homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Are these people complete prats? (Page 12)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  9  10  11  12 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Are these people complete prats?
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
TGC--

Um, why are you so worked up about the politics of another country??

I can't speak for the giant cheeseburger but here are a few reasons.

On the crisis in general:-

1. The USA is often seen and sees itself as the leader of the free world. So the ability of the operation of its constitutional structures to produce a b*****up of this scale is of concern to us all.

2. The size of the US economy and its importance in the world, means that the risk of its government defaulting on its debt is also of concern to us all.

3. Furthermore, the size of the US and its role in world affairs means that our lives might be screwed up by the actions of a clique of prats.

4. Putting aside ones horror at the possible consequences - which have merely been postponed until February - for those that study constitutions, it's interesting to see how different constitutional traditions that forked in the C18 have now become.

5. If truth be admitted, there is also a certain element of schadenfreude at seeing a country that always proclaims itself a citadel of democracy, a beacon to the unfree world and an exemplar of constitutional inspiration should stuff itself into a corner in such a crass way. How indeed are the mighty fallen.

To put it bluntly, your Constitution is not fit for purpose. Nor is ours but its flaws are in a different place, and when there was a referendum on the biggest of them, the majority voted the wrong way. So we have to accept it. A lot of our fellow electors are thick. That's also democracy.


On the particular point Orfeo, the giant cheeseburger and I have been making about prosecuting congresspersons who you think have behaved badly or stupidly, or have been using a rather poor set of rules of debate to further their own political ends:-

6. Because this betrays a disturbing and very basic misunderstanding of how modern democratic constitutions are supposed to work. It is a reversion to the way the late Henry VIII and Charles I viewed elected representatives. It's an approach that Stalin would have agreed with, but would probably be regarded as a bit excessive in Tehran.

7. Going down any such road would mean the US saying goodbye to any claim to be a beacon for the free world.


Does this help answer your question?

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Damn straight: what Enoch said.

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Yes, 'fraud so. Unless we're talking about taking bribes or taking up arms against the state, if you don't like what your elected representatives do, that has to be the way you get back at them. If, which I suspect is what some are fearing, over 50% of your fellow electors like what they've done, or if you're not in their electoral district, that's democracy. Hard luck.

And if they simply vote a way we hate, that's what we do--try to vote them out of office, contact them to express our opinions, cuss 'em out in the media and at home. We're well versed in that, thank you.

This is about purposely shutting down the gov't and causing great harm--and asking the attorney general to look into any EXISTING laws, acts, statues, parts of the Constitution, to see if they've been broken.

Do you get that??? It's not about trumping something up 'cause our feelings got hurt. It's within and about the law.

The question is, why are you so convinced that 'shutting down the government' is capable of being a treasonous act?

The government is not the country. Nor is shutting it down through lack of money the same thing as taking it over.

It's not a coup, for God's sake. It's simply a lot of dysfunctional squabbling that is terribly inconvenient for all the people that are used to having a functioning bureaucracy around. And yes, I know that's a LOT of people, and it really is VERY inconvenient, but the basic nature of it has absolutely nothing to do with betraying the United States to its enemies.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Need I remind everyone, again, that Europe had its own economic crisis centered around Greece only, what, a year ago? It had all the "Will they/won't they destroy the world economy" dialogue about bailing out Greece, if'n you'll recall.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
(Addendum)

The simple fact is that this is what they are legally empowered to do. If you've got a bunch of laws that say the Executive government is not allowed to function without appropriation (which was a piece of legislation from the late 19th century) and that Congress makes the decision as to whether approve the appropriation (which was a piece of legislation from the 1970s) then you have explicitly given Congress the right to shut down by the government by not approving the appropriation.

It's utterly stupid, but it's the very essence of legality. The power to make laws includes the power to make incredibly dumb laws. But people operating within the bounds of incredibly dumb laws - laws that authorise the very actions they are taking - are not criminals.

IMHO one need only look at the American habit of deliberately killing people to see this principle in action. But I know damn well that my personal opinion that what certain people in the USA are doing is completely abhorrent doesn't mean they're going to get arrested. No matter how much I jump up and down and shout on the internet about it.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Enoch—


--I'm pretty much with you down through the first paragraph of part 5.


--What is the bit of your constitution that you feel is messed up?

--Re: part 6: I don't think a lot of US gov't attention is put into comparing our constitution with others--at least, not publicly. American culture has quite a bit of veneration for the Constitution. (To varying degrees; for some people, it's just about on level with the Bible. Goes with the whole "Christian nation with a manifest destiny" thing.)

It is very, very hard to make an amendment to the Constitution. We don't change it lightly nor easily. ) Even on the Supreme Court, there's a divide between justices who go for a strict "constructionist" (?) interpretation ("interpret it just the way the Founders meant it", AIUI), and the justices who allow more breathing room.

I think we need some kind of amendment, or change to Congressional rules, or whatever will work, to keep any faction of Congress from doing this ever again.

Given the fight for past amendments, it will be a lonnnnng time, if ever, before that change is made. Or any other. And changing to a parliamentary system will happen sometime after “the twelfth of never, and that's a long, long time".


--Where we're missing each other is A: "You're punishing them for their vote! [Mad] " vs. B: "It's not about their vote! They must be punished by existing laws for holding the gov't, Americans, and the world's economy hostage".

Several of us Americans have said B, in various forms, again and again, explaining why and linking to media coverage. **We're not making anything up.** It's all right there in the news. For Pete's sake, kids have gone without food because of these jerks. Do you not believe that???

As usual, power and money are deeply involved.

But some of us saying B are being met with bitter nastiness from A supporters, with arguments that don't include a hair's breadth of humility that maybe someone who's looking at the situation from another country just might miss something.

Want American democracy to continue? Then let us use our existing laws to deal with people who purposely broke it, and may do so again, in a few months.

Working with laws is part of a democracy, too.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Enoch—

--I'm pretty much with you down through the first paragraph of part 5.

--What is the bit of your constitution that you feel is messed up?

The voting system means that our Parliament is unrepresentative. The Irish have a much better system.
quote:

--Re: part 6: I don't think a lot of US gov't attention is put into comparing our constitution with others--at least, not publicly. American culture has quite a bit of veneration for the Constitution. (To varying degrees; for some people, it's just about on level with the Bible. Goes with the whole "Christian nation with a manifest destiny" thing.)

That sort of veneration is a very serious problem. It's a sort of idolatry and a bit like Gilbert and Sullivan's Lord Chancellor. It means no one ever asks the questions they ought to be asking, such as 'is this democratic?' and ''couldn't we do this better?'.

From outside, as I've said earlier in the thread, belief in the separation of powers as a sacred dogma means the legislators aren't actually responsible for running anything. They don't have to answer for whether what they do works - or, as I've said before, in this case, refuse to do.

It also means the Executive doesn't have to answer from day to day to anyone for what it does. There's no 'Presidents Question Time'. Hence the drastic, all or nothing, threat of impeachment, which more or less died out here in the eighteenth century.
quote:

It is very, very hard to make an amendment to the Constitution. We don't change it lightly nor easily.

So it should be. It is dodgy states that keep changing their Constitutions because their executive can't get its own way.

However, there have been amendments. According to Wikipaedia, the last one was as recently as 1992, and it doesn't look as though it was about anything very profound.
quote:

Even on the Supreme Court, there's a divide between justices who go for a strict "constructionist" (?) interpretation ("interpret it just the way the Founders meant it", AIUI), and the justices who allow more breathing room.

I think we need some kind of amendment, or change to Congressional rules, or whatever will work, to keep any faction of Congress from doing this ever again.

Orfeo, who understands these sorts of things, has said that this wouldn't require a change in the Constitution, just the adoption by the two houses of Congress of more sensible rules of debate.

From what has leaked out in the course of this thread, I would also say that the practice of having partisan Speakers rather than impartial ones, is indefensible and something that both houses should change immediately.
quote:

Given the fight for past amendments, it will be a lonnnnng time, if ever, before that change is made. Or any other. And changing to a parliamentary system will happen sometime after “the twelfth of never, and that's a long, long time".


--Where we're missing each other is A: "You're punishing them for their vote! [Mad] " vs. B: "It's not about their vote! They must be punished by existing laws for holding the gov't, Americans, and the world's economy hostage".

Several of us Americans have said B, in various forms, again and again, explaining why and linking to media coverage. **We're not making anything up.** It's all right there in the news. For Pete's sake, kids have gone without food because of these jerks. Do you not believe that???

As usual, power and money are deeply involved.

But some of us saying B are being met with bitter nastiness from A supporters, with arguments that don't include a hair's breadth of humility that maybe someone who's looking at the situation from another country just might miss something.

Want American democracy to continue? Then let us use our existing laws to deal with people who purposely broke it, and may do so again, in a few months.

Working with laws is part of a democracy, too.

I repeat what Orfeo, the giant cheeseburger and I have been saying. What 'law' have these people broken? Unless they have committed what are clearly proper offences, e.g. can be shown to have taken bribes, conspired with foreign states against their own country etc, this isn't 'criminal' territory. To concoct some vague sort of 'common law' offence so as to imprison your political opponents for behaving obstructively would not just be a first step towards tyranny but several steps down that road.

If you want to punish them, you have to wait for the next next election and vote them out, or hope that meanwhile they get caught doing something quite different, fiddling their taxes, driving too fast, or trying to import a Kinder Egg.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
From what I can tell, deliberately engineering a government shutdown isn’t illegal – whether or not it should be or whether it’s moral or sensible is another discussion entirely! And, given the Tea Party’s attitude to government, the fact that people went hungry won’t wash as they believe that the government shouldn’t be feeding them in the first place! There probably isn’t an argument that would change their minds TBH, Tea Partiers seem to be true believers who value purity etc over effectiveness. Actively participating in the political process and tactically supporting the moderate candidate – from whatever party - that’s most likely to get them rid of them seems to be the best plan.

A repeat performance is due in February / March. (Government funding in 6 monthly blocks?! Madness!) Speaker B may be hoping that the failed shutdown might teach some of the noobs political smarts – pick your battles, work out the minimum and maximum you want to gain from your strategy etc. Attempting to defund Obamacare by refusing to fund it was never going to work because it’s a law. The only way the GOP are going to get rid of it is via the ballot box.

Given that mid-term elections are coming up, we’ll either be treated to a fudge to get everyone past that OR more of the same. More of the same isn’t likely to end well for the GOP’s wider election hopes, fund raising and endorsements (some articles said that not even the Koch Brothers wanted a US default – how true that is, who knows!), the dollar in people’s pockets, the reputation of the US or the rest of the world.

To answer Zach’s question – Greece’s collapse and exit would have caused huge problems within the Eurozone and the markets but wouldn’t have had the impact of a US default.

T-Bills / US Dollar are currently the universal currency within the markets and considered the safest of safe havens. A default would be 2008 again – on steroids. Interestingly enough, I noticed in a press article that banks designated strategically important are now required to hold a month’s worth of reserves so they can trade as normal if the markets freeze for a short period. Someone is obviously working on the assumption that if that loons may win at some point.

Eventually all this is likely to become irrelevant – as the markets move away from US financial instruments and the US’ international influence decreases - and another nation takes over the role. Maybe I should start learning Mandarin now so I can communicate with my new Chinese Overlords when they arrive?!

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
To answer Zach’s question – Greece’s collapse and exit would have caused huge problems within the Eurozone and the markets but wouldn’t have had the impact of a US default.
I was hardly saying that the two situations were the same. I was pointing out that political paralysis over issues vital to the world economy is not a uniquely American problem.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Zach82: I was pointing out that political paralysis over issues vital to the world economy is not a uniquely American problem.
I have many criticisms about the actions taken by the EU over the Greek crisis, but political paralysis isn't one of them.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Zach82: I was pointing out that political paralysis over issues vital to the world economy is not a uniquely American problem.
I have many criticisms about the actions taken by the EU over the Greek crisis, but political paralysis isn't one of them.
I can't account for what you remember, but I distinctly remember the "Will they/won't they save the world economy by bailing out Greece" debate, with the stock markets teetering on the edge til the last minute. The debate centered mostly around whether Germany would foot the bill.

I mean, I know the American thing it happening now and it's bigger, but don't you think it's time to stop taking person umbrage at it and making it a yet another pond war?

[ 29. October 2013, 14:01: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
quote:
To answer Zach’s question – Greece’s collapse and exit would have caused huge problems within the Eurozone and the markets but wouldn’t have had the impact of a US default.
I was hardly saying that the two situations were the same. I was pointing out that political paralysis over issues vital to the world economy is not a uniquely American problem.
Nope, anyone who is well versed in the history of the markets etc would be able to rattle off other examples. (Sadly not me!)

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Besides the EU bailout of Greece, Iceland declared it just wasn't going to pay its bills in the face of warnings of dire peril. It happened to turn out well for them, but it's still an example.

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Zach82: I can't account for what you remember, but I distinctly remember the "Will they/won't they save the world economy by bailing out Greece" debate, with the stock markets teetering on the edge til the last minute. The debate centered mostly around whether Germany would foot the bill.
I guess we're talking semantics here, but I wouldn't call a decision not to bail out Greece 'political paralysis'. Whether you'd agree with this decision or not, at least they'd have decided something.

The refusal to vote in the US Congress comes down to not deciding anything at all.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Besides the EU bailout of Greece, Iceland declared it just wasn't going to pay its bills in the face of warnings of dire peril. It happened to turn out well for them, but it's still an example.

I don't think the ordinary people of either Greece or Iceland would say that things have "happened to turn out well for them". Perhaps your television doesn't show the poor in Athens being fed in church run soup kitchens.

Those countries couldn't pay their debts because they were bankrupt. Borrowing more than you can afford to repay and not paying your debts are both generally regarded, both for individuals and states, as dishonourable and a bad thing.

Are you saying the US is really bankrupt and that its government should therefore take the opportunity to flush itself down the pan?

Or are you saying that if in February the same prats pull off the same trick, the rest of the world should rustle round to put together a rescue package for the US's executive arm that in this case would be entirely of US polity-as-a-whole's own making?

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If it helps you sleep at night or feel better about yourself believing that the United States is exceptionally undemocratic, inept and evil, then go right ahead.

[ 29. October 2013, 23:15: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:

--Re: part 6: I don't think a lot of US gov't attention is put into comparing our constitution with others--at least, not publicly. American culture has quite a bit of veneration for the Constitution. (To varying degrees; for some people, it's just about on level with the Bible. Goes with the whole "Christian nation with a manifest destiny" thing.)

That sort of veneration is a very serious problem. It's a sort of idolatry and a bit like Gilbert and Sullivan's Lord Chancellor. It means no one ever asks the questions they ought to be asking, such as 'is this democratic?' and ''couldn't we do this better?'.
Yes, it can be a serious problem, depending on the form it takes. IIRC, the Lord Chancellor is from "The Mikado"? I know little about the play. I'm more of a "Pirates of Penzance" fan.

Some people do ask questions—actually, lots of people ask lots of questions. But there’s a long way between asking and having the opportunity to do anything about them.

quote:
From outside, as I've said earlier in the thread, belief in the separation of powers as a sacred dogma means the legislators aren't actually responsible for running anything. They don't have to answer for whether what they do works - or, as I've said before, in this case, refuse to do.

It also means the Executive doesn't have to answer from day to day to anyone for what it does. There's no 'Presidents Question Time'. Hence the drastic, all or nothing, threat of impeachment, which more or less died out here in the eighteenth century.

Well, they do have to answer in terms of getting re-elected. But that depends on people actually voting (and not that many do), and on whether Big Money wants them back in office. (I don’t think anyone can make it in American politics without getting their hands dirty. Too much money needed to run, and too much power at stake.)

As to questioning the president: well, that's what the White House Press Corps is for. Various media outlets assign reporters to be on hand. There are briefings and press conferences, led by a spokesperson or the president. There's a lot involved with who gets to ask what questions when. We effectively lost the press corps after 9/11. They were as freaked out as everyone else, and they mostly parroted whatever Bush et al were saying. IIRC, it was gadfly Helen Thomas ( [Votive] ) who got it in gear again.


quote:
quote:
It is very, very hard to make an amendment to the Constitution. We don't change it lightly nor easily.

So it should be. It is dodgy states that keep changing their Constitutions because their executive can't get its own way.

However, there have been amendments. According to Wikipaedia, the last one was as recently as 1992, and it doesn't look as though it was about anything very profound.

But it took 203 years27th Amendment. Seriously!


quote:
quote:

I think we need some kind of amendment, or change to Congressional rules, or whatever will work, to keep any faction of Congress from doing this ever again.

Orfeo, who understands these sorts of things, has said that this wouldn't require a change in the Constitution, just the adoption by the two houses of Congress of more sensible rules of debate.
That may well be, but "sensible" isn't exactly a Congressional watchword.


quote:
From what has leaked out in the course of this thread, I would also say that the practice of having partisan Speakers rather than impartial ones, is indefensible and something that both houses should change immediately.
Ain't likely to happen.


quote:
I repeat what Orfeo, the giant cheeseburger and I have been saying. What 'law' have these people broken? Unless they have committed what are clearly proper offences, e.g. can be shown to have taken bribes, conspired with foreign states against their own country etc, this isn't 'criminal' territory. To concoct some vague sort of 'common law' offence so as to imprison your political opponents for behaving obstructively would not just be a first step towards tyranny but several steps down that road.

If you want to punish them, you have to wait for the next next election and vote them out, or hope that meanwhile they get caught doing something quite different, fiddling their taxes, driving too fast, or trying to import a Kinder Egg.

Did you read the 18 USC 2384 quote I posted upthread? That's the law that I've seen mentioned. It's about sedition, not treason. Doesn't involve other countries at all. I haven't said anything about concocting a common law offense. As I've said, over and over, this is about having the US Attorney General look into that law and see if he finds it—or others--applicable.

Maybe you don't have a law like this—but we do. You've been worried about the world-wide effects not raising the debt ceiling, etc. Well, these bozos are going to have another opportunity to mess everything up in a couple of months. Do you want us to just sit by and wait for an election???

I don't know what a "Kinder Egg" is, but the other offenses you mentioned wouldn't likely get a member of Congress thrown out of office.

PS Has anyone read the articles Ruth and I linked to?

[ 30. October 2013, 05:13: Message edited by: Golden Key ]

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
If it helps you sleep at night or feel better about yourself believing that the United States is exceptionally undemocratic, inept and evil, then go right ahead.

"Democracy is the worst system--except for all the others!"--Mark Twain (attr.).

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I am quite comfortable in saying that any court will read down 18 USC 2384 to not including 'overthrowing' the government by denying it funds, when there is another law that specifically states that Congress decides whether the government gets funds.

Frankly, any attempt by the Attorney General to investigate such a charge would turn what is currently a Democrat win on polling and public perception into a Democrat loss. It would snatch defeat from the jaws of moral victory. It would enable every Tea Party person who thinks that the government is oppressing them to point to conclusive evidence that the government is oppressive.

It's an incredibly dumb idea, basically.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Also-- well, TBH, I wondered about the idea of sedition, too, GK, but two things: 1. the Teabag contingent stated their battle plan well ahead of the time they implemented it. If it were illegal, somebody would have mentioned it. 2. Even if the President decided to let them hang themselves on an act of sedition, a substantial portion of the House would be jail by now, because sedition is just not something let pass. If there was a case, it would have been made by now.

Like orfeo said-- an election circuit is coming up. That is when we will see some karma.

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Did you read the 18 USC 2384 quote I posted upthread? That's the law that I've seen mentioned. It's about sedition, not treason. Doesn't involve other countries at all. I haven't said anything about concocting a common law offense. As I've said, over and over, this is about having the US Attorney General look into that law and see if he finds it—or others--applicable.

I read it, but a few parts which struck my eye
quote:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
make it pretty obvious to me that this doesn't at all apply to the Republican maneuvers in question.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
... As to questioning the president: well, that's what the White House Press Corps is for. ...

Sorry, but if the only people who can hold the President to account are a rat-pack of squabbling journalists, then things are more seriously wrong than I thought. It's worse even than having a partisan Speaker.

Leaving aside the obvious questions such as 'who do they represent?', 'who voted for them?', 'to whom are they answerable?', 'who gave them their jobs?' and 'who pays them?', the press has no status whatsoever.

Leaving aside the more fundamental issues about Henry VIII and Charles I, even at a technical level, I'm sure Orfeo and Dave W are right in their analysis about possible criminality. Besides, if you're really serious, rather than just making a despondent joke, that a congressperson would not be at risk if they were clearly found to have taken bribes or conspired with a foreign state, they are at no risk of prosecution just for being obstructive, and as they see it, doing their duty by the American people.

The Kinder Egg bit was a joke. It's a bit like a Cadbury's Cream Egg except that it also has a little toy inside it. There was an exchange on the Ship a few months ago in the course of which it was revealed that it's a criminal offence to import a Kinder Egg into the USA. Apparently from time to time people get fined $500 for having them in their cars when they cross from Canada.

That would explain why you would not know what a Kinder Egg is.

Originally posted by Zach82
quote:
If it helps you sleep at night or feel better about yourself believing that the United States is exceptionally undemocratic, inept and evil, then go right ahead.[
I wasn't suggesting that. I was questioning the reasoning that underlay your post.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dave W.--

As Porridge (?) and I discussed upthread, it depends on how you define "force". Does it have to be physical? Or can it be extortion?

That's something for the Attorney General to sort out, if he so chooses.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Actually, it's something for the courts to sort out, should the Attorney General attempt to have someone prosecuted.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942

 - Posted      Profile for the giant cheeseburger     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, the meaning of "by force" is something for a judge to sort out in a court if the executive made a prosecution, unless of course you're planning on the lawfully elected members you don't agree with sharing cells and torture chambers with those lawfully appointed judges you don't agree with.

The whole court thing would be too messy even if it did turn out that voting against a bill did fit the definition of "by force." Oppressing the opposition in show trials isn't always very popular (see Libya, Syria, Egypt and Bahrain) and it might affect the future electoral popularity of the Democratic Party unless you're also proposing that electoral officials be tortured and executed along with the members they allowed to get elected. Much cleaner to simply use the Great Man Of Hope's normal favoured tactic of drone strikes, each opposition representative could be taken out cleanly with only killing 30-100 innocent civilians, sorry "collateral damage."

As I said before, if you think that locking up the opposition like they do in places like China or Zimbabwe is a great idea, you should stand by your convictions in public rather than cowering behind a pseudonym on a website. Have some pride for fuck's sake!

--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?

Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Orfeo--

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Actually, it's something for the
courts to sort out, should the Attorney General attempt to have someone prosecuted.

Yes, but the AG has to first sort out what he thinks of the matter. And he might well decide that what they did wasn't illegal; or that he could never win the case, even if their actions were illegal. In the US, prosecutors tend to choose cases they think they have a good chance of inning.

Even if he did have a good chance of winning, the case would stretch on and on.

OTOH, even raising the issue may scare enough of the perpetrators that they think twice, next time, about holding the country hostage. Last time we had a shutdown was in the '90s, when Newt Gingrich (Republican) was speaker. He infuriated many, many people with that shutdown, and his "Contract For America". (AKA "Contract ON America", as in hiring a contract killer. Very common phrase, back then.) If nothing else, maybe we can wait another 15-20 years for another shutdown.


TGC--

Drones are being used very wrongly, and they should be stopped. However, that has nothing to do with this.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
GK, I still think you're mad if you think the effect of an investigation would be to frighten the Tea Party folk into behaving. It would have the exact opposite effect, by giving them ammunition (metaphorically speaking) they could otherwise only dream about.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, it probably wouldn't scare the TP, unless some of them are miraculously approaching sanity.

*However*, AIUI, most of the House Republicans *aren't* TP members. Some of them have been waking up and publicly stating that what they did was wrong, stupid, etc. (Heck, even Karl Rove {makes warding off sign} says it was a bad strategy.)

Raising the specter of sedition charges--even if no charges are ever filed--might just "scare *them* straight". (Scared Straight refers to a program to keep troubled/criminal kids out of prison, by showing them exactly what it's like, up close.)

There's been media coverage about MoveOn's petition. If nothing else, at least the idea is out there.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Raising the specter of sedition charges--even if no charges are ever filed--might just "scare *them* straight". (Scared Straight refers to a program to keep troubled/criminal kids out of prison, by showing them exactly what it's like, up close.)

Golden Key, I think your suggestion is far more likely to accomplish exactly the opposite - it would confirm the Tea Partiers in their conviction that Obama is really a tin-pot dictator who wants to suppress dissent and throw his political opponents in jail, and no Republican (however moderate or even just pragmatic) could deny it because that's exactly what he'd be trying to do.

Hell, he'd probably drive away plenty of his own supporters too.
quote:
There's been media coverage about MoveOn's petition. If nothing else, at least the idea is out there.
The birther movement is out there, too, but that doesn't mean it's not crazy.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What Dave W said. Which is why, Golden Key, I think there's an element of wild fantasy in your proposition. To me it's so obvious that Obama would be proving his enemies right about how oppressive he is that I'm amazed you can't see it.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Folks, it's now been long enough since Gummint opened back up for most American voters to have forgotten all about this and the idjits who engineered it and how. Now our attention is (yet again) being directed to How Terrible the ACA website is, and HOW Promises Have Been Broken concerning keeping existing coverage, etc.

What will determine the results of the next federal ballot will be the gasp-a-tory headlines produced in the two weeks immediately preceding said election. If the Tea-potties are smart, they'll lie low for a while and hope no one brings up (or if they do, believes in) the $24 billion the shutdown cost the US taxpayer.

Their goal is simple, and so are their tactics:

Goal: Dismantle the "bloated, federal bureaucracy" of government

1. Make government as ineffectual as possible by gumming up its works.

2. Shout loudly and point fingers at said gum-ups, while claiming gum-up is the fault of The Totally Unreasonable Opposition.

3. With luck, this will encourage the electorate to vote more TPs into office; the more Potties we have, the more gum-ups can be achieved.

4. Lather, rinse, repeat.

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Porridge [Overused]

They've just focused all their energy on the website mess and the ACA.

(And yes, the mess *is* a mess. The gov't has messed up all along the line with the ACA, starting with not selling it at all well. But this is the first time we've had anything *near* health coverage for everyone. It's been the law for a couple of years, IIRC, and we can't afford to lose it again, no matter how bad it is. FYI: politicians fought hard against Social Security and Medicare, back when they were first proposed. And some people are *still* trying to get rid of those. Grrrr.)

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Kelly Alves

Bunny with an axe
# 2522

 - Posted      Profile for Kelly Alves   Email Kelly Alves   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
What Dave W said. Which is why, Golden Key, I think there's an element of wild fantasy in your proposition. To me it's so obvious that Obama would be proving his enemies right about how oppressive he is that I'm amazed you can't see it.

Yeah, that. Time will tell, but I think his "let 'em hang themselves" approach will win out.

And all the nonsense and smokescreens being throw up are exactly that. People aren't going to forget the shutdown, and they are not going to forget the pathetic goalpost-shifting that follows.

--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.

Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I see that Ken Cuccinelli lost in Virginia.

Even with the IT problems that are bedevilling the Obamacare roll-out, the public is still not so stupid to vote for the nuts who brought Government to a standstill. Cuccinelli spent gazillions and still didn't make it.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No idea who he is, but doubtless it's all the fault of the electors for not voting for him.

Or is that complaint exclusive to UK politicians?

From Wikipaedia, though, he doesn't appear to have been a recent member of the House of Representatives. Also, he can't be all bad. Unless I've translated the terminology incorrectly, he seems to have been an implacable opponent of the use of compulsory purchase to facilitate private (for-profit) development.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A commentator before the election said that making Cuccinelli Governor of Virginia would turn the clock back 40 years or more.

He's a darling of the Tea Party. He's anti-abortion, anti-immigration, would remove US citizenship from children of illegal immigrants, would refuse unemployment benefits to non-English speakers, etc, etc, etc.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
He's a darling of the Tea Party. He's anti-abortion, anti-immigration, would remove US citizenship from children of illegal immigrants, would refuse unemployment benefits to non-English speakers, etc, etc, etc.

And let us not forget his tireless efforts to criminalize blowjobs. That's definitely something more attorneys-general should spend a lot more time on.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
And let us not forget his tireless efforts to criminalize blowjobs. That's definitely something more attorneys-general should spend a lot more time on.

My imagination has just gone into overdrive speculating about his opponent's election literature.

More seriously, though, bearing in mind this was not a by-election for the House of Representatives, and this chappie wasn't personally culpable for the recent fiasco, was it the issue rather than a collection of completely different package of O&S policies? There's no obvious connection between what people can and can't do in the privacy of their bedrooms and bringing your country's government to a shuddering halt.

Does each state have the same or a broadly similar constitution to the Union? If you're standing for Governor, which is presumably the local equivalent of the President, presumably you don't want your state legislature to be able to cripple what you can do.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, a lot of the federal workers in northern Virginia (a.k.a. the suburbs of Washington, DC) are still angry about the government shutdown, and it's made them re-assess their willingness to vote for any Republican.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
jbohn
Shipmate
# 8753

 - Posted      Profile for jbohn   Author's homepage   Email jbohn   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
There's no obvious connection between what people can and can't do in the privacy of their bedrooms and bringing your country's government to a shuddering halt.

He aligns himself with the "Tea Party" movement, whose adherents in Congress (the opposite of pro-gress [Biased] ) created the shutdown fiasco.

--------------------
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
--Elbert Hubbard

Posts: 989 | From: East of Eden, west of St. Paul | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Misc. responses:

--Kelly

quote:
Also-- well, TBH, I wondered about the idea of sedition, too, GK, but two things: 1. the Teabag contingent stated their battle plan well ahead of the time they implemented it. If it were illegal, somebody would have mentioned it. 2. Even if the President decided to let them hang themselves on an act of sedition, a substantial portion of the House would be jail by now, because sedition is just not something let pass. If there was a case, it would have been made by now.

Like orfeo said-- an election circuit is coming up. That is when we will see some karma.

1. Maybe. OTOH, people might have been afraid of making things even more tense.

2. I respectfully disagree. Things are let pass in Congress, all the time. If someone brandished a sword and called for civil war, they’d probably be taken into custody—then probably placed on psych hold, and made to quietly retire. Folks don't want to upset the apple cart.

However, I think sometimes you've got to skip the easy way to handle things, and do what needs to be done. E.g., Bush v. Gore. Huge mess. Gore said later that he should’ve pushed to have all the votes counted. I agree—because making the process work honestly and rightly is more important than one particular election. Ironically: if he had insisted, it would've been clear that he'd won the popular vote. The Supremes might never have gotten involved. And we might have had a president who could've handled 9/11 better, and didn’t already have an obsession about Saddam Hussein.


--Enoch

quote:
Besides, if you're really serious, rather than just making a despondent joke, that a congressperson would not be at risk if they were clearly found to have taken bribes or conspired with a foreign state, they are at no risk of prosecution just for being obstructive, and as they see it, doing their duty by the American people.
Actually, I was responding to your comment (in the paragraph about the “Kinder egg”) that maybe they’d get arrested for speeding or for fiddling with their taxes.

As to Congress critters taking bribes: unfortunately, I think it’s next to impossible for someone to get beyond city-level politics with clean hands. Even if you have the best of intentions, you have to have a LOT of money to run. That means you’re beholden to donors. If you do get elected, then people and organizations and corporations will want to influence you, and get you to use your influence for their purposes. Lobbyists will try to entice you to take gifts—money, expensive vacations, etc.


"Corruption, American Style"--Forbes finance magazine.

"Ex-lobbyist: Most in Congress accept bribes"--USA Today.


--DaveW

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:

Raising the specter of sedition charges--even if no charges are ever filed--might just "scare *them* straight". (Scared Straight refers to a program to keep troubled/criminal kids out of prison, by showing them exactly what it's like, up close.)

Golden Key, I think your suggestion is far more likely to accomplish exactly the opposite - it would confirm the Tea Partiers in their conviction that Obama is really a tin-pot dictator who wants to suppress dissent and throw his political opponents in jail, and no Republican (however moderate or even just pragmatic) could deny it because that's exactly what he'd be trying to do.

Hell, he'd probably drive away plenty of his own supporters too.

I'm not sure O would even have to approve an investigation, given that we’ve had large-scale investigations of sitting presidents. And the Republicans in Congress swore from the beginning that they wouldn’t approve any bill that O was for. It's unlikely they'd think any worse of him, no matter what he did about anything.


--Kelly

quote:
quote:


Originally posted by orfeo:
What Dave W said. Which is why, Golden Key, I think there's an element of wild fantasy in your proposition. To me it's so obvious that Obama would be proving his enemies right about how oppressive he is that I'm amazed you can't see it.

Yeah, that. Time will tell, but I think his "let 'em hang themselves" approach will win out.

And all the nonsense and smokescreens being throw up are exactly that. People aren't going to forget the shutdown, and they are not going to forget the pathetic goalpost-shifting that follows.

No, people are apt to forget, or go into deep denial, or just push the shutdown off to the back of their minds. If they do remember, they may do nothing for fear of rocking the country's boat. That's the way people tend to be.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I thought this thread had sadly finally died. It's good to get another post.
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:

"Ex-lobbyist: Most in Congress accept bribes"--USA Today.

Although I'm sure the boundary between legitimate lobbying and bribery gets smudged, a person convicted of bribery is not a disinterested authority on this - or for that matter an authority of any value at all. All he seems to be saying is 'It's not fair. I got caught, but lots of other people haven't been'.

Besides, going back to the phrase 'congress critters', it's easy to say 'all politicians are bad', particularly when some of them reveal themselves so to be. But if we do write them all off by tarring them all with the same brush, we've only ourselves to blame if that turns out to be the case.

To misappropriate a famous book title - which I've not read, by the way and am unlikely to - politicians like everyone else come in at least 50 shades of grey. We should not say, 'they must be sparkling white, whiter than no fuller on earth could whiten them, and they're not. So I've lost faith in the lot'. It's better that more of them should be and aspire to be paler shades of grey, and it's reasonable to expect that of them.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Enoch--

Did you read the Forbes article, too?

I have an advantage: decades of hearing news stories and in-depth investigations of Congressional corruption. Much of it focused on campaign financing and on lobbying.

This stuff is for real. I didn't make it up, and I'm not exaggerating.

Google "US Congress corruption". Also try adding in "lobbying", "campaign finance", and "junket".

It's a huge, well-known problem. As I mentioned, the system is set up so Congressfolk HAVE to get a bunch of money in order to run. Campaigns last for months and years, and they ain't cheap. People have tried, repeatedly, to change the system, but any changes that get made never really last.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  9  10  11  12 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools