Bill O'Reilly Scolds Jon Stewart for Not Knowing About Government's $16 Muffins
Liberals love to put comedian Jon Stewart up on a pedestal as being the most intelligent man on television aware of all that's impacting the nation.
On Wednesday's "Daily Show," guest Bill O'Reilly of Fox News exposed the host for having missed a major story last week about almost unthinkable waste in government spending (video follows with transcript and commentary):
[Dedicated Newsbusters readers! We are up to $2940 of our goal to raise $5000. Help us continue to expose and defeat the insidious bias of the liberal media. Show your appreciation for NewsBusters and get "I Don't Believe the Liberal Media" buttons and bumper stickers, or a Chris Matthews floormat, as our thank you. Donate now!]
BILL O’REILLY, FOX NEWS: Now listen.
JON STEWART, HOST: But that's my point. That’s a very…
O’REILLY: You've got to downsize the government so they can watch what's happening and make intelligent decisions. It's insane. Right now, look, the $16 muffin. Do we all know what the $16 muffin is? Alright.
STEWART: What?
O’REILLY: See, you don't even know what the $16 muffin is.
STEWART: What neighborhood do you live in?
O’REILLY: Yeah.
STEWART: Who makes a $16 muffin?
O’REILLY: This is great. I'm glad. Look.
STEWART: Alright.
O’REILLY: $16 muffin, broke the story last week on “The Factor.” You were otherwise occupied, making your little wise remarks. Not reading what's happening. They had a bunch of conferences for pinheads, federal government, and they ordered 250 muffins at $16 apiece.
STEWART: That's a lot for muffins.
O’REILLY: Yeah! And you know what, I paid for the muffins.
STEWART: I understand that.
O’REILLY: And so did you.
STEWART: I understand that.
For Stewart's sake, Reuters reported on September 21:
As the U.S. government grapples to find ways to trim the bloated federal deficit, a new report suggests officials might start with cutting out $16 muffins and $10 cookies.
"We found the Department (of Justice) spent $16 on each of the 250 muffins served at an August 2009 legal conference in Washington," said a DOJ Office of Inspector General report released on Tuesday.
The DOJ spent $121 million on conferences in fiscal 2008 and 2009, which exceeded its own spending limits and appeared to be extravagant and wasteful, according to the report that examined 10 conferences held during that period.
The review turned up the expensive muffins, which came from the Capital Hilton Hotel just blocks from the White House, as well as cookies and brownies that cost almost $10 each.
I guess the smartest guy in the room missed this story.
Might it have been important if a man he didn't like was in the White House overseeing such waste?
Hmmm.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I thought $16 designer
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 11:32am.
I thought $16 designer muffins were commonplace in NYC?
/sarc
Nahhhhh
Submitted by c5then on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 11:46am.
You have to also get the Vignte Latte Grande Frappaccino decaf to get up to the $16 range...
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Actually, it's not a trivial
Submitted by lotr on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:37pm.
Actually, it's not a trivial task to get a muffin to cost $16. An AP Food Editor recently tried to duplicate the effort, and found the only way to achieve it was to use organic ingredients, cultured butter, rare honey imported from Zambia, Tahitian vanilla beans, free-range organic eggs, and, to top it all off: Top-shelf single-malt Scotch and edible gold leaf flakes.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_FEA_FOOD_16_MUFFINS?SITE=AP&SE...
In other words...STARBUCKS!
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:13pm.
In other words...STARBUCKS! :-)
Well....
Submitted by SamC on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:54pm.
It's easy to get a muffin to cost $16. Just find a sucker who will pay you that amount. In DC, that's an extremely easy task I would imagine.
Don't Forget Obama's 2 Billion Dollar solar panel racket...
Submitted by Slyrr on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 4:36pm.
Let's not forget about Obama's 2 BILLION dollar solar panels.
For 2 billion a pop, they ought to be made of solid gold and encrusted with diamonds and rubies.
Or maybe it was just 1B per solar panel, the other B to make build a relaxation spa for Obama's thugs (which they CALLED 'Solyndra')
The way the Fed and Treasury keep inflating the currency
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 11:49am.
Based on the way the Fed and Treasury are debasing the dollar, we will look back with nostalgia and remember just how cheap that $16 muffin was!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
I smell kickbacks
Submitted by donnyvee on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 11:53am.
I can't prove it but I'm certain someone who ordered the $16 muffins and the $10 cookies was handsomely rewarded for having done so.
Do you know?
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:56pm.
Do you know the Muffin Man? Drury Lane is a pretty exclusive address.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Muffin cap and trade?
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 11:56am.
Maybe that $16 includes muffin "offsets" to assuage liberal guilt for eating all that sugar and fat.
Of course liberals feel no guilt. They just want us to, and to control every aspect of OUR lives ... and that's the way the cookie crumbles in 2012.
Liberal Guilt
Submitted by Riled on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:14pm.
Actually, I think we need to impose a Glucose Credit System. Those that want to eat more can buy Glucose credit from those who don't.
The DOJ would be willing to
Submitted by ThisnThat on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:20pm.
The DOJ would be willing to cut the expenses of these muffins and cookies .......
But only if we raise taxes to pay for it.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Your comment was the best example of the debate!!
Submitted by pockets64 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:27pm.
I hate to mar a brilliant comment by adding on to it, but here I go anyway:
Not only that, they will cut the expenses of these muffins over 10 years if we raise taxes NOW.
They are already on it...
Submitted by c5then on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:31pm.
The administration has put forth a muffin cost reduction plan where they agree to cut $1.35 out of their muffin budget over the next 10 years.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
c5then,
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:36pm.
So what you are saying is that the $16 muffins were going to increase to $25 over the next ten years but the cost reduction plan will only have them costing $23.65 at the end of ten years if we increase muffin taxes by 3% indefinitely?
My ObamaMath is weak so please help me if I missed anything.
Just wanted to say thanks
Submitted by Now_I_Want_Change on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 8:21am.
All you in this thread explaining how the accounting for these muffins will be handled have made my day!
Who filters the news for Jon
Submitted by ThisnThat on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:23pm.
Who filters the news for Jon Stewart? Clearly, bringing this up on his show was a mistake. This type of news is something that he and his ilk work hard at suppressing.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Line of the week!
Submitted by MyDogDarby on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:24pm.
An absolute golden line came from Dennis Miller on O'Reilly last eve,after he endorsed Herman Cain..gave Bill a bumper-sticker for the campaign: "Cain versus UN-ABLE" Beauty.
I wonder...
Submitted by c5then on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:27pm.
Does Stewart know about Solyndra?
Does he know about LightSquared?
Does he realize that as a result of the bail out to GM and the forced government restructuring of that company which made the UAW a major shareholder, that the UAW was in effect negotiating with themselves in the recent contract talks?
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
C5, that explains why the workers at GM
Submitted by UpNorth on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:51pm.
are now treated like sports figures. They get a $5K "signing bonus" under the contract they extorted from GM.
Missed one c5*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 6:58pm.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/crony-capitalism-737-million-green-j...
Conferences for the VIPs
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:37pm.
Having participated in many Federally-sponsored conferences over my career, I've noticed that there are two levels.
LOWER -- These are the ones that I attended for the most part. Attendees are charged a 'conference fee' to cover the cost of meals, coffee, snacks, etc. served at the conference.
UPPER -- These are attended principally by senior government officials, leaders in the various business communities, former politicians-turned-lobbyists, etc. I've been to a handful (usually in support of my boss attending as the VIP) and they don't charge conference fees. I suspect that these are the gatherings where the $16 muffins appear.
I've never heard the VIPs comment about the free food, let alone its expense. I think they assume its an entitlement due their particular stations in life.
AP article claims $16 muffins not true
Submitted by eis271828 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:38pm.
From http://finance.yahoo.com/news/16-muffins-No-says-apf-142094783.html?x=0&...
I expected as much, the
Submitted by redfish on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 12:53pm.
I expected as much, the muffins were provided by Hilton who I wouldn't expect to jack up the price just because they're selling to the government, and I think Mr. O'Reilly is making himself look like a fool.
And honestly, in the end, even if we cut out any extravagant waste we find in government programs , that will be good and all, but it doesn't deal with the fact that our major budget problem is not waste you can trim out, but huge insustainable entitlement programs.
You are absolutely correct on that last point
Submitted by lotr on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:33pm.
Miniscule cuts to discretionary spending programs will do nothing toward solving the debt problem. Even if we cut the entire military budget (by far the largest component of the discretionary spending), we would still not be able to pay down debt.
Fundamentally, it's the mandatory spending (entitlements, especially Medicare, as well as interest on the debt) that is behind the debt problem.
I don't know about you, but
Submitted by redfish on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:47pm.
I don't know about you, but its annoying to me when Republicans talk about cutting agencies, NPR, the Department of Education, NASA, and so on, as a solution to our debt problem. Or focus on Social Security exclusively in place of talking about Medicare, which is a much bigger, more immediate problem.
Democrats are wrong when they talk about tax increases as the solution or blame military spending, but there are things that Republicans say on fiscal matters that avoid the issue also.
Exactly!
Submitted by lotr on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 10:03pm.
A breath of sanity at last.... couldn't have said it better myself, on all counts.
Higher taxes alone may buy time, but otherwise cannot sustain the runaway entitlements brought on by the inevitable reality of an aging population. Clinton's surplus was destined to be temporary, regardless of the Bush tax cuts.
Insignificant cuts (insignificant relative to the total federal budget) to discretionary programs amount to a fart in a hurricane in terms of the debt, but are otherwise devastating to the programs.
Both "solutions" are nothing more than posturing on the part of politicians who have no other motivation but to get and stay elected, which, of course, not what the founders intended as representative government.
The people need to hold to get informed about the debt problem and its root cause, then hold politicians accountable to their elected office, putting the good of the country ahead of their "career" ambitions.
I'm currently staying
Submitted by Bodini on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:07pm.
at a Hilton Garden Inn where I can purchase a complete breakfast including all of the muffins, pastries, fruit, juices, coffee, omelets, eggs to order, hash-browns etc for a few cents shy of $10. So it still sounds like $16. is a ripoff!
P.S. If Jon Stewart is the best and brightest I guess it says a lot about DumBO!
Not only
Submitted by Chaitealover on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:07pm.
does it cost them a lot less than $10 to put that breakfast together for one person, when they put it together for a large group of people it costs even less per person. So whether the $16 was for one muffin or the whole breakfast, the taxpayers are still paying far too much for other people's meals.
It is a lot, but I doubt
Submitted by redfish on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:13pm.
It is a lot, but I doubt Hilton charges more for government conferences than for corporate conferences. And all in all, we need to worry more about bigger budget problems.
Oh Yeah,
Submitted by SamC on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:03pm.
because padding the bill on a government contract never happens. Nope, not once. Seems to me a big corp like Hilton would know exactly how to squeeze more $$ out of a government job.
I'm goin' to Denny's.
Submitted by Beukeboom on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:15pm.
I'm goin' to Denny's.
Austerity for thee but not for me.
Submitted by kata on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 4:43pm.
Think back on how meticulously the expenditures of companies who got bailouts were pawed through.
It's amazing to me how the Government can't look at it's own spending in the same light.
A 16 dollar breakfast?
Submitted by CobraMan on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:50pm.
A 16 dollar "continental" breakfast, something that most motel.hotel chains offer for free? remind me never to stay at the Hilton! Why couldn't these people stay at Best Western or Motel 6? There's no reson foe them to stay at the Hilton. Unless, of course, they want to enjoy opulence at the tax payers expense.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Jon your in the safe zone....
Submitted by TerryWest on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:20pm.
So much more Mr O'Reilly could have focused on to demostrate the Govts reckless over spending, but hey muffins are safe, everyone likes muffins and no one is really going to hold it against Jon for being uninformed about muffin gate.
I have been reading
Submitted by Bob K on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:33pm.
all sorts of lame excuses at leftist websites. "The cost of the room was added to the bill for the muffins". "These costs are ridiculous only because we can relate to them. Ultimately, it's still chump change." and the most numerous comments were about how "All military spending is a waste, but you don't see Republicans going after that." LOL
Hilarious
Submitted by buttercup815 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 1:34pm.
You know there are actually references to "muffiingate" on google for real! No wonder a serious politician can't get their message across.
♫ Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay ♫
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:01pm.
Plenty of zip-trolling heading our way
This proves what exactly?
Submitted by balboa on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:11pm.
This proves what exactly?
don't worry bal
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:16pm.
just a few jokes - no one is attacking your man
at least not as much as usual
I'm on to you! ;-)
Submitted by balboa on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 6:03pm.
I'm on to you! ;-)
And right on schedule
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:00pm.
Bal shows up to defend his girl.
Not sure he needs defending
Submitted by balboa on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 6:05pm.
Not sure he needs defending because he didn't know about "muffingate"...
$16 for a muffin? Only the
Submitted by talkradio55 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 2:51pm.
$16 for a muffin? Only the government could be that stupid. Muffins don't even cost that much in New York.
anyone else suprised this part wasn't edited out?
Submitted by Jnoble on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:33pm.
Golden Boy Stewart can't possibly be in a position to not be seen as the smartest guy in the room when interviewing someone. Espeically someone who's not a sceaming lib like himself.
$4K for 250 muffins
Submitted by Great Debater on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 3:43pm.
Wow, I would've made the muffins and hand-delivered them for a quarter of that (and I don't live anywhere near DC).
Ah, tax dollars well spent
Submitted by Mister Orange on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 4:13pm.
Anyone ever taste an $18 omelet?
Lobster and Asparagus
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 6:56pm.
The Bellagio in Vegas has a lobster and asparagus omelet that goes for $16.95. It's big enough to split and pretty tasty to boot.
(p.s. to Jer. How's that link for reference!)
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
*gasp*
Submitted by kata on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:01pm.
Not a chance in h*ll I'd pay that kinda money for food. Twelve fifty for just FRENCH TOAST??!
Kata
Submitted by Mister Orange on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:12pm.
The flour for the french toast was imported from France. The butter made from the milk of prepubescent cows (oh yes, the milk too). The eggs are 100% free range, but I could find nothing as to the origin of the vanilla extract.
But between you and me, pure vanilla extract is expensive.
I used to bake everyday
Submitted by kata on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:23pm.
even mail order flour isn't that expensive. I get my vanilla extract from Costco :P
Seattle is loaded with eateries that tout things like what you've described. You only think you're kidding...
I wish I was
Submitted by Mister Orange on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:45pm.
Cheese is what kills me. Too many varieties and very costly. But vanilla will always be at the top of my list...until I visit Costco again. So...thanks for the tip.
Kata*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:24pm.
You, of course, would have cajun's french toast for free but it is worth a lot more than $12.50...;-)
aww thanks cajun.
Submitted by kata on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:25pm.
well have to exchange recipes ;)
Food?
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:49pm.
The food only costs about two dollars per person. What your paying for is the view.
And I miss the old days on the strip when you got a decent prime rib breakfast at the old Stardust for $1.99. Well, I guess it would have been more properly called a really, really late second dinner.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Jesus
Submitted by Mister Orange on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 7:07pm.
I guess if the day's market price for lobster is $80/lb a $17 omelet would be properly priced (to split). This is absurd as spending $8000 for a bottle of wine. How much better is it than a $1000 bottle? Or $100? Or 2 buck Chuck?
$8,000 Bottle of Wine
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:43pm.
When I see an $8,000 bottle of wine at a casino restaurant, I can't help but think of three things:
Me? I always look for the second cheapest wine on the list, so I can impress my wife without being a total cheapskate!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
I only drink wines
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 9:50pm.
I like, I NEVER try new ones at restaurants. I ask for recommendations from folks in the know.
Cali Reds and French Reds are my favorites. Particularly the Red Zinfandels
I go 3rd cheapest
Submitted by Mister Orange on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 9:35am.
Then I look super-impressive. Although bringing your own wine and paying the corking fee beats all.
2 and 3/4 buck Chuck
Submitted by Clutch1956 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:51pm.
here in the great state of Georgia. Good wine for the price!
$2 3/4 now?
Submitted by Mister Orange on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 9:37am.
Sheesh. This Obama economy is literally destroying our country.
Go eat breakfast!
Submitted by kata on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 4:20pm.
It's waste, fraud and abuse and ya can't get past the word muffin.
but hes is a standup comic..
Submitted by 4Deuce on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 5:02pm.
I assume that in this defensive position, Stewart fell back on his trite, "Hey, I'm just a standup comic. What do I know?" routine. Leftists are entirely comfortable with hypocrisy.
The late great Frank Zappa...
Submitted by Clutch1956 on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:57pm.
The muffin man is seated at the table in the laboratory of the Utility Muffin
Research Kitchen... reaching for an oversized chrome spoon he gathers an
Intimate quantity of dried muffin remnants and brushing his scapular aside
Procceds to dump these inside of his shirt...
He turns to us and speaks:
Some people like cupcakes better. I for one care less for them!
Arrogantly twisting the sterile canvas snoot of a fully charged icing
Anointment utensil he poots forths a quarter-ounce green rosette (oh ah yuk
Yuk... lets try that again...!) he poots forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
Near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
Later he says:
Some people... some people like cupcakes exclusively, while myself, I say
There is naught nor ought there be nothing so exalted on the face of God's gray
Earth as that prince of foods... the muffin!
Girl you thought he was a man
But he was a muffin
He hung around till you found
That he didn't know nuthin
Girl you thought he was a man
But he only was a-puffin
No cries is heard in the night
As a result of him stuffin
Bruce fowler on trombone, napoleon murphy brock on tenor sax, and lead vocals,
Terry bozzio on drums, tom fowler on bass, denny walley on slide, george duke
On keyboards, captain beefheart on vocals, and soprano sax, and madness. thank
You very much for coming to the concert tonight. hope you enjoyed it. goodnight
Austin, texas, where ever you are.
Clutch
Submitted by Noel Sheppard on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 10:17pm.
Clutch,
I was wondering when one of the Zappa fans here was going to resurrect Muffin Man. Thanks. Big smile.
Of course, the best song on that album was Carolina Hardcore Ecstasy.
But I always loved the line, "Some people like cupcakes better. I for one care less for them!"
I couldn't agree more. Thanks for the smile. ns
$16 muffins are no big deal. Even $25 for a muffin is no big
Submitted by Rush Fan on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 10:51pm.
deal when it's coming out of all the taxpayers' pockets, rather than just yours..
the muffins
Submitted by OffTheLows on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 2:52am.
I heard that it was actually $16 for a continental breakfast but they listed it as only a muffin in paperwork. I've been on biz trips and have been comped about that much for breakfast, though arguably you could go to a fast food place and spend $5 or less. I'm more worried about political pet industries like Solyndra or entitlements to get too worked up over breakfast costs.
Now we know why they confiscated all those Gibson guitars...
Submitted by aloyicious on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:53pm.
... To pay for the $16 muffins...
Latest photos just relased of the raid.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:00pm.
Gibson shellacking
You Didn't Build That.
LOL. SGs are THE most dangerous.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:03pm.
They'll turn on you in a second.
?
Submitted by Mister Orange on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:19pm.
Why is that?
Didn't you notice the devil's
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:58pm.
Didn't you notice the devil's horns on those SGs? Evil!!!!! ;-)
http://www.gibson.com/Files/USA/SGs/Zoot-SG/FinishImages/SGZTRKCH1-Finis...
---
FWIW I don't get a comment box anymore. Only when I use the reply button. Another glitch?
Double cutaway
Submitted by Mister Orange on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 2:14pm.
Makes it easier to hit those high frets. Well, guys with petite hands anyway.
-Proud SG owner
LOL! I know that. My
Submitted by Beukeboom on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 3:24pm.
LOL! I know that.
My collection: http://www.collectguitars.com/thumbnails.php?album=49&page=1
Damn, dude
Submitted by Mister Orange on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 4:29pm.
Nice collection. I see you also have my Jag-Stang's blue sister. Fender just released a Cobain Jaguar with real electronics this time around (and yes, I did read your disclaimer) ; ) That flip out is pretty sick - any chance you have audio files online to share how that sounds?
~"Guys with petite hands"
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:46pm.
You sure you want to admit that?
.........
Hey!!!
Submitted by Mister Orange on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 12:05pm.
I don't have petite hands! I'm just imagining some people with tiny hands who have the luxury of hitting those high frets.
I get up to about 12 and give up. MONSTER hands. ; )
There was NO 16 dollar muffin
Submitted by mrbill on Fri, 09/30/2011 - 1:58pm.
Sorry folks, there was no 16 dollar muffin. The hotel put out its explanation. The 16 dollars was for the entire breakfast line up...it was just listed on the itemized note as "muffin" for their internal order system.
It included the whole breakfast etc.
Bill is full of it.....again and did not do any follow up on the issue....as did most of the media. You had to actually read and research a bit.
Noel Sheppard is a HACK!
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:10pm.
Not only is the "$16 muffin" a myth, but the Hilton issued it's statement clarifying the invoice on Sep. 23.....almost a week before this article was posted by Noel Sheppard. So either he is a pathetically sloppy "journalist" or he is a dishonest political hack. Either way, I find it humorous that he is employed to write on a site that claims to monitor the Media for just such offenses. So Mr. Sheppard, I will wait for you to clarify this post. Somehow I doubt you will do it because it is rather obvious that you are completely lacking integrity of any kind.
You should eat something,
Submitted by kata on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:18pm.
since it seems you can't seem to get beyond the word muffin.
red-sox-rudy
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:26pm.
Here - let me clarify so Mr. Sheppard doesn't have to waste his time on someone who apparently has reading comprehension issues.
The point of this article was that Steward wasn't aware of the story. You might have been tipped off to that by the very first sentence in the article.
Whether the story about the $16 muffins turned out true or false is irrelevant to this point.
You might want to actually get straight what a post here on NB is about before you start throwing around the words "HACK" and "sloppy".
I look forward to your apology to Mr. Sheppard - assuming you have any integrity.
The point of the story?
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 9:35pm.
So you are saying the point is that Stewart wasn't aware of a story that turned out to be bull*#@t? What the hell does that prove? I am sure there are lots stories that bounce around conservative media and are utter fantasy, that Mr. Stewart rightfully ignores. So whether it "turned out true or false is irrelevant'?I think nothing more perfectly sums up the whole mindset of all who replied to me and Mr Sheppard's piece. There is your apology.
red-sox-rudy
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 6:32pm.
In order for Stewart to ignore the story, he would have to be aware of it first.
Again, the point of Mr. Sheppard's post (and the basis for O'Reilly's scolding) was that he wasn't.
What part of that do you not get?
Based on your argument, it would be reasonable for a person who claims to a science correspondent to never have heard of cold fusion since, in the end, it turned out to be false.
The fact is that you didn't get the point of the original post and your criticism of the author is warrantless.
And apparently your ego is too fragile for you to admit you were wrong.
You have to kidding me
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:44pm.
Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say Mr. Stewart should be called out for not knowing about a false story. Do you not find anything dishonest about not at least mentioning that the story is bunk? THAT is my point. Mr. Sheppard does not out flat out say the muffin story is true, but he sure as hell implies it. So if the reader is unaware of the truth(I have yet to see any corrections anywhere on this site), then the myth continues. Which I contend is the intention of the post.
red-sox-redy
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:00pm.
"Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say Mr. Stewart should be called out for not knowing about a false story."
And there you go.
As it stands, that was the point and Mr. Sheppard's post. Nothing more and nothing less.
As for the rest - yes, I actually agree with you that it should have been mentioned that the story had been debunked.
That might get me in trouble :\
Here is the actual report
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:31pm.
Here is the actual audit report ---
AUDIT OF DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CONFERENCE PLANNING AND FOOD AND BEVERAGE COSTS
U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General
Audit Division
Audit Report 11-43
September 2011
I will give it to you without comment.
Good evening Vet
Submitted by cocodrie on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:52pm.
Thank you
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
The Vet
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 11:08pm.
You know we are not allowed to comment to each other.
Keep it up and this entire website will collapse into a bottomless black hole of unreality where balboa expounds without end in lengthy posts while Blonde and Wrathful Brunette flail about in the insane dance of the pickles while Jer stands atop his mountain of pockets, insanely piping his tunes of the turtleneck and the sentence fragment.
I think we can all agree that we don't want that.
Nut Breads and Muffins: Six for $32?
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 7:33pm.
Scroll down to exhibit 11. The charge for six Nut Breads and Muffins was $32? Signature breakfast buffet.....for $41.48 per person? Dang, I went into the wrong line of work.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Still a pretty lame story.
Submitted by balboa on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:09pm.
Still a pretty lame story.
balboa
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:47pm.
Irrelevant.
I wouldn't have commented on this post except for red-sox-rudy acting the big man while totally missing Sheppard's point.
Care to comment on that?
hydro
Submitted by balboa on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 5:36pm.
Well Noel was trying to take a swipe at Stewart, as if this muffin story is so big no one could possibly not know about it, so redsoxrudy was countering that.
balboa
Submitted by hydrodynDM on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 6:41pm.
Actually, rsr was arguing about the validity of the muffin story, which is a separate issue from whether Stewart should have been aware of it or not.
hydro
Submitted by balboa on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 9:52pm.
Yep, he was arguing the validity of it, and since it very well might not be (details vary it seems), why should Stewart be aware of it?
Man Made Global Warming
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 11:07pm.
Man made global warming hasn't been proven to have validity, yet you are aware of it. Validity is not a requirement of awareness.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Give it up Bal
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 11:38pm.
RSR already admitted he was wrong, and that Stewart should have been aware of the story, right or wrong.
How 'bout those Red Sox!
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:33pm.
You gotta let the anger go; it's not good for your heart.
$16 continental breakfast- per person. Yeah, that's much better. You can bet half the attendees didn't even get a muffin; they had coffee and nothing else, as most people attending a conference do.
But good try Papelbon; better luck next year. On the flip side, you can now root for the Yankees.
I think we are about to see another NB suicide à la Dave High
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:39pm.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
We already know you are stupid, Rudy.
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 4:57pm.
No need to prove it post after post.
Wow, such a witty retort.....
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 9:42pm.
Thanks for choosing not address any real point. That the muffin story is utter bollocks, and was already debunked when the author chose to ignore reality and write this "story." Instead you came back with that snappy rejoinder, "you are stupid." I wasn't aware that grade schoolers like to post on NB. Apparently your teacher needs to do a better job keeping you from eating the paste.
rudy, rudy, rudy..... If you are correct that the $16 muffin
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 11:53pm.
story is not true, you are still showing disrespect and taking an unsupported leap when you criticize the validity of the post by calling the poster, a respected member of NewsBusters, a hack.
Didn't you and I already have this conversation? Didn't we agree that the most effective approach to making a point or argument was to do so without using pejorative words? Didn't you and I have a respectable exchange, even though we disagreed? You are smart enough to know that treating others with respect is the most effective approach to communication..
The other benefit of not using disparaging comments is that you will be able to post your opinions at NewsBusters for many years to come. Some of the others who took your current path got the boot, as they rightfully deserved.
You seem like a decent guy. I hope you make the righht choice.
Ain't likely to happen, Rush Fan---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 12:17am.
as rude rudy is tracking exactly as the majority of lib trolls do here at NB's.
Started off reasonably enough, but has become increasingly shrill, mocking, and combative with each succeeding post.
Some sort of inverse ratio thing relative to how badly Messiah Obama's poll ratings slump. :o)
Future flameout, no doubt, for rude rudy.
MD
MD
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 7:50am.
It seems the more his idiotic posts get slapped down, the more shrill he gets. Maybe this is hellary in disguise??
MD, did you note Rudy's "absolute bollocks" line?
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:03pm.
This may be yet another reincarnation of good old Hank Mud. A little more down to earth, the language more keyed to what it believes is it's audience, but the SBS is still there.
What, some may ask, is SBS, why, it's Superfluous Bull S--t.
Actually for what is worth...
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 10:16pm.
I have never posted here under any other name. Not sure I have any particular audience in mind. Though I have to give you a tip of the hat for the SBS line. Very funny UpNorth :D Cheers!
And if rudy continues to
Submitted by Beukeboom on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 2:41pm.
And if rudy continues to attack Newsbusters' personnel he'll end up on the ash heap of past trolls.
Fair enough...
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:21pm.
Rush fan, you seem to be one of the few reasonable folks on this site. If you think calling him a hack is over the line, then fair enough, I am sorry. Just for the record, without using a pejorative, how would you describe it then? Mr. Sheppard wrote this article 6 days after it was reported that the hotel clarified that there was no $16 muffin, that this was the price for the whole breakfast, but they had put only "muffins" on the invoice. It doesn't take a lot of research to find this out. A freakin' two minute google search will do the trick. I contend that Mr. Sheppard does not mention the truth about this story because his whole intention is mislead his readers. IMO that is how it seems to work on this site. Even now after this story has been thoroughly debunked, I GUARANTEE that the majority of readers of this site still believe it to be true. That is because Mr. Sheppard does not clarify even now! You could make an honest argument that $16 is too much for the government to spend on an entire breakfast. So why the need to lie to your readers?
red sox
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:30pm.
If we're so unreasonable, then don't come here.
There I fixed it for you. And more importantly, for the rest of us, because you generally post and run when your arguments fail.
There are a few
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 10:08pm.
people that respond in way that is more than just ad hominem attacks. I try to return the favor with these folks and address any points they have made. I don't need to only hang out on web sites that only reinforce my beliefs (not implying that you specifically do.) I actually enjoy a little back and forth with those with opposing views who don't mind a rational conversation, like yourself. I tend to "run" from the post when things devolve into nothing more than insults (see any/all replies by mattewdean.)
I see you won't respond to my
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:39pm.
comment above, so I'm jumping back in. But don't be scared; I'm reasonable and fair- you can continue to embarrass yourself and I won't stop you.
You think that $16 for a continental breakfast helps them out? As I said above, the vast majority of people attending a conference in which a continental breakfast is offered never get near anything resembling a muffin; most get a cup of coffee or bottled water and take their seat. They've probably already downed their Five Hour Energy of three Red Bulls before coming down from their hotel room. So again, you're good with a $16 cup of coffee? Does that improve your position?
The other issue is your take on the purpose behind the story. If you had lurked long enough before deciding to join this site, you would know that while this site exists to combat liberal media bias, it is not in the business of creating news. Noel was simply reporting on the exchange between BOR and Little Jonny Stewart. I know this has been covered already, but I hoght maybe if I said it again, it might start to sink in.
Your move.
Thank you bkeyser
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:14pm.
For actually addressing points and not just hurling names. I kinda addressed your point in my reply to Rush Fan. You are right, it is a very valid argument that the cost is still too high. I certainly would never pay that much for a continental breakfast. I also am aware of the intention of this site. All I am saying is even if he is not "creating news" when Mr. Sheppard wrote this column he should have been aware that it had been debunked. So even if he does not flat out say it, he sure implies that the story is still true. That doesn't strike you as dishonest? Really? And to your other original point, I am not angry in the least. I am a Red Sox fan that is old enough to remember when the Sox choking away a season was an annual rite of passage......and no I will never root for the Yankees. As someone wiser than me said, "Rooting for the Yankees to win is like rooting for Brad Pitt to get laid."
You earned the name calling, rude rudy---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:22pm.
both by calling others names and then playing dumb about it.
If you can't take it, don't be dishing it out.
Whiner, indeed.
Whinus maximus.
MD
The point of the blog
Submitted by bkeyser on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 4:09pm.
as I read it, had nothing really to do with the accuracy of the original reporting, or whether that accuracy had been challenged by a subsequent release of information.
(And on that note- this administration has made famous thuggery when challenged. When FoxNews didn't jump on the Obama bandwagon and refuse to do any digging into his real record -like the other networks- they were actively and aggressively chastised by this White House. Remember Anita Dunn? And now you have a CBS reporter being blasted by the DoJ spokeswoman and Eric Schultz at the White House for writing about Fast and Furious. There are allegations that Ford was pressured to remove a non-friendly ad relative to Obama policy. And there are several other notable instances in which this group of thugs has gone after those who don't toe the Obama line. Just look at AttackWatch; that was developed just for that very purpose. So to assume that this negative report didn't result in a White House staffer calling Hilton Hotels to "clarify the record" is not beyond suspicion. In fact, I'd almost lay money on it. Why wouldn't that information have been provided the IG who certainly did a thorough investigation of DoJ spending?)
As for Noel being dishonest? Absolutely not. When you wrote HACK, you invited all of this retort by the long-time members of this site. Noel is no hack. You had every right to comment that subsequent to the IG report being issued, Hilton released a statement. This is a statement of fact that is irrefutable. But to attack the blogger -that was over the line. We welcome dissenting views around here so long as they're presented civilly and with merit. I think you'll find the few remaining and unbearably stubborn libs who still frequent this site find most of us quite congenial to debate with. ........... Okay. Maybe that was a stretch. They may not find us all that congenial, but they're wrong on just about everything anyway so in my book, their opinion doesn't really matter. Right bal? ( ;-) just kidding.) My advice? Be forceful but stick to the topic at hand and debate the facts on merit rather than call into question the bloggers integrity. Corrections have and will continue to be posted when warranted around here; hell, I'm wrong at least twice a day.
By the way, as someone who lives not far from Camden Yards, I'm no more a Yankee fan than you are.
I do not feel lied to.
Submitted by kata on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:53pm.
I thought the focus was all wrong but I didn't think the facts were misrepresented.
Indeed Bill O'Reilly was incorrect about the $16 muffin not being a complete breakfast plus tax and gratuity. If anyone is a hack it's him. He's obviously never had to personally pay a caterer.
On the other hand, comedians don't care a whit about a hyperbolic story if it will get a laugh. For some reason Jon Stewart missed this gold nugget and O'Reilly ribbed him for it. Basically asking him if he lived under a rock. I think that is what this story is about.
I for one think that our Government does a horrible job as stewards of our tax dollars. If someone can show me that this was the cheapest, most efficient way to feed these people then I will forgo using this as yet another example of a spending blunder.
The Editor's pick on the right of this page, however, gives the entire story about the "Sixteen Dollar Muffin".
I think you hit the nail on the head!
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:25pm.
You are exactly right that either way, Stewart (or his writers) SHOULD have been on this story. True or false it is obviously comedy gold. So this might be a case of satirical ineptitude, but "liberal bias?"
P.S. I am not saying Stewart is not obviously a liberal, just that his being unaware of the story somehow reveals said bias.
"for some reason"
Submitted by kata on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:43pm.
could mean anything from being in the Bahamas sipping mojitos, to negligence due to liberal bias. If this had been George Bush do you think this would have been missed?
Well, you are stupid
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/02/2011 - 11:48pm.
I just noticed is all.
Your lack of comprehension has been pointed out on this. Noel makes no claim that the $16 muffins story is true, only that BOR berated Stewart for not knowing anything about it. You should be calling BOR the hack, not Noel.
The fact that you can't see this proves you are stupid.
Restless 1 indeed
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:28pm.
If you would be so kind as to precisely point out any erroneous fact or assumption that I have made. Your replies seem to mostly lob insults, so I honestly believe you lack the intellectual ability to do so. So PLEASE prove me wrong.......too shrill?
Iz remindiz unt Germanzee joke.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 8:59pm.
iz funniz huuman. U iz laughingz roilldown floor,poppoppop iz butt. Readingz? Iz Merkel, got kik in tushee 16 weeks ago. Iz make merkel mad. Iz go away. Iz come back whar? Iz beantown nah.
Can't be Satchmo, can it?
Submitted by Beukeboom on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 2:45pm.
Can't be Satchmo, can it?
Let me try
Submitted by Chaitealover on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:08pm.
1. The $16 muffin story, true or not, was all over the place before O'Reilly went on Stewart's program.
2. Stewart allowed as how he had not heard the story.
3. O'Reilly ribbed Stewart about not being aware of the story.
4. Newsbusters reported on item 3.
5. People commented.
Chai
looks good
Submitted by kata on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:09pm.
just needs some John Madden scribbles at the end there.
Hey rude rudy,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:15pm.
Does calling Noel Sheppard a hack ring a bell, meat?
An assumption on your part, AND erroneous.
A twofer, putz.
MD
Hey JimmyDean
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:34pm.
Actually that is an accusation, not an assumption. Get a dictionary moron.........Look, I can resort to calling names as well. I would rather avoid such silliness, but that seems to be your only modus operandi for responding to anyone that disagrees with you. Pathetic!
Wrong again, rude rudy---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 9:48pm.
You made an assumption first; and then built on that to justify what you are now calling an accusation.
As far as the semantics issue, I have pieces of fools like you in my stool.
MD
Sighhhh...
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 10:01pm.
For me to make an assumption, I would have to ASSUME that it is taken for granted that he is a hack....by definition. I do not (at least on this site) assume that belief is taken for granted. Your name calling is rather tedious, and I believe says a lot more about you than me, or anyone else that you have to resort to it with.
Shove your sighhh, rude rudy,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 11:12pm.
into a dark, damp place in your nether regions.
A liberal troll like you assumes that when it makes a charge, it has ownership rights to the last word on the subject at hand.
You advise me to get a dictionary, and then make yourself look the pluperfect fool by implying that the definition of a word is only what you say it is.
Assumption, as I leveled it at you, means either arrogance or pretentious; oddly enough, an established liberal trait. Who knew?
Now try and slither away by stating you were NOT being arrogant and pretentious with your inane labeling of Noel Sheppard as a 'hack'.
You exhibit the less than profound, but hysterically funny ability to bring a cap pistol to a gunfight; and this after trying to be a badass by calling out the professional gunfighter publicly.
You make the typical troll complaint about name calling, but only after you have initiated that very same thing; and then use the extremely lame shibboleth that name calling is tedious when flung in your direction.
You hide behind the exceptionally dense charge that others who call names lack the chops to engage in verbal duels while utilizing varied, yet most valid verbiage; you equate being vociferous to being versimilar, all the while remaining ignorant of the fact that people call you names because you are a phony and a fool.
In case you skipped past the last: You are a phony and a fool. Also a whiner of considerable magnitude.
You are a wanna be word bully troll who has had it's ass kicked all up and down this thread for making nasty charges against an esteemed member of NewsBusters; and you ended up groveling and mewling to a couple of regular posters who were decent enough to talk nice to you.
You also ended a sentence with a preposition.
Here's a novel proposition - you don't like being called names, don't use the tactic yourself.
A sniveling shigella, you are.
MD
Oh snap, MD
Submitted by MrShy on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 11:38pm.
That was awesome.
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
The simple fact that you ignore Stewart's ignorance
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 10:26pm.
and that you are missing a prime opportunity to call out BOR as a twit, or "hack" as you say, tells me you are only trying to denigrate Noel with your post. I see you have now admitted that Stewart should have been aware of the story, true or false, (and I maintain more true than false as a muffin, cup of joe, OJ, and a nice omelet can be had for less than $16 if one actually looks).
So, it looks as if you've already proven yourself wrong. I wouldn't want to come off like some conservative meany, so I won't pile on. Have a good one.
red-sox-rudy
Submitted by lotr on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 1:25pm.
To be honest, I suspected from the very moment I heard BoR's report that there was probably a lot of overhead tacked onto the "muffin costs." Let's face it: EVERYTHING is marked up by 100%, 200%, 300%, 500% at hotels like the Hilton. Ever try having simple eggs for breakfast at one? So I'm not surprised by the revelation that since came to light that it wasn't just muffins after all.
IMO, the hotel deserves the bad publicity, as in the end it's THEIR own fault and stupidity for using the cryptic (and false) "accounting code." See, this is a pet peeve of mine... anyone who has ever tried to actually keep track of various expenses, be it hotel, credit card, restaurant, merchant, etc. has frequently encountered this difficulty of interpreting what an actual expense was. It's almost as if they don't want us, the customers, to account for our expenses (or just don't care). It's my sincere hope that the hotel will now indicate their "continental breakfast" as "continental breakfast," not "muffin" (WTF?) in the future. If someone wants to whine on about "continental breakfast" being to long a word, well then, come up with an abbreviation, or otherwise come up with some other way of providing an accurate description of the item purchased.
Aside from that, I'll echo the general sentiment by some others that "you catch more flies with honey than vinegar." Your subject line just puts people into a defensive posture, myself included -- my initial reaction was to find some way to come up with a rebuke, even if I knew your basic premise that the muffin story is invalid was true.
The $16 Muffin story appears to be true. The Inspector General's
Submitted by Rush Fan on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 12:53am.
Audit of the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CONFERENCE PLANNING AND FOOD AND BEVERAGE COSTS that The Vet provided the link (PDF file) to states the following on Page 6:
DISCLAIMER: I didn't read the complete report, so perhaps I missed some point of additional clarification.
My BAD......I should have spent a few seconds on Google before
Submitted by Rush Fan on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 1:24am.
I posted the post above. I just came across this post and this post that clarifies that the muffins did not cost $16.00.
As Gilda Radner playing Emily Litella on Saturday Night Live would say: Never Mind!
Couple of points.
Submitted by The Vet on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 7:58am.
1. The $16 muffins were mentioned in the report. Twice. By the auditors.
a. So the convention center/hotel/whatever printed out a receipt with an inaccuracy.
b. The government person receiving the receipt failed to notice the mistake.
c. The financial people back at Justice failed to notice the error when it was filed. I call them the financial people because that is all they do. Financial stuff. Every department in the government has those.
d. The mistake was never caught until audited. Only 10 conferences were audtied. How many more are there?
2. The Justice Department was panned in the audit for violating their own standards AFTER the last audit.
3. The Justice Department spent $121 million in two years on conferences. What is so important that much money has to be spent gathering people to discuss things over and over and over? No one ever heard of emails or power point slides?
4. The trolls are willing to excuse Jon Stewart for missing the story in the news. Yet Bill O'Reilly is some kind of demon because he did not hear about the rebuttal. Catch that?
5. About that rebuttal ---
Hilton Worldwide, the hotel company that hosted the 2009 confab in Washington, disputes the accuracy of the claim in a report by the Justice Department's inspector general. The hotel called it an accounting thing, explaining that the price included various drinks and gratuity charges, in addition to the muffins. The IG stands by the report.(1)
A. Huh? THE. IG. STANDS. BY. THE. REPORT.
6. That bears repeating. THE IG STANDS BY THE REPORT.
7. Again. THE IG WILL NOT BUDGE ON WHAT IT SAID.
a. And why not? You telling me, the guy that had to fill out paperwork for Uncle Sam for 20 years. Still files paperwork once a year for taxes, that guy, the guy that traveled on Uncle Sam's dime and had to report on what he ate and where he stayed, that yeah, simple mistake, oopidoodles Uncle Sam, we said muffins when clearly, CLEARLY, we meant Continental Breakfast including fruits, pancakes, donuts and MUFFINS too. Don't pass the sniff test. Too many eyes had a chance to see this and missed it and now, NOW, the auditors says something and oh, wait, so sorry, we musta goofed. whoopies. So sorry.
8. Yeah, auditors never saw that before. Oops made a mistake there.The IG stands by the report.
(1) http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2011/09/27/how-to-cook-16-muffin/?test=faces
Excellent
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 10/04/2011 - 7:45pm.
A tale of two cities, both built on greed: Las Vegas crashed and burned when things got crazy, in Washington D.C., the good times still roll and the money continues to flow in from all over the country. In Vegas, it was all voluntary, in Washington D.C. it's all mandatory.
Looks like Vegas got the business model wrong.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama