I watched it online from whitehouse.gov, so what did that cost? What network paid for the live .gov stream?
Who cares if they are salaried or per hour? They still work for us.
I watched it online from whitehouse.gov, so what did that cost? What network paid for the live .gov stream?
Who cares if they are salaried or per hour? They still work for us.
If the equipment is paid for, (fixed one time cost) and the bandwidth is purchased on an annual contract basis (fixed annual cost) it cost the taxpayer........
Not a sous.
So http://www.whitehouse.gov/ is free? It doesnt cost anybody anything?
Originally Posted by Meriam Webster
whitehouse.gov costs the salaries of the people who run it. (fixed cost, doesn't matter what they put there)
The bandwidth is purchased on an annual contract basis.
My humble apologies for putting an extra 's' on the word sou.....
It is an old french coin, which was essentially worthless.
OK so whitehouse .gov does cost tax payers money.
The live .gov stream for 09/09/09 speech was one of the best Ive seen, little lag, good quality A/V, and allmost no buffering. So if .gov has allready paid for a contract for that type of bandwidth, with tax payer money, I feel we should see alot more bang for our buck from whitehouse.gov. Maybe a 24/7 feeds from both the POTUS and the Congressional branch. Heck lets have a live feed from the SCOTUS when they are in session. If its under contract we shouldnt be wasting money by not using the bandwidth.
Democrats say South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst during President Barack Obama’s speech to Congress is turning into a financial boon for his opponent, Rob Miller.
Miller is a former Marine and Iraq war veteran who resigned his commission to run for Congress. His campaign last year presented Wilson with the most serious challenge he’d had since winning a special election in 2001. Miller got 46 percent of the vote.
Contributions to Rob Miller's campaign fund since Baby Wilson temper tantrum.....$751,562 from 20,494 American Citizens!!
Interesting article by Pat Buchanan.
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." - Abraham Lincoln
Interesting article but rather...one sided in his view.
I am not sure that Robert E. Lee was once a national hero or Stonewall Jackson? They were both confederate generals. Fighting to destroy the United States! National heros???
He sees newer heros (and really...the only ones he can think of after 1865 are Martin Luther King and Cesar Chavez) as replacing instead of in addition to earlier heros.
To him Christmas and Easter may have been holidays that united the country but I feel that really reinforces his "European Christian core" as he calls it.
I agree with the loss of civility in our lives but I think Mr. Buchanan is mourning the loss of his world. His experience of this country may not be the same as everyone else.
He doesn't even include rock as music that defined us!
But I find most offensive of all this statement...
I love American history - but not the fake "George Washington chopped down the cherry tree" type. I love the real American history - warts - genocide, racism and all. Fairy tales are for kids. I enjoy learning how this country has survived and prospered because of ordinary men and women who sometimes do extraordinary things.One part of America loves her history, another reviles it as racist, imperialist and genocidal
Yes, I did notice the slant to the right; but much of what he said concerns me. The sheer nastiness prevalent these days. Maybe it's because of my age - growing up in a kinder, simpler world where politeness was a virtue
As for Robert E. Lee - he was a national hero. He was asked to command the Northern troops, but could not betray his home state of Virginia. His father was a hero of the Revolutionary War, and Robert stood out during the Mexican War. He commanded West Point for a few years during the 1850s.
But at the end, Lee was a traitor.
I agree with you on the nastiness. I see some connection to another thread - the one about reality shows. I find the very tone of American Idol and that ilk rather nasty and the peeping tom shows invasive. Pam posted perhaps it is a generational thing. In thinking about that I think of Facebook, Tweetering, and sending nude photos of yourself over the cell phone - whatever the name for that is...
My grandparents had neighbors all their lives. The Murdocks. They had an only child the same as my mother - also an only child. The two families were like one. And until the day she died my grandmother never called her anything but Mrs. Murdock.
People are more open now and I think the quote "familiarity breeds contempt" might be at play in the increased nastiness.
Although I do think Buchanan might want to do a bit of self-reflection. I remember when his sister married a man who was not a Catholic. He refused to speak to her or acknowledge her. Until she divorced.
This might explain his bias in his choice of heros...Buchanan has English, German, Scots Irish, and Irish ancestry. He had a great-grandfather who fought in the American Civil War on the Confederate side. He is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and admires Robert E. Lee.
That was it! She converted when she married. As I recall, he accepted her when she divorced and returned to the fold...something like that.
I don't remember the exact details. I just remember him refusing to have anything to do with her because of religion - an attitude that was causing some problems around me at the time.
Last edited by Edwina's Secretary; 09-11-2009 at 03:23 PM.
ACORN!!!!
Well, well, well. Mr. Duvall, the "family values" politician who is either lying about having sex with two lobbyist - one from a company his committee regulates or was lying when he told a co-worker in graphic detail about the sex he imagined he had with lobbyist - one from a company his committee regulates is going to cost me money.
It will cost the taxpayers of Orange COutny $440,000 to have a special election to replace Mr. Duvall. I hope the sex or imaginary sex was worth it!
Monday 9/14
The Barack Obama Show 2009-Comedy
Barack travels to Wall Street in an effort to celebrate the one year anniversary of the failure of Lehman and to placate the masses.
He also mixes metaphors with catch phrases in a delightful slapdown
and chiding of the Wall Street companies, and the public, while boistering his claim that he 'didn't run for president to bail out big business"- But, he manages to pull a fast one on the public by letting everyone know that he plans on creating more big government offices with more government intervention!
Copyright © 2001-2013 Pet of the Day.com
Bookmarks