Michelle Obama rents Hollywood Hills home, possibly scoping out L.A. move, report says

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the 13,000 square home LEEd certified? Seems like a lot of energy consumption.

And, how are they going to travel between both houses?

By sailboat I hope?

Are you saying you want them on a slave ship? Why should they have to travel differently than anybody else?

Because...climate change is about to destroy the planet in 12 years so we shouldn't fly all the time between house A and house B?

Are they going to skate from DC to LA?

Is that what you would do?

Actually, even if we could afford two McMansions, we only have one small townhouse, to be able to be energy efficient. And we only fly/ drive as last resort, choosing public transportation as much as possible.

I'd expect a politician to claims to care about climate change to walk the talk, not to walk the opposite of the talk.

And I'd expect people who claim to care about climate change not to vote for Trump, but judging by this thread, they still did. So, here we are.

Who's talking Trump here?

Does he live in your head full-time?

Bingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the 13,000 square home LEEd certified? Seems like a lot of energy consumption.

And, how are they going to travel between both houses?

By sailboat I hope?

Are you saying you want them on a slave ship? Why should they have to travel differently than anybody else?

Because...climate change is about to destroy the planet in 12 years so we shouldn't fly all the time between house A and house B?

Are they going to skate from DC to LA?

Is that what you would do?

Actually, even if we could afford two McMansions, we only have one small townhouse, to be able to be energy efficient. And we only fly/ drive as last resort, choosing public transportation as much as possible.

I'd expect a politician to claims to care about climate change to walk the talk, not to walk the opposite of the talk.

And I'd expect people who claim to care about climate change not to vote for Trump, but judging by this thread, they still did. So, here we are.

Who's talking Trump here?

Does he live in your head full-time?

Uh, he's only the president who'd been slashing environmental regulations, so he's more than a little relevant if you're actually concerned at all about climate change. Much more so than nitpicking over Obama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wasn't Obama going to stop sea level rise by curbing Co2 emissions???

That is a 13,000 sq ft SECOND HOME with two swimming pools.

Jealous much?

Im definitely jealous! And I'm guessing a lot of people supported Obama's and the Democrats in general income inequality rhetoric because they're jealous. Ironic much? Or how do you square the two?

Easy.

Everyone knows it was just talk to look hip and sell fat book contracts.

[Anonymous]

Say what you will about Cheney but he had a great corporate career.

[Anonymous]

Obama family is hurting many by showing what they truly value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama family is hurting many by showing what they truly value.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wasn't Obama going to stop sea level rise by curbing Co2 emissions???

That is a 13,000 sq ft SECOND HOME with two swimming pools.

Jealous much?

Im definitely jealous! And I'm guessing a lot of people supported Obama's and the Democrats in general income inequality rhetoric because they're jealous. Ironic much? Or how do you square the two?

Easy.

Everyone knows it was just talk to look hip and sell fat book contracts.

So many politicians ride the democrat and now socialist hip talk bandwagon to get just what they need for themselves. It's just sad.

[Anonymous]

Wow this thread has made it obvious that republicans have no idea what Obama and democrats mean by income inequality. Hint: it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be allowed to be wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wasn't Obama going to stop sea level rise by curbing Co2 emissions???

That is a 13,000 sq ft SECOND HOME with two swimming pools.

Jealous much?

Im definitely jealous! And I'm guessing a lot of people supported Obama's and the Democrats in general income inequality rhetoric because they're jealous. Ironic much? Or how do you square the two?

Easy.

Everyone knows it was just talk to look hip and sell fat book contracts.

So many politicians ride the democrat and now socialist hip talk bandwagon to get just what they need for themselves. It's just sad.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow this thread has made it obvious that republicans have no idea what Obama and democrats mean by income inequality. Hint: it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be allowed to be wealthy.

We know.

It means only politicians can get wealthy via book contracts and paid speeches, like Obama, Biden, Clinton, Sanders, Warren...

For everyone else, money is dirty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow this thread has made it obvious that republicans have no idea what Obama and democrats mean by income inequality. Hint: it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be allowed to be wealthy.

We know.

It means only politicians can get wealthy via book contracts and paid speeches, like Obama, Biden, Clinton, Sanders, Warren...

For everyone else, money is dirty.

+1

Exactly! Political people can’t produce a product or provide a good or service. They can only write fawning books about themselves with composite girlfriends lurking in the background. Or speak to the Indonesian Grocers Association for a million bucks.

[Anonymous]

Nice to see the Obamas living rent-free in Trumpsters' heads and benefiting handsomely from the Trump tax cuts. LOL!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow this thread has made it obvious that republicans have no idea what Obama and democrats mean by income inequality. Hint: it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be allowed to be wealthy.

We know.

It means only politicians can get wealthy via book contracts and paid speeches, like Obama, Biden, Clinton, Sanders, Warren...

For everyone else, money is dirty.

+1

Exactly! Political people can’t produce a product or provide a good or service. They can only write fawning books about themselves with composite girlfriends lurking in the background. Or speak to the Indonesian Grocers Association for a million bucks.

Envy is not a good look. Quit whining and pull yourself up by the bootstraps. Isn't that what your party keeps telling everyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow this thread has made it obvious that republicans have no idea what Obama and democrats mean by income inequality. Hint: it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be allowed to be wealthy.

Please explain it to us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nice to see the Obamas living rent-free in Trumpsters' heads and benefiting handsomely from the Trump tax cuts. LOL!

+1

13 PAGES on where the Obamas live?

MAGAs are so stupid.