1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Obama playing political games with defense cuts?

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by crusha, Oct 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    "White House Discourages Layoff Warnings" (...and Lockheed Martin rolls over, puts on their knee pads, and starts suckin').


    So: the Obama administration encourages contractors to violate labor laws, to sway the election their way in Virginia...then gamely offers to use your tax dollar$ to pay off the workers' lawsuits, after they unexpectedly lose their jobs (...Hell, those workers are probabaly just Republican voters anyway, right?)



    Blade819: doesn't this make you proud of your President, and employer?
     
  2. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,737
    POLITICO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why does the ignorance continue!
     
  3. slide action

    slide action Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,918
    Oh yea FLYN! 500 BILLION(half a TRILLION) in defense cuts and the lefties in the government say layoffs "may not happen"??!!--They are ALREADY happening and will sky rocket! But not to worry! Your HERO AliBama will be saved the scare which will increase his election chances and tax payers will pay for the lawsuits BECAUSE it "IS" federal law that the notices be sent out, but, all this helps you BUDDY get elected and that's what's REALLY important isn't it???!!!
     
  4. blade819

    blade819 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    4,467
    whatever!

    blade819
     
  5. BT-100dc

    BT-100dc Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,487
    As a former Human Resources manager for a steel processing company, we were required by law to give notices. I always followed the law. How does a president who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution feel it's right to encourage violation of the law? The U.S. Constitution does not authorize a president to encourage anyone to break the law. This is un-American and does not represent America. It's bigger than politics. If police would do this, it would be entrapment. The next issue is Obama is authorizing Congress to pay, with our tax dollars, damages as a result of his urging contractors to violate the law. This is abuse of power and should be condemn by the voter. BT100dc
     
  6. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,645
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The law means nothing to this administration.

    We have seen this over and over. End runs around Congress, stonewalling Fast & Furious, and now the libyagate coverup.

    If the communists get back in you can bet there will be no 2016 election.

    HM
     
  7. Recoil Sissy

    Recoil Sissy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,647
    Gentlemen:

    No less a source than PMS-NBC has reported alleged political shenanigans by the obummer administration. Names were named and quotes were quoted.

    There is of course, room for honest disagreement. Since Stl Flyn and Blade are the dissenting voices at moment, I'll address my comments and questions to them.

    Can we agree on the following points?

    1. The issue concerns potential layoffs that would result if sequestration comes to pass.

    2. Layoff notices are required by federal law no matter the reason for an anticipated layoff.

    3. The law makes no distinction between speculative layoffs and drop dead certain layoffs. It mandates the notices be sent.

    4. A layoff notice doesn't REQUIRE a layoff to occur. If a layoff notice is given, but the layoff doesn't come to pass, there's no harm and no foul.

    If we agree on that, I’ll continue. If not, please explain where in your opinion, I’ve strayed from fact.

    As an aside, I've faced this exact situation (layoff notices without a layoff) as a board member of a service provider. "We" do significant business with a deadbeat state government. In the absence of payment for services rendered (several million dollars worth), I've twice approved laying off sufficient numbers of employees to prevent default and bankruptcy. Thank Heaven such layoffs have not been necessary, so far. However, the notices WERE sent in accordance with law.

    Moving on, following are the first questions that come to my mind...

    A. If the potential consequence of looming sequestration (including layoff notices for defense industry workers) isn’t political, what is it?

    B. If, as the administration contends, any layoffs due to sequestration would happen months after Jan. 2013, why is it necessary for the White House Office of Management and Budget (to) issue a memo saying the government would cover the costs of any (defense) contractors that might face legal trouble if they have to lay off workers due to spending cuts effective Jan. 2013?

    C. If the timing of layoffs are consistent with obummer’s schedule, it would allow layoff notices to be sent in a timely manner. So what legal troubles would a contractor face?

    D. If this whole thing isn't about covering obummer's ass until Election Day, what exactly is it?

    Stl Fly and Blade, please explain your alternative point of view for those of us who don't understand.

    Sincerely yours,

    sissy
     
  8. blade819

    blade819 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    4,467
    Sissy........ what do you not understand about "whatever"? That makes me a desenter or do you just want to pick a fight like a Right Wing Bully on the street corner? I gladly participate in arguements if they warrant my participation, this one doesn't. IDGAS !

    blade819
     
  9. Recoil Sissy

    Recoil Sissy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,647
    I have no earthly idea what you meant by "whatever" Blade. IDGAS doesn't ring bells either. I understand threads that don't warrant one's participation. If that's the case, why did you comment?

    I'm not picking anything. Just looking for clarification.

    Respectfully and Sincerely,

    sissy
     
  10. Bisi

    Bisi TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,399
    If Scott Walker did what Obama does, Stl Flyn would be outraged. But since it is Barack.......

    There'll be enough money left in the defense budget to keep Air Force One fueled up? Right?
     
  11. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    R.Sissy,


    Your questions are dead-on.


    Way to demonstrate Intellectual Humility! You da man!


    buzz
     
  12. blade819

    blade819 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    4,467
    Sissy- I commented because buzz gun chose to use me as an example in his original post. IDGAS means I don't give a sh-t.... refering to his original post. I hope I clarified this to your satisfaction. Have a nice day.

    blade819
     
  13. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,737
    This belongs in the Political BS section! That is my point! It is either ignorance (Knowing better, and doing it anyway), or stupidity (Lack of knowledge).

    Just because one idiot decides he needs more attention, causes the other followers to do the same, WTF!
     
  14. John Galt

    John Galt TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,788
    Ostool, you are hardly in a position to call anybody an idiot.
     
  15. slide action

    slide action Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,918
    flyn doesn't like it because it looks bad for his buddy Obama. Blade is iritated also so he uses the "whatever" teenager brained comment. Obama is trying to get DOD contracting companies to break or disregard federal law! Now what part of THAT don't you GET!
     
  16. Johnny

    Johnny Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,804
    Apparently the law does not require an employer to send a 60 day notice based on speculation. So no law is broken. Companies would be sending notices simply to influence the election. A notice would not be required till the layoff is certain.
    It's the defense companies that are playing games.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.