Home » India on 200 million dollars a day

Comments

India on 200 million dollars a day — 13 Comments

  1. Drudge is reporting that 34 warships will be stationed off the coast of India. That is about a third of our navy. Together with 40 or so planes flying in it sounds more like an invasion than a trip of state. Perhaps Michele talked the Dope into allowing her a shopping spree and she needs the ships to lug her stuff home.

    My take is that 5 minutes before the party lands the Indians will surrender.

    By the way, what is the purpose of this trip? Is it for 4 or 10 days? How will it be perceived in Pakistan, a country that we are lobbing bombs into and are in the process of destabilizing? Will they demand an equal or greater presence? After all, if India gets 40 planes, 34 warships and 3,000 or more bodies on the ground, aren’t they entitled to 41 planes, 35 warships and 3,001 bodies, plus the Dope, Michele and his mother in law. Did they have the foresight to send George Mitchell there in advance to assure no settlements are or will be built on or near the Dope’s planned routes?

  2. This trip will not be viewed as appropriate by anyone with a sense of proportion. It is the definition of clueless behavior.

  3. Maybe we’ll come out ahead since Obama is capable of pissing away more than $200 million per day when he stays in Washington.

  4. He better get it while the gettin’ is good!

    And yes I agree with Matthew M. Let’s keep him there for the rest of his presidency. Find someone to screw up his visa.

  5. Just for perspective, if the $200 million per day figure is accurate, the rural school district my children attended could run for seven years on what it’s going to cost us to send Obama to India for one day.

  6. Brian Swisher: seemed suspicious to me, as I wrote in the original post. The figure was just way way too high.

    Glad it’s not true. I don’t like Obama, but even he didn’t seem capable of an outrage this big.

    I just added an addendum to reflect the new info. Thanks!

  7. This is the problem with false information. Americans eager to bash their president don’t care if their hammers are real. The people who commented on this story probably told all of their friends of this “outrage.” Most of whom will believe it and never bother to check. And this is on a website that did a decent job of smelling this one out (it was an outrageous story). I don’t mind if patriots question the president. It is our right and often our duty. Just care if your information is solid. When it isn’t, and you don’t care, you start to lose the right to call yourself patriotic.

  8. Yes, you found the story hard to believe, and then went ahead and wrote your entire post as if it was true. Good for you.

  9. David Pirtle: a bit reading-comprehension-challenged, are you?

    Wrote my entire post as if it were true? Let’s see—here’s the entire post [emphasis and added comments in brackets mine]:

    Remember those Arthur Frommer travel guides that promised the reader a way to tour Europe and spend only $5 a day? [neutral intro]

    I know inflation has made that a thing of my youth. [neutral sentence]

    But still, I find this figure hard to believe, even for a restless president and his entire entourage. [Doubt about its truth in the very first moment in which I mention the story about the cost. This sets the tone of doubt at the outset, giving it a primary place.]

    Could it really be? [second sentence in which I mention it is an entire sentence devoted to restating my doubt]

    And if so, why isn’t everyone outraged by it? [third sentence in which I mention it is a third disclaimer, which points out the lack of coverage of the story, which wouldn’t be the case if it were true]

    And is this trip really necessary? [fourth sentence is neutral; introduces a different thought, which is whether the entire trip to India and especially Mumbai is necessary, no matter how much it does or doesn’t cost]

    I’m all for cementing business ties with India, a country Obama spent the early part of his presidency alternately ignoring and offending (as discussed by this author, who seems to be an admirer of Obama’s foreign policy in general). [neutral sentence on the subject of the cost, which is not mentioned or alluded to at all. The sentence is merely an endorsement of ties to India, and then a criticism of some of Obama’s earlier policies towards the country];

    But the side trip to Mumbai seems gratuitous and excessively expensive, even for Obama. [This is the very last sentence in the body of the post, and in it the only mention of the expense is the phrase “and excessively expensive, even for Obama,” which is qualified by the earlier word in the sentence “seems”—meaning, “gives the appearance of.”]

    [Then the whole thing is followed by the addendum that states the report wasn’t true, as I had suspected.]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>