I thought when Willow turned up it was her!) on the USMB and you'll get an idea of what type of person you are dealing with...

...any body who thinks it's BAD advice to tell people not to gamble during a recession is a fucking idiot. At least you Steph can't accuse Obama of making it a political issue...

Ah, I see you haven't changed a bit, Dr. Grumpy. guess what, I'm back..

 

[masquerade]

So, I was thinking back to my most recent trip to Walt Disney World and how it cost a small fortune. Anyone who has ever visited knows just the meals in the parks ( or resorts ) alone can put the average family in debt. But that was OUR decision to go. OUR decision to put out that money.

This story immediately caught my attention because I've been looking into vacationing in Las Vegas. No matter what the Prez said, I still plan on flying out to Vegas. And I know that a trip out there will be a hell of a lot cheaper than doing another week at WDW. I'll allot myself a certain amount of cash and I WILL enjoy myself at the Blackjack table!

So why is it that Obama didn't mention the over-priced theme parks that the average family just love to, or would love to visit? Why not scold ... excuse me ... preach to us citizens about not blowing money for thrilling rides and over-priced food?

It truly amazes me that this guy stands there and talks to us about being fiscally responsible when his spending is out of control!

 

[Dr Gregg]

People spending during a time of prosperity was a bad thing?

And if we spent less creating less tax revenue it would have helped the tax revenue/government spending ratio (known as the deficit)?

Please explain.....this is going to be quite entertaining.....wait...let me pop some corn first.

Let me see if I can put this in terms simple enough for you to understand. The fiscal restraint Obama is urging has two points.

1. People not using monies designed for things like student loans to go to places like Vegas. He's saying use the money for it's intended purposes. If Bush would have been urging individual fiscal restraint rather than urging people to take on more debt than they could afford, the individual consumer would have been in much better shape to handle the financial crash.

2. He's trying (too early in my opinion) to deal with the deficit.

Now, if Bush, instead of creating a brand new deficit, would have practiced fiscal restraint, when the crash came, the government would have had far more resources to deal with the fallout.

Do you understand now?

i understand you're a hack with a prediliction for revisionist history.

does that help?

and you apparently lack any sort of intelligence as to state points. But that's usually what hacks do, that you so criticize.

 

[Rambunctious]

Maybe he lost a bunch of money in Vegas. Lord knows I've left a few paychecks at he crap table and I hate the place too but I can't wait to return. Hell, I've got to get my bling back.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[youtube]S_BFZ8qyUDo[/youtube]