First Lady requires more than twenty attendants

reply to post by Jadette



Really? is that why President Obama's inauguration was the most expensive ever made for ANY president DURING a time of FINANTIAL CRISIS?......

Oh sure, we are in a recession, and going towards a really bad Deppression but hey, let's allow the first lady to continue hiring more than 20 attendants being paid by the tax-payer meanwhile many American families can't afford to buy 3 meals a day for their families, and of course, hundreds of thousands of Americans keep losing their jobs each month.....




[edit on 9-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

reply to post by SR


Most leftists don't believe people like you, and I who have experienced Socialism/Communism, and they rather believe a liar like Moore.

A couple of years back I was pointing out the fact that Moore was lying about "the so wonderful healthcare in Cuba" yet many members were claiming they would accept lies like that to get to the truth of the American healthcare...

I never knew you get to the truth with lies but anyway, meanwhile the Obamatrons keep cheering for "CHANGE" the country is indeed being changed into a Socialist dictatorship, and the Obamatrons still keep cheering....

Of course, business goes as usual, and the Obama administration spends more money than ever as if we were not having an economic crisis...and as the Obama administration have been saying... "Let's not let pass a GOOD economic CRISIS, since now they can do things that would be impossible to do in the past. That is to transform the Republic into a Socialist dictatorship.


[edit on 9-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Say what you will about Carter (and I think in many ways, he was a total failure as President) but at least he attempted to set an example during the lean years of the late '70s.

America wants to see their leadership deal with the same problems that we are. What we don't want is to have our faces rubbed in the fact that our leaders live in an untouchable bubble and that the nations ills are nothing more than stories on the tee vee.

Yes, we know that the three branches of government aren't worried about how they will pay their household bills, how they'll eat today, or that they are on the verge of financial collapse. Heck, we even know that if the Russians/Chinese/North Koreans, etc ever throw a few nukes our way, they'll all be safely ensconsed in a mountain bunker somewhere with a warm bed, a hot meal, and a comfortable life. We don't want to be reminded of it.

As someone quoted here earlier, the line 'Let them eat cake' is the vibe that we're getting. Even Clinton felt "our pain..." or at least said so. Prince Barak seems like all is right in the world... his maybe, but that may be about it. There is no 'lead by example,' it's all 'do as I say, not as I do.'

First off I love the fact this news source is Canadian. Is it just me or are people applauding the fact the first lady has a nearly two dozen member entourage? The inauguration ceremony was excessive, but in-light of the recent throwing away of money at every problem fitting. We are just getting a taste of the change. What a proud American she is now!

Originally posted by larphillips
Prince Barak seems like all is right in the world... his maybe, but that may be about it. There is no 'lead by example,' it's all 'do as I say, not as I do.'

That's what I was thinking. I was always taught to lead from the front and lead by example. I guess that the military taught me wrong, and I should have learned leadership from a "community organizer".

Originally posted by Jadette
Does it make sense to 'change' what you're doing if it hinders you in accomplishing your job? Change just for change's sake is just silly.

So what exactly is her 'job' that requires these minions?

What ya expect?
It takes a lot of time, effort and resources to tend to dat booty!
Baby got back!

reply to post by jd140


Exactly, all I am saying is that she has things that need to be done and if she cuts back on assistants everything might not get done. I personally don't know what all she needs done but does anyone else here know exactly what she needs done? Without that knowledge we can't really say she has to many assistants.

Cutting back is a good thing, there are just some things where cutting back is not the best idea. In my opinion this article is just attempting to take some cheap shots at the Obama family.

This is total insanity.

I could do with one, and most of the time she would be in the way.

This thread is merely a perpetuation of hate. It needs to cease. Look into your hearts of hearts, and throw away the bitterness that lies within. Attack the policies and not the individuals, for there is no gain in making petty and pathetic attacks. Understand that the women has two children, her mother, and a pet to look after. Her attendants are not merely her own. That being said, I tell you to let go of blind hate. Simply let it go, focus your energy on debating the policies and the true conspiracies against the children of man. Simply focus your energy on something substantial, not insignificant happenings.

That is all I have to say. Look inside yourself for a few minutes after reading and feel it out. You will see how it truly comes across within your truly rational mind and spirit.

isn't this good news for the employment of your country?

have another 50 maybe, that is 50 new jobs

[edit on 9-7-2009 by yiersan]

Originally posted by TruthWithin

I would hope that if YOUR wife were being attacked, the way you deep south hill-billies are attacking her, you would want some help too.

Give it up and get real.

If i had a wife who needed 22 helpers to sit around and look pretty I would be quite sad with myself.

reply to post by jd140


The first assisant to Michelle has 3 blackberriers just to keep up with Michelles appointments alone.

I am pretty sure she is busy.


this thread really has to be one of the more immature threads. I thought school was back in.

reply to post by Styki

Exactly, all I am saying is that she has things that need to be done and if she cuts back on assistants everything might not get done. I personally don't know what all she needs done but does anyone else here know exactly what she needs done? Without that knowledge we can't really say she has to many assistants.

Now that ain't exactly logical now is it? If we have no idea what she 'needs to get done' FOR THE COUNTRY in an OFFICIAL role...then without that knowledge we really cannot say she even needs ONE assistant. As other first ladies appear not to have had more than two or three....I find it completely and utterly excessive.

reply to post by TheOneElectric

Attack the policies and not the individuals, for there is no gain in making petty and pathetic attacks. Understand that the women has two children, her mother, and a pet to look after.

Wow...two children...and a mother who was allowed to live in the White house to help look after those kids....and a pet. How does she do it? And there I was thinking that other mums, often single parents have to work all day and still cope...silly me.
NOBODY on this earth needs 22 assistants.
Didn't she talk about everyone having to share the pie...and some would have to have less of the pie so that others would have more?
Well, there ya go.

reply to post by solarstorm


I just want to restate what others have said because I will be the last post...

Laura Bush had a staff of 24, Hillary had 15 plus interns...it is how the game is played. Maybe they are not elected officials, but they are used as diplomatic tools just as women have been used for centuries. They have to take up public causes, they have appearances every day, etc.

"Attendant" is somewhat inflammatory and unnecessary, IMO.

reply to post by Jadette


What I want to know is.. Why isn't the main stream media in an outrage over this womens 20 attendants paid for by the tax payers, as they were by Sarah Palin's nice clothes paid for by her campaign?

The explanation: She's married to a democratic president. As long as the democrats do it, it's ok! But if a republican does it? Oh no, their wasting money?

I don't know if this is the right place to bring this up, but does anyone think there's a chance the Obama's won't be elected for another term?

reply to post by Bombeni


Bush got elected for a 2nd term, So there is definately a possibility.

not a one liner.