Elections
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
moreluck
golden ticket member
Of course, this is a business visit and he probably won't mention re-election at all!!
Obama Will Use Cinderella Castle As Backdrop For Speech At Disney World…
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, set to unveil a new policy for boosting U.S. tourism, has chosen a fairy-tale setting for the Thursday announcement: Walt Disney World’s Magic Kingdom, with its iconic Cinderella Castle as a backdrop.
And if some Disney magic rubs off on his re-election bid, too, then so be it.
The event, details of which were made public Tuesday, is the first of what is sure to be many election-year visits by the president to Florida. Obama carried the nation’s largest swing state in 2008, but he faces a heavier lift this year in a state where the unemployment rate remains above the national average.
Obama Will Use Cinderella Castle As Backdrop For Speech At Disney World…
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, set to unveil a new policy for boosting U.S. tourism, has chosen a fairy-tale setting for the Thursday announcement: Walt Disney World’s Magic Kingdom, with its iconic Cinderella Castle as a backdrop.
And if some Disney magic rubs off on his re-election bid, too, then so be it.
The event, details of which were made public Tuesday, is the first of what is sure to be many election-year visits by the president to Florida. Obama carried the nation’s largest swing state in 2008, but he faces a heavier lift this year in a state where the unemployment rate remains above the national average.
moreluck
golden ticket member
[h=2]Obama’s First Campaign Ad Gets “Three Pinocchios” From WaPo Fact Checker…[/h]
Surprised? Didn’t think so.
Obama ad cherry-picks fact checking organization — WaPo/Fact Checker
Surprised? Didn’t think so.
Obama ad cherry-picks fact checking organization — WaPo/Fact Checker
We love ads that cite fact checkers, but President Obama’s first campaign ad contains a real blooper. It cites a positive fact check by PolitiFact, while ignoring a subsequent column taking away that original ruling.
The suggestion that Obama was responsible for the 2.7 million clean-energy jobs or the decline in foreign oil imports is bad enough, though the ad does not directly claim that. We have more trouble with the citation of PolitiFact.
The Facts:
The ad attempts to push back against a slashing ad attack on Obama’s clean-energy initiatives by a group called Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group, and accurately quotes from an ABC analysis that said the ad “contains claims that are not tethered to the facts.”
The Obama ad that quickly slips in claims that slickly appear to be the result of Obama’s policies, though the ad does not directly make that claim—a reference to 2.7 million clean-energy jobs, a note that for the first time in 13 years foreign oil imports are below 50 percent.
Those figures are correct, but they are also not tethered to anything Obama has done. Thereport that mentioned the 2.7 million jobs simply said that is how many potentially exist. Meanwhile, the Energy Department cited a host of reasons why foreign oil imports have declined, noting the main reason was “a significant contraction in consumption” because of the poor economy and changes in efficiency that began “two years before the 2008 crisis”—ie, before Obama took office.
Then, in bold type, the ad proclaims: President Obama “kept a campaign promise to toughen ethics rules” and it cites: “PolitiFact, 1/21/09.”
Politifact did write that on Jan. 21, 2009, but then it almost immediately changed its ruling as Obama began granting waivers to his ethics policy.
We had originally given this a Four Pinocchio ruling because we believed the campaign had ignored the fact that PolitiFact had changed its ruling. Instead, it turns out it cherry-picked one ruling while ignoring the other negative one. That’s pretty slippery, but it is more of a three Pinocchio violation rather than a Four, so we are revising it downward
The suggestion that Obama was responsible for the 2.7 million clean-energy jobs or the decline in foreign oil imports is bad enough, though the ad does not directly claim that. We have more trouble with the citation of PolitiFact.
The Facts:
The ad attempts to push back against a slashing ad attack on Obama’s clean-energy initiatives by a group called Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group, and accurately quotes from an ABC analysis that said the ad “contains claims that are not tethered to the facts.”
The Obama ad that quickly slips in claims that slickly appear to be the result of Obama’s policies, though the ad does not directly make that claim—a reference to 2.7 million clean-energy jobs, a note that for the first time in 13 years foreign oil imports are below 50 percent.
Those figures are correct, but they are also not tethered to anything Obama has done. Thereport that mentioned the 2.7 million jobs simply said that is how many potentially exist. Meanwhile, the Energy Department cited a host of reasons why foreign oil imports have declined, noting the main reason was “a significant contraction in consumption” because of the poor economy and changes in efficiency that began “two years before the 2008 crisis”—ie, before Obama took office.
Then, in bold type, the ad proclaims: President Obama “kept a campaign promise to toughen ethics rules” and it cites: “PolitiFact, 1/21/09.”
Politifact did write that on Jan. 21, 2009, but then it almost immediately changed its ruling as Obama began granting waivers to his ethics policy.
We had originally given this a Four Pinocchio ruling because we believed the campaign had ignored the fact that PolitiFact had changed its ruling. Instead, it turns out it cherry-picked one ruling while ignoring the other negative one. That’s pretty slippery, but it is more of a three Pinocchio violation rather than a Four, so we are revising it downward
moreluck
golden ticket member
| Friday, January 20, 2012 @ 12:27 pm | Obama Campaign Organizes Fashion Event Hosted By Scarlett Johansson And Vogue Editor Anna Wintour…
Can you say, out of touch?
Via Weekly Standard:
Can you say, out of touch?
Via Weekly Standard:
The Obama campaign is hosting an event next month featuring Marc Jacobs, Scarlett Johansson, Tory Burch, Vera Wang, Anna Wintour, and many more. It’s the kind of event the Republican National Committee appreciates, because it can (as it did just now) show how out of touch President Obama is by simply sending out the invitation.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
nothing illegal here.
His IRA is handled by Bain Capital , there is a trust fund for his wife, and most of other funds and trusts are under the control of his lawyers.
"Im not a crook"............."I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."..............."My lawyer made me do it"?? LOL
You just keep apologizing for your 1% candidate!!
Its about being out of touch with the common people. I mean he says making a $374,000 is "not very much" when the median wage is about $49,000 a year?? I still think he will be the nominee but admit it mittins is actually bush sr and al gore put together =stiff and out of touch.
moreluck
golden ticket member
How do you figure Obama is in touch with the common people????
Being president puts one in a temporary bubble. Before that obama was very in touch with common people: as community organizer, professor, state senator,etc. His problem is that he doesnt want to offend the 1% . He doesnt want to be a "divider".
Did BABA file this case??
The president does not have to appear on these ridiculous supoenas.
Another waste of time.
Peace
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
He has to be one of the most divisive Presidents in modern history.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Fixed for ya.
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
I would think there is little doubt more than Bush. That's kinda the nature of our political system each one doubles down one the previous ones divisiveness.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Four different groups have filed suit in GA. , all claiming their rights under GA law to challenge bhos being on the GA state ballot. bhos' lawyer tried to squash it without supplying any facts ( sound familiar ), but the judge ruled against him. It's now in the discovery phase, meaning everyone has to comply or be subject to jail time.
Only one group issued a subpoena for bhos to appear, most of the others are claiming that since he "released" his BC , he knows that he is unfit to hold office ( something about his named father not being a USA citizen , but a British subject ).
The order from Judge Malihi reads, in part: Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012. In support of his motion, Defendant argues that “if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as President of the United States” to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, Defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend. Defendant’s motion suggests that no President should be compelled to attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is “unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony…[is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation in the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced…
It would be a real shame if bhos' name was removed from the GA ballot , why it may even serve as catalyst for other challenges in several states to do likewise.
Anyone who believes the world hates the USA more today than under BUSH is devoid of world knowledge. Fire up another one, maybe it will seem more real that way.
Peace.
Similar threads
