Obama the douche-bag.

[LiveSteam]

Obama closes the White House tours that were run by VOLUNTEERS. He's blaming it on the Sequester

The White House has canceled tours until further notice, the White House Visitors Office confirmed, citing sequester cuts.

Tours will continue through Friday, March 8. All tours for March 9 and onward have been canceled and will not be rescheduled due to “staffing reductions resulting from sequestration,” the office says.
“We very much regret having to take this action, particularly during the popular Spring touring season,” the office’s statement reads.
Some Republicans are skeptical.

“They just jumped the sharquester,” said John Hart, a spokesman for Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). Coburn has long highlighted ways the federal government could cut back on what he considers needless spending. But in this case, he’s opposed to the White House’s decision.
“It’s clearly a PR ploy,” Hart said. “They can tour the country on the taxpayer’s dime but can’t allow taxpayers to tour the White House? Seriously?”
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), agreed. “This decision appears to be purely political in nature rather than being in the best interest of the American people,” he said in a letter to Obama.
The White House has been highlighting cuts from the sequester in order to put pressure on congressional Republicans to compromise on ending tax loopholes.
“We are going to manage it as best we can, try to minimize the impacts on American families, but it’s not the right way for us to go about deficit reduction,” President Obama said Monday.
Not every administration claim has held up. Our Factchecker dinged Education Secretary Arne Duncan for saying over the weekend that teachers are already being laid off thanks to the sequester, and Obama himself for saying janitors in the Capitol will get a pay cut.
House Republicans introduced a bill Monday that would avoid a government shutdown at the end of the month and shift some spending cuts while leaving in place the $85 billion spending reduction that went into effect March 1.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-to-sequester/

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Frankie

http://www.dailywritingtips.com/passed-vs-past/

“Past” as an adjective

The first definition which the OED gives for past as an adjective is “Gone by in time; elapsed; done with; over.” For example:

“The days for mourning are now past.”

I'm right. You are wrong. Your "Oops, I ****ed up" is accepted, Pat.

No, you're wrong. It's worse that you're still wrong after having it brought to your attention. That definition doesn't help you because you weren't using the word "past" that way.

Edit: BTW, you're using it as a verb, not an adjective.

[Fairplay]

Originally Posted by Frankie

1- There are different schools of thought here. Some say memory has little to do with IQ.

Frankie I was just relating a story that I had experience with, not making fun of you actually because I don't know you on here.

But the point of the story he claimed he was a Mensa and he refused to take notes claiming an excellent memory as well. Unfortunately his claim was false on all accounts.

[Raiderhader]

Originally Posted by Frankie

Oooooh, that makes me so dumb. No wait, it makes YOU that for totally missing the point.

No, I totally got the point. You have to keep defending your intelligence to a bunch of strangers on the intrawebz because you are very insecure about your alleged intellect.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by Raiderhader

No, I totally got the point. You have to keep defending your intelligence to a bunch of strangers on the intrawebz because you are very insecure about your alleged intellect.

Nails on

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

Obama closes the White House tours that were run by VOLUNTEERS. He's blaming it on the Sequester

I was offered a job to work in the White House. As part of my due diligence I did a lot of research on how thew logistics and mechanics of working in the White House.

It is really complicated to determine cost. You have military, contractor and civilian employees all working together alongside volunteers. There are a lot more cost than just the actual person leading the tour. They told me it costs $500K to onboard someone on the staff.

As far as Obama's decision, my personal opinion is that its political grandstanding regardless if it is legal, proper and within his prerogative to do so. But, the republicans have and do the same thing. It's not a Dem or republican thing.

[King_Chief_Fan]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I was offered a job to work in the White House. As part of my due diligence I did a lot of research on how thew logistics and mechanics of working in the White House.

It is really complicated to determine cost. You have military, contractor and civilian employees all working together alongside volunteers. There are a lot more cost than just the actual person leading the tour. They told me it costs $500K to onboard someone on the staff.

As far as Obama's decision, my personal opinion is that its political grandstanding regardless if it is legal, proper and within his prerogative to do so. But, the republicans have and do the same thing. It's not a Dem or republican thing.

For now and in this instance, it is an Obama thing

[Fairplay]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

They told me it costs $500K to onboard someone on the staff.

Another example of blatant waste of the tax payers money.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Fairplay

Another example of blatant waste of the tax payers money.

No, it's not. That figure is for security and background checks. You need to know who is going to have access and proximity to the President and top secret info. Is that an area you think we should cut back? Let's cut some corners?

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

For now and in this instance, it is an Obama thing

Isn't that what I said?

[Fairplay]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

No, it's not. That figure is for security and background checks. You need to know who is going to have access and proximity to the President and top secret info. Is that an area you think we should cut back? Let's cut some corners?

I think it could be done at a greatly reduced cost then that.

According to your way of thinking why not spend a million, maybe two? We want to protect the president right? The sky's the limit.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Fairplay

I think it could be done at a greatly reduced cost then that.

According to your way of thinking why not spend a million, maybe two? We want to protect the president right? The sky's the limit.

Okay, lets hear how you would save money, what you would do?

[Fairplay]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Okay, lets hear how you would save money, what you would do?

You could do the same checks without it costing a half a million for crying out loud, you can't be that naive.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Fairplay

You could do the same checks without it costing a half a million for crying out loud, you can't be that naive.

Again, let's hear your plan to save the money.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Okay, lets hear how you would save money, what you would do?

I would cut commitments overseas over military muscle as a start. Then I'd freeze call spending.
Abolish the ACA, Dept of Education, DHS, Department of Commerce—all not vital or needed and some hampers what they were formed to handle. That would be just to start. Pay for officials to be performance based show demonstrated results.

I absolutely would not cut WH tours. Geez!

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I would cut commitments overseas over military muscle as a start. Then I'd freeze call spending.
Abolish the ACA, Dept of Education, DHS, Department of Commerce—all not vital or needed and some hampers what they were formed to handle. That would be just to start. Pay for officials to be performance based show demonstrated results.

I absolutely would not cut WH tours. Geez!

I was talking about Fairplay's plan to make security and background checks cheaper. He seemed to know where the costs were and what they did to cost that amount.