Where noted, portions of the following post were taken from "The Hill's Pundits Blog" and "Weaselgal's Haven", an intelligent blogger if ever there was one. There's been so much angst over the proposed [and now current] vacation being taken by the POTUS that non-news stories have been popping up all over about it. IMO, the guy deserves a break for some things at least. You can't tell me that if you had vacation time and the means to do something about it, you wouldn't Just Do It - instead you would stay home and nurse your martyrdom in all its purity, right? Right.
You might be a Conservative if ~~ You’re irate over the president taking so many vacation days on the taxpayer’s dime (61 thus far), but you thought George W. Bush earned every minute of his leisure time (196 days at the same point in his presidency).
Obama's vacation: Vacationing House GOP
should shut up about it
By Brent Budowsky - 08/19/11 04:29 PM ET
"Obama has taken less vacation time, by far, than Presidents Bush or Reagan. I never criticized either of them for vacations. Second, Speaker Boehner is known to enjoy a good time. I never criticized him, either. And third, the Republican House may well set a historic record for few legislative days and much recess. Those in glass houses …
"Personally I think the Congress takes too much recess and the prolonged recess today, with jobs so scarce, is inexcusable. I also think it's pretty bad political judgment for the president, who is not a stranger to elitist attitudes (he is in good company) to visit (again) Martha's Vineyard.
I would rather criticize the president, the House, the Senate, Democrats and Republicans for all continuing to fail to propose major jobs initiatives. The vacation issue is phony. The jobs issue is a national crisis. Shame on them all for not fighting for jobs. Shame on vacationing House Republicans for talking about the president's vacation while they fight to the death against jobs programs."
***
OK. That said, the following is the "work" schedule designed by John Boehner for the House this year:
2011 House schedule, 112th Congress
Jan. 5, House Convenes, Boehner's First Day
Jan.13 - 15, House Republican Retreat
Jan.29 – Feb. 6, not in session
Feb. 19 – 27, not in session
March 19 – 27, not in session
April 16 to May 1, spring recess
May 14 – 22, not in session
May 30, Memorial Day
June 4 – 12, not in session
June 25 – July 5, Independence Day
July 16 – 24, not in session
Aug. 6 – Sept. 5, August recess, with Labor Day
Um . . . . . does anyone see a pattern here? I've heard it said that all these so-called 'breaks' were designed so that Congressmen/women could use the time to visit their districts and gather feedback. Just curious, you know, who would be paying for all those plane tickets? You don't suppose that would be the taxpayers, do you? I mean, I'm not really sure, but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that these guys DO NOT PAY FOR THEIR OWN AIRFARE back and forth and back and forth and back and forth ... well, you get what I mean. If anything, I suppose, they might get their corporate connections to buy them things. All the more reason to sleep with the lobbyists, my dear. Bet on it.
On to a slightly different subject, following Brent Budowsky's post were the usual, almost obligatory Hateful Trollish Comments. It's interesting to me to note that these "entities" [I call them that to be polite] always seem to talk in circles with "each other", almost as if they had been assigned to this - or other liberal blogs - by say, ALEC perhaps?
One of my favorite explanations for these "individuals" comes from WeaselGal's Haven:
"I have visited conservative sites and I have yet to see a dissenting opinion in their comments on articles. I have seen ugly rants on AlterNet against liberals, by a regular number of commenters, who show up like clockwork on hot-button issues. By far the worst attacks come on the Huffington Post, which I happen to enjoy reading on a regular basis. Most of the time, you can tell who the neo-cons are by their screen names. Most reflect something about patriotism, military, God, guns, or capitalism. Oh, and Tea Party jingoism. These ones show up constantly, and some of their comments are so vulgar they get removed, but they still keep popping up.
"I understand the idea of political discourse, the discussion of opposing views, but I’m really not seeing it in these comments. How does using crude insults and counterattacks supposed to be level-headed debate? I came across a comment on a site where the theory of political operatives whose sole job is to harass members of liberal and progressive sites. They were paid to log into those sites to keep track of what the opposition was saying about them and also to attack verbally the writers, site managers, everyone involved in running liberal sites. I don’t know if this is just an idea, an internet rumor, or if it’s real, but the more I read on sites, the more I find this kind of activity becoming more prevalent. I’m not talking about censorship, but do liberals go on sites like Fox and return the favor? Do they call up conservative talk shows and vent their spleen at the host? I’ve yet to hear it, or if it does happen, it’s not reported.
"Everyone says to ignore the trolls and they’ll go away, but to be brutally honest, it doesn’t work. These are individuals who act like a porcupine quill; the more you worry it, the more embedded it becomes. They mean to stay, they mean to make themselves and their agenda known, and they won’t stop until they break the other side down. This is schoolyard bully behavior, being performed by adults. Adults who should know better, but maybe the paycheck is more important. I know some would complain that the whole idea of this is not worth discussing, is pointless, boring and trivial, but I don’t think so. We’ve become too complacent, too self-absorbed in our own egos, that when something does happen that affects us personally, we’re scared witless. Sadly, the ones who need to see this message won’t ever read it, and those that do will mock this as hysterical and reactionary. Next time when you read the news online, check out the comments portion, if one is there. See how many conservatives post as opposed to liberals. I’m willing to bet there’s more right-wing views than the left being represented, and the left regularly gets trashed. Does it affect you? Which view do you lean towards, or what side represents you? Do these self-appointed spokespeople speak for you and your views? If not, would you be strong enough to call them out? The right has plenty of soldiers to support their cause; give any fanatic of theirs a computer and an audience, and they’ll rant away. Just look at Alex Jones. Yikes. If you don’t know, he’s that kook responsible for the ‘Terror Storm’ propaganda, which I think is a crock of horse dung. [Now she's just being nice ...]
"I also find laughable the accusations of ‘liberal media bias‘. Eh? I don’t see it. If anything, it’s bias against anything liberal. Right-wing statements and Tea Party rallies are more likely to be talked about on the news than the efforts of progressives working for equality. All the networks are guilty of this, though smaller networks who don’t necessarily cater to the masses hype things to the extent the major networks do. Do some internet searching, look up some of the things I’ve mentioned. Maybe you can prove me right or show me errors in judgement.
"This is just my observations, not professional research. This comes from my internet people-watching via comments on articles. Agree, disagree, that’s fine. I think it’s only fair to put this out there for people to think on."
Well, as for me, I happen to agree with her.
No comments:
Post a Comment