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
 

In article ,
says...

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.

I like the Republicans are obstructing everything in Congress argument.
It is an easy deflection game for the Democrats in-fighting and failure
to work as a team.

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