A pro Obama poster on this blog argues that Barack Obama is ethical because he didn't spend more than George Bush on his frivolous inauguration. According to the "Common Dreams" website:
"Official statistics show that 12.7 percent (or 37 million) of the population in the U.S. lived in poverty in 2004, while 15.7 percent (45.8 million) lacked health-insurance coverage; 11.9 percent of households (comprising 38.2 million people, including 13.9 million children) experienced food insecurity."
The urban legends website from which the anonymous poster seems to have derived his comment states:
"There's no final tally yet for the Obama inauguration, but given that at least five times as many people attended, security and clean-up costs were surely higher than for the 2005 event. Press estimates currently range around $150 million total, including both private and government expenditures."
Let's see. A hamburger and a glass of juice costs about $1.50. At $1.50, Mr. Obama could have purchased 100 million lunches. So with 13.9 million hungry school children, Mr. Obama could have ended hunger for more than a week. Instead, he chose to starve the children and spend it on a self-serving inauguration party.
Mr. Obama's starvation of children is an outrage. The media, including Fox News, lies and fails to hold the child-starving American president to account.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment