RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this?

RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 6:38:47 PM)
round and round and round, spin spin, changing goalposts, adding more information without even acknowledging your first OP was more than a little OUT THERE, and not to mention LARGELY BOGUSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Until you can do that, I have no use for you. for example, why have you ignored this In 2007, President Bush requested a total of $51.9 million for White House office salaries. (That's for the core of 500 or so staffers.) The numbers creep up every year. In 2003, the maximum pay for assistants was $151,000. Since then, it has increased between 1.7 percent and 4 percent annually. In 2008, it reached $172,000 and remains there, since Obama declared a pay freeze for anyone making more than $100,000. Obama put on the spending freeze, but nope apparently promotions are just wage increases Care to explain that? or are you going to ignore all the information you have been given to just try to reinforce your OP whatever you do, its not working.

StrangerThan -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 7:03:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic round and round and round, spin spin, changing goalposts, adding more information without even acknowledging your first OP was more than a little OUT THERE, and not to mention LARGELY BOGUSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. Until you can do that, I have no use for you. for example, why have you ignored this In 2007, President Bush requested a total of $51.9 million for White House office salaries. (That's for the core of 500 or so staffers.) The numbers creep up every year. In 2003, the maximum pay for assistants was $151,000. Since then, it has increased between 1.7 percent and 4 percent annually. In 2008, it reached $172,000 and remains there, since Obama declared a pay freeze for anyone making more than $100,000. Obama put on the spending freeze, but nope apparently promotions are just wage increases Care to explain that? or are you going to ignore all the information you have been given to just try to reinforce your OP whatever you do, its not working. A good bit of how it works in government during wage freeze time is creating new positions or moving people around to accomplish the same thing. I worked in government for 8 years. Not saying it's an Obama thing. It's just a government shuffle. And if you want the really pissy part of it, are those who go into positions who are totally unfit for them - because they know someone. Shrug.

Lucylastic -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 7:11:34 PM)
[;)]Yes:) Im well aware of that, its all bollocks, doesnt matter where you are, Canada and the UK are full of the same bollocks, corruption, nepotism and an unlevel playing field.thats without all the lobbyists, corporations, backstabbers, social climbers, hangers on and varied yes men n women

tazzygirl -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 7:13:18 PM)
lol... I just enjoy taking some talking head point from someone with an ax to grind against a political party and showing them the stupidity of their assertions.

outhere69 -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 10:22:08 PM)
Tax dollars for these positions? More like fractions of a penny.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 10:30:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: punisher440 Yes,I read the complete write up and I did state some may have been bumped to higher positions.But does that justify the % increases? Also from the same piece quote: But almost half of the raises doled out by the White House in the last year—59, or 40% of all raises—weren't accompanied by new job descriptions. One of them—special assistant and associate counsel to the president Michael Gottlieb's 14% pay bump from $114,000 to $130,500—was a clear violation of Obama's freeze on salaries over $100,000. .And yes,I read where he left in 2010 but returned in 2011 to the SAME position.Did you see a salary increase like this over the last year? Do you really think that Pres. Obama sits around giving annual reviews to W. H. staff? I'm guessing that, if he did do such, you would be pissing and moaning about how he wasn't paying attention to Bohner.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 10:41:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Did you miss where the WH budget went down a million?? . Ratfuckers have math trouble. That's 1.7 million, which is somewhere close to 3%... (38.8-37.1)/38.8 x 100 = That's why the stupid shits can't grasp that, if my county is growing at a measly 3% per annum, the population will double in less than 25 years. One of my very first posts on CM was about exponential growth. I won't bother linking it, as I believe that very few here are actually interested in learning. (have you noticed, asswoman, that I seldom start threads anymore? The discussions are far better elsewhere. Really, who wants to talk about the Powell Memo (ex-Supreme Court Justice, which set in motion the right-wing "think-tank"/US Chamber of Commerce/Republican collaboration, when really important shit, like "Bachmann says something stupid!!!" can be discussed?) Punshner, do you have a problem with the payroll dropping 3%?

tazzygirl -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/24/2011 10:55:45 PM)
He is comparing it to Bush's last year. He doesnt care that between year one and year two in Obama's administration that it dropped... he is fixated on it rising from Bush to Obama. Of course he wont address the huge drop from the $51.9 million from 2007.

punisher440 -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 6:47:58 AM)
Where to start here,first,if any of you care to look the links I showed the numbers making over 100k are higher with this administration than with the last year of the previous administration.Also you keep throwing out the 51.9 figure for 2007 but it also says requested,not received.While I am still trying to find the link that stated in 2007 that said the total was 37.1.Which is still too high,I do not care what party is in the White House.Now about the 3% drop,of course it is good.But this is like a furniture store 50% sale,if you have inflated the prices well beyond the norm,it makes no difference.And not once have you seen nor heard me bad mouthing either party although both need it.It is not a Democrat or Republican thing,it is a Washington,D.C. thing.Of course trimming a million plus from the staff is a good thing,to me it is just a start.And before you start with it is only a drop in a bucket,adding enough drops will fill the bucket.Until enough people decide that it is a Washington,D.C. problem we have,both parties and their minions will try to keep our attention diverted fighting each other instead of fighting the real problem.

Moonhead -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 7:36:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan And if you want the really pissy part of it, are those who go into positions who are totally unfit for them - because they know someone. Shrug. Such as the failed horse breeder who did such a magnificent job of running FEMA while New Orleans was being flooded? Wait, he wasn't appointed by the Kenyan was he? Mea culpa, Brown must have been competent, rather than somebody's crony...

Mouth4Mistress -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 3:46:45 PM)
Why is it that when Obama's defenders are pressed up against the wall with facts (unemployment, wars, Gitmo, dollar crash, etc), they INEVITABLY resort to the "But Republicans ALSO {insert sub-clause here}!". It's like a 5-year-old caught at something, justifying it as "But Johnny did it too!". Seriously?

Lucylastic -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 3:54:22 PM)
was that comment directed at me?

tazzygirl -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 4:59:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress Why is it that when Obama's defenders are pressed up against the wall with facts (unemployment, wars, Gitmo, dollar crash, etc), they INEVITABLY resort to the "But Republicans ALSO {insert sub-clause here}!". It's like a 5-year-old caught at something, justifying it as "But Johnny did it too!". Seriously? No one is using Bush to justify what is going on in this case. In fact, the OP is using Bush to justify bitching about Obama. Obama has stood by his promise of no raises above 100,000 and dropped the cost of staffers by 3%.

Lucylastic -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 5:39:46 PM)
I thought it was more to do with the fact that the righties have never come to terms with what a clusteruck Bushes 8 years were. And just how it is affecting what is happening today. But no, all we get is revisionist history from the worst of them.

tazzygirl -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 5:46:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I thought it was more to do with the fact that the righties have never come to terms with what a clusteruck Bushes 8 years were. And just how it is affecting what is happening today. But no, all we get is revisionist history from the worst of them. As a nation we havent come to terms with that clusterfuck. What the OP is also neglecting is the fact that pay raises were pushed through just before Obama took office in other departments. Couldnt take those back.. cant give a pay demotion. Cant justify paying others more.. by saying.. I didnt do it. There were multiple reasons for these raises... none of which the OP wants to even consider.

Lucylastic -> RE: In these times,how can the White House justify this? (8/25/2011 5:49:35 PM)
Very true:)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125