Sen. Allen Still Pushing 'Paycheck Penalty'

[DrMaddVibe]

NewsMax caught up with Sen. George Allen Saturday morning at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in Memphis, Tenn. to ask him about his proposed idea of withholding congressional pay when Congress fails to deliver legislation during the regular Congressional season.

The senator and likely 2008 presidential candidate explained that he first introduced the idea last month and he mentioned his "paycheck penalty” proposal again during the morning general session.

In fact, unbeknownst to Allen, the witty Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who spoke after Allen in the morning session, drew laughter from the crowd when he said he just heard about a pay cut in October, so he would need to hold a fundraiser.

"The reaction of my colleagues was, they were not real thrilled," Allen said. "One of them said that’s an interesting idea and he asked ‘that applies only to appropriation committee meeting members, right?' And I said, 'no, no, it applies to all.' He wasn’t real happy.”

Allen added that support was lean, even with families.

"I brought this up to a group and one of the spouse’s said, 'No, no, no!' And I said that’s exactly why it would work ... The spouses and the family would be saying, ‘Hey mom and dad, get these things done We can’t be going month after month without a paycheck.'

"My argument is in the real world that it works exactly that way," Allen continued. "If someone is building a house or an addition there is always 10 percent or so that is withheld until they get a certificate of occupancy.”

With a more serious tone, the Virginia senator explained why he thinks some type of penalty is needed.

"I find it deplorable, really, that you have a full-time legislature and you go into session on January 3 and you have all the way to October 1 and you can’t get it done. The fact is if you look at last January, we had two votes in the Senate, both on Alito - stopping the filibuster and the vote which was very important.

"But not everyone is on the judiciary committee," he continued. "Why can’t they get moving on a variety of other matters, so they don’t get into May and June and start saying we don’t have enough time.”

When asked who is actually supportive of the idea, the Senator laughed.

"I haven’t found any yet. However, I am going to try to find a way. [Sen. Tom] Coburn, R-Mo., ought to be with me. I’ll have to talk to him.”

On a more serious note, the Senator said he believes Americans would be for the idea.

"I know who’s for it: the American people ... If these folks were in the U.S. Senate, this would have passed 99 to 1.

"The people are for it and that’s what matters," Allen said. "The owners of government are for it. Maybe the owners of congress aren’t yet enthused about it.”







I can see this guy's star rising!

[Nickdfresh]

What did he say about the massive deficit?:)

[blueturk]

Or the raises these fuckers give each other all the fucking time? :mad:

[FORD]

These guys are all millionaires anyway. If they miss a paycheck, they'll replace it with another bribe from a corporation.

Allen is another Quayle/Chimpy dumbass empty suit puppet candidate.

[Big Train]

I don't care how long they take to do it as long as it's reasonable. And it could create the incentive to just go along with some ideas just to get the session over.

A better bill would be to say "No Riders" legislation. Vote on the proposal and the proposal only. That would save billions and billions of dollars.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Big Train
I don't care how long they take to do it as long as it's reasonable. And it could create the incentive to just go along with some ideas just to get the session over.

A better bill would be to say "No Riders" legislation. Vote on the proposal and the proposal only. That would save billions and billions of dollars.

Ted Stevens would never go for that. How else would he have gotten that $300 million dollar bridge to an island with 20 people living on it?

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by FORD
Ted Stevens would never go for that. How else would he have gotten that $300 million dollar bridge to an island with 20 people living on it?

so we should just abandon those 20 people??? Elitist!!!

[FORD]

Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
so we should just abandon those 20 people??? Elitist!!!

Actually, the island has a ferry and an airport. The residents didn't see what all the fuss was about.

[Warham]

George Allen in '08!

[EAT MY ASSHOLE]

Originally posted by FORD
Actually, the island has a ferry and an airport. The residents didn't see what all the fuss was about.

Maybe Stevens didn't want the residents to have to emulate Bainbridge.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
George Allen in '08!

I agree! We'll paint the White House 'blue.':)

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe


I can see this guy's star rising!



Bwahahahahahahhaahahahhahaahahahahahahahahahahahha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Jeus fucking Christ that's hilarious.


He's Bush, only dumber , and without the leadership skills

LMMFAO

:lol
:lol:
:lol:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
He's Bush, only dumber , and without the leadership skills

LMMFAO

:lol
:lol:
:lol:

You mean without KARL ROVE's hand up his ass...

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Bwahahahahahahhaahahahhahaahahahahahahahahahahahha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Jeus fucking Christ that's hilarious.


He's Bush, only dumber , and without the leadership skills

LMMFAO

:lol
:lol:
:lol:


He's smarter than you!

[Warham]

:rolleyes:

[FORD]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
You mean without KARL ROVE's hand up his ass...

That would change......

As I said a while back, if they run Allen, it's a sign that the Republican party is still controlled by the BCE and Allen will just be another empty headed empty suit like Reagan, Quayle, and Chimpy. Rove's hand will be deeply implanted in his ass by then.

My gut feeling though is that the BCE will sit this one out. When you have already drained the Treasury and bankrupted the country, you need to allow it to fill up again......so you can steal it all over again in 8 years.

If this country survives this incarnation of the Bush Criminal Empire, I would at least hope that their memory does not fail them in another 8 years like it did in 2000. There is no such thing as a good Bush presidency. There is no such thing as a "compassionate" Bush. There is no good in these fucking bastards, period.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
You mean without KARL ROVE's hand up his ass...


FTR, "leadership skills" was me being sarcastic. ;)


King George has none.


I'm a uniter, not a dividererer:D

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by FORD
Ted Stevens would never go for that. How else would he have gotten that $300 million dollar bridge to an island with 20 people living on it?


It was more money than that! A lot more!

Let me check for you, though. I just read an article in Fleet Owner (I'm in the trucking business) magazine the other day that railed on Bush and his "oil addiction" comments. Very interesting to say the least, but the "Stevens bridge" was brought up and the amount of money allotted for that was outrageous.

I'm coming out. I don't know if I can defend Bush much longer, if not, any longer.

This does NOT mean I'm turning liberal!



:D

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by FORD
That would change......

As I said a while back, if they run Allen, it's a sign that the Republican party is still controlled by the BCE and Allen will just be another empty headed empty suit like Reagan, Quayle, and Chimpy. Rove's hand will be deeply implanted in his ass by then.

My gut feeling though is that the BCE will sit this one out. When you have already drained the Treasury and bankrupted the country, you need to allow it to fill up again......so you can steal it all over again in 8 years.

If this country survives this incarnation of the Bush Criminal Empire, I would at least hope that their memory does not fail them in another 8 years like it did in 2000. There is no such thing as a good Bush presidency. There is no such thing as a "compassionate" Bush. There is no good in these fucking bastards, period.


A good question for you...

If you were a Republican who would you support and why?

It's not a loaded question either. I'm just curious.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Roy Munson



I'm coming out. I don't know if I can defend Bush much longer, if not, any longer.

This does NOT mean I'm turning liberal!



:D


Woo hooo

Welcome to The Light, Muny :D :D :D


:cool:

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Woo hooo

Welcome to The Light, Muny :D :D :D


:cool:



Try not to get your panties in a bunch...:D

The thing is, with this place, so much of the bickering going on is just partisan knee-jerking. Everyone here does it and is not immune. I'm willing to admit that I have been fighting for my team but there are just too many things going on with the country that, to me, are headed in the wrong direction.

Do I still support the war in Iraq? Yes, I do. And while I am upset that we haven't found any WMD's I still do believe that they were there. Where did they go? The fact that Bush and his admin have not been able to put this puzzle together perplexes me and pisses me off.

Also aggrevating to me is the fact that we haven't caught bin Laden yet. I believe that there is no excuse for this guy still being alive. We have satellites that can fucking take a picture of a license plate on a car anywhere in the world and, yet, we can't fing this scumbag? Hmmm...what was that word again? Oh, yeah. Incompetence.

But even more bewildering to me is the fact that Bush is NOT a fiscal conservative. I supported the tax cuts and was happy to see that measure pass. It was a great idea but not if you're not going to cut spending! Of course, the war doesn't help things at all. Still, this guy throws money around like it's going out of style.

I like most of Bush's "talk" but I'm growing ever weary of his "walk."

[FORD]

Originally posted by Roy Munson
A good question for you...

If you were a Republican who would you support and why?

It's not a loaded question either. I'm just curious.


If I were a Republican going into this decade, I would have left the party already, and a lot of Republicans have done exactly that.

Apart from deserting the party (or feeling that the party deserted me) I would probably do exactly what I'm doing now as a Democrat.

And that is simply refusing to support anyone who is in favor of this corporatist, fascist agenda.

Problem for Republicans is that they seem to have less options in that regard. John McCain might have fit the bill before 2000, but after 2 terms of Bush ass kissing, he wouldn't be my candidate now.

Pat Buchanan seemed to be making a lot of sense for a while, but recently even he seems to be drinking the BCE kool-aid to some extent.

Ron Paul (Congressman from Texas) has consistently opposed the BCE agenda, but I don't know if he has any presidential ambitions.

Not looking too good for candidates on either side of the aisle, I guess.

[Warham]

You'll be voting for Hillary in '08, FORD. Stop beating around the Bush, no pun intended.

[scamper]

Originally posted by FORD
And that is simply refusing to support anyone who is in favor of this corporatist, fascist agenda.


Are you against capitalism?

[FORD]

Originally posted by scamper
Are you against capitalism?

This merging of corporate and state interests currently taking place in this country is not "capitalism" as it was previously known in this country.

Capitalism was fine when it was properly regulated to protect the environment, the consumer, and prevented corporations from getting too big and choking all competition.

Most products that are generally known to be overpriced are that way because either a monopoly, or a virtual monopoly controls the price of that product.

Gasoline, for example, is controlled by 4 multinational corporations. And as they artificially increase the prices, claiming the problems in the Middle East as an excuse, they also report the highest quarterly profits ever in the history of mankind.

CD's being another example. The music industry is also controlled by 4 multinational mega-giants. Though a CD costs less than $3 to produce (and that's accounting for all materials and labor) they retail from anywhere from $15 - $20 (more if you're Canadian)

The "cheaper" solution to this is to charge $1 a piece for a compressed lossy file that can be accidentally deleted at anytime if not burned to a CD. Yet if you DO burn it to a CD, the fascist nazi pigs called the Recording Industry Assholes of America accuse you of "breaking the law"

That's not capitalism. It's fascist, and it's Unamerican.

[Warham]

If you don't want to pay the money, don't buy it.

Capitalism is controlled by the consumer.

If everybody in the country didn't want to spend $10-15 to buy a CD, and dropped their purchasing habits immediately, the prices would drop across the board.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Big Train
I don't care how long they take to do it as long as it's reasonable. And it could create the incentive to just go along with some ideas just to get the session over.

A better bill would be to say "No Riders" legislation. Vote on the proposal and the proposal only. That would save billions and billions of dollars.


Agreed. It's nonsense that all this pork gets passed and no one gets a chance to look at it.

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Roy Munson
Also aggrevating to me is the fact that we haven't caught bin Laden yet. I believe that there is no excuse for this guy still being alive. We have satellites that can fucking take a picture of a license plate on a car anywhere in the world and, yet, we can't fing this scumbag? Hmmm...what was that word again? Oh, yeah. Incompetence.


Exactly. No excuse. We should have the human intel by now. Only bad will and incompetence keep us from him.

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by FORD

CD's being another example. The music industry is also controlled by 4 multinational mega-giants. Though a CD costs less than $3 to produce (and that's accounting for all materials and labor) they retail from anywhere from $15 - $20 (more if you're Canadian)

The "cheaper" solution to this is to charge $1 a piece for a compressed lossy file that can be accidentally deleted at anytime if not burned to a CD. Yet if you DO burn it to a CD, the fascist nazi pigs called the Recording Industry Assholes of America accuse you of "breaking the law"

That's not capitalism. It's fascist, and it's Unamerican.


So, you're saying it's American to steal something just because you don't agree with the pricing.

:rolleyes:

I fucking hate the fact that people bitch and complain about CD prices. Where are you buying your CD's for $15-$20? When I buy a new disc the price is usually around 12-15$. IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD THAT YOU MUST DIRT FUCKING POOR AND YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BUYING ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I'm not trying to defend the record companies because I hate them with a passion but to bitch about something like a CD, where you basically pay $1.00-$1.50 per song and will be able to enjoy those songs for years to come, is absolutely ridiculous.

Get a second job if you can't afford it. :rolleyes:

[FORD]

Originally posted by Roy Munson
So, you're saying it's American to steal something just because you don't agree with the pricing.

Where the fuck did I say that??



I fucking hate the fact that people bitch and complain about CD prices. Where are you buying your CD's for $15-$20? When I buy a new disc the price is usually around 12-15$. IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD THAT YOU MUST DIRT FUCKING POOR AND YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BUYING ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I'm not trying to defend the record companies because I hate them with a passion but to bitch about something like a CD, where you basically pay $1.00-$1.50 per song and will be able to enjoy those songs for years to come, is absolutely ridiculous.

Get a second job if you can't afford it. :rolleyes:

My point is that the markup is ridiculous. CD's are actually far cheaper to produce than vinyl and cassettes were. When CD's were new technology, everyone expected they would cost more for a while, as new technology always does. By 1990, that research & development cost had long been paid off, and CD's had decidedly taken over as the standard auto format. The price then should have dropped down to the $8.99 - $9.99 range that LP and cassette were at. And the labels still would have a nice profit in doing so.


Contrast this with the transition from VHS tapes to DVD as the standard for home video.

I can remember when new VHS releases had a retail price tag of $50 - $79. It took years before the price dropped on those tapes.

Now I usually pay under $20 for a single DVD, and most full seasons of a TV show cost around $30 -$40

This is an example of new technology marketed correctly. And they are able to sell back catalogs of TV shows at this price, where they probably would not have on VHS tape, where the same collection would have been priced at $100 or more.

Maybe rock bands should just release DVD's and fuck the CD's altogether?

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by FORD
My point is that the markup is ridiculous. CD's are actually far cheaper to produce than vinyl and cassettes were. When CD's were new technology, everyone expected they would cost more for a while, as new technology always does. By 1990, that research & development cost had long been paid off, and CD's had decidedly taken over as the standard auto format. The price then should have dropped down to the $8.99 - $9.99 range that LP and cassette were at. And the labels still would have a nice profit in doing so.


Contrast this with the transition from VHS tapes to DVD as the standard for home video.

I can remember when new VHS releases had a retail price tag of $50 - $79. It took years before the price dropped on those tapes.

Now I usually pay under $20 for a single DVD, and most full seasons of a TV show cost around $30 -$40

This is an example of new technology marketed correctly. And they are able to sell back catalogs of TV shows at this price, where they probably would not have on VHS tape, where the same collection would have been priced at $100 or more.

Maybe rock bands should just release DVD's and fuck the CD's altogether?


You're forgetting some key components to the cost of making a CD. Do you realize that overall production for an album of material has gone up significantly? Do you know anything about recording techniques and equipment? Most pro studios now days have 2-4 million $$$ worth of gear alone. That's not even including the facility, producers, engineers, etc. This shit costs money to make. You seem to only be thinking of the manufacturing costs.

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by FORD
This merging of corporate and state interests currently taking place in this country is not "capitalism" as it was previously known in this country.

Capitalism was fine when it was properly regulated to protect the environment, the consumer, and prevented corporations from getting too big and choking all competition.

Most products that are generally known to be overpriced are that way because either a monopoly, or a virtual monopoly controls the price of that product.

Gasoline, for example, is controlled by 4 multinational corporations. And as they artificially increase the prices, claiming the problems in the Middle East as an excuse, they also report the highest quarterly profits ever in the history of mankind.

CD's being another example. The music industry is also controlled by 4 multinational mega-giants. Though a CD costs less than $3 to produce (and that's accounting for all materials and labor) they retail from anywhere from $15 - $20 (more if you're Canadian)

The "cheaper" solution to this is to charge $1 a piece for a compressed lossy file that can be accidentally deleted at anytime if not burned to a CD. Yet if you DO burn it to a CD, the fascist nazi pigs called the Recording Industry Assholes of America accuse you of "breaking the law"

That's not capitalism. It's fascist, and it's Unamerican.


When exactly did we as a nation ever reign in business?

Your comments bend towards communism with socialist undertones.

Take the time to actually re-read them and compare them to Marx's foundation example.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Roy Munson
So, you're saying it's American to steal something just because you don't agree with the pricing.

:rolleyes:

I have gotten downloads...

But I've used them to preview music I want to buy since MP3s/AAC are lossy, and definitely are not as good as CD music.

But a study was done by HARVARD/UNC that found that MP3s do not impact the sales of CDs.


I fucking hate the fact that people bitch and complain about CD prices. Where are you buying your CD's for $15-$20? When I buy a new disc the price is usually around 12-15$. IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD THAT YOU MUST DIRT FUCKING POOR AND YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BUYING ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

So people should just take price-gouging to record companies can subsidize their crappy marquee stars like Titney and Whoregalaria? They actually lose money on them you know, then pass the cost along on albums that have paid for themselves 50-times over...


I'm not trying to defend the record companies because I hate them with a passion but to bitch about something like a CD, where you basically pay $1.00-$1.50 per song and will be able to enjoy those songs for years to come, is absolutely ridiculous.

Get a second job if you can't afford it. :rolleyes:

I won't buy lossy music...

If they downloaded as FLAC or APPLE LOSSLESS it would be worth it...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
When exactly did we as a nation ever reign in business?

Your comments bend towards communism with socialist undertones.

Take the time to actually re-read them and compare them to Marx's foundation example.

After they found that people were being dissolved into vats of lard after workers accidentally fell in...

[Roy Munson]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
[B]I have gotten downloads...

But I've used them to preview music I want to buy since MP3s/AAC are lossy, and definitely are not as good as CD music.

But a study was done by HARVARD/UNC that found that MP3s do not impact the sales of CDs.

I have used iTunes and Napster to preview stuff, too. I have also purchased songs from those sites.

You can really tell the difference between an MP3/ACC and an actual CD? You should have been a record producer if that's the case. You must have ears of gold.

Not sure I totally believe the Harvard study. Do you have a link?




So people should just take price-gouging to record companies can subsidize their crappy marquee stars like Titney and Whoregalaria? They actually lose money on them you know, then pass the cost along on albums that have paid for themselves 50-times over...


I agree with you that the record companies have it all wrong as far as talent and marketing. But, I still don't think there is that much gouging going on. Please see my previous post about the cost of production of making a full length album. It seems as though you guys ONLY think about the actual manufacturing costs. Production has become far more sophisticated and expensive.

The problem with record companies to me is marketing and artist support. Ninety per-cent of their budget goes to whom they feel will be marketable and popular. They create stars even if there isn't much talent involved. It's all about the look. I'm sure you already know this. It's just sad that there is really only that 10% left over for talented bands.

We can go further with the idea that the masses probably aren't interested in great music. I think most people just want a tune they can hum along in their head without too much thought. That's what we have become...a bunch of mindless idiots when it comes to our entertainment choices. It's the same with television. I don't even know why I have a fucking television anymore. We hardly watch the damn thing because it's all rubbish. We have made a consious effort to keep the boob tube away from our daughter, and with another one on the way (just found out!), we will fine tune our viewing habits even more. It's the same with music.

I think you and I are probably on the same page with most of this. It's just that I don't really agree that CD's are that overpriced.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Roy Munson
I have used iTunes and Napster to preview stuff, too. I have also purchased songs from those sites.

You can really tell the difference between an MP3/ACC and an actual CD? You should have been a record producer if that's the case. You must have ears of gold.

Yes. The snap crackle, and pop is a dead give away. And if you listen real closely, the music sounds thin and tinny because of the drastically reduced sample rate, through a good stereo that is...


Not sure I totally believe the Harvard study. Do you have a link?


Here it is: http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5181562.html

I also posted an article/fight thread in the Music forum, search "Harvard" to find it. There is simply no comparison to downloading MP3's for personal use, which is like taping off the radio, and selling pirated versions of copyrighted material in CHINA for instance...

The two main points are that: people download music they wouldn't buy anyway. And previewing music via MP3 often can sparks sales of an artists entire back catalogue if the downloader likes what they hear...


I agree with you that the record companies have it all wrong as far as talent and marketing. But, I still don't think there is that much gouging going on. Please see my previous post about the cost of production of making a full length album. It seems as though you guys ONLY think about the actual manufacturing costs. Production has become far more sophisticated and expensive.

The problem with record companies to me is marketing and artist support. Ninety per-cent of their budget goes to whom they feel will be marketable and popular. They create stars even if there isn't much talent involved. It's all about the look. I'm sure you already know this. It's just sad that there is really only that 10% left over for talented bands.

We can go further with the idea that the masses probably aren't interested in great music. I think most people just want a tune they can hum along in their head without too much thought. That's what we have become...a bunch of mindless idiots when it comes to our entertainment choices. It's the same with television. I don't even know why I have a fucking television anymore. We hardly watch the damn thing because it's all rubbish. We have made a conscious effort to keep the boob tube away from our daughter, and with another one on the way (just found out!), we will fine tune our viewing habits even more. It's the same with music.

I think you and I are probably on the same page with most of this. It's just that I don't really agree that CD's are that overpriced.

All good points. But I think one can clearly draw the conclusion that CD-price gouging was going on in the late 90's, when petroleum was cheap, and CDs had no real competition...

Record companies have often used misstated data to perpetuate the myth of falling sales when in retrospect, sales boomed in the 80's and early 90's because people were converting their vinyl collections to CD...

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
After they found that people were being dissolved into vats of lard after workers accidentally fell in...


When was that?:confused:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
When was that?:confused:

Actually, it has never been verified, but UPTON SINCLAIR wrote about such an instance in 1906's "THE JUNGLE." Obviously this was a rare, extreme circumstance. But the meat packing industry was pretty disgusting then. His descriptions on making sausage using whatever they had, including dead rats, dirt, spoiled meat, helped to force greater regulation of the meat packing industry.


Back in the day, the printed word was the medium of choice for moving the masses. In Upton Sinclair's powerful 1906 novel The Jungle , a slaughterhouse worker falls into a large vat of meat being rendered into lard at a Chicago packing plant. His bones are retrieved, but the rest of his body eventually becomes part of Durham's Pure Leaf Lard. Scenes like this one, supposedly based on fact, shocked readers from complacency, and they demanded slaughterhouse reforms. Convening in June 1906, the House Agriculture Committee was soon embroiled in a debate over a bill that would become the Meat Inspection Act. Not surprisingly, the bill faced stiff resistance in Congress, thanks in part to well-funded lobbyists representing the “beef trust” and other food producers. President Theodore Roosevelt, who had read Sinclair's book, stepped in to ensure the bill became law.

http://www.upc-online.org/slaughter/9904hawthorne.htm

[DrMaddVibe]

Thanks for lying...AGAIN!

[Nickdfresh]

I didn't lie. It was never verified, though everything else in the book was... I doubt Durhams called OSHA afterward...

Thanks for missing the point, again.

Forest through the trees, oh fuck it all....