bobbo says:

#159–Mustard==maybe it is god (or the devil since they can’t be told apart) punishing me for operating only on that which he has provided me. I thought wired routers would make more “guaranteed” connections and would use wire even with a wireless router.

My take away is that if these router thingies are so reverently admired by your more proficient types, I probably just got a bum unit. Think I’ll go get another one and see.

Thanks.

Mr. Fusion says:

#160, bobbo,

Is Congress and every member therein responsible for what Congress does or fails to do–whether their party is in power or not?

No, of course not. No more than anyone is responsible for what someone else does. Even in the BART Cop Shooting, some other cop miles away bears no responsibility for the shooting.

Congress has the dirty job of representing 500,000 to almost 1,000,000 constituents.That is a lot of varied ideas present. Then there are 435 of those interests in the House and another 100 in the Senate. Most laws passed are done with some consensus and compromise, even among the majority party.

Most laws are not perfect and the representatives hold their nose at the objectionable sections just to get the good portions through. Of course some times the compromises turn too many people off so the law ends up not passing.

Votes are also traded as favors so some representative can push through a law that helps his district / State.

If this compromise and vote trading didn’t occur, nothing would ever get passed as there is always something objectionable in any law.

Your same sense of joint accountability would also mean that you too are to blame because you voted for (or not) the person representing your district.

bobbo says:

#153–Fusion==thank you. The horrendous basis of your error is finally plain for all to see. Please cut and past that post into your personal diary to reconsider as time permits.

Even if your generalized prounouncement where true, it is irrelevant to long time congressmen serving on the committees having direct oversight responsibilities for the very activity that suffered from lack of oversight don’t you think?

The cop example is just as stupid as you suggest. Why did you make it?

Then you finish with a flourish: “Your same sense of joint accountability would also mean that you too are to blame because you voted for (or not) the person representing your district.” /// How can I be responsible when I VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!

The opposite answer also gives you a fail: of course I am also derivatively responsible===just 5 more steps removed.

As I posted, whats wrong with our government is people giving these crooks a pass for the corruption and ineptitude EVEN when presented with the facts/evidence against them.

I wish I could be your personal banker.

Mister Mustard says:

#165 – Bobbo

>>How can I be responsible when I VOTE ALL
>>INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!

No you don’t. You sing that silly song here on dvorak dot org slash blog, but you certainly don’t do it in real life. In fact, you probably even vote FOR some of the incumbents, if their opponents are distasteful enough. What if they dropped term limits and Dumbya ran against Obama in ’12? Would you vote for him? Cheney? Palin?

You’re just blowing smoke up our asses with this adolescent battle cry. Even if you DID vote against all incumbents (which I don’t believe), THAT’S NOT ENOUGH. YOU COULD HAVE DONE MORE. You could have, BY WHATEVER MEANS NECESSARY, prevented the inumbents from fulfilling another term.

>>Even if your generalized prounouncement
>>where true, it is irrelevant to blah blah

Blah blah. You might want to post that into YOUR personal diary and reconsider it. You STILL have not shown what Barney Frank did that is so reprehensible. You blather on with your smoke and mirrors and outlandish punctuation, saying “something bad has happened, and it has to do with moeny and houses, and there are people supposed to be taking care of money and houses for me, committees to do that stuff, and Barney Frank is a member of one of those committees….so BINGO! The bastard is to blame for all my woes”.

Pretty shabby.

Where were were you in 2002 when Barney Frank was working all his devilsh magic? Where were the neocon wingnuts in 2002? The only thing they could find to criticize Barney Frank at in 2002 were that he took it up the ass from his boyfriend. Now all of a sudden “everybody” “knows” that he was up to no good 6 or 7 years ago, and if he hadn’t done what he did (or didn’t do; whatever that was), we wouldn’t be in this pickle today.

Christ. For a Master Logician, you make no sense at all.

pedro says:

#146 Yeap! #144 & #145 had blisters in their hands and forearms since yesterday.

#147 Frank was amongst those pushing for the crisis to occur. It’s so stupid to start “fixing” after 2006 all the pushing he did for it to happen.

He’s like a member of a group of kids telling another one to break his mother’s china only to acuse him later.

#151 Now, take it easy. Those blisters of yours are about to burst. Take a nap now, it’s daylight.

#153 took the hit by behaving like: “I know what you are, but what am I?”

Mr. Fusion says:

#165, bobbo, aka Cow-Paddy the Troll,

How can I be responsible when I VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!

Simply because you cast a ballot. You want to hold all Congressmen responsible regardless of how they voted or even spoke simply by some gross act of inclusion. Therefore by voting you either enables someone to be elected or prevented a better person NOT to be elected.

I am not aware of any State that allows a strict vote on who should be removed from office during a general election. Therefore your statement that you “I VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE!!!!” is false. When you enter the voting booth you either vote FOR someone or you do not vote at all. There is no option allowing you to vote to see the incumbent removed.

The very thesis that you vote solely to remove incumbents is as stupid as not voting and even worse in outcome. If, you vote to remove Congressman “A”, and Congressman “A” is a good person and candidate “B” ends up being elected then you must share candidate “B”‘s stance on police brutality, self paid health care, more religion in schools, and putting blacks back into slavery.

BUT,

I’m still waiting to see some substance about Frank promoting the financial crises and some of those articles you’ve been reading about Frank in bed with so many people.

I just know you wouldn’t make a claim that couldn’t be backed up.

Mister Mustard says:

#69 – ‘dro

>>Frank was amongst those pushing for the
>>crisis to occur. It’s so stupid to
>>start “fixing” after 2006 all the pushing he
>>did for it to happen.

‘dro! Bro’! To date, I’ve not included you in the list of liars here on dvorak dot org slash blog, such as ‘temp and Paddy-RAMBO. I preferred to imagine you as a simple, vacuous, harmless Kuzconian with no real point of view of your own.

Was I wrong, bro’ ‘dro? If you are going to make affirmative statements like “Frank was amongst those pushing for the crisis to occur”, then you will be held to the same standard as ‘tempt and Paddy-RAMBO, and will be required to provide proof of your assertion.

A word of warning…it’s much easier to sit on the sidelines tossing Kuczonian humor like “Mustard is beating his dick” than it is to actually SAY something, and back up what you say.

So, as we say in Kuzconia, ¿Dónde está la carne? How exactly did Frank “push for the crisis to occur”?

Wretched Gnu says:

I quote:

“#172 Again, who’s not saying that Bush is responsible too?

The problem here is the Dems. unwillingness to take responsability.”

Please read that again.

How and when, exactly, did Bush take any responsibility?

How and when, exactly, did any Republican ever, anywhere take responsibility — for their much greater complicity in letting the banks and corporations go without any oversight whatsoever?

Where? When?

Mr. Fusion says:

#176, Pedro the *A*hole,

Several times and by several posters you have been asked to show us what Frank actually did to initiate, perpetuate, or become complicit in the failure of Freddie Mac or Fanny Mae. Every time you have gone off on some tangent about how Democrats can’t face responsibility or we are just in denial.

There has been ample evidence presented that Bush and his Republican Administration were the most responsible for the lack of regulation and oversight that led to the over abundance of “toxic paper” that caused the crash. Yet there has been no evidence presented that the Congressional Democrats (and I’ll also include the Congressional Republicans to some degree) contributed to the financial trouble we are now in.

I slightly disagree with Wretched Gnu in that Congressional Democrats also wanted to expand home ownership to poorer people, and include Bill Clinton there too. It must be remembered though that these mortgages and most other sub-prime mortgages were not the the cause of the problem. It was the fraudulent paper that was floated as if it was good as well as the general economy going down the tubes.