Author Topic: So much for "draining the swamp"  (Read 753 times)

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
So much for "draining the swamp"
« on: January 03, 2017, 05:32:41 am »
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/with-no-warning-house-republicans-vote-to-hobble-independent-ethics-office.html?action=Click&contentCollection=BreakingNews&contentID=64742303&pgtype=Homepage&_r=0

Yeah, let's just get rid of those pesky people that try to keep us ethical and non-corrupt. That'll be super annoying while we're running the most corrupt and unethical Congress in US history draining the swamp.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2017, 05:37:48 am by Tiffanys »

Offline Ixarku

  • Member
  • Posts: 5871
  • (V)_|*,,,*|_(V)
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2017, 12:35:36 pm »
I would say that I'm shocked but I'm not.
If I ever meet God in person, I'm going to ask Him why he created so many stupid people, and then punch Him in the nose before he answers.

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2017, 06:41:29 pm »
Looks like Trump tweeted about it now... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WQ6zvmbtiw

Offline halfelite

  • Member
  • Posts: 1615
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2017, 09:29:24 pm »
they reversed course after Trump shows displeasure.

Offline Burkingam

  • Member
  • Posts: 11031
  • Love, Science & Music
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2017, 10:13:53 pm »
The thing is that the ethics office held Republicans to the same standard as Democrats which is completely unfair and unbalanced!
Altmed is altfact!

Offline halfelite

  • Member
  • Posts: 1615
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2017, 11:13:01 pm »
The thing is that the ethics office held Republicans to the same standard as Democrats which is completely unfair and unbalanced!

So 2 years ago when the Democrats tried to close it was it because they were held to the same standards as Republicans? Its a big hoot about nothing. Every 2 years one of the parties proposes to close it. It has no purpose. If the Ethics committee finds wrong doing all the can do is pass the information to the House Ethics Committee which can then pursue it for criminal charges. What Both Parties have wanted to do is combine the OCE with the HEC. So its under scrutiny of lawmakers. The biggest complaint is the Ethics committee does not follow due process. The second part is both parties have tried to make it so any findings are not public knowledge. As currently if the ethics committee finds anything all they can do is public shame the individuals. Which is not a bad thing but not the ideal means to handle the situation. 

« Last Edit: January 03, 2017, 11:22:44 pm by halfelite »

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2017, 11:40:08 pm »
I'm starting to think this entire thing was just a ploy to try to make Trump look better going into office. *shrug*

Offline halfelite

  • Member
  • Posts: 1615
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2017, 11:52:23 pm »
I'm starting to think this entire thing was just a ploy to try to make Trump look better going into office. *shrug*

Its a much to do about nothing. Look up how many times its been on the chopping block. Usually not to this degree where they actually take it to a private vote just people reading to far into it. Every 2 years when terms are up and reelections are starting someone always brings it up to get rid of it.

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2017, 04:18:54 am »
So just Republican hubris then?

Offline Tanis

  • Member
  • Posts: 3247
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2017, 05:00:49 am »
I know it sounds bad...but I REALLY hope Trump and the GOP just fuck up this year.

I mean, full on...HOLY FUCK EVEN FOX NEWS IS JUMPING SHIP...levels of fuck up.


This guy is scum, and the GOP are getting worse and worse.

It used to be the GOP was voted in to make the money and the DEM was voted in to spend the money.


Now all the GOP does is fuck over anyone not rich (and white) while screaming about baby parts and Jesus.

I sometimes think there should be an IQ test for voting.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2017, 06:27:46 pm by Tanis »

Offline Burkingam

  • Member
  • Posts: 11031
  • Love, Science & Music
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2017, 04:41:44 pm »
I don't hope they fuck up. I don't have enough faith in humanity to think republican voters will understand the error of their way if republicans fuck up. They already have their answer preformulated: that trump is doing great and big media is lying.
Altmed is altfact!

Offline Ixarku

  • Member
  • Posts: 5871
  • (V)_|*,,,*|_(V)
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #11 on: January 06, 2017, 12:25:29 am »
I don't hope they fuck up. I don't have enough faith in humanity to think republican voters will understand the error of their way if republicans fuck up. They already have their answer preformulated: that trump is doing great and big media is lying.

No matter what happens during the next 2-4 years, it's the Democrats' fault.
If I ever meet God in person, I'm going to ask Him why he created so many stupid people, and then punch Him in the nose before he answers.

Offline VicViper573

  • Member
  • Posts: 1056
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2017, 03:46:22 am »
I sometimes think there should be an IQ test for voting.

That one's dead on arrival:

In part to curtail the use of literacy tests, Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Act prohibited jurisdictions from administering literacy tests to citizens who attained a sixth-grade education in an American school in which the predominant language was Spanish, such as schools in Puerto Rico.[3] The Supreme Court upheld this provision in Katzenbach v. Morgan (1966). Although the Court had earlier held in Lassiter that literacy tests did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment,[4] in Morgan the Court held that Congress could enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights—such as the right to vote—by prohibiting conduct it deemed to interfere with such rights, even if that conduct may not be independently unconstitutional.[5][6]

As originally enacted, the Voting Rights Act (of 1965) also suspended the use of literacy tests in all jurisdictions in which less than 50% of voting-age residents were registered as of November 1, 1964, or had voted in the 1964 presidential election. In 1970, Congress amended the Act and expanded the ban on literacy tests to the entire country.[7] The Supreme Court then upheld the ban as constitutional in Oregon v. Mitchell (1970). The Court was deeply divided in this case, and a majority of justices did not agree on a rationale for the holding.[8][9

Offline Burkingam

  • Member
  • Posts: 11031
  • Love, Science & Music
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2017, 05:07:52 am »
I don't hope they fuck up. I don't have enough faith in humanity to think republican voters will understand the error of their way if republicans fuck up. They already have their answer preformulated: that trump is doing great and big media is lying.

No matter what happens during the next 2-4 years, it's the Democrats' fault.
Thanks Obama!
Altmed is altfact!

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2017, 05:24:02 am »
I sometimes think there should be an IQ test for voting.
You aren't the only one. It's called Geniocracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniocracy

There's a book about it by a guy named Rael. Totally batshit alien religion cult nutter, but it's a pretty good proposal... if we could ever come up with some more reliable tests.

Offline Tanis

  • Member
  • Posts: 3247
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #15 on: January 06, 2017, 05:38:14 am »
I sometimes think there should be an IQ test for voting.
That one's dead on arrival:
In part to curtail the use of literacy tests, Congress enacted the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Act prohibited jurisdictions from administering literacy tests to citizens who attained a sixth-grade education in an American school in which the predominant language was Spanish, such as schools in Puerto Rico.[3] The Supreme Court upheld this provision in Katzenbach v. Morgan (1966). Although the Court had earlier held in Lassiter that literacy tests did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment,[4] in Morgan the Court held that Congress could enforce Fourteenth Amendment rights—such as the right to vote—by prohibiting conduct it deemed to interfere with such rights, even if that conduct may not be independently unconstitutional.[5][6]

As originally enacted, the Voting Rights Act (of 1965) also suspended the use of literacy tests in all jurisdictions in which less than 50% of voting-age residents were registered as of November 1, 1964, or had voted in the 1964 presidential election. In 1970, Congress amended the Act and expanded the ban on literacy tests to the entire country.[7] The Supreme Court then upheld the ban as constitutional in Oregon v. Mitchell (1970). The Court was deeply divided in this case, and a majority of justices did not agree on a rationale for the holding.[8][9
No shit Sherlock.

'Thinking' and 'Doing' are two different things.


Like, when I worked at Wal-Mart, I often dreamed of a world where you had to past a test before you were allowed to breed.

Sure, it's never going to happen, but when you work retail long enough you dream of not dealing with stupid fucking idiots who can't read a goddamn sign and/or get pissed off because you didn't read their minds.



Offline Burkingam

  • Member
  • Posts: 11031
  • Love, Science & Music
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #16 on: January 06, 2017, 05:40:13 am »
The IQ test doesn't test rationality. Mensa is actually full of conspiracy theorists.
Altmed is altfact!

Offline Fool010

  • Member
  • Posts: 1562
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2017, 09:21:19 am »
You aren't the only one. It's called Geniocracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniocracy

Different name, same crap ... Just another brand of dictatorship. Being smart has never prevented anymore from being an idiot or a sack of shit.

For some reason, the advocates of geniocracy think "intelligence" also entails the absence of flaws, a view I consider a spectacular lapse in lucidity. If anything, intelligence acts like a flaw amplifier.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2017, 09:30:27 am by Fool010 »
Who needs a signature anyway ?

MAL               last.fm

Offline Ixarku

  • Member
  • Posts: 5871
  • (V)_|*,,,*|_(V)
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #18 on: January 06, 2017, 12:25:01 pm »
You aren't the only one. It's called Geniocracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniocracy

Different name, same crap ... Just another brand of dictatorship. Being smart has never prevented anymore from being an idiot or a sack of shit.

For some reason, the advocates of geniocracy think "intelligence" also entails the absence of flaws, a view I consider a spectacular lapse in lucidity. If anything, intelligence acts like a flaw amplifier.

I like your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
If I ever meet God in person, I'm going to ask Him why he created so many stupid people, and then punch Him in the nose before he answers.

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 10259
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: So much for "draining the swamp"
« Reply #19 on: January 06, 2017, 04:37:39 pm »
You aren't the only one. It's called Geniocracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniocracy

Different name, same crap ... Just another brand of dictatorship. Being smart has never prevented anymore from being an idiot or a sack of shit.

For some reason, the advocates of geniocracy think "intelligence" also entails the absence of flaws, a view I consider a spectacular lapse in lucidity. If anything, intelligence acts like a flaw amplifier.

See italicized below:

Quote
This method of selectivity is deliberate so as to address what the concept considers to be flaws in the current systems of democracy. The primary object of criticism is the inability of majoritarian consensus to provide a reasonable platform for intelligent decision making for the purpose of solving problems permanently. Geniocracy's criticism of this system is that the institutions of democracy become more concerned with appealing to popular consensus through emotive issues than they are in making long-term critical decisions, especially those that may involve issues not immediately relevant to the electorate. It asserts that political mandate is something far too important to simply leave to popularity, and asserts that the critical decision making required for government, especially in a world of globalization, cannot be based on criteria of emotive or popular decision making.

...

As a response to its controversial attitudes about selectivity one of the more general responses is to point out that universal suffrage, the current system, already discriminates to some degree and varyingly in different countries, in who is allowed to vote. Primarily, this discrimination is against minors, incarcerated felons, and the mentally incapacitated. This is on the basis that their ability to contribute to the decision making process is either flawed or invalid for the purpose of the society.

...

The current difficulty in the ideas of geniocracy is that the means of assessing intelligence are ill-defined. One idea offered by Raël in Geniocracy is to have specialists such as psychologists, neurologists, ethnologists, etc., perfect or choose among existing ones, a series of tests that would define each person's level of intelligence. They should be designed to measure intellectual potential rather than accumulation of knowledge.

Other components deemed necessary for a more rounded understanding of intelligence include concepts like emotional intelligence. As such, geniocracy's validity cannot really be assessed until better and more objective methods of intelligence assessment are made available.

The matter of confronting moral problems that may arise is not addressed in the book Geniocracy; many leaders may be deeply intelligent and charismatic (having both high emotional/social intelligence and IQ) according to current means of measuring such factors, but no current scientific tests are a reliable enough measure for one's ability to make humanitarian choices (although online tests such as those used by retail chains to select job applicants may be relevant).