Obama buys wife $30,000 Rhodium Ring [Archive] - The Michigan Sportsman Forums

Wildone

12-02-2008, 08:05 AM

Michelle Obama is to receive this £20,000 thank you from her husband for her support during the election.

The Harmony ring is made of rhodium - the world's most expensive metal --and encrusted with diamonds. It is being hastily made by Italian designer Giovanni Bosco in time for January's inauguration ceremony.

Only about 25 tons of rhodium are mined each year, mostly in South Africa, and as a result its price is typically around £5,000 an ounce.
Bosco is based at Valenza Po near Alessandria. The top designer counts a select list of VIPS's and celebrities as his clients.
Rhodium typically sells for around £5000 an ounce.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1090653/Barack-Obama-buy-rare-20-000-rhodium-ring-wife-say-thanks-support.html

thedude

12-02-2008, 08:14 AM

Yep, another politician who knows what its like to live on a middle class budget. He's just so in touch with the common man... it's inspiring.

wadevb1

12-02-2008, 08:22 AM

Who cares? They are both independently wealthy and nothing was given to them on a silver platter if I recall. And no, I'm not an Obama supporter.

RumRunner

12-02-2008, 08:24 AM

Good for him! He worked his way up and earned some money and now he is pumping some money into the economy.

guito13

12-02-2008, 08:27 AM

Good for him! He worked his way up and earned some money and now he is pumping some money into the economy.

Italian Designer with South Africian Materials. Global economy maybe, definately not local...

ScavengerMan

12-02-2008, 08:28 AM

Obama buys wife $30,000 Rhodium Ring

So what? I'm no Obama fan, but they have both certainly earned it.....

Jackster1

12-02-2008, 08:28 AM

Boo... hoo... hoo...
Do you read the rags at the supermarket check-out counter too for important news? :evil:

TC-fisherman

12-02-2008, 09:09 AM

Wildone

12-02-2008, 10:09 AM

Why do people believe everything on the internet?

Do you actually think think the jeweler who would sell something like this would put out a press release if it was true?

I guess it must be pretty important though as drudge was headlining it:rolleyes:
Actually I heard about it at the Jewelry store this morning when I bought my new Rolex Submariner.;)

It is good he bought his wife the ring. I have no gripes with people who can afford buying things like that. More power to them.....

Wildone

12-02-2008, 11:55 AM

Boo... hoo... hoo...
Do you read the rags at the supermarket check-out counter too for important news? :evil:No I am to busy checking out the Easy Rider mag to read while in line..:evilsmile

http://www.easyriders.com/

john warren

12-02-2008, 12:24 PM

wow how cool is that, wish i could spend that kind of money on my wife... of course i probably would choose to spend it on something mined and produced here in our own country rather then a country that places our black brothers in economic bondage in a nasty mine shaft. but hey,, maybe his half brother will make an extra dollar or two this year ....and be able to get new curtains for his mud hut.

RumRunner

12-02-2008, 12:25 PM

wish i could spend that kind of money on my wife... .

Well, if you had gotten a better education and applied yourself more maybe you could have...jess sayin is all

Wildone

12-02-2008, 01:26 PM

Well, if you had gotten a better education and applied yourself more maybe you could have...jess sayin is allNot everyone needs 2, 4 or 8 years of school to live the good life.
Just need to apply yourself, have drive and when needed be VERY Aggressive.
Just sayin is all....

hunter62

12-02-2008, 04:41 PM

I have no gripes with people who can afford buying things like that.

Why start the thread then?

Is this to counterbalance the threads you started about Cindy McCain's $300,000+ Rrepublican convention outfit and the other one that you started about all the money spent on Palin's clothes? Oh wait, you didn't start any like that. My bad!

:lol::corkysm55:dizzy::evilsmile

Bwana

12-02-2008, 04:52 PM

Who cares, it's his money.

Now, if you can prove that he's useing taxpayer money for it, then it's news! :evil::evil::evil:

Wildone

12-02-2008, 05:07 PM

Why start the thread then?

Is this to counterbalance the threads you started about Cindy McCain's $300,000+ Rrepublican convention outfit and the other one that you started about all the money spent on Palin's clothes? Oh wait, you didn't start any like that. My bad!

:lol::corkysm55:dizzy::evilsmile
From talking to the jeweler today it seemed like a very interesting material. I never have heard of it before. Have you???

If I wanted to stir the pot I would of posted it in the one thread where Obama screwed his campaign workers out of money.;) But I didn't...

Cindy McCain is very wealthy..She could afford a $1,000,000 dress if she wanted..

Wildone

12-02-2008, 05:08 PM

Who cares, it's his money.

Now, if you can prove that he's useing taxpayer money for it, then it's news! :evil::evil::evil:
Does excess campaign money count?:D

Hoppe's no.10

12-02-2008, 05:16 PM

Who cares, it's his money.

Now, if you can prove that he's useing taxpayer money for it, then it's news! :evil::evil::evil:

I fully agree with you - "Who cares, it's his money" on this issue BUT money and power have a symbiotic and corrupting influence on whomever CHOOSES to become entangled in it.

Look at Jesse Jackson - He undoubtedly started out to good and he ended up doing well - as in VERY, VERY well. Obama is well on his way. Last year's income $4.7M. Again I fully agree that it's his money to spend as he and his family see fit BUT given his "progressive stance" one has to ask: "Wouldn't he have thought that the $30,000 be better spent helping the poor, the disadvantaged, the disenfranchised or those organizations struggling to help the struggling wake up to another day as opposed to a $30,000 bauble on his wife's finger?

Hoppe's no.10

skulldugary

12-02-2008, 05:50 PM

He's "spreading the wealth"....but just keeping it in the family...

Brian S.Kroll

12-02-2008, 05:58 PM

If it is actually his money, and not Tony Resko's, or someone else's, and he paid income taxes on it, then it is his business to spend his money as he sees fit.
...After all, it's just another effort at spreading the wealth, isn't it?
Curious however, how much he donated to charity on his last year's tax return. Anybody know that?
...And, if anybody researches that, check on Joe Biden, as well.
I'm sure he'd want to "be a part of it" !
:lol:

Bwana

12-02-2008, 06:07 PM

I fully agree with you - "Who cares, it's his money" on this issue BUT money and power have a symbiotic and corrupting influence on whomever CHOOSES to become entangled in it.

If you say so.

Look at Jesse Jackson - He undoubtedly started out to good and he ended up doing well - as in VERY, VERY well. Obama is well on his way. Last year's income $4.7M. Again I fully agree that it's his money to spend as he and his family see fit BUT given his "progressive stance" one has to ask: "Wouldn't he have thought that the $30,000 be better spent helping the poor, the disadvantaged, the disenfranchised or those organizations struggling to help the struggling wake up to another day as opposed to a $30,000 bauble on his wife's finger?

Hoppe's no.10

I didn't say it wasn't hypocritical on Obama's part to play class warfare and then purchase a "rock" for his wife (maybe he can get some haircut tips from J. Edwards), but no more so than his promises to tax the rich and then back pedaling immediately after the election. OR, his railing against free trade before the election, but nominating pro free trade financial advisors after the election. OR, his promising huge social spending programs before the election, but nominating pro balanced budget advisors after the election. OR, his railing against the Iraq war before the war, but then nominating pro war advisors after the election (notice how his withdrawl went from "timeline for withdrawl" prior to election, but is now dependent upon "conditions on the ground" after the election?) and leaving a Republican in place at Defense. :lol:

He's twisted his positions prior to the election to the point they seem almost unrecognizable now. No.........those issues, he has to reconcile with those who voted for him, not with me. Hopefully, they realize they've been hoodwinked just like many of us conservatives were after we got Bush Jr elected.

Trout King

12-02-2008, 06:43 PM

I didn't say it wasn't hypocritical on Obama's part to play class warfare and then purchase a "rock" for his wife (maybe he can get some haircut tips from J. Edwards), but no more so than his promises to tax the rich and then back pedaling immediately after the election. OR, his railing against free trade before the election, but nominating pro free trade financial advisors after the election. OR, his promising huge social spending programs before the election, but nominating pro balanced budget advisors after the election. OR, his railing against the Iraq war before the war, but then nominating pro war advisors after the election (notice how his withdrawl went from "timeline for withdrawl" prior to election, but is now dependent upon "conditions on the ground" after the election?) and leaving a Republican in place at Defense.

He's twisted his positions prior to the election to the point they seem almost unrecognizable now. No.........those issues, he has to reconcile with those who voted for him, not with me.

OH SNAP, and Amen...

Heck I just spent $30 on my gf for her birthday,lol. Barrack understands my financial situation.

Michihunter

12-02-2008, 06:43 PM

I was told he was "adapting to the changes" Bwana. You know how things have "changed" since he was elected.;)

fishenrg

12-02-2008, 07:04 PM

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iws_VLNyRvFjaUFcUOPxgJY-n-wAD94QOU6O0

WASHINGTON (AP) — Looks like Michelle Obama won't be setting aside her fake pearls in favor of a $30,000 thank you ring from her husband.

London tabloids reported that President-elect Barack Obama was buying a pricey rhodium ring from Italian designer Giovanni Bosco for his wife. But there's no truth to the report, said Obama spokesman Dan Pfeiffer.

The rumor began overseas and made the rounds of American blogs, including the Drudge Report.

The office of Giovanni Bosco, reached in northern Italy, also said the reports were incorrect.

I love how some can't wait for anything to jump on him for, no matter how irrelevant...or untrue!

Spanky

12-02-2008, 07:29 PM

OH come on now, If wildones jeweler said it was so, its so!:lol:

Lmao, 8 more years of this crap! should be entertaining.:lol:

USMarine1171

12-02-2008, 07:45 PM

Not everyone needs 2, 4 or 8 years of school to live the good life.
Just need to apply yourself, have drive and when needed be VERY Aggressive.
Just sayin is all....

Just sayin...all you're selective quoting sure makes you seem like a bitter, sore loser. Not that you are, just sayin...that's how your lookin ;)

Barack Obama has denied his wife Michelle is to receive this £20,000 thank you for her support during the election....

...But Dan Pfeiffer, communications aide for Obama's transition to the Presidency, flatly denied the story in an email to an American political website...

...The report is 'not true,' said Pfeiffer in the message to Politico

USMarine1171

12-02-2008, 07:46 PM

Hoppe's no.10

12-02-2008, 08:14 PM

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iws_VLNyRvFjaUFcUOPxgJY-n-wAD94QOU6O0

I love how some can't wait for anything to jump on him for, no matter how irrelevant...or untrue!

Welcome Mr. Obama (and Mr. FishEngr) to the 21st Century, complete with immediate and unrelenting media/internet coverage. This tempest in a teapot reaches the same level as the other big controversy - Palin not knowing Africa was a country or er... was it not knowing South Africa is a continent (did I get that right?) Still doesn't reach the level of Dan Rather DESPERATELY WANTING TO BELIEVE the veracity of the so-called "Killian Documents" (Bush's service in the Air National Guard controversy.) Rather and CBS should have known better, after he was a supposedly a reputable journalist and CBS was supposedly a reputable news organization.

Our excuse here on MS - we're just a bunch of doo-doo internet surfers.

Hoppe's no.10

Wildone

12-03-2008, 09:27 AM

Just sayin...all you're selective quoting sure makes you seem like a bitter, sore loser.Who just came back from being banned for changing MS reply quotes???
Well at least some of us tell the truth and DON'T have to change other peoples quotes to make ourself better like some do. You have repeativly lied on here so I take your posts with a grain of salt anymore...If you need more of your lying quotes I could dig them up and post them...Who is the SORE LOSER ???:lol:

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2415380#post2415380

Don't do it again USMarine...
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMarine1171 http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2415226#post2415226)
I couldn't agree with you more.

Originally Posted by Hoppe's no.10 View Post
Goes back to a statement I've made many times here and elsewhere: The Republican Party is controlled by very wealthy (or about to become very wealthy) conservatives (Bush I, Bush II, Romney, the Amway guy, McCain last year's income $6M) who view the poor, undereducated, gun-toting etc. through kind of a distant and romantic veil - they're nice as a concept and a source of political support but sorry - stay out of my neighborhood and certainly out of my children's schoolyard.

Hoppe's no.10

I couldn't agree with you more.
************************************************** ***********************************************

In the future do not attribute or sign my "name" to quotes that I did not make. Not funny, not cute and not very mature and I've sent a complaint to a moderator.

Hoppe's no.10

szokr1

12-03-2008, 09:49 AM

Wildone

12-03-2008, 10:04 AM

OH come on now, If wildones jeweler said it was so, its so!:lol:

Lmao, 8 more years of this crap! should be entertaining.:lol:New Your post
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008/news/nationalnews/o_ring__30g_bling_for_michelle_141802.htm

Oh ya going to very interesting 8 years.

Anxiety among Democrats as Pelosi tightens her grip
Read the whole story.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/anxiety-among-democrats-as-pelosi-tightens-her-grip-2008-12-02.html

fishenrg

12-03-2008, 12:53 PM

Welcome Mr. Obama (and Mr. FishEngr) to the 21st Century, complete with immediate and unrelenting media/internet coverage. This tempest in a teapot reaches the same level as the other big controversy - Palin not knowing Africa was a country or er... was it not knowing South Africa is a continent (did I get that right?) Still doesn't reach the level of Dan Rather DESPERATELY WANTING TO BELIEVE the veracity of the so-called "Killian Documents" (Bush's service in the Air National Guard controversy.) Rather and CBS should have known better, after he was a supposedly a reputable journalist and CBS was supposedly a reputable news organization.

And the people who so gleefully jumped on the Palin trashing bandwagon were (rightly) called out by some of the same people being down on Obama in this thread. Dan Rather, as I recall, faced some consequences for his actions as well.

Yes, I know stuff like this happens. And because of that, sometimes a bit of caution is in order before accepting things as fact just because they happen to be on Drudge, Free Republic, or Daily Kos. Making moral judgements based on a false article is, well, unfortunate.

Our excuse here on MS - we're just a bunch of doo-doo internet surfers.

Speak for yourself! :lol:

USMarine1171

12-05-2008, 11:52 PM

Who just came back from being banned for changing MS reply quotes???
Well at least some of us tell the truth and DON'T have to change other peoples quotes to make ourself better like some do. You have repeativly lied on here so I take your posts with a grain of salt anymore...If you need more of your lying quotes I could dig them up and post them...Who is the SORE LOSER ???:lol:

http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2415380#post2415380

Don't do it again USMarine...
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMarine1171 http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2415226#post2415226)
I couldn't agree with you more.

Originally Posted by Hoppe's no.10 View Post
Goes back to a statement I've made many times here and elsewhere: The Republican Party is controlled by very wealthy (or about to become very wealthy) conservatives (Bush I, Bush II, Romney, the Amway guy, McCain last year's income $6M) who view the poor, undereducated, gun-toting etc. through kind of a distant and romantic veil - they're nice as a concept and a source of political support but sorry - stay out of my neighborhood and certainly out of my children's schoolyard.

Hoppe's no.10

I couldn't agree with you more.
************************************************** ***********************************************

In the future do not attribute or sign my "name" to quotes that I did not make. Not funny, not cute and not very mature and I've sent a complaint to a moderator.

Hoppe's no.10

Cry about it...I know some of you have problems remembering what was written 4 posts prior...It's not my fault you were fooled because I changed a few words.

It was done to illustrate how absurd some of the arguments are from the right.

Goes back to a statement I've made many times here and elsewhere: The Republican Party is controlled by very wealthy (or about to become very wealthy) conservatives (Bush I, Bush II, Romney, the Amway guy, McCain last year's income $6M) who view the poor, undereducated, gun-toting etc. through kind of a distant and romantic veil - they're nice as a concept and a source of political support but sorry - stay out of my neighborhood and certainly out of my children's schoolyard.

USMarine1171

You guys are desperate and will do anything to try and ban me. You would rather silence opposing viewpoints.

Changing quotes is done quite frequently on military.com forums...but people there can figure it out. I can't help it if rules for the forums are made on the fly...while there is no TOS explaining what is and isn't allowed. I just go off precedents set in various forums.

Sore losers.

Hoppe's no.10

12-06-2008, 10:51 AM

You guys are desperate and will do anything to try and ban me.

You're hardly worth the bother.

Hoppe's no.10

Wildone

12-06-2008, 11:52 AM

Cry about it...I know some of you have problems remembering what was written 4 posts prior...It's not my fault you were fooled because I changed a few words.

It was done to illustrate how absurd some of the arguments are from the right.

You guys are desperate and will do anything to try and ban me. You would rather silence opposing viewpoints.

Changing quotes is done quite frequently on military.com forums...but people there can figure it out. I can't help it if rules for the forums are made on the fly...while there is no TOS explaining what is and isn't allowed. I just go off precedents set in various forums.

Sore losers.Cry about it...I know some of you have problems remembering what was written 4 posts prior...It's not my fault you were fooled because I changed a few words.Cry about what??? For pointing out the truth that you LIE continuously.. Hmmm I remembered the post that you falsified a few weeks ago.:lol:

The MODS even caught that post a few weeks back.

If I am correct your actions got you banned last time. So don't try blaming it anyone but YOURSELF for your actions.

Changing quotes is done quite frequently on military.com forums...but people there can figure it out. I can't help it if rules for the forums are made on the fly...while there is no TOS explaining what is and isn't allowed. I just go off precedents set in various forums. .

Well the rules are different over and changing quotes are not allowed here.
military.com has nothing to do with the MS or the rules here.
I suggest you spend some time reading the MS rules.

Well us sore losers are not getting time out because we play by the RULES.;)

So again who is the sore loser?:D

Wildone

12-06-2008, 12:00 PM

You guys are desperate and will do anything to try and ban me. You would rather silence opposing viewpoints.
We are not trying get you banned..You are doing a good job by yourself. RumRunner and Umichmike are the best debtors on the left by far.;)

After some of your unreliable posts I tend to just skip over yours post these days. But this one I did have to reply to.

fishenrg

12-06-2008, 12:05 PM

We are not trying get you banned..You are doing a good job by yourself. RumRunner and Umichmike are the best debtors on the left by far.;)

After some of your unreliable posts I tend to just skip over yours post these days. But this one I did have to reply to.

As reliable as the post that started this whole thread? :lol:

Wildone

12-06-2008, 12:23 PM

As reliable as the post that started this whole thread? :lol:I will belive the NEW YORK POST over you any day.:D Oh I get it the left didn't send you a certified letter about it.:lol: At least I have links for a major new source.;)
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008...lle_141802.htm (http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008...lle_141802.htm)

hunter62

12-06-2008, 06:12 PM

Cry about what??? For pointing out the truth that you LIE continuously.. Hmmm I remembered the post that you falsified a few weeks ago.:lol:

The MODS even caught that post a few weeks back.

If I am correct your actions got you banned last time. So don't try blaming it anyone but YOURSELF for your actions.

How ironic that he got banned, but he's back?, for changing a few words in a quote but another member openly gloats about being a troll and flaming people and the mods don't do anything about him even when he's reported.

Seems like there is a double standard when someone gets a ban for violating a rule that isn't even posted but the guy that flaunts his breaking of the posted rules is still free to do it at will. :confused:

I wonder if the application of the rules have anything to do with the way one leans politically?

hunter62

12-06-2008, 06:13 PM

I will belive the NEW YORK POST over you any day.:D Oh I get it the left didn't send you a certified letter about it.:lol: At least I have links for a major new source.;)
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008...lle_141802.htm (http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008...lle_141802.htm)

Dead link, they took whatever story down that you tried to link to.

MiketheElder

12-06-2008, 08:10 PM

you guys/girls crack me up.:D

Just plugging into this thread. Don't go getting all nervous and jerky.

GIDEON

12-06-2008, 08:16 PM

This thread is crackin me up. the question of the day. If you could afford it, why not buy it, I would

MiketheElder

12-06-2008, 09:33 PM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008/news/nationalnews/o_ring__30g_bling_for_michelle_141802.htm

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12022008...lle_141802.htm

Why would the link in posts 38 and 40 come up different than the link in post 31?

I'm just asking. I went back to the top of the page and it works, I come down the page and they don't work. Maybe it's just me. :dizzy:

alex-v

12-07-2008, 08:07 AM

Dead link, they took whatever story down that you tried to link to.
The reason this link does not work is because it is truncated. All those little dots represent the rest of the link. They were inserted into the original link to save on space. If someone goes and copies and pastes the link that they saw in an earlier msg it then includes the little dots.

Gotta go back to the original msg, click on the link and then copy and past the entire URL. The software will put the dots back in but the link on the msg should then work.

hunter62

12-07-2008, 10:44 AM

At the end of the day, did he buy the ring or not? The answer is no.

And even if he had why would it matter? If it's his money isn't he allowed to spend it however he chooses?

fishenrg

12-07-2008, 07:04 PM

Hoppe's no.10

12-07-2008, 07:08 PM

At the end of the day, did he buy the ring or not? The answer is no.

And even if he had why would it matter? If it's his money isn't he allowed to spend it however he chooses?

You're missing the point of this thread:

1. Yes it's his money and yes he has the right to spend his money as he sees fit - we all seem to agree on that.

2. BUT - Given the public stance of his campaign and his surrogates -
the poor and the middle class are in desperate straits. Therefore
those that have - $250,000 and above - should fork over MORE
of there income vis-a-vis the Federal Tax Code and concurrently show
patriotism (VP-elect Biden) in order to help those less fortunate.

3. Given all of that why doesn't or shouldn't the Obama household forego
a $30,000 bauble on Michelle's finger for say a $30,000 donation to a
soup kitchen, abused women's center or inner city job training
consortium.

Wouldn't such an outlay be more in keeping with the tenor of the Obama campaign that those who have should give more for worthwhile causes as opposed to tawdry personal and short lived satisfaction?

Wouldn't that be a refreshing gesture on the part of the Obama's and be the anti-thesis of Mccain's multiple residences ?

Hoppe's no.10

Hoppe's no.10

fishenrg

12-07-2008, 07:18 PM

You're missing the point of this thread:

1. Yes it's his money and yes he has the right to spend his money as he sees fit - we all seem to agree on that.

2. BUT - Given the public stance of his campaign and his surrogates -
the poor and the middle class are in desperate straits. Therefore
those that have - $250,000 and above - should fork over MORE
of there income vis-a-vis the Federal Tax Code and concurrently show
patriotism (VP-elect Biden) in order to help those less fortunate.

3. Given all of that why doesn't or shouldn't the Obama household forego
a $30,000 bauble on Michelle's finger for say a $30,000 donation to a
soup kitchen, abused women's center or inner city job training
consortium.

Wouldn't such an outlay be more in keeping with the tenor of the Obama campaign that those who have should give more for worthwhile causes as opposed to tawdry personal and short lived satisfaction?

Wouldn't that be a refreshing gesture on the part of the Obama's and be the anti-thesis of Mccain's multiple residences ?

Hoppe's no.10

Hoppe's no.10

If only it were true, this moralizing just might be relevant.

Brian S.Kroll

12-07-2008, 07:19 PM

Cheap cheap! (http://mrssatan.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-charitable-giving-cheap-cheap.html)

Obama Forgot to Spread His Own Wealth (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/obama_forgot_to_spread_his_own.html)

Hey Joe, where's the dough? (http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/09/bidens_charitab.html)

:lol:

fishenrg

12-07-2008, 07:31 PM

Cheap cheap! (http://mrssatan.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-charitable-giving-cheap-cheap.html)

Could it be their last name is really Obamastein? Obamawitz?

Nice link there. :dizzy:

Hoppe's no.10

12-07-2008, 09:41 PM

If only it were true, this moralizing just might be relevant.

For the sake of continuing a tempest in a teapot whether or not Obama actually did or didn't buy the ring is not the point of this thread. To wit:

1. It was posted with a citation to a seemingly reputably source ( a U.K.
newspaper) that Obama had bought his wife a $30,000 ring.

2. Obama supporters on this forum, rather than discounting the story or
initially providing evidence that it wasn't true variously responded
with posts like: It's his money, he has a right to spend it as he sees fit. (A valid argument)
These responses implicitly suggested that Obama supporters
initially believed the story.

3. The so-called anti-Obama people, like the Obama supporters, also
initially believed it but (to be succinct) legitimately presented an
argument that given Obama's/Obama campaign's continual drumbeat of progressive rhetoric - sacrifice is needed/
redistribute the wealth/ patriotic to pay more taxes/ Earnings of
$250,000 etc./ his $30,000 would be more 'patriotically' spent in ways
other then on a bauble for his wife's finger. (Also a valid argument)

The thrust of this post is not whether or not he actually bought the ring but rather how various sides on this post reacted to the belief that he had bought it.

Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

Hoppe's no.10

fishenrg

12-07-2008, 10:18 PM

For the sake of continuing a tempest in a teapot whether or not Obama actually did or didn't buy the ring is not the point of this thread. To wit:

The title of this thread is clearly:

Obama buys wife $30,000 Rhodium Ring

That is the point of the thread, and false.

2. Obama supporters on this forum, rather than discounting the story or initially providing evidence that it wasn't true variously responded
with posts like: It's his money, he has a right to spend it as he sees fit.

These responses implicitly suggested that Obama supporters
initially believed the story.

I think you need to go back and read those again if that is what you believe. RumRunner said that it's his money, yes. But the rest:

Post #7 from Jackster1:
Boo... hoo... hoo...
Do you read the rags at the supermarket check-out counter too for important news? :evil:

Post #8 from TC-fisherman:
Why do people believe everything on the internet?

Do you actually think think the jeweler who would sell something like this would put out a press release if it was true?

I guess it must be pretty important though as drudge was headlining it:rolleyes:

Post #24 from me:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...-n-wAD94QOU6O0 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iws_VLNyRvFjaUFcUOPxgJY-n-wAD94QOU6O0)

I love how some can't wait for anything to jump on him for, no matter how irrelevant...or untrue!

Post #25 from Spanky:
OH come on now, If wildones jeweler said it was so, its so!:lol:

Lmao, 8 more years of this crap! should be entertaining.:lol:

So that's 4 out of the first 5 people who could be considered obama supporters who did not say anything about it being his money, clearly not initially believing the story, and one clearly providing evidence to the contrary. So your argument, just like the original post, is not based in any sort of fact.

3. The so-called anti-Obama people, like the Obama supporters, also
initially believed it but (to be succinct) legitimately presented an
argument that given Obama's/Obama campaign - sacrifice is needed/
redistribute the wealth/ patriotic to pay more taxes/ Earnings of
$250,000 etc. his $30,000 would be more 'patriotically' spent in ways
other then on a bauble for his wife's finger.

Who cares? Since he didn't buy the ring, its all just empty moralizing.

The thrust of this post is not whether or not he actually bought the ring but rather how various sides on this post reacted to the belief that he had bought it.

The thrust of your post is, yes. But you must be reading a different thread from your argument. I saw one (1) post from a potential Obama supporter that can be construed as acceptance of the information. But, as is typical, you group us all together..."oh RumRunner said it, all liberals must say that".

Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

The difficulty is apparently yours, you tell me.