Visit the U.S. Politics Online Discussion Forum Archives!

Sponsored by:

U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum  

Bookmark Us! E-Mail DONATE NOW! Photo Gallery Document Archives Quiz! Register to Vote!!!
Go Back   U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum > Current Events > Political Parties, Campaigns & Elections
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Political Parties, Campaigns & Elections A forum to discuss political parties and elections/campaigns in general.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
Imperator's Avatar
Moderator
Audiatur et altera pars!

 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 21,257

United_States    
Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

So here we go again, only the slant has changed. Unreal. Look for your selves, I am exhausted after reading the links; reading about locked files, refused records, fines, court decisions, qwest field hidden studies morfe colurt sdecsions and fines, more financing skullduggery, to say nothing of the ballots and lack transparency, etc…this is now into full blown embarrassment now.


Hot Air Blog Archive Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD


So what the FUCK!!!!!!!!!!! Is the yardstick for a governmental appointment or chance at a position now? You must be involved in some impropriety etc….is that the benchmark now?

Oh and rumors have it that Hilda Solis is up next, for what maybe nefarious dealings with the SEIU...



okay I feel bettttttter now, my Soma is kicking in.....ahhhhhhhh
__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
daddio's Avatar
Vice President

 
Member Since: Jun 2008
Location: the south
Posts: 8,827

United_States     Virginia

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

we keep forgetting that the O is looking at people from a Chicago perspective. none of these people's problems would raise an eyebrow in comparison to Chicago politicians. I'm sure he's totally baffled by all the fuss.
__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
RFK1968's Avatar
Speaker of the House

 
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 906

United_States     Missouri

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imperator View Post
So what the FUCK!!!!!!!!!!! Is the yardstick for a governmental appointment or chance at a position now? You must be involved in some impropriety etc….is that the benchmark now?
I think you're getting upset about something relatively minor. Some guy showed up asking for copies of studies regarding the creation of a new football field in Seattle. King County, of which Ron Sims was the County Executive, "repeatedly deceived and misinformed Yousoufian for years." The guy was awarded $5 for every day he didn't receive the information. The fine was then bumped up to $15 for every day. Now the guy is appealing again to try and get more money.

Based on your capitalization of the word "fuck," and the 11 exclamations points that follow, you appear to be quite put off by the fact that a Washington county is being sued because Armen Yousoufian didn't get the information he wanted regarding a new football stadium.

I agree that what the county did was wrong. And because Ron Sims was the County Executive, he should bear most of the responsibility. But it's quite misleading of Hot Air to essentially declare Ron Sims the "most fined" Washington State bureaucrat when the size of the county's fine hasn't even been determined, and such discrepancies have virtually no impact on whether or not he's capable of being deputy secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

I suppose, through a similar line of reasoning, one could argue that because the state of Florida was forced to settle with the NAACP and the ACLU after the 2000 election regarding voting irregularities, governor Jeb Bush should be precluded from holding any office equal to or greater than deputy secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

I will admit, however, that I'd be much happier if all of these appointees had no discrepancies whatsoever on any of their records. Also, I think those calling for Tom Daschle's removal-from-consideration might be regretting doing so if he's replaced by Howard Dean (who's name is being batted about).
__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
RFK1968's Avatar
Speaker of the House

 
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 906

United_States     Missouri

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

I also think Ezra Klein provided an interesting perspective on the problems Obama has had with these appointments:

Quote:
It was this coverage -- not a word from Obama or an attack by the Republicans -- that drove Daschle to withdraw his nomination. And this coverage would not have existed had Obama not run the campaign he did.

There was always something studiedly vague about Obama's insistence that he would battle a culture in which “our leaders have thrown open the doors of Congress and the White House to an army of Washington lobbyists who have turned our government into a game only they can afford to play.” Obama could not remake Washington anew. His administration would certainly face unwanted scandal and welcome proficient rogues.

But it turns out that Obama's words, well, mattered. They made it harder to ignore scandal, as the Bush administration had done. The endlessly long vetting forms forcing deep tax and income transparency, which in turn uncovered embarrassments that would never have emerged under past regimes. This has made for a more troubled transition, but will probably also result in a cleaner administration. For all the embarrassments, this, in a concrete sense, is what change looks like. It's not an administration that decides to be clean so much as one that has little choice in the matter.

What Change Looks Like
__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
daddio's Avatar
Vice President

 
Member Since: Jun 2008
Location: the south
Posts: 8,827

United_States     Virginia

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFK1968 View Post
I also think Ezra Klein provided an interesting perspective on the problems Obama has had with these appointments:


if he knew these people were dirty then why nominate them ? thats the purpose of vetting.
__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2009
chassisman's Avatar
Secretary of State
Right Wing Extremist

 
Member Since: May 2004
Location: bible belt
Posts: 10,384

United_States     Texas

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Keep in mind the questions asked on the Obama admin's applications to get a "peon" job with them. Evidently the executive positions have an application with NO questions.
__________________
Want government run healthcare? Join the military.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2009
Imperator's Avatar
Moderator
Audiatur et altera pars!

 
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: San Jose, Ca
Posts: 21,257

United_States    
Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFK1968 View Post
I also think Ezra Klein provided an interesting perspective on the problems Obama has had with these appointments:
But it turns out that Obama's words, well, mattered. They made it harder to ignore scandal, as the Bush administration had done. The endlessly long vetting forms forcing deep tax and income transparency, which in turn uncovered embarrassments that would never have emerged under past regimes.

This has made for a more troubled transition, but will probably also result in a cleaner administration. For all the embarrassments, this, in a concrete sense, is what change looks like. It's not an administration that decides to be clean so much as one that has little choice in the matter.


I mean are you *ucking kidding em with this rfk? come on man....

Change my ass, so now there is some congratulations due him for running the campaign he did, Oh and don’t forget, of course that- drum roll please-“words matter”.
Hes being held accountable see; “it works”!!!
The One has done it again….by being sloppy and duplicitous, he actually facilitated a parable…messiah be praised… hes still the One!!!!!



Talk about tortured logic Throw in the usual “bush scandal” attempting to buck up some off brand verisimilitude to buttress a weak case, he sounds like he trying to convince himself he still did the right thing by voting for obama, hoping to tease out some strangled logic that will, like aroma therapy and the Columbia review, help him live with himself.

I see this as the usual; off the hook because the environment is bad" liberal weenie roast, there ios no personal responsibility anymore, the system is to toxic you see, ipso Tom had become bad because well, the system is bad. Let us pray.

He should stick with making his "mean" kung pao, and add plenty of spice, he needs a wake up call for god sakes.


Oh, Yes it’ll be cleaner ( well that is except for geithner, and well the 14 waivers hes written since his much hailed and slobbered over rule against lobbyists etc. )
__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-06-2009
RFK1968's Avatar
Speaker of the House

 
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 906

United_States     Missouri

Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imperator View Post
But it turns out that Obama's words, well, mattered. They made it harder to ignore scandal, as the Bush administration had done. The endlessly long vetting forms forcing deep tax and income transparency, which in turn uncovered embarrassments that would never have emerged under past regimes.

This has made for a more troubled transition, but will probably also result in a cleaner administration. For all the embarrassments, this, in a concrete sense, is what change looks like. It's not an administration that decides to be clean so much as one that has little choice in the matter.


I mean are you *ucking kidding em with this rfk? come on man....

Change my ass, so now there is some congratulations due him for running the campaign he did, Oh and don’t forget, of course that- drum roll please-“words matter”.
Hes being held accountable see; “it works”!!!
The One has done it again….by being sloppy and duplicitous, he actually facilitated a parable…messiah be praised… hes still the One!!!!!



Talk about tortured logic Throw in the usual “bush scandal” attempting to buck up some off brand verisimilitude to buttress a weak case, he sounds like he trying to convince himself he still did the right thing by voting for obama, hoping to tease out some strangled logic that will, like aroma therapy and the Columbia review, help him live with himself.

I see this as the usual; off the hook because the environment is bad" liberal weenie roast, there ios no personal responsibility anymore, the system is to toxic you see, ipso Tom had become bad because well, the system is bad. Let us pray.

He should stick with making his "mean" kung pao, and add plenty of spice, he needs a wake up call for god sakes.


Oh, Yes it’ll be cleaner ( well that is except for geithner, and well the 14 waivers hes written since his much hailed and slobbered over rule against lobbyists etc. )
But that's part of the point. He set the bar so high for himself, by promoting virtually unrestrained transparency and the "strictest, most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition in history," that any discrepancies on the part of his appointments and the "waivers" he has given to certain individuals make him look considerably worse than if he'd just said, "We're going to hold ourselves to the same standard as every other president, rather than try and set the bar higher."

I'm not saying that violating his own standards is acceptable. I just think he set the bar too high with some of these rules. Had he implemented rules that weren't so focused on transparency and ethics, we'd probably just shrug our shoulders and say, "That's about on par for the political game." Instead, because he's setting such a high standard, many are more upset that certain violations are taking place than they would be otherwise.

Quote:
Lobbying Limits

A lobbyist who joins the Obama administration also is forbidden from working on issues they previously were involved with, he said. Any person who leaves the administration will be barred from lobbying the government for two years.

“We need to close the revolving door that lets lobbyists come into government freely and lets them use their time in public service” to promote their own interests when they leave, the president said. Government hiring, he said, will henceforth be based on qualifications, competence and experience, “not political connections.”

Regarding the pay freeze, which will leave pay levels for senior positions where they were under President George W. Bush, Obama said he is acting because “families are tightening their belts and so should Washington.”

There are more than 100 White House staff positions under the office of the president that pay more than $100,000 annually, including chief of staff, White House counsel and chief speechwriter.

Obama Freezes Pay, Toughens Ethics and Lobbying Rules
I think it would have been more politically convenient for him to not implement these rules. However, by doing so, he now has to answer any time any of them are violated. Had he taken the politically convenient route, the electorate would only be able to really criticize him for completing actions that all presidents complete. Instead, they're now able to criticize him for violating new standards that he, himself, implemented.

I am of the opinion (and I can certainly see how some would disagree with this) that I'd rather have a president who sets the bar high and, therefore, has to answer to the electorate when he doesn't meet his own standards, rather than a president who sets the bar low and, therefore, has little trouble meeting the standards.
__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-17-2009
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member

 
Member Since: Dec 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,066

   
Re: Obama names “most fined” Washington State bureaucrat to HUD

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFK1968 View Post
But that's part of the point. He set the bar so high for himself, by promoting virtually unrestrained transparency and the "strictest, most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition in history," that any discrepancies on the part of his appointments and the "waivers" he has given to certain individuals make him look considerably worse than if he'd just said, "We're going to hold ourselves to the same standard as every other president, rather than try and set the bar higher."

I'm not saying that violating his own standards is acceptable. I just think he set the bar too high with some of these rules. Had he implemented rules that weren't so focused on transparency and ethics, we'd probably just shrug our shoulders and say, "That's about on par for the political game." Instead, because he's setting such a high standard, many are more upset that certain violations are taking place than they would be otherwise.



I think it would have been more politically convenient for him to not implement these rules. However, by doing so, he now has to answer any time any of them are violated. Had he taken the politically convenient route, the electorate would only be able to really criticize him for completing actions that all presidents complete. Instead, they're now able to criticize him for violating new standards that he, himself, implemented.

I am of the opinion (and I can certainly see how some would disagree with this) that I'd rather have a president who sets the bar high and, therefore, has to answer to the electorate when he doesn't meet his own standards, rather than a president who sets the bar low and, therefore, has little trouble meeting the standards.
I actually choked while laughing at this.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 U.S. Politics Online