10
   

CNN: Giffords to Resign from Congress

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jan, 2012 12:09 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
It is not possible for him to be speaking for more then himself


you'd do well to be reminded that you speak for no one other than yourself unless
Quote:
authorization has been presented
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  3  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 10:34 pm
I'm sorry to see Giffords resign, but her recovery has to be her first priority. Her rehabilitation program seems quite time consuming.

It would not surprise me if one day she returned to public office, or some type of public service. The main obstacle she has to try to overcome is in the area of speech and language, so that she can express herself more completely. Her friend, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand commented on that...
Quote:
While Ms. Giffords’s ability to understand what people say to her is strong, she does not have the language skills to express her responses. “She can get across how she feels and what her views are,” Ms. Gillibrand said, but her ability to communicate effectively is hindered “because she can’t talk in paragraphs. That is the development she wants to focus on.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/us/politics/gabrielle-giffords-says-shes-leaving-the-house.html?scp=1&sq=giffords&st=cse





hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 10:40 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
I'm sorry to see Giffords resign, but her recovery has to be her first priority. Her rehabilitation program seems quite time consuming.


this time suck neither only happened last week, nor is a shocker. She and her people knew a year ago what this year was going to be like, and yet knowing that she could not do her job what did she choose to do?

The kicker is all the yap about how fabulous she is doing in her recovery, yet for the last year she has not be able to do a lick of her job. This means that a year ago based upon her average expected recovery she could not be expected to do any work this year. Knowing this she had a duty to resign. Failing that the House had a duty to fill her seat.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 01:08 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
yet for the last year she has not be able to do a lick of her job

That's not quite true...
Quote:
She cast a vote to raise the nation’s debt ceiling. Her Congressional aides continued to churn out news releases outlining her positions and hold community meetings
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/us/politics/gabrielle-giffords-says-shes-leaving-the-house.html?scp=1&sq=giffords&st=cse

So she did cast one vote--on a very significant issue, and one where her vote was needed. Her Congressional office has continued to serve her constituents. And she will cast one final vote tomorrow before she formally resigns her seat.
Quote:
she had a duty to resign

The people of her Congressional district elected her, and they did not call for her resignation. Therefore, she had no duty to resign.
Quote:
Failing that the House had a duty to fill her seat.

That's not how the House of Representitives operates. Nor do they have any authority to fill her seat.

Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois just suffered a rather serious stroke which will likely leave him paralyzed on the left side of his body and the left side of his face. While his neurosurgeon is hopeful regarding Sen. Kirk's cognitive abilities, he will probably be unable to walk and might be unable to speak clearly due to the facial paralysis. Would you demand that he resign immediately too?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 01:40 am
@firefly,
Quote:
While his neurosurgeon is hopeful regarding Sen. Kirk's cognitive abilities, he will probably be unable to walk and might be unable to speak clearly due to the facial paralysis. Would you demand that he resign immediately too?


The test is the answer to the question " can I serve my constituents to the level to which they deserve, and am I likely to be able to do so in the near future?" Congress is not a jobs program for the incapacitated....those who sit in the chair (or in Giffords case do not 364 out of 365 days) must either perform their duties or resign, honor demands it.
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:05 am
@firefly,
Thank you Firefly, interesting...I was wondering what the overall picture is at present.
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:09 am
@dlowan,
Quote:
"It was the least I could do," Flake told CNN after the address. "It was just an incredible experience to be there with her, particularly after last year, having an empty chair where she should have been. It was just an overwhelming, emotional experience for, I think, all of us."
Standing with Gabby Giffords Giffords arrives for Obama address
Honoring Giffords was something both sides of the aisle could agree on as she prepared to continue her recovery without responsibilities in Washington

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/25/politics/gabrielle-giffords-sotu/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

She gets honored even though she has no honor, because we love our victims so.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:15 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
.those who sit in the chair (or in Giffords case do not 364 out of 365 days) must either perform their duties or resign, honor demands it.

Honor demands it?

Since when was "honor" made a part of it?

Come back down to earth. You don't make the rules.
Quote:
She gets honored even though she has no honor...

There is nothing dishonorable about her. Not at all. You seem to really resent this woman, and the compassion that people feel for her, and the fact that people admire her courage and fortitute. You are also forgetting she was liked and admired before the shooting.

The Congresswoman was literally injured in the line of duty, and nearly killed, while performing her job of meeting with her constituents, and those constituents did not want her to resign. In fact, she had a rather hefty campaign war chest for her next election. And her Congressional office never stopped serving the needs of her district. She was kept briefed on issues, and she voiced her opinions and views.
There are plenty of other members of Congress who miss a great many votes.
Quote:
Congress is not a jobs program for the incapacitated....

Nor was she completely incapacitated for the past year.

Nor do you get to make up the rules or decide the matter for the people in Giffords district.

Do you know how many votes your own Congressional representative missed in the past year?





hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:20 am
@firefly,
Quote:
The Congresswoman was literally injured in the line of duty, and nearly killed, while performing her job of meeting with her constituents, and those constituents did not want her to resign


REALLY? When did the tally of the votes take place?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:34 am
@hawkeye10,
From someone who thinks along the same lines as I on this

Quote:
After mooching at the public trough for more than a year, Congresschick Gabby Giffords will finally resign this week, a move that passed the “it’s about time” point long ago. I’ve written about this a few times (here and here), and several readers have noted that it’s better to have a liberal Democrat in Congress who generally doesn’t vote then an active participant liberal. But, as you know, that’s not how I look at it.

Giffords milked the system big-time. She remained on full pay as a U.S. Congresswoman, with well over $200,000 in annual salary and benefits, despite not being at work for over a year. That’s something that the rest of America would never get, despite paying for it for her. She also got the best therapy, the best rehab, the best medical care money can buy–something the average American will never get, even on Obamacare–which the hypocrite Giffords supported but didn’t make applicable to Congressmen like her (in fact, they will get far less of it under Obamacare). While she was on fully-paid leave for a year, she and her hubby wrote and marketed a book and did media appearances to promote it.

As I’ve asked before, do ya think you’d get to collect full pay on “sick leave” while promoting a book for which you got paid millions? Puh-leeze. Your boss would fire you and probably report you for healthcare fraud to recoup the money and benefits he paid you while you were working full-time for yourself on a book. And even if you didn’t write a book, after a few months, your boss would likely terminate you after you exhausted Family Medical Leave Act time off, and you’d be forced to pay expensive COBRA fees and file for Workers Comp or Social Security Disability. And, again, if you had the ability to write and promote a book and make millions off of it, you wouldn’t qualify for either. They’d laugh at you.

It’s well past time that Giffords resigned and focused on her health, rather than simply milking the system, as she’s done for the last year. I feel for her that she was attacked in the course of her Congressional duties and shot in the head. But she is a victim, NOT a hero. And she’s been using it to bask in glory and make money off your backs.

Again, I feel for this woman for the tragedy of being shot. She’s lucky that she survived and good for her for that. But it’s utter chutzpah to take advantage as she has off the backs of working-class people for whom she claimed to fight, but from whom she merely collected, while double-dipping with a book deal.

Yes, now an able-bodied liberal Democrat will replace her in a a special election, and it will be a vote for the wrong side on pretty much every issue. But I’m approaching this not as a Machiavelli-ette, but as someone interested in fairness and the end to Gabby Giffords chutzpahdik mooching.

Her farewell video on Facebook bore a classy message:

I don’t remember much from that horrible day, but I will never forget the trust you placed in me to be your voice.

I’m getting better. Every day my spirit is high. I will return and we will work together for Arizona and this great country.

But her stubborn clawing to hold on to the seat for over a year while she engaged in shameless self-promotion was not so classy.

I hope she achieves a complete recovery, and I wish her well in private life

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/46291/well-past-time-moocherette-gabby-giffords-resigns/
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 02:53 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Giffords struggled with the decision to resign and had been focused on working toward a return to Congress. But after her recent trip to Tucson for the anniversary of the Jan. 8 shooting, she realized that the re-election campaign would arrive quickly and not allow her to focus as much on recovery, Wasserman Schultz said.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/For-Giffords-focus-is-fixed-on-recovery-2674397.php

Wait....she decided that she could not be completely absent from the campaign as she has been absent from her job, so she quit???

Quote:
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) could face a tough fight to return to Washington after Arizona approved new congressional districts Tuesday night -- but so could two GOP incumbents


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/21/gabrielle-giffords-ben-quayle-jan-brewer-arizona-redistricting_n_1163451.html

DAMN, even victims dont get the sham forever. Who knew?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 03:24 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

From someone who thinks along the same lines as I on this


There are a lot of arseholes in this world. Scouring the net you're bound to find another idiot who shares your paranoid toytown revolutionary mindset. Hitler found kindred spirits when he joined the Nazi party.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 08:25 pm
@izzythepush,
Hawkeye's real beef is that no one sees him as a sympathetic victim.

In numerous threads, where he he claims to be allegedly speaking for all men, he's told us how he's downtrodden and abused and made to feel insignificant and marginalized. For someone who allegedly rejects the "victim culture", he presents himself as the poster child for injustice and victimization, constantly whining about feeling powerless, abused, misunderstood, unfairly treated and attacked and on, and on. He's even accused the hamsters of voting down his posts.

So the entire idea that a genuine victim, like Gabrielle Giffords, could receive tremendous support and compassion seems to enrage him. He seethes with jealousy that she's not being punished in some way for her vulnerabilities, that people are being too understanding, too tolerant, too supportive of her, because he doesn't feel she's entitled to it. He'd like to see her abused, discarded as damaged goods, treated more the way that he feels people treat him, and he really can't fathom why that didn't happen. He can't connect empathetically with others because he's too damn angry to have room left for that sort of thing, and that anger comes from envy, and what he envys most of all is power. He'll never be a member of Congress, he'll never really effect change or inspire people, he'll never get beyond whining anonymously on an internet forum, where most of what he says is rejected with derision or ignored.

So, attacking Giffords is his way of getting even, of trying to whittle her down to his size so he can have his pathetic little moment of vindication. He turns her into the abuser, she's taken unfair advantage and behaved dishonorably, she's been harming her constituents by not doing her job, she's been harming him in some way. And that brings it right back to Hawkeye as the victim. He's always the victim, it's always about him and his righteous indignation, and he won't let some accomplished woman, who tragically took a career-ending bullet to her brain, steal his victim thunder, not even in an internet thread. He's got to put her in her place so he feels he's "winning" something, so he's got to carry on that Giffords didn't resign fast enough for him..

He's never learned the difference between winning and whining or between a winner and a whiner. Giffords was a winner before that tragic shooting, and she's still a winner. And the chronic whiner is still whining...




hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:04 pm
@firefly,
Right.....I who argue vigorously against the victim culture , I who refuse to take the label of victim even though by most definitions I am entitled, am bothered if I am not seen as a victim. Drunk
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  6  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:12 pm
@firefly,
Why do these threads become all about Hawkeye?

It doesn't need to happen.
hawkeye10
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:16 pm
@dlowan,
dlowan wrote:

Why do these threads become all about Hawkeye?

It doesn't need to happen.

Because far too many a2k'ers are incapable of argueing subjects wihout throwing turds at those who don't agree with them. These people take every disagreement with them as a personal insult, and so they get personally hostile. We used to be better than this, we used to be more civilized.
firefly
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:28 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Because far too many a2k'ers are incapable of argueing subjects wihout throwing turds at those who don't agree with them. These people take every disagreement with them as a personal insult, and so they get personally hostile. We used to be better than this, we used to be more civilized.

You mean like when you made this personally hostile remark to dlowan...
Quote:
Given your poor performance in the arena of ideas I am not shocked that you now avoid the whole exercise, and talk about cats and other fluff so that your ignorance does not hobble you.

Or this personally hostile comment to failures art...
Quote:
I am not exactly shocked that you are so ignorant of how our Government works, but kindly go get educated so that I dont have to watch you make such an ass out of yourself.

So, why are you less civilized now?
ossobuco
 
  5  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:33 pm
@dlowan,
Because people feed him.
dlowan
 
  4  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:49 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

Because people feed him.


My point exactly.

This is why I stick to harmless little threads generally now......I just can't bear to see the enabling going on and on and on and drowning the interesting debate.

It's possible to HAVE a reasonable debate about whether someone like Giffords ought or ought not to have resigned earlier....it's a fair enough point....but it all becomes about bloody Hawkeye because of the nonsensically inflammatory language he drags people into his world with. You don't have to be dragged people!

I suspect the hawkeyes here can't/won't ever change...it's the enablers who can stop so many threads just becoming paradises for these people and dead seas for others.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2012 09:50 pm
@dlowan,
Yeah.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 9.16 seconds on 12/05/2024 at 10:41:04