Can you hear me ? If not now ever?

[Beavah 205]

Yah, of course it's da media's fault, acco.

 

Ethics means not just doing everything yeh can to grab an easy buck. Whether you're a banker or a news outlet or even an attorney . Yeh have to think about what your role and responsibility is to your clients, to your country, to your God.

 

And it definitely is your fault if yeh go for the quick and easy buck at the expense of your Duty. Isn't that what we teach every day in Scouting?

 

Even well off and well educated Americans don't have the time or sophistication to read and discern a 3000 page law by themselves. I'm an old pro at this and I gave up after around 500. . Da thing is like a welfare act for lawyers and bureaucrats. I'm sure nobody on this list even tried, and there are a lot of bright folks here with good civic values. That's where an independent media has to come in. Yeh can't expect the populace to do it on their own, eh? Part tim, untrained folks cantvkeep up with a full-time, highly paid and staffed bunch of slime balls.

 

Beavah

[packsaddle 753]

To Brent, Wouldn't you agree that 'term limits' were what were applied just this past Tuesday?

[WAKWIB 107]

I would agree that the ballot box is the best place to see term-limits played out.

Case-in-point: A fellow who has been a US Rep. for 34 years in a neighboring district got his rear-end handed to him Tues. He seldom had to campaign before and was regarded by folks from both parties as a fine fellow and effective rep. But the day of judgement came and came hard.

Also concerning "third parties"; as I was glancing over a list of county-by-county results, what caught my attention was that Libertarian and Constitution party candidates who in the past only received 100's of votes were this time getting numbers well into the 1000's.

[Woapalanne 11]

"The first step would be to dump the party system."

 

AMEN, Scoutfish!!! Actually, all we have to do is abide by the "Law of the Land". Parties are already illegal at the Federal level. (There is nothing in the Constitution authorizing parties, - I've searched diligently - and there IS a provision saying that if the Constitution doesn't authorize it, then you - the Feds - can't do it.)

[JoeBob 606]

I'd like to see the Democratic Party develop something akin to the Tea Party, to shake up their primaries. The Middle, socially liberal & fiscally conservative, has no representation.

A 'Middle of the Road Party' wouldn't have to be large to wield considerable influence.

[GernBlansten 10]

"The Middle, socially liberal & fiscally conservative, has no representation."

They exist, they are the RINOs. You teapartiers have bagged them.

[JoeBob 606]

The Blue Dog Democrats need to get their act together.

The RINOs got elected saying "I'm a fiscal conservative!", but spent money like a drunken Democrat once in office.

They really were liars.

[Lisabob 13]

I guess it comes down to how you define the soul of the party. For me, a Democrat through and through, those "blue dog" Democrats are not Democrats. They would probably be happier in the Republican party - except that the Republican party seems to have been hijacked by its various factions to such an extent that moderates have no home there anymore.

 

As for Tea Partiers, I guess I figure that most of them would be better labeled as Libertarians. And I'd like them to run under their own party label since I don't think many of them represent many of the things that the Republican party is/was all about. But we all know that it is hard for third parties to win in our system, and so I figure that these Tea Party folks made a calculating decision to take over the Republican party and name, rather than build up their own, more ideologically apt, Libertarian party ID.

 

But that's just me, a Democrat who is irked by those blue dogs trying to hijack MY party, as much as by the Tea Party having hijacked the opposition party.

 

 

[gwd-scouter 11]

Regarding reading the bills: Recently on Washington Journal (C-SPAN) the head of the Sixty Plus Association, a self-proclaimed nonpartisan group of seniors, was stating that ALL of the Association's members read the bill - all the way through. They KNOW what was in the bill and that is why they opposed it and want to repeal the law. Really? They all read it? I find that very hard to believe.

 

I find it disturbing now to hear all the outcries about the deficit commission proposals. Nope, can't have any tax hikes. Nope, can't do anything to Medicare and Social Security. Nothing about defense spending reductions. The Tea Party folks and Republicans keep talking about taking spending back to 2008 levels. Why not 2000 levels? How about letting the tax cuts expire as was designed? They knew then that the cuts would explode the deficit. (Very shrewd by the way to have the expiration date during the first term of Pres. Bush's successor.) How about repealing the prescription drug plan? Nope, no way, can't do that. Paying for Iraq and Afghanistan? Who are you kidding? Can't make the American People sacrifice for something like that.

 

Let's just make folks work until they're 70. Not a huge problem for those folks that make their living sitting in a comfy office behind a desk, but might be a big deal for those that do manual labor (yeah, a lot of middle class folks in there, eh?).

 

Complain about labor union pension plans? How about the pension plans for our elected officials? Cutting the pay of government workers sounds like a great idea to some, but oh hell no let's not get outraged at the Wall Street guys, CEO pay, bonuses, etc. that we, the taxpayers, helped secure. Better yet, too many government workers as it is so let's just fire a bunch of them. More people unemployed? No problem, they are just trying to pay their mortgage and raise their families, but they are GOVERNMENT workers helping to encourage "big" government and we can't have that.

 

Yeah, I'm a bit angry.

[packsaddle 753]

OK gwd, let me get this straight. The country's economy is augering in, infrastructure failing, and institutions falling apart, while the administration accelerates the process and congress is deadlocked or in disarray and people are out of work, factories closed, jobs sent overseas, and shysters are out in droves preying on the misfortunate and...you're saying that you have doubts about the veracity of a special interest group's claim about a political issue? Wow. There is only one way to address this:

we need to drown ourselves in cholesterol at Lee's BBQ!

[gwd-scouter 11]

Excellent idea, Pack. It is clearly the only thing left to do.

Edited to add: You realize that we are going to need Medicare for the medical bills that will pile up because of our high cholesterol? Oops, too bad, guess we're on our own. Heh heh.(This message has been edited by gwd-scouter)

[packsaddle 753]

OK, let me see what possibilities there are to travel over your way. Maybe I'll pick up some more escargot while I'm at it.

What little cholesterol we add over lunch will pale in comparison to the assaults I've already taken from decades of aluminum cooking pans, fried food, and my mother's obsession with saccharin...probably just the tip of the wad of crud, so-to-speak. So...might as well enjoy it! (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[SSScout 1615]

Any politician, on any level, offer to take a pay cut, even a symbolic one?

[Lisabob 13]

The newly elected governor of my state is foregoing his salary. Of course, as an independently wealthy multi-millionare, he can afford to do that.

 

At one of the debates during the campaign, his opponent was asked if he, too, would pass up a salary if elected. His opponent rightly pointed out that most ordinary people simply cannot afford to do that if they also want to feed and house their families. Since the opponent is not wealthy, the opponent said he would draw a salary if elected.

 

So - passing up a salary is fine and all, but do we really want to say that only wealthy people should be able to govern?

[gwd-scouter 11]

Speaker-elect, John Boehner, will get a raise when he becomes Speaker of the House. Haven't heard him say he'd turn down his raise. I seriously don't expect any of our representatives to turn down their salary or raises or whatever - comes with the job. If we, the people, don't want to pay our representatives their salary or give them their benefits and pensions, then I suppose it is up to us to change it.