You're making a huge assumption that it doesn't elicit negative emotions. I think it's a tremendous waste and would prefer that neither side hold huge parties in these economic times. I would also prefer that they not spend millions on lying tv ads, or expensive clothes for the candidates.
However, your constant harping that holding an inaugural ball, or celebratory party somehow means that Obama is the same old, same old, is just so much BS. McCain is also claiming to be different, where's your outrage at the RNC plans for an election party? On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, I get it now. He is for change, but only for the things others are > doing/have done that don't feed his ego, like spending an obcene amount of > money for an 'I love me' party. > > Lt's try this again... $2,000,000 for a party. The man who harps on spending > 10 billion a month in Iraq is spending 2 million on a party. I pity anyone > who is so hypnotized by the Cult of Obama that this does not elicit any kind > of negative emotion. > > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> When Obama talks about change, he is talking about ending the war, and >> relieving the burden of government on the middle class. He's talking >> about integrity, not more of Cheney's deals with oil company, no more >> feeding the greed of Shurb and his minions, and having a President who >> can actually put together a coherent sentence. He's talking about the >> death of the reptilian back brain of current American politics. >> >> If he can do all of that, I'll pay for the frigging celebration. >> >> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:15 PM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > So, to be clear, the candidate for 'change' is doing what every one else >> has >> > done. >> > >> > Standard or not, maybe his higness could have scaled things down a bit >> (like >> > the mayor of Chicago suggested) given the current economic climate. In >> my >> > opinion, it shows poor judgment on his part. >> > >> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >> Because 2 million is a fairly standard cost for an election night >> >> party, while 150K is an excessive amount for a hockey mom to spend on >> >> clothes. >> >> >> >> I'll give Palin a pass on this one. She claims had no idea where the >> >> clothes came from or what they cost, which considering her usual >> >> fashion sense, I can believe. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > But, to echo Charlie's comment, why does it seem to be ok that Obama >> >> drops 2 >> >> > mil on a party, but its excessive when the RNC drops 150k to make >> their >> >> VP >> >> > candudate look like she should be VP? >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:276589 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
