From Roll Call:
The Office of Congressional Ethics has closed its investigation into Reps. John Murtha (D-Pa.), Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) and Jim Moran (D-Va.) and their relationships to the lobbying firm PMA Group, and the OCE advised against a formal House ethics investigation, the lawmakers’ offices said Friday.
George Behan, Dicks’ chief of staff, said the OCE, which reviews potential rules violations and refers investigations to the House ethics committee, informed the Washington lawmaker on Dec. 2 that it had recommended the inquiry be dismissed.
“In his case, there was never anything there,” Behan said.
Maybe if these guys weren’t in the House and Senate for so damn long they wouldn’t have a chance to be investigated for corruption. It’s time for term limits for Representatives, Senators, and Supreme Court judges.
And, yes, I realize that means amending the Constitution.
@1 Great…you want to muck around with what the Constitution says about the makeup of each of the three branches and that’s no problem, but nobody better even breathe the notion of taking away the Right To Keep And Bear Assault Weapons.
It seems that the chant about term limits always comes from whichever party is in the minority. Come on…show a little patience. Your side will get a chance to run it all again. Hope you do a better job than last time. In fact, I hope you do a better job than the Democrats are doing now.
profiles in ethics:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol.....cycle=2010
vs.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol.....8;newMem=N
So we see the result once again:
Bush-era witch hunts against anti-war Democrats were politically-motivated.
Anybody remember how many Republicans ran in 2004 and 2006 on a ” voluntary term limits” pledge, and then recanted once in office? I lost my list, it was pretty impressive at the time. Guys like Largent who honored the term limits pledge were the exception to the rule.
Republicans just want term limits to apply to Democrats. When it affects them, suddenly they have a memory lapse.
Of course, when the Republicans were in charge in Congress, you thought you were watching Hogan’s Heros: “I see NOTH-ING! I hear NOTH-ING!” – at least as long as it concerned the Republicans.
Democrats were another story – Republicasn would level ethics complaints against Democrats about two weeks before an election, with the investigation to drag out for months (or years) before being dropped.
The two situations are different.
One change is about controlling the government.
The other is about controlling the people.
Which side are you on, more control over the people or more control over the government?
@1 What log have you been sleeping under? The SCOTUS declared all those term limits schemes (as applied to federal offices) unconstitutional several years ago.
In any case, I would rather be represented by a professional politician who knows what he/she is doing than some dipstick whose only qualification for public office is yelling the loudest in a townhall meeting.
@5 “Guys like Largent who honored the term limits pledge were the exception to the rule.”
One who didn’t was George “Term Limits” Nethercutt who, after getting elected to Congress, decided he didn’t want to give up the pay and perks. But the voters decided otherwise. Another wingnut hot air balloon shot down …
Exactly like oba-mao ran on the promise of taking public funds for the general election and then flip-flopped when it wasn’t to his advantage anymore.
And considering it was much more recent than 2004 & 2006 I wonder why you didn’t mention oba-mao and his flip-flop.
@7 “The two situations are different.”
Nope. Repubs want to pick and choose which constitutional provisions to abide by, and which to ignore. It’s not supposed to work that way.
P.S., owning guns has NOTHING to do with “control over the government.” If you don’t believe me, try using a gun to “control government” and see what happens to you.
These idiot wingnuts have talked themselves into believing they can fight aircraft carriers, F-16 jets, Abrams tanks, napalm cannisters, cluster bombs, ICBMs and nukes, with their handguns, hunting rifles, and shotguns.
You almost want to see them try it, just for the sheer entertainment value of watching them get slaughtered like chickens in a packing plant.
As for those idiotic gun-brandishing teabaggers, what good is a gun unless you’re willing to use it? Who are they going to use it on? Some senior citizen who shows up for a townhall leaning on a walker and holding a pro-health reform cardboad sign? If he blocks a doorway and someone pushes him out of the way, is he going to kill that person with his gun? The gun is nothing but a cartoonish prop, a garish sign that says “I’m a moron, kick me!”
@10 “oba-mao ran on the promise of taking public funds for the general election and then flip-flopped when it wasn’t to his advantage anymore”
Boo-fucking-hoo! Cry me a river! Got a complaint? Write it here [ ] and send it here _.
There is no need to amend the Constitution. If you’ve ever read, and comprehended the document, you’d know that provision already exists in the Constitution.
All you have to do is vote “no.” If enough people do not wish to be represented by a certain politician then that person cannot govern because they don’t have the consent of the governed.
See how that works?
By placing an artificial term limit on an individual you are taking away one of the basic premises of “representative government.”
Get it?
What you’re concerned about is unethical people in Washington D.C. pulling the levers of power.
The fastest and perhaps best way to eliminate the majority of the corruption problem is to reverse recognizing corporations as “persons” with the same rights as individuals and, eliminate lobbyists and their money.
Political office being a job of, for, and by The People should be PAID for by The People.
Money always has, and always will corrupt people. Removing the CAUSE of corruption, i.e. money, will eliminate the vast majority of the problem.
I invite you to learn about our Founding Fathers and their political ideals. Particularly on religion in government, progressive taxes, and how long a company should be allowed to remain incorporated.
You’ll never say “original intent” about the Constitution again.
Gee…what a shock.
The R’s and D’s are in on the whitewashing.
They fear a challenge from the Progressive Party and TeaParty.
I’d love to see 4-5 Parties in the 2012 Elections. It appears the Progressives are livid with Obama and the Democrats…and the TeaParty livid with BOTH Parties.
It’s time.
Personally, I’m against term limits for another reason–I don’t want to see high office become strictly a rich man’s game. Some ordinary wage-earner or someone with a small business with a family would be nuts to try and put a career on hold, spend a year campaigning and if successful have to go live in one of the most expensive places on earth for a few years…then try to pick up the pieces of a life after it was all over.
It doesn’t get talked about much, but as it is even though it’s illegal, employers are finding ways to screw National Guard members and reservists out of the jobs that are supposed to be kept waiting after they return from deployment–so trying to put a similar provision in place to protect short-time officeholders probably wouldn’t work either.
Art @ 17: Yep, Benjamin Franklin used to believe that office-holders shouldn’t even get a salary. Of course, Franklin spent the second half of his life living off the money he made selling his printing business, and didn’t need a salary. Toward the end of his life he changed his mind, recognizing that not paying a reasonable salary to office-holders guaranteed that only the rich could hold office, and others would be encouraged towards corruption in order to make ends meet.
Notice that our state legislature is geared the same way. As a part-time legislative body, and paid accordingly, it tends to discourage candidates who have to work full-time to make a living. It also encourages a variety of different forms of influence-peddling as part of their extra-governmental business interests.
Finally, your comment about the National Guard and Reserves is rather apt. There was a special report on it a while back, I’ve forgotten who aired it. They detailed how even a nurse in a Veteran’s Hospital got assigned to a lesser job when she returned from duty in Iraq.
One H.R. person attended an industry function where everyone at the dinner table (H.R. professionals) agreed that dealing with N.G. or Reserve people was “a pain” due to long and repeated deployments, and that they would not hire someone who’s resume indicated that they were in the N.G. or Researve. When the individual being interviewed pointed out that such conduct was illegal, they laughed, and one lady said “I can ALWAYS find a reason NOT to hire someone”.
A friend of mine (who’s currently back in “the sandbox” – again) keeps having to fight for his job every time he returns. He works for a large private utility, and every time he gets back they try to put him on the part-time shifts & schedules normally held by the newest and lowest-ranking employees. They ask him to be a good sport and “be patient” until a full-time position “opens up” – when someone dies, retires, or someone else gets deployed. He now goes right to his lawyer, and gets his old job back. But he found that one manager had put a note in his personnel file criticizing him for not being a “team player” and “uncooperative” – apparantly not agreeing to be a victim is a black mark in their eyes.
@5
When George Nethercutt ran against Tom Foley (’94?) his loudest rallying cry was for term limits and promised he’d only serve for three terms. He served for five, earning him the nickname George “the weasel kig” Nethercutt. There was a guy that would show up at his events and rallies in a weasel outfit. Too much fun.
Marvin,
why do you think Gen. Powell is a war criminal?
Now I get it.
You don’t want to take me up on my challenge because of your mancrush on me.
Does your wife know you got a thing for me?
@16 Oh, absolutely! Let’s have parties galore. There should even be a Nonpartisan Party for the Suzie Hutchisons of the world.
@18 In Ben Franklin’s day, only the rich could vote. Men who didn’t own property had no more say in running the country than women or children did.
@18 “One H.R. person attended an industry function where everyone at the dinner table (H.R. professionals) agreed that dealing with N.G. or Reserve people was “a pain” due to long and repeated deployments, and that they would not hire someone who’s resume indicated that they were in the N.G. or Researve. When the individual being interviewed pointed out that such conduct was illegal, they laughed, and one lady said “I can ALWAYS find a reason NOT to hire someone”.”
Gee, that sounds a whole lot like one of those Republican sunshine patriots — you know, the people who fly flags from their houses and “support the troops” as long as they’re not asked to actually do anything, but whose “patriotism” evaporates if they’re asked to pay taxes for a war or put up with a minor inconvenience like holding a job open for an NG or Reservist.
@21 I think the attraction must be that you’re the biggest dick on this board.
Karma
A New York gang banger murdered three men in an apartment yesterday, then tripped over his baggy pants while making his getaway, and fell to his death off a fire escape.
http://www.sphere.com/crime/ar.....n/19287498
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Hey Republicons, before you scoop the money out of a Salvation Army kettle, remember that what goes around comes around.
@26
That’s funny in a Quentin Tarantino- I shouldn’t be laughing at this but I can’t help my self- kinda way.
@13
They’re out there parading around and exercising their “rights” while oblivious to the fact that their parading around with guns interferes with everyone else that is trying to use that public spaces fundamental right to travel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement
The Alliance for Bonded Term Limits http://www.bondedtermlimits.org/ has another approach that is gaining traction. The Constitutional route will takemany years to accomplish. But, here is a valid start on the issue that bypasses the legislative process, yet achieves the aim.
Candidates for the Congress pledge a maximum number of years in Washington, and back that up with a promissory note of credible value. Default and those dollars go to a pre-designated charity in the promissory note.
Will Breazeale made history as the first to do so in October. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZusco2nqew
Also, see JC Watts’ endorsement http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/a-.....31402.html
We currently have six Congressional Candidates in various stages of formalizing their pledges.
Consider Bonded Term Limits in your problem solving deliberations. I think it will make good, common sense … for a change.
Who said Assault Weapons FartyArt? Man you are losing it. First you call Joe Lieberman an anti-semitic slur (manoftruth-like) and now you are misrepresenting the Second Amendment.
Puddy brought this up before when Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm placed these fools as CZARS.
Carol Brower – Ultra liberal anti-gun nutcase
Lynn Rosenthal – Domestic Violence Czar – Ultra liberal anti-gun fool who supports male castration.
Cass Sunstein – Puddy’s personal favorite – Another anti-gun nutcase, who said gun ownership is not a personal freedom
Ashton Carter – Another of Puddy’s favorites as this anti-gun nutcase fool called for the UN to ban gun ownership in America
Richard Holbrooke – Ultra liberal anti-gun fool who wants to dissolve the 2nd Amendment
Dennis Ross – Another anti-gun nutcase
Gil Kerlikowske – Drug Czar – Former Chief of Police of Libtardo Seattle. Another anti-gun nutcase. He was a close ally of the anti-gun Washington CeaseFire. And he hasn’t found his stolen police issue pistol yet.
George Mitchell – Another anti-gun nutcase
Joshua DuBois – Another anti-gun nutcase, who lobbies for anti-gun ownership
Hey FartArt, isn’t that what they did in Germany, ban firearms in the interest of Public Safety? First it was against the Nazis and Communists. When Hitler took power he removed the Nazi gun ban. Clayton Cramer in his book “Firing Back” discussed how the Weimar Republic went about this disarming. Ask ylb arschloch for the PuddyMissive.
This HA Libtardo fool has lost it badly, during the holiday season.
Roger Dumb Bunny again pellets smelly crap…
First it’s Republicans who put the money in the Salvation Army bucket. All Puddy to deliver this again for the 7th time… Here’s the setup Roger Dumb Bunny…
“To illustrate what distinguishes those who give from those who don’t, 20/20 went to two parts of the county that have two very different populations: Sioux Falls, South Dakota and San Francisco, California. 20/20 asked the Salvation Army to set up buckets at their busiest locations in both cities – Macy’s in San Francisco and Walmart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket gets more money?
Sioux Falls is rural and religious, more than half of the population go to church every week. People in San Francisco make much more money, are more liberal, and just 14% of people in San Francisco attend church every week. Liberals are said to care more about helping the poor; so will people in San Francisco give more?”
What they discovered was that even though the Sioux Falls location was not as busy and, in general, the folks living in Sioux Falls make way less than those in San Francisco they gave 30% more money.
So much for your Internet navigation skillz. Oh yeah Puddy recently read your web page navigation skillz are “priceless”. Click back four pages then click forward five pages? Hmmm…? Yep “PRICELESS”.
You know the answer Roger Dumb Bunny… Liberals are Cheap Bums… Worthless smelly pellets abound from the Dumb Bunny
Hey FartyArt, Puddy knows you are slow in the uptake but did you catch why Puddy included Lynn Rosenthal’s title, the Domestic Violence Czar, who jockstraps violence against men? Puddy suggests she pays you a visit and does surgery. How about your ex-police chief Gil Kerlikowski’s title? Don’t give him anything for safe keeping.
That’s why Puddy put hers and Kerlikowski’s CZAR titles there. Did you catch why Puddy placed their titles only next to them? Being the mental moron midget you are it flew right over ya head! Their positions definitely support the Peter Principle.
@30-32 Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.