Obama's Sleek Black Tour Bus Cost $1.1 Million

[WillowTree]

it's pretty damn low to blame it on the SS. damn low.

Wow...wrong and a jerk...again.

Right-Wing Media Attack Secret Service For Commissioning New Cost-Effective Buses | Media Matters for America

Thanks. I KNEW WT got her talking-point from RuperTV LOLOL
Right-Wing Media Attack Secret Service For Commissioning New Cost-Effective Buses | Media Matters for America

Hannity: Obama "Doesn't Have To Waste Your Tax Dollars And Travel Around In A $1.1 Million Luxury Liner" To Talk To "Actual Americans."

You need to change the channel every once in a while WT

you stick with media matters, that's kinda like TruthMatters.............. KNOT

 

[Auxous]

Hey! Asswipe! What part of we the people already bought two busses for two previous presidents and didn't need two more don't you fathom?

Zomg....this is the fist time government bought something that they didn't need.

Again, 2.2 million is a drop in the bucket. If you are really concerned about spending, I just gave you a great area where we could cut back and make significant gains.

However, you rather rage about Obama buying and replacing some buses. Your fake rage is duly noted.

That's just it . . . it's something that isn't needed and in the vast scheme of things isn't a lot of money. But this is exactly the behavior/attitude that has permeated D.C. for years from both sides and that is the problem. So much so that all those millions and billions are now into the trillions.

Obama again missed an opportunity to lead by example, to lead by his actions. His words are cheap; his actions speak volumes.

Obama missed to lead by example regarding this problem during his inauguration. Granted much of it was funded privately, but it was an excessive display during a time of economic calamity and war when times called for prudence and frugality.

This spending of $2.2 million a couple of buses does not really surprise me nor am I angered about it. I now that useless spending adds and we could do a much better job at mitigating it. However, the overwhelming majority of our spending stems from SS, Medicare, and the MIC.

Again, it is all this faux outrage that is amusing. Righties are more upset over this than they are about a "glitch" in Obamacare costing a potential $50 billion a year. However, what topic commands more attention?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Zomg....this is the fist time government bought something that they didn't need.

Again, 2.2 million is a drop in the bucket. If you are really concerned about spending, I just gave you a great area where we could cut back and make significant gains.

However, you rather rage about Obama buying and replacing some buses. Your fake rage is duly noted.

That's just it . . . it's something that isn't needed and in the vast scheme of things isn't a lot of money. But this is exactly the behavior/attitude that has permeated D.C. for years from both sides and that is the problem. So much so that all those millions and billions are now into the trillions.

Obama again missed an opportunity to lead by example, to lead by his actions. His words are cheap; his actions speak volumes.

Did you read the links @ media matters. According to the Secret Service, they were needed since they have always rented them in the past then had to outfit them for security.

They will pay for themselves in 10 years.

You missed my point.

 

[WillowTree]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Zomg....this is the fist time government bought something that they didn't need.

Again, 2.2 million is a drop in the bucket. If you are really concerned about spending, I just gave you a great area where we could cut back and make significant gains.

However, you rather rage about Obama buying and replacing some buses. Your fake rage is duly noted.

That's just it . . . it's something that isn't needed and in the vast scheme of things isn't a lot of money. But this is exactly the behavior/attitude that has permeated D.C. for years from both sides and that is the problem. So much so that all those millions and billions are now into the trillions.

Obama again missed an opportunity to lead by example, to lead by his actions. His words are cheap; his actions speak volumes.

Obama missed to lead by example regarding this problem during his inauguration. Granted much of it was funded privately, but it was an excessive display during a time of economic calamity and war when times called for prudence and frugality.

This spending of $2.2 million a couple of buses does not really surprise me nor am I angered about it. I now that useless spending adds and we could do a much better job at mitigating it. However, the overwhelming majority of our spending stems from SS, Medicare, and the MIC.

Again, it is all this faux outrage that is amusing. Righties are more upset over this than they are about a "glitch" in Obamacare costing a potential $50 billion a year. However, what topic commands more attention?

You need to read more threads here. Everything is up for discussion!

You missed my point as well.

 

[Modbert]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

Do you even know who those fifty percent are? I doubt it. Fox News doesn't explain that talking point to you indepth.

 

[WillowTree]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

Do you even know who those fifty percent are? I doubt it. Fox News doesn't explain that talking point to you indepth.

save it,, your "faux" indignation.

 

[Auxous]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

If you are that concerned about spending, then go after the GOP's Medicare Part D. However, you rather wallow in fake rage over a couple of million rather than a trillion.

Republicans: Spending 2.2 million is more angering than spending a trillion on a policy that was a handout to Big Pharma.

So much fake rage.

 

[WillowTree]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

Do you even know who those fifty percent are? I doubt it. Fox News doesn't explain that talking point to you indepth.

I know who they are. They're the fifty percent who pay ZERO, get rebates on the ZERO and demand MORE. That's who they are.

 

[Modbert]

I know who they are. They're the fifty percent who pay ZERO, get rebates on the ZERO and demand MORE. That's who they are.

The Truth About All Those People Who Don

1. According to the Tax Policy Institute, 46% of American households are not expected to pay federal income tax in 2011. It’s not 51%, but that’s still a pretty big number.

2. Of that 46% (that’s roughly 76 million American households), half of them pay no federal income tax due to standard deductions and basic exemptions. In English—it means they’re poor. Our tax system doesn’t tax subsistence level incomes. For example: a married couple making $18,700 a year or less would pay no federal income tax. It’s important to note that they still are subject to Social Security and Medicare taxes, either through their wage withholdings or through their self employment taxes on their federal return. There’s a big difference between “no federal income taxes” and “no taxes ”.

3. That leaves 38 million households that pay no income tax because of special provisions in the tax code.

So what are these special provisions and who is affected by them?
1. 44% of those 38 million households are covered under tax benefits for the elderly. That would include the extra standard deduction for senior citizens and the exclusion of some social security benefits from taxation. (The report also mentions the credit for the elderly, but in reality, I have never, ever prepared a return where someone actually qualified for that credit.)

And the article explains the rest. So you want to bitch about how the extreme poor, elderly who collect social security (isn't that you?), and poor families with kids aren't being taxed?

Like I said Willow, your priorities are screwed. But then again, critical thinking isn't in your vocabulary since Fox News does all your thinking for you.

 

[Zoom-boing]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

If you are that concerned about spending, then go after the GOP's Medicare Part D. However, you rather wallow in fake rage over a couple of million rather than a trillion.

Republicans: Spending 2.2 million is more angering than spending a trillion on a policy that was a handout to Big Pharma.

So much fake rage.

You're new here . . . how do you know she's never raged against Part D?

 

[Dot Com]

WILLOWTREE!!!

 

[Auxous]

oh yes, the retarded liberal attitude. "what's a trifling pififul little 2.2 million dollars" know why they think that way? Cause they are the fifty percent of Americans who pay zero in FEDERAL INCOME TAX. They are the leeches and it shows in their attitudes.

If you are that concerned about spending, then go after the GOP's Medicare Part D. However, you rather wallow in fake rage over a couple of million rather than a trillion.

Republicans: Spending 2.2 million is more angering than spending a trillion on a policy that was a handout to Big Pharma.

So much fake rage.

You're new here . . . how do you know she's never raged against Part D?

It is a deduction and I could be wrong. Willow seems more transfixed on partisan BS than actual issues.

That is just my opinion.

 

[Dot Com]

YOU did it WT so.....

 

[Avorysuds]

Well first there's this:

A Secret Service spokesman explained that the agency has to protect politicians riding in buses all the time anyway, and it plans on using the buses for future candidates and officials.

It's funny Willow. You complain about a $1.1 million bus but nothing about the defense budget.

It's funny Modbert, you complain about the defense budget but then vote for people that expand every aspect of that budgets spending including starting new "not wars," that kill "not people" and spend "not money."

 

[Modbert]

It's funny Modbert, you complain about the defense budget but then vote for people that expand every aspect of that budgets spending including starting new "not wars," that kill "not people" and spend "not money."

It's funny Avorysuds because the only federal election I've voted in my life is my state representative. So unless Mickey Mouse is a member of Congress, you are entirely incorrect.

But hey, keep swinging.

 

[Charles_Main]

He ain't worried about balancing no damn budget. Not at all.

As President Obama cruises through the Midwest the next three days, he'll be riding in two buses -- sleek and black, with dark-tinted windows -- that cost $1.1 million, the Associated Press reports. A Secret Service spokesman explained that the agency has to protect politicians riding in buses all the time anyway, and it plans on using the buses for future candidates and officials.

The White House says Obama will spend the roadtrip listening to voters vent their frustration with Washington and talk about their economic struggles. The full length of the bus:

Obama's Sleek Black Tour Bus Cost $1.1 Million - Elspeth Reeve - NationalJournal.com

Call it what it is. A Tax Payer Funded CAMPAIGN BUS.

 

[Avorysuds]

It's funny Modbert, you complain about the defense budget but then vote for people that expand every aspect of that budgets spending including starting new "not wars," that kill "not people" and spend "not money."

It's funny Avorysuds because the only federal election I've voted in my life is my state representative. So unless Mickey Mouse is a member of Congress, you are entirely incorrect.

But hey, keep swinging.

My bad then =D

So you don't aprove of Obama nd the Dems in congress on the military issues?

 

[Salt Jones]

He ain't worried about balancing no damn budget. Not at all.

As President Obama cruises through the Midwest the next three days, he'll be riding in two buses -- sleek and black, with dark-tinted windows -- that cost $1.1 million, the Associated Press reports. A Secret Service spokesman explained that the agency has to protect politicians riding in buses all the time anyway, and it plans on using the buses for future candidates and officials.

The White House says Obama will spend the roadtrip listening to voters vent their frustration with Washington and talk about their economic struggles. The full length of the bus:

Obama's Sleek Black Tour Bus Cost $1.1 Million - Elspeth Reeve - NationalJournal.com

Does he get to keep after 2016?

 

[Too Tall]

Your beef is w/ the sec service WT They make travel arrangements/requirements.

funny innit? all of a freaking sudden we gotta have tour busses that cost 1.1 million dollars each.. and that's after he increased the limousines brigade by about 70%.. cool damn dude.

I'm waiting for you to blame him for a thunder storm. You're running out of legitimate complaints.

No way, but I do blame him for Katrina.