I don't give a hoot....big deal...The libs talk about anything but the bad economy and Obama and Michelle's spending........etc...
The libs~~~ they are all nuts....
Ann Romney's $990 Bird T-Shirt: Stylish or Stupid?
SodaHead Living
2012/05/03 23:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
114 votes
|
|
32% | |||
|
240 votes
|
|
68% | |||
The blog-o-sphere is still chirping about the bird shirt Ann Romney wore on CBS' "This Morning" on Wednesday, and the fact that it was hideously ugly wasn't even the news. Ann Romney's silk shirt costs $990, Styleite reports.
Critics say wearing the shirt -- part of Reed Krakoff’s spring 2012 ready-to-wear collection -- was a particularly foolish move for the first lady hopeful, as she and her multi-millionaire husband struggle to relate to average Americans. Meghan McCain, an MSNBC contributor, slammed the shirt on Lawrence O’Donnell’s "The Last Word."
"She needs to be a little more cognizant of the message she’s trying to put out, just given the economic recession that we're in and everything that's going on," McCain said. And this is just when we'd forgotten that Ann drives a "couple" of Cadillacs. Do you think her pricey bird shirt is stylish -- or stupid?
"She needs to be a little more cognizant of the message she’s trying to put out, just given the economic recession that we're in and everything that's going on," McCain said. And this is just when we'd forgotten that Ann drives a "couple" of Cadillacs. Do you think her pricey bird shirt is stylish -- or stupid?
Top Opinion
-
Pearlie Momi♥Patriot Warrior♥ 2012/05/04 03:56:26
The Tyler Foundation made $647,500 in donations during 2010, including $75,000 to the Center for the Treatment of Pediatric Multiple Sclerosis and $10,000 to the Dana Farber Cancer Institute. It also donated $145,000 to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, $100,000 to the George W. Bush presidential library and $10,000 to the Harvard Business School, of which Romney is an alumnus.
I don't mind what expensive clothes women wear as long as they pay for it with their own money and not the taxpayer's.
Strange you would care so little about ultra-lavish spending of other people's money yet object to Ann Romney spending her own money.
Wait...I know why.
Its' all documented. The part of the Spain trip that was charged to the taxpayers was just under $500,000. Given the length of their stay and the number of people that went with them, the entire tab was a lot more.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/...
I guess all the vacations are 'state trips' too?
Judicial Watch sued under the Freedom of Information Act to get the expense accounts of the trip and made them public, that's where the $467,000 taxpayer funded figure comes from.
Judicial Watch did not find any inappropriate expenses charged to the taxpayers, nothing was there that should not have been.
Sucks for you, I know.
When the first lady travels it is not 'official'.
Family vacations are paid for mostly by taxpayers as US secret service and planes are government owned and operated.
Nice try with your spin.
First Ladies travel in "official" capacities all the time. Laura bush traveled to Africa with both daughters as a good will ambassador promoting G. W.'s policies like Aids awareness. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
Hillary Clinton, as First Lady, traveled to 82 countries promoting children's issues. She often took Chelsea with her. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
When the First Family takes a personal vacay void of promoting personal initiatives, the taxpayers pick up the tab for SS and Air Force One. The First Family gets SS wherever they go, that's a constant no matter what, and they must use AF1 whenever they fly as they are prohibited from using commercial aircraft. Aside from that, the First Family pays for everything else. It is, after all, a PERSONAL vacation that has nothing to do with official duties.
Congress holds the purse strings and dictates what the First Family can and cannot charge to the taxpayers. The Founders made it so to prohibit the very behavior you accuse the Obama's of. Look up the Judicial Watch report, it proves this.
Regardless of what propaganda you prefer to spread, it simply doesn't work the way you say. The Constitution forbids it. Many Americans simply don't know enough about how their government functions to recognize BS when they hear it.
Being dumb sucks.
>Being dumb sucks
I am sorry you bear this burden. I am trying to alleviate it by clearing up your confusion.
The only thing you've supplied is insults and glib remarks.
Enough said.
I don't take orders from leftists.
You are wrong and an activist.
I am here to point out how stupid your ideas are.
You are welcome.
First Ladies travel in "official" capacities all the time. Laura bush traveled to Africa with both daughters as a good will ambassador promoting G. W.'s policies like Aids awareness. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
Hillary Clinton, as First Lady, traveled to 82 countries promoting children's issues. She often took Chelsea with her. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
When the First Family takes a personal vacay void of promoting personal initiatives, the taxpayers pick up the tab for SS and Air Force One. The First Family gets SS wherever they go, that's a constant no matter what, and they must use AF1 whenever they fly as they are prohibited from using commercial aircraft. Aside from that, the First Family pays for everything else. It is, after all, a PERSONAL vacation that has nothing to do with official duties.
Congress holds the purse strings and dictates what the First Family can and cannot charge to the taxpayers. The Founders made it so to prohibit the very behavior you accuse the Obama's of. Look up the Judicial Watch report, it proves this.
Regardless of what propaganda you prefer to spread, it simply doesn't work the way you say. The Constitution forbids it. Many Americans simply don't know enough about how their government functions t...
First Ladies travel in "official" capacities all the time. Laura bush traveled to Africa with both daughters as a good will ambassador promoting G. W.'s policies like Aids awareness. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
Hillary Clinton, as First Lady, traveled to 82 countries promoting children's issues. She often took Chelsea with her. Taxpayers paid for all those trips.
When the First Family takes a personal vacay void of promoting personal initiatives, the taxpayers pick up the tab for SS and Air Force One. The First Family gets SS wherever they go, that's a constant no matter what, and they must use AF1 whenever they fly as they are prohibited from using commercial aircraft. Aside from that, the First Family pays for everything else. It is, after all, a PERSONAL vacation that has nothing to do with official duties.
Congress holds the purse strings and dictates what the First Family can and cannot charge to the taxpayers. The Founders made it so to prohibit the very behavior you accuse the Obama's of. Look up the Judicial Watch report, it proves this.
Regardless of what propaganda you prefer to spread, it simply doesn't work the way you say. The Constitution forbids it. Many Americans simply don't know enough about how their government functions to recognize BS when they hear it, so they're susceptible to believing all kinds of junk.
It's embarrassing how little Americans know of their own government.
'Bush did it too' is both foolish and incorrect.
Look up how many vacays Michelle has taken and you will see a clear difference.
Remember when Bush was portrayed as the golf-player in chief?
Guess who has golfed more the first few years in office?
LMAO!
Ann will spend the same amount of taxpayer money that Michelle has.
Michelle must pay for most of those "extravagances" out of her husband's salary, since only items for official state functions can be charged to the taxpayer.
The Founders gave the power of the purse to CONGRESS, Congress dictates what the First Family can and cannot charge to the taxpayers. The Founders made it so to prevent the very thing you're accusing the Obama's of doing, which is living high on the hog at taxpayers expense.
The Founders were very sensitive to this issue as they had watched European monarchs live in luxury while their subjects starved, and they did not want to allow this abuse in the new government. Therefore, the separation of powers was enacted and the power of the purse was given to Congress.
Suggested reading: American History and Civics 101.
You can suggest plenty but I don't take reading assignment from leftists. You have a habit of violating the constitution and I already read the 'Communist Manifesto'.
Obama used the War Powers Act in Libya in the same way Clinton used the War Powers Act in 1999 in Kosovo. Neither were impeachable offenses.
Tell me, if Obama has subverted the Constitution so much and committed so many "impeachable offenses", why isn't your party trying to impeach him?
After all, their stated goal is to make Obama a "one-term president", so all these "impeachable offenses" should be a slam dunk for them. Why aren't congressional Republicans trying to impeach him? Hmmmm?