Obama daughters are paid staff!

[Trip McNeely]

Fuck these corrupt assholes and any and all associates.

[Unicorn Jeff]

Those are some expensive ass fucking Bananas!

[Pro Trash]

I was wondering if this website investigates independent or republicans? After browsing the website I didn't see anything about other parties, they seem to specifically investigate the democratic party. I am not saying that they are wrong in any fashion just wondering if they are party oriented?

[racrguy]

I was wondering if this website investigates independent or republicans? After browsing the website I didn't see anything about other parties, they seem to specifically investigate the democratic party. I am not saying that they are wrong in any fashion just wondering if they are party oriented?

"Fair and balanced."

[YALE]

If they were listed as staff, that means they were technically employed, which means the White House has to follow child labor laws. Technically anything they were doing with their mom on that trip would have been work related, which would put them on the clock.

No, it doesn't. It means they were listed as senior staff for the purposes of the trip. If no other evidence of their employment exists, and all the anecdotal evidence of the trip seems to be that the Obama family was (big surprise!) on another taxpayer funded vacation, then it looks like the listing was at best an error, unless they somehow needed to justify their presence, in which case it would be a fraudulent listing. If the Obama girls were actually working (you and I both know that's not in the cards for those girls, ever), then they would be working, or volunteering, or whatever. It could also be the Secret Service muddying the waters from a clerical standpoint, for security purposes.

[mikec]

I was wondering if this website investigates independent or republicans? After browsing the website I didn't see anything about other parties, they seem to specifically investigate the democratic party. I am not saying that they are wrong in any fashion just wondering if they are party oriented?

One little...

"Fair and balanced."

Two little...

No, it doesn't. It means they were listed as senior staff for the purposes of the trip. If no other evidence of their employment exists, and all the anecdotal evidence of the trip seems to be that the Obama family was (big surprise!) on another taxpayer funded vacation, then it looks like the listing was at best an error, unless they somehow needed to justify their presence, in which case it would be a fraudulent listing. If the Obama girls were actually working (you and I both know that's not in the cards for those girls, ever), then they would be working, or volunteering, or whatever. It could also be the Secret Service muddying the waters from a clerical standpoint, for security purposes.

Three little liberals...

[Pro Trash]

One little...



Two little...



Three little liberals...

I am no liberal, nor am I an independent or republican; however, given the political radicalism of the majority of dfwmustangs respondents, I consider any statement that I hold a separate view to be a compliment. I consider myself an American Michael, a person who wants our country to succeed no matter who the President is, can you say the same without an if, but or statement of blame? Also I am more than willing to compare our collective mutual service to this beloved nation at any time, you want to let this one go.

I do find it amusing that any question or opinion that even remotely differs in any form from the collective here on dfwmustangs must mean someone is a "liberal". So if liberal means I have the right to my own opinion, can accept a persons viewpoint without judging them and want what is best for this country then call me liberal all you want.

[Nash B.]

LOLz @ Yale being liberal. I'll give you racrguy, but just barely.

[stevo]

I am no liberal, nor am I an independent or republican; however, given the political radicalism of the majority of dfwmustangs respondents, I consider any statement that I hold a separate view to be a compliment. I consider myself an American Michael, a person who wants our country to succeed no matter who the President is, can you say the same without an if, but or statement of blame? Also I am more than willing to compare our collective mutual service to this beloved nation at any time, you want to let this one go.

I do find it amusing that any question or opinion that even remotely differs in any form from the collective here on dfwmustangs must mean someone is a "liberal". So if liberal means I have the right to my own opinion, can accept a persons viewpoint without judging them and want what is best for this country then call me liberal all you want.

Instead of coming into this forum/website and making snide "holier than thou" remarks and offering questions to which you already have the answer, how about you add some content or make your own threads with your own, differing opinions?

And by the way, which ever political party that you "consider" yourself to be affiliated with is moot, it is your actions, opinions and beliefs that prove your political associations. There are millions of people that voted for the 0bama regime that are now having a severe case of 'buyer's remorse', and choose to publicly claim to be of a different political inclination. They were proud leftist liberals when the voted in November, now they are embarrassed. You voted for him, you are a liberal Democrat.

Stevo

[Pro Trash]

Instead of coming into this forum/website and making snide "holier than thou" remarks and offering questions to which you already have the answer, how about you add some content or make your own threads with your own, differing opinions?

And by the way, which ever political party that you "consider" yourself to be affiliated with is moot, it is your actions, opinions and beliefs that prove your political associations. There are millions of people that voted for the 0bama regime that are now having a severe case of 'buyer's remorse', and choose to publicly claim to be of a different political inclination. They were proud leftist liberals when the voted in November, now they are embarrassed. You voted for him, you are a liberal Democrat.

Stevo

Steve I respect your point and find your statement compelling. I cannot intelligently align myself holistically with any one party, the democrats and republicans seem more intent on destroying one another than fixing the countries problems.

I did not vote for President Obama in either election. I voted republican in both of the last two elections because of key issues such as economics, national security and gun control. I do not care for the democratic parties view of gun control and consider their views a threat to my 2nd amendment right and I do not care for social medicine. I also do not care for the republican parties general view of capitalism which in my opinion constitutes outsourcing without any true benefit to our country. I think Obama is in intelligent in some areas and weak in others. I felt the same way about George W. Bush, William Clinton and George H. Bush.

My favorite two Presidents of all time are Ronald Reagan and Andrew Jackson. I do not subscribe to the idea that Obama is trying to destroy America, I do think he is aligned with people who want to take more of my money to support those who cannot or will not work as hard as I. I do not subscribe to the idea that George Bush was a horrible President; however, I do feel he made some very bad decisions while in office that will take this country years to recover from if at all.

[stevo]

Steve I respect your point and find your statement compelling. I cannot intelligently align myself holistically with any one party, the democrats and republicans seem more intent on destroying one another than fixing the countries problems.

I did not vote for President Obama in either election. I voted republican in both of the last two elections because of key issues such as economics, national security and gun control. I do not care for the democratic parties view of gun control and consider their views a threat to my 2nd amendment right and I do not care for social medicine. I also do not care for the republican parties general view of capitalism which in my opinion constitutes outsourcing without any true benefit to our country. I think Obama is in intelligent in some areas and weak in others. I felt the same way about George W. Bush, William Clinton and George H. Bush.

My favorite two Presidents of all time are Ronald Reagan and Andrew Jackson. I do not subscribe to the idea that Obama is trying to destroy America, I do think he is aligned with people who want to take more of my money to support those who cannot or will not work as hard as I. I do not subscribe to the idea that George Bush was a horrible President; however, I do feel he made some very bad decisions while in office that will take this country years to recover from if at all.

If that is the case I retract my statement that it applied to. I could have sworn that you made many posts about supporting 0bama and his (now very evident) corrupt cabinet.

And while I consider myself a conservative and generally vote towards the right, there are many Republicans that I cannot support. What I consider myself and what I should be labelled may not necessarily be the same thing, but I'll at least admit if I made a mistake in hindsight with my vote. Many people that voted with passion for 0bama are now trying to downplay or outright lie about doing it. And in 3.5 years, they'll do the same thing again.

Stevo

[LANTIRN]

No, it doesn't. It means they were listed as senior staff for the purposes of the trip. If no other evidence of their employment exists, and all the anecdotal evidence of the trip seems to be that the Obama family was (big surprise!) on another taxpayer funded vacation, then it looks like the listing was at best an error, unless they somehow needed to justify their presence, in which case it would be a fraudulent listing. If the Obama girls were actually working (you and I both know that's not in the cards for those girls, ever), then they would be working, or volunteering, or whatever. It could also be the Secret Service muddying the waters from a clerical standpoint, for security purposes.

Staff of the White House have to be EMPLOYED by the White House. They are paid by taxpayer dollars. If they are listed as staff then that means they were TECHNICALLY employed, and thus the White House would be bound by child labor laws. By law, children are only allowed to work so many hours per day, so there is a good chance that they would end up breaking the law since so much of these trips involve official activities.

And if they were listed as senior staff for the sole purpose of the taxpayers paying for them, then sounds an awful lot like fraud to me. Either way it looks like they have probably violated law.

[YALE]

Staff of the White House have to be EMPLOYED by the White House. They are paid by taxpayer dollars. Redundant

If they are listed as staff then that means they were TECHNICALLY employed, and thus the White House would be bound by child labor laws. Please explain the mechanism of the technicality.

By law, children are only allowed to work so many hours per day, so there is a good chance that they would end up breaking the law since so much of these trips involve official activities.

And if they were listed as senior staff for the sole purpose of the taxpayers paying for them, then sounds an awful lot like fraud to me. Either way it looks like they have probably violated law.

I still don't quite make your point. I am not attacking your argument, I really just don't understand it. Is there a law that brings the technicality into effect? Just listing someone as staff doesn't create the position, and again, if they were government employees, their salaries would be public record, just like all the others.

MikeC: Why don't you stick to what you do best, and run along and snipe a construction job that someone else will have to fix? Name calling doesn't suit you.

[racrguy]

MikeC: Why don't you stick to what you do best, and run along and snipe a construction job that someone else will have to fix? Name calling doesn't suit you.

Oh snap!

And lol@ me being a liberal.

[Pro Trash]

If that is the case I retract my statement that it applied to. I could have sworn that you made many posts about supporting 0bama and his (now very evident) corrupt cabinet.

And while I consider myself a conservative and generally vote towards the right, there are many Republicans that I cannot support. What I consider myself and what I should be labelled may not necessarily be the same thing, but I'll at least admit if I made a mistake in hindsight with my vote. Many people that voted with passion for 0bama are now trying to downplay or outright lie about doing it. And in 3.5 years, they'll do the same thing again.

Stevo

It wasn't that I made statements supporting Obama, it is that I made statements in which I supported McCain and did not support many of Bush's decision. In this particular forum refusing to agree with the masses about the republican party leads to being called a liberal. I do not consider myself better than anyone else, I just refuse to jump on the right wing band wagon. It does not take much to figure out this particular forum, essentially anytime someone remotely has an opinion that isn't strictly anti-Obama/pro-Republican the insults fly. For a group of people whom claim to be pro-American there are some very un-American qualities on display in my opinion, beginning with the lack of interest in freedom of speech.