POTUS to announce nonimee for secretary of Interior
Mandel NGANMANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images
February 6th, 2013
10:50 AM ET

POTUS to announce nonimee for secretary of Interior

Sally Jewell, the CEO of outdoor gear company REI, will be nominated by President Barack Obama to succeed Ken Salazar as secretary of the Interior, a senior administration official tells CNN.
But before he makes this announcement he will head to the Senate Democatic retreat in Annapolis and discuss strategy to advance his second term agenda.

EST
7:45AM In-Town Pool Call Time

9:50AM THE PRESIDENT departs the White House en route Annapolis, Maryland. South Lawn

10:10AM THE PRESIDENT arrives Annapolis, Maryland

10:30AM THE PRESIDENT attends the Senate Democratic Issues Conference

12:25PM THE PRESIDENT departs Annapolis, Maryland

12:45PM THE PRESIDENT arrives the White House. South Lawn

2:00PM THE PRESIDENT makes a personnel announcement. State Dining Room

Briefing Schedule
11:30AM Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney


Topics: Daily Schedule

soundoff (57 Responses)
  1. Moose

    Again another day of neglecting Americas economic problems. We need a pres not a celeb !!!!

    February 6, 2013 at 11:37 am |
    • NAM VET

      YOU ARE RIGHT WE DO NOT NEED ANYMORE CELEBS–BUT WE WILL GET THE ONE JUST THE SAME. THIS PRESIDENT
      IS A HORNEY TOAD WITH DEEP DREAMS HE HAS A REALITY,.WHEN TIMES GET TOUGH HE LOVES TO MAKE IT
      TOIGHER FOR AMERICA. HE WILL TRY TO CONVINCE US ALL THAT ALL WILL BE WELL, WHEN IN REALITY IT TURNS TO DOGGY DO-DO---IF HE WERE TO ASK HIS SUPPORTERS TO EAT A TERD THEY WOULD RESPOND–HOW MANY MR .PRESIDENT. THAT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS–MOST CALL IT BRAIN WASHED AND WHIPPED. JUST SAYING---

      February 6, 2013 at 12:37 pm |
  2. acdcguy

    Well, he did appoint a white female, sure that will make some happy, not all, but some...............oh, and The King can't shoot skeet, sorry, couldn't resist........

    February 6, 2013 at 12:25 pm |
    • Moose

      A pic is worth a thousand words, its just so clear he had a hard time knowing what end to point !!!!

      February 6, 2013 at 12:31 pm |
    • NAM VET

      NO HE CAN'T SHOOT SKEET, BUT HE COULD IF HE WANTED TO. I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO BUT COULD NEVER
      AFFORD IT. SOME OF US NEVER HAD THE ADVANTAGES HE HAS NOR MOST OF US FOR THAT MATTER. SOME
      OF US WILL NEVER HAVE THE OPPORTUNTIES HE HAS--WE ARE JUST THE SMALL FOLK, BUT WE PREVAILE. AND
      WILL BE AROUND LONG AFTER OTHERS HAVE VANISHED-THAT IS REALLY SAD TO SAY BUT IS A REALITY JUST
      THE SAME.

      February 6, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
  3. NAM VET

    IF YOU NOTICED THE OVER AND UNDER BARRELS, YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN THE "BALL" THAT WAS FIRED–YOU DO NOT SHOOT SKEET WITH A BALL FROM A RIFLED BORE OVER OR TOP BARREL. HE WAS
    NOT SHOOTING SKEET–THE SKEET WOULD HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED UP AT A HEIGHT ,SAFE FOR GROUND FOLKS
    A CLEAR AIM FOR THE SHOOTER. THIS PRESIDENT WOULD LIKE YOU TO THINK HE IHAS A CLUE,AS MOST KIDS
    DO IN THE USE OF ANY KIND OF WEAPON OF SPORT–THEY KNOW THE BASICS–HE HAS A LOT TO LEARN-MAYBE
    A GUN SAFTY COURSE OR JUST COMMON SENSE---HE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN OTC IN COLLEGE.

    February 6, 2013 at 12:58 pm |
    • acdcguy

      Nam Vet......go to the previous article "Tuesday...Feb 5.....".. I've been trying to educate them but no luck

      February 6, 2013 at 1:03 pm |
      • NAM VET

        I DON'T FIND THE COMMENT YOU REFERED TO–ENTER THE GIST AND I MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER–OK.--–

        February 6, 2013 at 2:15 pm |
  4. NAM VET

    THE SS FOLKS WHO WERE THERE HAD NO CLUE AS TO SKEET SHOOTING-WE HAVE A PROBLEM , THOSE THAT
    ARE SWORN TO PROTECT OUR PRESIDENT LACK SOMETHING--GUESS WE NEED SOME UPDATED TRAINING FOR
    THEM AS WELL AS HOW TO CONTROL THEIR HORMONS WHILE ON THE JOB. JUST PART OF DOING WHAT YOU ARE
    PAID TO DO , NOT WITHSTANDING YOUR OATH OF SERVICE---JUST SAYING. SOME THINGS SHOULD BE SELF
    EVIDENT IN WHAT YOU ARE TO DO–COMMON SENSE SEEMS TO BE " NOT IN THE BOOK ". THIS PRESIDENT IS IN
    SERIOUS HARMS WAY– HE WAS NOT MY CHOICE FOR THE JOB, BUT WE CAN NOT HAVE SECOND BEST IN US PROTECTING HIM. I WISH HIM NO HARM, ONLY WISH THE BEST FOR OUR COUNTRY– "JUST SAYING"–

    February 6, 2013 at 1:28 pm |
  5. freedom

    To all those who spoke to my comment (on another page) – successful business people – especially our candidate, Mitt Romney, was severely demonized by the Obama campaign, his followers, and the media relentlessly. We couldn't have had a more stellar businessman represent success, ambition, intelligence, patriotism, integrity, values, and charity. If Obama really discredits such an individual so aggresively (which he did and the whole country witnessed), then why would he all of a sudden realize that a private sector CEO could be of value?

    February 6, 2013 at 4:40 pm |
    • Moose

      Good point

      February 6, 2013 at 5:14 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        Good grief.

        Did you even understand what he is trying to imply? He practically called you, an Obama hater, a liar.

        February 6, 2013 at 7:46 pm |
    • Cynthia L.

      During the Republican primary season, the presidental candidates were ALL picking on poor wittle Mitt. The President didn't say squat during that time even when they were bashing and trashing him. Your own people sunk your boat before the real campaign even started. And then came Clint Eastwood, Mr. Hollywood Elite, and pulled the plug in the bathtub by talking to an empty chair. That was after we heard Mitt sing.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:41 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      He mostly discredited himself by not presenting moderate views and pandering to the far right. Why do you think the Republicans are struggling now? They are just a lost as Romney was.

      And then there's that 47% fiasco. I'm sure he's still feeling gimpy from that self-inflicted wound.

      Did the President make him look bad? Absolutely. That's part of any campaign and both sides were guilty of it. To come back here and start drudging this up again does nothing to promote reasonable discussion of the problems our country faces now.

      If you really want to know more about this stuff, there was a panel of all the campaign strategists from both sides with the Institute of Politics in the University of Chicago where they discussed and dissected the election of 2012.

      February 6, 2013 at 5:56 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      If you really want to get into this again, there is was a recent get together by campaign strategists from both sides discussed how the election went down. I don't know why you want to drudge this up again but here you go.

      http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49263362#50717731

      February 6, 2013 at 6:03 pm |
    • jean2009

      Need I repeat again the federal govenment is NOT a business.

      People that push that unintelligent hogwash don't know the difference between the public and the private sector...or understant why those two things should be different from each other. we should no more want the government to run like a business, than we would want a business run like the government. Businesses are run for profit if they don't make a profit they go bankrupt....explain to me how the military is ever going to make a profit? Try selling shares for maintaining a standing army door to door.

      The roll of government is to promote and maintain things that have social value and benefit the citizens...things that by their nature are not money making propositions. Do you actually think the government is going to be profitable maintaining a public lending library? A book store that sells book....yes...but a library that lends books for free...no!

      Many of our presidents who ran on being business men have in fact been our worst presidents. the last business man like Hoover was no genius or we wouldn't be digging our way out of his mess.

      A well run government is more like a non-profit foundation that addresses the needs of citizens....and a person who is most qualified to do that is: a person who has experience as a community organizer. Someone who has worked at the grass-roots level helping people organize to find ways to make government address their needs....and in making it work for them.

      Mitt Romney is the reason Mitt Romney failed. The package of America for only the upper class...and out of touch with the times message he was given by the GOP to carry is the reason he failed. You cannot win when you treat the majority of the electorate like they the great unwashed and aren't worthy of respect ...like they are leachs with their hand out.

      February 6, 2013 at 7:39 pm |
      • John

        Apparently, the role of government includes killing Americans without due process. I remember, during F+F you hammering me for saying this president could be involved with killing people and you libs would say nothing. Now, once again, we have proof.

        February 7, 2013 at 7:14 am |
      • Cynthia L.

        The process was started by the Bushies and they topped it off with torture to boot. Did you defend it then? Please, we need to have more accountability individually and in government and if you are one American that takes up arms with a group tied to killing Americans and proudly posts it on You-Tube, well,..............seems you're looking to go down in a blaze of "HE WAS A LEGEND IN HIS OWN MIND".
        This is also a time to give due process to the folks in Guantanamo which hawkish Republican leadership has been very much CHICKEN to do. At least, torture is outlawed again. And no new prisoners have been sent there. What do you do then with enemy combatants?? Even if they are Americans? Seems the President has been pushed into killing them outright. If you don't like it, then set up a trial situation which Republicans seem scared to do but are first to shout "Due process!" to distract from their cowardly double-talk. We best get a hold on what was started and what has continued and make some serious decisions about the conducting of drone missions pretty darn fast. Others in the world want their own drones and if there are no lawful guidelines set forth now, I predict it'll get much more ugly.

        February 7, 2013 at 10:40 am |
      • John

        Cynthia, do not get me wrong. I am all for targeting terrorists no matter if they are Americans or not. I was commenting specifically to Jean. I told Jean in the past that this President could kill someone and continue to be supported by the left and that now appears to be the case. Similar to what Kerry has said in the past, it appears the people on the left were against this before they were for it. I wonder what changed their minds?

        February 7, 2013 at 11:22 am |
      • John

        Torture is outlawed, but we can go ahead and kill these same people... The left isn't too caught up in their political correctness are they? Also, say what you will about repubs and Guantanomo – but I think Obama has been in office for over 4 years now so he owns it.

        February 7, 2013 at 11:27 am |
      • Cynthia L.

        John, the continued use of torture has been glorfied by the right who continues to cozy up to the likes of Dick Cheney and his pro-torture agenda. People died during those procedures you can bet.
        I no where said I condone the killing by drones – did I? I also said that we as Americans better get straight on the subject of drones and the subject of due process. It is the Democrats pushing to see the documents about these operations, and I feel very strongly that they should. That they have now have the opportunity to talk to the guy who was there at the beginning under Bush when it was started and who is now Obama's choice for CIA Director is going to bring a secretive operation open to examination by the Congress who funds it and has been funding it. But to say the left doesn't care that Obama is killing people by drones is trash talk. It's been a subject of many conversations in many news publications and news shows that have been addressing the situation since Bush. Nothing new here in that regard. But, you wouldn't know because you are allergic to doing research beyond what the RIGHT tells you to read. YOU OWN THAT.

        February 7, 2013 at 12:04 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        I find it hilarious you would even bring this up since for the most part Republicans had no problem with the drone policy other than for the inconvenient fact that Obama is running it. If anyone is outraged by this it is the Democrats and they have brought it now to everyone's attention. Is it also outrageous to you that MSNBC was the one that broke this story?

        All I hear in FOX News is how so little news this story is getting compared to how Bush was grilled for 'enhanced interrogation.' Well, maybe if you actually pressed the issue, like the Democrats have, instead of presenting fake outrage? Come on, how about keeping it real? This is not just about Obama but the future presidents to come and the vast power they hold

        I have a very serious problem with the way the drone program is being handled and it should go through more Congressional oversight as many liberals have been clamoring for. There should be clearly defined process for determining who gets targeted, and if assassination is even necessary, not to mention carefully factoring in civilian casualties.

        February 7, 2013 at 1:52 pm |
      • NAM VET

        YOU ARE RIGHT JEANNE-THE GOV. IS NOT A BUSSINESS–IF THEY EVEN HAD A CLUE OF PROFIT AND LOSS WE WOULD NOT BE SPENDING MORE THAN WE MAKE. A BALANCED LEDGER IS WHAT FAMILIES WHO HAVE THEIR
        OWN HOUSEHOLDS CAN LIVE WITH AND EVEN PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. BUT OF COURSE YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF
        WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. YOU ARE A PART OF THE PROBLEMS AND NOT ENGAGED IN SOLVING ANY OF THEM.

        February 8, 2013 at 12:11 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      Oh and if you are asking us why your BS about Obama and the Democrats being hostile to successful people in the private sector doesn't make sense, well...

      February 6, 2013 at 7:41 pm |
    • Caramon

      Well Jean, some of what you said is absolutely true. However, it is not up to the federal government to supply all the needs and even wants of the public. The public library analogy may be an example. I am certain there is a national library. But most libraries are local and should be maintained by local governments. If the federal government suddenly found its way into funding local libraries then what is the purpose of local governments?

      I also agree that Mitt Romney lost because of Mitt Romney. Whether or not he was packaged for only the upper class is a matter of opinion. However, he was perceived this way by enough voters and found no way to convey and alternative message.

      I am also certain we can find past presidents who did not run government like a business who were just as bad.

      February 6, 2013 at 8:04 pm |
      • jean2009

        I suppose you never heard of a federal grant to help local libraries? Granted it is not at the level of state and local funding, but $156.9 million to states for library funding does contribute. More federal funding is actually provided through aid to education for school libraries.The 2013 budget actual request for (LSTA) is for $184.7 million...you can read all the details of cuts at the ALA website. And yes, there are national libraries the Library of Congress being one of the largest. Libraries receive funding through a federal act....The Library Services and Technology Act....which with the current cuts have taken a hit to help on funding that bloated military budget. Some other federal funded libraries are: The Native American Library; The National Agriculture Library; The National Library of Medicine...and then there are einities like the National Endowment for the Arts...and the National Endowment for the Humanities all items which add social value which is not profit driven.

        And when I said the "roll of government" I was not talking about only the federal government...local governments have the same restraints to serve citizens. They are there to meet the needs of citizens not turn a profit..just like any good non-profit foundation. If the government has extra income they should use that money to benefit the needs of all citizens current and future....and my suggestion would be.... if the federal government has excess income it should pay down the Federal debt deficit and NOT send each current family a rebate/refund check.

        In the long run doing that from any point of good of having a good business sense would be the most beneficial approach.

        In answer to your last question try democrat-James Buchanan. He and G.W. Bush made it to the list of bottom 5 on the Siena College historical rankings poll.

        February 7, 2013 at 10:43 am |
      • Caramon

        But most libraries are local and should be maintained by local governments.

        "I suppose you never heard of a federal grant to help local libraries? "

        Thank you for supporting my statement. The federal government supports local libraries but can no longer support the Post Office, a Const. responsibility.

        February 7, 2013 at 10:55 am |
      • Caramon

        In answer to your last question try democrat-James Buchanan. He and G.W. Bush made it to the list of bottom 5 on the Siena College historical rankings poll.

        Is this the only poll you follow. I suppose the only polls that matter are those that agree with your beliefs.

        February 7, 2013 at 10:57 am |
      • jean2009

        No Caramon, but considering the Siena rankings poll is conducted with the imput and aid of 744 professors of political science, and polls which include 238 presidental historians, it is probably one the most thoughtful and well researched consensus.

        February 7, 2013 at 11:22 am |
      • jean2009

        Caramon....My point was not which branch of government (Federal-State-County) was operating/maintaining or funding the library, or even setting the guidelines for its management.

        My point and question was: Is a lending library set up to be a profitable money making operation? NO!, or is it set up to be of social value to citizens? YES! That is the full basis for determining the differences between how government and business operates. Businesses are profit driven....government is more in line with a non-profit which provides for the social or real needs of citizens who need those services.

        February 7, 2013 at 11:39 am |
      • Caramon

        I will acknowledge the value of the Sienna poll. However,coming from working in academia for 15 years, I can tell you with personal experience that academia is predominantly Liberal. It is very difficult to conduct any poll without certain political bias. This is true whether the presidential poll favors Democrats or Republicans. As I have mentioned before, other polls likewise conducted by historians show different results. Although I suspect that George Bush will rank low on most. However, many also show different ranking for Reagan which you have also claimed a lousy president.

        I will also agree that government is not business. But there seems to be difficulty in establishing needs and wants.

        February 7, 2013 at 11:51 am |
      • jean2009

        The Federal government is still supporting the post office ....just because you will be getting mail one less day a week doesn't mean the government still isn't on the hook for supporting the Post Office.

        Hey! I thought you wanted the government to be run like a business? Whats with that! To me, it means one less day of a bombardment of junk mail for me to recycle. Besides the founding fathers did not expect overnight express delivery...some mail could take weeks and months to get to its destination. I'm sure the founding fathers didn't specify anywhere delivery was to be based on a 6 day work week.

        But even if they did, the founding fathers didn't live in the current era of instant text messages,email, business online file sharing, or competing with Fedex and UPS. If all these things had been available then I'm sure they wouldn't have bothered they would have left it to private enterprise. But communication being something of social and economic value to the citizens during their period of history, they set up a Postal system to meet the needs of citizens then.

        The true question is: in our period of history what should we do from a financial view point when the need for that service disappears? Do we treat it like those tanks the military no longer needs, uses or wants..just keep on funding to deliver junk mail 6 days a week?

        February 7, 2013 at 12:06 pm |
      • jean2009

        Really academia is predominately liberal? ...yet both Barack Obama and John Roberts graduated Harvard Law and both were Editor of the Harvard Law Review! However, from my view point I don't see either one as liberal or conservative ideologues, but a lot of people want to make that assumption.

        February 7, 2013 at 12:19 pm |
      • Cynthia L.

        Caramon, I feel I have to address your comment on the U.S. Postal Service cut-backs. We all know that Republicans hate unions and they have made no secret about it. The Republican Congress, in it's effort to destroy the Postal Service union, demanded that they fund their retirement programs for 75 YEARS IN THE CONTINUING FUTURE. Say what?? Who has had to do that and what department could survive? I for one, am mad as a hornet. And, I won't be the only one who remembers.

        February 7, 2013 at 12:22 pm |
      • jean2009

        Actually Caramon....here is another question for you to ponder. What do we do about building and maintaining lending libraries (regardless of which branch of government is doing the funding) when the major demographics of the population accesses and download the majority of the library literature, and media needs from online to an e-reader? We are fast approaching that point, I would estimate maybe inside a 10-15 year time-frame. I haven't been to an actual library to borrow a book for awhile. I either downoad it to a couple of Kindles, or buy the book.

        February 7, 2013 at 12:41 pm |
      • Caramon

        Jean, you can argue with me as much as you want to but academia is predominantly liberal. You named only two graduates from Harvard. I worked with thousands of professors at the university. My sister, a full professor, would tell you the exact same thing.

        Cynthia, sorry. I did not mean to imply anything against the postal service. I am very happy with the service I get with USPS. I would love to see them continue to succeed. Nor have I differentiated which political party is the cause of the problem. My statement was simply that the federal government cannot fund everything. There is a reason we have state and local governments, with state and local taxes.

        Jean, at no time did I state that I wanted the federal government to run like a business. Feel free to cut and paste when I did to prove me wrong.

        February 7, 2013 at 12:46 pm |
      • Caramon

        The true question is: in our period of history what should we do from a financial view point when the need for that service disappears? Do we treat it like those tanks the military no longer needs, uses or wants..just keep on funding to deliver junk mail 6 days a week?

        Jean are you saying that we should eliminate the postal service?

        February 7, 2013 at 12:49 pm |
      • jean2009

        Actually both UPS and FeDex employees are now unionized.

        February 7, 2013 at 1:00 pm |
      • jean2009

        Caramon That might be a question....I don't see it happening soon, but I do see a cut to 5 days a week as not a big problem. They just won't need to hire as many new employees,or buy or maintain as many delivery trucks or planes. At the present the USPS operates the biggest fleet of motorized vehicles in the world. Cutting Saturday deliver will cut the cost of $1 billion per year from their budget. Everyone will still get their mail.

        Now we need to talk about those tanks and jet engines the military no longer wants or needs.

        February 7, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
      • Cynthia L.

        I too, want the Postal Service to survive and they happened to have sucessfully managed to be a self-funded program on the most part, and if anything NOT a drain on our economy. When you have competitors for delivery service like UPS and Fed-Ex who want more of their business, then you have to offer more services than the postal service has yet to have to provide. They have offered quite a number of items like boxes, cards, collectors stamps, wrapping tape. But, they need to expand to other consumer products related to a one-stop shop that also includes the use of copying services, the paper goods that are required, office-school supplies, Notary Public services and other items that the pubic uses everyday. I would hate to see them not be able to compete fairly because they have served this nation honorably and they don't deserve to be strangled by the political whims of idiots.

        February 7, 2013 at 1:14 pm |
      • Caramon

        "Actually Caramon....here is another question for you to ponder. What do we do about building and maintaining lending libraries (regardless of which branch of government is doing the funding) when the major demographics of the population accesses and download the majority of the library literature, and media needs from online to an e-reader?"

        Jean I have to give you credit on this one. It is a good question. Although, I go to library quite often and currently have borrowed many books. Which reminds me. I also have a small overdue fine to pay.

        Electronic access to books could also save many trees as well. I agree, it will eventually happen.

        How about we put wings and jet engines on the tanks and combine it into one new program?

        February 7, 2013 at 1:36 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        The problem of cutting Saturday service may not seem apparent to most but it will affect rural communities who depend on the USPS the most for receiving bills, paperwork, medication, etc. These are places that have limited access to internet and many other modern conveniences so the Postal Service is a lifeline that any limitation of could be crucial to their everyday lives.

        February 7, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
      • Caramon

        Good point December. In fact, I think you said this earlier.

        February 7, 2013 at 2:00 pm |
      • steveo

        @December, How do we effectively balance the needs of rural folks and fiscal inepti-tude?

        February 7, 2013 at 2:40 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        You mean regarding the USPS? Cutting service should always be the last choice because chances are, you are losing more revenue than actually doing more cost saving. The first thing that should be done would be to roll back the ridiculous legislation of pre-funding of health care benefits 75 years in advance as Cynthia pointed out. That is just sabotaging a once profitable operation of the Postal Service, a blatant political move that is now costing us billions in taxpayer money. Congress created the mess, they need to fix it.

        February 7, 2013 at 3:30 pm |
      • jean2009

        "How about we put wings and jet engines on the tanks and combine it into one program?"

        I think they have done that alread they are called drones. bombs, and surface to air missiles.

        February 7, 2013 at 4:09 pm |
      • jean2009

        December.... it is good to know that the USPS is one of the few organizations that is fully funding its retirees pension plan....just look at all those that will go bankrupt from not fully funding their plans ....which winds up with the government for that non-profit insurance to pick up the tab.

        I'm amazed that the people who are complaining most about cutting the cost of government waste, but don't want it to be this or that...they would rather people who need assistance...A.) go without food B.) a roof over their heads, or C.)needed medical care....so as to continue funding 6 days of junk mail delivery, and supplying unneeded and unwanted tanks and jets to the military instead.

        People living on the great plains, or the frontier wilderness, certainly didn't have problems in expecting overnight express delivery...or even a mail train...or pony express rider until he and his horse arrived.. Today we have more than one private enterprise picking up much of that delivery....plus the postal service will still deliver packages 6 days a week ....so everyone will get their meds.

        I was just looking at a historical record from the early 1800's for Shelby County Ohio, and as late as 1824 they were receiving mail once a week delivered by horseback rider.

        February 7, 2013 at 4:40 pm |
      • steveo

        Congress created the mess, they need to fix it.
        ---------------

        No argument there! Thanks

        February 7, 2013 at 4:45 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        Jean, while I am always for employees getting healthcare benefits for retirement, mandating that it be pre-funded to the extent that no other organization or even a competing company like UPS or FEDEX can survive because of the sheer cost is insane. Doing it for 75 years into the future means you are doing it for employees who are not even born yet! Would the USPS even survive for that long at this rate? It's a sweet deal until you realize that you are getting it from people who are out to destroy you... with sweetness.

        Cutting services should be the last step. I would raise the amount charged for stamps first. How about $1 stamps? Again, much of this is controlled by Congress so their hands are tied.

        February 7, 2013 at 10:20 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      Well, the topic is not even about business vs government, it's not even about Romney. Freedom is asking why Obama wants to nominate a CEO for Secretary of the Interior.

      Does the question make any sense to you? Probably not, because unlike our pal freedom over here, we are not easily confused by campaign rhetoric..

      February 6, 2013 at 8:22 pm |
      • jean2009

        December--I don't think you want someone without any training or education to run the Department of Interior. Nor do you want your "let's tear it up fracker" in charge. The Department of Interior is sort of a mixed bag...on one side you have parks and recreation, and on the other you have the BLM which issues federal leases for mining, drilling for water,gas and oil, and cattle-ranching activities which can be open to pollution and exploltation if you don't have someone with an educated management background. We truly need someone who will oversee things like fracking and the environment.

        The Natonal Parks are not something that should be up for grabs to use indiscriminately for our and some corporations' momentary profit at the expense of future citizens. A conservationist who headed an outdoor recreation company that would like to keep wild areas our asset; not an environmental wasteland...sounds good to me!

        February 7, 2013 at 11:10 am |
      • DEcember 2012

        I don't have a problem with the pick and I am sure the President picked Sally Jewell for those qualifications, much to freedom's chagrin. :)

        February 7, 2013 at 11:49 am |
  6. Matt

    What's a nonimee? You might want to run your headlines through spellcheck before posting them.

    February 6, 2013 at 7:16 pm |
  7. review online casinos

    I think this is one of the so much significant info for me. And i am glad studying your article. But wanna observation on few basic things, The site style is great, the articles is in reality great : D. Good process, cheers

    February 7, 2013 at 5:35 am |
  8. jean2009

    How about Anthony Scalia...Harvard graduate and past-editor of the Harvard Law Review? How about ...Andrew Schlafly same MO founder of Conservapedia?

    February 7, 2013 at 1:30 pm |
    • Caramon

      Still trying huh Jean. There are about 3,000 colleges and universities in the US. You have provided a total of 3 names. I was not exaggerating when I said I know thousands. But, don't take my word for it. The Washington post once reported that 72 percent of people teaching at colleges and universities are liberal and 15 percent are conservative. For elite schools it is 87 percent liberal and 13 percent conservative. That study was conducted in 2005. Even more important is the fact that some of these universities openly discriminate against conservatives. Academia is one of the most political environments there is, again from personal experience.

      February 7, 2013 at 6:05 pm |
      • NAM VET

        IT HAS NEVER BEEN THE SCHOOLS JOB TO INDOCTRIINATE OUR CHILDREN–YET THEY DO JUST THAT. THE PARENTS
        HAVE THAT RIGHT AND MOST DO. OUR SCHOOLS WILL IF WE ALLOW IT WILL CRIPPLE THEIR FUTURE FOR ALL TIME
        THOSE WHO SET THE CORRICULM AND WRITE THE BOOKS WHICH CHANGE HISTORY WITH EACH REWRITE ARE
        FOLKS WHO HAVE AN IDEA THAT IF WE TELL IT AS WHAT IT WAS, IS NOW NOT THE SAME AS OUR PARENTS KNEW
        IT TO BE TRUE IS JUST WRONG TO DO..ALL OF HISTORY HAS BEEN SO BASTERDISED SINCE THE BEGINNING OF
        TIME THAT WE ARE NOW TRIPPING OVER ALL THE LIES.---WE ARE ENTERING INTO ORWELLIAN TIMES–SEEMS
        THAT FICTION REALLY BECOMES REALITY------

        February 8, 2013 at 1:19 pm |