- This topic has 33 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m glad you mentioned that. I recorded Days but haven’t yet watched it. Now I will turn in to Soapnet at 6:00 today to see the last 10 minutes of the show.
the last 10 minutes on SoapNet and we only actually missed about 5 min. and nothing important at all.
But, again, I really saw no need for the interruption. It was certainly nothing that important we needed to know right now.
I really think that this is the time the NETWORK allocates for any Special Report that somebody feels has to be aired. After all, no politician can just go on air to espouse any issue. The networks have to agree to it.
The same with the sports stuff that is broadcast during the 1 PM hour. It isn’t the players that reserve that time, it’s the NETWORK.
They all whine and point fingers. I know which finger I’d like to point at all of them! If any of us spent money and ran up debt like these idiots do, we’d be on the streets or in jail.
We need a balanced budget amendment pronto. And a fair tax so that those who make lots of money through illicit means have to pay their part. Tax the goods and services we CHOOSE to buy, not our income.
the other day with someone who is "in the business." He said that, yes, it is the network that allows the interruption…BUT…it is the president (and his staff, obviously) who decide that a press conference is necessary. IMO, neither of the last two announcements were so necessary that they needed to interrupt a program; any program, not just ours.
I think TPTB have come to think that any topic someone might be interested in hearing is justification for a "special announcement." I can’t tell you how many times we get them here in FL for nothing more than a thunder storm on its way. Like we can do anything about it!
and am of the opinion that the situation our country is in today he, unfortunately, inherited, I, too, do not support network interruptions to DOOL or any other show, whether it be by the President or anyone else for that matter, that is not "breaking" news; something that will affect my life dramatically at that particular moment. If that be the case, by all means, interrupt away. This state (Maryland) has 4:00 p.m. Eyewitness News, followed by 5:00 p.m. Eyewitness News, followed by (wait for it….) 6:00 p.m. Eyewitness News, so what was the cause for the interruption other than that’s the time-slot he was given by the network to make his announcement.
Now, here’s how I truly feel about that announcement:
"If you cross the North Korean border illegally, you get 12 yrs. hard labor. If you cross the Afghanistan border illegally, you get shot. If you cross the U.S. border illegally, you get a job, a driver’s license, food stamps, a place to live, health care, housing, child care benefits, education and tax free business for 7 yrs. No wonder we are a country in debt."
I can’t understand why the problem is so apparent yet nothing is done about it. My handiman has an uncle who has been here illegally from Columbia for 30 years and…get this…has not worked a day he has been here.
Agree he did inherit the situation as did the president before him and the one before that. I remember 20-30 years ago my parents were worried about Social Security and Medicare. There was talk that neither would be around when us baby boomers retired. Those in Washington went around with the "business as usual" attitudes, their heads in the sand and ignoring what needed to be done generations ago to prevent us from being in the situation we’re in now. It’s so easy to sit there and pass the buck thinking there’s no problem NOW so we’ll let those that come after us worry about it later. It would have been so easy to fix when it was just a projected problem.
If the members of Congress were having to rely on Social Security and Medicare, there would be no problem. There would never be any worry as to whether either program would survive. But they don’t. So, for years and years, any time money was needed for some other program or project, they "borrowed" it from Social Security. And have never paid it back.
And while we’re on the subject…..let’s make sure every Congressperson takes a pay cut. A big one. Just like the rest of us. They should live paycheck to paycheck just to see what it is like.
Just sayin’
I’ve said for a long time they should have to work a certain amount of years to collect full pension just like the rest of us. This bull about being in for one term and getting the full pension is rediculous. The president should HAVE to serve 2 terms. If he runs a second and doesn’t get re-elected, to me it’s the same as getting fired. How many of us get full pensions after being fired. I think any politician should serve public office for 12 or 16 years before being receiving pension. It could be anything. Example for 12 years for full pension: Mayor for 4, governor for 4 then president for 1 term and if he chooses not to run again he’s eligable for pension but if he runs again and doesn’t get elected then he looses part of the pension. If he’s only in a public office for 4 years before running for president and gets elected then doesn’t run the second term or isn’t elected the second term no pension unless he serves in another capacity. This might make them do a better job while they’re in office in order to collect that pension.
Or why not base their pension on years of public service. Our SS is based on how many years we’ver worked (up to 20) and how much we made. Why not do their’s the same way? If they serve for a total of 20 years, they get full pension based on their combined salary for those years. If they only serve two, they only get 1/10th of it.
There could be added bonuses for serving a higher position, like president or senator. God knows, no matter what kind of job he does, being president is a 24/7 job and has to be the most stressful job in the WORLD! That’s gotta be worth something.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.