Old Hippie Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 Now that's FUNNY: A lib talking about "ethics". HH Well someone has to explain the concept to the conservatives... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 I wouldn't put anything past Pelosi and Reid. They are determined to do what they think the public needs, and the public be damned if they disagree. That's just part of the structure of lib DNA, isn't it? HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted December 14, 2010 Report Share Posted December 14, 2010 Now that's FUNNY: A lib talking about "ethics". HH Well someone has to explain the concept to the conservatives... But "ethics" isn't part of a lib's vocabulary. How many ways was it necessary to explain it to Charlie Rangel and, now, Maxine Waters? HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 Or any of the conservative reps who get "caught with their pants down..." Who was the guy who said "morality and ethics have no place in politics...?" Churchill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 I think that is part of an oath of office to which all legislators are secretly sworn. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 And now we break for some pole dancing. After viewing this you may go back to arguing about assinine American politicians. 4j9X5li5a5E&feature=player_embedded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 Reid threatens to keep Congress into next year [color:red]New spending bill totals $575.13 million per page[/color] Forget about going quietly into the night. Senate Democrats on Tuesday unveiled a broad agenda for an end-of-session sprint that, in other years, could be a whole year's worth of activity  ranging from an arms-reduction treaty with Russia to a major immigration bill to overturning the ban on gay troops. And that's not to mention the nearly 2,000-page, $1.1 trillion massive spending bill Senate Democrats said they'll try to push through. The bill contains hundreds of pork-barrel spending projects and new rules governing everything from airport baggage to detainees at the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. "We're not through. Congress ends on Jan. 4," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrap. The omnibus spending bill is likely to get the most attention, spanning 1,924 pages and spending an average of $575.13 million per page. It stands in contrast to the House, which last week passed a streamlined bill freezing fiscal 2011 government spending at 2010's level. The Senate bill, though, boosts spending by $16 billion  a tough sell at a time when deficits and debt already are dominating the policy debate in Washington. [color:red]In some cases the spending bill not only rejects President Obama's proposed cuts, it actually boosts spending.[/color] For example, Mr. Obama earlier this year told Congress to cut funding for the health and welfare package targeting Mississippi's Delta region, which in 2010 received about $26 million. But the Senate bill includes funding and actually increases it to nearly $35 million in 2011. ... Washingdung Times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizardKing Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 But "ethics" isn't part of a lib's vocabulary. How many ways was it necessary to explain it to Charlie Rangel and, now, Maxine Waters? Funny thing is that the Dems call out their own and if a member is doing something not good, they bust them for it very publicly. Hence Rangel and Waters. However, the GOP does not do such a thing, and just sweeps any & all under the rug. Too many to list (the dozen K Street lads, Ensign, etc.). This Hudson thing was just the latest. The GOPers actually want to kill or severely downsize the ethics committee now that they are in charge (gee, there's a surprise!): http://www.congress.org/news/2010/12/02/watchdogs_urge_gop_not_to_downsize_ethics_office You tell me who has the ethics. And no, the answer is NOT they are both the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 Flash...not sure if your clip was an intentional employment of symbolism or not. However, the nature of politicians and dancing whores is not much different. Both are sponsored by "special interests" (unions, corporations, associations by politicians; bar owners and foreign sponsors by the dancers.) Politicians and whores are well-known for often promising one thing and doing quite the opposite. In most cases, the voters and "johns" get fucked. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted December 15, 2010 Report Share Posted December 15, 2010 BTW, LK, the two judges who have upheld the constitutionality of requiring health insurance were promoted by Demoncrats. So much for slinging mud at Hudson. Either you were unaware of that, or your ethics prevented you from disclosing the fact. 555555555555555 HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now