patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

First Lady to Speak at Upper Dublin High School on Thursday

Tickets will be available beginning Tuesday at noon.

 

First Lady Michelle Obama will be at Upper Dublin High School on Thursday, August 9, as part of the Obama 2012 campaign.

As part of the campaign’s new It Takes One effort, the First Lady will speak on what’s at stake in this election for Pennsylvania’s as well as encourage the growth of the grassroots network.

The event begins at 4 p.m. at the Upper Dublin High School. The event is free to the public, but tickets are required. Tickets are available beginning Tuesday, August 7 at noon at these locations in Montgomery County:

Organizing for America – Bristol
414 Mill St.
Bristol, PA 19007

Organizing for America – Elkins Park
8120 Old York Rd. Unit 4
Elkins Park, PA 19027

Organizing for America – Media
340 W. Baltimore Ave.
Media, PA 19063

Organizing for America – Norristown
1729 Markley St.
Norristown, PA 19401

Organizing for America – West Chester
533 E. Gay St.
West Chester, PA 19380

Related Topics: First Lady, Michelle Obama, Upper Dublin High School, election 2012, and upper dublin

Paul Nolan

8:13 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Will they be serving Kool-Aid?

Reply

Smedley

8:33 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

How about that the event is in upper dublin but you can't get tickets there.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Rebecca Britt

8:51 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

I just said the same thing! I'm not able to go to Norristown or Elkins Park to try to get tix for an event in my back yard.

Would have been nice if some tix were available at our Township building.

Comment_arrow

Cher

12:00 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

The only thing I can figure is if they offered the tix to the hometown people they would be absolutely swamped. So by making people drive an hour to get them, they are hoping not as many go. IMO.

MaggieMay

10:53 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

If it where at the township building it would appear as if the township were supporting a political event. That would not be appropriate.

Reply

Joe Koenig

11:38 am on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

The polls say that the President is 8-9% ahead of Mitt Romney in PA. I have noticed political ads on TV and this event seem to indicate that their polling shows a much closer race. It seems that PA is in play. Perhaps the Dems cannot get their 400,000 majority in Phila for several reasons, apathy and voter ID laws??

Reply

Paula Goff

12:39 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Probably there is no Organizing for America office in Upper Dublin.

Reply

Bob

2:47 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

You have to get the tickets at the Organizing For America office...talk about having to drink the kool-aid. I was near one today and decide to pick up a pair because I want to go and will wear the appropriate anti-Obama attire at the new high school that I'm paying for. So I walk into Communisim Central and ask for two tickets. I first had to write down my name, address, town, zip code, and if I needed ADA assistance. Ditto for my guest They then handed me a card asking me to fil out & sign. They asked for my name, address, phone number and email address. The card also said that I would vote Democrat in the upcoming election. I did not want to lie to them so I told them that I would not sign the card because I could not promise that I would vote for the democrat. They then said it was an "Obama Rally" and I had to sign. I said that the info I read said nothing of it being an Obama Rally and that it was being held in the high school building that my UD school taxes paid for. After a few minutes they gave me the two tickets. I guess now we'll see if they let me in...

Reply

Curmudgeon

3:04 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

@Bob: Did you need to show photo ID?? I'm sure that it's hard to get tickets because they'll be bussing in all the SCIU and AFSCME workers. @Patch, make sure when you report this event, you get pics of the busses, and interview those who are bussed to the event. Sorry for the cynicism.

Reply

Pumpkin

4:18 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

The old Obama trick...bus people to an event.
He started that right?

Reply

danny roturra

9:19 pm on Tuesday, August 7, 2012

who's paying for this charade? i have no interest in this woman, her blight of a husband or their shared socialist views. perhaps the corrosive libs on the school board, commissioners and registered dems should pick up the tab for this orchestrated farce. barry o has done extensive damage to this country since his coronation.and this woman has reaped all the perks she could during his tenure. now, in jeopardy of not being elected, she arrives in a community that is the antithesis of all the principles that this community used to stand for and spews her propaganda...all the time immune from comment or criticism. it will be a good day when the two of them are a bad memory...november ain't that far away.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mike

2:52 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

I'm sorry, but "socialist views"? Because he wants to ban assault rifles? because he thinks part of only a TEMPORARY solution is taxing millionaires (who won't be hurt by it at all, are willing to, and make additional money off of investments rather than their actual income which isn't taxed at all) just a little more to gain revenue to address the financial problems? Because he wants to give tax cuts to middle class Americans, part of a plan that Bush made! (but let me guess, it's not good anymore because Obama supports it). He is not a Socialist, in fact, far from it. You talk as if he is a bad candidate, but take a look at the Congress that says no to everything (http://www.comedycentral.com/video-clips/tnawa2/key-and-peele-obama-s-meeting-with-republicans ... this is actually hilarious). There are so many politicians who just refuse to do what he proposes and aren't willing to work. John McCain even said so himself that a lot of the Republicans in Congress won't work if they don't get what they want! And you also seem confident in a Romney for whatever reason... The man has yet to propose any sort of substance in his campaign! You know before the election he wasn't that bad, but now he has changed his views just to get the radicals (like the NRA) to support him. Just so he has a chance to win the election. Do you ever notice how he just doesn't answer questions in interviews? Just answers something completely irrelevant? I guess we'll see in debates when he has to answer.

Comment_arrow

Cher

3:59 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Thank you Mike for being the voice of reason.

Comment_arrow

Mike Shortall

9:42 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

@ Mike: One correction .... President Obama doesn't want to ban assault rifles. He really doesn't care about gun control at all. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/barack-obama-guns_n_1696708.html)

And it's pure political calculus.

Comment_arrow

patrick

9:54 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

your right danny-boy. i'm going to vote for the dog-abusing, non-tax paying, grandson of a mexican polgamist.

Comment_arrow

madMAX

12:18 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Although your post seems more like a political rant than an actual question. the answer to who is paying for this charade.... the Obama campaign and the Montgomery county democratic party are probably splitting the costs. Zero of your tax dollars are being spent on this event.

Marilyn

9:46 am on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

In support of preserving our natural resources...I'll being the packets of KoolAid so they can snort the powder and conserve water at the same time. Maybe an IV line?!?

Reply

Linda

4:39 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Just think all the time you spend spewing lies and sharing unsubstantiated rumor and you could be researching fact. Danny, the damage HE has done to this country?? Did you know we were in the worst economic since the recession and headed there again in the FALL of 2008, before he took office? Here is the deal people, if you don't like them, DON'T go...keep it moving. Why waste your time, if you have made up your mind? You teach your children to not say anything if you don't have anything nice to say, so lead by example! Simple as that!

Reply

Joe Koenig

4:51 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

@Mike: Let me try to explain my position. Raising taxes on those who already pay 40% of all taxes collected by the IRS is illogical for several reasons. If you have a problem with capital gains, then lets take a look at the whole tax code, including flattening the tax rates, reducing deductions, solving medicare's and social security's inevitable bankruptcy and collecting income taxes from 90% of the working population. This President has increased spending $1Trilllion dollars per year. Without significant spending reductions, firm and not imaginary, I resent sending anymore $$ to Washington so that they can spend it irrationally. This mantra about rich people paying their fair share is ridiculous. They are an easy target, but in fact they pay their fair share especiall when 47% pay no Federal income taxes. He has done end runs around Congress with Executive orders, and his EPA is in the process of destroying the energy business in this country. "If you want to build a caol plant, we will bankrupt you." Green energy is pie in the sky at this time. It is costly, unproductive, and hard to distribute. Eventually we will solve these issues, but until then, why raise our costs, lose jobs, and promote foreign production of thes energy sources for us and the world. Greed is not people who earn their $$ and wan to keep it, it's those who want other people's property for them w/o working for it. They didn't build it either!!!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mike

7:39 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Joe, you make some fair points. I agree that the tax code needs to be simplified and there needs to be some spending cuts. But as to your point about the rich paying 40% of all taxes, it's not that they are being taxed more because it's the same percentage. It's just that since they make more they give more money, meaning 15% of $500,000 is more than 15% of $40,000, but it's still the same percentage. I also understand where you're coming from when you say they are an easy target and you shouldn't tax them more because they have more money. In theory, the principle is fair and if we were in good times I'd agree to stand by that principle. However when looking into context (harder times with a debt to address), the principle doesn't hold as strong. The reason being is because they need to make revenue and taxing the rich just a little more will gain revenue without hurting anyone because they can afford it. Also, keep in mind that majority of upper class Americans make money off of investments that is not included with their income which does not get touched at all and the tax rate used to be much higher than what it is now, so even a raise would be lower than what tax rates used to be. The point is that they will still be very well off and no one gets hurt. The principle is right if the tax hikes are unnecessary, so if we are in good times and they won't be hurt they shouldn't tax them more just because they can. Here, it's justified because there's a clear, good purpose.

Denise

7:32 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

I make it a rule never to engage in political discussions with people who are mean-spirited and ignorant of the facts, but I feel compelled to respond to the person above misrepresented the process of obtaining a ticket to the event tomorrow at the high school. First off, there was one ticket per person... period. You could not have gotten two tickets because you were not permitted fill out someone else's paperwork. This is usually a rule no matter where you are. They ask you to fill out ONE piece of paper, not two, and never are you asked to commit to voting for our President in November. Everyone working there at the Obama For America field office are smart volunteers working to better our country, the same country that allows you to voice your opinion on the internet about anything. I will be there tomorrow! I hope you will come tomorrow and keep an open mind and treat our First Lady with the respect that she deserves.

Reply

Mike

7:54 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

@Joe: Also it's in effort to strengthen the middle class and consumer spending. As we have learned throughout U.S. history, the "Trickle Down" theory, as what seems to be proposed by Romney, has never actually worked so Obama's plan is the better alternative. In fact, although Romney's plan seems desirable where he calls for tax cuts for everyone, the government will inevitably need to make up for the revenue lost from the upper class and that could likely end up being demanded from the middle class. I'm not saying Obama's perfect, but I don't like when people unnecessarily insult or bash him with no reasoning behind it. Not saying you did, but my original comment was in a response to someone who did.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Janis C Sheridan

9:13 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Mike, I assume you are speaking of the percentage on capital gains and not on income????

Joe Koenig

8:45 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Actually Mike, I believe that trickle down economics did work under Reagan, but Congress allowed spending to ballon. It has been the Republicans as much as Democrats who spend uncontrollably. I appreciate your points, but respectfully disagree. The reason venture capital funds get investors is precisely the favorable tax rates. When sucessful, they create companies with employees, a new tax base, and investors with wealth. Even Microsoft, Google, and FaceBook went to venture capitalists for $$ to expand. Gates, Brin, Zuckerberg are all paying at the 15%. Zuckerberg lost 50% of his net worth in the last two months. I disagree with Obama's policies, I think they are counterproductive, but to personally bash anyone does not help one's arguement, perhaps his (sic Obama) campaign should resort to challenging Romney's policies, not calling him a felon and murderer.

Reply
Comment_arrow

patrick

10:20 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Joe, the most important word you used was think, because it established an opinion and not fact. Trickle down economics is completely false. We have yet to see any data to support it. When consumers, with incomes above $250,000.00/yr income are given tax breaks to increase their disposable income, they don't spend it. It does not and never has, in modern economic times, "trickled down". If you want to check it you can go to many nonpartisain sites, GAO, GBO,and others. You write many intelligent points, but please don't propagate a myth. We need to concentrate on a 14 trillion dollar deficit. This has to be brought into the black by raising taxes on pretty much everyone making over $32,000/yr. You can blame Obama for 5 trillion, but the other 9 falls on Bush and the unraised revenues of our recession. We also need to cut programs, defense, education, infrastructure, etc.. The answers in the middle, but the parties are at the extremes (I think the dems are closer to the middle than the pubs-opinion). That's why I will again vote for Obama. PS. We've been a Socialist country as soon as we formed an army to fight England, created interstate commerce, and offered those veterns benifits. That's what socialism is, not to be confused with communism.

Comment_arrow

Azaz Leforte

2:08 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Joe, I think you know I will give you credit when credit is due. However, Reaganomics has proven itself not to work - at least in its purest form. Once way to substantiate my point is how national debt quadrupled under the Reagan administration. The idea very well may work, but it did not work in the way it was deployed.

I am not a proponent of welfare (especially the earned income tax credit), but the economic support is substantial that if a poorer person is given a dollar, they will spend it and fuel the economy (through our stupid consumer driven market). A wealthy person has more options - including investing the funds, funding a business or stuffing it under their mattress. If the wealthy person elects to invest the funds into the capital market, Reaganomics will not be fulfilled.

George H W Bush coined it best, "Voodoo Economics".

Mike

9:01 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

So I guess we'll agree to disagree haha, but I think in terms of the campaigns, Romney has had more of the personal bashing with virtually false ads. For example, the one where he took Obama's words out of context in that speech which led to a huge misinterpretation by many. Now, both sides will always do this unfortunately, and it's the part of politics that I strongly dislike because it really drags away from the issues at stake. However, I think Romney has clearly made the more attacking ads to help his campaign.

Reply

Mike

11:20 pm on Wednesday, August 8, 2012

@Mike: I know that he has shied away from the gun issue in his first term, but I think it's clear that after the Colorado shooting he has a stance and wants to make it a bigger part of his platform than it was last election.

Reply

Roxanna G

9:18 am on Thursday, August 9, 2012

OMG how did we get in this mess in the first place it didn't just happen over the LAST FOUR YEARS!!!! I TELL YA THAT!!! Started long before we got a BLACK Predisent in office...NOW ALL OF A DARN SUDDEN EVERYONE HAS A PROBLEM...I AM SICK OF IT! GIVE THE MAN HIS CHANCE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE HAS HAD FOR EIGHT YEARS...AND HE WON'T STEAL OFFICE LIKE SOMEONE I KNOW

Reply

SMDH

1:19 pm on Thursday, August 9, 2012

Having a prestigious speaker is a boon for our community whether you care to vote to re-elect her husband or not. I am taking my children to hear her speak and we are very excited about it. NO taxpayer dollars are being spent on this, as you surely are aware. The Obama campaign is paying a rental fee to the school district. It is sad and shocking that some of you are so disrespectful of the First Lady. I wasn't a fan of GW Bush, but if Laura Bush had ever given a free speech in the area I would have gladly taken my children to that, too, because it would be exciting and historical.

Reply

Janis C Sheridan

9:38 pm on Thursday, August 9, 2012

There seems to be a bit of confusion here. Let's start by getting the facts straight: For one thing, Obama's deficit in three years of his presidency exceeded Bush's 8 years and Bush was fighting two wars. Also, the lowering of taxes during the Reagan years ushered in a period of economic prosperity that extended through the Clinton years. And by the way, the balanced budget of the Clinton years was the result of a house and senate controlled by the Republicans and the fact that Bill Clinton was able to be a pragmatic middle of the road Democrat and not a liberal idealog like Obama. It's ironic, that the most successful economies around the world have learned that lower taxes and fiscal restraint stimulate growth while we are abandoning that formula.

Reply

Leave a comment