What tax payer money was used here other than the money that is used paying them a salary they get no matter what? If you want to gripe about that I'm onboard. But this resolution cost the taxpayer $0 additional dollars. Which you should like. How often does Congress cost us nothing?
time is money is the point.
The only reason this isn't the same is I find congressional activity to be damaging in general, so I don't really want them to get to other things, but the reality is by taking up this, they are tabling something else they are actually paid to do.
If I were to hire you and found you were spending time conducting a fantasy football draft, would you say, big deal, it's not costing you any money? Salary is salary, right?
Well its sorta my gripe. They get paid to waste time on BS like this when there are more pressing matters to attend to. They can suffix their real work with a comment about Iran.
When they waste time, they waste the money we invest in them.
But hey, at least we know how they feel and it only cost a days worth of salary.
There are no funds attached to this measure, and it keeps them busy. I say it's a good thing. Anything that keeps them from passing new laws, particularly with funds attached, is a positive.
Depends on whether my work got done. If my report is finished and on time I can't see why you would care what I did. But I'll tell you what. If you can tell me an important bill that needs to get passed that will now not get passed because they took a few minutes to pass this resolution I'm all ears. Otherwise, you really got nothing here. Faux outrage over nothing. Which is odd because with Congress there's a ****load of actual outrage.
I am fully aware of this. However it doesn't take wasting tax payer dollars and time to say something. You just say it. What doesn't make sense is adding bureaucracy to a comment. If that makes sense, then there is no sense.
I suppose Paul was twiddling his thumbs in wait of a real issue.
America stands by the citizens of Iran, for justice, for peace.
There you can have that one for free. Sign it -THE USA.
You know, there is plenty of time for them to get to pressing and non-pressing matters. And as far as them wasting time, the best I can tell that's ALL they do. But in this case it didn't cost me anything. Now I'm beginning to like resolutions a lot.
Because under US Code Congress is required to do certain things by the book and making and passing a resolution is one of these items. My god don't any of you know US Code's and how Congress works on a Day to Day base's no wonder most people have no clue about the inner workings of DC.
Sorry, but I don't really understand what you're saying to reply to it adequately.
Personally, I find our election system to be a joke so I find it ridiculous that we are spending time in the house penning legislation to smear another nation.
Those entrenched in our two party system uses every power at their disposal to circumvent free and fair elections.
Originally Posted by johnjoel said:Because it takes tax payer dollars for Congress to verbally support events.
Evidently...
The efficacy of governmental resolutions are at their best when they outline a future course of action that the government intends to pursue. Often, by exploring public reaction through a resolution, senators and other lawmakers may guage the feasibility and impact such a resolution might have on their careers.
Of course, it could be said that it is more admirable to pass laws and act according to one's ideals instead of timidly seeking the reaction of an american public. This would make sense, however, only if government leaders possessed authority to move american policy without repercussion or personal responsibility.
I find, however, that politicians seeking the approval of their constituency are more in-line with a republic's structure, even if this doesn't always lead to the best policy decisions.
As for the efficacy of the Iranian Resolution, it's written in general language that most people would find worthy. But I doubt most non-american's would see this as a bold defense of freedom or sincerity.
Rather than seeing it as American politicians covering their ass.
.............Obama holds to measured course on unrest in Iran
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Friday stuck to a measured response to the uprising in Iran over a disputed presidential election, even as both houses of Congress voted overwhelmingly to condemn an official crackdown on mostly peaceful demonstrations in the streets of Tehran.
Administration officials said they remained convinced that the wiser U.S. course was caution over confrontation. President Barack Obama is coming under growing domestic political pressure to speak out more forcefully in support of protesters warned by Iran's supreme leader Friday to end their huge street rallies.
In the strongest message yet from the U.S. government, the House voted 405-1 to condemn Tehran's crackdown on protest rallies and the government's interference with Internet and cell phone communications. The Senate followed suit later in the day.
Obama holds to measured course on unrest in Iran | Comcast.net"When Ronald Reagan went before the Brandenburg Gate, he did not say Mr. (Mikhail) Gorbachev, that wall is none of our business," said Pence, R-Ind., of former President Ronald Reagan's famous exhortation to the Soviet leader to "tear down that wall" in a divided Berlin.
President Obama is "very concerned" about the events unfolding in Iran, as the Islamic Republic's supreme leader warned Friday about a coming crackdown on peaceful protesters.
"I'm very concerned based on some of the tenor -- and tone of the statements that have been made -- that the government of Iran recognize that the world is watching," the president told CBS News. "And how they approach and deal with people who are, through peaceful means, trying to be heard will, I think, send a pretty clear signal to the international community about what Iran is and -- and is not."
Earlier, the White House welcomed a non-binding resolution in Congress supporting street protests in Iran as top officials said the president will continue his low-key approach to the roiling internal debate over Iran's disputed presidential election.
"It's not about us, it's about them," a senior administration official. "They are the ones driving this."
Both houses of Congress have voted to condemn Iran's crackdown on anti-government demonstrators.
The resolution -- approved by the House and then the Senate -- condemns "the ongoing violence" by the government and the Iranian government's suppression of the Internet and cell phones. It also expressed support for Iranian citizens who embrace freedom.
It didn't cost you anything? You work tax free? I could easily change my point of view if I didn't have to invest in these people.
Now if you are like most of the rest of the American people then you already paid into the system, which paid their salary already.
Your quote is sending mixed signals. They waste time all the time but that is okay since it doesn't cost you anything.
Is FICA not on your paycheck any longer all the sudden? I don't understand.
To state my position; It always matters what Congress does and in this case, they made a bold and just statement I fully agree with. The thing with Congress and many other bureaucracies is they have this knack for having great ideas but poorly implementing them. I happen to a person who attempts to speak out against waste and to me the way this was done was wasteful and could have better impact in another area or by another group that included Congress.
These people represent us and speak for us. Every move they make is very important to monitor.
If some would like to brush this off as no big deal, we pay for this crap all the time, its the norm, fine. That is cool. I have no personal problem with that and there is no love lost. I disagree though.
Seriously. You are not making a lick of sense. It cost me the same as any act of Congress costs me. Their salary. Which they get no matter what. Not sure why you don't grasp that.
He's just pissed they took the time to do this. It's not really about how much it cost, it's about the fact that the House and Senate did "something" in support of the Iranian people. Nothing more than that.
oooh hes "very concerned"
aka- "I have talks I want and this is annoying!"
...and that's a nice condensing of this-
"I'm very concerned based on some of the tenor -- and tone of the statements that have been made -- that the government of Iran recognize that the world is watching," the president told CBS News. "And how they approach and deal with people who are, through peaceful means, trying to be heard will, I think, send a pretty clear signal to the international community about what Iran is and -- and is not."
Silly puddy cannot stretch enough to make that appear meaningful.
There is a difference between morally and verbally supporting freedom, and interventionism involving U.S. forces and dollars.
At least he said something. Woefully inadequate in my opinion, but at least he put words to it.
Don't fool yourself, they did nothing. This "resolution" is about as forceful as a vote in support of Christmas cheer. And yet Ron Paul still voted against it.
Wasn't anything more then he had said before..frankly its even weaker then what he said before.
Why is Congress wasting its time on such nonsense. What's happening in Iran is none of our business. Ron Paul, as usual, did the correct thing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?