Quantcast

Obama Whines Michelle Doesn’t Collect Salary As First Lady

Welshtaff 2012/09/07 02:08:57






michelle-obama-workingAnd now we get more of the whining Barack Obama we’ve come to get
annoyed at and despise. At a campaign stop in Colorado on Wednesday, Barack
Obama got in touch with his feminine side, which isn’t that hard after he’s been
hanging out in Chicago bath houses, in an attempt to sweep some women voters off
their feet. Just what was his tactic? He complained that his wife Michelle did
not receive a salary for her First Lady duties.

First Lady duties? Say what? No one elected Mrs. Obama
or gave her a post to represent the people. Why should we then pay her for being
Obama’s wife? Listen as Barry tries to play the tiniest of violins as he appeals
to the emotional women in his audience.


“I want to make sure that when she’s working she’s
getting paid the same as men,” Obama said. “I gotta say that First Ladies right
now don’t [get paid], even though that’s a tough
job!”

It’s a tough job? Please! It must be tough running
around the country at tax payer’s expense for purchasing expensive lingerie,
spending millions for a Hawaii
vacation
, as well as, flying all around the world with an entourage
of gullible liberal groupies and attending big dinners with famous people. Yes
that must be quite the job Mrs. Obama has. I bet she hardly breaks a sweat or a
nail.

Now compare that to my wife. Yes I’m going to take time
to praise the woman that God gave me. We were recently made aware that she is
not just a mother of nine, but now a mother of ten. That in and of itself is a
huge job, but she cooks, cleans, washes clothes, runs a small business, helps to
educate our kids at home, is a chauffeur, a fashion designer, a nurse to injured
kids, a promoter of what is good and much more, yet still has time to keep
herself up and look amazing all through the day! Does she get a salary for being
a mom? No. She helps me accomplish a goal and that is the dominion mandate from
God. I give thanks to God for her and sing her praises to those I come in
contact with. As the Proverbs declare, ” Her husband is known in the gates, when
he sitteth among the elders of the land.” I am known by my wife and she is known
to all by me. “Her children rise up and call her blessed.” She is a wise and
virtuous woman whose worth is far above rubies. She is a gift from the Lord. She
is my equal, our purposes are the same, but our roles are vastly
different.

No other
president in our history has made such a selfish, self-serving and ridiculous
request as Barack Obama did. I have an idea for Obama: Split your salary with
her, which is what should be happening anyway. Matter of fact, just give her all
of it. I mean you’ve told us you don’t need a tax
cut
. I say you don’t need any of the pay taxpayers give you. Give it
to your wife for another vacation and set the example instead of whining like a
little, hen pecked, angry man.

It appears that for Barack Obama his wife is simply a
sidekick that needs to get paid for……..wait, what is she supposed to get paid
for? Telling me how
to eat healthy
? Demanding that I exercise? Please. It won’t be long
until Barry will be whining about his two daughters not getting paid for being
first children.



You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • princess 2012/09/07 02:42:03
    princess
    +35
    Why would she need a salary when the American taxpayers already slave for and pay all her bills!!! The day can't come soon enough for OVomit and his Marxist pig Moochelle to be kicked to the curb.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Josh Robinson 2012/10/11 23:45:38
  • Jerry 2012/10/11 07:33:47
    Jerry
    ..........don't believe it for even a second........Michelle, wouldn't miss a chance, at making sure Her Closets are filled with lavish clothes, some of Her coices for women's fashions, are pretty ugly......but Us taxpayers are paying Her First Lady Salary......
  • MIZ®  ₱д₸Ɽ¡Ö₸ ₩дⱤⱤ¡ÖⱤ   †
    +2
    LOL Well boo-freakin-hooo - Who does she think pays for her $50 hamburgers?
  • Pug For Huck 2012/09/22 05:10:55
    Pug For Huck
    +2
    What the hell does he need her to pay for??? Her servants???

    I guess this is a logical bitch from a perpetual spender; he has no idea how to cut back.
  • 3414503 2012/09/18 06:11:30
  • robert.goldsmith.14 2012/09/16 20:44:48
  • Hamilton 2012/09/14 21:39:49
    Hamilton
    +5
    Arrogant foolishness.
  • Michaelene 2012/09/14 12:52:00
    Michaelene
    +5
    I don't know why anyone is surprised. If she were to get a salary, she would retain it for the rest of her life. More of the gimme gimme mentality of the progressives.
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/09/24 16:35:22
    Jeremiah
    +3
    Hi Michaelene. She is not after a salary. Her husband tried his hand at comedy again, proving why he shouldn't quit his day job.
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/09/25 16:31:45
    Michaelene
    +4
    He was not joking, he was serious. Knowing Michelle's work history with Treehouse (Walmart) and her unethical behavior at her position of power at the Chicago Hospital ($100k raise when Obama became Senator), this call for her to become a salaried First lady is another prime example of Chicago politics at work. Pay to play has never been so obvious!
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/09/25 16:35:55
    Jeremiah
    +3
    What does "Chicago politics" have to do with anything? You can keep insisting he was serious, but he wasn't. Every time he tries a quip, it doesn't work. He should stop trying for humor.
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/09/25 21:32:22
    Michaelene
    +4
    Chicago politics is why Michelle received a 100k raise. Is there something wrong with my statement that makes it unreadable?
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/09/25 23:47:40
    Jeremiah
    +2
    No, it is readable. Why do you ask?

    How did Chicago politics play a role in Michelle Obama's career? Here is a little help in the matter:

    According to the couple’s 2006 income tax return, her salary was $273,618 from the University of Chicago Hospitals, while her husband had a salary of $157,082 from the United States Senate. The Obamas' total income, however, was $991,296, which included $51,200 she earned as a member of the board of directors of TreeHouse Foods, and investments and royalties from his books.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/...

    I couldn't find anything about a $100,000 increase in salary due to "Chicago politics." The U of Chicago is a private institution and is completely independent from the Chicago city government. Even the RW blogs are very vague on this topic. Perhaps you have a link I could use.
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/10/01 21:07:24
    Michaelene
    +3
    You know who you are talking to, why do you insist to cite those rediculous .com's and expect me to converse with you?
    Don't waste my time Jeremiah, you know I'll just have to go back to ignoring you until you cite a source worthy of discussion.
  • littleb... Michaelene 2012/10/01 21:51:30
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    Lol! Mindless defense at every turn!
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/10/02 02:11:43
    Jeremiah
    Too much truth for you? Did you even bother to look at it? You may ignore me if you wish, but I will continue to speak the truth.

    I asked how Chicago politics played a role in Michelle Obama's career, and you refused to answer the question. I gave you information from the Obamas' 2006 tax returns, which covered the period in question, but you did not refute any of it. Instead you give me a lame personal attack.

    I wouldn't think of wasting your time, dear friend.
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/10/02 14:24:50
    Michaelene
    +1
    I did not personally attack you, we've conversed before, remembe?
    Answers .com (and wiki too) is not a site I'd waste my time with. Sorry pal.
    How can you not include Michelle's thousands of stock options as if they were worthless. Will you defend HER when she cashes in and only pays a capitol gains tax rate too?
    Give me something substantial to read, a primary source, then we'll talk.
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/10/02 16:01:35
    Jeremiah
    When you can support anything you say; then we can talk. All you come up with are vague references, and then you reject any source I offer. That is the definition of ad hominem.

    I consider Answers.com a very good source, and I do research for a living. A scientist friend has fed several complicated questions into it, and he says it has never failed to deliver a correct answer.

    Wiki not so much, and its founder admits it is not a good source for research.

    Now, how about you coming up with something concrete?
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/10/03 13:03:30
    Michaelene
    +2
    yeah you told me that before, are you a poll taker?
    That's the only capacity that may allow the use of ask.com or any of the sources you cite.
    I'm cracking up over here, it's basic Eng 101 that teaches which sources are primary, secondary etc
    Perhaps I should answer some of the ask.com question, then you can cite me, lmao
  • Jeremiah Michaelene 2012/10/03 14:59:24
    Jeremiah
    Ask.com is a search engine, similar to Google, Bing, Yahoo and the other search engines. Why do you have such a problem with Ask? What does English 101 have to do with any of this?

    I am beginning to suspect you of blowing smoke.
  • Michaelene Jeremiah 2012/10/03 20:55:14
    Michaelene
    +1
    You say you are a researcher. I don't know what your qualification are for that position, but even high school students know that a primary source is what you cite, not an opinion site that can be easily altered by users.
    Like I said, pretty soon you'll be citing me to get your research from answers.com
    I distincly remember having this discussion before. Perhaps this will help.
    grahams heirarchy of disagreement primary vs secondary sources
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/01 21:50:22
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    Yeah and his North African Policy ain't working to good as well! Lol...or does he have one?
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 02:17:07
    Jeremiah
    +1
    We supported Arab Spring last year, and provided drone support to the French and British over Libya. What kind of policy is supposed to be operative now? Sorry, we do not run the world.

    Perhaps if your man Mitt is somehow elected, we can be in two or three wars this time next year. If he appoints John Bolton Secretary of State we can count on it. He and Dan Senor––another Romney adviser––were architects of the disastrous invasion of Iraq.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 02:29:08
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +1
    Lol....Excuse the incompetence anyway you can! We had more than "Drones" over Libya!

    Sure "Spring" has been Sprung! And here is who's springing it! A Rather Famous North African!

    zawahiri
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 02:45:41
    Jeremiah
    He probably supported it, so long as it was Sunnis doing the demonstrating, but Al Qaeda had little influence in Arab Spring.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 03:04:53
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +1
    Lol....are you really that gullible? Oh and I have multiple reports from CNN, NY Times, Huffington Post....etc. That A-10s, F-15E, EA-18, AV-8B, B-2, F-16 and others.

    Lol...."A few drones"

    That's six types! Oh and also shows ALL branches had aircraft in combat! The Turks have over 220 F-16s they sent 6!

    Kinda takes some credibility out of "I did NOT know where Auntie was!"!
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 16:06:09
    Jeremiah
    Yes, we were there in support of the French and the British. Yes, we had a few drones in the air for recon and for the interdiction of Khaddafi's convoy at the end.

    Libya is in Turkey's part of the world. Of course they were involved. Syria is also in their region.

    It's been nice talking to you, but you seem to be going in circles. Have a nice day.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 19:00:51
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +1
    Sure we had drones in the air. Why? To monitor the strikes and for damage assessment of the 100s of Cruise Missiles WE fired The United States Armed Forces struck Libya in Force! Which at the same time violated OUR Constitution!

    Lol...."A few drones"? Absurd! And it noted that as that "Oh gee Circles & Circles nice chat to hip gotta GO".

    Maybe you should go to the several sources I sited and "Drone" around them and see how absurd "A few Drones" actually is?
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 19:27:50
    Jeremiah
    You cited sources? I must have missed them. Yes, a few drones. They can use the same ones over and over.

    I wonder if you noticed one small item. No Americans were put in harm's way in Libya. A dictator was deposed, a regime was removed, and a new government is in place. Contrast that with Bush's invasion of Iraq for no legitimate reason, where 4,400 Americans lost their lives and 32,000 were wounded and maimed.

    Romney and John Bolton would have us in a shooting war with Iran within six months, and more Americans would die. I like Obama's way better.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 20:13:47 (edited)
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +1
    http://youtu.be/E-r_8jQTYPg
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    http://www.cbsnews.com/storie...

    Note: US AV-8Bs joined in the attacks from the USS Kearsage. That in fact would put US Forces in Harms Way!

    I'm not here to contrast another adventure to this! That merely deflects (nice try!). I am clearly pointing out what was done by this Administration this time.

    Fine you have that right. But you don't have the right to make what was actually larger involvement smaller! So in you very own words you like Obama's way better yet don't really know what that is!
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 21:37:32
    Jeremiah
    Obama's way is actually similar to Eisenhower's in how he conducts foreign policy.

    You could take a look at Ike's policies in Korea and Vietnam. He did not believe in blundering into any country, and neither does Obama. For a military man, he was very cautious, exploring every option and listening to every opinion before deciding on a course of action, also similar to Obama.

    I was in Vietnam toward the end of Eisenhower's presidency. Our mission was limited. We were there in an advisory capacity, although an occasional bullet whistled by. I got nicked a couple of times, and we were allowed to fire back, but we did not assume an aggressive posture. Of course, all that changed when Ike left office.

    I repeat, no Americans were in any danger in Libya. The comparison with Iraq is appropriate in how many lives were lost.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 21:48:43
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    You "repeat" wrong! And I have showed it as so! A US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle (mechanical) was lost over Libya! I would say the crew WAS in fact in Harms Way! And still you refute? Again United States Marine Corps AV-8Bs did in fact overfly and strike inside Libya! That is Harms Way!

    I will repeat the President by not having or even seeking Congressional approval violated the Constitution! Now spare me the history lesson about others who have as well! It's not the point! The point IS this President has!

    Lol....Barack Obama is a Piker compared to Ike!

    There is NO comparison you could ever draw on the resume he had before becoming president on actual action and understanding in working depth foreign policy! Laughable to even suggest!

    Thanks for your service! Now we are done.
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/02 22:10:48
    Jeremiah
    If every president sought Congressional approval for action in support of our allies, there would have been no actions by Reagan, Bush Sr, or Bush Jr, as well as by Eisenhower.

    If you will recall, there was no approval of anything in Vietnam until the 1965 Tonkin Gulf incident. But I can confirm we were there.

    For that matter, the approval from Congress and the UN for the Iraq invasion was based on lies about WMD and Iraq's involvement with the 9-11 attacks. Most Democratic members of Congress who voted on the resolution now wish they could re-vote.

    Tell me all about George W. Bush's experience or understanding of foreign policy. For that matter, explain how Romney is knowledgeable in foreign affairs. From his comments so far, he has been a disaster.

    Obama has never claimed to be as knowledgeable as Eisenhower in foreign policy, but he often follows Ike's lead, with similar results.

    I keep asking, how many Americans were killed in Libya before the consulate attack? How many were killed in Iraq?

    We are done because you are losing? Not so fast.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/02 22:35:05
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    Lol....How could I be "Losing" when you have failed to stick to the Topic? You did exactly as I said you would! You are through the woods and down the road missing Grandmas house all together! I specifically said does not matter what others in the past have done! That assumes in your mind I approved of their not seeking approval? Does not matter! The topic is did Barack Obama do it? Why is that so hard to focus on?

    Lol....I never said Barack Obama "claimed it" you did!

    I am unaware of any killed? Not the point! You are the one who claimed none were put into harms way! That is patently false!
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/03 15:01:25
    Jeremiah
    You love to flatter yourself, but I doubt that you will find any collaborators in your self admiration.

    Time to move on, unless you have something concrete to contribute.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/03 18:24:42
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    Let's review shall we? It's not a matter of "flattery". It's a matter of your claim of "Just a few drones to help the British & French". That's not even close to what happened!

    I did add concrete and it covered your claim of it being some minor participation on his part! With the rebar of multiple sources!

    And in that he and the rest of the mindless UN & Nato created a void that the deeply rooted North African leader of Al Qaeda has and will now exploit.

    Taking off on some "This is what some guy longtime dead did and Obamas like him" is a deflection from that fact no more! The argument of "Other guys did it" in regard to Congressional approval for war does not make it right!

    The Liberals and others make the case of the US being less of the "Worlds Police Force" but it appears that's only when who they don't like politically doe it? Then they underplay it and say "It's ok because no Americans died".
  • Jeremiah littleb... 2012/10/03 18:55:31
    Jeremiah
    I agreed with Clinton's policy in Bosnia and Kosovo, and with Obama's policy in Libya, and I wish someone would do something about Syria. People were and are being slaughtered in those countries, and simple humanitarianism dictates help of some kind. No American lives were lost in any of the counties.

    This is altogether different from Iraq, where no one was being slaughtered in the runup to the invasion. I seem to be more consistent than you are.

    I also wish Obama would withdraw all troops from Afghanistan immediately. Whatever mission we had there either has been accomplished or is no longer possible. How did the Taliban become our enemy?

    I believe our continued presence in that region is responsible for the attack on the consulate in Benghazi. Our presence in Saudi Arabia was the cause of the 9-11 attacks, according to Osama bin Laden. We can still be Israel's ally, but there is no need to occupy any country in the region.
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/03 19:55:34
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    In large part I agree. I am usually disappointed with Germany in these things. Afghanistan as well as Libya are a mess in large part due to the European apathy in Nato participation that also included the Balkans which is on their doorstep not ours! I applaud Clinton took the lead but at the same time was disappointed he took his eye off the ball in regards to Al Qaeda. And Americans did die because of that!

    As we speak the Turks are striking Syria in response to some attack over it's border. .

    As far as the bizarre excuse of Bin Laden used of "Occupation of Saudi Arabia" is just that an excuse! I'd feel differently if we had desecrated Mecca or even Medina. But that never happened. The mutual agreements between The Royal Saudi family and the United States date back to Franklin Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz bin Saud the 1st king.

    As such today Saudi Arabia is one of the best armed well trained overall stable countries in the region. You are aware that covertly Saudi Arabia is knee deep in Syria supporting the Sunni Freedom Fighters against the Iranian Supported Alawite ruling class who are Shia?

    Very simple the Taliban gave safe haven to Al Qaeda. Has the mission become a hot mess? It sure has! No doubt others contributed but Barack Obama is not free from bad choices in this!
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/03 20:02:30
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    You are flat wrong to suggest I was in favor of the invasion of Iraq! I did support their expulsion from Kuwait! I also have never forgiven George Bush Sr. for not insisting Saddam be surrendered in that tent!

    "Consistent? Lol....yes in that I don't absolve the mistakes. You're consistency seems to be to excuse them when it's your guy!

    Have you forgiven Bill Clinton for not killing Bin Laden when putting the assets in place to do so and not issuing the order? That most certainly helped lead to more slaughter! I have not!
  • littleb... Jeremiah 2012/10/01 21:49:17
    littlebuffalo55TBA
    +2
    This is "Comedy"? Very clearly the President is a joke! He made over $789,000.00. And yet he cannot help Auntie with some rent money? She lives on the Dole having never had a job or paid into OUR economy!

    Her very own words! Please note she was invited and did attend the inauguration and to (if real) several thousand dollars worth of gold jewelry!

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 39 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/26 07:43:19

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals