[SeMissourian.com] Fair ~ 41°F  
River stage: 15.78 ft. Rising
Friday, Dec. 26, 2014
Post reply Read replies (74) More threads Create thread

So Beyoncé was lip-syncing the National anthem?.
Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 7:44 PM:

This shows even more how the Obama regime is just fancy wallpaper covering bad craftsmanship.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-207_162-5756...



Replies

I like the mention of the dress that was "designed". Nice looking dress but how many times and ways can a dress be designed and how many times, how much can someone's buddy in the dress designing business get paid for a "Design" anyone can find in any upscale dress shop?

I hope I am wrong and that dress cost under $100, although as long as the Obamas are paying for it, don't matter. :)

-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 8:04 PM

Perfect. She lip-syncs the national anthem and Obama lyp-sincs Karl Marx. Doesn't get any better than this... :-)

-- Posted by Dug on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 8:33 PM

I'm sure Common and crew are burning up the keyboard trying to find a spin.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 9:09 PM

I think the last person to not lip sync the national anthem was Rosanne Barr.

-- Posted by Simon Jester on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 9:14 PM

Simon

That was a all time low in baseball.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Jan 22, 2013, at 9:27 PM

So Beyoncé was lip-syncing the National anthem?. Posted by We Regret To Inform U

if this matters to you you have serious issues

-- Posted by mysterious on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 4:06 AM

She was lip synching to HER OWN VOICE. So what?

-- Posted by ssnkemp on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 5:07 AM

She is a traitor and should be banned to the repub party.

-- Posted by Dexterite1 on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 5:41 AM

Come on spring get here you couldn't arrive any sooner, cabin fever beginning to sit in on many.

-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 6:37 AM

It's a funny. Most liberals just don't have any humor these days. I guess I would be sitting on pins and needles too wondering if my welfare, 99 weeks of unemployment, medicaid, food stamps, section 8 housing credits, obamaphones or "free" healthcare will get cut.

-- Posted by Dug on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 7:42 AM

The election is over behind us until the next election cycle four years from now time to move forward. Many mistakes were made by the republicans in the last election, they didn't even hardly make an attempt to go after the majority of the hispanic vote. The GOP needs a leader and they haven't had one for years now many things have changed the GOP is going to have to go after the middle class and the young voters which they didn't do in the last election even Newt and Hailey said that and go for the middle of the road that is how elections are won not to the far right or far left and they must have a candidate that is able to connect to the middle class. Times have changed the day of Reagan is gone this is the 21st century.

-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 8:26 AM

A fake ceramony for a fake president.

-- Posted by jadip4me on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 8:43 AM

if this matters to you you have serious issues

-- Posted by captcha on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 4:06 AM

I know. I should be ashamed of myself.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Jan 23, 2013, at 9:40 AM

Someone has stolen my dexterite identity. BYE all you nice people.

-- Posted by Dexterite1 on Wed, Jan 30, 2013, at 5:55 AM

Uh Oh

""The only time he shot skeet was for President's Cup," said the source, referring to a shooting competition tradition involving the presidential Marine guards. "I was there. He stayed for about five minutes, and couldn't leave fast enough."

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Jan 31, 2013, at 12:21 AM

Oops wrong thread

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Jan 31, 2013, at 12:21 AM

I would say that Bey'once couldn't sing no matter the circumstances,

-- Posted by BCStoned on Sun, Feb 3, 2013, at 10:07 PM

I guess if you have no talent then dance and gyrate in your underwear and people will say how great the show was.

-- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 8:03 AM

I guess if you have no talent then dance and gyrate in your underwear and people will say how great the show was.

-- Posted by Mowrangler on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 8:03 AM

Yep, bring back the stones or the Who . Whatever is left of them or some other old broken down antique act. Bey once was a great show. Moving the Super Bowl into modern times.

-- Posted by 3forone on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 8:19 AM

Well if you reside in Missouri's 8th congressional district, there is a good chance you would be. -- Posted by Spaniard on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 1:06 PM

Far less of a chance than the inner city of St. Louis which is run by your liberal democrats. Or chicago. Or LA. Or Detroit. Or... nearly any city run by liberal democrats. It's a pattern.

-- Posted by Dug on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 3:17 PM

Well if you reside in Missouri's 8th congressional district, there is a good chance you would be.

-- Posted by Spaniard on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 1:06 PM

And will continue as long as the empty suit is still in office. I'm not risking my retirement to hire folks.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Feb 4, 2013, at 5:41 PM

-- Posted by Spaniard on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 8:54 AM

Sources please. And please don't compare what it takes to live in SE Missouri to the cost of living in LA. Don't give me some national "poverty" income that says your "poor" if you make $86,000/year and have 6 kids.

Source please.

-- Posted by Dug on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 9:29 AM

"Hardly. The 8th is one of the poorest, least educated congressional districts in the country. 7 or 8 of the bottom ten are in red states."

Depends on your unit of measure. If you use the percentage of population living below the poverty line, the poorest ten are in Puerto Rico, New York, Texas, Michigan, Arizona, Michigan, Mississippi, California, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky.

Median Household Income produces similar results.

Within the state of Missouri, the 1st Congressional district has a higher percentage of households below the poverty line, though the 8th has a slightly higher percentage of the total population below the poverty line. (20.5%). Nationwide, the 20.5% puts the 8th district 376th out of 437 disticts.

http://proximityone.com/cd_income0910.ht...

I'm not sure how to measure education, this site puts the bottom 5 in TX, AX, CA, CA, and CA.

http://measureofamerica.org/file/Congres...

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 10:10 AM

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 10:10 AM

There are many analyses on this and I've got several sites that also confirm the difference in poverty by government political affiliation.

The national standard of "poverty" is the one that gripes me.

$25,000 in Doniphan, MO might be a decent living where $75,000 in LA might be poor in some areas. I also know that taxes in some states like Illinois (property, income, etc.) are outrageous.

A lot of factors to consider.

-- Posted by Dug on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 10:45 AM

Per Capita Income puts the poorest Districts in Puerto Rico, New York, California, Texas, Arizona, Texas, California, Texas, Florida, and Kentucky.

While the 'poorest' states tend to be 'red states', the same does not hold true when you break it down into congressional districts. The poorest district, traditionally, has been NY16, which incorporates a heavily Puerto Rican area of the Bronx.

I'm not sure how education is being guaged, but I would tend to think many inner city districts would suffer from the lowest graduation rates and test scores. Again, comparing overall state grading to individual districts makes a difference. New York and California, for instance, seem to have both the richest and the poorest among them. The great income disparity the Democrats seem to bemoan appears to be most prevalent in 'blue states'.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/25/news/eco...

This is primarily driven by the disparity of income of the top 5% in each state, ranging from a low of about $135,000 (WY - a red state) to a high of about $270,000 (NJ - a blue state), while the average income fo the bottom 20% varies from a low of about $13,200 (WV - a blue state) to a high of about $23,100 (NH, - a blue state).

But, as you note, once can live much better on a $14,000 annual income in the Midwest than one can live on such an income on either of the coasts, or along the Great Lakes, so comparing simple income values is misleading.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 11:24 AM

WV - a blue state WTF?

-- Posted by howdydoody on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 11:27 AM

West Virginia is a blue state, yes.

The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and both U.S. Senators are Democrats. The House is split, two Republicans and one Democrat.

The Democrats also hold both houses of the State Legislature.

I know you like to think the whole world revolves around Mr. Obama, and thus that West Virginia is a 'red state' becuase it didn't vote for him, or for any Democrat president since Mr. Clinton won the state in 1996, but that is not the deciding factor.

West Virginia is a coal-producing state, and the Democratic Party's anti-coal sentiment has not played well in the state at the presidential level, beginning with Mr. Gore's being the frontrunner.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 1:40 PM

It's easy enough to get demographics of any area from the census bureau.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 1:52 PM

The Census Bureau produces the data, but does not put their demographics into graphics which are easier to read. The majority of readers here on the SEMissourian forum usually have neither the time nor the inclination to read through the Census Bureau's detailed data to find the information sought. There are plenty of sites that put the information from the Census Bureau into easily-read graphic or table formats, such as the ones I've linked.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 2:02 PM

SH, How does the poverty rate in Texas compare to Missouri and California?

I have read on this site that about a third of Californians are on welfare.

In Texas, the per-capita income is $25,548 and its household income $50,920.

Although the cost living in California is higher, which must be taken into consideration. The per-capita income is $29,634 which is a little over $4000 higher than Texas, or the household income of $61,6332 is more than $10,000 more than Texas.

By the way, the poverty rate in Texas is around 17 percent. In California and Missouri the poverty rate is right at 14.3 percent which is the national average. I'm sure that your websites explained this well enough.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 2:26 PM

"SH, How does the poverty rate in Texas compare to Missouri and California? "

I haven't looked it up. I can tell you that, at $17,869, the per capita income of Missouri's eight district is higher than that for at least six California districts, which kind of counters Spaniard's claim.

McKinney, TX made Money Magazine's #2 spot in the 'Best Places To Live, 2012' issue. This was based, in part, on its low cost of living and high quality of life. Irvine, CA followed a few spots behind, but cost of living was not in its favour. This is consistent with Dug's argument about 'one size fits all' income numbers as related to the poverty level. There should be at a minimum 50 different poverty lines, one for each state, based upon the local cost-of-living. Even at 50, it's not a good figure, since a descent salary in the Bootheel might not pull you out of poverty in St. Louis or Kansas City.

California has the highest poverty rate in the nation, at 23.5%. This is higher than Missouri's 8th Congressional district's value of 19.6%.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14...

http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p60-...

The reason for the disparity is the use of the Statistical Poverty Measure, which takes into account such things as cost of living, as opposed to the official measure using the standard methodology.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 3:07 PM

Sorry, that was supposed to be 'Supplemental Poverty Level (SPM)'. It takes into account a greater number of factors, such as the cost of housing and taxes, instead of simply using the cost of food, as the official measure uses.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 3:19 PM

When you take into account those factors, California and the District of Columbia, both traditionally blue, outpace the third-place contender, red-state Florida.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 3:21 PM

SH, According to the US census bureau at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/... California's poverty rate is 14.4 percent.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 3:37 PM

BC, the link I posted is direct from the Census Bureau, as well as the Huffington Post's plain-English version of it.

Your link is the five-year average (2007-2012) using the official measure, which I discussed earlier.

The SPM measure is a three-year average, which puts the California Poverty Level at 23.5%. They also provide the three-year average using the official method, which puts it at 16.3%, still well above Missouri's offical rate of 15.5%, and SPM rate of 12.9%.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 3:58 PM

The five-year average is lower because it includes two years (or a year and a half, depending upon how it is measured) before the economic downturn. California was hit hard by the recession. 2008 saw many Californians leaving the state. Texas, curiously enough, was a favourite destination of emigrating Californians.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:01 PM

And during that 5 year period, Texas had a 17 percent poverty rate.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:07 PM

"And during that 5 year period, Texas had a 17 percent poverty rate."

Which proves what?

Using the 3-year average, Texas also had a 17 percent rate, while California had a 16 1/2 percnet rate, if you use the official method of measurement. However if you use the SPM method, Texas had a 16% rate and California had a 23 1/2% rate. Ergo, which is worse depends on which method you use, even though both methods come from the Census Bureau.

California, obviously, would prefer that you use the official method, as it makes them look better. But, there must be some reason so many Californians have moved to Texas.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/...

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:29 PM

SH, California is still growing, just not as fast as it once did.

The poor man's land of Los Angeles still only ranks behind Tokyo and New York in GDP. Its GDP is greater than The Netherlands, Turkey, Sweden, Belgium, and Indonesia's. It may be poor, but it isn't all that poor.

California may be poor, but it is still the richest state of the United States. Its Agriculture still smokes any other state's.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:38 PM

I should have said the larger Los Angeles Metro Area instead of just Los Angeles.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:44 PM

Per Capita, it's GDP ranks twelth in the nation. But, I ask again, what is your point?

Missouri's GDP, at $246 billion, is greater than Hong Kong's, Israel's, or New Zealand, but what of it.

Government spending is a component of GDP, and California spends a lot of money. Washington DC has the highest per capita GDP of any state, and yet they produce little of anything of value, so GDP numbers are misleading, to say the least.

For all its virtues, California is on the fast track to Bankruptcy, as is Illinois and various other states. Clearly they have their problems. Missouri has its problems, but it's not on the fast track to bankruptcy.

-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 4:50 PM

Dissident, California sends more money to Washington D.C. than it gets back.

California has always had the worst government of any state. But the state outside of its government is very rich. Even though its government says it has an $800 million surplus, that surplus is in its accounting methods.

California and Texas should be their own countries.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 5:19 PM

Uh huh. Always the big talker.

-- Posted by Spaniard on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 8:55 AM

All but one of my men are gone Meg. Only me and him messing around until I can jump off the train.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 5:52 PM

I have worked in Georgia, South Carolina, Florida. Mississippi, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, California, and Missouri and all have treated me well. Their governments may have been terrible, who knows, but government is bad just by being government. I liked every state that I have worked in, and would not put any of them down.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 6:21 PM

So if I wanted to be smarter and richer, what state should I move to? I think the answer is not in the statistics but in the individual opportunities that fit what one is seeking.

I knew a guy that owned and operated a mechanic's truck, fixing heavy equipment in the field. A kind of mobile machine shop for construction contractors.

Work was sparse here in SEMO and his brother in law invited him to try his luck in Ca while staying with them. He said he was flagged down on the highway by a contractor that saw his Mo plate.

Had work and never had to move in with his sister, came back to Mo two years later a lot better off.

Poverty and success statistics of the state or party of government are not the determinant of individual quality of life for someone with a little ambition. IMO

-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 6:33 PM

Old John: I had employment in every state. I had no trouble finding employment in California. I worked for a black contractor in Hawthorne, and when that work ran out, he fixed me up with a contractor in Beverly Hills. I got to work on some of the finest homes in America.

I worked on homes owned by millionaire Chinese from Taiwan and rich Germans. If times were tough, you couldn't tell from my wife and my employment.

There are poor places in the Los Angeles area, South Central, East LA, and the Eastern Empire, but for the most part, there is a lot of wealth there.

Missouri is my home, and it is definitely OK in my book. I'm a hillbilly at heart.

-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 10:17 PM

Someone well respected once said the poor will always be among us.

Sometimes when the gold is the lure, selling picks and shovels pays more.

-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 12:22 AM

3forone If you think she has any real talent your are sadly mistaken. People everywhere were talking how skanky she looked and couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.

-- Posted by Mowrangler on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 8:20 AM

Poverty and success statistics of the state or party of government are not the determinant of individual quality of life for someone with a little ambition. IMO

-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Feb 5, 2013, at 6:33 PM

That ambition thing is the real factor. I was always looking for good help even if it was slow. Good talent, no bad attitudes, and not a job hopper is what employers are looking for.

If I had one of the 90 week wonders ask for a job I would not waste my time. They are lazy. If they had tried to find work that long they would already be working.

I found good jobs for all my help and they didn't miss a beat. My last one is retiring at the same time I am. If I ever get to. This is harder than I thought.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 6:19 PM

3forone If you think she has any real talent your are sadly mistaken. People everywhere were talking how skanky she looked and couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.

-- Posted by Mowrangler on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 8:20 AM

Where? The local boondock coffee shop. Most national news accounts gave her rave reviews. Everyone at my house 20 plus people thought it was a great performance, much better than anything in the last 10 years and believe me I have music critics for friends.

-- Posted by 3forone on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 6:34 PM

"Everyone at my house 20 plus people thought it was a great performance, much better than anything in the last 10 years and believe me I have music critics for friends."

Sorry but the best by far was Madonna's and the people that voted agree. You were just with all your friends drinking the Obama Kool-Aid and just thought she was the best. BTW everyone is a critic.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 7:23 PM

I figured Beyonce was some kind of celebrity but had to ask who or what. I don't get out much I suppose. I certianly don't keep up with or care who is in or who is out within the we worship people crowd.

-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 8:56 PM

Sorry but the best by far was Madonna's and the people that voted agree. You were just with all your friends drinking the Obama Kool-Aid and just thought she was the best. BTW everyone is a critic.

-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 7:23 PM

And what does Beyonce"s performance at the super bowl have to do with O'Bama? You people really need to get a new whipping post for everything you see wrong with the world. Sad old men.

-- Posted by 3forone on Wed, Feb 6, 2013, at 9:51 PM


Respond to this thread

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account , enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Want to comment?

In order to participate in semissourian.com's forums, you must be a registered member of the site. Once registered and logged in, you can post comments to existing threads or post new threads of your own. Click below to register now (it's free!). If you're already registered, just start commenting and posting threads.