Throw All the Bums Out!

How stupid and simplistic are Americans to overlook the obvious problems with this extremely simplistic and inflammatory posting! Where to begin:


First of all, are we talking about the average income of ALL Americans or just the ones paying taxes, or just the legal citizens, does this include people on a pension etc, etc etc?

Second, what is the average level of education of the "average Federal Government Worker” vs. the average American once we figure out what your idea of an “average American” is?

Third, how many years of service does the "average Federal Government Worker" have vs. how many years of service the average American worker have on any one job?

Forth, we could also look at the mead earnings of the "average American automobile assembly line worker in Dearborn" and guess what:

The Average Dearborn Assembly line worker makes $67,000.00 per year as of 1-2009. Let’s see ya bitch about how much more than the average Ford Assembly line worker makes with a HS diploma or less.

Fifth, do these numbers factor in the value of their benefits?

This could go on and on! Just like all good instigators and crybabies about people who work in government or education, why don’t you post some of the REAL FACTS instead of just glittering generalizations for the sole and specific purpose of making people pissed off for nothing! Granted, the vast majority of the American public are too stupid to put anything into context, but this is over the top for even the average idiot!

--by DUAH! on 2/19/10   Lives: Michigan  

Unless you derive your income from the government, mad is an understatement. The 1.7 to 2 million jobs saved or created the Obama administration claims is a ‘snake oil’ claim. But they do state that most of the jobs actually saved were state and local government jobs. Obama’s trust in the Democratic congress has spiraled up the debt with reckless funding of pet projects and preservation of jobs in the public sector. State and local jobs are normally funded by the tax base. But, when the tax revenue declines, the state faces layoffs and reduction in services. Since most tax revenue is derived from the private sector, why did congress put the emphasis on job creation and preservation in the public sector rather than the private? Could the motive be political? If the elitist attitude that “government know best” continues with the fiscal irresponsibility of a reckless congress, a state of emergency is inevitable. Then we will all watch Obama take advantage of this crisis by issuing executive orders and signing legislation to force you to comply with the government directives. This is change you better believe in.

--by PJanny on 2/19/10   Lives: USA  

Duah, Really likes to present his mismash of liberal info as fact. As they say on the street he is full of himself.

--by Got you on 2/19/10   Lives: Michigan  

Friends, I have to agree with the approach that 'Duah' takes (are you trying to spell D'oh! like Dad Simpson says?). It is so hard to nail down 'average.' Also, is it the average wage that is the problem, or that there are so MANY government employees?

--by JP Dearborn on 2/19/10   Lives: Dearborn  

Funny the Duah, person who goes on and on about this post. Does not get it at all ! Maybe, he should go back to school and pay attention to Occam's Razor: "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate." This translates roughly as "Multiple variables are not to be posited without necessity. "

--by T. S. on 2/19/10   Lives: Detroit area  

I have to agree with Duah, when I read this yesterday and there were no comments, I mentioned his points to my husband. The government salaries does not have Wendy's operators. Statistics are always a funny thing and can always be manipulated. Just having the salaries does not tell me enough information to get upset about.
PJANNY- these numbers are not about the number of jobs saved or created or whatever screwed up math Obama wants to use.

--by ME on 2/20/10   Lives: Dearborn  

Obama... From hero to zero in one year. Throw them all out.

--by jl on 2/21/10   Lives: Detroit area  

So let’s just see how Obama has done in just one year of his presidency.

He came into office during a depression, call it what you like, it is a depression!

Two foreign wars we know about and at least two that are being quietly fought (a trade war with China and attempting to topple the Iranian government). One of the two wars we were suckered into through lies and deception by our last president who we were dumb enough to RE-elect after getting caught lying to us multiple times.

The biggest deficit in American History due to military spending.

Over 10% unemployment nationwide

Banking system in chaos after Republicans deregulated banking

Highest oil prices in history after Republicans deregulated the Oil industry.

1/3 of US born Americans un insured or under insured for health care.

So what in the HELL does anyone expect this one man would be able to do in one stinking year? What did any of you idiots think McCain would do in only one year after 8 years of total incompetence from our previous president?

God, I think we maybe the dumbest generation in history! Our parents and grandparents were the greatest, we will be known as the dumbest!

--by Republicans are no better on 2/22/10   Lives: USA  

Russ, Why is it the Democratic defenders of Obama are so long winded ? They go on in a ramshackly way with a lot of useless information.They miss your point compleatly.

--by A Forrester on 2/23/10   Lives: Michigan  

Forrester, Your use of the word "ramshackly" is perfect to discribe the Obama faithful on this site.They do go with their helter-skelter Bush blame fest.I wonder if they realize what a bad Obama joke they have become.

--by CC Calaway on 2/23/10   Lives: Detroit area  

ramshackly? LOL!! Is that even a word? Is that one of those “Bushisems?”

Could somebody explain exactly what the original point was? How can anyone draw a reasonable conclusion from the original string considering the total lack of facts, or without any qualifying data? Just a bunch of random members and angry conjecture.

I guess Republicans (members of the obstructionist party) really don’t like to be bothered with details like truth or facts or details. I guess that’s why we are fighting a war over in Iraq despite the fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction and no Iraqi involvement in 911. We just went rushing in on a bunch of trumped up BS that Rumsfeld, Chaney and Bush floated out there.

Let’s make it nice and simple for your more right leaning readers, SHOW US THE FACTS TO BACK UP THE NUMBERS. While you are at it, please refer us to the meaning of the word "ramshackly." I am sure its right in the same place these "facts" in the original post are from. Maybe we should blame Argentina for this and invade them too. Maybe they are to blame for Government workers making too much money.

Sorry, am I asking too many questions for your readers in one string? Some folks just can’t process too much information.

--by De-Forrester on 2/24/10   Lives: Dearborn  

Providing the backup for my previous post: Please see former Iraqi general Georges Sada's book "Saddam's Secrets" (2006). Also, the United Nations (Demetrius Perricos) confirmed that the WMD's were smuggled out of Iraq before our invasion. While a Pentagon report states that there were no 'operational' links between al-Qaeda and Iraq, that doesn't mean there weren't significant connections. There are documented meetings reaching back into 1998 between the two groups. The documentation includes European and Middle-Eastern journalists. The Iraqi camp where terrorists were trained to take over a jetliner with small knives was called 'Salman Pak'. The report on the camp was from the London 'Observer.'

--by JP Dearborn on 2/24/10   Lives: Dearborn  

To 'De-Forester:' Addressing just one of your points, you claim there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and no Iraqi involvement in 9/11. More recent information is available on both these issues, including books written by former Iraqi generals. The WMD's were sent to Syria before we invaded. Most of them, anyway. Some were used against the British in the south of Iraq. This is what the Israelis were saying immediately after the invasion, and their intelligence has turned out to be correct. As far as Iraqi involvement in 9/11, consider that Iraq ran a training camp for foreign terrorists where the slime were trained to take over a jetliner using small knives. Does that remind you of 9/11 and the boxcutters? There were a long string of meetings between Iraqi officials (including Saddam) and Al Queda (sp) leaders wherein Saddam promised his support. These meetings are documented. The fact that Saddam didn't plan those specific attacks doesn't mean that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Support Barry O. if you want, but please don't continue the warped lies of others.

--by JP Dearborn on 2/24/10   Lives: Dearborn  

OH GOD GIVE ME A BREAK!

Hell, Pakistan has more international terrorist training camps than anyone in the world and they are loaded with WMD's WHY ARNT WE INVADING THEM? Why aren’t we invading Syria? Saddam had less to do with 911 than members of the Saudi government did and yet, they are our friends! We send them money and troops. You people really need to get your heads out of your butts!

So everyone else’s lies are warped except George Sada, right? George Tenent, than director of the CIA himself, testified to Congress that there were no WMD's and there was no links to 911 in Iraq, as a matter of fact, Al Queda was HATED by Saddam Hussein and often rounded up and exacuted by his goons. Furthermore, our than Secretary of State, Colin Powell STENOUSLY objected to reporting to the American Public that Iraqi's were building WMD's when every bit of intelligence that was available did not support the claims. Powell himself openly admitted that he was repulsed by being pressure to flat out lie to the American people about mobile anthrax labs and WMD capabilities of the Iraqi military. I guess Mr. Soda knows more than him too, right? Isnt Powell a Republican? War Hero?

So let me get this straight, our own director of the CIA and our own Secretary of State wasn’t convinced despite having 100% access to all the intell and information, but you obstructionists have better sources to refute them.

I guess it’s true, there is a sucker born every minute! I suppose you will all be screaming for us to invade Iran pretty soon, that is as long as YOUR kids don’t have to go do the fighting and we keep the oil flowing out of Iraqi oil fields.

Its clear that you people will beleive anything anyone tells you as long as you get your oil.

--by Warped lies on 2/24/10   Lives: Dearborn  

So Sad,"Warped Lies" seems
clear that you will believe any liberal Democratic Party spin anyone tells you as long as you get your ego fix.. You are indeed a sad,sad excuse for an intellegent person. LOL

--by G. H. on 2/24/10   Lives: Dearborn  

'Warped Lies' makes a good point. We SHOULD invade Syria and Pakistan, kicking butt as we go. Sitting here wringing our hands instead of acting forcefully is NOT living up to the promise to 'pursue them wherever they are.' The Muslim leaders only understand force. Period.

--by Good point on 2/27/10   Lives: Dearborn  

Yes, let’s invade Syria and Pakistan. Than lets just finish up with Jordan and Iran. While we are there, just take over Saudi without a shot, its not like they have a real army.

Sound like any other event in History? Maybe like Nazis in WWII? They were convinced that all those countries were plotting against them too. Or course, to know this would mean that people would have to know a little about history and we all know how Americans are not capable of learning from our mistakes now are we?

--by No point on 3/15/10   Lives: Dearborn