Obama '08?

oooh oooh oooh - and who grew the U. S. federal civil service enormously?

I see bonus points for the Democrats on this one.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Year................USA Civil Population......USA Total Civil Employed
1981...................... 170,130,000………….....100,397,000
1982..................... 172,271,000.................99,526,000
1983..................... 174,215,000...............100,834,000
...
1990..................... 189,164,000...............118,793,000
1991..................... 190,925,000...............117,718,000
1992..................... 192,805,000…….….......118,492,000
...
2001..................... 215,092,000………………136,933,000
2002...................... 217,570,000...............136,485,000
2003..................... 221,168,000...............137,730,006
...
2007..................... 231,867,000...............146,047,000
2008..................... 233,788,000...............145,362,000
2009..................... 235,810,000...............139,959,000


2008:

October....................... 234,612,000…….....144,650,007
November................... 234,828,000..........144,144,000
December.................... 235,035,000.........143,338,000

2009:

January...................... 234,739,000...........142,099,000
February.................... 234,913,000...........141,748,000
March........................ 235,086,000……......140,887,000
April.......................... 235,271,000............141,007,000
May........................... 235,452,000...........140,570,000
June........................... 235,655,000...........140,196,000
July............................ 235,870,000...........140,041,000
August....................... 236,087,000...........139,649,000
September................. 236,322,000..........138,864,000
October..................... 236,550,000...........138,275,000
November ................ 236, 775,000…….……138,381,000
December ................. 237,005,000….…...…137,792,000

georgeob1 wrote:

In my view the most ominous issue ahead for Democrats is going to be public resentment for the growing cadre of better paid public employees (nearly all members of various gov't employee unions) and the increasing taxation from states and counties required to support them during economic hard times. This has the potential to become an issue that underlies all others, and reduces the public appetite for government programs of all kinds.

Here, here, George!!!!

I, for one am upset about this, and of all the private sector people I know who are fighting for their jobs and their benefits every day, there is growing discontent.

Do you think your hero was effective in his avowed purpose of persuading them to cooperate??

Isn't it odd that with the largest majorities in both houses of Congress enjoyed by any president or Administration (of either party) in many decades, that our debater-in-chief has been so uniquely ineffective in pursuing his legislative agenda?

It can't be his fault or that of the legislative leaders of his party. it must be the opposition, ... or perhaps the public. Maybe he needs a new opposition or a new public.

It is not O's fault that the Reps march in a mindless lockstep, the country be damned. The Dems have a good majority in congress, but just miss the required super majority. I still have to wonder how you and the other Reps sleep at night knowing that 40-50,000 die every year due to lack of health coverage.

I have to admit that the Reps did a great job in misleading the public. Just look at the poor deluded tea partyites who parrot the lies and distortions fed them by their Rep leaders, such as Dick Armey.

So, you have no problem with deferred income?

Hey, bring it on! The nonsensical stuff from the doesn't faze me. After all, you guys are led by the nose by the likes of Palin, Hannity, and Limbaugh.

in Advocate's case, it appears that there is no level to which he will not stoop.

With each response he stoops lower. And, in Advocate's case, it appears that there is no level to which he will not stoop.