Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He was saying that money shouldnt be thrown away because it wasnt theirs, it was taxpayer money!!!
I know it's tangential but I cant believe you all glommed onto that quote and twisted its meaning, speaking of twisting meanings.
The Soc Sec people were going to have a mandatory meeting of all their managers (who are NOT all located in WashingtonDC). They asked for bids from cities -- would you rather they just take off for Hong Kong or whatever? They were being responsible with this and Im sure the businesses of Phoenix that made some money from it are happy this morning, sorry you cant be.
lmbo Whose money do you think was thrown away for this conference? lol Let me help you its tax payers. Do you think the gov employees got into their own bank account and paid for this trip? No we paid for it.
I give it to you I really do I swear you are trying so hard to spin this some how anyway
Bottom line. Obama told companies they cant waste tax payers dollars but his white house can waste them the social security office can
You can try and spin it all day long. Bottom line its being a hypocrite. Telling a company they cant waste our money but the gov can.
I dont want to hear excuses as to why they had to have this conference because we can say the companies that canceled theirs made it so the social sec office can follow their lead
Why could they not teleconference? Why did they have to have this meeting? What was so important that they had to waste 700k of taxpayers money? Lots of questions if you ask me.
The companies that canceled their conferences in Vegas due to Obamas orders because they got tax dollars made it just fine, Our gov cant make it
you're 2 for 2 with the mystifying nonsense. Obama =/= Bush. I dont get it about Jimmy. Perhaps if you stayed on topic.
lol They said that because you tired to bring up Bush which has nothing to do with this, How Ironic you telling them to stop on topic
Reguardless so if Bush did it means that Obama has to eat paste also? lol
But Bush has nothing to do with this since he isnt the one that told Companies they cant have a conference paid for by tax dollars while allowing his offices to have a conference paid for by taxpayers
you're 2 for 2 with the mystifying nonsense. Obama =/= Bush. I dont get it about Jimmy. Perhaps if you stayed on topic.
If that response was mystifying, that's pretty sad.
It is an analogy to "Were you happy when Bush did xyz?", pretending there's an association with pro-Bush and anti-Obama folks. It's rhetoric #15 in the Obamatron playbook. Retorting with Obama != Bush doesn't make sense since you defended the assertion that Obama = Bush by suggesting it's ok that federal employees are spending this kind of money just because Bush may or may not have done the same.
lol They said that because you tired to bring up Bush which has nothing to do with this, How Ironic you telling them to stop on topic
Reguardless so if Bush did it means that Obama has to eat paste also? lol
But Bush has nothing to do with this since he isnt the one that told Companies they cant have a conference paid for by tax dollars while allowing his offices to have a conference paid for by taxpayers
$700,000 is peanuts. Should they not train? Should they stop all operations? Should they check CD before planning training conferences? What's an acceptable price for a training? They went with the lowest bidder. What more can you do, less stopping all operations?
lol They said that because you tired to bring up Bush which has nothing to do with this, How Ironic you telling them to stop on topic
Reguardless so if Bush did it means that Obama has to eat paste also? lol
But Bush has nothing to do with this since he isnt the one that told Companies they cant have a conference paid for by tax dollars while allowing his offices to have a conference paid for by taxpayers
Oh, I see
Look. I tried to put all this fake indignation into perspective by asking if the poster had ever had a problem with govt employee wasting/spending under Bush -- implication being it was okay then, not okay now under a pres he doesnt like. The poster who answered deflected. I commented on deflecting. He pressed the deflection. None of you ever did answer the question, which is a simple "yes" or "no."
You last para - these are two different topics, but you still dont see what Obama was saying. I thought I explained pretty clearly, but if I didnt get through that's okay.
If that response was mystifying, that's pretty sad.
It is an analogy to "Were you happy when Bush did xyz?", pretending there's an association with pro-Bush and anti-Obama folks. It's rhetoric #15 in the Obamatron playbook. Retorting with Obama != Bush doesn't make sense since you defended the assertion that Obama = Bush by suggesting it's ok that federal employees are spending this kind of money just because Bush may or may not have done the same.
I was asking if the poster had ever complained about govt employees having meetings and spending money under Bush. I suspect the answer is "no." Did you ever complain about it under Bush? I suspect you never did, either. Therefore it's hypocritical and childish of you all to complain about the exact same thing, simply because it's now happening under the Obama Admin. Ya get me?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
