Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic |
#22
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. |
#23
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:37:05 -0400, H the K
wrote: Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. What's your point? I just said that. --Vic |
#24
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "H the K" wrote in message m... Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. Yes, for a top flight lawyer doing lawyer jobs. Not for an not needed position at a hospital, where you get a 100% raise when your spouse becomes a State Senator. Sounds more like bribery! |
#25
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Calif Bill wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message m... Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. Yes, for a top flight lawyer doing lawyer jobs. Not for an not needed position at a hospital, where you get a 100% raise when your spouse becomes a State Senator. Sounds more like bribery! A top-flight rainmaker lawyer is going to be earning a hell of a lot more than a couple of hundred thou in NY, Chi, DC, LA, SF, et cetera. Since you have no way of knowing whether Mrs. Obama was "needed" or not, or what she accomplished, your opinion on this matter is worth your usual nothing. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. |
#26
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "H the K" wrote in message m... Calif Bill wrote: "H the K" wrote in message m... Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. Yes, for a top flight lawyer doing lawyer jobs. Not for an not needed position at a hospital, where you get a 100% raise when your spouse becomes a State Senator. Sounds more like bribery! A top-flight rainmaker lawyer is going to be earning a hell of a lot more than a couple of hundred thou in NY, Chi, DC, LA, SF, et cetera. Since you have no way of knowing whether Mrs. Obama was "needed" or not, or what she accomplished, your opinion on this matter is worth your usual nothing. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. You mean a good bribe getting lawyer earns more in NYC? She got a 100% raise when her husband got elected.. A bribe. |
#28
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
NotNow wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:31:38 -0400, NotNow wrote: wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:46:22 -0400, NotNow wrote: wrote: On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:38:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: Oh, come on now. You can't possibly think that the Bush/Cheney/Halliburtion/Dubai debacle was on the up and up. No one except a complete opposite of Harry could think that!!!!!! Former President Clinton had a pretty sweet consulting deal with Dubai too. And China... can you say "How much to sleep in the Rincoln bedroom?" It is no accident that WalMart doubled it's market share in the 90s. They are from Bentonville Arkansas, a suburb of Little Rock. Aren't republicans FOR free trade? Or is that with certain qualifiers? I don't have a problem with free trade, The real question was if this was "fair" trade. We pile environmental, labor and safety laws on our corporations (not a bad idea) without imposing those on the competition (the bad part), then wonder why they kick our ass. Ah, so then it's not free trade if we put a bunch of restrictions on it, not is it? If the cost of environmental and safety laws make us non-competitive in a certain sector, it's time to re-invent. BTW this trend still continues. All of the upcoming "carbon" and existing CFC protocols that favor countries like China and Mexico who are largely exempt. So? First of all that's the personification of "free trade". I take it you really don't want free trade at all, you just don't want anyone in the U.S. bound by any rules. Tell me, what ARE Mexico and China's environmental, safety and labor laws anyway? Don't say they are non-existent because that's not true. Do you have a problem with the unions getting "busted" because all the jobs are in China now? Nope. China and Mexico's environmental, safety and labor laws may exist but they are certainly not enforced. That puts us at a severe disadvantage so the trade is not "fair". This will really be true if the cap and tax bill passes, unless we put a huge carbon tariff on all imported Chinese products, based on the amount of coal they burn. That will not happen Sure it's "fair". It may not be fair to YOU however. You can't have it both ways. Either you want free trade or you don't. More about China's labor laws: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/29/wo...4.6417118.html Mexican labor laws: http://www.natlaw.com/pubs/purchase/mexus.htm |
#29
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Calif Bill wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message m... Calif Bill wrote: "H the K" wrote in message m... Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:48:34 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: $317,000.00 is a LOT of money... everywhere... and if was for a job that didn't need to exist... it was pretty clear that it was akin to payola. Those "in the know" and those working in much of the corporate world don't think $317k is a lot of money. They just figure it's what they deserve, since their pals have similar salaries. Everybody has their own reality. --Vic It's *not* a lot of money for a high-powered, well-connected lawyer in a big city. Yes, for a top flight lawyer doing lawyer jobs. Not for an not needed position at a hospital, where you get a 100% raise when your spouse becomes a State Senator. Sounds more like bribery! A top-flight rainmaker lawyer is going to be earning a hell of a lot more than a couple of hundred thou in NY, Chi, DC, LA, SF, et cetera. Since you have no way of knowing whether Mrs. Obama was "needed" or not, or what she accomplished, your opinion on this matter is worth your usual nothing. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. You mean a good bribe getting lawyer earns more in NYC? She got a 100% raise when her husband got elected.. A bribe. D'oh. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. |
#30
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
NotNow wrote:
Just wait a frekin' minute! wrote: wrote: On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:32:48 -0400, NotNow wrote: Just wait a frekin' minute! wrote: wrote: On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:25:00 -0400, NotNow wrote: Just wait a frekin' minute! wrote: Jim wrote: Lu Powell wrote: From the website of Free Library, at http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Some+e...e.-a0192591436 "Some employees are simply irreplaceable. Take Michelle Obama, for example. The University of Chicago Medical Center hired her in 2002 to run "programs for community relations, neighborhood outreach, volunteer recruitment, staff diversity, and minority contracting." In 2005 the hospital raised her salary from $120,000 to $317,000--nearly twice what her husband made as a U.S. senator. Oh, did we mention that he had just become a U.S. senator? He sure had. Requested a $1 million earmark for the UC Medical Center, in fact. Way to network, Michelle! But now that Mrs. Obama has resigned, the hospital says her position will remain unfilled. How can that be, if the work she did was vital enough to be worth $317,000? We can think of only one explanation: Roland Burris's wife wasn't interested." Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliberton, quit to become Vice President, but still gets "deferred compensation," bonuses and held stock until 2006. Halliburton received no bid contracts and cost plus contracts for their work in the Iraq war. Profiting from a war, especially one you were instrumental in starting, should **** you off. But it doesn't. Everything is Obama. War profiteering used to be a bad thing, but it's ok now. As long as you are a Republican, that is. Don't be an...... Clinton used Haliburton in the Balkans too, for the same reason.. Nobody else does what they do! Period... That wasn't a "no bid" contract. Who bid against them? Like most of the criticism, the Haliburton issue is a red herring manufactured by the opposition... Like most of these issues, they are criminalizing "government as usual", and in this case, have done exactly the same thing themselves... IE Tom Delay... This is only possible because of the full support of the Media. we are already seeing censorship and the stomping of the constitution with new rules against criticism in the senate and senators political speech, next it will be the rest of the media, just like I said long ago. We are in huge trouble.. Oh, come on now. You can't possibly think that the Bush/Cheney/Halliburtion/Dubai debacle was on the up and up. No one except a complete opposite of Harry could think that!!!!!! Former President Clinton had a pretty sweet consulting deal with Dubai too. I see little difference between the Bushes and the Clintons. Shhhhhhh... You are not supposed to mention that! Using your previous analogy, how many criminal charges were filed? About the same number that have been filed against Halliburton and/or Cheney... |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
You think you've got it bad? Try Chicago... | General | |||
Chicago to the Mississippi | Cruising | |||
Looking for mechanic in Chicago | General | |||
Chicago Mac | Crew | |||
FS: 21' Crestliner in Chicago | Marketplace |