During the last presidential debate, Barrack Obama demanded that the AIG execs involved in a junket to a spa be fired!!!!!!!!!
I would be all wealth-enviously angry about the AIG Junket thingy, except for the fact that their junket provides jobs for all the new age spa worker type people. New age types would not exist if not for the fabulously wealthy who fund people to flutter like butterflies around the spa.
BTW, have you noticed that everytime a Republican is involved in firing an executive or lawyer it is a scandal?
Democrats and union types are always jumping up and down demanding their enemies be fired.
Do you remember the grief Bush got for (gasp) firing lawyers. You can't fire lawyers. Lawyers are above the common man and deserve adulation.
Well, I was kind of angry with Bush about the lawyer thing. It should have been 900 and not just 9. I thought that the RIF of 9 lawyers was a test to see if he could save taxpayer's money by a larger RIF.
BTW, has anyone else noticed that the price of gas seems to have dropped a bit. I know it is not news. News, after all, is something that can be framed as such to help secure the Democratic Party's victory.
Defending AIG in order to attack Obama shows a lack of reasoning on your part, replaced instead by ideological blindness. It's what got our party into the mess it's in right now, we don't need more of it. Obama had a point, be rational and admit it, and knock this content free writing off. We need to get back to our roots. Refusing to admit when your opponent has a point is just as stupid as what you accuse (in a sweeping generalization, nonetheless) the Dems of. We've got to be better than this or we deserve every lost election we get. Voters are not stupid for supporting Obama. We are stupid for not regrouping around conservative priciple instead of "social conservative values" pressed on us by the evangelical right wing, and letting our central principles go in place of anti-libertarian ideals. True small government conservatives don't give a hoot about abortion, or gay marriage, unless it's going to cost the state money. True small government conservatives don't want to amend the constitution left and right to ban this or prevent that. And (I believe) true conservatives, with integrity, can admit when the opposition has an edge, without resorting to fluff pieces like what you've written here. Step up, or step out of the way. Your days of speaking for my conservative, limited government values are over.
The post was about a MSM that lauds Obama for demanding that a group of people get fired, then attacks Palin for actually firing someone.
I was not defending AIG. I was defending the spa, and pointing out that Obama was demanding that a group of people be fired for going to a spa. That is as capricious as Palin's and Bush's acts.
Spas and fitness clubs are always the first to suffer in economic downturns.
I am angry with the AIG bailout.
AIG's fatal flaw came in the form of buying mortgage backed securities to serve as the investment tool for their insurance reserves. The company's practice of using junkets to spas as a perk was not the cause of the company's problems.
I think it is a silly perk. But the whole notion behind bailouts is that it keeps a company's failure from having a ripple effect in the economy. If the theory has merit, then we should be happy that the spa didn't lose its contract with AIG. That means the spa workers didn't lose their jobs and will be able to make one more payment on their cabanas. This helps keep the price of cabanas from plummeting, etc..
If we are to be angry, we should be angry with the bailout and not with AIG for maintaining perks that employ spa workers.
The rhetoric that we should fire a group of people for going to a spa is silly, because the firing is not based on the actual performance of the worker.
As Democrats demand that people get fired for visiting a spa, I hope people realize that there is a capricious political element to all personnel decisions.
Post a Comment