10
   

CNN: Giffords to Resign from Congress

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 01:00 am
@firefly,
Quote:
U.S. Senate likely to allow indefinite recovery period, as it has for ill members in the past


DUH, I have never heard anywhere a single person saying anything contrary to this. Whether this should be the case however is a very dicey question.
BillRM
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 03:07 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I have never heard anywhere a single person saying anything contrary to this. Whether this should be the case however is a very dicey question


Of course it should be the case as in Firefly world view having a government where the people had a voice is not a big or important concern.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 07:51 am
@hawkeye10,
Come to think of it as lobbyists run the congress now and in many cases even write the texts of bills why do we need functional humans being sitting in the chairs in congress?

As long as we can tape them upright in the chairs and run the voting buttons controls into the lobbyists offices that should do.

I guess Firefly is right it does not matter..........................
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 01:01 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Quote:
I agree that there are two of 'em. We ought to let them both starve.

Awwww...that's too harsh. Some circus is missing it's freak-show twins--they must have left the cage door open. Laughing
http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/trolls.jpg
I just farted, Bill, doesn't it smell good.............It was the best, Hawk, do it again.

And, at times the comic relief they provide is priceless--as in this great insight, and true gem, about why their posts get voted down. Laughing
Quote:
Oh as far as the large votes downs I am betting some idiot is making up phony accounts to do so as I had not seen this level of vote downs in a year or more...

Now, that's a real knee-slapper.

http://www.nairaland.com/attachments/415891_ROFLMAODog_gif3fa44b12f55ba64fc785c3a5794ba92e
I've really begun thinking of them as only one troll, but with two heads, which I call Squawky and Clueless
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_oYGRZcY3Lt4/SSUDbGsajoI/AAAAAAAABEg/iRJ90u7ySiU/s400/2-headed+hideousdoll-stupid.jpg
Squeezing their tummy can be quite amusing, it sets both heads in motion at the the same time, so you get clueless squawking. Laughing

But, if you'd prefer, I'll stop feeding the little buggers...at least until I need another good laugh. Wink
http://rlv.zcache.com/do_not_cast_your_pearls_before_swine_matthew_7_6_poster-ra7457a3041984fa5aa48a2ca843dd190_6vk_400.jpg






OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 01:43 pm
@BillRM,
Lobbying elected holders of public office
is democracy in action; everyone shud do it. I do.





David
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 05:44 pm
@hawkeye10,
I dont want to silence you. I want to force you to be reasonable rather than radical.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 05:46 pm
@firefly,
Way the hell over the top. Youve just graduated to troll status.
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 31 Jan, 2012 08:51 pm
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

I dont want to silence you. I want to force you to be reasonable rather than radical.


I have been a radical since my early 20's.....defined as not in line with the herd. So far as reasonablness goes I don't care, only where the truth is....me being in tune with the cosmos, interests me.

You do realize that you are a moral reprobate for wanting to force change my beliefs.....right?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 04:41 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
....me being in tune with the cosmos, interests me.


You're so full of it. You're not in tune with the cosmos, you're in tune with Terry Fuckwit.
http://ohcheersproductions.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/tfckwt_6m_viz194.png
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 08:28 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:
Way the hell over the top.
I agree,
that those remarks were foul, untoward and uncalled for; reprehensible.
I have a hunch that Ms. Giffords woud disapprove of their lack of civility,
while upholding Firefly's freedom of speech.


RABEL222 wrote:
Youve just graduated to troll status.
No. Firefly is not a troll.
She does not conform to that definition.





David
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 12:19 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
David we are reaching the same stage as the late Roman Republic where all that matter is what is best for the super rich as far as the Roman Senate and senators was concern not what is best for the Roman Republic as a whole.

Given that the founding fathers base to a large degree our system on the early Roman Republic I guess it is no surprise that we have the same kinds of weaknesses and going down the same road as they did.

firefly
 
  5  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 12:52 pm
@RABEL222,
Quote:
Way the hell over the top.

No, I'm not way the hell over the top. In fact, that post barely expresses the amount of disgust I feel with those two.

If you think the ideas that Hawkeye expresses are merely "radical" you either don't follow his posts very closely or you don't choose your words very carefully. Thinking that is radical might be extreme, even revolutionary, but it is not the term I would use to describe the constant anti-female, sexist, misogynist, and bigoted comments that characterize his remarks in this thread and others.

In this thread, Ceili called him out on it, by pointing out that he was using the topic to find yet another opportunity to bash females--and she was right.

In this thread, we have been discussing a Congresswoman, shot in an assassination attempt, who was forced into a medical absence from Congress for a period of months--not a year, because Congress is not in session for a year--only a period of months, before she submitted her resignation. That she remained in office, and retained that office, during that period, was entirely consistent with what every other member of Congress has ever done in similar circumstances.

But, in Giffords case, Hawkeye calls this "a scam"--a scam--and "a stunt"--and said quite pointedly that he doubted that a man had ever pulled such "a stunt". He has labeled her "dishonorable" among other unjustified assaults on her character. All of this crap is very consistent with what he says about women, in general, in other threads, and it is flat out bigotry, that I find offensive and intolerable. Comparing it to the stench of a fart, is an understatement, but I am saying quite clearly that it stinks. And his Bilious side-kick tells him how good it smells and eggs him on, adding his own pollutants to the atmosphere.

This sort of pejorative attack on a female member of Congress is nothing more than gratuitous woman-bashing. It has nothing to do with the broader issues of whether temporary replacements are necessary to fill Congressional seats, or how one evaluates "incapacity", or the length of incapacity that is acceptable before a resignation is submitted, or whether incapacitated members of Congress should have their seats vacated by another authority--it is unrelated to any of those things. There was no "scam" or "stunt" involved with Giffords remaining in office, or to any of the medical or salary benefits she received during the interval of her recovery, those were things she was entitled to as a federal employee/office holder who was literally injured during the performance of her duties, and in her work representing the government of the United States in her district. To accuse this woman of dishonesty, fraud, and dishonorable conduct, not only goes beyond any reasonable appraisal of the situation, it is absolutely uncalled for and outrageous--it stinks to high heaven.

You just want this man to be "reasonable"? You expect a bigot to be reasonable?

I am sick of the sexist and misogynist crap continuously expressed by these two posters in thread after thread. I can ignore it only up to a point, and then I will react to it, just as I would to any other sort of bigotry, and negative stereotyping of any entire group, that is voiced on these boards.

I am also sick of the tag-team routine of these two, that is designed to take over threads, and which has the destructive effect of grinding meaningful topic discussion in a thread to a halt while they pursue their own agendas and focus attention on themselves.

And I am sick of the hypocrisy of posters like you, who tell me to stop feeding them, and then immediately respond to them yourself.

That you might not appreciate the manner in which I chose to express myself in that post is fine, you do not have to appreciate it. But I am most definitely not being "a troll"--I am simply fed up with their crap and chose to express those feelings in the clearest manner I could.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 02:48 pm
@BillRM,
I don't see it that way, Bill,
tho I regret n dislike the war in Iraq from the point beyond
which we got rid of Saddam and forward in time,
but I note that it continued with bipartisan funding
and under Democratic presidential leadership,
with relatively little debate in Congress.

Our troops shud have been brawt home a lot sooner,
as W's dad did from Panama.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 03:36 pm

FOR THE RECORD: I see nothing rong
in any conduct of Congresswoman Giffords.
Her conduct after the assassination attempt was correct in all ways.
Any characterization of her performance as being "a scam" or "a stunt" is nonsense.

I was a victim of non-representation in the House,
when my Representative, Weiner, resigned in disgrace.
It took a few weeks or a few months b4 we had a special election to fill that seat.





David
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 04:26 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Which brings up a good point...why the hell does it take Arazona alnost 6 months to hold an election after she finally did the right thing?
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 04:34 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:



RABEL222 wrote:
Youve just graduated to troll status.
No. Firefly is not a troll.
She does not conform to that definition.





David

The majority of people who get called troll around here do not conform to the definition.....
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 04:44 pm
@hawkeye10,
Anyone can accuse anyone of anything.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 04:46 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Which brings up a good point...why the hell does it take Arazona alnost 6 months to hold an election after she finally did the right thing?

Where?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 10:22 pm
@izzythepush,
He's as ignorant of the realistic time frames necessary to prepare for primary and general special elections--both on the part of potential candidates, as well as the state--as he is the location of "Arazona".

That's been one of the main flaws in his argument that Giffords should have resigned months ago so that her seat could have been "immediately" filled by someone else. The democratic process of electing someone to fill out the balance of a term takes time.

There has to be filing of forms, signatures have to be gathered by candidates in order to get on the special election primary ballot, candidates have to raise money, they have to begin seeking support in the district, they have to initiate publicity efforts and campaign to seek votes, etc.--and that's just for the primary, which is why it's not scheduled until April 17th, so that there is time for all of that. Then there is another two month interval, to allow for money raising, campaigning, etc. before the special general election on June 12th--and the winner of that will only serve out the balance of Giffords term.

Then this whole process will repeat itself prior to the regular general election in November when another new representative will be chosen. And the primary for that race will be on August 28th.

It's really not going to be until January, 2013, when a new representative is sworn in for another two year term, that the 8th C.D. in Arizona will have a consistent Member in the House for any extended length of time.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Feb, 2012 10:45 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I was a victim of non-representation in the House,
when my Representative, Weiner, resigned in disgrace.
It took a few weeks or a few months b4 we had a special election to fill that seat

I think it took 3 months to fill Weiner's seat, David. He resigned in June, and the special election was held in September (on NY's primary election day). But I don't think NY had to hold a special primary election prior to that special general election to fill Weiner's seat. Do you know whether they did? State law on these matters might differ from state to state.

Also, the governor of NY could have waited several months before announcing the special election to fill Weiner's seat--something he chose not to do--but that is what his predecessor did before announcing the special election to fill Gillibrand's vacated Congressional seat. So, NY doesn't always schedule those special elections as quickly as three months either.

A lot of political considerations went into when the special election for Weiner's seat was scheduled.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/16/cuomo-faces-strategic-chi_n_878153.html
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 09:26:28