US Senators - a bunch of pathetic drama queens

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by broadside, Aug 11, 2010.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I accept that US politicians have a duty to investigate issues that affect their constituents but I am growing heartily sick of them sticking their noses into all manner of places they have no business being near.

    Hearings into the US car industry, the Iraq war, Afghanistan, and of course the BP oil explosion are valid areas of US public interest but they SHOULD be properly conducted "hearings" not some sort of media hyped Punch and Judy show which is what they seem to be degenerating into.

    I thought the "soap opera" antics at the BP hearing with these pathetic individuals desperately trying to score points over Tony Hayward was excruciating and was little better than a precursor to a lynching.

    The subsequent attempt to implicate BP (as the current US hate figure) in the release of Megrahi was mind-numbingly grotesque (and I can see little justification for it other than a further attempt to kick someone while they are down and now they have decided that since that link seems to be a non-starter they want to keep their foul faces in the media by going after the medical "experts" who declared he was about to breathe his last breath (Link -

    Just how gullible do these pathetic little creatures think we are? They had no interest in finding the ruth in the BP grilling, it was just point scoring and trying to get a grovelling apology. Similarly (IMHO) they only had a go at trying to establish BP links to the Megrahi release because they thought it would be an easy win for them (well done Alec Salmond for telling them to shove it).

    All they want is to get their extra 15 minutes of fame as the US approaches the mid-term elections and it makes me sick watching their pathetic posturing - what cynical self-interested scum these so called "elected representatives" are.
  2. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker War Hero Moderator

    I think you should get off the fence and say it as you see it. :wink:
  3. Yes, you are probably right, it is a criticism I have heard before, I do tend to keep things a bit to myself :lol:
  4. The attitude of the Senators does leave a lot to be desired but their enquiries are not entirely without foundation.Alex Salmond says Megrahi was not released because of any oil deal and I believe him.The main reason was that Megrahi was appealing against his conviction and the clever money was on him succeeding.After all the expense of the Trial to have the verdict overturned would have been a major embarrassment for Scotland and it's legal system.They decided to release him on compassionate grounds on the condition he withdrew his appeal.
  5. You know, I've been shouting those exact same things at the telly, my misses thinks I'm mad and tells me that they 'can't hear you', well I wish someone would say it out loud enough for them to hear and get into their one track 'we are the greatest' shit for brains. Now they want the medical records for fcuks sake. Tell them it's none of their cockin business and to piss off.
    The use of 'points scoring' is another exact term I used. They may not think so but the shit they are spouting is purely transparent.
    No sod off and prosecute the 'American' manufacturer of the oil safety valves that stop oil leaking in the event of an accident but didn't work because of poor design and manufacture.
  6. I think you will find that is hearsay.

  7. Or even a load of old bollocks.... :D
  8. witsend

    witsend War Hero Book Reviewer

    TBH, I think its their own countrymen & women they treat as gullible.

    I might not have agreed with him all of the time, but I enjoyed this performance.
  9. They can always be voted out ya know!
  10. Yes they are.
  11. Blackrat

    Blackrat War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    I've always thought Galloway was a complete cock (still do as it goes) but you have to admit, he was spot on in this vid. He made that US Senator look like a right tool.
  12. There's a second part to his speech on utube aswell--even better than
    the first one

    Admire his stand anyway --and he's won a lot of dosh in courts proving
    his straight dealings.

  13. Blackrat

    Blackrat War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    I watched them both Greenie. Good viewing if i'm honest. I love watching Spams squirm.
  14. In a sense you are both "right" and both "wrong".

    The law as it stands (stood) is that IF he was released on compassionate grounds THEN he would be unable to pursue his appeal.

    So, by offering him a release on "compassionate grounds" they effectively bribed him into silence and blocked the appeal.


    This was in all the UK papers at the time and was an OBVIOUS cause to be taken up in the USA, however the "main" survivor group went along with the decision, although there were individuals who didn't realise how SUPPOSEDLY strong the appeal case was. The US media was noticeable in their downplaying of the Appeal process and the dodgy evidence (see, for instance, Private Eye).

    If the US Congress wanted to really find the truth (as opposed to just grandstanding) then they should look at the evidence which is under suspicion. Unfortunately the USA is still under the McCarthy type paranoia that reared its head after 911 and such a search for the truth is just not a realistic proposition as "truth and justice" just isn't the "American way" at the moment (decade).

  15. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    All politicians are like this, it's how they get and stay elected - they know there are far more stupid voters than thinking ones. What you are seeing is democracy in action, the least worst solution to how a country should be governed.
  16. There is a movement in Elmerfudville to pass an amendment to the Constitution.

    Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution

    "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens
    of the United States that does not apply equally to the
    Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no
    law that to the Senators and/or Representatives that
    does not apply equally to the citizens of the United
    States ."


    Because Congress voted laws that do not apply to them, such as a Gold-plated health care scheme that gives them and their extended families life-long healthcare after 1 term in Congress OR even more bizarre - Insider Trading Laws do not apply to them:-

    Q: Why Do Congressmen Outperform the Market by 12%?

    A: Because it is entirely legal for members of Congress to trade on nonpublic information. Looking at the timing of cumulative returns, the senators also appeared to know exactly when to buy or sell their holdings. Senators would buy stocks just before the shares suddenly would outperform the market by more than 25%. Conversely, senators would sell stocks that had been beating the market by about 25% for the past year just when the shares would fall back in line with the markets performance. No one should be above the law.
  17. PT2

    Sorry to urinate on your bonfire mate, this is a well known internet hoax, ( ).

    Congressmen and Senators are US Citizens and therefore are already covered under the laws of the Land.

    Having said that I have to acknowledge they are knobbers in the main.

    Edited due to extreamly fat fingers :roll:
  18. 8O What!

    P-T accused of swallowing and perpetuating a discredited Urban Myth? :oops:

    Whatever is the world coming to!! :roll:

    ....... our Rum Rat would never put himself in that position. (Or would he, Steve? :wink: )
  19. I'd roll-over and admit Mea Culpa but it's not quite that straightforward.

    The 28th Amendment email comes and goes with slightly amended content but there is nevertheless a grass-root movement to amend the US Constitution to make Congress accountable. My first point - that Congress voted themselves a 'gold-plated' health care package is not disputed.

    Insider trading? It is illegal in the USA, but this is what the Wall Street Journal had to say about Congress:-

    Congress Refuses to Outlaw Insider Trading For Lawmakers
    Posted May 05, 2010 01:04pm EDT by Peter Gorenstein in Investing, Banking, Politics

    Even a cynic can find Washington's hypocrisy shocking at times. The Wall Street Journal reports today a House bill that would force lawmakers to make greater disclosures on financial transactions and disallow them from trading on nonpublic information is going nowhere fast.

    That's right. Members of Congress are currently allowed to profit on insider trading!

    The bill, which has been languishing in the House for four years, would require elected officials "to make their financial transactions public within 90 days of a purchase or sale" and "prohibit lawmakers from trading in financial markets based on nonpublic information they learn on the job," the WSJ reports.

    It seems they're above the transparency they've been calling for on Wall Street.

    This comes a day after the same newspaper reported several lawmakers profited by betting against the housing and stock market in 2008. And some did it using derivatives they've recently been railing against.

    As our colleague Henry Blodget wrote Tuesday, "If you're going to complain about how awful short-selling is and how evil and venal people are for doing it, you should probably abstain from the practice yourself."


Share This Page