EvilMonkey Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 I think it is time to pass a law that requires each and every congressman to read every bill that comes before them , and have to sign a form saying that they did so. Not only would that prevent them from 'suddenly discovering' something in a bill they already passed, it would keep them busy enough so that they wouldn't have time to pass stupid stuff just to try and justify their jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) I think it is time to pass a law that requires each and every congressman to read every bill that comes before them , and have to sign a form saying that they did so. Not only would that prevent them from 'suddenly discovering' something in a bill they already passed, it would keep them busy enough so that they wouldn't have time to pass stupid stuff just to try and justify their jobs. even better, let's have a truth-in-legislation bill, requiring one bill to cover one subject matter. None of this adding FBI terror funding to the transportation bill crap. That simplification alone would allow more clarity. But I do like your idea. If they vote for it, they own it, and all its consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 08:07 AM) I think it is time to pass a law that requires each and every congressman to read every bill that comes before them , and have to sign a form saying that they did so. Not only would that prevent them from 'suddenly discovering' something in a bill they already passed, it would keep them busy enough so that they wouldn't have time to pass stupid stuff just to try and justify their jobs. Well, unfortunately that's just not going to be practical in the least; i mean seriously, how many 1000 page+ bills does Congress pass each year at this point? From changes to the tax code to budgeting resolutions, I don't even think its possible for people to read every bill. On the other hand, the Patriot Act is a particularly bad case, they basically made it magically appear during the night and had it passed before anyone even had a chance to open the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 Brownie's still pissed. Political storm clouds gathered again over the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina as former Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Michael Brown said party politics influenced decisions on whether to take federal control of Louisiana and other areas affected by the hurricane. Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco said the partisanship Brown described was "disgusting," while a White House spokeswoman said Brown was making "false statements." Brown told a group of graduate students Friday that some in the White House had suggested the federal government should take charge in Louisiana because Blanco was a Democrat, while leaving Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican, in control in his state. Brown, speaking at the Metropolitan College of New York, said he had recommended to President Bush that all 90,000 square miles along the Gulf Coast affected by the devastating hurricane be federalized — a term Brown explained as placing the federal government in charge of all agencies responding to the disaster. "Unbeknownst to me, certain people in the White House were thinking, 'We had to federalize Louisiana because she's a white, female Democratic governor, and we have a chance to rub her nose in it,'" he said, without naming names. "'We can't do it to Haley (Barbour) because Haley's a white male Republican governor. And we can't do a thing to him. So we're just gonna federalize Louisiana.'" Brown, 52, declined to say who in the White House had argued for federalizing the response only in Louisiana. He said that he'd later learned of the machinations through Blanco's office and from federal officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 01:59 PM) Well, unfortunately that's just not going to be practical in the least; i mean seriously, how many 1000 page+ bills does Congress pass each year at this point? From changes to the tax code to budgeting resolutions, I don't even think its possible for people to read every bill. On the other hand, the Patriot Act is a particularly bad case, they basically made it magically appear during the night and had it passed before anyone even had a chance to open the book. HOw many 1000+ page bills do they NEED to pass? I swear that sometimes they propose things just so the public won't realize that they are mostly useless. If they don't want to read it, hire staff to do it and summarize it for you. But you sign it, you one it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 01:59 PM) On the other hand, the Patriot Act is a particularly bad case, they basically made it magically appear during the night and had it passed before anyone even had a chance to open the book. thats exactly how it happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 01:06 PM) HOw many 1000+ page bills do they NEED to pass? I swear that sometimes they propose things just so the public won't realize that they are mostly useless. If they don't want to read it, hire staff to do it and summarize it for you. But you sign it, you one it. Do you have any concept of how much detail is in budgeting and tax related resolutions these days? Those need to be that long because the government just does that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 20, 2007 -> 08:52 PM) Do you have any concept of how much detail is in budgeting and tax related resolutions these days? Those need to be that long because the government just does that much. And if they spent their time reading those, they wouldn't have time to come up with half the frivolous crap that they do to justify their existence. Maybe they should work on simpler language in these bills, stuff that wouldn't take an army of lawyers to figure out what the f*** they mean. I also agree with what Northside said about having a truth-in-legislation action so that bills are for what they really are. Both sides add crap which is why some good stuff gets passed over, and some crappy stuff gets voted yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Update on a "Long-ago" story that I'm not sure where to put but want to put it somewhere. Last year, CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) received copies of the Mark Foley emails. CREW immediately forwarded these emails to the FBI upon receiving them. CREW then later became on of the groups alleged to have set up the Republicans wiht an "October Surprise" by having had possession of the naughty emails before they came out right before the election. CREW responded by filing a complaint with the Inspector General's office. Today, the IG announced that in fact, CREW had done everything they were supposed to do, and the FBI was negligent in not having done anything when they were given those emails. Press release link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 28. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 22, 2007 -> 07:32 PM) Update on a "Long-ago" story that I'm not sure where to put but want to put it somewhere. Last year, CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) received copies of the Mark Foley emails. CREW immediately forwarded these emails to the FBI upon receiving them. CREW then later became on of the groups alleged to have set up the Republicans wiht an "October Surprise" by having had possession of the naughty emails before they came out right before the election. CREW responded by filing a complaint with the Inspector General's office. Today, the IG announced that in fact, CREW had done everything they were supposed to do, and the FBI was negligent in not having done anything when they were given those emails. Press release link. FBI showing again how messed up they are. That agency was in bad shape on 9/11, and amazingly has gotten worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 So, in SOTU drinking games, how many drinks does one take when the President brings up Dikembe Mutumbo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2007 -> 08:11 PM) So, in SOTU drinking games, how many drinks does one take when the President brings up Dikembe Mutumbo? Thats a 12 pack right there...........and you have till the end of the speech to finish it. Penalty for not doing it is 3 kicks in the ass and you're new name is "f**" for the rest of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mplssoxfan Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2007 -> 08:11 PM) So, in SOTU drinking games, how many drinks does one take when the President brings up Dikembe Mutumbo? An uberliberal who hangs out at the bar said, "it would be hilarious if Dikembe stood up and did the finger wag". I couldn't see it happening, but it would have been funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 26, 2007 Share Posted January 26, 2007 A wee bit of polemic from Ted Kennedy regarding the Senate filibuster on the minimum wage bill. Do you have such disdain for hard-working Americans that you want to pile all your amendments on this? Why don’t you just hold your amendments until other pieces of legislation? Why this volume of amendments on just the issue to try and raise the minimum wage? What is it about it that drives you Republicans crazy? What is it? Something. Something! What is the price that the workers have to pay to get an increase? What is it about working men and women that you find so offensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 (edited) Memo to Teddy: Kick out all the illegals and the wages will rise without passing a law. We all know he just wants the workers to get an increase so he can tax it. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20070126-122635-7699r.htm Senate Democrats quashed a proposal yesterday that would have dramatically increased civil fines on employers who hire illegal aliens. Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, offered the amendment to the bill now being debated that would increase the federal minimum wage. Ridding the economy of illegal aliens, he argued, would do far more to help low-income wage earners than simply raising the minimum wage. Not only do aliens displace U.S. citizens in the work force, he said, they also artificially suppress wages. "Our whole purpose of the minimum-wage act is to increase the wages of working Americans, particularly low-skilled workers," Mr. Sessions said. "That's a noble goal." One of the reasons "that those salaries have lagged behind is because of a large influx of illegal immigrant labor," he said. "That is indisputable, and it's not been discussed much here. People apparently don't want to talk about it, but we're going to talk about it." Edited January 27, 2007 by Alpha Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Lemon Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 (edited) Sessions's amendment passed 94-0 Edited January 27, 2007 by Chet Lemon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 07:35 PM) Sessions's amendment passed 94-0 Bravo!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 07:35 PM) Sessions's amendment passed 94-0 It was a watered down version that only applied to government contractors, but still a step in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 The Dems will find this amusing. Link or chilling I'd suggest the GOPerheads around here not click on the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damen Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Jon Tester becomes the first Senator to post his daily schedule online. This should be required of everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 28, 2007 -> 08:22 AM) The Dems will find this amusing. Link or chilling I'd suggest the GOPerheads around here not click on the link. Here is a list of Hitler's public stances. So now you too can accuse just about ANYONE of being Hitler!! for abortion capital punishment socialism censorship Christianity eugenics nationalism euthanasia genocide gun control Leni Riefenstahl films racial purity vegetarianism against gypsies Jews feminism Freemasonry democracy "degenerate" art atheism capitalism communism labor unions miscegenation nudism Pacifism Poles pornography prostitution psychoanalysis Slavs smoking Edited January 29, 2007 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jan 28, 2007 -> 07:58 PM) Here is a list of Hitler's public stances. So now you too can accuse just about ANYONE of being Hitler!! for abortion capital punishment socialism censorship Christianity eugenics nationalism euthanasia genocide gun control Leni Riefenstahl films racial purity vegetarianism against gypsies Jews feminism Freemasonry democracy "degenerate" art atheism capitalism communism labor unions miscegenation nudism Pacifism Poles pornography prostitution psychoanalysis Slavs smoking wtf is this doing in this thread? And, I would be really curious to see who the top 5 posters in this thread are. Really curious. I believe the Freudian term is: reaction formation. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 09:14 AM) I believe the Freudian term is: reaction formation. . . Reaction Formation was the name of a decent if forgettable band I used to see back in my Stone Age college days. Poster Children, Material Issue (honestly one of the best power pop bands ever), Lonely Trailer, Modern Humans, Smokin' Toast, Naked Apes, Plump Harriet, Earth Mothers, Otis and the Elevators, Mudhens, Cowboy X, the Last Straw, Haardvark, Elvis Brothers, Combo Audio and Vehicle in Tow were among the other local or regional bands that did their best to keep me from actually staying home at night and studying. Edit: Wow, that stroll down memory lane and remembering how great Material Issue was just prompted me to order up their whole catalog on CD from Amazon! 5 used CDs. $7.50 – you just can't beat that. I'm not an eBay or Amazon junkie by any stretch, but there's something in the air I think because last night I put eBay bids in on a cheapo import violin, a knockoff of a martin Backpacker guitar, and a drill-powered pump. Looks like the violin and the guitar may cost me $0.99 each – until I add the trumped up $25 S+H on each item! Edited January 29, 2007 by FlaSoxxJim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 08:14 AM) wtf is this doing in this thread? And, I would be really curious to see who the top 5 posters in this thread are. Really curious. I believe the Freudian term is: reaction formation. . . Click on Texsox's link and you will understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts