When is onecell and company

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Who gives a fuck how the children were identified on the manifest? Seriously. What does it matter? I'm trying to understand your point here, Yurt, but I don't get it. Let's assume that the children were identified as "Senior Staff," so what?

What are you asking me for? Do you have something that says so?

you asked.

is it your claim the taxpayers are billed the same for senior staff and family? one is official, the other is not.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

This pretty much contradicts your first response on this thread.

You joined the circus.

how? i dare you to try and explain your reasoning.

notice you avoided the questions and christie's error. typical hack move.

 

[Onceler]

how? i dare you to try and explain your reasoning.

notice you avoided the questions and christie's error. typical hack move.

You called SF a spazz because he said you're defending this BS, and you provided your initial response as "proof."

However, all you have done since is defend this BS.

No way around it, Yurt. Oooooooops.

 

[Bonestorm]

you asked.

is it your claim the taxpayers are billed the same for senior staff and family? one is official, the other is not.

So, you assume that identifying the children as Senior Staff on an Air Force flight manifest means tax payers pay more then if the children were identified in some ther manner?

OK.

By the way, what's the marginal cost for an additional passenger on a flight to Africa?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

So, you assume that identifying the children as Senior Staff on an Air Force flight manifest means tax payers pay more then if the children were identified in some ther manner?

OK.

By the way, what's the marginal cost for an additional passenger on a flight to Africa?

if it is staff, then the tax payers pay the travel cost. if it is not, my understanding is that obama pays.

marginal cost is irrelevant if they were labeled senior staff in order to avoid paying for their travel.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

other than labeling the daughters as senior staff, which seems against rules, what is the big deal? wives of presidents should do this and have been doing this. are you against laura bush's trips?

You called SF a spazz because he said you're defending this BS, and you provided your initial response as "proof."

However, all you have done since is defend this BS.

No way around it, Yurt. Oooooooops.

you have serious reading comprehension problems. i defended the trip, not the kids being labeled senior staff. thus, your claim that i contradicted my first response is completely untrue.

care to admit you're wrong?

 

[Onceler]

you have serious reading comprehension problems. i defended the trip, not the kids being labeled senior staff. thus, your claim that i contradicted my first response is completely untrue.

care to admit you're wrong?

Are you being serious?

 

[Bonestorm]

if it is staff, then the tax payers pay the travel cost. if it is not, my understanding is that obama pays.

DO you have a source for your understanding? If so, do you have a source for the idea that identification for purposes of Air Force Flight Manifest controls for billing purposes?

marginal cost is irrelevant if they were labeled senior staff in order to avoid paying for their travel.

But you claim that tax payers pay more if they are identified as senior staff. If the marginal cost is zero, then that claim is untrue. The cost to the taxpayer is the same if the kids are identified as senior staff, guests, supreme allied commanders or if the kids don't make the trip at all.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

other than labeling the daughters as senior staff, which seems against rules, what is the big deal? wives of presidents should do this and have been doing this. are you against laura bush's trips?

This pretty much contradicts your first response on this thread.

You joined the circus.

Are you being serious?

absolutely. i knew you couldn't admit you're wrong a second time. too much for you huh.....you simply cannot show how i contradicted my first response.

you are dead wrong. man up and admit it.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

DO you have a source for your understanding? If so, do you have a source for the idea that identification for purposes of Air Force Flight Manifest controls for billing purposes?



But you claim that tax payers pay more if they are identified as senior staff. If the marginal cost is zero, then that claim is untrue. The cost to the taxpayer is the same if the kids are identified as senior staff, guests, supreme allied commanders or if the kids don't make the trip at all.

i don't have anything, that is why i have asked questions from the start. i doubt that is published. but common sense seems to be that obama is on the hook for personal trips like this. if obama has to pay for the cost of the kids, then marginal cost is not zero. good lord.

if this is so common, why have we not heard about it before? why didn't obama claim this happens all the time. that would clear things up.

 

[Onceler]

absolutely. i knew you couldn't admit you're wrong a second time. too much for you huh.....you simply cannot show how i contradicted my first response.

you are dead wrong. man up and admit it.

Huh?

If I'm wrong, then what did SF say that was wrong? You have defended the stupidity since your initial post. And yes - that includes how the kiddies were designated.

As I keep saying - you joined the circus. SF is absolutely, 100% correct. You took a good position to start w/, but as soon as a couple of "lefties" chimed in, you had to defend what you at first questioned.

Deal w/ it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

ooops, SF spazzes again and makes a fool out of himself

Poor spaz.... if that had been your only post on this thread, you would have a point. Alas, it was not your only post. Do you think one correct post makes up for all the subsequent posts you made that were ridiculous (at best)

 

[Bonestorm]

I love how the onus is on Obama to "clear things up." Things looks crystal clear to me.

I'm guessing that the correlation between bitherism and "senior stafferism" is slightly more than statistically significant.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

i don't have anything, that is why i have asked questions from the start. i doubt that is published. but common sense seems to be that obama is on the hook for personal trips like this. if obama has to pay for the cost of the kids, then marginal cost is not zero. good lord.

if this is so common, why have we not heard about it before? why didn't obama claim this happens all the time. that would clear things up.

Because it is absolutely a pathetic and petty topic and up until you and bravo, no one had been retarded enough to care about something so irrelevant?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I love how the onus is on Obama to "clear things up." Things looks crystal clear to me.

For the record, most crystal is not clear.... so you need to be more specific on exactly which clairity level you are referring to.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Huh?

If I'm wrong, then what did SF say that was wrong? You have defended the stupidity since your initial post. And yes - that includes how the kiddies were designated.

As I keep saying - you joined the circus. SF is absolutely, 100% correct. You took a good position to start w/, but as soon as a couple of "lefties" chimed in, you had to defend what you at first questioned.

Deal w/ it.

nice try, now the lies come out. my position since my first statement has remained unchanged. thus, there was no contradiction.

i have not said obama did wrong or that this isn't appropriate. you and SF are just yurt spazzes. you cream all over yourselves when you think you have me in a gotcha. lord forbid someone question something. how dare that happen on a political board.

you two are over sensitive. you should share a group hug or something.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

nice try, now the lies come out. my position since my first statement has remained unchanged. thus, there was no contradiction.

i have not said obama did wrong or that this isn't appropriate. you and SF are just yurt spazzes. you cream all over yourselves when you think you have me in a gotcha. lord forbid someone question something. how dare that happen on a political board.

you two are over sensitive. you should share a group hug or something.

The above is quite the emotional outburst. You really should try to calm down spaz. It is not good for your health to be that uptight.

 

[zappasguitar]

wouldn't the tax payers be billed differently for their trip?

Why don't you do some research if you're so keen on finding out?

 

[zappasguitar]

if it is staff, then the tax payers pay the travel cost. if it is not, my understanding is that obama pays.

marginal cost is irrelevant if they were labeled senior staff in order to avoid paying for their travel.

Then why don't you go find some answers?

 

[christiefan915]

i didn't realize talking about facts got under your skin. all we have are the manifest and obama's claim. and then christie's claim they were on airforce one. show me more than just "obama said"....that really shouldn't be too much. especially for you liberals who never took bush at his word.

Sorry to bust your bubble but there are two official planes and neither is specifically designated as Air Force One. When the president's the passenger, it's called AFO. When the Veep, FL or congress members are passengers, it's called Air Force Two. So maybe you can explain why the second plane wouldn't have the same cabin interior info as the first.

Air Force One is the designation of any airplane that serves the President of the United States government. The same planes are used by the vice-president but are called Air Force Two when he is aboard.

Let's see if Judicial Watch is going to come clean on this, once enough independent research is done.