100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
and what are those questions? Cmon Moe. I'm back online for 30 seconds and you're badgering me to pay attention to your question first? Kinda rude, doncha think?
What questions? Well, Whos's gong to build your roads? Who's going to teach the children of people who have no money? Who's going to see to clean air, clean water, safe energy, safe food? How do we prevent monopolies so that we have choices in the marketplace? How do we keep the Koch Brothers from running the world? How do we ensure choice in our election systems? How do we prevent America from becoming like Somalia? How do we ensure that there will be a middle class? How do we prevent the Corporatocracy from cornering the market on things like air and water, or do we want to? Are we to have our entire transportation system consist of privatized toll roads? Should our National Parks become private Disneylands? How many plane crashes do we need before we decide that we need an FAA? Is it OK to have a two-tiered class system? A rich elite and a working poor? Is it OK to have a police state to keep people who don't like this kind of a world in line? Should every news medium become a propaganda machine exclusively for the ruling bureaucracy? How shall we ensure that the Supreme Court does not become completely owned by the Koch Brothers? How many of these questions do you want me to come up with? Perhaps you could attempt some answers on your own. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Libertarianism believes that everyone should be a big girl or boy and solve their own problems.....that is the solution to solve your own problems....what a novelty...ehhh? A real-world answer to the real-world questions.
Somalia is a Libertarian paradise. Everybody there is a big boy and girl and has absolute, complete freedom to solve their own problems. No thanks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think Cain would be an awesome President.
You thought MIchelle Bachman was "awesome". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul should be excused for his inability to answer important questions. There are many real-world questions that religions like libertarianism simply have no answer for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But now Iran and N Korea are building reactors and Iran spews a lot of anti-American hate... They are building longer and longer range missiles, and they both have reactors... Yet their people live in poverty
Iran's distribution of wealth is almost identical to that in the United States. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are we talking politicians as a whole or just congressional members because last I checked the filthy democRATS had control of the senate
If you bother to read the report, you would understand who is being referenced. Also, it would be a good idea to read up on the filibuster rules of the Senate. The people who are in control of the Senate are the people who can control what the Senate does (or doesn't do). Unfortunately for the country, the radical right-wing super-minority are in that position with 41 votes. Here is an article that explains how the filibuster works. It would clear up any misunderstandings you have about this. It would be well worth reading and studying it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster (I understand that you believe you are circumventing the rules of the forum by not mentioning any specific posters, but if you want a duel of personal insults, your meaning is clear. Who do you think you are fooling? We aren't supposed to be making personal insults. Nonetheless, this kind of rhetoric says much more about you that it does about us DemocRATS. It really doesn't bother us). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are we talking politicians as a whole or just congressional members because last I checked the filthy democRATS had control of the senate
If you bother to read the report, you would understand who is being referenced. Also, it would be a good idea to read up on the filibuster rules of the Senate. The people who are in control of the Senate are the people who can control what the Senate does (or doesn't do). Unfortunately for the country, the radical right-wing super-minority are in that position with 41 votes. Here is an article that explains how the filibuster works. It would clear up any misunderstandings you have about this. It would be well worth reading and studying it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster (I understand that you believe you are circumventing the rules of the forum by not mentioning any specific posters, but if you want a duel of personal insults, your meaning is clear. Who do you think you are fooling? We aren't supposed to be making personal insults. Nonetheless, this kind of rhetoric says much more about you that it does about us DemocRATS. It really doesn't bother us). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The Obama jobs bill hoax
|
|
That's a good start, at least better than the last analysis. However, it doesn't really address just how you're going to repair that trade deficit thing. Also, it ignores the importance of weak consumer performance domestically. Taxes in Italy are a caricature of the direction US taxes are taking. You still have some work to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Fri 09/23/11 11:55 PM
|
|
Thats how I got 3.6% and 4.9%
Well, as long as we're trying to prove things, let's look at it this way. By simple proportion, 4.9% corrupt Republis/3.6% corrupt Democrats=1.36%. This tells us that, for every 1 % corrupt Democrat we found, there were 1.36% corrupt Republicans. In terms we can all understand, that would tell us that the incident of corruption among Republicans is 1.36 times as many as for for Democrats. That is, a Republican is about a third more likely to be corrupt than a Democrat. Your example is analogous to saying that since only .5% of all Americans will get a terrible disease and 1% of another group will get it, they are only half a percent apart, when in fact, it shows that the risk factor for one group is twice that for the other group. That's the problem with reducing these statistics down to little tiny percentages. It really distorts the meaning of the numbers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I said nothing about one party being more corrupt than the other. I said only that Republis comprise 56% of the House and 63% of the list of corrupt politicians. You can make anything you want out of that. I made nothing of it. The details of their case, as described in the report, however, were interesting to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the only thing i see in all that is they are saying there is only 19 corrupt members of congress? that seems a little low
You really didn't read the Executive Summary, did you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, anyone who opposes their Fuhrer Obama or his policies is labeled a racist.
You really don't read the things you want to respond to, do you? Just the tea Party talking point that you are unfairly victimized by an unjustified charge. Why continually whine about something that isn't even before you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are going to some amazing calisthenics to prove something that was never even addressed. Why prove your case with a hypothetical? Why don't you use real numbers? They're all available. You may succeed in actually proving something if you work hard enough at it.
The only facts before you are that Republis comprise 56% of the House and 63% of the list of corrupt politicians |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i googled that like you said
No you didn't. You wouldn't have come up with a lot of links. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corrupt is corrupt...........get em outta there if they are,
I'm afraid that you and I don't get to have a say about who people in other states or districts get to vote for. Charlie Rangal had quite an ethics kerfuffle, but the people of Harlem found him to be good for his constituents. that's how elections are supposed to work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Fri 09/23/11 07:48 PM
|
|
I'm afraid I found that posting to be incomprehensible for my poor brain.
I am saying that Republis comprise 56% of the House and 63% of the list of corrupt politicians. People can conclude what they want. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Fri 09/23/11 07:41 PM
|
|
Well what would you expect from Grover Norquist? Of course it's a strategy, just like all the fanciful smears that come from the right about the left. Nonetheless, racists obviously have a natural home with the Tea Party. They are not disavowed or repelled at Tea Party rallies. They appear to feel quite welcome. Their signs speak for themselves. Just Google "tea paty rallies racist">images. The Tea Party is obviously quite comfortable with the company of racists.
I see nothing wrong with pointing that out to the world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just wondering because I am not understanding your meaning or where the facts or percentages came from never could bring it up....are you saying that 63% of the House members were cited or 63% of Republicans currently holding seats in the House were cited or 63% of the Republicans members holding seats over the years were cited
"Republis comprise 55% of the House" = "55% of the House members are Republicans. " and 63% of the corrupt members cited." = 63% of the people listed are Republis. The list only seems to be for people against whom action is currently ongoing. (I think). CREW’s seventh report on congressional corruption names 19 members of Congress – 14 members whose actions violated the law or who otherwise engaged in serious misconduct, and five others whose lack of regard for the rules earned them a dishonorable mention. The 2010 midterm elections swept in a large freshman class, but certainly didn’t produce more ethical conduct. A startling 14 of the 19 members on CREW’s list are new to it this year, and six of those members are also new to Congress: Reps. Jeff Denham (R-CA), Stephen Fincher (R-TN), Michael Grimm (R-NY), Frank Guinta (R-NH), David Rivera (R-FL) and Joe Walsh (R-IL).
CREW’s definition of corruption goes beyond assessing whether someone technically violated a criminal law. It encompasses public officials who fail to act responsibly and ethically, and who instead place personal or special interests before those of the public. As always, members on this year’s list have abused their positions to benefit themselves, their families, and other associates. Ten violated campaign finance or personal financial disclosure rules, failing to reveal gifts, income, campaign contributions or debts. At least nine members are or have been under investigation either by the House or Senate ethics committees, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) or law enforcement agencies. One member, Rep. Rivera, is under investigation by at least five different law enforcement agencies for a range of violations, apparently including income tax evasion. Another, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), got a loan on very sweet terms and failed to disclose or repay it until the FBI started asking questions. In the latest revelation in Rep. Vern Buchanan’s (R-FL) ongoing scandal, he attempted to bribe a witness to sign a false affidavit. The conduct exhibited by each of the members on the list has contributed to the eroding public trust in government. The report, of course, doesn’t reflect the misdeeds of those who have left Congress. Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), a Most Corrupt alumnus, resigned hastily this year. He left just before a special counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics issued a scathing report concluding the evidence against him in connection with his attempted cover-up of an affair with a staffer “would have been substantial and sufficient to warrant the consideration of the sanction of expulsion.” Reps. Christopher Lee (R-NY), Anthony Weiner (D-NY), and David Wu (D-OR), meanwhile, were quickly pushed out of Congress by House leadership after news broke of their salacious conduct. There seems to be no particular standard, however, regarding the sort of misconduct that induces party leaders to move decisively against unethical members given the relatively more egregious actions of some members who have been permitted to retain their seats. Some Most Corrupt veterans are missing this year either because no new action was taken by any law enforcement agency or the House and Senate ethics committees, or because CREW discovered no new information. These members include: Reps. Ken Calvert (R-CA), Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL), Jerry Lewis (R-CA), Charles Rangel (D-NY), Pete Visclosky (D-IN), and Don Young (R-AK) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Five members are making return appearances: Reps. Buchanan, Laura Richardson (D-CA), Hal Rogers (R-KY), and Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA). Sen. Vitter and Rep. Richardson are included for conduct unrelated to that which led to their inclusion in previous years. .....I still haven't been able to bring up the site or be able to where these percentages are coming from...
The percentages came from me: 242 Republis in Congress/434 total in the House = 56% 12 Rupublis on the list/19 people on the list = 63% .or who did the study
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington or what variables were used to come up with the statistics
# of Republis in the House (plus one Senator) Total # in Congress # of Republis on the list Total # on the list or who did the study....or what variables were used to come up with the statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Fri 09/23/11 03:08 PM
|
|
I guess its fuzzy in the eyes of people that aren't good at math./quote]
You still haven't explained how any of this changes the fact that Republis comprise 55% of the House and 63% of the corrupt members cited. The Independents that you wanted us all to know about don't even figure into that. Even a Math dunce like me can see that. I would think that a Math genius, like maybe an Engineer, could see that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The Obama jobs bill hoax
|
|
But Italy falls way behind other countries with much higher taxes that are much more economically sound. (According to your own source). So perhaps a more sophisticated analysis of the impact of taxes is called for. Try again.
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
