Thousands of Walter Reed Employees to Be Furloughed due to Sequester

longknife

Diamond Member
Sep 21, 2012
42,221
13,089
2,250
Sin City
From Thousands of Walter Reed Employees to Be Furloughed due to Sequester

Walter_Reed5.jpg


Walter Reed National Military Medical Center has announced it will be forced to furlough thousands of civilian employees this summer due to the sequester, while President Obama and the first family are planning to take a vacation to Africa that may cost as much $100 million.

According to Fox News Walter Reed plans to furlough thousands; soldier advocacy groups worry about care despite assurances | Fox News , the furloughs are for a period of 11 days "without pay."

Already, 2,400 workers have been notified that they will need to take the days off due to "extraordinary and serious budget challenges."

All our Commander-in-Chief cares about is himself and publicity. Out servicemembers mean nothing to him.
 
And yet IRS employees are getting $70M of bonuses, and Obama is spending $100M to vacation in Africa.

Telling priorities....
 
Which is more important? Medical care for vets or obama's vacation. We are just thankful that the 60 million dollar safari was cancelled.
 
From Thousands of Walter Reed Employees to Be Furloughed due to Sequester

Walter_Reed5.jpg


Walter Reed National Military Medical Center has announced it will be forced to furlough thousands of civilian employees this summer due to the sequester, while President Obama and the first family are planning to take a vacation to Africa that may cost as much $100 million.

According to Fox News Walter Reed plans to furlough thousands; soldier advocacy groups worry about care despite assurances | Fox News , the furloughs are for a period of 11 days "without pay."

Already, 2,400 workers have been notified that they will need to take the days off due to "extraordinary and serious budget challenges."

All our Commander-in-Chief cares about is himself and publicity. Out servicemembers mean nothing to him.
Obama can't pay for the military, because of his dirty deal with people who want to collect money for free from the government, who in return vote for him for the enjoyment of taking free money paid for by somebody else's hard work, while they get a free ride.

Obama's credo: Calling all friends! You don't have to spend your life working! Vote for me and I will take care of you! You don't even have to be nice! Anyone who tries to make you be nice will be destroyed in my court system. All you have to do is vote for me and be willing to collect free money for the rest of your life. What do you have to lose with idiots for taxpayers we can force to work so you can play!!!
 
Last edited:
Didn't obama seek to eliminate tax loopholes that don't help the economy in order to avoid sequestration? And, didn't the gop declare govt itself is the problem?

Paul Ryan Championed Sequester Since 2004, Now Calls His Own Idea Not Good Government

Though I agree the Africa trip, while probably less expensive than W's which included grants for aids drugs, is tone deaf.

from a private message: no Staidhup, we shoudl not keep spending like drunken sailors and buy these guys legs by cutting tax cuts for private jets and Bill gates' type houses. I mean we have to draw a line somewhere, and I agree with you that THIS is the place to do it.
 
Last edited:
There is no reason for obama to go to Africa, it's not an aid mission, not even a humanitarian visit. It is an obama family vacation.
 
Since when is Obama the one holding the purse strings?

Last I checked, the Constitution delegates the budget to Congress.
 
But the big eared ape in our WH takes $100 million trips to africa. And the tv networks won't talk about it.
 
The sequester was written by Congress, not Obama.

The cuts called for in the sequester are spelled out entirely in the bill. Obama has no leeway in terms of deciding what should be cut, or by how much.

If you're pissed that Walter Reed employees are being furloughed, blame it on the people who wrote the bill that furloughed them, rather than the President who fought against it.
 
Obama can't pay for the military, because of his dirty deal with people who want to collect money for free from the government, who in return vote for him for the enjoyment of taking free money paid for by somebody else's hard work, while they get a free ride.

Obama's credo: Calling all friends! You don't have to spend your life working! Vote for me and I will take care of you! You don't even have to be nice! Anyone who tries to make you be nice will be destroyed in my court system. All you have to do is vote for me and be willing to collect free money for the rest of your life. What do you have to lose with idiots for taxpayers we can force to work so you can play!!!

Federal govt can'd do anything right. We must return to states rights - like the founding fathers said in the constitution.
 
The sequester was written by Congress, not Obama.

The cuts called for in the sequester are spelled out entirely in the bill. Obama has no leeway in terms of deciding what should be cut, or by how much.

If you're pissed that Walter Reed employees are being furloughed, blame it on the people who wrote the bill that furloughed them, rather than the President who fought against it.

Obama is the Chief Executive of the United States of American and, as such, is responsible for managing the budgets of federal agencies outside those specified by Congress. [Government 101 which certain posters seem to not understand]

And, the Sequester DID NOT remove any spending from the budget! :eusa_whistle: All it did was LIMIT THE GROWTH of the budget!!!!! :cuckoo:

The administration is planning on HIRING thousands of people to guard over Obamacare. It gave out $700 MILLIONS to IRS employees.

And they can't find the money to care for those men and women who have given so much for this country? :evil::evil::evil:
 
The sequester was written by Congress, not Obama.

The cuts called for in the sequester are spelled out entirely in the bill. Obama has no leeway in terms of deciding what should be cut, or by how much.

If you're pissed that Walter Reed employees are being furloughed, blame it on the people who wrote the bill that furloughed them, rather than the President who fought against it.

HAHAHA. Well hell - lets just start making stuff up around here. Nothing in the bill demanded this. Obozo just hates the military. He only likes welfare bums since he knows they always vote for him.
 
The sequester was written by Congress, not Obama.

The cuts called for in the sequester are spelled out entirely in the bill. Obama has no leeway in terms of deciding what should be cut, or by how much.

If you're pissed that Walter Reed employees are being furloughed, blame it on the people who wrote the bill that furloughed them, rather than the President who fought against it.

Obama is the Chief Executive of the United States of American and, as such, is responsible for managing the budgets of federal agencies outside those specified by Congress. [Government 101 which certain posters seem to not understand]

And, the Sequester DID NOT remove any spending from the budget! :eusa_whistle: All it did was LIMIT THE GROWTH of the budget!!!!! :cuckoo:

The administration is planning on HIRING thousands of people to guard over Obamacare. It gave out $700 MILLIONS to IRS employees.

And they can't find the money to care for those men and women who have given so much for this country? :evil::evil::evil:

Here is the text of the sequester law: THOMAS (Library of Congress)

I would suggest that you read it before making more of a fool of yourself. The sequester bill specifically disallows the President from modifying any of the budget changes via discrestionary spending, and specifies exact cuts to each and every government "account".
 
The sequester was written by Congress, not Obama.

The cuts called for in the sequester are spelled out entirely in the bill. Obama has no leeway in terms of deciding what should be cut, or by how much.

If you're pissed that Walter Reed employees are being furloughed, blame it on the people who wrote the bill that furloughed them, rather than the President who fought against it.

Obama is the Chief Executive of the United States of American and, as such, is responsible for managing the budgets of federal agencies outside those specified by Congress. [Government 101 which certain posters seem to not understand]

And, the Sequester DID NOT remove any spending from the budget! :eusa_whistle: All it did was LIMIT THE GROWTH of the budget!!!!! :cuckoo:

The administration is planning on HIRING thousands of people to guard over Obamacare. It gave out $700 MILLIONS to IRS employees.

And they can't find the money to care for those men and women who have given so much for this country? :evil::evil::evil:

Here is the text of the sequester law: THOMAS (Library of Congress)

I would suggest that you read it before making more of a fool of yourself. The sequester bill specifically disallows the President from modifying any of the budget changes via discrestionary spending, and specifies exact cuts to each and every government "account".

Hey, he's not totally stupid, he can spell anus.
 
An absolute disgrace if it happens.
Veteran needing medical care from an injury during active duty? - can't afford it.
Meanwhile the FED is still spending/borrowing $85,000,000,000 per MONTH in bond buying, toxic asset relief (aka paying off dead-risky loans by major banks).

The choice is clear.
 
An absolute disgrace if it happens.
Veteran needing medical care from an injury during active duty? - can't afford it.
Meanwhile the FED is still spending/borrowing $85,000,000,000 per MONTH in bond buying, toxic asset relief (aka paying off dead-risky loans by major banks).

The choice is clear.

There is no "choice". That's the point you guys aren't getting. The law was passed, and you guys cheered it - and now you're trying to blame Obama for something he has no control over.
 
An absolute disgrace if it happens.
Veteran needing medical care from an injury during active duty? - can't afford it.
Meanwhile the FED is still spending/borrowing $85,000,000,000 per MONTH in bond buying, toxic asset relief (aka paying off dead-risky loans by major banks).

The choice is clear.

There is no "choice". That's the point you guys aren't getting. The law was passed, and you guys cheered it - and now you're trying to blame Obama for something he has no control over.

Yes there is a choice idiot.
I don't call people names often, but you deserve it after a post like that.
Your favorite administration is allowing $85,000,000,000 PER MONTH to be spent on the Wall Street relief fund, making this administration the single largest trickle down economic principles in practice in US history - and this is all you got to say to that.
There is always a choice, the President has WELL WITHIN HIS POWERS to take from one pot and give to another. That is not happening, so sheep like you can blame the opposition for it.
 
An absolute disgrace if it happens.
Veteran needing medical care from an injury during active duty? - can't afford it.
Meanwhile the FED is still spending/borrowing $85,000,000,000 per MONTH in bond buying, toxic asset relief (aka paying off dead-risky loans by major banks).

The choice is clear.

There is no "choice". That's the point you guys aren't getting. The law was passed, and you guys cheered it - and now you're trying to blame Obama for something he has no control over.

Yes there is a choice idiot.
I don't call people names often, but you deserve it after a post like that.
Your favorite administration is allowing $85,000,000,000 PER MONTH to be spent on the Wall Street relief fund, making this administration the single largest trickle down economic principles in practice in US history - and this is all you got to say to that.
There is always a choice, the President has WELL WITHIN HIS POWERS to take from one pot and give to another. That is not happening, so sheep like you can blame the opposition for it.

That's simply not true. I can't for the life of me figure out where you guys are getting that from.

The President does NOT have the power to "take from one pot and give to another".
 

Forum List

Back
Top