Perkins Twp. schools create new position

Perkins Township School District announced Tuesday morning that it has named high school principal Chris Gasteier as the district's new communications director.
Sandusky Register Staff
Jun 7, 2011


Perkins Township School District announced Tuesday morning that it has named high school principal Chris Gasteier as the district's new communications director.

The move is in response to community feedback, according to district officials.

"Community comments given through the district community survey, discussion at public Board meetings, and individual conversations with community members have indicated a significant need to improve district communications, especially a sense of listening to the community," officials said in a statement.

Gasteier will take on his new role immediately. Mark Dahlmann, former high school assistant principal, will return from retirement on Aug. 1 to take up leadership at the high school.


For the scoop on other changes at Perkins Township School District, be sure to get Wednesday's Register from a newsstand near you or check out the e-paper.



LOL!  More wasted money from Gunner!  When Gunner goes you will get many YES votes on the levy!  Get rid of Gunner and watch the levy pass!  Simple as that.


So let me understand.

Teacher and support staff take a pay freeze for two years and the administration adds another beauracratic position costing the taxpayers over $100,000 in wages and benefits?

The assistant principal retires and they hire him as the principal?  Don't you just love education double dipping?

The place is out of control.


Nothing worse than double dippers!!!

Get some new blood in there!




Creating another high salary position sure doesn't sound like the board is getting the message that we the taxpayers are tapped out.  You can't get what we don't have!!!  But maybe that just illustrates that the current board and superintendent are not listening, a major part of communication.  Guess they are only hearing what they want to hear...another characteristic of arrogant bureaucracy.

And if Dahlmann needs to work because he doesn't make enough from his pension, then don't retire!  Simple as that.  I'm sure with all the cuts in teachers in surrounding districts, there are other persons with the necessary qualifications and certificates that could be a principal that don't have the option to retire.  All the districts need to quit hiring back administrators that have retired. 


Hey Gunner, move your family here!



 What the Register fails to mention is that there is someone leaving as one of the curriculum directors, and this new position is taking the place of that.  It's not a new salary that is being paid on top of the existing positions.  The Register seems to do a great job of leaving out important information in order to make things look worse than they really are.  Perkins is a fantastic school system, and I'm happy to have my kids go there.



If I remember correctly, The school system added a second curriculum director last year. There is no need for a second curriculum director or a communications director in this small school system.

It's just added burden to the taxpayers.


Can't Gunner do this job?  More added layers.


 Outsider, wow i was not aware that they created that other curr. position just last year.  Thank you for the information.  i wonder if this was the plan all along.  i do still think that the Register tends to put down perkins in ways that they don't sandusky or other schools in the area.  99.9% of the people that live and work in that school system want the very best for kids, and even with the questionable decisions made at the top,i still think that the excellent education that the kids receive outweighs the negatives.  Every school has some problems and hopefully we can get ours worked out soon.


If you really believe that the Register seems to put down perkins more than sandusky, you are clueless. The Register is a good reason why many kids from Sandusky went to Perkins. The Sandusky Register has done nothing good for the Sandusky School System.


Let me get this straight: People wanted improved communications. Okay, fair enough.

Now to me, that means what you're doing wasn't communicating adequately. It did NOT mean that somebody had to be put into a created position to do the communicating! It simply meant that those who were SUPPOSED to be communicating were either failing to listen or failing to talk.

Perkins has been pleading poverty, and now this? Huh. I wonder if Gunner has figured out yet just why there's so little support for him OR a new levy... Communicate THAT, if you will, Mr. Gasteier!

NOTE: This is no commentary whatsoever on Mr. Gasteier, or his qualification for such a position. I don't know him nor do I know his level of expertise. It's the HYPOCRISY that's killing me, not the man himself.


 Does Mr. Gastier have a degree in communications and PR - or is he just a person that people likes?Would it not be better to get someone whose job it is to do this?  


 Was the old curriculum person they got rid of the one that was an old board member that had a business degree?  What is that salary compared to the new persons?  Maybe it isn't just one person for another.


Sounds a big fishy...




Get rid of the bureaucrats and consolidate with Sandusky and Margaretta.

Give the students the best education possible and the taxpayers the best value for their tax dollar.


 I have worked with both gentlemen at times.  They are both great men, and this move makes Perkins Schools even stronger.  People may not be very informed of what is going on.  Administrative salaries are less next year than they were this past year.  This is due to one of the curriculum directors leaving.  The taxpayers are not paying Dahlman's retirement.  He paid 10% of every paycheck for his retirement.

All in all, a great move by Perkins.



Guess how much the school system would have saved with one less curriculum director and no communication director ?

Guess what new blood could have done at the high school? Nope, lets keep the double dipper and stifle growth by people who have earned a chance for advancement.

Mr. Dahlman earned his retirement. Get out of the way.



 New blood could make the school even blood could also make things much worse.  At least with Dahlman, taxpayers know what they are getting, and with no added cost.  

Which people have earned a chance for advancement?  Who are you referring to?  I cannot think of another principal in any surrounding district that would do a better job than Dahlman.

Quit starting an argument for argument's sake.  You come off as being over-dramatic and you sound rather silly.

You honestly can't believe what you are saying, can you?




Love your logic. Lets keep everyone forever because we might get someone worse.

How about Ms. Smith? She was sleeping on the job and was fired. With your logic the school system should have kept her because we might get someone worse.

So we should keep Mr. Gunner who creates non essential jobs . A extra curriculum director last year and now a communication director.  It's just a couple hundred thousand dollars for taxpayers. What's the big deal.

Lets just keep everyone because we might get someone worse.

I don't like my money wasted. I will continue to voice my opinion. Sorry if this bothers you.





No.  Keep the good ones (Dahlman) and get rid of the bad ones (Smith).  This works for any company, public or private.  Go into any establishment, and within a week you will find out who is doing their job, and who isn't.  

Keep the ones doing their job, and let the lazy ones go.

Remember, you voted for the board that hired Gunner.  Gunner hired these people to these positions.  If you don't like how things are being run, you can run for office.  I am sure you will get the votes, due to your positive attitude and persuasive arguments.


 This is exactly why Senate Bill 5 is needed. Why would you hire someone who will double dip the retirement system and spend tax dollars needlessly? Where do these clowns come from? Why would you hire someone to run your schools who doesn't even live there? We need to take our outrage directly to the Board of Education as well as the ballot box.  Until then, nothing is going to change. Gastier was a joke when I went to high school with him. 


House Bill 5 has nothing to do with administrators. It's collective bargaining for the teachers and non teachers in the system that the Governor wants to screw with.

Erie County Resident

Gunner just needs somebody with a full box of crayons to draw him some pictures so he can understand the meaning of the word NO!!!


to WesTaylor:  No, the taxpayer won't be paying Dahlmann's retirement, but they will be paying his salary as principal.  And you can bet he won't be getting paid less because he is drawing a pension.   The point is that school districts all over the area are cutting staff, people who can't retire but may have the necessary certification or qualifications.  Why not hire one of those as principal instead of bringing back someone who CHOSE to retire.  He wasn't forced out or fired or laid off.  And it has nothing to do with whether he's a nice guy or not.  It has everything to do with the economy.



The people that are being cut are not qualified to become a high school principal of one of the best districts in the area.  The people who are being cut are those with 5 or less years of teaching experience.  

I believe that he will give his 10% to the state, and it will not increase his pension, so essentially, he will get paid less.

He has earned the right to be the principal, and if you ask the "bad kids" of PHS, he isn't nice at all.  He does his job, and does it well.  

Funny how Perkins wasn't affected by the economy.  Maybe they are doing something right.  Maybe that is why they should keep the people they have, until someone better comes along.



If Mr. Gastier is now the communications director and Mark Dahlman is now the principal, then who will be the assistant principal?  As of todays date, the position has not been posted which leaves one to assume that they will hire an assistant principal from within the ranks- likely a well qualified teacher who has earned their Masters Degree in Administration.  If the system chooses to hire someone from within, then that person will need to be replaced.  In any event, Perkins will be hiring someone to fill this position, whether at the lower level, or administrative. 

Captain Gutz

Another compelling argument for privatization.


Hmmm let's see if I can put this together...  The curiculum director's position that's being eliminated was created last year for only one year.  That person was administratively transferred from principal to curriculum director to see out his last year before retirement.  Now Gasteier is being administratively transferred from principal to communications director for, what I understand, is his last year before retirement. 

What's up Gunner?  Are these administrators not on board with your agenda and this is your way of getting rid of them quietly? 



Community comments were that the board members needed to do a better job at communicating!  We elected them and PAY them to be our voice and to communicate and built a positive relationship with the community.  If they can't do their job, well.....  If I can't perform my job to expectations, is my boss going to hire someone just to do the work that I can't?  Heck no!  I'd be out on my rear and they'd hired someone else!

Gasteier, here's a little sweet revenge for you to communicate with the board and superintendent, we don't like the job they're doing and we can't wait for elections in November!  The answer to any vote they put in front of us will be NO!  We don't trust's that simple.

Shame on Mark Dahlman for going along with this shady move on Gunner's part. I don't care what kind of sweet deal they made you. 

I know that the board has to have a public meeting before they can officially hire him back (it's in July) but what can the public actually do to prevent it, or is the meeting just a formality?

Pirate Mom

 Congratulations on your retirement, Mr. Dahlmann, and enjoy your summer.  You served the community well in your assistant principal position.

The school community should be grateful that such a perfectionist will head the high school!  So many changes have been made that you need an organized, intelligent man in charge.  Hopefully they will find someone to balance him the way he balanced Mr. Gasteier.

We look forward to more changes to come.


Why would you congratulate someone on their retirement, when they're not retiring?


Please try to understand - retire/rehire saves taxpayer dollars! Why not hire a good person at less cost!  Secondly, don't put stipulations on passing a levy - those that don't will always find an excuse to make themselves feel better.  You either support education or you don't, even if you don't always agree with the details.  As seen from many of these comments, you don't understand the details.


SMH.  They just don't get it. 

local man

The comment about eliminating the teachers with five years or less experience exposes the exact problem that now exists, we get rid of people based on time of job not based on their performance.  We keep the most expensive teachers on the payroll versus the best performing teachers.  We eliminate those who were most recently educated with the most up to date teaching methods because of senority. How many  more energetic lower paid teachers could be teaching our children if we could eliminate more expensive underperforming ones whose seniority have entrenched them  in the position.

local man

The comment about eliminating the teachers with five years or less experience exposes the exact problem that now exists, we get rid of people based on time of job not based on their performance.  We keep the most expensive teachers on the payroll versus the best performing teachers.  We eliminate those who were most recently educated with the most up to date teaching methods because of senority. How many  more energetic lower paid teachers could be teaching our children if we could eliminate more expensive underperforming ones whose seniority have entrenched them  in the position.


 I've grown weary of the number of comments over the years about "young, energetic" teachers vs. "old, lazy" teachers.  Making the generalization that all young teachers are by definition "better" strictly because they are younger is no different than generalizing that all "old" teachers are "lazy and incompetent".  It may come as a shock that in reality not all new teachers are great and not all old teachers are terrible.  In fact, it takes most new teachers (regardless of the age they are when they start) 3-5 years to just get comfortable with classroom management and figuring out what teaching methods will work best for the group of kids in the classroom (those methods will need to be changed with each new group of kids due to differences in the kids).  What makes a good teacher has nothing to do with age; it has to do with experience, the desire to continue to improve, a supportive administration, and adults at home who are willing to support the teacher.  

Those who continue to bash teachers in general need to spend one week in a classroom running the show.  I suspect the attitude about teachers and what they do will change.  




 Teachers need to try working a full year. With a 12 week vacation every year I suspect their attitude would change if they worked in the private sector.

Azure Ray

 Outsider, many teachers do work year round, as they pick up summertime jobs to supplement their incomes.  The salary that teachers receive is based on 180-ish days of work.  They are not paid for the "days off" in the summer.  It is not vacation time.  I've spoken to numerous teachers about year-round school, and the majority of them are open to it for several reasons.  The biggest of those reasons is that their salary would increase since the number of days worked would increase.  Instead of being paid for 180 days a year, they would earn money for working about 240 days per year.  Also, it would eliminate the month of review that most classes have to go through at the beginning of the school year, since kids are unable to retain information over the summer.   If you look at the schools that have been doing year round school, they have a "fall break" and "spring break."  Teachers, I'm sure, would love to be able to maneuver vacation days around to any time of year, instead of only having the summertime to do it.  

Summers off began with agriculture and farms.  We no longer need that, as it is basically obsolete in this area.  I'm pro-teacher and pro-year round schooling.  The problem is, the districts have problems paying the salary as it is now.  They wouldn't be able to pay teachers to work year round.  If you look at the root of everything, it isn't the taxpayers problem, it isn't the fault of the teaching staff, and you have corrupt upper-management anywhere you go.  The problem is how schools are funded.  We are in the middle of a huge overhaul right now, and of course there is going to be disagreements and finger pointing.  If we continue to devalue teachers like we are, however, we are just making things worse.   It's easy for people to point fingers instead of trying to come up with a real solution.  Come on, people, let's be a part of the solution, not the problem.




outsider: have you worked in education and the private sector?  I know an individual very well who has done both. This individual's private sector management job lasted over ten years and was a year round salaried position with bonus programs.  This person left to go into education, took a hefty salary cut to do so, and works as many hours in the school year (yep-got to count those hours outside of school spent on school related work and summer meetings, classes, and prep work) that were required in the private sector job (40-60 hours per week).

In fact, over the years I have known several people who left education for the private sector due to low wages, working conditions and/or the low chance of career advancement (promotions which come with higher salary and benefits; opportunities for advancement in education rarely occur).  All of the folks I mentioned also became upper managers in their respective private sector careers (so much for those who teach can't do).

I know doctors who take numerous three day weekends, six weeks of vacation time a year, use trips to conferences for extended vacations, and so on and charge over a hundred dollars per visit for five minutes of face time with patients.  Should we demand doctors receive less salary and benefits for themselves so that our medical costs will go down?

A NY Times article from last September indicated that some health insurers, in an effort to "rein in costs" and improve care were evaluating doctors and paying them according to "quality ranking" (same type of approach as pay for performance for teachers base on student scores on tests).  Effectively, doctors were being paid based on how the patients took care of themselves, returned for follow up visits, and son on.  Doctors didn't like the system because they didn't like having patients who didn't follow their advice affecting their quality ranking (sort of like students who don't follow teacher instruction but will be determing teacher evaluation outcomes).  Is the doctor a bad doctor if the patient chooses to not follow the doctor's advice or misses appointments?

The AMA Journal published findings related to this and concluded that "who doctors cared for could have as much of an influence on pay for performance rankings as what those doctors did."  Researchers looked at 125,000 patients and their doctors and concluded among other things that "primary care physicians who cared for underinsured, minority and non-English speaking patients tended to have lower quality rankings."



So are you inferring that teacher are as important as doctors? I don't know any doctor who get off 12 weeks a year. 

By the way, teachers get off 14 weeks a year but I gave them the week before school starts and the week after school ends as time worked for preparation.

Teachers don't work anymore or less after their scheduled work time than private sector employees , as a whole, so that's a wash.

There are good teachers and bad teachers. THere are good private sector employees and bad. That's a wash.

Take your teacher pity party somewhere else.



outsider: Not a pity party when stating reality.  You obviously have never been in both the private and public education sectors (a week only for prep time-certainly not for all educators).  All of the doctors I know have gone through quite a number of educators to become doctors. Some doctors even credit teachers for providing the inspiration.  Tell you what-go spend some time as the teacher in classrooms at elementary, middle and high school levels, then we'll talk. Your third statement is incorrect (there are teachers who see 100 or more students a day and who can't possibly get all of the work done during normal school hours; English, reading, math, science, for example). 

BTW-I have a day off.  How is it that you have so darn much time to be on the Register site at all hours of the day on multiple days? Retired? Independently wealthy?


 I have the day off too. This could be fun.

So you have experience as a teacher and a doctor?

When a doctor makes a mistake someone could die. When a teacher makes a mistake  a kid misses a math fact. 

Yeah, their pretty equal in importance.

People in private business also cannot get all their work done in a days time. They take it home. It doesn't make them as special as a teacher though. Right?

Here's a simple fact. If there weren't people in the private sector making wages and paying taxes their would be no teachers. The private sector makes the money to support the public sector.  Sorry, but without people like me there would be no teachers, firemen, policemen or librarians.




Go back and read it. 9299 is using an example to explain how the input can skew results as it relates to comparing doctors and teachers dealing with the public.

9299 and others just don't support puplic education, and they choose to not understand the chicken and egg analogy.



So you are saying that you are alone responsible for teachers, police, fireman,librarians.  Don't you think that those people also pay into the system through taxes.(and the more you fire, the less money going in!)  Secondly, do want to live in a sociey without those professionals?  You would be the first to complain when your kids don't learn, your house is robbed or burned down, and you can't get a book or video for your tax dollars! I can't believe that you even try to make that argument.  Do you want everything in your life for free?  Wake up and join society and the real world.


You can say SB 5 has no bearing on these two individuals if you so choose but one question,  Just where in the heck do you think the wages originate.  Tax payers don't get to negotiate different contracts we vote for people that we hope represent our views when negotiating contracts that we pay directly into.  It's very obvious people are turned-off by Gunner.  The schoolboard has done the poorest job I could imagine in selecting not only Gunner but look at their past hiring record--GRADE  F- - - - -.

I have to believe the teachers are smart enough to see what was needed.  Their failure to negotiate contracts that would have kept the double-dipping and mostly the vast difference in pay from say 5 year and 25 year seniority teachers necessitated the need for SB 5.  All these people blamed the auto workers union for their demise "Breaking News" you are in the same boat. 



Why do people believe that just because you pay taxes that you get to control where all the money goes?  If you don't believe in war, or abortion, or tax cuts for the rich, you don't get to choose where all tax dollars go.  Why do you think you get to choose the salaries of teachers or policeman?  How many workers would like to have the public decide if they get a raise or not?  I would conservatively say, not many.  SB5 is an attack on all middle class people, while the rich do not contribute at all.  Kasich wants to cut costs, yet refuses to move into the governor's mansion (and costs taxpayer dollars to accomodate his residence!) because, for all reasons, he wants to stay in his children's school system (while he cuts schools funding across the state).



Do taxpayers have a right to decide if they feel they pay enough taxes?

I believe we need to have more input on where our money goes. Do you concur?

I believe Outsider hit the nail on the head. Without the private sector there would be no public sector. If the private sector did not pay their initial taxes the public sector would have no money to make their wages to pay their taxes.

When is enough? How about when there are more people working for the public sector than the private sector? We are very close to this situation. 

Lets say the private sector decided not to pay their taxes. How would the public sector get paid? Remember there is no tax money. The public sector does not generate money so in a short period of time there would be no new money. 

This present policy of deficit spending is economically impossible to continue. What's your suggestion? Should we burden our kids and grandkids for the next century with this debt?







                       Read  v e r y  c a r e f u l l y  what I wrote.  As one of the taxpaying public I "TRY" to vote for the paople who share my same opinions.  They are suppose to represent me and my best interests.  Having to pay more money to schools is "NOT" in my best interest.  A superintendent should "Not" be a retired teacher.  I'm all for entry level teachers making the same money as teachers with more seniority as long as they can do thre job.  That's union, what you have in schools is "NOT" union as I know it.  You people have made-up your own rules now stand by yourself and quit crying to auto workers, police, and other unions to come help.  The only thing other unions in this area has recieved from the teachers union is negativity up until now.  You people know this is a fact.  Drive to the UAW's halls in your Toyotas, Hondas, and Nissans and ask for their support.


Taxes are an unfortunate reality.  If one wants services in a society, they must be paid for.  Again, both private and public sectors pay into the tax burden.  How they got their income doesn't matter.  There are private sector corporations that are also driven by tax revenue (the huge military industry for example), so everybody pays.  Trying to privatize everything would be cost prohibitive (check the prices for private versus public education).  So the great debate is how and how much taxes should be paid.  I couldn't agree more that the current system is not working.  If I could come up with the definitive solution, I wouldn't be here.  My opinion is the tax laws are too complex, and too easy for people with lots of  money to pay less than their fair share.  I'm not talking class warfare, just fairness.  When hedge fund managers that make millions a year can avoid the tax rate I pay because they claim that their income is just dividends (and only taxed at 15%, that's wrong.  I am willing to pay for services that I use (or don't use), but it should be an equal burdent to all.  Right now, the middle class are becoming poorer, and the megarich even wealthier.  I am amazed by how many people that don't make much, and pay alot, fall for the banter of "trickle down economics".  As for teachers whining about help for SB5, they are not the only ones affected.  All public employees are terribly hurt by this bill (and workers in private companies won't be far behind).  As for the definition of an American-built car, check out the June issue of Car & Driver magazine that lists every car and its origin sold in the US.  Many of the Toyotas, Hondas and Nissans are built here, while many of the US Brands are build elsewhere.  You may argue where the profits (if any) may go, but the workers and communities of those plants are happy to have those companies in town.  Even our own fomer GM and Ford plants are selling to all brands for income, and good for them. Finally, no superintendant should have been a teacher?  How silly that you don't think experience in a classroom setting would be beneficial. 



How people got their income does matter. It's the central and most important issue we face today. 

Our present way of public entitlement can only be financed through taxes and a majority of those taxes come the general public. 

The more services you require to be provided by the government the more taxes the general public will have to pay.

At this time, 46% of the working public is supported by government taxation. That means 54% of the general public is funding this expense.  This tax burden is not possible so the government borrows money to fund this entitlement.  The federal government is 17 trillion dollars in debt. The state government is 8 billion dollars in debt. The county government is 100 million dollars in debt. 

You have two choices. Tax more or cut services. 

That means cutting public service jobs. Teachers, firemen, policemen, social services and bureaucrats.


  I think experience in any field is important but not when they benefit so much by negotiating their own contracts.  They might have retired from the job but they are prone to look after one another.  This can be true in any field but it's more prevalent in the teaching world.  I don't think police or fire chiefs should head contract talks in thier fields and most all don't unless they are become a mayor or city manager.  On this issue, I strongly feel I'm in the majority and the election results will prove it.


Mr. Dahlmann Congratulations on your retirement, and enjoy your good time.  You served the community well in your assistant principal position. line-height:115%;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#363630">


The community should be thankful that such a perfectionist will head the high school.  So many changes have been made that you need an organized, intelligent man in charge.  Hopefully they will find someone to balance him the way he balanced Mr. Gasteier.









Isn't it interesting that a few years ago that the opposition re: endless entitlements was directed toward welfare recipients and rightly so. 

But now, the opposition against entitlements is directed toward teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social service workers?  

Do you really equate the above to welfare recipients? 



Can any of your above mentioned groups survive without taxpayer money?

We as taxpayers have the right to decide how much of this entitlement we wish to fund. Is it the responsibility of the community to provide these basic services. Yes. How much is our decision based on the money we, as taxpayers , can allocate.

Do you agree or disagree?


Why did this just hit print today? (AFTER the monthly board meeting I might add) and why isn't there a new thread for today's article to post comments? 

Anyway...So... where does the $25,000 in administrative savings come from?  Was someone that over paid or is someone else being screwed?  Regardless, this is a position that isn't needed if our Board of Ed would just do their jobs!

Good luck Chris Gasteier, because I don't think anything you do will make them happy.  You've just been set up to be a fall guy!


I don't disagree with you that our taxes are excessive.  But to suggest that these EMPLOYEES are sucking off of the taxpayers teet without doing anything is ridiculous and where you sound frankly foolish.  

Really, how far are you going to take this?  Do you believe that  prosecutors are receiving entitlem4ents for their work in the community?  What about judges?   Are they receiving entitlements?  

I'd agree wholeheartedly if the first people to stand in line to have their taxpayer funded wages and benefits cut were the elected officials, but that isn't what's happening.   We've got a chorus of elected officials saying, "Taxes are too high in Ohio.  We've got to cut wages to make this state more business friendly.  And it's going to start with YOU, not me.   YOU." 

I'd like leadership by example.   But we never get that.   Not in the schools, not with the state, and not with the federal gov't. 


Captain Gutz



So, since the elected officials won't volunteer for cuts, nothing should be done?



Public employment has become entitlement. Public employees need unions to protect themselves from whom? Taxpayers ? We have college professor unions. We have Police Lieutenant unions. These unions are to protect their members from the us, the taxpayers.

There are so many layers of bureaucratic waste on the local, state and federal levels it's beyond reason. The government  creates legislation that requires more and more government employees to implement these entitlement projects without money.

The taxpayers are fed up with feeding this overweight and out of control beast we call entitlement. They are voting "No" at the voting booths to this endless drain on their pocketbook. Case in point, the Communication Director at Perkins School. This waste of taxpayer dollars will cost them at their next levy request.

If we don't right the ship basic economics will right it for us.  You can't spend more money than you make. You can't have more people supported by the government than are supporting the government.



Capt. G -  Don't you see the hypocrisy of them volunteering OTHERS for cuts?  They are more than willing to receive their own (as donutshopguy calls them) entitlements while they chastise other EMPLOYEES for being on the receiving end.    Hyp.  O.  Crits. 

donutshopguy - YOU are fed up wiith "feeding this overweight and out of control beast YOU call entitlement."  I won't villify police officers, firefighters, and teachers for the mess we are in.  Give me a break.  



Do you know the best part of this discussion? We are able to have it. You can have your opinion and I can have mine.  We both can vote our beliefs.

The three groups you singled out are part of the problem. They are not the whole problem. You cannot cherry pick who is sacred and who isn't. Every part of this entitlement beast needs to be put on a diet.  Whether it be teachers, bureaucrats, social services or defense.

It's time as taxpayers to take back our country from special interest groups. It will take courage and determination.


Captain Gutz


Yep, they are hypocrites. So, should nothing be done to stop the madness just because they are hypocrites?


donutshopguy - I agree wholeheartedly that we're able to have the discussion.   Enjoy this day. 


  Two groups of people can make 80,000 dollars a year on their backs, firemen and prostitutes.  Harsh but true, over 50% of the firemen in the United States are volunteers.  I seperate firemen from rescue departments.  You can never have enough public employees, police, teachers, etc.  The big question and the one that the service unions continue to ignore, How much can we afford??