Obama Administration Has Less Private Sector Experience than Any Other.

[California Girl]

The reason Obama is so great is precisely because he hasn't been corrupted by the private sector, and he understands that simple economic theories do not explain the best way to govern the masses. The private sector is all about what people want (greed). The public sector is all about what people need (compassion).

Wow. That's definitely got to be a contender for 'stupidiest post of 2009'.

 

[saveliberty]

As is usually the case, this kind of rightwing nonsense gets comprehensively debunked sooner or later:

Obama’s well-qualified cabinet: Conservatives hoaxed by “J. P. Morgan” chart that verifies prejudices « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

And the wingnuts wonder why no one with a brain takes their word for anything.

All your source proves is both of you are not understanding the chart. It was not a chart that simply said, has this person EVER worked in the private sector, yes or no. It was looking at each work history, taking the total time worked by each person and figuring the percentage of that time in the private sector. I clearly pointed this out in an earlier post on this very thread.

Example: you have worked a total of 30 years, 3 of which were as a private practice lawyer, the rest in government or a university. You have 10% private sector experience.

 

[Big Fitz]

As is usually the case, this kind of rightwing nonsense gets comprehensively debunked sooner or later:

Obama’s well-qualified cabinet: Conservatives hoaxed by “J. P. Morgan” chart that verifies prejudices « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

And the wingnuts wonder why no one with a brain takes their word for anything.

You call 'wingnuts' and you give us a radical lefty blog to read?

Yeah... that's impartiality for you.

I just want to make one point perfectly clear. Being a lawyer is not the same as running a business IMNSHO. If you were in a law firm, unless it's yours and you have more than 10 employees you manage then maybe you can qualify as a small businessman. But if it's you, your secretary and a few part time paralegals... not much credibility.

Here's some of the "Highly Qualified Private Sector Experience" the propaganda cites.

H R-Clinton

Extremely successful private practice lawyer in Arkansa for the Rose Law Firm

You REALLY wanna bring that up? What part of RUNNING that business did she do?

Joe Biden

Biden’s father worked in the private sector his entire life — unsuccessfully for a critical period. Biden attended a private university’s law school (Syracuse), and operated a successful-because-of-property-management law practice for three years before winning election to the U.S. Senate.

Your dad's failed business does not transfer to you. NOR does running a property management law practice for only THREE YEARS, regardless of success mean diddlyshit! After that? Career politician. FAIL.

"Tax Cheat" Geithner

Geithner traveled with world with his Ford Foundation-employed father. ...
Starting his career, he worked three years in the private sector with Kissinger Associates. ...
ventured into the private sector with the Council on Foreign Relations ...
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York — in what is at worst a semi-public organization. ...

-Ford Foundation = Charity. What profit making work did they do? And oh, again... DAD'S WORK DOES NOT RUB OFF ON YOU!!!
-Kissinger Association... lobbyists and think tanks do not count as a REAL business that needs to show a profit. Special interest government leeches.
-Council on Foreign Relations? Private Company? How's that?
- Federal Reserve?!?! Semi-private. Oh mergatroid! Talk about a reach. FAIL

Listen I could go on and dissect every one of these people and point out how they've never had a REAL private sector job. And this is not a 'no real scotsman' style argument. I see nobody who worked for anything but semi-government, government contractors, bankers, Civil service charities, private charitable funds, investment firms and law firms primarily.

Failfailfailfailfail.

This has so much fail you could effectively spend the rest of your life breaking mirrors and never worry about another fail. They're all tied up here.

 

[Zona]

I wont even waste my time and read through all this thread but you all do ralize what the OP first said was a lie.

Beck, good try, but he lied again...

Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector


Which brings us back to how Beck used Cembalest's data. We'll acknowledge that rating someone's degree of private-sector experience is an inexact science, and it's true that Beck accurately relayed the information contained in Cembalest's chart. But at PolitiFact we hold people accountable for their own words. So we rate Beck's claim False.

PolitiFact | Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector

 

[saveliberty]

I wont even waste my time and read through all this thread but you all do ralize what the OP first said was a lie.

Beck, good try, but he lied again...

Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector


Which brings us back to how Beck used Cembalest's data. We'll acknowledge that rating someone's degree of private-sector experience is an inexact science, and it's true that Beck accurately relayed the information contained in Cembalest's chart. But at PolitiFact we hold people accountable for their own words. So we rate Beck's claim False.

PolitiFact | Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector

This is how the author of the chart termed private sector experience:

"What I was really trying to get at was some kind of completely, 100 percent subjective assessment of whether or not a person had had enough control of payroll, dealing with shareholders, hiring, firing and risk-taking that they'd be in a position to have had a meaningful seat at the table when the issue being discussed is job creation," Cembalest said.

PolitiFact | Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector

Cembalest admitted missing one cabinet member's privaet experience and not counting the private practice of three laywers. Thing is, as long as he was consistent in his treatment of all the other presidents, it is a useful chart.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As is usually the case, this kind of rightwing nonsense gets comprehensively debunked sooner or later:

Obama’s well-qualified cabinet: Conservatives hoaxed by “J. P. Morgan” chart that verifies prejudices « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

And the wingnuts wonder why no one with a brain takes their word for anything.

All your source proves is both of you are not understanding the chart. It was not a chart that simply said, has this person EVER worked in the private sector, yes or no. It was looking at each work history, taking the total time worked by each person and figuring the percentage of that time in the private sector. I clearly pointed this out in an earlier post on this very thread.

Example: you have worked a total of 30 years, 3 of which were as a private practice lawyer, the rest in government or a university. You have 10% private sector experience.

And your link to substantiate what you're claiming?

I've already proved it's all irrelevant anyhow.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As is usually the case, this kind of rightwing nonsense gets comprehensively debunked sooner or later:

Obama’s well-qualified cabinet: Conservatives hoaxed by “J. P. Morgan” chart that verifies prejudices « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

And the wingnuts wonder why no one with a brain takes their word for anything.

You call 'wingnuts' and you give us a radical lefty blog to read?

Yeah... that's impartiality for you.

I just want to make one point perfectly clear. Being a lawyer is not the same as running a business IMNSHO. If you were in a law firm, unless it's yours and you have more than 10 employees you manage then maybe you can qualify as a small businessman. But if it's you, your secretary and a few part time paralegals... not much credibility.

Here's some of the "Highly Qualified Private Sector Experience" the propaganda cites.

H R-Clinton

Extremely successful private practice lawyer in Arkansa for the Rose Law Firm

You REALLY wanna bring that up? What part of RUNNING that business did she do?

Joe Biden

Biden’s father worked in the private sector his entire life — unsuccessfully for a critical period. Biden attended a private university’s law school (Syracuse), and operated a successful-because-of-property-management law practice for three years before winning election to the U.S. Senate.

Your dad's failed business does not transfer to you. NOR does running a property management law practice for only THREE YEARS, regardless of success mean diddlyshit! After that? Career politician. FAIL.

"Tax Cheat" Geithner

Geithner traveled with world with his Ford Foundation-employed father. ...
Starting his career, he worked three years in the private sector with Kissinger Associates. ...
ventured into the private sector with the Council on Foreign Relations ...
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York — in what is at worst a semi-public organization. ...

-Ford Foundation = Charity. What profit making work did they do? And oh, again... DAD'S WORK DOES NOT RUB OFF ON YOU!!!
-Kissinger Association... lobbyists and think tanks do not count as a REAL business that needs to show a profit. Special interest government leeches.
-Council on Foreign Relations? Private Company? How's that?
- Federal Reserve?!?! Semi-private. Oh mergatroid! Talk about a reach. FAIL

Listen I could go on and dissect every one of these people and point out how they've never had a REAL private sector job. And this is not a 'no real scotsman' style argument. I see nobody who worked for anything but semi-government, government contractors, bankers, Civil service charities, private charitable funds, investment firms and law firms primarily.

Failfailfailfailfail.

This has so much fail you could effectively spend the rest of your life breaking mirrors and never worry about another fail. They're all tied up here.

Do you have a link to the methodology of the original 'study'?

What's most hilarious about this whole discussion is that the entire exercise starts with a massive begging of the question by imposing the unsupportable, debatable premise that working in the private sector has some sort of measurable value as a prerequisite to doing well in government.

 

[saveliberty]

PolitiFact | Beck says less than 10 percent of Obama Cabinet has worked in private sector

It doesn't address the counting process exactly, but it appears partial credit was given in at least some cases. All you have proven is you would LIKE it to have no relevance. As I mentioned, as long as the chart was given the same threadhold of private versus public sector for all presidents in the chart, it still has usefulness.

 

[Foxfyre]

What's most hilarious about this whole discussion is that the entire exercise starts with a massive begging of the question by imposing the unsupportable, debatable premise that working in the private sector has some sort of measurable value as a prerequisite to doing well in government.

I suppose you could read that into it, but there was no begging of any question, much less that one, in the opening post. There was a proposition that the Obama administration has less private sector/business experience than any administration in most of our lifetimes. I don't think one needs to look too deeply to come to that conclusion.

Then, the follow up question is also not begged, but should be straight forward: Does that have a bearing on whether the Obama Administation is more or less competent than previous administrations to identify problems and evaluate solutions?

We expect our doctor, lawyer, mechanic, plumber, and barber/beautician to have some expertise in their fields when we employ them.

Why should we not expect those who are given overwhelming power to affect our property, prosperity, opportunities, goals, options, etc. to have some demonstrated expertise to carry out their responsibilities?

 

[saveliberty]

What's most hilarious about this whole discussion is that the entire exercise starts with a massive begging of the question by imposing the unsupportable, debatable premise that working in the private sector has some sort of measurable value as a prerequisite to doing well in government.

I suppose you could read that into it, but there was no begging of any question, much less that one, in the opening post. There was a proposition that the Obama administration has less private sector/business experience than any administration in most of our lifetimes. I don't think one needs to look too deeply to come to that conclusion.

Then, the follow up question is also not begged, but should be straight forward: Does that have a bearing on whether the Obama Administation is more or less competent than previous administrations to identify problems and evaluate solutions?

We expect our doctor, lawyer, mechanic, plumber, and barber/beautician to have some expertise in their fields when we employ them.

Why should we not expect those who are given overwhelming power to affect our property, prosperity, opportunities, goals, options, etc. to have some demonstrated expertise to carry out their responsibilities?

Many found experience to not be a factor in choosing a president. Further this group prefers entitlements to responsibility.

 

[Zona]

Here is a general rule.....If Beck says it, its not true. If you agree with Beck, your an idiot who believes Fox is fair and balanced.

Period.

 

[saveliberty]

Here is a general rule.....If Beck says it, its not true. If you agree with Beck, your an idiot who believes Fox is fair and balanced.

Period.

Don't be fooled kids. Just insert Zona where you read Beck or Fox. It is a much more accurate paragraph.

 

[California Girl]

I think looking at the attendees list for the 'jobs summit' tells us pretty much all we need to know about how little this Administration knows about job creation.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's most hilarious about this whole discussion is that the entire exercise starts with a massive begging of the question by imposing the unsupportable, debatable premise that working in the private sector has some sort of measurable value as a prerequisite to doing well in government.

I suppose you could read that into it, but there was no begging of any question, much less that one, in the opening post. There was a proposition that the Obama administration has less private sector/business experience than any administration in most of our lifetimes. I don't think one needs to look too deeply to come to that conclusion.

Then, the follow up question is also not begged, but should be straight forward: Does that have a bearing on whether the Obama Administation is more or less competent than previous administrations to identify problems and evaluate solutions?

We expect our doctor, lawyer, mechanic, plumber, and barber/beautician to have some expertise in their fields when we employ them.

Why should we not expect those who are given overwhelming power to affect our property, prosperity, opportunities, goals, options, etc. to have some demonstrated expertise to carry out their responsibilities?

I would like my dentist to have experience in dentistry, not experience running a Burger King franchise.

 

[Foxfyre]

What's most hilarious about this whole discussion is that the entire exercise starts with a massive begging of the question by imposing the unsupportable, debatable premise that working in the private sector has some sort of measurable value as a prerequisite to doing well in government.

I suppose you could read that into it, but there was no begging of any question, much less that one, in the opening post. There was a proposition that the Obama administration has less private sector/business experience than any administration in most of our lifetimes. I don't think one needs to look too deeply to come to that conclusion.

Then, the follow up question is also not begged, but should be straight forward: Does that have a bearing on whether the Obama Administation is more or less competent than previous administrations to identify problems and evaluate solutions?

We expect our doctor, lawyer, mechanic, plumber, and barber/beautician to have some expertise in their fields when we employ them.

Why should we not expect those who are given overwhelming power to affect our property, prosperity, opportunities, goals, options, etc. to have some demonstrated expertise to carry out their responsibilities?

I would like my dentist to have experience in dentistry, not experience running a Burger King franchise.

Exactly. And though administering a branch or agency of government requires a more generalized skill set as opposed to a specialized field like dentistry, you still want to know that those with so much power over so many do appreciate that America is basicly a great and wonderful country and are committed to keeping it that way. We should demand that they have a basic understanding of economics, cause and effect, and what is and is not effective for the best stewardship and interests of the American people. And we should take care that they are committed to competent public service for the benefit of all Americans and American values rather than using their office to impose their own self-serving agenda for their own benefit or those to whom they owe allegiance or fealty.

 

[Big Fitz]

I think looking at the attendees list for the 'jobs summit' tells us pretty much all we need to know about how little this Administration knows about job creation.

Yeah, that pretty much says it all. Invite those hostile towards the running of a business while keeping those who know how, out.

 

[California Girl]

I think looking at the attendees list for the 'jobs summit' tells us pretty much all we need to know about how little this Administration knows about job creation.

Yeah, that pretty much says it all. Invite those hostile towards the running of a business while keeping those who know how, out.

I would like any leftie to 'splain to me - cuz I is stooopid - why the fuck SEIU and the Teachers Unions were both at the 'jobs summit' and the Chamber of COMMERCE, and the Federation of Manufacturers were not. Which organizations have members who actually create jobs?

 

[Foxfyre]

I think looking at the attendees list for the 'jobs summit' tells us pretty much all we need to know about how little this Administration knows about job creation.

Yeah, that pretty much says it all. Invite those hostile towards the running of a business while keeping those who know how, out.

I would like any leftie to 'splain to me - cuz I is stooopid - why the fuck SEIU and the Teachers Unions were both at the 'jobs summit' and the Chamber of COMMERCE, and the Federation of Manufacturers were not. Which organizations have members who actually create jobs?

So would I. I would really like to see an argument made for why the union people were included and those who know where jobs come from and how to create them were excluded. And given his track record so far, I would like to see an argument made to defend President Obama's savvy re job creation and that he is interested in repairing the economy.

In other words is he 'stooooopid?' or 'ignorant?' or 'brainwashed?' or calculating to accomplish a larger agenda that does not have America's best interests at the heart of it? Or something else?

 

[saveliberty]

Obama is just following his values. He doesn't value the business community.