|
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 12:00 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. plume du BS what do you not understand about a 58 to 40 democrat majority in the senate? Dumb democrats can't agree amongst themselves is more like it. Probably some dim wants pork to support it. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 11:21 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 5:58 AM, Harry wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Let's be thankful we control both houses. Can you imagine Mr. Obama trying to work with a republican Congress? At least until 2010 elections.... and hopefully the congress will change to a more conserative leaning with more integrity than the current pork loving democrats. Mind you, I am sure Obama will find an excuse... |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 12/27/09 2:28 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 27/12/2009 5:58 AM, Harry wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Let's be thankful we control both houses. Can you imagine Mr. Obama trying to work with a republican Congress? At least until 2010 elections.... and hopefully the congress will change to a more conserative leaning with more integrity than the current pork loving democrats. Mind you, I am sure Obama will find an excuse... The fool thinks conservatives have "integrity." snerk |
Somalia in the Midwest
|
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 26, 6:17*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
For a look at where rule by Democrats will get us, look no further than Detroit. *Detroit, ruled for many years by a Dem mayor and by the unions is a failed city more resembling Mogadishu than a US city. Demo mis-rule has resulted in a dying economy with high unemployment and schools with a 24% graduation rate. Of course, if you want to see Dem economics on a larger scale, one can see the failed state of California, hopelessly broke with no possibility of paying its bills but the legislature still increases the budget to pay for pay increases for state employees. Then there is the *War on Terror which we were assured was over, ooops, dont pay attention to the guy on the plane landing in............Detroit. On Thursday, I was told by a local Demofool that having TSA check for "build a bomb e-route" materials was stupid because it could not happen..........oooops. *Sorta reminds me of when Clinton was Pres and George Will wrote an article about using aircraft as weapons against buildings and the Dems said it was just a paranoid fantasy...ooopps. I can not believe that some of you on the right are so unhinged and narrow minded that you think because some crackpot did something that it's Obama's fault! You certainly don't act that stupid here, so it MUST be that you are as narrow minded as Rush. |
Somalia in the Midwest
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 13:12:04 -0500, Harry wrote: Are you under the delusion that federal employees are immune from layoffs? They aren't. But it really hasn't happened since the Eisenhower administration. Tell me about ONE year when federal employment actually went down since 1960. If you threaten to lay off a federal employee they start firing off 171s and get a new job before they lose a pay check. Usually that is not even necessary because when they close an agency, another one springs up in the same building with the same people. The only thing that changed was the name on the building. They changed so many signs during the Carter administration the joke was GSA installed them with thumb screws. Us Coast and Geodetic Survey on Montrose rd became ESSA and then NOAA. AEC in Germantown became ERDA and then DOE (maybe something else I forgot in between). HEW on Parklawn drive changed names a couple times ending up being HHS. If you were walking around in the building every day nothing changed but the stationary. Actually, the RIF I vaguely recall took place during the reagan mis-administration, in the fall of his first year in office. I remember it because I had as a client a couple of postal unions, and thanks to the contract, they were exempt. The client contact was recruited by the reagan admin to become deputy pmg, and I could have gone along as his chief assistant. We both were not interested. The USPS was infected with the worst management of any organization on the face of the earth. You have touched on the truth of the matter. Everyone ended up being exempt. I was still living in the belly of the beast in 1981. There was some shuffling around but they never actually "Reduced" the "Force". BTW wasn't it Reagan who privatized the USPS and actually made it competitive with Fed-x and UPS? I use the mail a lot these days and they actually provide superior service at a lower cost. Try Click n ship. You can print (or Email someone) the PDF of a shipping label, put it on the box and the post man will pick it up for around half of what Fed-x/UPS charges. I use click n ship several times a month. USPS is going broke. They're cheap, but certainly not great. We use them 100s of times a month. They're not very good with pickups, and I suppose they're better than the others, but the loss/damage rate is pretty high. Dealing with them on the phone is trying to say the least. Fedex and UPS have their own problems, mostly to do with cost and delivery. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 26/12/2009 9:38 PM, Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 11:30 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Dec 26, 10:28 pm, wrote: On 12/26/09 10:25 PM, Rob wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 8:35 PM, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. Bush's TSA is a department of idiots. The best thing Obama could do is restructure it, replace every bit of management, and retrain the entire staff. Leaving SF for Chicago and then DC a couple of weeks ago, I ran into a TSA'er who spent five minutes shining a blue flashlight onto my state driver's license. She was looking in the wrong place for the "invisible" part. So I said, "Want to examine one of my concealed carry permits?" They all have my photo on them, too. I thought she was going to loogy her pants. Sure. You know that never happened you ****ing liar. Carry on... Another example of Rob's "debate" skills. The Obamination has had nearly a year to appoint somebody to TSA and to alter it in any way he chooses but he does NOTHING so this incident happens. Pure Dem incompetence. So, in your simple little frogwatch brain, you think that because there is no chief administrator at TSA, terrorist wanna-be's are free to have their way with our planes? Is that what you think? The way to alter the TSA is to scrap it and start over. It was the product of the incompetent Bush admin, and a clean sheet of paper is needed to design something that can be competent at its job. So we can replace Bush incompetance with Obamanation incompetance? We can replace Bush incompetence with intelligence. Oh wait, we did. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 11:21 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. Also untrue. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 10:21:11 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message news:m6edj5dpkung13l2p0gadqnqmcrhnucnh0@4ax. com... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. Cite that. What is the person's name? I thought you watch CNN????? http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 12:00 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. plume du BS what do you not understand about a 58 to 40 democrat majority in the senate? Dumb democrats can't agree amongst themselves is more like it. Probably some dim wants pork to support it. You're the dimwit, apparently: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 26/12/2009 10:52 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Given the senate is democratic majority, it must be democratic infighting for pork spending. No one thinks the position is worth the pork. No. That's wishful thinking on your part. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 5:58 AM, Harry wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Let's be thankful we control both houses. Can you imagine Mr. Obama trying to work with a republican Congress? At least until 2010 elections.... and hopefully the congress will change to a more conserative leaning with more integrity than the current pork loving democrats. Mind you, I am sure Obama will find an excuse... Yeah more integrity... now that's funny! -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 12:07:23 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message You have touched on the truth of the matter. Everyone ended up being exempt. I was still living in the belly of the beast in 1981. There was some shuffling around but they never actually "Reduced" the "Force". BTW wasn't it Reagan who privatized the USPS and actually made it competitive with Fed-x and UPS? I use the mail a lot these days and they actually provide superior service at a lower cost. Try Click n ship. You can print (or Email someone) the PDF of a shipping label, put it on the box and the post man will pick it up for around half of what Fed-x/UPS charges. I use click n ship several times a month. USPS is going broke. They're cheap, but certainly not great. We use them 100s of times a month. They're not very good with pickups, and I suppose they're better than the others, but the loss/damage rate is pretty high. Dealing with them on the phone is trying to say the least. Fedex and UPS have their own problems, mostly to do with cost and delivery. That must be a local problem. I have lost more with UPS than USPS. Try calling the 800 number if you have a problem.. as I said, they're going broke. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
wrote in message
... On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 14:32:30 -0500, wrote: OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. Cite that. What is the person's name? OK it is Erroll Southers and his confirmation is still hung up in the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. That is chaired by Jay Rockefeller (D WV) and he is the one who is still asking questions of Southers. It has to be noted that you can't filibuster a committee so the idea that this is anything but bureaucratic screw up has to be acknowledged. Did you even read the article? Sheesh. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 27, 12:18*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...0%28600%29.jpg |
Somalia in the Midwest
TopBassDog wrote:
On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...0%28600%29.jpg Her hair is a bit longer but the resemblance is amazing! |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 12/27/09 8:29 PM, Rob wrote:
TopBassDog wrote: On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...0%28600%29.jpg Her hair is a bit longer but the resemblance is amazing! I'll bet you two mooks have no idea of the reasons behind the ban against soldiers having weapons in their personal possession on military bases. |
Somalia in the Midwest
"TopBassDog" wrote in message
... On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...0%28600%29.jpg I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 27, 7:29*pm, Rob wrote:
TopBassDog wrote: On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, *wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...Here%20in%20My... Her hair is a bit longer but the resemblance is amazing! Possibly so. Now, concerning the rug-munching, I would suppose that is an option? http://peacemoonbeam.typepad.com/.a/...8a4c970c-500wi |
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 27, 7:35*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message ... On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...Here%20in%20My... I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) -- Nom=de=Plume But, D'Plume. I would never call you average. |
Somalia in the Midwest
TopBassDog wrote:
On Dec 27, 7:35 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "TopBassDog" wrote in message ... On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...Here%20in%20My... I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) -- Nom=de=Plume But, D'Plume. I would never call you average. I'll bet she/he gives himself/ a woodie I haven't seen such narcissism since Krausie fell in love with himself. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 1:08 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On 26/12/2009 9:38 PM, Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 11:30 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Dec 26, 10:28 pm, wrote: On 12/26/09 10:25 PM, Rob wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 8:35 PM, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. Bush's TSA is a department of idiots. The best thing Obama could do is restructure it, replace every bit of management, and retrain the entire staff. Leaving SF for Chicago and then DC a couple of weeks ago, I ran into a TSA'er who spent five minutes shining a blue flashlight onto my state driver's license. She was looking in the wrong place for the "invisible" part. So I said, "Want to examine one of my concealed carry permits?" They all have my photo on them, too. I thought she was going to loogy her pants. Sure. You know that never happened you ****ing liar. Carry on... Another example of Rob's "debate" skills. The Obamination has had nearly a year to appoint somebody to TSA and to alter it in any way he chooses but he does NOTHING so this incident happens. Pure Dem incompetence. So, in your simple little frogwatch brain, you think that because there is no chief administrator at TSA, terrorist wanna-be's are free to have their way with our planes? Is that what you think? The way to alter the TSA is to scrap it and start over. It was the product of the incompetent Bush admin, and a clean sheet of paper is needed to design something that can be competent at its job. So we can replace Bush incompetance with Obamanation incompetance? We can replace Bush incompetence with intelligence. Oh wait, we did. I hear lots of cheap talk. Talk a lot Obama even makes good sounding excuses. Lots of talk, same old hole. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 1:08 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 11:21 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. Also untrue. Only in your mind. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 1:12 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 12:00 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. plume du BS what do you not understand about a 58 to 40 democrat majority in the senate? Dumb democrats can't agree amongst themselves is more like it. Probably some dim wants pork to support it. You're the dimwit, apparently: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ Usual liberal BS slant. Since when can one minority senator hold up the show? |
Somalia in the Midwest
On 27/12/2009 1:13 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 5:58 AM, Harry wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Let's be thankful we control both houses. Can you imagine Mr. Obama trying to work with a republican Congress? At least until 2010 elections.... and hopefully the congress will change to a more conserative leaning with more integrity than the current pork loving democrats. Mind you, I am sure Obama will find an excuse... Yeah more integrity... now that's funny! Ya, I know. Wishful thinking. Need a Hackswa Jack type to clean house, or wait until pigs fly. |
Somalia in the Midwest
"TopBassDog" wrote in message
... On Dec 27, 7:35 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "TopBassDog" wrote in message ... On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...Here%20in%20My... I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) -- Nom=de=Plume But, D'Plume. I would never call you average. Thanks. And your point? -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 1:08 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 26/12/2009 9:38 PM, Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 11:30 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Dec 26, 10:28 pm, wrote: On 12/26/09 10:25 PM, Rob wrote: Harry wrote: On 12/26/09 8:35 PM, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. Bush's TSA is a department of idiots. The best thing Obama could do is restructure it, replace every bit of management, and retrain the entire staff. Leaving SF for Chicago and then DC a couple of weeks ago, I ran into a TSA'er who spent five minutes shining a blue flashlight onto my state driver's license. She was looking in the wrong place for the "invisible" part. So I said, "Want to examine one of my concealed carry permits?" They all have my photo on them, too. I thought she was going to loogy her pants. Sure. You know that never happened you ****ing liar. Carry on... Another example of Rob's "debate" skills. The Obamination has had nearly a year to appoint somebody to TSA and to alter it in any way he chooses but he does NOTHING so this incident happens. Pure Dem incompetence. So, in your simple little frogwatch brain, you think that because there is no chief administrator at TSA, terrorist wanna-be's are free to have their way with our planes? Is that what you think? The way to alter the TSA is to scrap it and start over. It was the product of the incompetent Bush admin, and a clean sheet of paper is needed to design something that can be competent at its job. So we can replace Bush incompetance with Obamanation incompetance? We can replace Bush incompetence with intelligence. Oh wait, we did. I hear lots of cheap talk. Talk a lot Obama even makes good sounding excuses. Lots of talk, same old hole. According to you... a guy who has no skin in the game. You left... remember.... -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 1:08 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 11:21 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. Also untrue. Only in your mind. Fortunately, I have one. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 1:12 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 12:00 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. plume du BS what do you not understand about a 58 to 40 democrat majority in the senate? Dumb democrats can't agree amongst themselves is more like it. Probably some dim wants pork to support it. You're the dimwit, apparently: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ Usual liberal BS slant. Since when can one minority senator hold up the show? Since it was done, apparently. I guess them facts is a bit scary. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 27/12/2009 1:13 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 5:58 AM, Harry wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... Let's be thankful we control both houses. Can you imagine Mr. Obama trying to work with a republican Congress? At least until 2010 elections.... and hopefully the congress will change to a more conserative leaning with more integrity than the current pork loving democrats. Mind you, I am sure Obama will find an excuse... Yeah more integrity... now that's funny! Ya, I know. Wishful thinking. Need a Hackswa Jack type to clean house, or wait until pigs fly. So, basically your argument that the "conservatives" have more integrity is a load of crap. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 27, 11:19*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 1:08 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: *wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 11:21 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: * wrote in message m... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume" * wrote: * wrote in message news:cl0ej51qc1dl4s5ombdqreq1f6krobo78h@4ax. com... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" * wrote: * wrote in message news:m6edj5dpkung13l2p0gadqnqmcrhnucnh0@4a x.com... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch * wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that.... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. OK that was easy, there is no hit on TSA confirmation on Thomas. There has not been a bill with those words introduced in the senate or the house. Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. Also untrue. Only in your mind. Fortunately, I have one. -- Nom=de=Plume D'Plume. Is it broken? If not, then use it. |
Somalia in the Midwest
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 1:12 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 27/12/2009 12:00 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:52:57 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. They have an acting director. It's not like there's no one in charge. I wonder why the Senate hasn't gotten around to it... perhaps it's been the obstructionism going on by the Republicans, who are continually threatening the filibuster, even with Defense bills? Nah, couldn't be that... The TSA is an executive branch department. Obama has to appoint the director. I am not even sure they have to be ratified by the senate at that level. It would be a rubber stamp thing anyway. It's an appointment and it needs to be approved by the senate. It's being held up, as I said, by the right-wing. If you're not sure, look it up instead of guessing. plume du BS what do you not understand about a 58 to 40 democrat majority in the senate? Dumb democrats can't agree amongst themselves is more like it. Probably some dim wants pork to support it. You're the dimwit, apparently: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...age-screeners/ Usual liberal BS slant. Since when can one minority senator hold up the show? Since it was done, apparently. I guess them facts is a bit scary. Let us honor Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina. A true American hero on the whacko political scene. -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Somalia in the Midwest
nom=de=plume wrote:
D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...Here%20in%20My... I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) -- Nom=de=Plume Better looking than who? Ugly Betty? -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Somalia in the Midwest
nom=de=plume wrote:
Now back to you. Who's confirmation IS being held up? The Senate. Try again. In any case, be it Obamanation hasn't submitted a name or the senate hasn't got off their pork barrel asses, in either case it is a Democrat issue. Also untrue. Only in your mind. Fortunately, I have one. Yes. A pork barrel ass. -- It's flattering to see so many of you turds spoofing me. |
Somalia in the Midwest
Harry wrote:
On 12/27/09 1:56 AM, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:53:30 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 20:52:21 -0500, wrote: On 12/26/09 8:35 PM, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. Bush's TSA is a department of idiots. The best thing Obama could do is restructure it, replace every bit of management, and retrain the entire staff. Leaving SF for Chicago and then DC a couple of weeks ago, I ran into a TSA'er who spent five minutes shining a blue flashlight onto my state driver's license. She was looking in the wrong place for the "invisible" part. So I said, "Want to examine one of my concealed carry permits?" They all have my photo on them, too. I thought she was going to loogy her pants. It was the Democrats who demanded that we fire the private security people and make them "fireproof" government dweebs. You're in favor of Blackwater running the TSA?? I don't think so... Blackwater is the group protecting Hillary right now so somebody likes them. There was still no reason why the actual screeners could not be contracted and working under TSA guidance. The way it is, we own those people forever, even if they came up with a lot less labor intensive way to screen passengers. If anything, having 45,000 minimally skilled employees, you can't fire, will stifle innovation. "Thinking" was never a job requirement for this job. Are you under the delusion that federal employees are immune from layoffs? They aren't. If you work for a crown corp, you have to be caught screwing a goat on the CEO's desk during working hours to even be considered for time off without pay. That is the reason i loved working for a crown corp. I really didn't mind the time off, it was sort of like extra vacation time. |
Somalia in the Midwest
On Dec 28, 2:34*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:26:50 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: On Dec 26, 8:35 pm, wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:17:44 -0800 (PST), Frogwatch wrote: TSA Again Jon Stewart points out things the real news missed Obama still hasn't filled the office of director of TSA. So? That position would be one of managing the overall operations and if it had been filled or not would most assuredly not had any affect on this instance. So we don't need to fill that post. Great, that is a quarter of a million off the deficit. It's a good start, now lets start trimming some more fat off the government budget. I didn't say the post was not needed. Don't get like John and put words in my mouth that I did not say. |
Somalia in the Midwest
Don White wrote:
If you work for a crown corp, you have to be caught screwing a goat on the CEO's desk during working hours to even be considered for time off without pay. That is the reason i loved working for a crown corp. I really didn't mind the time off, it was sort of like extra vacation time. What did you name your goat? |
Somalia in the Midwest
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On Dec 27, 12:18 pm, wrote: Thirdly, their involvement should be shutdown, as they're a corrupt, ultra-right-wing organization. D'Plume. Are you Napolitano in disguise? http://www.getliberty.org/content_im...0%28600%29.jpg I think she's smarter and I know I'm better looking. :) At least you can hang on to that... Rob |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com