"We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can."

The Washington Times is owned by the Moonies.

:lol::D

Chris is misinformed.
The Wash Times is now owned by Herring Broadcasting.
In any event, it makes no difference. The Unification Church save for its influx of cash to keep the paper in business had little influence over editorial content.
The Church did however insist on a Conservative editorial bias.
Story content as always is a freedom of the press issue.
By comparison, Current TV is now owned by Al-Jazeera...
I hear no libs whining about that.

That's because they agree with A-J's hate-America slant.
 
1380269_10151783240617740_1304646979_n.jpg
 

I'm all for that....Obama is the most UnAmerican hateful President I have livid under...and I've lived under a few Presidents

You know what I'm thinking? I'm thinking his chef, his butler and his maids aren't "necessary" personnel. During this government shutdown, he should be doing his own laundry, making his own meals and answering his own door.
 
I've heard people talking about this situation and they are now blaming "the government" or Obama by name. Not the GOP.

Man on the street may just not be blaming the Republicans for this, we'll have to wait to see what the 2014 elections bring.
2014 is going to be interesting...There is a huge wall in front of this nation to hurdle over...WE will see...
 

I'm all for that....Obama is the most UnAmerican hateful President I have livid under...and I've lived under a few Presidents

You know what I'm thinking? I'm thinking his chef, his butler and his maids aren't "necessary" personnel. During this government shutdown, he should be doing his own laundry, making his own meals and answering his own door.

Has he EVER done that?? I'm dead serious in asking this.
 
Here's a question: If these workers are "non-essential", why are they employed in the first place?

I've worked my entire life, from a Fortune 100 to a entrepreneurial start up. I've never seen a non-essential employee, at least not for long. If one is not essential to an operation, they should not be employed by that entity.

What am I missing here???
 
Here's a question: If these workers are "non-essential", why are they employed in the first place?

I've worked my entire life, from a Fortune 100 to a entrepreneurial start up. I've never seen a non-essential employee, at least not for long. If one is not essential to an operation, they should not be employed by that entity.

What am I missing here???
Nothing. I wondered that myself. NOW is the time to take them off the payrolls if they are NON-ESSENTIAL...
 
Here's a question: If these workers are "non-essential", why are they employed in the first place?

I've worked my entire life, from a Fortune 100 to a entrepreneurial start up. I've never seen a non-essential employee, at least not for long. If one is not essential to an operation, they should not be employed by that entity.

What am I missing here???

Attempting to compare public employment to private sector employment is futile.
 
Here's a question: If these workers are "non-essential", why are they employed in the first place?

I've worked my entire life, from a Fortune 100 to a entrepreneurial start up. I've never seen a non-essential employee, at least not for long. If one is not essential to an operation, they should not be employed by that entity.

What am I missing here???

Attempting to compare public employment to private sector employment is futile.
Especially when you hear Obama Compare his Healthcare law with the release of an Apple product...

The MAN is NOT living in the real world.
 
Here's a question: If these workers are "non-essential", why are they employed in the first place?

I've worked my entire life, from a Fortune 100 to a entrepreneurial start up. I've never seen a non-essential employee, at least not for long. If one is not essential to an operation, they should not be employed by that entity.

What am I missing here???
Nothing. I wondered that myself. NOW is the time to take them off the payrolls if they are NON-ESSENTIAL...

I agree.
 
Please don't use the term non essential. We don't wanna hurt the feelings of the weak minded tools
You mean TOOLS that couldn't make it in the private sector?

These people went through their schooling with one goal in mind. Government service.
These people do not care about accomplishing anything. All they want it the high pay, cushy work conditions and over the top benefits.
 
Please don't use the term non essential. We don't wanna hurt the feelings of the weak minded tools
You mean TOOLS that couldn't make it in the private sector?

These people went through their schooling with one goal in mind. Government service.
These people do not care about accomplishing anything. All they want it the high pay, cushy work conditions and over the top benefits.

And with the backing of a Government Worker's Union that even FDR advised against...

~Go figure...
 
The Washington Times is owned by the Moonies.

:lol::D

Chris is misinformed.
The Wash Times is now owned by Herring Broadcasting.
In any event, it makes no difference. The Unification Church save for its influx of cash to keep the paper in business had little influence over editorial content.
The Church did however insist on a Conservative editorial bias.
Story content as always is a freedom of the press issue.
By comparison, Current TV is now owned by Al-Jazeera...
I hear no libs whining about that.

Yea, I know. I spent a weekend with the Moonies once, and that's why I thought that was funny. :D
 
The Washington Times is owned by the Moonies.

:lol::D

Chris is misinformed.
The Wash Times is now owned by Herring Broadcasting.
In any event, it makes no difference. The Unification Church save for its influx of cash to keep the paper in business had little influence over editorial content.
The Church did however insist on a Conservative editorial bias.
Story content as always is a freedom of the press issue.
By comparison, Current TV is now owned by Al-Jazeera...
I hear no libs whining about that.

You are incorrect.

The Washington Times is owned, personally, by the Reverend Moon. Until 2010, it was run by an external organization created for that purpose by Moon, but in 2010, he decided to purchase the Times from his shell company for $1, returning control to him and his church.

Herring Broadcasting is partnering with the Washington Times on a new News channel, but they don't own any part of it.

And your comments about Current TV don't make any sense.

No matter how much Arabs scare you, Al-jazeera is a much more reputable news source than the Washington Times.
 

Chris is misinformed.
The Wash Times is now owned by Herring Broadcasting.
In any event, it makes no difference. The Unification Church save for its influx of cash to keep the paper in business had little influence over editorial content.
The Church did however insist on a Conservative editorial bias.
Story content as always is a freedom of the press issue.
By comparison, Current TV is now owned by Al-Jazeera...
I hear no libs whining about that.

You are incorrect.

The Washington Times is owned, personally, by the Reverend Moon. Until 2010, it was run by an external organization created for that purpose by Moon, but in 2010, he decided to purchase the Times from his shell company for $1, returning control to him and his church.

Herring Broadcasting is partnering with the Washington Times on a new News channel, but they don't own any part of it.

And your comments about Current TV don't make any sense.

No matter how much Arabs scare you, Al-jazeera is a much more reputable news source than the Washington Times.
See what I mean about you lefties and the Muslims. You circle the wagons.
And yeah it makes complete sense. You stepped right up and fell into the trap. You curse the Unification church although the worst thing they ever did was brainwash some very weak minded people and convince them to sell flowers. While that oil wealth of the middle east has most definitely found its way to funding weapons sales to Islamist terror groups...I will take the flowers.
Whatever. I posted a link that says otherwise.
This is a non issue.
You don't get to pull that bullshit of discrediting a legitimate and respected news organization because the owner is a a little strange yet harmless.

Now, lets get back on point
 

Forum List

Back
Top