http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009...overy.html

Embarrassing.

I stopped reading when I read "Krugman"....That guy is a total hack. I have a dog in the backyard with a better understanding of economics.

(10-26-2009 05:35 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I stopped reading when I read "Krugman"....That guy is a total hack. I have a dog in the backyard with a better understanding of economics.

You should have read it - it was a kick in the nuts to Krugman. The below comment from the article is insane. Who helped her cut her hair and put on her make up before she was 1st lady? And all this from a party that criticized how much the GOP, not the public, paid for Palin's clothes. These two are reallin pimping it up. I'm guessing there's a framed velvet picture of dogs shooting pool somewhere in the Oval Office.

Quote:The collective salary of Michele’s personal “staff” apparently costs the American taxpayer $1,750,000.00 per year, plus benefit packages

I've been pretty consistent in my support of any President doing what needs to be done to maintain family life / semblence of normalcy. Take the working vacation, AF1 to NYC for a date, large WH staff whatever.

In the grand scheme of things, the number and cost of MO's personal staff is irrelevant.

But hell, this would make a monsterous polictical ad. But since it would be attacking the "defenseless non-political spouse" it will never be made. And probably shouldn't.

Doesn't mean though it can't go viral.......

(10-27-2009 12:46 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I've been pretty consistent in my support of any President doing what needs to be done to maintain family life / semblence of normalcy. Take the working vacation, AF1 to NYC for a date, large WH staff whatever.

In the grand scheme of things, the number and cost of MO's personal staff is irrelevant.

But hell, this would make a monsterous polictical ad. But since it would be attacking the "defenseless non-political spouse" it will never be made. And probably shouldn't.

Doesn't mean though it can't go viral.......

I have no problem using this. I say go for the throat. Embarrass the hell out of them.

(10-27-2009 12:46 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I've been pretty consistent in my support of any President doing what needs to be done to maintain family life / semblence of normalcy.

Ummmm, I don't know what kind of family you come from, but I don't consider taking a private jet to see a Broadway show and having 26 workers at your beckon call a normal family life.

(10-27-2009 12:53 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  

(10-27-2009 12:46 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I've been pretty consistent in my support of any President doing what needs to be done to maintain family life / semblence of normalcy. Take the working vacation, AF1 to NYC for a date, large WH staff whatever.

In the grand scheme of things, the number and cost of MO's personal staff is irrelevant.

But hell, this would make a monsterous polictical ad. But since it would be attacking the "defenseless non-political spouse" it will never be made. And probably shouldn't.

Doesn't mean though it can't go viral.......

I have no problem using this. I say go for the throat. Embarrass the hell out of them.

While I understand the outrage at this...It really is akin to grain of sand in the desert. We get pissed at the high profile cases and ignore the overall problem...Governmental theft and income redistribution to middle class bureaucrats...most of which could easily be replaced by "market incentivized businesses" that would have a reason to actually..."Care" about customer service and quality of work.

I agree FO, but MOST great leaders do so by example. It's pretty hard to talk about people cutting back and being a good steward of money when you aren't practicing what you preach.

(10-27-2009 05:13 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I agree FO, but MOST great leaders do so by example. It's pretty hard to talk about people cutting back and being a good steward of money when you aren't practicing what you preach.

Oh..I don't give the O's a pass. Unfortunately..I can not think of a govt. bureaucrat that cares too much about "cutting spending". They are just NOT incentivized to do so as those in the free market.

I have a simple solution to reducing the size of government..(and it will NEVER happen)....Give the top bureaucrats a 25% bonus each year that they reduce their budget by 5%. It would cause a slow drawback of the size of government and would allow the effected workers time to find work in the marketplace without causing drastic problems. Unless you give incentives the size of government will NEVER reduce. Marketization of many government functions would also be in order.

(10-27-2009 04:20 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-27-2009 12:46 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I've been pretty consistent in my support of any President doing what needs to be done to maintain family life / semblence of normalcy.

Ummmm, I don't know what kind of family you come from, but I don't consider taking a private jet to see a Broadway show and having 26 workers at your beckon call a normal family life.

You are correct to not confuse my lifestyle, security and work needs with those of the President of the United States of America. I don't make nearly the money, I don't have lunatic stalkers, and I work a general 8-5 M-F job. Since the President lives a more monied lifestyle due both to his salary, his book royalties, and his social commitments, and has the most remarkable security needs on the planet, and works what amounts to a 24-7 job, I cut any man in that office a little slack.