Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 455

• 0%

  stephen-johnson1 year, 7 months ago

  Beat me to the punch posting this! Good job, though

  It looks like Washington is still open for business to the lobbyists

  Reply

  35 Replies

  • 67%

    jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

    It does seem endemic to the way our Congress operates and shows it is essentially fascist (as in corporatist vs the rhetorical "totalitarian"). Both sides seem to rush, stifle debate, and perform all sorts of games with legislation for the real powers in their districts and states.

    Reply

    31 Replies

    • 100%

      ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

      If this story is accurate, then I would also join in the condemnation of Pelosi. I do have some issues to raise that perhaps someone else can clear up for me.

      Here is the bill:

      http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

      It raises the federal minimum wage in the U.S. to $5.85 after 60 days, $6.55 after 1 yr, and $7.25 after 2 yrs in the U.S and amends FSLA USC(A)(1), which includes "Employees engaged in commerce; home workers in Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands; employees in American Samoa; seamen on American vessels; agricultural employees"

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

      Where does the bill say that Samoa is exempt? Where does it say Starkist is exempt?

      It also raises the minimum wage in N. Mariana Isl. to $3.55 after 60 days and an additional $0.50 every 6 months until it meets cost-of-living. It appears N. Mariana isn't covered by FSLA USC(A)(1).

      Reply

      29 Replies

      • 89%

        jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

        Good post. Like most people I just read the story and didn't look up the bill in question. But this illustrates just how bad our press is. Why wasn't the wording in question made part of the story? Why weren't the Republicans forced to identify the specific section under attack to support their allegation?

        It seems that the press allows politicians to belly-ache without providing any evidence that what they claim is true. Actually, the first complaint from any citizen should be about the press and why we aren't provided with the full story.

        As it stands with your questions about where the exemptions are in the bill not being part of the story makes the story look more like Republican smear campaign, no details and writing in a way that make the Democrats look like they are ruling undemocratically.

        I'm sure the right-wingers will not even question the absence of any details.

        Reply

        24 Replies

        • 100%

          NoSpinDave1 year, 7 months ago

          Check this out for more Democrat antics.......

          http://politics.netscape.com/story/2007/01/12/barb

          Reply

          11 Replies

          • 92%

            jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

            Boxer's right. Rice has no skin in the game. None of the Republicans that broke Iraq have sacrificed their own family in their quest for Middle East dominance but have done so with others'. Rice is a fool and a great example of the abject delusion that right-wingers supporting Bush and his failed right-wing policies are suffering from.

            It is funny to see right-wingers act so PC though. What irony.

            Reply

            10 Replies

            • 0%

              ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

              NoSpinDave, DavidHalko, and ike5266,

              Why are you changing the subject? What's the matter: can't argue the merits of the accusations presented by this article?

              There seems to be a pattern here of conservatives strenuously muckraking to find any scandal--no matter how truthful ore reliable the source of information--they can to denigrate the Democrats. Sure, you might claim that Democrats did the same thing to Bush, but the truth is Democrats never had to search for scandals--Republican scandals found them.

              This certain fits the pattern.

              Reply

              7 Replies

              • 100%

                ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

                DAVIDHALKO WROTE:

                "I presented evidence requested, there is not much to say."

                Where? I don't see any quotations of any official documentation.

                The truth is that the FSLA of 1938 is a ~70 year old act. Nancy Pelosi is only responsible for the bill passed on January 10, 2007, which can be found here:

                http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

                The allegation which this article makes is that Pelosi is a hypocrite for singling out Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte to receive exemptions from federal minimum wage law in return for campaign contributions. So, show me again, specifically where in the bill that was passed on January 10, 2007 does Pelosi specifically name Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte for exemptions? Go ahead; quote it if you can.

                It's a pity that so many conservative posters had to conspire to promote this to the front page, only to discover that the quality of journalism was woefully inadequate.

                Reply
              • 100%

                jordan111 year, 7 months ago

                There seems to be a pattern here of conservatives strenuously muckraking to find any scandal--no matter how truthful ore reliable the source of information--they can to denigrate the Democrats.>>>>

                Well, they've had a lot of years of practice under this new 'CON' umbrella. And they have had to sit and watch their house of cards topple. One by one, the truths came out, and it hasn't finished yet. They know that. Some people identify so strongly with 'ideals' that are set up for them by others, they have nothing to hold on to anymore. I noticed how this thread got huge quickly....and it's obvious that they're scurrying to grab on to anything that will deflect from their choices to bond with a truly despicable political party. Maybe they'll come around and take that party back to the integrity of its former self, but judging from what I've read, I doubt it.

                Reply

                3 Replies

                • 0%

                  PatrioticAmerican1 year, 7 months ago

                  Jordan seriously the repubs looking for scandals how many scandels did the dems come up eith i counted 35 so please be quite

                  Reply

                  2 Replies

                  • 0%

                    ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

                    And most of the were valid, indictable charges. Where is the indictable charge in this article that Pelosi specifically granted Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte exemptions? By all means, quote the original bill passed January 10, 2007 to make your point, if you can:

                    http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

                    Reply
                  • 88%

                    jordan111 year, 7 months ago

                    "Quite" what? And try again. I haven't a clue what you're saying.

                    Reply
              • 100%

                PCTitan841 year, 7 months ago

                "There seems to be a pattern here of conservatives strenuously muckraking to find any scandal--no matter how truthful ore reliable the source of information--they can to denigrate the Democrats. "

                Two Points...First, The media is happy to dig up dirt on the republicans, while this and the Pelosi story were not seen on CBS, ABC, NBC.

                Secondly, the source is extremely reliable...it's a primary source. We can watch Barbara Boxer sticking her size 8 1/2 right in her mouth, thanks to FOX News.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 100%

                  ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

                  Is this the same Fox News, whose viewers were polled to be the most likely to have misconceptions regarding the war in Iraq according to a nonpartisan, academic, peer-reviewed study by the University of Maryland?

                  http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/in

                  Maybe you should change the channel to NPR or PBS. Who knows; you might actually learn something.

                  Reply
            • 100%

              RedstateLib1 year, 7 months ago

              Boxer only voiced what many who have family members are asking. If this is so important why aren't the family members of this Admin volenteering to serve. This Admin won't put skin in the game.

              Reply
            • 33%

              b2arrowhead1 year, 7 months ago

              I want to say that the entire argument of whether or not politicians have anything to lose when they send soldiers to fight is rediculous to begin with. I think that if you are signing up for the military, regardless of the reason, you already know that you might have to go to war. That is your job. Even if only 8 Pols have family members in a warzone, their job is to protect this country. If that means that service members are needed to fight, then there should be no hesitation. It is a sacrifice that the soldier know they are making when they join. It is a sacrifice that the wife knows she is making when she marries that soldier that joined.

              Reply
        • 0%

          jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

          So, it's not an exemption its an omission. I heard that Pelosi is going to ensure that all territories are added. The Democrats are pretty quick to correct an error. Were the Republicans?

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 100%

            bill29361 year, 7 months ago

            You probably also still believe that Bill Clinton "Did not have Sex with that woman!"

            LOL

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              IcCaRus1 year, 7 months ago

              oh he did lie, but...

              NO1 DIED WHEN CLINTON LIED

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 88%

                ryates1 year, 6 months ago

                No one died right away but how about later?

                My 8 year old daughter asked me what o**l s*x was and why the President did this. We had discussed human sexuality in an age appropriate manner before that but thanks to Slick Willy J she had to be exposed to topics far beyond her level of reasoning and level of inncoence.

                Clinton's defense was that what he did was not s*x because there was no v*gin*l penetration.

                Recently in my middle school students were caught engaging in a "lewinsky". When caught their defense was that Clinton did it in the White House and it wasn't real s*x.

                Instead of condemnation of Clinton's act, the press and the Democrat left circled the wagons around him and defended the indefensible.

                How many innocent students will be dead from STD transmission because of the example Clinton set with no self control? If it feels good, do it.

                Before you mindlessly regurgitate a coined phrase about nobody dying maybe you should think it all the way through.

                Reply
          • 100%

            ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

            The FSLA of 1938 is a ~70 year old act. Nancy Pelosi is only responsible for the bill passed on January 10, 2007, which can be found here:

            http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

            The allegation which this article makes is that Pelosi is a hypocrite for singling out Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte to receive exemptions from federal minimum wage law in return for campaign contributions. So, show me again, specifically where in the bill that was passed on January 10, 2007 does Pelosi specifically name Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte for exemptions? Go ahead; quote it if you can.

            DAVIDHALKO WROTE:

            "It seems like some Republicans kept her honest!"

            You mean the same Republicans who voted for the January 10, 2007 bill? You do realize that it passed by a wide, bipartisan margin, don't you? By the way, who's keeping the Washington Times honest? This article was shoddy reporting at best, and intentionally deceiving at worst.

            Reply
        • 92%

          ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

          IKE WROTE:

          "Because it's a matter of public record"

          And did you bother to read the public record?

          The bill amends FSLA USC(A)(1), which includes "Employees engaged in commerce; home workers in Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands; employees in American Samoa; seamen on American vessels; agricultural employees."

          http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

          http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

          Reply

          5 Replies

          • 100%

            bill29361 year, 7 months ago

            Note on your comment is that while the bill amends (A)(1), American Samoa is defined in (A)(3):

            Your link:

            (3) if such employee is employed in American Samoa, in lieu of the rate or rates provided by this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, not less than the applicable rate established by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with recommendations of a special industry committee or committees which he shall appoint pursuant to sections 205 and 208 of this title. The minimum wage rate thus established shall not exceed the rate prescribed in paragraph (1) of this subsection;

            This means that the minimum wage shall not exceed the US min wage, but an industry group(StarKist/Del Monte) gets to set the Min wage outside of (A)(1).

            Wage Rates in American Samoa

            http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/ASmin

            Fish Canning and Processing Industry Minimum Hourly Wage Rates in American Samoa

            http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/fishC

            Reply

            4 Replies

            • 100%

              RedstateLib1 year, 7 months ago

              Wrong is says the Dept of labor sets the wage in American Samoa. Due to special economic circumstances.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                bill29361 year, 7 months ago

                No read it again:

                Secretary of Labor in accordance with recommendations of a special industry committee or committees which he shall appoint pursuant to sections 205 and 208 of this title.

                The Secretary of Labor does. And note the two links are 'dol.gov'; guess what that stands for?

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 100%

                  ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

                  BILL2936

                  "No read it again:"

                  I suggest you do the same.

                  The FSLA of 1938 is a ~70 year old act. Nancy Pelosi is only responsible for the bill passed on January 10, 2007, which can be found here:

                  http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

                  The allegation which this article makes is that Pelosi is a hypocrite for singling out Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte to receive exemptions from federal minimum wage law in return for campaign contributions. So, show me again, specifically where in the bill that was passed on January 10, 2007 does Pelosi specifically name Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte for exemptions? Go ahead; quote it if you can.

                  Reply
            • 0%

              Watchemoket1 year, 7 months ago

              What this appears to mean is that it is the REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION's Deapartment of Labor that controls the minimum wage for the fishing iindustry in American Samoa. Without enacting specially targetted legislation, Congress apparently can't adjust minimum wage in AS.

              Reply
        • 31%

          intelliblog1 year, 7 months ago

          You certainly can do better than that. Selectively criticizing the press for not revealing all of the facts, to me, shows an unwanted desire to discredit one of their own. By adopting practices that you identify as -"how bad our press is", when you simply do not like the facts is a further indication of how 'left' the press has leaned. Hypothetical- What if the person involved was a conservative? Try and get over the fact that, Yes- even liberals can exhibit flaws in their character and decision making.

          Reply
      • 0%

        ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

        http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

        TITLE 29 > CHAPTER 8 > § 206(a)(1) applies to all

        "(a) Employees engaged in commerce; home workers in Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands; employees in American Samoa; seamen on American vessels; agricultural employees"

        Notice "American Samoa" is included.

        http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

        The bill specifically states

        "IN GENERAL -- Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206 (a)(1)) is amended to read as follows:"

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          bill29361 year, 7 months ago

          Note on your comment is that while the bill amends (A)(1), American Samoa is defined in (A)(3):

          Your link:

          (3) if such employee is employed in American Samoa, in lieu of the rate or rates provided by this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, not less than the applicable rate established by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with recommendations of a special industry committee or committees which he shall appoint pursuant to sections 205 and 208 of this title. The minimum wage rate thus established shall not exceed the rate prescribed in paragraph (1) of this subsection;

          This means that the minimum wage shall not exceed the US min wage, but an industry group(StarKist/Del Monte) gets to set the Min wage outside of (A)(1).

          Wage Rates in American Samoa

          http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/ASmin

          Fish Canning and Processing Industry Minimum Hourly Wage Rates in American Samoa

          http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/fishC

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

            The FSLA of 1938 is a ~70 year old act. Nancy Pelosi is only responsible for the bill passed on January 10, which can be found here:

            http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

            The allegation which this article makes is that Pelosi is a hypocrite for singling out Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte to receive exemptions from federal minimum wage law in return for campaign contributions. So, show me again, specifically where in the bill that was passed on January 10, 2007 does Pelosi specifically name Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte for exemptions? Go ahead; quote it if you can.

            Reply
      • 92%

        PBuchman1 year, 7 months ago

        ybdogsct - Thank you for pointing this out. There is no exemption for American Samoa. In fact, the minimum wage provisions in Sec. 6 of the FLSA already apply to American Samoa. H.R. 2 extends the application of Sec. 6 to include Northern Mariana, as well as transitioning the minimum wage to meet US standards.

        Interestingly, Alaska republican Frank Murkowski has been pushing for labor reform in Northern Mariana for years, due to a workforce that was "being paid barely half the U.S. minimum hourly wage and were forced to live behind barbed wire in squalid shacks minus plumbing, work 12 hours a day, often seven days a week, without any of the legal protections U.S. workers are guaranteed."

        http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/09/real.delay/

        Reply
    • 100%

      ryates1 year, 6 months ago

      Socialism is a form of government in which some production is publicly owned (usually confiscated). This always manages to fail as government can't even run itself much less a viable commercial enterprise.

      The left is the US has been smart to avoid this trap. They prefer elements of fascism, in which the means of production remain in private hands but are taxed and regulated to the point of virtual slavery. This keeps the spigots flowing longer, until the taxed and regulated decide enough is enough.

      Atlas shrugged.

      Reply
  • 100%

    Twistoflex1 year, 7 months ago

    There's only one problem: this story in the rightwingnut Moonie Washington Times is a complete fabrication.

    CSPAN documented the GOP disruption in the House: they were clearly in violation of the House rules of Parliamentary procedure. See for yourself,

    http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/13472

    Naturally, we wouldn't expect the Repugnants to know about Parliamentary procedure since they've spent a dozen years making a mockery of it as well as the legislative process. Their primer is Robot's Rules of Order. Tnings are different in the real, lawful world.

    As for the packing factory, it would not be exempted from Federal minimum wage requirements.

    Reply
  • 100%

    Twistoflex1 year, 7 months ago

    The intention of the Washington Times and the Repugnant hacks that repost the lies and distortion of this article, will be to propagate disinformation for the weak minded and illiterate who never bother to check the facts and just swallow the Kool-Aid.

    Don't expect the Washington Times to print a retraction - even though you can see from C-SPAN that they're completely full of crap. If they do, don't expect Repugnant hacks to repost it.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 100%

      not2needy1 year, 7 months ago

      Twist, you are wasting your time, this is exactly what they were wanting and looking for. Who knows, these packing companies may already pay way over minimum wage anyway, but i don't see where anyone bothered to check what the base pay was for these companies.

      Reply
• 100%

  jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

  Provide evidence that corruption has increased. This bill was passed under rules that existed under the Republican rule, which contradicts your allegation. So, to find out if corruption has increased one would have to research how much the Republicans did the same thing and compare that finding with the single incident discussed here.

  From your posts, you are the type of person that doesn't complain when your side acts unethically or is corrupt because you believe in your side and believe that the ends justify the means.

  There are many of us that don't like it at all. The problem is systemic and should be stopped. Hypocrisy should not be indulged under any circumstance.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 100%

    m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

    OK corruption is the same. Except that Democrats and their allies now get the swag.

    The best Congress money can buy.

    End the culture of corruption or just under new management?

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 100%

      ryates1 year, 6 months ago

      There is song by the Who that has the lyrics "won't get fooled again".

      Throw all the bums out, left and right.

      Isn't it time for a citizens's political party? How about a party for taxpayers? How about a party for people who truly believe in the US Constitution? How about a party for those of us who believe in enforcing ALL of our laws and not ignoring immigration laws? How about a party for those of us who don't commit crimes and would like protection from those who do?

      Neither the left or right side of Congress gives a whit about you and me...only our votes and our money.

      Ryates

      Reply
  • 0%

    WMPENN1 year, 7 months ago

    and were there no rules in effect before the rep.?

    here we go ... around in circles

    Reply
• 0%

  THOMNH621 year, 7 months ago

  Ike

  Damn that was funny, the idea of Barney Frank in any position is enough to make sick. The Libs will hate this post.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 75%

    samsara151 year, 7 months ago

    At least he's upfront about being gay. So what's wrong with having an upfront gay guy?

    Reply
  • 100%

    not2needy1 year, 7 months ago

    THOM.

    I don't hate any of the posts or articles. I know there are liberal based media as well as conservative based media, and each will do it's own bit to discredit the other.

    I do wish that Nancy had been given the benefit of making a statement, or if she did, then at least include it in the article.

    Reply
• 100%

  time4change1 year, 7 months ago

  So now it begins.....was this article authored by Karl Rove, or one of his many henchmen...the repubs just can't stand passing the torch...indeed this bill was passed under Republican rules !! Get over it....if you want to attack character rather than leadership, look over at Foley et al..

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 100%

    m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

    This article was authored by Pelosi.

    It is just that some one else wrote it.

    LOL

    I'm remined of Picasso when asked by a German about the painting Guernica: "Who did this?"

    Picasso replied "You did."

    Reply
• 82%

  ouzie-q1 year, 7 months ago

  Word Up G'money!

  "The Checks-N-cheese crowd is back and anything goes to get a vote." Pelosi and her other San Fransisco Libertarian phenom, Dangerous Dianne Feinstein will continue to subvert and manipulate legislation to cater to their little Multi-million dollar circle back in the bay area.

  You can bet "gold plated Dildoes and legal Butt love" will be the rule of the land when Pelosi fever indulges her love of perversion.

  A sad mess, to be sure.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    jeffery11 year, 7 months ago

    So, you approve of government preventing consenting adults from "perverted" behavior? You approve of government sactioned relationships? You approve of government approved behavior? You sound pretty authoritarian and to date very conservative, with a hatred of wealth to boot! Your statement is a good example of why we need to keep the right-wing out of power.

    Reply
  • 38%

    m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

    Libertarians favor smaller government and lower taxes.

    I don't think that describes many Democrats.

    LOL

    Reply
• 0%

  m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

  I think Pelosi is also the owner (or her husband is) of a string of restruants or motels that will not allow the employees to unionize.

  Maybe it was Boxer.

  One of them.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 100%

    deathray1 year, 7 months ago

    Pelosi's husband is an investment banker.

    Reply
• 100%

  lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

  David, you're a hypocrite yourself. You claim to be upset about 5000 American Somalians not getting the minimum wage which they have never gotten and don't give a damn about the safety of the 20,000 troops that Bush wants to send in harms way nor are you outraged over the 3000 Americans that have been killed and the 22,000 that have been wounded in Iraq. Again, that's hypocrisy's.

  Reply

  6 Replies

  • 100%

    RedstateLib1 year, 7 months ago

    They oppose raising the wage, the other pacific rim nations that are large tuna packaging competitors don't have minimum wages and raising theirs will cost them thier jobs. Their delegate is the one lobbying against raising it. Good job righties your little political game will be costing 5000 people thier jobs with no other opportunities available. Hey but you got to throw some mud. Hope it was worth it.

    Reply

    4 Replies

    • 100%

      Bkumm1 year, 7 months ago

      True. Right on. I want every single one of the people on here to remember this. This kind of political crap will be blamed on the Democrats, when it is totally the fault of the Republicans.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 100%

        not2needy1 year, 7 months ago

        Absolutely Bkumm. At least the Democrats are willing to raise it without giving their cronies a big inheiritance tax break.

        Reply
    • 80%

      m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

      Wait a minute.

      Raising the minimum wage will cost jobs?

      I never heard that from a Democrat before.

      The jobs will go to other nations?

      I never heard that from a Democrat before.

      When did Democrats learn economics?

      Reply
    • 100%

      bill29361 year, 7 months ago

      So raising the Minimum Wage might cause job loses? I wonder if that will happen here? Will the Dems take the blame if it does?

      Reply
  • 100%

    lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

    "Nope, I never said I was upset about that.."

    Actions speak louder than words. That is what this whole post is about and bashing Pelosi. Read the story.

    You have been in favor of sending the extra troops by previous post and sending them back only show your lack of care for their safety because they have been in and out of Iraq so many times that they may be getting tired and complacent.

    "I am outraged enough to get the job done and not see America turn tail and run like cowrards when so much has been won and so much will be lost."

    Turn tail and run is a right wing phase to justify their desire to stay in Iraq until they have control of the oil right without regard of how many lives were or will be lost.

    As far as the apology for my remark of hypocrisy, it could seem harsh but it's the feeling I have about the post that you've made and I cannot apologize until I see you be consistent in your statements.

    Reply
• 0%

  donald511 year, 7 months ago

  Halko, you said "again", so where did she demonstrate corruptness before? Or. just more of your typical false embellishmnet? Maybe American Samoa as only an American Protectorate had the leeway not to be included, and only continuing Republican corruptness drew the false links and conclusions?

  Reply

  8 Replies

  • 0%

    ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

    DAVIDHALKO WROTE:

    "Let me get this straight... the Minimum Wage bill will be good for Americans, not hurt the economy, and not hurt any company - execpt Nancy Pelosi's companies?"

    Let me help you "get this straight." Where exactly in the bill does it say that Samoa is exempt? Can you find this text anywhere in the bill itself? Quote the text to me that specifically mentions Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte by name. Here is a link to the bill and the FLSA that it amends.

    http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

    Reply
  • 0%

    ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

    http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/09/23/democ

    The staffer received the paid trip, not Pelosi. This is not a case of Pelosi being corrupt. Besides, her staffer's trip wasn't geared toward entertainment purposes, like a paid vacation in the Mediterranean or the use of VIP box at a popular sporting event, it was a (from your own article) "$4,475 trip to Spain and Germany last April to learn about hydrogen-fuel cells for buses." There is no evidence that this violated House rules. The Republicans controlled all 3 branches of government; if Pelosi had broken a law, there's nothing that would have stopped them from indicting her.

    http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/09/23/democ

    Reply

    4 Replies

    • 100%

      ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

      "The violation was the same violation that she accused DeLay of."

      She did not commit the violation herself; it was a staffer who received a paid trip to study hydrogen cells in Spain and Germany. Plus, one paid trip in 2001 was not the only reason why DeLay was indicted.

      "Just because someone was not indicted does not mean they are innocent."

      It does if the ruling party refuses to bring an indictment against the opposing minority party's leader.

      But then again, we digress. This thread is about the amendment to the FSLA. And you still haven't quoted the text in the amendment that would suggest Pelosi granted Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte exemptions. Where is it?

      http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 100%

        ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

        "I never mentioned an Ammendment..."

        What do you think the article was talking about? From the text of the bill to raise minimum wage and AMEND the FLSA:

        "IN GENERAL -- Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206 (a)(1)) is AMENDEDto read as follows:" [my emphasis]

        "this thread was about the exemption of American Samoa from the bill!"

        And exactly where does the bill specifically state that Pelosi granted Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte exemptions? Quote it for me.

        http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

        http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

        Reply
    • 100%

      m-simon1 year, 7 months ago

      Good thing Pelosi is not responsible for what her employees do.

      That should allow a lot of corporations off the hook.

      Couldn't the Dems have waited at least a couple of weeks before restarting the culture of corruption?

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 25%

        deathray1 year, 7 months ago

        I gues that GWB is as accounable for he performance of his employees...might as well get him fired, for reasons of incompetence.

        Reply
  • 89%

    ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

    Btw, a 2001 paid trip is not the only reason why Delay was indicted:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_delay#Investigati

    "Texas Legislature was called into session in 2003 to redistrict the state's congressional lines in favor of the Republican Party."

    "On May 26, 2005, a Texas judge ruled that TRMPAC had violated state law by not disclosing over $600,000 worth of fundraising money, mostly from the credit card industry."

    "On September 8, 2005, a federal grand jury indicted TRMPAC, which allegedly accepted an illegal political contribution of $100,000 from the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care and the Texas Association of Business, on four charges, including unlawful political advertising, unlawful contributions to a political committee and unlawful expenditures such as those to a graphics company and political candidates"

    Many more available from the link.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

      You haven't explained the actions committed specifically by Nancy Pelosi that should force her out of office, nor have you quoted the specific house rules she herself (not a staffer) violated.

      And you're hi-jacking the thread. Stay on topic. Where in the amendment to the FSLA does it specifically name Samoa, Starkist, and Del Monte as interests to whom Pelosi granted exemptions?

      http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/us

      Reply
• 75%

  lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

  "and not hurt any company - execpt Nancy Pelosi's companies?"

  David, either you're a liar or you cannot read very well. The company is in the district that Nancy represents and is not her company. This is different from the companies that the Bush administration has helped because they do own stock in those companies.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 92%

    ybdogsct1 year, 7 months ago

    "I am aware it was not her company, my typing was not as careful as it should have been"

    That's odd for someone who prides himself on being "normally very careful about my wording..."

    Reply
  • 83%

    lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

    David, I call it like it is. You said that you were in a hurry to type which I can see by the misspelling but the idea that came across was you saying the company was owned by Pelosi. Are you aware that Pelosi did not write this bill and how many republicans voted against this bill??

    Reply

• catstevensComment removed: User banned.6 Replies

  • 0%

    lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

    "You beat me to this post david...here is what n.boortz comment"

    It seems that you republicans are jumping on the band wagon on this one and ignoring the fact that the republicans failed to pass a minimum wage bill for the 12 years they had control. Samoa never had a minimum wage and they still won't and if the republicans were in power, the American workers wouldn't have an increase either. You and David need to get you head out of your posterior and see the benefit of the bill instead of false outrage about the people in Samoa who you care nothing about. You guys are just funny. LMAO

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 100%

      lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

      THEN WHY ARE YOU SO UPSET THAT SAMOA DID NOT GET THE MINIMUM WAGE. THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT GIVE THE PRESIDENT THE POWER TO DECLARE WAR ON ANOTHER NATION BUT THAT DIDN'T STOP HIM. Now can we stop with the cap??

      Reply
  • 0%

    MonkeyBiz1 year, 7 months ago

    What is really fishy is that the bill specifically INCLUDES American Samoa (Read it!), yet there is all this hyperbole from the right wing. I am not surprised with their politics, but I am surprised that they can't read.

    Reply

    3 Replies

    • 91%

      lfergie8121 year, 7 months ago

      Doesn't surprise me because I have observed for some time now that the right wingers can't read. They have to listen to Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter to know what to say. LMAO

      Reply
    • 0%

      bill29361 year, 7 months ago

      If you look into ybdogsct's link, you will see that America Samoa is defined outside the US mainland Minimum Wage.

      (A)(3) if such employee is employed in American Samoa, in lieu of the rate or rates provided by this subsection or subsection (b) of this section, not less than the applicable rate established by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with recommendations of a special industry committee or committees which he shall appoint pursuant to sections 205 and 208 of this title. The minimum wage rate thus established shall not exceed the rate prescribed in paragraph (1) of this subsection;

      This means that the minimum wage shall not exceed the US min wage, but an industry group(StarKist/Del Monte) gets to set the Min wage outside of (A)(1).

      Wage Rates in American Samoa

      http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/ASmin

      Fish Canning and Processing Industry Minimum Hourly Wage Rates in American Samoa

      http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/fishC

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 100%

        RedstateLib1 year, 7 months ago

        No it means the dept of labor sets the wage.

        Reply
• 100%

  Mintyfunk1 year, 7 months ago

  Influence peddling at its finest. It's hard to ween politicians off of graft.

  Reply
• 100%

  bubba21 year, 7 months ago

  Well, shame on Pelosi! I'm disturbed by her politics on this. (Yes, I am liberal-leaning, but cr*p is cr*p regardless of where it comes from.)

  The Senate has not voted on this yet. Write or call your Senators and tell them to not vote for the minimum wage increase unless the Samoa exemption is REMOVED. That can force the house to re-visit the bill and fix it on their side.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 100%

    Mintyfunk1 year, 7 months ago

    Transparency in government is the only way that these types of issues will go away. As long as there are ways for politicians to manipulate contributions through a myriad of organizations, we will always have politicians on the take. Neither party is exempt to this type of corruption. When responsible partisans, such as yourself, take them to task it is heartening. So many are willing to ignore actions in their own party that they would deride indivuals in other parties for doing.

    Reply
  • 100%

    beachboy60001 year, 7 months ago

    I am proud of you Bubba. You are a stand up guy. I am Republican who has no problem with the increase in the minimum wage for all Americans. I am hoping Bush signs it into law and believe he will.

    Reply
  • 100%

    bubba21 year, 7 months ago

    thanks ... I want all politicians to be honest and above-board and to walk the walk that they talk - doesn't matter which party they belong to.

    Pelosi talked A LOT about ethics and transparency - she needs to walk the walk!

    Reply
• 100%

  slate1 year, 7 months ago

  I heard about this,,, are we surprised?

  Man this has been some 100 hrs

  Reply
• 0%

  slate1 year, 7 months ago

  Well hell Bubba and I agree on something,,,, how bout that

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 100%

    bubba21 year, 7 months ago

    scary, huh ... :-)

    Reply
• 50%

  slate1 year, 7 months ago

  Hey Ho Pelosi has got to Go!

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 100%

    bubba21 year, 7 months ago

    But that's the problem ... minimum wage WOULD be good for Samoa, but apparently bad for some of Pelosi's constiuents who happen to run the tuna industry in Samoa ...

    TSK, TSK!!

    Reply
  • 100%

    bubba21 year, 7 months ago

    I wouldn't agree that "she has to go" ... she has an opportunity to fix this. If she does any more of this and doesn't straighten up, then maybe, yeah she needs to get out of the Speaker seat, at least.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%