25 Comments  :::   Post a comment »

1. Comment by alppuccino on 12/18 @ 9:54 am #

   Once again, the most useless people on the planet give themselves a raise. I’m writing all my virus members (OH) and demanding they refuse the raise.

   The suck so bad.

2. Comment by alppuccino on 12/18 @ 9:54 am #

   y

3. Comment by Mr. Pink on 12/18 @ 9:56 am #

   I would hate for Nancy Pelosi to go for a year without a new Botox injection. I consider this my tax dollars well spent. Now if they would only vote to throw my money at union members who donate to their campaigns.

4. Comment by DarthRove on 12/18 @ 10:01 am #

   Yeah, this’ll send that approval rating screaming into the high teens. Great move, nimrods.

5. Comment by BJTexs on 12/18 @ 10:05 am #

   [Expletive Deleted]

6. Comment by JD on 12/18 @ 10:09 am #

   Yeah, this’ll send that approval rating screaming into the high teens

   I think SanFranNan would settle for low double digits.

   This is a really big elaborate Ashton Kutcher Punkd show, right? They cannot think this is a good idea.

7. Comment by C Smith on 12/18 @ 10:09 am #

   This is the explicit pay. The lower you keep this, the higher the Blago pay.

8. Comment by Bob Reed on 12/18 @ 10:10 am #

   Rep. Harry Mitchell, a first-term Democrat from Arizona, sponsored legislation earlier this year that would have prevented the automatic pay adjustments from kicking in for members next year. But the bill, which attracted 34 cosponsors, failed to make it out of committee.

   “They don’t even go through the front door. They have it set up so that it’s wired so that you actually have to undo the pay raise rather than vote for a pay raise,”

   What.a.racket…

   If all the rest of us poor stiffs only had it so good…

9. Comment by Mr. Pink on 12/18 @ 10:15 am #

   There approval rating can sit in the high teens as long as everyone scapegoats Bush for every single thing that happens.

10. Comment by Mikey NTH on 12/18 @ 10:27 am #

    I’m beginning to think that Guy Fawkes had the right instincts.

11. Comment by JHoward on 12/18 @ 11:08 am #

    I’m writing all my virus members (OH) and demanding they refuse the raise.

    Yep, and even that sentiment, should it resemble the anti-bailout movement and constitute a convincing majority, probably won’t phase these clowns.

    Have we all visited our career liars’ homepages? Constituent services, grant applications, scholarship how-to’s, internships, visit Washington, free flags, welfare and countless federal services assistance.

    These people are sold to the highest bidders, they being the fools who vote.

    Yeah, write your asses off, at least for as long as it takes to turn the place upside down anyway. All we seem to be able to do is slow the “progressives” a tiny fraction of their warp factor back to servitude or something.

12. Comment by JohnAnnArbor on 12/18 @ 11:49 am #

    They did this to avoid the most recent amendment to the Constitution, which was proposed way back with the Bill of Rights but only ratified in the 1990s. The amendment says that, if they raise their pay, it doesn’t actually go up until an election takes place (presumably, to give people the choice of tossing them).

13. Comment by SRS on 12/18 @ 12:02 pm #

    “I’m writing all my virus members (OH) and demanding they refuse the raise.”

    Sen. Brown (OH) will probably ignore you. I wrote to him at least 5 or 6 times about offshore drilling and tried to actually reason with him/his staff/whoever… I literally got the exact same identical PC bull shit rewritten response every time… I was pretty pissed hoping that would eventually get though to someone and I realize now I should have quit after attempting the second letter.

14. Comment by The Monster on 12/18 @ 12:37 pm #

    The amendment says that, if they raise their pay, it doesn’t actually go up until an election takes place (presumably, to give people the choice of tossing them).

    No, it says that if they change their pay, it can’t take effect until after the next Congressional election. That means that if they voted today to not take the raise that was authorized by a law passed before November, they still would get the raise until after the Nov. 2010 election.

15. Comment by Techie on 12/18 @ 12:48 pm #

    US Congressman, so easy a caveman can do it.

16. Comment by Silver Whistle on 12/18 @ 12:51 pm #

    I’m beginning to think that Guy Fawkes had the right instincts.

    Guy Fawkes was the last man to enter Parliament with honourable intentions.

17. Comment by N. O'Brain on 12/18 @ 3:09 pm #

    “Suppose you were an idiot.
    And suppose you were a member of Congress.
    But I repeat myself.”

    -Mark Twain

18. Comment by JD on 12/18 @ 3:27 pm #

    We can look at it this way. As is, we have all of the village idiots working under one roof. They could be out ruining 535 towns/companies.

    On the flip side, with all of the idiocy consolidated under one roof, they can destroy the entire country more efficiently.

19. Comment by BJTexs on 12/18 @ 3:39 pm #

    Again I say: Nuke ‘em from orbit.

20. Comment by Sdferr on 12/18 @ 5:03 pm #

    It is a pretty young President we’ve got to stand astride them though, isn’t it?

21. Comment by buzz on 12/18 @ 7:09 pm #

    I will give them the pay, but then I want to be exempted from most of the laws they pass. Like they are.
    “However, at 2.8 percent, the automatic raise that lawmakers receive is only half as large as the 2009 cost of living adjustment of Social Security recipients.”
    Good point. But a reversal of the logic they used about the tax cut. So very unfair since the rich got much more money back than the not so rich. % of rich so much more than % of poor. UNFAIR.

22. Comment by qwfwq on 12/18 @ 8:07 pm #

    Hey Dan: You see Guido lately? Interesting discussion about moderating comments.

23. Comment by Swen Swenson on 12/18 @ 9:27 pm #

    Pay for performance? How about we just pay them to stay home and leave us alone?

24. Comment by Ag80 on 12/19 @ 12:16 am #

    A long time ago, there was a reason that the writers of the Constitution prevented Congressional members from voting on raises for Cabinet positions: Because it meant something.

    They really were representatives of their constituents and if they received a higher office, with the accordant pay, it could be construed as a real conflict of interest. Now, the salaries they receive don’t mean anything. They all have their lobbyist payoffs and rich contributors.

    With trillion dollar bailouts and secured seats, it’s nothing more than a Kabuki play as we all go not the toilet.

25. Comment by Silver Whistle on 12/19 @ 2:56 am #

    From the Guido Fawkes link:

    Originally when this blog started and had readers numbering only in the tens, rather than the tens of thousands, some of the regular comment makers were very witty and brought gossip. In the last four years 200,000 comments have been made, the signal to noise ratio and average quality of the comments has declined. That is an inevitable consequence of having among the tens of thousands of readers a number of moronic, window licking, certifiable loonies.

     It seems that window licking is a global phenomenon; solidarity in suffering, PW comrades!

RSS feed for comments on this post.

TrackBack URI: http://proteinwisdom.com/wp-trackback.php?p=13943

Leave a comment

If you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below.