Lefty corruption....again

What? He resigns because he used "bad language". By that definition half of the republican party should be on the street. ;)

Surely, something more must have been said to be considered harassment...
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
The ongoing saga of Massa is getting pretty juicy. The guy sounds like the term 'loose cannon' may have been coined just for him—but he's very entertaining in a goofy kind of way. Apparently not only is he salty in speech, he's also exceptionally verbose. This weekend he had a go at just about everybody in his party on his radio show(apparently new york congressmen get to have their own radio shows.)

Here's some of the high points(linked from the beltway website Roll Call):

  • His sexual harassment problem occurred when he and his staff got blasted at a wedding party, and he tousled a guy's hair after suggesting he should 'frack' him instead of a bridesmaid the boys had been drooling over.
  • The evil democratic party leadership united ranks(that'll be the day) to sweep him out of office because he's a no vote on healthcare.
  • And last but not least, he was once accosted by a naked Rahm Emmanuel in some place where our elected officials apparently all hang out naked together—some steam bath or something.

This guy is giving Sandford (the Appalachian Trail governor) a run for top slot in the Can't Stop Explaining sweepstakes.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
He is actually from my area, and as the area runs conservative so does he ... but while he runs his mouth, much of what he says about the issues and poison environment are true.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,961
The press made it seem like he was being thrown out for ethical reasons, but it sounds like he was unhappy. Since he seems like a blue bitch, no great loss :p
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
This guy is quite the attention magnet. Firedoglake has some speculation(fairly valid, I think) about whether he is actually going to resign after poking the hornet's nest this weekend.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/03/08/will-massa-still-resign/
Massa says very specifically that he is resigning to protect his family from a media circus...And yet, he spends an entire radio show bringing forth an array of new charges and a bunch of other incidents that seem to always place him in a Jack Tripper-like misunderstanding about his sexuality. If he’s warmed to the media glare, and is no longer concerned about the impact on his family, well… why resign?

@Thrasher--if he does leave, it helps Pelosi with her whip count so she can rule teh world and pass healthcare, also.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
This one caught my eye
Massa clearly feels burned enough by the Democratic leadership to return fire at them. But the attack is not logically coherent. It’s also perhaps not the entire story. And certainly, the long looping statement yesterday undercuts his argument that he was forced out of office, which even Democratic aides conceded last week.

Something else is missing from the picture. Of course, he could turn out to be just a wack job. Appearing on FOX noise's resident psycho show would be consistent with that. ;)
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
This was sent to me. I don't know the source, but a little digging did confirm the basic facts. Not corruption yet, but this would qualify as the 3rd Obama "buy-off", wouldn't it?
================
Utah's lone Democratic Congressman Jim Matheson voted against Obamacare when it first passed the House last year. Then the heavens opened up and Obama came forth to nominate his brother Scott to a federal judgeship. Will the appointment influence Matheson's vote? Was it a bribe?

The League of American Voters is asking this question in a very public way through an advertisement it is currently airing on Salt Lake City television, in the middle of Matheson's district. The ad poses the question:

"Our Congressman Jim Matheson voted against Obama's health care proposals and Salt Lake City is saying thanks. He voted against cutting Medicare by $500 billion, against health care rationing, against higher taxes. But then Obama appointed his brother to a federal judgeship. Some people say it was bribe to get Jim to change his vote. Was it? We'll be able to tell if Jim now switches his vote. Hey Jim, we'll be watching!"

This ad, which costs $77,000 to run, is indicative of the hand-to-hand warfare going in district after district over the health care bill. The League is running ads in eighteen districts and its efforts are being supplemented by other groups which have now also begun running media in the districts of swing Congressmen.
=================
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
No telling. They've obviously not hesitated to pull out all kinds of bribes up to this point. In fact, I can't remember ever hearing about so many deals regarding a piece of legislation coming out beforehand--maybe we're getting more transparency? ;)

Seriously, I've not followed politics this closely til the last two years--I know there's tons of deal-making and horsetrading routinely done for important votes, but can anyone remember hearing about it like this all the time? What was the Abramoff /Tom DeLay scandal about? That's the last one I dimly remember, and it seems to me it was an after the fact exposure.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
After months of whining that Obama wasn't giving them teh leadership on Healthcare Reform, the Senate is now predictably all pissy because he is:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100313...Ec2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDZnVsbG5ic3BzdG9y

President Barack Obama says he wants projects helping specific states yanked from the health care bill Congress is writing. Democratic senators, being senators, beg to differ…
That tepid salute underscores the prickliness with which many senators have greeted what they consider Obama's meddling in their business and raises questions about how successful the president will be in erasing the special projects from final legislation.

On the other hand, while 'eliminating all state-specific provisions' from the bill sounds good—Cornhusker kickback, etc—it also looks like a pragmatic combination of pandering to the House for votes and pure Poll Riding imo, so maybe the Senators have a point, especially this one:
Obama has railed against the "ugly process" of cutting special deals, but the president and his top advisers were prime players in negotiations on the agreements to win votes and push the legislation forward.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
It's even having an impact here. His visit has been delayed, shortened, cancelled (we're not sure yet) and his family won't be coming. All the planned events here now have to re-arranged, etc.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,830
Location
Australia
You mean Hillary had a crooked donor? Hillary Clinton?? I'm shocked, shocked I say. :)

Here's some lefty on lefty policing over at Huffpo that is a bit more worrisome:
Ten Things Obama isn't Telling Us
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Here's what happened: after WWII, the country was exporting products and oil, and U.S. workers were receiving high wages and the promise of the American dream, i.e., a house, car, and appliances for every househood, or a middle class lifestyle. But high wages led to high prices, and soon the country began to experience one trade deficit after another from the early '70s onwards. Peak oil didn't help, so the country struck deals with oil-producing countries and used the dollar to leverage itself out of everything, from trade deals to military invasions to loans.

Manufacturing started outsourcing and moved from Main Street to Wall Street to play casino capitalism. Government regulated less, allowing business to play casino capitalism some more and citizens, now out of the factory, to move to more satisfying occupations, receive higher wages, and borrow more. Government, meanwhile, used the armed forces to establish U.S. power worldwide.

That's why there's a chronic deficit and a total debt of around $57 trillion, with more than $12 trillion from government and $45 trillion shared between corporations and households (around $9 trillion for the latter). That's why by the 1990s personal debt exceeded disposable income and reached 150 pct of the latter. That's why U.S. banks are likely exposed to almost $100 trillion in derivatives, an amount that would make the total amount spent on bailouts look like peanuts. As for the armed forces, likely up to 40 pct of military operations are already funded by foreign loans. That's expected given an economy where 70 pct of growth comes from consumer spending.

The cause of U.S. ills is not "lefty corruption" but spendthrift behavior by government, corporations, and households. Put simply, the U.S. citizen demanded a middle class lifestyle and prosperity and that's what he got, only he was hardly exporting and saving, so he gained wealth by borrowing. Not surprisingly, corporations and government did not same. Not surprisingly, too, they are blaiming each other when all three were responsible.

And the countries that earned a lot by exporting to the U.S. will experience the same when they start cashing in and dream of a middle class lifestyle, too.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
43
I have searched in vain for a link to post with this observation I have about what I think is the most under-reported story of the health care mediapalooza. That would be the three dem no votes in the Senate against the reconciliation 'fix" package that was primarily crafted to take out the infamous Cornhusker Kickback.

Two of those no votes were the two dem Senators from Arkansas, (totally understandable as both of them are probably red toast in 2010, ) but the third, no one seems to have noticed, was the broker of the Kickback himself, Ben Nelson.

That's right. Ben Nelson voted against removing his sweetheart deal for Nebraska that has been decried in every possible venue from every possible pundit as the epitome of corruption. And it's not even news.

EDIT: Okay I found a sort-of link that says it's because Lincoln and Nelson are owned not just by the insurance industry but by the banking industry too. So it's two for one lefty corruption.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-connor/the-bank-lobbyists-behind_b_512049.html
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
Any Faux News quote should be considered with suspicion.

Why this is in the leftie thread is beyond reason. Since the EPA was gutted by rightie adminsitrations it's not surprising that they are incompetent...
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
Back
Top Bottom