Do you believe in results?

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Do you believe in results?

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 6:52 pm

Congress Slouches Toward Home
The New York Times | Editorial

Friday 24 September 2004

The Republican-controlled Congress is shambling to the end of one of the lightest workloads in decades without a hint of embarrassment, concentrating on the defense of the flag, tax cuts and marriage while failing at the most demanding obligations of government.

When the lawmakers get back home, voters should ask them how they could quit their posts while leaving a dozen basic spending bills in next year's budget unfinished - hung up once more in back-room feuds about pork and logrolling. The assault weapons ban was allowed to lapse to appease the gun lobby. A simple $5 billion corporate-tax plan to satisfy a violation of tariff laws remains mired in a $150 billion pork fest, while American products suffer retaliatory sanctions in the billions. As for fully financing and enforcing the No Child Left Behind Act, voters have to settle for lawmakers' posing tenderly with schoolchildren.

Equally disturbing is how our elected representatives have been spending their time.

Eager to help the middle class, a goal no one can argue with, they threw moderation to the winds this week on a $145 billion extension of existing tax cuts benefiting families. They hoped voters would not notice that they had not bothered to find budget savings to offset the costs of this program, and that these tax cuts will spawn a borrowing binge by the government from banks around the world. The loans will come due for America's children and grandchildren, whose earnings may just as well be stamped "Payable to the Bank of China." Republican leaders did find the fiscal constraint to brush aside proposals to extend minimal credits for millions of children in working-poor families, only to add a $13 billion dollop of tax boons to corporations.

The House began its work on the decades-delayed reform of the American intelligence agencies by announcing that its kudzu patch of competing committees, one of the central points of criticism by the 9/11 commission, was too sacred to touch. Beyond that, House Republican leaders' most enthusiastic response to the call for reform seemed to be in trying to tack on a Patriot Act postscript that would grant law enforcement even more powers that could curtail civil liberties.

Republican leaders have also been chipping away at the Constitution by proposing to deny judges jurisdiction to review selected acts of Congress. The House passed a measure yesterday retaining the Pledge of Allegiance's "under God" phrase and prohibiting any federal court - including, outrageously, the Supreme Court - from judging the law's constitutionality.

In essence, the House proposed to protect a patriotic ritual by trashing the constitutional system it celebrates.



------------------------------------------------


I really wonder how thinking people remain Republicans. Absolutely baffles me.

User avatar
shanek
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:11 pm
Location: Starbug 1

Re: Do you believe in results?

Post by shanek » Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:31 pm

Sundog wrote:The Republican-controlled Congress is shambling to the end of one of the lightest workloads in decades without a hint of embarrassment,
What would be embarassing about a light workload for Congress? Seems to me the biggest problem is Congress doing way, way more than they should.

Article I Section 4 Clause 2 of the Constitution begins, "The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year..." Does that sound to you like they were figuring on Congress having a lot to do?
When the lawmakers get back home, voters should ask them how they could quit their posts while leaving a dozen basic spending bills in next year's budget unfinished
Wait, the government isn't going to waste a bunch of our tax money on stuff it shouldn't be doing, and you want me to COMPLAIN about that??? Geez, I'm hardly one to defend the Republicans, but come on...
hung up once more in back-room feuds about pork and logrolling.
Well, all I have to say is, "Hooray for back-room feuds!" They could make me even happier by shutting down the government again...
The assault weapons ban was allowed to lapse to appease the gun lobby.
So something that neither Article I Section 8 nor any Amendment allows them to authorize is no more...again, this is cause for complaint???
As for fully financing and enforcing the No Child Left Behind Act, voters have to settle for lawmakers' posing tenderly with schoolchildren.
Since that is all No Child Left Behind ever was anyway, I fail to see the surprise, or the problem (other than the fact the NCLB Act still exists...).

Anyway, I'm sure there's a lot of terrible things this Congress has done, but I'd be willing to bet just about anything that each time there were plenty of Democrats behind it, too.
I really wonder how thinking people remain Republicans. Absolutely baffles me.
I agree; the only difference is I feel the same way about Democrats, too.
There is an old android saying. In binary it reads: 01001001001001110110110100100000011011100110111101110100001
00000011101110110010101100001011100100110100101101110011001
1100100000011100000110000101101110011101000111001100100001. Makes you think, huh?

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:25 pm

:lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:31 pm

Sundog wrote::lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?
I find his replies to be a rather reasonable one, did you read it or did you just dismiss it all because shanek posted it?

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:33 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote::lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?
I find his replies to be a rather reasonable one, did you read it or did you just dismiss it all because shanek posted it?
I immediately dismiss anyone who does not realize that a certain amount of actual business has to take place in our nation's capital each year, and who instantly equates any necessary spending measures with squandering tax dollars. You two play together all you like.

We're talking basic spending bills here. It has nothing to do with squandering tax dollars unless one believes all tax dollars are ill-spent, in which case one is also dismissed immediately.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:35 pm

Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote::lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?
I find his replies to be a rather reasonable one, did you read it or did you just dismiss it all because shanek posted it?
I immediately dismiss anyone who does not realize that a certain amount of actual business has to take place in our nation's capital each year, and who instantly equates any necessary spending measures with squandering tax dollars. You two play together all you like.
A certain amount did take place, you just happen to disagree with the amount.

I have a very important question for you, did you feel that congress was not doing enough before or after you read this article?

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:36 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote::lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?
I find his replies to be a rather reasonable one, did you read it or did you just dismiss it all because shanek posted it?
I immediately dismiss anyone who does not realize that a certain amount of actual business has to take place in our nation's capital each year, and who instantly equates any necessary spending measures with squandering tax dollars. You two play together all you like.
A certain amount did take place, you just happen to disagree with the amount.
Do you even understand what a basic spending bill is?

I have a very important question for you, did you feel that congress was not doing enough before or after you read this article?
They aren't doing enough of what they were sent there to do, and they are doing way too much politicking and power-grabbing instead. As the article makes clear. And yes, I already felt this way.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:46 pm

Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote::lol:

OK, any replies from Planet Earth?
I find his replies to be a rather reasonable one, did you read it or did you just dismiss it all because shanek posted it?
I immediately dismiss anyone who does not realize that a certain amount of actual business has to take place in our nation's capital each year, and who instantly equates any necessary spending measures with squandering tax dollars. You two play together all you like.
A certain amount did take place, you just happen to disagree with the amount.

I have a very important question for you, did you feel that congress was not doing enough before or after you read this article?
They aren't doing enough of what they were sent there to do, and they are doing way too much politicking and power-grabbing instead. As the article makes clear. And yes, I already felt this way.
Once again, this is your opinion and not fact. Some elect congressman to make sure governemnt spends as little as possible and stops stupid laws from passing.

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:50 pm

Grammatron wrote:Once again, this is your opinion and not fact. Some elect congressman to make sure governemnt spends as little as possible and stops stupid laws from passing.
Have you ever taken a civics class?

A basic spending bill is a bill to fund things already in the budget. You send people to Washington to pare down the budget if you are so inclined; you don't send them to hold the process hostage!

It bothers me when people have strong opinions about things when it's clear they don't understand the messy details and just want to paint things with their enormous opinion-brush.

Amazing how you can think that this is in any way a good thing. But if so, you are dismissed too.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 9:55 pm

Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:Once again, this is your opinion and not fact. Some elect congressman to make sure governemnt spends as little as possible and stops stupid laws from passing.
Have you ever taken a civics class?

A basic spending bill is a bill to fund things already in the budget. You send people to Washington to pare down the budget if you are so inclined; you don't send them to hold the process hostage!

It bothers me when people have strong opinions about things when it's clear they don't understand the messy details and just want to paint things with their enormous opinion-brush.

Amazing how you can think that this is in any way a good thing. But if so, you are dismissed too.
I think you are a bit naive when it comes to politics. :)

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:00 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:Once again, this is your opinion and not fact. Some elect congressman to make sure governemnt spends as little as possible and stops stupid laws from passing.
Have you ever taken a civics class?

A basic spending bill is a bill to fund things already in the budget. You send people to Washington to pare down the budget if you are so inclined; you don't send them to hold the process hostage!

It bothers me when people have strong opinions about things when it's clear they don't understand the messy details and just want to paint things with their enormous opinion-brush.

Amazing how you can think that this is in any way a good thing. But if so, you are dismissed too.
I think you are a bit naive when it comes to politics. :)
I think it's pretty clear you don't understand how the budget process works, but if you'd rather take refuge in insults, that's fine.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:04 pm

Sundog wrote: I think it's pretty clear you don't understand how the budget process works, but if you'd rather take refuge in insults, that's fine.
I'm sorry if I insulted you by calling you naive.

Do I not understand how the process works, do you? We can ask these silly questions all day if you like. Point is the congressmen did as much work as they though their constituency wanted them to do. If that is not the case they get replaced in the next election. It's rather simple.

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:12 pm

No prob.

Let me try one more time.

When a budget is passed, it's been agreed on. The arguing is over. It is dishonest to not fulfill the will of the people by simply not following through and providing the money for things in the budget.

You seem to think it's OK to subvert the budget process. It really isn't. That's guerilla warfare, not politics.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:16 pm

Sundog wrote:No prob.

Let me try one more time.

When a budget is passed, it's been agreed on. The arguing is over. It is dishonest to not fulfill the will of the people by simply not following through and providing the money for things in the budget.

You seem to think it's OK to subvert the budget process. It really isn't. That's guerilla warfare, not politics.
This is where you go wrong, that is exactly what "politics" is.

For example, the same tactic was used to handicap Patriot Act by making sure the budget for certain activities (I don't have the time to search for exact one's right now) was changed to $0.00. Do you think that's dishonest?

I think it's just another check and balance to make sure money is not wasted.

User avatar
Sundog
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm

Post by Sundog » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:19 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:No prob.

Let me try one more time.

When a budget is passed, it's been agreed on. The arguing is over. It is dishonest to not fulfill the will of the people by simply not following through and providing the money for things in the budget.

You seem to think it's OK to subvert the budget process. It really isn't. That's guerilla warfare, not politics.
This is where you go wrong, that is exactly what "politics" is.

For example, the same tactic was used to handicap Patriot Act by making sure the budget for certain activities (I don't have the time to search for exact one's right now) was changed to $0.00. Do you think that's dishonest?

I think it's just another check and balance to make sure money is not wasted.
I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree again. I think it's shameful, you think it's wonderful. What a world.

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33643
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1760 times

Post by Grammatron » Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:22 pm

Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:No prob.

Let me try one more time.

When a budget is passed, it's been agreed on. The arguing is over. It is dishonest to not fulfill the will of the people by simply not following through and providing the money for things in the budget.

You seem to think it's OK to subvert the budget process. It really isn't. That's guerilla warfare, not politics.
This is where you go wrong, that is exactly what "politics" is.

For example, the same tactic was used to handicap Patriot Act by making sure the budget for certain activities (I don't have the time to search for exact one's right now) was changed to $0.00. Do you think that's dishonest?

I think it's just another check and balance to make sure money is not wasted.
I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree again. I think it's shameful, you think it's wonderful. What a world.
Democracy :)

User avatar
shanek
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:11 pm
Location: Starbug 1

Post by shanek » Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:30 pm

Sundog wrote:I immediately dismiss anyone who does not realize that a certain amount of actual business has to take place in our nation's capital each year,
Now that's just a strawman. I acknowleged that Congress must get to gether at least once a year to conduct business. The agenda for that business, by the way, is Article I Section 8. How long do you think Congress would remain in session if they stuck to that?
There is an old android saying. In binary it reads: 01001001001001110110110100100000011011100110111101110100001
00000011101110110010101100001011100100110100101101110011001
1100100000011100000110000101101110011101000111001100100001. Makes you think, huh?

User avatar
shanek
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:11 pm
Location: Starbug 1

Post by shanek » Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:31 pm

Sundog wrote:Do you even understand what a basic spending bill is?
Yes: It's what the Demopublicans call something that isn't necessary and they can't defend but they want to pass anyway.
There is an old android saying. In binary it reads: 01001001001001110110110100100000011011100110111101110100001
00000011101110110010101100001011100100110100101101110011001
1100100000011100000110000101101110011101000111001100100001. Makes you think, huh?

User avatar
shanek
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:11 pm
Location: Starbug 1

Post by shanek » Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:32 pm

Sundog wrote:A basic spending bill is a bill to fund things already in the budget. You send people to Washington to pare down the budget if you are so inclined; you don't send them to hold the process hostage!
If what they're trying to spend the money on violates the Constitution? You bet I do!
There is an old android saying. In binary it reads: 01001001001001110110110100100000011011100110111101110100001
00000011101110110010101100001011100100110100101101110011001
1100100000011100000110000101101110011101000111001100100001. Makes you think, huh?

User avatar
rikzilla
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:37 pm
Title: Mister Wrong
Location: Northern Virginia
Has thanked: 1 time

Post by rikzilla » Sat Sep 25, 2004 12:24 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Sundog wrote:
Grammatron wrote:Once again, this is your opinion and not fact. Some elect congressman to make sure governemnt spends as little as possible and stops stupid laws from passing.
Have you ever taken a civics class?

A basic spending bill is a bill to fund things already in the budget. You send people to Washington to pare down the budget if you are so inclined; you don't send them to hold the process hostage!

It bothers me when people have strong opinions about things when it's clear they don't understand the messy details and just want to paint things with their enormous opinion-brush.

Amazing how you can think that this is in any way a good thing. But if so, you are dismissed too.
I think you are a bit naive when it comes to politics. :)
Well, there's a revelation! You have a great gift for understatement Grammy. As for Shanek...I don't care for him that much either SunDog, but he's forgotten more about the actual Constitution of the United States than you will ever know.

-z
Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul. ~Mark Twain