Texsox

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 01:34 PM) There's quite a bit that the government doesn't share with the press both good and bad. Just wondering if and how they share it with y'all.

Doing stupid things "in the moment" has been going on for millenniums. It isn't specific to males or females, gay or straight, Roman or Greek.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 08:18 PM) The firefighters union is supporting a Dem over Giuliani? shocking mr_genius agreeing with the liberal media over the brave men and women of the NYPD, shocking.

I always struggle to articulate this. I believe Bush should be allowed to nominate a hard core conservative whose ideology closely matches his. That is why out Constitution calls for the President to nominate. I also believe that same ideology should not be a reason to not confirm someone. Their qualifications, character, morals, and ethics should come into play, but not their ideology. I disagree with these "litmus" tests for positions. If Congress is that upset about this particular crime, and I do believe it is a crime, then write a new law which is very specific, do not use a confirmation as the opportunity to legislate. And before someone labels me a hypocrite, I'd say the same thing if a Dem was President.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/30/...in3428882.shtml Interesting story on leaving products on "stand by"

QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 10:39 AM) They should be asking him 'If we make waterboarding illegal, will you prosecute people who do it', not 'do you think it is illegal'? It isn't his job to make the laws, but to enforce them. Congress is supposed to be making the laws. grow some stones, write a specific law, and be done with it. I thought there are already laws on the books against torture, asking if this fits the definition of the law seems like a valid question. Now I wish they were more interested in his thought process and how he arrived at his decision, than the actual decision. Ultimately that is more important.

Yet it didn't put hookers and intravenous drug use out of business. It also gave the wacko Christian groups a new target to attack and use to raise money, after the decline of communism.

The government says it is real, other people disagree. I guess I have to ask why would the government lie? Would this not be considered a success and make President Bush look better?

I just realized we've been living with this for over twenty years. Many people here have known AIDS all their lives.

And we believe Williams? Probably true, we believe him, but that doesn't mean another GM will believe it. And would we want Williams believing everything he reads in the newspaper?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) So the technology doesn't work in reverse? They can't forward the local information to Washington, where they actually work? I'd much rather see the Reps and Senators in committees and meetings working together to come up with ideas to actually fix the problems, then seeing them at home at $1000 a plate hot dog luncheons. To me the negotiations that need to take place to fix the countries problems are more critical in being in a face to face setting, then anything that is going to be done in their district. Being in their district isn't going to solve the compromises and negotiations that need to take place in order to actually fix the problems. They have not come up with a technology yet that sovles the intracacies of those types of mass human interactions. If you want to utilize staffs and such, it is much easier for them to send relevant information on to their one rep/sen than it is for all of those reps and sens to negotiation the finer points of immigration reform or social security reform with each other. Going home early is just a cop out so that they can ignore the problems and fund raise for their re-election. I agree with almost everything you mention. It's the solution where we differ. Sometimes working longer and harder doing the exact same thing the exact same way is the solution. Sometimes it is stepping back and changing what you are doing. I'd like to see what stepping back and doing something different accomplishes. If they use the day to play golf with lobbyists, it's a waste. If they use it productively, it's a plus. Yet one more way we can evaluate our elected officials. Perhaps emailing our Congressman and asking what their Friday schedule is would be interesting. I hope an enterprising journalist does just that. But remember, we vote. They cannot ignore the problems if we do not allow them to. They have to rely on staffs, there are too many bills, over too wide a range of topics, for them to personally review and understand each one. Like any CEO, they have various levels of staffers with increasing levels of responsibility and earned trust. And just like a CEO, if he is out of the building the work still goes on, and it is that end result that matters. So having staffers that can reduce a 250 page bill into a 25 page summary are invaluable. The Senator can read that anywhere. I assume we can separate the hundreds of mundane bills from the few critical like Social Security, Iraq, etc. I agree having them out fund raising and campaigning is a waste of our time and detracts from the important stuff. It is also the most compelling reason in my mind for term limits. I also agree that there is a time and a place for face to face meetings. I believe they should also spend time in their district offices. It is a balance of time and priorities. I think it is a cop out and an easy excuse to require them to stay nice and cozy in Washington instead of getting off their asses and visit their districts. Not 100% of the time, but 20% feels ok to me. And I guess an argument could be made that campaigning puts them in front of their constituents, which accomplishes partially that goal. I doubt the effectiveness, but a little is better than none, and far better than another lunch with a lobbyist. As for the technology in reverse, you already answered that. There are great reasons for face to face and great reasons for email, phones, etc. Both need to be employed. 80% face to face in Washington and 20% face to face in their district.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) How exactly do you work on the details of a bill when no one is in Washington? Their staffs play a huge role. They email, call, send memos. You don't think they are roaming the halls taking meetings? They are spread out in various office buildings around Washington. They convine to vote. Same thing if they are travelling. It's 2007, we have the technology that replaces face to face meetings. I assume their district offices have the technology to work effectively.

Exactly what I've been saying. Results, not hours is the key. If you think they have failed because they are not spending enough time together, in Washington, then OK, this is a bad idea. I think they fail when they lose touch with the American public. When they believe the average Americans are the people they see everyday in Washington, they have a warped sense of who we are. They get cozy and comfortable. I'm not advocating working less hours, I believe if they replace the Washington hours with district hours, we will benefit. No more theoretical citizens this bill is going to help, have them meet actual people with real problems. I've always worked jobs where the hardest working people are doing extra work away from the office. The sales reps who travel the streets after working hours canvasing new customers, who are searching the internet for leads, who are out in the community making contacts. Chaining them to a desk for an extra ten hours is not productive. Much like out elected officials should be doing.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 08:36 AM) Dispite your initial protests, I know you are trying to bait here. You went from talking about not happy with your governments body of work to immediately questioning why anyone would want them to do more... What kind of sense does that make? They have failed, so they should work less. Uh, ok. I think they would do better if they got their asses out of Washington and came back to see the people they are paid to represent. Not working less. I don't see where they are forced to work less. They are not required to be in Washington. That is very different than not working. The one thing they have to be in Washington for is voting on new laws, I don't think that should be a priority. Does it make sense to say, you have failed, so I want you to keep doing the same thing, only do more of it? Uh, ok. And by the way, you do realize it is an election year and of course they are going to need that time to campaign. Which is the real reason for this.

Bottom line, I wish they could get the sessions down to a week a month and have our elected representative, available, in their districts, the other times. Access to all, not just those that can fly to Washington. I want them in local restaurants, visiting local industry, driving the local roads. My Congressman ran a local business, people knew him. He was a member of our Manufacturing Association. He was in touch. Spending time in Washington, as part of the industry, does not assure us better government. In fact, I think it could produce worst. All they like to do in Washington is produce new laws, get them back in their District to make the government work for the people.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 30, 2007 -> 08:01 AM) You find it interesting that people expect an effecient, hardworking, government for the huge salaries and benefits that we pay them? You must be the greatest boss in the world to work for. Also the correlation between size of government and work ethic is pretty much comical. They have nothing to do with each other, at all. Again, what outcomes are you looking for, something concrete. More legislation? Name something they did not accomplish that could have been accomplished if they work longer hours? When I was managing sales reps, that's what I looked for. Outcomes. In this venue, do you want a CEO whose companies shows a profit of $100,000,000 and works 30 hours or someone who leads the company to a profit of $10,000,000 in 80 hours? And the only work that counts is in Washington? Are you discounting everything they do in the District? Sorry you found my question comical. Do you equate hardworking with hours worked? That somehow a person who completes a project in 3 hours is not working as hard or efficient as someone who completes the same task in 6 hours? I hope you never manage hourly rate employees.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 11:12 PM) I have full internet access at a cost to me of 50 a month. There's some local here on our base who is really cleaning up from running it but I have no problem with that as it allows me to stay in touch for the same price I was paying for the net back home. This being the case, I can read any of the news websites I choose, stay up to date with sports, trade stocks.......whatever. That's a far cry from the 1st time I was over here when I was jostling to get close to the shortwave radio someone brought to listen to BBC. Any additional information beyond what civilians receive?

http://netaddiction.com/resources/internet...iction_test.htm What the hell does some internet test know? If I have a problem I better talk to my buddies on soxtalk . . .

Those that think they should be in session more, is it because you want more government? What is it that hasn't been done, and why is it better that they be in session instead of somewhere else? I find it interesting that the small government advocates are the same ones advocating for more hours in Washington for the representatives. I am seriously not trying to bait anyone, I'm interested.

What access to information about the war do you have? For example, newspapers, tv, radio, etc.

If only there were more warnings about meeting in person someone you met on the internet

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 04:50 PM) you really think thats all he did? well, he sure fooled everyone i guess \ I guess the Firemen of NY would also have an opinion, perhaps as relevant as Time Magazine. besides, these prestigious awards are just given out to make Bush look bad.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) Tell me about it. IMNSHO Rudy is the biggest sleaze ball, slime bucket that has declared and Hillary isn't exactly oozing integrity.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 02:27 PM) And ultimately, this is why she will win - and so will Guiliani. They are the only two people people have heard of. God help us all.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Oct 29, 2007 -> 12:56 PM) any sign of SB? SB? Sperm Backup?