Author Topic: Do the Obamas really need TWO "essential" chefs?  (Read 280 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,025
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them
Do the Obamas really need TWO "essential" chefs?
« on: October 03, 2013, 05:35:04 AM »

Do the Obamas Really Need TWO “Essential” Chefs?

White House ChefIn the discussion of the “keepers” and “throw-aways,” or what the government calls “essentials” versus “non-essentials,” I got curious.

Aside from the notion that government has any idea what’s essential or non-essential, this is a bad way to look at people.

Imagine you are told that your job is non-essential. The government pronounces to the general public that you must treat everybody equally and fairly. However, they have a program to determine who to keep and who to throw away. Who gets paid and who doesn’t.

The people who make that determination? The ESSENTIAL.

Why doesn’t government cut jobs like a lottery? One could argue that the way government runs, a congress of baboons could do a better job.

As I delved further into this issue, I found somebody who asked a good question: Are White House Chefs “non-essential?”

I did say chefs…plural. The WH has more than ONE chef, I learned.

The government shutdown that starts today results in temporary pink slips to “nonessential” government workers, begging the obvious question: Are the White House chefs essential?

The Obamas are known to eat quite well, at least in public, where they can be seen frequenting trendy spots around Washington and landing in over-priced restaurants aimed at vacationers when they’re in Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard. At home in the White House, a team of chefs plans menus for the Obamas and prepares an endless series of tasty meals.

The Obamas can afford to eat out every night or have the SS oversee take-out food if the First Couple prefers to order in. They don’t need two chefs, and in fact they don’t even need ONE.

Let Michelle Obama get her butt in the kitchen and cook a meal for her family. That’s what ORDINARY Americans do. At the very least, let Barack Obama microwave something.

These self-indulgent narcissists can live like the rest of us, until Barack Obama stops spending, and starts listening to the people who matter: Tea Party Americans!


There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.
Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private passions. John Adams

Offline Olivia

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
Re: Do the Obamas really need TWO "essential" chefs?
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2013, 08:16:37 AM »
These two parasites are set for life!  Living off the government with special guards to watch over them.  We'll never be completely rid of the moochers!
Truthfully, the most important thing in life is knowing what the most important things in life are, and prioritizing them accordingly.   Melchor Lim

Offline mountaineer

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 33,999
Re: Do the Obamas really need TWO "essential" chefs?
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2013, 08:41:28 AM »
While the gubmint is "shut down," Moochelle should have to take one of her shopping trips to Target and buy enough corn flakes and frozen pizzas to get them through this trying time.
Just being unique doesn't make you useful.

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo