The Democrat Thread

[bmags]

Its not nearly as easy as you characterize it. Executive Orders can be overturned by Congress, the judicial system isn't ready for all of them at once, and making a blanket rule about state secret use is incredibly dangerous. The only one you mention here that could even possibly be done as quickly as you'd like is extraordinary renditions, which I think is a difficult subject, and simply turning it off has consequences as well.

 

No, Bush did not do it, at all.

 

the use of state secrets under the bush administration was unprecedented, and now, it´s precedent is the status quo. obama, who railed against this, hides behind it.

 

Good luck overturning anything in congress, you need super majorities now!

 

No, turning off extraordinary renditions has no consequences. It´s supporting torture. If I order a man to murder someone, I´m as guilty as the murderer.

 

It´s not easy, but it´s completely possible, and could be done. But it´s not going to be done, because they don´t want it to.

 

So Obama is doing pretty much everything exactly the same. Considering Bush stopped torture in 2003, I´d say near identical.

[NorthSideSox72]

the use of state secrets under the bush administration was unprecedented, and now, it´s precedent is the status quo. obama, who railed against this, hides behind it.

 

Good luck overturning anything in congress, you need super majorities now!

 

No, turning off extraordinary renditions has no consequences. It´s supporting torture. If I order a man to murder someone, I´m as guilty as the murderer.

 

It´s not easy, but it´s completely possible, and could be done. But it´s not going to be done, because they don´t want it to.

 

So Obama is doing pretty much everything exactly the same. Considering Bush stopped torture in 2003, I´d say near identical.

If you'd like to try to make everything seem black and white, and give the Kaperbole "they're all the same" line, go right ahead. But politics is never, ever, 100% black and white.

 

[BigSqwert]

the use of state secrets under the bush administration was unprecedented, and now, it´s precedent is the status quo.

 

This

[NorthSideSox72]

This

And as I said earlier, that specific aspect, I generally agree. ObamaCo was good at first about putting more information out there, but then they closed up shop, which I did not like at all. If that is what Greenwald was even getting at. If we are talking about defense and intelligence-related secrecy, that is a different story.

 

[lostfan]

Meanwhile, however, they never forget to give themselves raises.

Contrary to popular belief, Congressmen don't make that much money. They have about enough to pay their mortgage in their home district, rent an apartment in DC (which is expensive), and that's about it. The ones who are rich were either already personally rich, or got rich after they left office.

[lostfan]

read some of these cases before you talk out of your ass and then claim we are delusional.

You guys think they're just sitting on their ass or something?

[Y2HH]

Contrary to popular belief, Congressmen don't make that much money. They have about enough to pay their mortgage in their home district, rent an apartment in DC (which is expensive), and that's about it. The ones who are rich were either already personally rich, or got rich after they left office.

 

Their compensation comes in more forms than salary.

 

They make a very good salary, by the way.

 

Now let's add in their health care benefits, which outclass mine by far and I work for Blue f***ing Cross...and some of these benefits NEVER end for them.

 

So contrary...while they may not be compensated in "pure money", they are better compensated than most anyone you know.

[Balta1701]

Now let's add in their health care benefits, which outclass mine by far and I work for Blue f***ing Cross...and some of these benefits NEVER end for them.

So you say we should perhaps make Congress's health care plan more like that of the rest of America's? Since the Senate bill requires Congress to enroll in the health care exchange system they're setting up, I assume we now have your support?

[lostfan]

Their compensation comes in more forms than salary.

 

They make a very good salary, by the way.

 

Now let's add in their health care benefits, which outclass mine by far and I work for Blue f***ing Cross...and some of these benefits NEVER end for them.

 

So contrary...while they may not be compensated in "pure money", they are better compensated than most anyone you know.

$174k, although with the cushy benefit package you mentioned, but we're talking about some pretty senior positions here. That's in the range of an SES (a GS-15 in DC probably makes around $130k). That's a nice salary especially for a single person, but you'll never get rich working for the government. Well-compensated sure, but not rich.

[Y2HH]

So you say we should perhaps make Congress's health care plan more like that of the rest of America's? Since the Senate bill requires Congress to enroll in the health care exchange system they're setting up, I assume we now have your support?

 

Forcing them onto private exchanges isn't the same as forcing them onto the government option.

 

You know damn well the senate/congress wants no part of that bill so long as the public plan applies to them, which is why it doesn't...and why they would have to be on "exchanges", which means exactly nothing.

 

And you will never have my support of any kind of government run option. And I find it funny they don't say they have to be on the public plan -- but on an exchange -- which could be exactly what they have now. That exchange system will have all levels of plans, some more affordable than others. Do note they want no part of their government run plan.

[bmags]

You guys think they're just sitting on their ass or something?

 

I think there are cases that it´s clear the US screwed up and is now only holding them to save face and justify the techniques.

 

and no, i don´t think they are doing enough to move these cases forward, and no, I don´t see GITMO closed down by Jan. 20

Edited November 24, 2009 by bmags

[lostfan]

I think there are cases that it´s clear the US screwed up and is now only holding them to save face and justify the techniques.

 

and no, i don´t think they are doing enough to move these cases forward, and no, I don´t see GITMO closed down by Jan. 20

They've already more or less admitted it's not happening by Jan. 20. There's so much involved with these cases.

[Y2HH]

$174k, although with the cushy benefit package you mentioned, but we're talking about some pretty senior positions here. That's in the range of an SES (a GS-15 in DC probably makes around $130k). That's a nice salary especially for a single person, but you'll never get rich working for the government. Well-compensated sure, but not rich.

 

I'm married and if I made 130k + benefits I'd be very well off. Depending on how you define rich, I could be rich making that money. In comparison to the richest people in the world...no, but 130k+ for me, I'd be rich, yes. But being rich had nothing to do with my point.

 

They're paid a lot for what they do. And I'm friends with a congressmen, so I know what they do and what they consider "work".

Edited November 24, 2009 by Y2HH

[bmags]

I'm married and if I made 130k + benefits I'd be very well off. Depending on how you define rich, I could be rich making that money. In comparison to the richest people in the world...no, but 130k+ for me, I'd be rich, yes.

 

we should pay them $20,000! then special interest money surely wouldn´t be a problem! What´s that pining about trying to attract the best talent?

[Y2HH]

we should pay them $20,000! then special interest money surely wouldn´t be a problem! What´s that pining about trying to attract the best talent?

 

I think they should be paid something fair, and 20,000$ isnt it, either. But neither is 130+ considering their benefits package alone is probably worth 70k a year.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Y2HH

[lostfan]

I'm married and if I made 130k + benefits I'd be very well off. Depending on how you define rich, I could be rich making that money. In comparison to the richest people in the world...no, but 130k+ for me, I'd be rich, yes. But being rich had nothing to do with my point.

 

They're paid a lot for what they do. And I'm friends with a congressmen, so I know what they do and what they consider "work".

Washington DC/MD/Northern VA has one of the highest costs of living in the nation (if I did the same job you had here, I'd probably make 20-30k more and we'd have the same standard of living), and like I said earlier, they have to pay for an apartment in the DC area and a place in their home district. I don't think their compensation is unreasonable at all really.

[BigSqwert]

Fox has an interesting take on how pie charts work.

 

[southsider2k5]

I'm married and if I made 130k + benefits I'd be very well off. Depending on how you define rich, I could be rich making that money. In comparison to the richest people in the world...no, but 130k+ for me, I'd be rich, yes. But being rich had nothing to do with my point.

 

They're paid a lot for what they do. And I'm friends with a congressmen, so I know what they do and what they consider "work".

 

Well according to Obama's team, if they make anything through their spouses or outside sources, they would be defined as rich.

[kapkomet]

So you say we should perhaps make Congress's health care plan more like that of the rest of America's? Since the Senate bill requires Congress to enroll in the health care exchange system they're setting up, I assume we now have your support?

I don't think that's true: and if it is, they will put the House version in place, because there's no way they accept that. I had read somewhere that it's not the same as what you and I will be forced into.

 

[Balta1701]

The Pentagon's top detainee affairs policy appointee has quit the Defense Department just seven months into the job, a Pentagon spokesman said Tuesday.

 

Phillip Carter, a former Army captain and Iraq War veteran, had been an outspoken critic of Bush-era war on terror detention policy as an attorney and blogging commentator.

 

He got the job of U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs in April, months after President Barack Obama pledged to empty the detention center at Guantánamo. He quit without explanation just days after Obama confirmed in aninterview with Fox News in Beijing that his administration would miss its Jan. 22 Guantánamo closure deadline.

Sigh

[BigSqwert]

"We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term" - Dana Perino

[lostfan]

That's such an intellectually dishonest and cheap way to score political points. Then again that's the only thing the Bush Administration can actually claim credit for.

Edited November 25, 2009 by lostfan

[Rex Kickass]

That's such an intellectually dishonest and cheap way to score political points. Then again that's the only thing the Bush Administration can actually claim credit for.

And it sort of ignores 9/11. Read the quote again.

[lostfan]

And it sort of ignores 9/11. Read the quote again.

Yeah that too. lol.

[lostfan]

I don't know where else to put this, but still funny http://comixed.com/2009/11/18/comics-comic...nkoma-biden-jr/