Typical Republican Hypocrisy

“dream on baked alaska!”

“So where on the ballot do I mark to vote no?”

“watch the hanging chad DOM...”

“The GOP's Great Mother's Day Prank

By Ruth Rosen, San Francisco Chronicle
May 6, 2003

You're working harder and longer than ever. Your kids demand your attention. Your household suffers from benign neglect.


If only you had some time flexibility, you could get that leaking toilet fixed. You could take your son to the dentist and talk with your daughter's teacher. You could visit your ailing parent.


Not to worry. The Republicans – famous for their support of labor and family-friendly policies – have come up with a solution. It's called the "Family Time Flexibility Act" and the House leadership, seeking to woo women voters, has promised to pass it by Mother's Day as a gift to America's working women.

You can almost hear Republican operatives laughing behind closed doors. "These women workers – they're so exhausted from doing two jobs – one at work and one at home – they'll never realize what we're doing; they'll jump at anything that promises more flexibility."

And, they're probably right. Most of us crave flexible work hours. "I used to work for a company that gave 'comp' time when I worked overtime, and I loved it," says Laurel Eby of San Jose.

But most of us don't realize that this bill, with its seductive illusion of flexibility, would end one of the fundamental rights enacted by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 – a 40-hour workweek and time-and-a half pay for overtime.

Under the Family Time Flexibility Act, an employer can decide to reimburse you for overtime with compensatory (comp) time, rather than with pay. So, if you work eight extra hours, your boss can give you 12 hours of comp time – which you can use or cash out sometime in the next 13 months, at the employer's convenience.

So what's wrong with such flexibility?

Plenty. "This bill," says John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, "is about giving more flexibility to employers – not employees." Employers, in short, get to decide when you work overtime and when you get to use your banked time. Jan Howe, a union member in San Ramon, agrees with Sweeney. She's "seen how nasty my employer can be in intimidating my co-workers to work overtime."

The Economic Policy Institute – a labor-supported think-tank – opposes the legislation because many low-wage, hourly workers simply cannot live without the extra money they earn working overtime. They also fear employers will discriminate against employees who insist on overtime pay rather than comp time. For these low-wage workers, says Rep. John F. Tierney, D-Mass., the result will be "less time for their families and less income to support those families."

Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, who voted against the bill, says that "employees are in effect being asked to give a no-interest loan to their employer." If a company goes belly up – which happened to more than 500,000 businesses last year – you might have banked a month of comp time, but you may never get it.

Arlie Hochschild, professor of sociology at UC Berkeley, and author of "The Second Shift" and "The Time Bind," views this legislation as "a fig leaf covering corporate interests." The boss, she says, "will have more incentive to increase overtime and the worker will get an IOU."

Not surprisingly, those who support the legislation include the National Association of Manufacturers and other business groups who stand to gain greater flexibility and profit from the bill's passage.

With so many mothers in the workforce, balancing work and family life has clearly emerged as the labor dilemma of the 21st century. But we need to find solutions that protect both employers and employees from exploitation.

Flexible schedules are already available, if employers want to offer them. Unfortunately, only 28.8 percent of workers have the choice to vary their work hours.

Congress, moreover, could increase the minimum wage, limit mandatory overtime, provide paid family leave, encourage flex-time and shorten the standard workweek – all of which would help workers achieve a saner balance between their work and family lives.

Meanwhile, Ellen Bravo, Director of 9-5, the National Association of Working Women, reminds us that the whole point of the 40-hour workweek was to make it more difficult for employers to force workers to take extra time away from their families.”

“How are we going to compete against the labor force in other countries who earn less than five dollars a day, if we don't drive ourselves into complete misery?
Is the machine working for us, or are we working for the machine?”

“Taxes are the same percentage of GDP that they've always been, regardless of rates. The Laffer Curve shows that you can reach a point where you cut taxes too much and it reduces revenue - but we're at the point where we're letting the rates get too high and that too creates a reduction in revenue to the Treasury. Ted Kennedy claims that his brother didn't face the deficit we have today when he cut taxes. That's irrelevant - especially since our current deficit is a tiny portion of our $10.7 trillion GDP. Democrats said we couldn't cut taxes when we had a surplus; now they say we can't cut them because there's a small deficit. They never want you to send less money to them! Second, Teddy points out that the tax rate was 90% when his brother took office and he lowered it to 70%.

True, but no one paid that 90% rate because of all the deductions. One of the things Reagan did was remove the deductions in exchange for a lower marginal rate in the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The top marginal rate was 70% in 1981 when Reagan took office, and 28% when he left. There were also something like 15 or 20 rates. How does lowering personal tax rates create jobs? I'm glad I asked. Because most small businesses no longer organize themselves as chapter C corporations. They organize themselves as subchapter S's, which means that the vast majority of small businesses pay their income tax on the personal 1040 form! want you to contrast everything JFK said in his era with the Democrat leaders of today - but be warned: doing so will earn you the wrath of Democrats like our caller Karen who don't think Kennedy belongs to them.

With the exception of Zell Miller, all the current Democrat leaders are putting the reacquisition of their own power above citizenship, the economy and national security. The last thing the Democratic leaders want is a reviving economy while they're trying to win an election. When the market was falling, Dick Gephardt said they'd pick up seats for every so many points the DOW lost. The last thing they want is high consumer confidence, which is why Tom Daschle is out there making the ludicrous claim that our growing economy is the worst since the Great Depression. They can only win if you suffer. Remember that.”

“When Republican diplomacy REALLY failed!

http://www.kosherjudaism.com/getalong.jpg”

“lmao”

“

Colin Powell, AKA "Colgate Kid"

Washington -

Colin Powell today announced that republicans, in keeping with the conservative nature of their party, would be required to revert to the 1800's style of dentifrice: wiping the teeth with an oily rag.

"Toothbrushes are for liberals," said Powell.

Mr Powell went on to add that the resources saved in the manufacture of toothpaste could be used to fuel SUV's for those midnight runs to the quickee mart for a pack of Salems.

"We're entering the golden age," said Powell, "we shouldn't worry about teeth like a bunch of whining liberals."”

“LMAO! Good one Phaedrus :)”

“[eyeroll]”

“Oh come on, Strat! Look at the dude's grill!!! He looks like he just got finished eating a cannister of shoe polish!”

“well my monitor's on the blink so i'm not a good judge.....


din't know dental records were important in being the secstate....but you can understand why we like him here in arkansas.....”

“Humor is lost on stratty.”

“No, really, We're gonna make the Middle East a whoooooole lot safer by invading Iraq. We're gonna stomp out the evil terrorists (even if we do buy oil from them). Trust us on this one.

Wonder if those folks in Saudi Arabia did...”

“phaeddy, i made a joke that went right over your pointy head....we like him in arkansas cuz he has bad teeth.....geesh


[foghorn leghorn voice]i say,pay attention boy...i keep throwin um and you keep missin um....”

“"Wonder if those folks in Saudi Arabia did..."

To call this a failure on our part is pure BS. Why do the left always want to blame us and never the terrorists? The Saudi’s have done nothing to stop terrorism and are now realizing the costs for their inaction. Posting that these attacks are our fault by going into Iraq is actually typical democratic hypocrisy. How ironic.”

“So, Nigal, you are saying that there is no connection for the sudden terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia against an American compound and the Bush's ME policy? Pull your head outta the sand, man.”

“Trust us on this one."
~RM
Where did that come from? Who said that?

"...sudden terrorist attack..."
Not to be confused with a gradual terrorist attack, eh?

"Why do the left always want to blame us and never the terrorists?"
~Nigal
Right on, bro. What's with this? Where does this mindset come from?
And they get all defensive at the mere mention of the term "Anti-American". It's a crying shame. Seriously, I could cry right now.


Let's take another look:
"No, really, We're gonna make the Middle East a whoooooole lot safer by invading Iraq. We're gonna stomp out the evil terrorists (even if we do buy oil from them). Trust us on this one.

Wonder if those folks in Saudi Arabia did..."
roseymonster
01:14:18 AM
05/14/03

Jesus help me. Did you read that, people? How does that make you feel? It sickens me.

It's blatantly sarcastic. Sarcasm. American citizens, et al, lie dead in the Saudi sand while Roseymonster makes fun of the situation. He doesn't make any attempt to express any condolences to them or theirs. Today, America grieves, and Roseymonster's strongest emotion is hate.

All he sees is an opportunity to bash the Bush administration. He shows no regard to the feelings of those affected by this tragedy. That's very disrespectful, IMO.

Also, "they", on the one hand, consider Bush a literal dunce, but on the other hand, act as if they expected him to have had thousands of years of ME conflict resolved by this stage of his presidency.


All because of six or seven hanging chads.

Poor. Piss poor.”

“I dislike the Bush administration's foriegn policy in general, and specifically believe the invasion of Iraq was a pre-planned agenda. That being said, I cannot fault them for an act of terror by al-qaeda in Saudi Arabia.

I don't see the connection between this and Iraq. Then again, I never did see a cpnnection between al-qaeda and Iraq.”

“Well said gojo.”

“No - not well said Gojo. You need to get down from the moral high ground - you've got no right to be there.

Rosey wasn't being sarcastic, he was making a valid point. Many of the opponents of the the invasion of Iraq made the point that it would do little to stop terrorism, as was the claim put forward by the administration, it was also said that the invastion could lead to more terrorism.

I'm not saying this wouldn't have happened if the war hadn't gone ahead, but the war hasn't stopped it, or made terrorism in general any less likely.
Everyone feels for the victims of terror - you are the one seeking to make political comments around that. It's not a contest for who cries the most when people die.”

“Spare me the melodramatics, Gojo.

I only see this terrorist attack as evidence that what the current administration has done has opened the gateway to destabilizing the Middle East while touting that what they were doing was bringing democracy and freedom and all that happy horsesheet that you and all the other warmongers flung in the face of the world.

I think it's easier for Al Qaeda to operate in the M.E. now. I think they're getting fresh recruits every day who see the U.S. a tyranical, imperialistic nation. They have sympathizers. People who were on the fence about before, I think, are gonna hop on over to the terrorist side.

And I think it is only going to get worse.”

“Destablilizing the Middle East, WTF? When has it ever been stable?”

“The bombing probably was meant more as a message to the Crown Prince rather than the US. Until very recently, Saudi officials didn't even admit that there were AQ operatives in SA, let alone active cells. I think that, combined with the Saudi security force's half-hearted crackdown on individual militant extremists, combined with the Kingdom's continued relationship with the US is what prompted this. I imagine it was particularly embarrassing for the Crown Prince, as it occurred a day before Powell's big visit.

Also, I would not call a car bombing an intensification of AQ operations in the wake of Iraq. If anything, it demonstrates their apparent inability to carry out sophisticated operations. If in the next 6 months, AQ doesn't engage in a 9/11 level of operation in response to the Iraq war, then one would have to wonder about their ability to act globally in a coordinated fashion.

Connecting this terrorism with events in Iraq is simply baseless at this point in time.”

“I agree that the selling point of easing terror in the Middle East was a false one (despite Mutt's best contrivances). The idea, however that this would have not happened had we not invaded Iraq doesn't strike me as particularly true.

I'd like to believe that the world operates on rational and predictable rules such as cause and effect, but with terrorism, it seems that it is, itself, a self-sustaining pathological movement. In other words, I doubt there is ANYthing we can do to stamp terrorism, in its current form, out.

Whatever the case, I don't think we can lay the blame for this act at anyone's feet but the terrorists themselves.”

“I never said that NOT invading Iraq would have prevented the latest terrorist attack in SA.

But I do think it provides empatus for these types of actions.”

“You need to get down from the moral high ground - you've got no right to be there."
~ynamiynami
12:48:45 PM
05/14/03

Yes I do. As do you.



"...bringing democracy and freedom and all that happy horsesheet that you and all the other warmongers flung in the face of the world."
When did gojo ever type "democracy and freedom and all that" in reference to the Iraqi war? They can establish whatever kind of system they please for all I care - as long as they allow another SADumesque regime.

About the
"roseymonster
01:14:18 AM
05/14/03"
post:
I can't help but imagine one of my ninth graders saying those words as I read them.

Then, he blames the Bush administration for the ills of the Middle East:
"...opened the gateway to destabilizing the Middle East..."
"opened the gateway"?
What? The gateway was closed until Bush came along? The Arabs and Jews were doing just fine in their little templegogues until that ol cowboy came riding into town?

Get credible - get real.

Know what? We gotta put up with this sorta blindfolded turkey shootin' through the remainder of this election cycle. And it will probably get EVEN WORSE during Bush's next term!

GAWD HELP US!”

“I was listening to NPR (know thy enemy - LOL!) on my way home yesterday. They reported that the American Embassy diplomat guy had caught wind of something about to go down. The diplomat requested stepped-up security measures of the Saudis. The Saudis ignored the request.

Then... BAM!!!

Kinda makes Roseys

"No, really, We're gonna make the Middle East a whoooooole lot safer by invading Iraq. We're gonna stomp out the evil terrorists (even if we do buy oil from them). Trust us on this one."

comment look more now like middle school.

Go for it Rosetta Monstettadetta, don't blame the terrorists, don't blame the Saudis. Keep on blaming Bush, K?”

“Hey Gojo, Do you believe we are safer from terror now than before we invaded Iraq?

Put another way, do you believe we eliminated a credible threat by ousting Saddam? If so, please explain what your reasons are for believing this.”

“To blame this on the Iraqi war is like blaming yourself when your Escelade gets car jacked. "Hey they pulled a gun on me and took my ride. It must be my fault for driving a desirable SUV!".

I just need to come to the realization that all the ills and evil in the world are the USA's fault. I'll try harder.”

“Nigal, I don't think anyone's saying this is the fault of the US.”

“I agree that the selling point of easing terror in the Middle East was a false one (despite Mutt's best contrivances).

Then how do you explain the historically unprecedented about-face Assad has made in the wake of the Iraq war?”

“"Nigal, I don't think anyone's saying this is the fault of the US."

"No, really, We're gonna make the Middle East a whoooooole lot safer by invading Iraq. We're gonna stomp out the evil terrorists (even if we do buy oil from them). Trust us on this one.

Wonder if those folks in Saudi Arabia did..."
roseymonster
01:14:18 AM
05/14/03”

“Again, Nigal, there's a difference between pointing out that we are not safer than before the invasion, and saying it is the fault of the US that we were attacked.”

“Mutt, The terrorist ideology won't recognize political borders. I think the view of terror as a rational outcome of a set of events is flawed. I see it as a pathological movement that is beyond reason (perhaps another discussion altogether). In keeping with that theme, I think military movements will be largely inneffective in combatting terror in its current form in the middle east. Forcing countries to put a show of policing for terrorists in the ME will force terrorists further underground, but I can't see it stamping it out or reducing the funding, as it comes from mainly non-government sources.”

“All of this Iraq and Afghanistan stuff is great! It has taken all of the focus off of Beruit. I am planning a trip in the fall.”

“"Hey Gojo, Do you believe we are safer from terror now than before we invaded Iraq?"

Yes.
Our action has given pause - in one degree or another - to other world leaders who may be accomodating terrorism and/or dreams thereof.

Granted, the terrorists proper are probably more enthusiastic now than before. But that, too, is a good thing. The more active they become, the more visible they will be. Then, when they stick their pointy heads out from under their rocks, said heads will be removed from their shoulders.

I'm curious -
what strategy would you have implemented on the heels of 9/11?”

“"what strategy would you have implemented on the heels of 9/11?"

Apologize and arrange to make immediate reparations for all our wrong doings.”

“First of all, Nigal, you have me confused with someone else, apparently.

Gojo, as far as us being safer from terror now: You mention that the terrorists will be more active, but say this is a good thing, because we can combat them when they strike? How is this safer?

You asked what my plan would have been... First, I believe the strikes on Afghanistan were necessary. Unseating the government that unabashedly housed and protected Al qaeda terror camps was a logical step. I think we were reckless in the steps we took to get there, but the military strike had to be made. After that, The homeland security office is crap. The PATRIOT act is unconstitutional and unnecessary. A few minor reforms in the way CIA and FBI share information would have been enough to prevent 9/11 type attacks. Remember: we had the information, but did nothing with it.

Invading Iraq was not spurred by 9/11. The Neocons had recommended doing this exact thing in '98!

There are a number of other things we could do to lessen our dependence on foriegn oil, which would take a big wad out of terrorist pockets, but all these things take time to talk through, let alone impement. War is quicker.”

“You are wrong! Get a clue!”

“Yeah, I mistyped implement, therefore I am wrong about everything.

Please excuse my utter ignorance, and bask in the light of the elightened UpUrs.”

“You got it buddy! Get it tight next time Phagrus~”

“opps I mistyped! Silly Me!”

“Plus, George gets to dress up like a pilot.

(still hasn't taken that drug test, tho'...)”

“He never inhaled though!”

“I see the Junior High crowd is hard at work.”

“The pink eyes are a nice touch.”