Diamonds for Michelle Obama


Recommended Posts

No, you are missing the point that he still had his mask on when he donated to charity.

Also it doesn't matter how much he gives away to charity. All that kindness doesn't compare to the wasting of 20000 euros for a ring, when many Americans barely make that much per year, or even have that much in their bank accounts. He's just like any other politician throwing his money around with out any worries at all.

So he's not allowed to buy things he can afford because other people can't afford them? That's absolutely ridiculous.

1. Is this really news?

2. I would buy $20,000 dollar rings if I was due to live in the white house and pretty much not have any form of necessary expenditure for the next 4 years guaranteed

3. Cool ring

:)

Take a look @ Cindy Mccain's clothes and jewels. Not to mention rofl Palin's looting of Neman Marcus.

So if you're going into that arena, the conservatives have lost this round as well.

1. Is this really news?

2. I would buy $20,000 dollar rings if I was due to live in the white house and pretty much not have any form of necessary expenditure for the next 4 years guaranteed

3. Cool ring

:)

Nope not news at all.

I'm a republican and if I remember my Reaganomics well enough, spending money is good for the economy. So Reps should be happy that money is going back into the economy. In addition you Dems out there will be happy with all the tax he paid on that ring going back to the government. There everyone should be happy.

If I have a gripe it is that he did not go American made and have more of that money go to our economy.

I'm not playing devil's advocate.

The media royally slammed McCain for the houses thing, and Edwards for the $400 haircut, saying both times that these politicians weren't being sensitive to what most Americans are going through. Why should Obama not be slammed for being insensitive for the exact same matter? Sure, report it. But if you're going to report it, be fair. Don't slam one side for something, then not slam the other side when they do almost the exact same thing.

Again, that's been my problem with the media recently. They give Obama a free pass no matter what he does. I fail to see how rebuking stuff and letting the public know "hey, this is wrong" hurt Obama. So you're saying that when they rebuked this information that it all hurt Obama? I find that extremely hard to believe. Of course they had an obligation to report it. And they did the right thing by saying a lot of the information was wrong. But the media repeatedly editorialized their stances by bringing up the McCain and Edwards scenarios I mentioned by saying "hey, these guys are being insensitive to what Americans are going through" but not doing the same for Obama in this scenario.

I never said they wouldn't report it. I said it's getting a different spin. He's being a loving husband is the spin right now. They're just reporting it. But they editorialized McCain's houses over and over again.

We must have different definitions of royally slammed, because from what I gathered, there was far more emphasis on Obama's issues than McCain issues during the campaign. I didn't really see any free pass since both campaigns were slammed for various things. I remember hearing Campbell Brown, CNN's main primetime election correspondent, even call out that the Palin clothing reports were unfair to her.

I mean, sure if you consider MSNBC or Fox News--then both gave out free passes to their respective political sides. But I really didn't see much of a bias from CNN (as described above) or BBC.

From one perspective, you could say that this would be a loving editorial. But then it would seem odd as to why they would detail that it cost 20k pounds and is reserved for mainly celebs/VIPS? Doesn't sound like much of a free pass--but then again the election is over and we're debating over pointless things.

Keep the insults out of here. Fresh has nothing to do with this.

Also it doesn't matter how much he gives away to charity.

Really? Are you serious or just trolling because your posts are getting more ridiculous all the time.

All that kindness doesn't compare to the wasting of 20000 euros for a ring, when many Americans barely make that much per year, or even have that much in their bank accounts.

Do you have a computer? I assume you do because you're obviously posting here. Did you know that many people can't afford a computer? You obviously must be a horrible person for buying expensive luxury items while other people go hungry. Seriously though, it's his money. He is not obligated to give any of it away, but he does. He gives a lot, and you can say that doesn't matter all you want but it does. You seem to be trying to say he should give every dime he has away, and that's just stupid.

He's just like any other politician throwing his money around with out any worries at all.

Once again, it's his money. Not the taxpayers' so being a politician has absolutely nothing to do with it. He can buy whatever he wants with his own money; it's nobody's business. We all buy expensive things we don't need, that doesn't make us evil and greedy. Just admit you don't like Obama, are bitter that he won, and will grasp at any ridiculous straw you can to bash him.

Edited by TRC
Do you have a computer? I assume you do because you're obviously posting here. Did you know that many people can't afford a computer? You obviously must be a horrible person for buying expensive luxury items while other people go hungry.

I don't own a computer, why waste thousands of dollars on one when I can easily have access to one 24/7 at school?

Also dude you picked out parts of my post, taking them out of context. You're just like a politician now.

I'm not saying that's he must give away all his life savings to charity, but his wasting of money on that ring is out character for man we have been supporting for two years. It looks like he is not what we all thought he would be.

Edited by s3n4te
I don't own a computer, why waste thousands of dollars on one when I can easily have access to one 24/7 at school?

Ok, so you never ever plan to buy anything expensive you don't need? You don't have a game console, or a TV, never plan to buy a car? Point is you're being a hypocrite. Since you're at school maybe you should be studying instead of whining on a forum because someone in another country bought an expensive ring.

Also dude you picked out parts of my post, taking them out of context. You're just like a politician now.

No, I replied to different statements in your post but not one word was changed and nothing was taken out of context.

I'm not saying that's he must give away all his life savings to charity, but his wasting of money on that ring is out character for man we have been supporting for two years. It looks like he is not what we all thought he would be.

That's your opinion, I see nothing wrong with it at all. Who are you to say what is a waste of money?

Ok, so you never ever plan to buy anything expensive you don't need? You don't have a game console, or a TV, never plan to buy a car? Point is you're being a hypocrite. Since you're at school maybe you should be studying instead of whining on a forum because someone in another country bought an expensive ring.

No, I replied to different statements in your post, like now, but not one word was changed and nothing was taken out of context. Keep grasping though...

Yea you're right I should get back to finishing my paper on how Obama lied his way to the Whitehouse.

Yea you're right I should get back to finishing my paper on how Obama lied his way to the Whitehouse.

id be interested in reading that when you are done

that is a serious comment

i always like to read the other side of a coin if i can... get someone else's perspective

I'm not saying that's he must give away all his life savings to charity, but his wasting of money on that ring is out character for man we have been supporting for two years. It looks like he is not what we all thought he would be.

But this is a gift for his wife. It's not like he clipped $20,000 off his charity money for this ring.

And waste? If anything that ring will only go up in value.

I wonder if people would be so critical if he had bought a $20 000 painting or automobile.

They're such a cute couple. It's nice to have a President and First Lady who are still in love with each other.

:heart:

I'm not sure where you are going with that. Most of our First couples have been pretty close. The exception might be Bill and Hill, extramarital affairs will put a strain on any relationship. I actually got to interact with Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter quite a few times about 3 years back and those two still act like love sick teenagers around each other; on the verge of making me uncomfortable even.

The guy just got finished with the second most demanding job on the planet: becoming President of the US.

In January he starts the most demanding job in the world: being President of the US.

Let him buy whatever he wants; he deserves it.

He not an average middle-class worker, he's president-elect. He shouldn't have to pretend to be someone he's not.

The guy just got finished with the second most demanding job on the planet: becoming President of the US.

In January he starts the most demanding job in the world: being President of the US.

Let him buy whatever he wants; he deserves it.

After all the BS claims the Mccain campaign tried to pull hell yeah he deserves it.

Not sure if anyone has noticed this or not, but that article in the OP was updated a short while ago, and it specifically says Obama "denies" those reports about him buying that ring. Just thought I'd throw that out there so all the hypocrites can stfu now.

Are you presuming Obama has never donated to charity?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/25/o...on_n_93353.html

He already paid his taxes. Wealth has been spread.

I could careless what the man buys; I am actually glad that he can....If this would have been something Bush would have done.... Oh man would we have heard about it!

Really?

So John McCain's houses and cars weren't discussed during the campaign at all? They were just minor points, even though it's his own personal money? John Edwards wasn't ridiculed for his $400 haircut, even though it was with his own personal money?

I like Obama, but I really don't like how journalists give him a free pass where they would ridicule others.

Bias is clear and cut, good luck ever trying to get anyone open minded enough to admit it.

I thought he compared himself to an average middleclass American worker. Buying a ring that expensive just shows that he's just like any other rich greedy politician!

What just like a Rebublican :) They attack when things like this are done on the right...

Is this a joke? Obama and his wife took their kids to feed the homeless the day before Thanksgiving. Your argument holds no merit as he actually did 'practice what he preached'. Unless you're going to tell me that you yourself are going to stop spending money on anything that's not absolutely necessary to live and give it all away to the homeless, you can't make this argument against Obama. He's given plenty back to the community and can spend his money how he pleases.

-Spenser

Go look up the charity donations... Again, it is his money and he can do what he likes. I am all for that; just pointing out how he might be just like the rest of us...when we earn money we OWN the money and can do what WE like with it. Hope he remembers others out there would like to keep as much of thier own money as possible.

Man I hope there's someone out there who still likes Fresh and his daily BS. :wacko:

My feelings are hurt :p

Keep the insults out of here. Fresh has nothing to do with this.

Thanks Giga! :)

The guy just got finished with the second most demanding job on the planet: becoming President of the US.

In January he starts the most demanding job in the world: being President of the US.

Let him buy whatever he wants; he deserves it.

He not an average middle-class worker, he's president-elect. He shouldn't have to pretend to be someone he's not.

Sure, I agree. Hope he remembers that....taking other people's money is easy.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!