keepthefaith Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 (edited) TRANSPARENCY: Obama’s Pentagon Suppresses Study Finding $125 Billion in Wasteful Spending. That’s $125 billion annually. President Barack Obama’s Pentagon discredited and suppressed an internal probe that uncovered $125 billion in wasteful spending on the enormous administrative operations primarily ran by civilians and contractors. The money could have been reinvested in payment for troops, weapons, and renovating the aging nuclear arsenal, the Washington Post (WaPo) has learned. The Defense Business Board produced the study in January 2015 by a federal advisory panel of corporate executives, in coordination with consultants from McKinsey and Company. Hand the study over the the new admin and congress and let's see if they can put it to good use. Let's not forget that BO never wanted the entire job as President. His passion is for social and economic justice for minorities along with the destruction of the opposition party. The rest is just noise and a distraction to those ends. And while we're at it, how'd he do on those 2 priorities? Edited December 8, 2016 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 TRANSPARENCY: Obama’s Pentagon Suppresses Study Finding $125 Billion in Wasteful Spending. That’s $125 billion annually. President Barack Obama’s Pentagon discredited and suppressed an internal probe that uncovered $125 billion in wasteful spending on the enormous administrative operations primarily ran by civilians and contractors. The money could have been reinvested in payment for troops, weapons, and renovating the aging nuclear arsenal, the Washington Post (WaPo) has learned. The Defense Business Board produced the study in January 2015 by a federal advisory panel of corporate executives, in coordination with consultants from McKinsey and Company. No, it's $125 billion over five years that they could save by being more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Thanks again Harry.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 USA TODAY COLUMN: Make D.C. a swamp again: Trump is scaring progressive hipsters away, he should send federal workers after them. “I propose that over the next several years, we transfer a lot of federal employees out of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, to parts of the country that aren’t doing so well economically. This would provide a boost to places like Buffalo, New York, or Quincy, Illinois, or Fresno, California, while getting federal bureaucrats out of the D.C. bubble.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 12, 2016 Share Posted December 12, 2016 (edited) Gee............why don't we trust the media ? OOPS: A big change to U.S. broadcasting is coming — and it’s one Putin might admire. Note the headline that tries to imply that Trump’s presidency will be Putin-like. But there’s this in the last paragraph: The Obama administration — perhaps anticipating a Hillary Clinton presidency — supported these changes. Edited December 12, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 USA TODAY COLUMN: Make D.C. a swamp again: Trump is scaring progressive hipsters away, he should send federal workers after them. “I propose that over the next several years, we transfer a lot of federal employees out of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, to parts of the country that aren’t doing so well economically. This would provide a boost to places like Buffalo, New York, or Quincy, Illinois, or Fresno, California, while getting federal bureaucrats out of the D.C. bubble.” Government jobs? Boosting the economy of places? Ok! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 Gee............why don't we trust the media ? OOPS: A big change to U.S. broadcasting is coming — and it’s one Putin might admire. Note the headline that tries to imply that Trump’s presidency will be Putin-like. But there’s this in the last paragraph: The Obama administration — perhaps anticipating a Hillary Clinton presidency — supported these changes. but you have no problem labeling the pentagon "Obama's" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 but you have no problem labeling the pentagon "Obama's" Again..............if you would think first...........you would see that the article's comment and the comment you attribute to me are not equivalent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 (edited) Well, look where we are now. I wonder, when this thread was started, if GreggyT understood where we'd end up? Ignore the BS, and especially the pleading and the whining from the media. I love that I saw a writer recently complain that "Trump is appointing people to the various departments, that hate the departments". Hey buddy, did you just figure it out? Every single sign points to a massive reform of DC, and yeah, in some cases, destruction of DC institutions. I said in 2014 after those elections, that whoever claimed the "reformer" mantle would be POTUS. Trump did, and now, he is. Make no mistake: people want reform. The only reason Trump didn't win bigger is because of his own personal F-ups(Access Hollywood, etc.), that allowed the Ds to run an anybody but Trump campaign. In hindsight, that backfired, because while they were out attacking him personally, and not creating a reform/"change" message of their own? Trump was saying, literally, that he was going to take a sledgehammer to DC. Now, he and the cabinet he is selecting are preparing to do just that. People DO hate the government right now. So, why keep it? Who says we have to respect LBJ's awful legacy? Why? That's from 60 damn years ago. Forget Obama's. That's gone, daddy gone. Why the F do we care about Carter, Nixon, or any other failed president's decades-old "accomplishments"(read: out of date/out of touch/just plain terrible programs)? This is one of those few instances where sledgehammer beats scalpel. I don't care if a few good things get broken, because there are so many bad things, and we must kill them all. The DC Building has condemned itself. Time to tear it down to the foundation, and build something better. We have lived in a new century for almost 20 years already. Time to do away with last century's solutions that don't apply today, and build new ones. The above is an example of what Teddy Roosevelt, the real progressive, said about his presidency beginning the last century. To bad we wasted 16 years to get to where we should have been in this one. Edited December 13, 2016 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 We live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by the TSA to protect us from teddy bears TSA warns travelers with depressing teddy bear Instagram post - NBC ...www.nbc-2.com/story/.../ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 We live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by the TSA to protect us from teddy bears TSA warns travelers with depressing teddy bear Instagram post - NBC ...www.nbc-2.com/story/.../ So someone thought they were actually able to carry that on? I know people are dumb but.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 So someone thought they were actually able to carry that on? I know people are dumb but.................. They bought a seat for it. It's not an unreasonable expectation. And in fact, the issue was that they couldn't fit it through any sort of security scanner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 They bought a seat for it. It's not an unreasonable expectation. And in fact, the issue was that they couldn't fit it through any sort of security scanner. Then it deserved a "pat down". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 They bought a seat for it. It's not an unreasonable expectation. And in fact, the issue was that they couldn't fit it through any sort of security scanner. So you're saying I should have read the article before I commented on it? How dare you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted December 16, 2016 Share Posted December 16, 2016 So someone thought they were actually able to carry that on? I know people are dumb but.................. It's a therapy bear! It introduces calm, and the person carrying it is able to deal with both the anxiety of flight plus the damnation of Trump's victory over Princess Hill'ry. Sheesh, give a millennial a break, would ya'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 17, 2016 Share Posted December 17, 2016 Illinois law forces hairdressers to take training — 1 hour every 2 years — in detecting evidence of domestic violence. The NYT reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 REMEMBER, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO THINK THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE IS UNDEMOCRATIC: EPA steamrolls auto industry to rush out new regs. The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday rejected an auto industry request to extend the review period for strict new vehicle regulations, allowing them to go into effect before President Obama leaves office. “The EPA continues to believe that the [decision] and the associated 30-day comment period remain appropriate and, therefore, the EPA is denying both the request for withdrawal and the request for an extension of the comment period,” Janet McCabe, the EPA’s air pollution chief, wrote in a letter to the top trade group for the automakers,the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. The auto industry requested last month that the EPA extend the review period for an agency study that determined the new rules for improving fuel efficiency and lowering carbon emissions be extended into the next year. The agency had surprised the industry last month by saying it was planning on finalizing its determination this year, instead of doing so next year as the law requires. Pen and phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 (edited) REMEMBER, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO THINK THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE IS UNDEMOCRATIC: EPA steamrolls auto industry to rush out new regs. The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday rejected an auto industry request to extend the review period for strict new vehicle regulations, allowing them to go into effect before President Obama leaves office. “The EPA continues to believe that the [decision] and the associated 30-day comment period remain appropriate and, therefore, the EPA is denying both the request for withdrawal and the request for an extension of the comment period,” Janet McCabe, the EPA’s air pollution chief, wrote in a letter to the top trade group for the automakers,the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. The auto industry requested last month that the EPA extend the review period for an agency study that determined the new rules for improving fuel efficiency and lowering carbon emissions be extended into the next year. The agency had surprised the industry last month by saying it was planning on finalizing its determination this year, instead of doing so next year as the law requires. Pen and phone. The auto-makers are not required to follow edicts that run counter to the law. They should refuse to abide, and sue immediately to seek injunction. Edited December 23, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 No, the IRS may not deny tax exemptions on the grounds that a group is a supposed ‘hate group.’ Which is good news, since "hate group" is often re-defined as someone the Left dislikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 31, 2016 Share Posted December 31, 2016 No, the IRS may not deny tax exemptions on the grounds that a group is a supposed hate group. Which is good news, since "hate group" is often re-defined as someone the Left dislikes just bought a laptop tax free today. I can also buy a TV tax free, cuz ya know... gotta be able to see the cows and all in high def 3d surround sound 5.1 Dolby... Tax free is a joke, I'll say it. Its a jokr that sales taxes exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts