[Wondergirl]

Maybe... the relevant question is did she know talking to him was against policy ?

The library I worked at for 25 years had all sorts of policies the employees didn't know about. (And the policies keep changing and getting updated.) Yeah, the employees were told about them at hiring, but who remembers? Even if the policies are noted in a pretty little booklet, who reads that and keeps it around?

Do you know all your company's policies as pertains to its employees?

And isn't it common sense? You don't badmouth your employer to a third party who also happens to be a stranger (and is on the air no less).

[smoothy]

I'm curious if ANYONE that's defending that employer... actually heard the entire conversation that aired?

Because I've heard it....and every person I've ever worked with at any job I've ever had in the last 30+ years has said far worse things about their employer....or boss or whatever.....and not one of them was ever fired for it.

[smoothy]

Michelle Obama's Princeton classmate was Obamacare website builder | The Daily Caller


Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is executive at company that built Obamacare website






First Lady Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the contract to build the failed Obamacare website.

Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is senior vice president at CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov. CGI Federal is the U.S. arm of a Canadian company.

Townes-Whitley and her Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.

Toni Townes ’85 is a onetime policy analyst with the General Accounting Office and previously served in the Peace Corps in Gabon, West Africa. Her decision to return to work, as an African-American woman, after six years of raising kids was applauded by a Princeton alumni publication in 1998

George Schindler, the president for U.S. and Canada of the Canadian-based CGI Group, CGI Federal’s parent company, became an Obama 2012 campaign donor after his company gained the Obamacare website contract.

As reported by the Washington Examiner in early October, the Department of Health and Human Services reviewed only CGI’s bid for the Obamacare account. CGI was one of 16 companies qualified under the Bush administration to provide certain tech services to the federal government. A senior vice president for the company testified this week before The House Committee on Energy and Commerce that four companies submitted bids, but did not name those companies or explain why only CGI’s bid was considered.

On the government end, construction of the disastrous Healthcare.gov website was overseen by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), a division of longtime failed website-builder Kathleen Sebelius’ Department of Health and Human Services.

Update: The Daily Caller repeatedly contacted CGI Federal for comment. After publication of this article, the company responded that there would be “nothing coming out of CGI for the record or otherwise today.” The company did however insist that The Daily Caller include a reference to vice president Cheryl Campbell’s House testimony. This has been included as a courtesy to the company.

[Wondergirl]

Because I've heard it....and every person I've ever worked with at any job I've ever had in the last 30+ years has said far worse things about their employer....or boss or whatever.....and not one of them was ever fired for it.

Public comments that millions heard?

[smoothy]

Public comments that millions heard?

It was broadcast live... Everyone that was listening to his show that afternoon heard every word of it. So his entire audience heard it... I was one of them, so was my wife. (we were driving home from work).

[Wondergirl]

It was broadcast live... Everyone that was listening to his show that afternoon heard every word of it. So his entire audience heard it... I was one of them, so was my wife. (we were driving home from work).

But not everyone gets their negative comments about their company or boss broadcast live on the radio. You had said, "...every person I've ever worked with at any job I've ever had in the last 30+ years has said far worse things about their employer....or boss or whatever.....and not one of them was ever fired for it."

[smoothy]

But not everyone gets their negative comments about their company or boss broadcast live on the radio. You had said, "...every person I've ever worked with at any job I've ever had in the last 30+ years has said far worse things about their employer....or boss or whatever.....and not one of them was ever fired for it."

Did you hear what these so called "negative comments" actually were? And the context they were made?

Because I didn't hear her bashing anyone when she spoke.

[Wondergirl]

Because I didn't hear her bashing anyone when she spoke.

Her comments were positive for the AC and the computer program?

[paraclete]

Did you hear what these so called "negative comments" actually were? And the context they were made?

Because I didn't hear her bashing anyone when she spoke.

Frequently comments by many people are taken out of context, however whether you are being specifically critical or making remarks that can be taken as critical, it is better not to big note yourself and yield to media traps. If you are not authorised to be a spokesperson you should keep your thoughts to yourself

[smoothy]

Her comments were positive for the AC and the computer program?

That call center wasn't the DNC... she's got legal grounds for a serious lawsuit if she was fired for her political affiliation.

And appropriately enough... it was a sweatshop (not paying a "living wage") pawning a ponzi scheme nobody wants... very typical of liberals...

Nothing she said was anything like its being made out to be... obviously since like most other things... those people weren't there and didn't here it themselves....they are talking and ranting about something they don't have any of the facts about.

In a nutshell what she said was the people she's been talking to weren't very happy about Obama-care...

But we all know the ACLU would have jumped to her defense if she made a comment supporting ,... say for arguments sake, baby murder (abortion)

[smoothy]

Frequently comments by many people are taken out of context, however whether you are being specifically critical or making remarks that can be taken as critical, it is better not to big note yourself and yield to media traps. If you are not authorised to be a spokesperson you should keep your thoughts to yourself

Well, we know you didn't hear it because I don't believe that show is broadcast in your part of the world. And its unlikely you would have been listening to the streaming version of it (assuming its not blocked outside the USA.)

Because she wasn't doing that in any way shape or form.

[paraclete]

Well, we know you didn't hear it because I don't believe that show is broadcast in your part of the world. And its unlikely you would have been listening to the streaming version of it (assuming its not blocked outside the USA.)

Because she wasn't doing that in any way shape or form.

I read the transcript, you have to ask, why was she in that situation

[talaniman]

Well, we know you didn't hear it because I don't believe that show is broadcast in your part of the world. And its unlikely you would have been listening to the streaming version of it (assuming its not blocked outside the USA.)

Because she wasn't doing that in any way shape or form.

Yes she was, I heard it live and she was being interviewed and interrogated and prompted by Hannity to get responses which she did instead of notifying her supervisor immediately. She knew she had no authority to even comment on things outside her area of expertise and should hve thought about it before she allowed herself to even be in this position. No doubt even you would have more sense than that.

That was an unprofessional thing to do. Don't try to spin it in her defense just because you hate liberals and always take the negative view.

[paraclete]

Yes she was, I heard it live and she was being interviewed and interrogated and prompted by Hannity to get responses which she did instead of notifying her supervisor immediately. She knew she had no authority to even comment on things outside her area of expertise and should hve thought about it before she allowed herself to even be in this position. No doubt even you would have more sense than that.

That was an unprofessional thing to do. Don't try to spin it in her defense just because you hate liberals and always take the negative view.

Well Tal her firing might have been a bit arbitrary, considering she was very low in the organisation, surely she could have been reassigned

[tomder55]

She knew she had no authority to even comment

lol I love the left's sense of fairness . The truth is that she had no instructions to not speak to the press. Her bosses must've known that there was a possibility that the press would try to contact given that the emperor had that very day made a very public promo about the 800 # being a viable alternative to the web site .

This is my guess... had Rachel Madcow or anyone else in the MSDNC called and put her on live ,she'd still be working there today.

[talaniman]

Why would the left even see a reason to grill a call center worker? They would have asked Kathleen Sebelius to appear on their show. See the difference? Of course you don't Hannity was pulling a stunt. And he didn't quit when he was told the website was down.

[paraclete]

Why would the left even see a reason to grill a call center worker? They would have asked Kathleen Sebelius to appear on their show. See the difference? Of course you don't Hannity was pulling a stunt. And he didn't quit when he was told the website was down.

We see these sorts of stunts all the time from shock jocks, it is the way they make their day

[talaniman]

Shock jock. An interesting term for Hannity because he is not a serious journalist.

[tomder55]

He never claimed to be a journalist... unlike some of the' gate keepers of the truth ' on NBC ,CBS,CNN ,ABC et al. On both TV and radio he is an advocate for a view point . He makes no attempt to hide his position under the banner of objective journalism. He's also not very entertaining... but that is a different issue than the one at hand... that they fired the women for violating policy they did not tell her about . My opinion is that they were being petty because no one dare question the emperor.
It's an attitude you see. The same attitude that would make Sebelius think she works exclusively for the emperor as opposed for the American people . The same attitude that makes her think it's OK to ignore a request to testify before Congress. The moment a public servant tells you they do not work for you is the moment they cross the line from public servant to ruler.

[speechlesstx]

lol I love the left's sense of fairness . The truth is that she had no instructions to not speak to the press. Her bosses must've known that there was a possibility that the press would try to contact given that the emperor had that very day made a very public promo about the 800 # being a viable alternative to the web site .

This is my guess... had Rachel Madcow or anyone else in the MSDNC called and put her on live ,she'd still be working there today.

Right, their sense of fairness, compassion and tolerance is entirely agenda driven. If it doesn't fit the agenda too bad for you.