Democrats Promise Ethical Era

[a_unique_person]

But in their first 100 hours of control on Capitol Hill, the chief Democratic goal appeared to be to make good on Ms Pelosi's pledge that this will be "the most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history".



heard it all before, i'm afraid.

[Upchurch]

heard it all before, i'm afraid.
heh, those were almost my exact words when I read the thread title.

[steverino]

Our congresses usually stay honest for about 103, maybe 104 hours. Then it's the same old s**t.

[RandFan]

Let's all celebrate the new congress by going out and buying a fresh jar of Vaseline.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." --The Who

[a_unique_person]

Our congresses usually stay honest for about 103, maybe 104 hours. Then it's the same old s**t.

See, that's why Australia is so much better than the USA. Ours stay honest for at least double that.

[NoZed Avenger]

See, that's why Australia is so much better than the USA. Ours stay honest for at least double that.

That's because the massive hangover after a win lasts a good 70-75 hours for your guys.

[rikzilla]

You'd think they'd be embarrassed by now to utter the words: "most ethical" and "history" in one sentence. Wouldn't it have been better for her simply to say "we'll try" and then let history be the judge?

The more things change, the more they stay the same I guess.

-z

[Darth Rotor]

Let's all celebrate the new congress by going out and buying a fresh jar of Vaseline.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." --The Who
Good call.

"You'll all do well to learn politics
Or I'll lay, your soul to waste!" ;)
-- Jagger/Richard --
(That's what is sounds like, I have no idea what the real lyrics were)

DR

[Upchurch]

Good call.

"You'll all do well to learn politics
Or I'll lay, your soul to waste!" ;)
-- Jagger/Richard --
(That's what is sounds like, I have no idea what the real lyrics were)

DR
close (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/r/rolling+stones/sympathy+for+the+devil_20117881.html)

"Use all your well-learned politesse (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=politesse)
Or Ill lay your soul to waste, um yeah"

I had to look it up, too. :o


eta: But, the line still fits, imho.

[shemp]

I'll comment on her remarks as soon as I stop laughing.

[Darth Rotor]

close (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/r/rolling+stones/sympathy+for+the+devil_20117881.html)

"Use all your well-learned politesse (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=politesse)
Or Ill lay your soul to waste, um yeah"

I had to look it up, too. :o

eta: But, the line still fits, imho.
Thanks for that, and for inspiring yet another look up. I now know what politesse means.

NOUN: Courteous formality; politeness: “the soul of uptown refinement and . . . politesse” (Russell Baker). ETYMOLOGY: French, from Old French, cleanliness, from Italian pulitezza, politezza, from pulire, to polish, clean, from Latin polre. See polite.

Oh, and drat, I forgot the "um yeah" and there it is, right on the Get Your Ya Ya's Out CD. (I love the bass line to that song.)

Woo hoooo! What's my name. Tell me baby, what's my name . . .

DR

[Upchurch]

Thanks for that, and for inspiring yet another look up. I now know what politesse means.
That's what I meant by "I had to look it up, too." ;)

[Beerina]

I recall the beginnings of the Clinton administration, observing many in the Reagan administration left office then immediately took huge fees as consultants or "book fees" or whatever, and claiming they weren't gonna do it, no sirree, not no way, no how, we're ethical. Then went and did it too.

[shemp]

OK I've stopped laughing now and can comment.

I'll be most interested to see how quickly my state's (New Hampshire) two freshman representatives are corrupted into the low ethical standards of Congress. Paul Hodes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Hodes) is a lawyer, so he's already hopelessly unethical, but Carol Shea-Porter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Shea-Porter) (from my district) is a social worker, so she might hold out for awhile before becoming trapped in the tarpit of Congressional (un)ethics. If she doesn't get trapped, she'll probably be out after one term.

[BPSCG]

I recall the beginnings of the Clinton administration, observing many in the Reagan administration left office then immediately took huge fees as consultants or "book fees" or whatever, and claiming they weren't gonna do it, no sirree, not no way, no how, we're ethical. Then went and did it too.And if I'm not mistaken, Clinton promised "the most ethical administration in history," or something like that.

Menwhile, even though the 100 hours haven't kicked off yet (starts Tuesday...), ethically-challenged John Conyers is set to become house Judiciary committee chairman (http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2454).

Pelosi is getting praise because she made the supposedly hard choices in not appointing Alcee Hastings, John Murtha, and William Jefferson to important committee posts. Someone please explain to me why this was supposed to be a tough call, and why she gets high marks for this. Hastings was impeached for corruption when he was a federal judge, Murtha got caught up in the Abscam scandal, and Jefferson ("I don't know how that $90,000 got into my freezer!") is desperately trying to avoid being indicted for bribery. Only an idiot would seriously consider giving these guys positions of responsibility, and only an idiot would deserve praise for struggling around to the right conclusion. I haven't heard anyone accuse Pelosi of being an idiot, so why the praise?

[Timble]

Tony Blair said something similar, when New Labour were elected in '97.....

[KingMerv00]

The problem with politics is that it is so damn full of politicians.

[Dr Adequate]

Yes, well, at least they have good intentions. Finally they can build that Washington-Hell interstate highway.

I didn't hear W announcing that he was going to be incompetent, lazy, stupid and ... oh, I already said incompetent.

---

BTW, I just googled "incompetent" to check I was spelling it right.

You try.

:dl:

[Dr Adequate]

Pelosi is getting praise because she made the supposedly hard choices in not appointing Alcee Hastings, John Murtha, and William Jefferson to important committee posts. Someone please explain to me why this was supposed to be a tough call, and why she gets high marks for this. Hastings was impeached for corruption when he was a federal judge, Murtha got caught up in the Abscam scandal, and Jefferson ("I don't know how that $90,000 got into my freezer!") is desperately trying to avoid being indicted for bribery. Only an idiot would seriously consider giving these guys positions of responsibility, and only an idiot would deserve praise for struggling around to the right conclusion. I haven't heard anyone accuse Pelosi of being an idiot, so why the praise? 'Cos it beats the heck out of the Republicans?

I agree, when the bar is set low, vaulting over it is easy. Heck, stepping over it is easy.

Limbo-dancing under it ... now there's a challenge.

[firecoins]

Pelosi is getting praise because she made the supposedly hard choices in not appointing Alcee Hastings, John Murtha, and William Jefferson to important committee posts. Someone please explain to me why this was supposed to be a tough call, and why she gets high marks for this. Hastings was impeached for corruption when he was a federal judge, Murtha got caught up in the Abscam scandal, and Jefferson ("I don't know how that $90,000 got into my freezer!") is desperately trying to avoid being indicted for bribery. Only an idiot would seriously consider giving these guys positions of responsibility, and only an idiot would deserve praise for struggling around to the right conclusion. I haven't heard anyone accuse Pelosi of being an idiot, so why the praise?
She had to consider these guys or the ones who haven't been caught yet.

[ponderingturtle]

BTW, I just googled "incompetent" to check I was spelling it right.

You try.

:dl:

of the first 5, three where about bush, one about how incompetent people don't realize it, and one on Incompetent Design, the new form of ID.

And I would expect less centralized corruption, as everyone knows that the democrats can't centralize anything in their party.

[rikzilla]

Sheesh! What ever happened to "a chicken in every pot"??? As recycled promises go the "most ethical" promise has also got to be #1 under the "most meaningless" category.

-z

[firecoins]

Sheesh! What ever happened to "a chicken in every pot"??? As recycled promises go the "most ethical" promise has also got to be #1 under the "most meaningless" category.

-z
The #2 most meaningless is to be bipartisan which Pelosi is also promising. She wants "to be a uniter, not a divider" in Bush language.

[ponderingturtle]

The #2 most meaningless is to be bipartisan which Pelosi is also promising. She wants "to be a uniter, not a divider" in Bush language.

Hey bush has united the country like few presidents before him, it just happens to be against him

[corplinx]

The offensive thing to me was Pelosi's speech yesterday about how far women have come because _she_ is speaker of the house and how it breaks some kind of barrier.

I think this demeans women CEOs like Carly Fiorina who actually made it and weren't just elected by their peers. Nancy Pelosi wasn't elected speaker of the house by the american people. She played the game and payed her dues and she rules the roost for now.

I think this also demeans Ann Richards, Christine Todd Whitman, and people with half a brain in general.

[ImaginalDisc]

You know, I'm a cynic too, but considering how bad the 109th Congress was, the 110th has a really easy act to follow.

[Darth Rotor]

The #2 most meaningless is to be bipartisan which Pelosi is also promising. She wants "to be a uniter, not a divider" in Bush language.
To which sentiment Ted Kennedy is alleged to have replied, in a drunken slur whilst hand grabbed the Massachusettes package: "Then unite with this, you hot blooded granny you! Wanna take a ride in my convertible, and watch the submarine races on the Potomac River, sweet Nancy Baby?"

Luckily, it was said in such a heavy Boston Brogue that Granny P didn't quite understand it, and his aids hustled him away before he grabbed at her.

Another crisis averted, to the chagrin of the tabloids and Rushbots everywhere. Sean Hannity wept. :p

DR

[Dr Adequate]

The offensive thing to me was Pelosi's speech yesterday about how far women have come because _she_ is speaker of the house and how it breaks some kind of barrier.

I think this demeans women CEOs like Carly Fiorina who actually made it and weren't just elected by their peers. Nancy Pelosi wasn't elected speaker of the house by the american people. She played the game and payed her dues and she rules the roost for now.

I think this also demeans Ann Richards, Christine Todd Whitman, and people with half a brain in general. Well, that was meaningful and coherent, thank you.

Oh, wait, did you have a point?

... No? Oh well.

Still, nice PC-speak. "Demeaning to women". Right, yeah.

[Katana]

The offensive thing to me was Pelosi's speech yesterday about how far women have come because _she_ is speaker of the house and how it breaks some kind of barrier.

I think this demeans women CEOs like Carly Fiorina who actually made it and weren't just elected by their peers. Nancy Pelosi wasn't elected speaker of the house by the american people. She played the game and payed her dues and she rules the roost for now.

I think this also demeans Ann Richards, Christine Todd Whitman, and people with half a brain in general.

As the first female speaker of the House, didn't she break some kind of barrier?

[Darth Rotor]

As the first female speaker of the House, didn't she break some kind of barrier?
If you are stuck in 1963, yes indeed. In 2006, hardly. Sandra Day O'Conner, on the other hand, was a glass ceiling breaker. Pat Schroeder paved the way for Nancy to arrive where she did. (I don't believe I spoke well of Pat S, but there ya go, she's not all bad.)

To Speaker Pelosi's credit, she played the political game well enough to position herself for this success. That's not easy to do, is it, Tom Delay? :confused:

DR

[Dr Adequate]

As the first female speaker of the House, didn't she break some kind of barrier? Get back in the kitchen. Men will decide what's "demeaning to women".

If only you girls had listened to us when we explained how degrading it is to have the vote.

[BPSCG]

I agree, when the bar is set low, vaulting over it is easy. Heck, stepping over it is easy.
So why did she almost trip over it? Reminds me of the Monty Python "Upper-Class Twit of the Year" competition, where the guy kills himself trying to jump over (IIRC) a couple of matchboxes. Pelosi's getting praise because she didn't make committee assignments that only an idiot would make.

Now, if she'd taken some back-bencher who'd demonstrated real character and leapfrogged him ahead of bunch of some time-servers whose chief talent is getting reelected from a safe district for the last twenty years, that would have been admirable. But in Congress, seniority is king, which is the only reason Murtha, Hastings, and Jefferson were even mentioned. In a sane world, they wouldn't be considered for choice committee assignments, because in a sane world, they wouldn't even be in Congress.

Meanwhile, in Virginia's 8th district, corrupt, influence-peddling, wife-beating, congressman-punching, twelve-year-old wrestling ("I like to hit people...") representative Jim Moran, has received his committee assignments, including the House Appropriations Committee (the guys who dole out the money). Said Moran (http://www.moran.house.gov/issues2.cfm?id=12379):



[quote]“As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, I plan to also ensure that

[BPSCG]

(Editor keeps truncating my post above. How dare it?)

“As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, I plan to also ensure that Northern Virginia receives its fair share of federal investment, to keep the economy strong, continue building a modern, livable, urban community and to help the underserved and underprivileged in our communities.”

I liked Moran better when he was more forthright about his love of pork (http://www.sungazette.net/articles/2006/06/10/arlington/news/nws936e.txt):“When I become chairman [of a House appropriations subcommittee], I'm going to earmark the **** out of it,” Moran buoyantly told a crowd of 450 attending the event.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." --The Who

Which is largely why I don't bother to vote.

[Katana]

If you are stuck in 1963, yes indeed. In 2006, hardly. Sandra Day O'Conner, on the other hand, was a glass ceiling breaker. Pat Schroeder paved the way for Nancy to arrive where she did. (I don't believe I spoke well of Pat S, but there ya go, she's not all bad.)

To Speaker Pelosi's credit, she played the political game well enough to position herself for this success. That's not easy to do, is it, Tom Delay? :confused:

DR
Well, I don't think I'm stuck in 1963. I was merely pointing out that as the first female speaker, she broke new ground. Didn't think that that was such a controversial notion. Other women have had similar success in their respective fields, and, yes, I'm sure many others paved the way for them, too.
Get back in the kitchen. Men will decide what's "demeaning to women".

If only you girls had listened to us when we explained how degrading it is to have the vote.

:p

[rikzilla]

LOL

This Christmas I was going to get my wife a watch...but then I thought...hey! why bother? There's already a clock on the stove! (badabing)

:chores004:

-z
I'll be here all week folks!"

[ImaginalDisc]

LOL

This Christmas I was going to get my wife a watch...but then I thought...hey! why bother? There's already a clock on the stove! (badabing)

:chores004:

-z
I'll be here all week folks!"

That would be funnier if that weren't the reason I don't wear a watch.

. . .And I'm a guy.

[Merko]

If you are stuck in 1963, yes indeed.

Hmm, according to Wikipedia, there seems to have been 7 speakers of the House since 1963. Of those, not 3 or 4, but 0 have been women. So I'm not really sure how Pelosi is not setting a first here just because the total male dominance was broken before in a different office.

[ponderingturtle]

To Speaker Pelosi's credit, she played the political game well enough to position herself for this success. That's not easy to do, is it, Tom Delay? :confused:


Exaclty, she has reached the top of her profession. Just like the other women.

[ImaginalDisc]

Hmm, according to Wikipedia, there seems to have been 7 speakers of the House since 1963. Of those, not 3 or 4, but 0 have been women. So I'm not really sure how Pelosi is not setting a first here just because the total male dominance was broken before in a different office.

You clearly didn't get the memo from Priviliged White Male, of the Boston Males, to the effect that woman's lib and voting for coloreds, or "civil rights" as the kids call them these days, are offically over. Done. Finito. All was made well when The Equal Pay Act of 1963 was passed, or was that the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or was that the Americans with Disabilites Act of 1990, or was it when "Brokeback Mountain" won an Oscar? Whatever. The point is that any seminal accomplishment by a woman or minority, never both of course, women aren't allowed to be black, is by definition passe.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

LOL

This Christmas I was going to get my wife a watch...but then I thought...hey! why bother? There's already a clock on the stove! (badabing)

:chores004:

-z
I'll be here all week folks!"

I always heard the joke as:

Q: How do you repair a woman's watch?
A: You don't have to - there's a clock on the stove!

:duck:

[pipelineaudio]

forget ethics, can we just get some health care from this ?

[corplinx]

Still, nice PC-speak. "Demeaning to women". Right, yeah.

The only ground she broke was the earth above real ground breakers rolling in their graves. Did you even see her speech to have any idea what I am talking about?

[luchog]

heard it all before, i'm afraid.

If I weren't at work at the time, I think I would have injured myself laughing.

[luchog]

Limbo-dancing under it ... now there's a challenge.
Well, not many administrations have failed to lower themselves to the challenge.

[RandFan]

BTW, I just googled "incompetent" to check I was spelling it right.Yeah, thanks to those bastions of free speech who go to great lengths to keep the Chinese from having free speech and otherwise silly BS from search results they some how don't care about this. Yes, "incompetent" brings up Bush and "liar" brings up Blair.

It's called google bombing (http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/google.asp).

Hey, poo poo, pee pee.

:rolleyes:

[Dr Adequate]

Pelosi's getting praise because she didn't make committee assignments that only an idiot would make. Quite so.

Which proves that she is smarter than idiots.

As I said, the bar is low.

[Dr Adequate]

Yes, "incompetent" brings up Bush and "liar" brings up Blair. Google scores two out of two!

[Dr Adequate]

The only ground she broke was the earth above real ground breakers rolling in their graves. Did you even see her speech to have any idea what I am talking about? I am sure that this means something in your head.

Now, how did Pelosi "demean women"?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I feel that this new congress is different from the last congress in only the fact that they are more timid and pacifist, however they are the same incompetent stuffed shirts as they have always been. I wish that there were politicians with initiative and dedication and freshness today, politicians who could by sheer chutzpah and personality change the way things are done and get others to follow behind. Unfortunately however we don’t see such people in Washington, what we see are desperate and officious individuals who either by carelessness, ignorance, naivety or pure cowardliness are unable to make lasting and effective changes to the way things are done in the United States.

[RandFan]

Google scores two out of two! Yeah but the Chinese will never know.

[davefoc]

I think all this cynicism is reasonable, but couldn't we just take a break for a moment and think it was nice that the new congress passed some ethics reform that even in the face of the abramoff scandals the Republicans didn't do.

They were all gung ho to, until, apparently some polling data showed reform wasn't all that necessary to getting reelected. So they didn't do it and now to avoid complete embarrassment they vote for it when the Dems take over.

I don't want to sound like a shill for the Dems here, I live in CA and the CA Dem party is pretty much of a criminal organization, still when politicians do something ethical isn't some kind of cynicism break justified for at least a few hours?

[RandFan]

I think all this cynicism is reasonable, but couldn't we just take a break for a moment and think it was nice that the new congress passed some ethics reform that even in the face of the abramoff scandals the Republicans didn't do.

They were all gung ho to, until, apparently some polling data showed reform wasn't all that necessary to getting reelected. So they didn't do it and now to avoid complete embarrassment they vote for it when the Dems take over.

I don't want to sound like a shill for the Dems here, I live in CA and the CA Dem party is pretty much of a criminal organization, still when politicians do something ethical isn't some kind of cynicism break justified for at least a few hours? Fair enough but is it real reform? If it's like that prescription medical BS that Bush pushed through you can keep it.

My parents are struggling and they don't qualify. I didn't believe them at first but after going over it with them it turns out that they are not.

So, if the Dem's deliver I'm there with bells on. Sorry to be cynical but I'll have to see it to believe it.

[BPSCG]

I think all this cynicism is reasonable, but couldn't we just take a break for a moment ...

(...snip...)

...when politicians do something ethical isn't some kind of cynicism break justified for at least a few hours?Okay, it's been nine hours since your post.

Back to the politician-bashing.

[davefoc]

Fair enough but is it real reform? If it's like that prescription medical BS that Bush pushed through you can keep it.

My parents are struggling and they don't qualify. I didn't believe them at first but after going over it with them it turns out that they are not.

So, if the Dem's deliver I'm there with bells on. Sorry to be cynical but I'll have to see it to believe it.

If by prescription medical BS you mean the medicare drug bill then I think you are referring to the most openly corrupt piece of legislation of my life time. The object of that bill was to transfer massive amounts of money to the drug companies and the insurance companies. It was good at that, but alas, it was confusing and very difficult for many seniors to deal with. I even read a report that for people with only moderate prescription drug requirements it was cheaper to buy drugs at Costco than to buy the same drugs through the medicare plan.

I was curious if the Democrats would actually make changes that would indicate a desire to be less corrupt than the Republicans. I had three tests in mind.

1. Real reform about earmarks and pork.

2. Reform of the Medicare drug plan.

3. Reform if not outright elimination of the ethanol subsidies.

I thought these programs were so corruptly inspired and of such low value to the country compared to their cost that regardless of the ideology of the legislator passing ethical reform in these areas would be an indicator of a more ethical approach than was put forth by the Republican congress.

So I'll give the Democrats a little credit for making some progress on one of those issues on their first day and be a little hopeful of some more progress in the days to come.

And now that BPSCG has had a nine hour rest from his cynicism about government doesn't he feel better?

[RandFan]

If by prescription medical BS you mean the medicare drug bill then I think you are referring to the most openly corrupt piece of legislation of my life time. The object of that bill was to transfer massive amounts of money to the drug companies and the insurance companies. It was good at that, but alas, it was confusing and very difficult for many seniors to deal with. I even read a report that for people with only moderate prescription drug requirements it was cheaper to buy drugs at Costco than to buy the same drugs through the medicare plan. Yep, that's the one.


I was curious if the Democrats would actually make changes that would indicate a desire to be less corrupt than the Republicans. I had three tests in mind.

1. Real reform about earmarks and pork.

2. Reform of the Medicare drug plan.

3. Reform if not outright elimination of the ethanol subsidies.

I thought these programs were so corruptly inspired and of such low value to the country compared to their cost that regardless of the ideology of the legislator passing ethical reform in these areas would be an indicator of a more ethical approach than was put forth by the Republican congress.

So I'll give the Democrats a little credit for making some progress on one of those issues on their first day and be a little hopeful of some more progress in the days to come.I'm not as yet convinced. Time will tell but if I think it looks like progress has taken place I will tell you. I didn't vote for Clinton either time but I have said on many occasions it was one of the best times of my life. I'm not sure how much Clinton had to do with that but there it is.

[BPSCG]

And now that BPSCG has had a nine hour rest from his cynicism about government doesn't he feel better?No. I'm in a bad mood.