It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by xuenchen
In all fairness to the 1%:
(story from August 2009)
“In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much,” she said. “See, that’s why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service,” — Michelle Obama.
We were wrong.
Michelle Obama, as we reported on July 7, is not served by twenty-two attendants who stand by to cater to her every whim.
She is served by twenty-six attendants, including a hair dresser and make-up artist.
[color=gold]The annual cost to taxpayers for such unprecedented attention is approximately $1,750,000 without taking into account the expense of the lavish benefit packages afforded to every attendant.
First Lady Now Requires 26 Servants
Ironic ?
Lelyveld said that Michelle Obama’s staff was actually no different than that of her predecessor, Laura Bush. "[W]e have exactly the same staff number as Mrs. Bush and our office organization reflects a similar staffing model, so insinuations otherwise are wrong," she said. Lelyveld said that the White House’s "personnel records indicate" that there were 24 staffers for Laura Bush at some point. We were able to verify at least 18 staffers for Laura Bush, as of June 30, 2008, via the 2008 White House staff list published in The Washington Post’s White House Watch column. Sixteen people were specifically referred to as a "first lady" staffer, and Amy Zantzinger and Dorothy Thornton served as White House social secretary and deputy social secretary, respectively. It’s possible that someone with the title of "staff assistant" was assigned to the Office of First Lady as well, as is the case with Michelle Obama’s staff.
The combined annual salaries for the 22 staffers we can specifically identify as working for Michelle Obama come to $1.6 million. For the 18 we could identify as working for Laura Bush in 2008, the total is $1.4 million.
Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by kaylaluv
The article was very true.
But only focused on Michelle.
It was fair to the 1%.
Originally posted by desert
reply to post by MrXYZ
Ok, Romney said "even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work.” ... ...the GOP candidate said "you need to go to work.”.... it wasn't a female pundit saying a mother should "go to work."... is he saying that mothers are lowly homemakers? ...I'm going to go type up a response .... ok, here's my response...
Romney apparently subscribes to the Linda Hirschman worldview, one that posits women are only as valuable as their contributions outside the home, unrelated to children and family. Rearing up the next generation that will someday run the world is woefully under appreciated.
From an overflow of the heart the mouth speaks and Romney makes it clear that his prejudice against women who stay home stems from a lack of respect and appreciation for what those women do. If the goal of feminism is choice, Romney betrays the mutual respect amongst members of the female sex by degrading the choices of other women.
....now I need a headline... Republicans Declare 'War on Moms' ...Dana Loesch, you're so inspiring!...
MrXYZ, what a great find!
Originally posted by js331975
This is nothing more than how extreme the election process of the United states has gotten.
One person said this so the whole party MUST think it.
It's getting old fast. Wait a minute it's already old.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Originally posted by js331975
This is nothing more than how extreme the election process of the United states has gotten.
One person said this so the whole party MUST think it.
It's getting old fast. Wait a minute it's already old.
It's not getting old to Stephen Colbert.
He informed Hilary Rosen - democrat strategist - that it is very bad strategy to
attack motherhood.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by kaylaluv
Here is the video of her declaring a war on moms.
They blasted her on Meet The Press.
She was convinced not to appear on that show by the White House.
Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by kaylaluv
The article was very true.
But only focused on Michelle.
Originally posted by xuenchen
such unprecedented attention
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by kaylaluv
The Hilary Rosen has the Twitter world on fire.
Why attack mothers across America?
Even David Axelrod is running away from her.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by kaylaluv
The Hilary Rosen has the Twitter world on fire.
Why attack mothers across America?
Even David Axelrod is running away from her.
It is a gift you have...the ability to repeatedly post words without any point or substance.
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by kaylaluv
Here is the video of her declaring a war on moms.
They blasted her on Meet The Press.
She was convinced not to appear on that show by the White House.
Originally posted by js331975
reply to post by xuenchen
Don't forget that everyone else in the Democratic party has backed away from these comments.
Originally posted by js331975
reply to post by xuenchen
Don't forget that everyone else in the Democratic party has backed away from these comments.